PTS Update 33 - Feedback Thread for Account Wide Achievements

SirBedevere

Jaraal wrote: »

SirBedevere wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

SirBedevere wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

TPishek wrote: »

KaGaOri wrote: »

If all zone content gets auto completed when update 33 goes live what's the point of playing anymore?

It doesn't, you can still do the quests on other characters. You just aren't able to get the achievements for doing the quests more than once, but they are still available to do and experience.

Nope, the quest givers consider you as having already completed the quest on the first character that got the achievement. The dialogue to start the quest is no longer available. And in some places, like Rimmen, you will see multiple NPCs in the same place.

The chaos when AWA in it’s current form goes live will be epic. And at that point, it will be too late to do anything about it.

Wait, are you saying all zone quests can only be done once? Or just specific ones? Because I think @KaGaOri was talking about things affecting all zones.

Here is just one example of how AWA is bugging quests:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/7526904/#Comment_7526904

Okay, but the Bard's College thing seems like it was already fixed, no? And the other is just an epilogue? That seems pretty minor to me. It should certainly be fixed, as should whatever it is in Rimmen that's happening, but these seem like they should all be still tracked in some way if the devs need to fix them later, right? Aren't there quest completions that could be used instead of achievements, for instance?

The way you were talking before, saying "the dialogue to start the quest is no longer available" in reference to the "all zone content gets auto completed" topic really made it seem like this problem was more widespread than I'm seeing any evidence for.

Have you ever been to the test server? You could play all day and potentially never run into another player. If you think all of the hundreds of quests in the game will have been tested for potential problems related to this rather large change, you'd be wrong.

They stated that museum type quests were fixed. As for the rest..... we will find out in a few weeks.

No, I haven't logged into PTS. Just gathering information about what's been tested so far.

I was alarmed when you started talking, because it sounded like most quests couldn't even be started because that data was wiped. As long as quest progression is still being tracked somewhere, it seems like most bugs would probably still be okay to be fixed in a future incremental, notwithstanding a few special things like Bard's College that are keyed off of achievements.

SilverBride

KMarble wrote: »

There will be no incentive to kill those bosses once the account has the achievement.

I only have 4 characters, one of which is fairly new and the first alt I have rolled in a couple of years. I planned to go though and replay all the content on her just like I did with the other 3. All the quests and map objectives, everything because this is how I play.

So yes there is a major incentive for me to kill those bosses again.

majulook

Well, appears that ZOS has made its decision and is rolling forward with their version of AWA.
Hope they will fix bugs found on PTS before it goes to live.
Guess it will be (as of now) 18 days before it is seen all of what they got fixed and what they did not.

SirBedevere

CombatCoati wrote: »

SirBedevere wrote: »

nightstrike wrote: »

SirBedevere wrote: »

Oh, well that's not good. Public dungeons are one of my favorite things in the whole game, at least when I'm soloing stuff. Those and world bosses. I'll be sad if I can't track those anymore.

You can't track those anymore.

If that's true, then it seems pretty messed up to me. I don't really care about achievements themselves, but not being able to tell if I've killed a boss? Might as well just camp one boss and kill it over and over if there's nothing that progresses as a result!

Screenshot from PTS:



As you can see, this character has cleared all delves, dolmens and world bosses in Deshaan. Being just a mule character, she has never ever set foot into that zone.

Edit to add: She of course also has the Forgotten Crypts Conqueror achievement, with all the bosses marked as killed. The reason why the Crypts are shown as not complete on the map is because this is tied to completing the quest and not to an achievement.

I don't really get into side quests or delves, but public dungon bosses, world bosses and dolmens? I really hope that is a bug and not a feature. I know I can't be the only one that likes those as somewhat difficult solo content.

It sounds like they need a new category of trackers for bosses that aren't based on achievements, quests or discovery.

CombatCoati

SirBedevere wrote: »

No, I haven't logged into PTS. Just gathering information about what's been tested so far.

I was alarmed when you started talking, because it sounded like most quests couldn't even be started because that data was wiped. As long as quest progression is still being tracked somewhere, it seems like most bugs would probably still be okay to be fixed in a future incremental, notwithstanding a few special things like Bard's College that are keyed off of achievements.

Yes, quest progression is (as for now...) still safed per character in a hidden database. So things that are checked against achievements that can be changed to check against quest progession may get fixed over time.

As for things like map completion or museum quests that are only tracked through achievements, there seems to be no fix as for now (I refuse to call what they did with museum quests a "fix". To me, that was nothing but a rollback, and thus far from fixing anything).

The_Saint

What will happen when i rename a character who earned the achievement? will the name also switch?

remosito

CombatCoati wrote: »

SirBedevere wrote: »

nightstrike wrote: »

SirBedevere wrote: »

Oh, well that's not good. Public dungeons are one of my favorite things in the whole game, at least when I'm soloing stuff. Those and world bosses. I'll be sad if I can't track those anymore.

You can't track those anymore.

If that's true, then it seems pretty messed up to me. I don't really care about achievements themselves, but not being able to tell if I've killed a boss? Might as well just camp one boss and kill it over and over if there's nothing that progresses as a result!

Screenshot from PTS:



As you can see, this character has cleared all delves, dolmens and world bosses in Deshaan. Being just a mule character, she has never ever set foot into that zone.

Edit to add: She of course also has the Forgotten Crypts Conqueror achievement, with all the bosses marked as killed. The reason why the Crypts are shown as not complete on the map is because this is tied to completing the quest and not to an achievement.

delves and pubdungeons can be tracked via skyshards if you always combo shard and allbosses killed..

KMarble

SirBedevere wrote: »

Okay, but the Bard's College thing seems like it was already fixed, no?

The Bards' college quest isn't fixed. See here:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/7528022/#Comment_7528022

This week's patch notes acknowledge that:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/7527624/#Comment_7527624

SirBedevere wrote: »

And the other is just an epilogue? That seems pretty minor to me. It should certainly be fixed, as should whatever it is in Rimmen that's happening, but these seem like they should all be still tracked in some way if the devs need to fix them later, right? Aren't there quest completions that could be used instead of achievements, for instance?

The way you were talking before, saying "the dialogue to start the quest is no longer available" in reference to the "all zone content gets auto completed" topic really made it seem like this problem was more widespread than I'm seeing any evidence for.

For certain people is a minor thing, for others it is not. Yes, all of it should be fixed. Preferably before it goes live.

The samples we got from testing seem to indicate the problem is more widespread than what you or anyone else is seeing. We, the players testing things, don't have the time to test it all. ZOS' employees who were assigned to work on AWA (and have access to things we do not - like the code) didn't catch many things (like the bug on the first week that prevented secondary characters from buy skyshards or the vampire/werewolf).

Think of it this way, lets say there is a bridge ahead that you need to cross. You get there, and as soon as you step on it, you notice parts of it are falling off. Do you back away and try to find a way to fix the bridge or a detour that will get you where you want to go, or do you keep on walking with faith that it was just that one plank?

Most people leaving comments in this thread have been asking for a DELAY, in hopes that someone will make the bridge safer. We didn't test all the wooden planks on the bridge, but it isn't hard to tell there are other rotten ones ahead.

deleted221106-002999

The 'fix' for museum quests was to flatten them for any character that has already done them. You'll have to do them again - no idea if you'd get an extra mural or perfected from doing so but I doubt it.

Associated achievements like 'saviour of elsewyr' are still active, though, as if the character/account has already completed the museum quest.

Essentially the fix is breaking it for characters who've already done it.


edit: referring to pts

peacenote

Alright. I've thought about the Q&A. It's never really productive or say "not good enough" without giving helpful suggestions on how things could be improved, so, while this is more feedback about the feedback, than direct feedback for the functionality, I'm going to take a shot a crafting the type of message I would have liked to see and/or would have released if I were in charge of community engagement for the company. Someone mentioned engagement as opposed to communication in another thread and I think that is really key here. The most disappointing part of the whole thing was exactly as I feared... mentioning that it was a requested feature without acknowledging the volume or nuance of the concerns directly. Purposeful or not, it feels dismissive. What follows is just an example style of communication for what might be nice in the future, and also some Q's that ideally I would think should be added to the Q&A's, to improve engagement. But first the example text:

Hi everyone. First and foremost, we want to thank everyone for all of their feedback in the feedback thread on Account Wide Achievements. Everyone here at Zenimax appreciates the fact that ESO means so much to you and that you've taken time out of your day to communicate to us on this topic. We've read your suggestions, heartfelt stories, and thoughtful comments and we've heard you, loud and clear, about how the loss of some character-specific data, and the ability to re-experience achievement pop-ups feels like a big loss to many of you.

Then, depending on what was decided and why, I'd say something like:

As a result of your feedback, we're going to try and take a little more time to see if we can preserve a larger portion of the experience you are used to in ESO, with regards to character tracking, while still ensuring that we deliver Account Wide Achievements in a timely manner to everyone who has been actively anticipating this functionality. (I think it's about 99.9% certain that this will not happen at this point, but it's what I would have done!)

OR

Unfortunately, while we'd like to preserve the historical data and provide you with more options (both character and account-wide tracking), to better live up to the "play the way you'd like" sentiment we believe in here at Zenimax, we are reaching a technical limitation, similar to why we can't provide additional furnishings in houses for you right now (as much as we'd like to!) where the achievement database has grown too large, and our ability to add more content is hampered. You saw evidence of this in the Greymoor release. Therefore this has been the tough choice we've had to make, and we sincerely hope that the new content and future plans we have for ESO will make up for the loss of these character-specific options. We know people engage with the game in many different ways, and you're all important to us as part of the ESO community. It was not our intention to create an account-wide vs. character-specific divide in our player base and this decision in no way means we value one play style over another. Thank you for understanding and being patient with our team as we continually work to improve performance.

Seriously, a message like that would make a HUGE difference to me personally, as a customer, regarding feeling heard and valued. If nothing is adjusted before go-live, it won't necessarily change the fact that I'll stop buying things from the Crown Store, I'll enjoy the game less, spend less time in it, and so on... but as someone who won't immediately quit due to my end game commitments, it would vastly increase my goodwill for the company and faith that they understand the choices they've made and are reading the feedback.

Additionally, I would love to see some other questions answered. If I were interviewing ZOS on this topic, here are some of the things I'd ask.

• Might it be possible to reap most of the performance benefits of AwA with a small adjustment, where the "earned by" field is expanded to contain any character name or date that accomplished or accomplishes the achievement? Was this expressly considered and rejected, and if not maybe could this be added?
• Some folks have expressed concern that the loss of the "pop ups" on new characters will make the game world less exciting and engaging, and will reduce motivation to replay content. Can you address that? Do you think it is an issue?
• Do you have any options available to the people who were asking for an opt-out? Can players copy characters to a new account, or is there a way to export the current data in the game just for nostalgic purposes before the change goes live?
• Let's talk about end game for a moment. Titles and achievements that are difficult to obtain have been used as a way to "validate" a player's experience by others. Some might call it gate-keeping. Some might call it requirements. Regardless there is concern by some that account-wide titles will be a detriment to forming functional groups for end game content. Did you ever envision titles and achievements being used in such a way? Do you have any plans for additional functionality to better assist raid and guild leaders with matching players of similar experience?
• Another concern for end game content is that it can be a significant time commitment to obtain harder achievements, like trifectas, in trials and dungeons. Chasing the achievements per character was looked at as a grind by some, but by others it was motivation to re-play the content, and in those cases players re-doing content were often mentors for people and enjoyed trying to earn the difficult achievements on different classes. It's been mentioned that lack of better, more meaningful rewards for playing and repeating this time-consuming content is a big part of the reason why the loss of character-specific achievements seems as if it could really reduce interest in end game content for players. Would you agree that ESO is lacking in meaningful rewards, and, if so, are there any plans to address this? if you don't agree, what would you say ESO offers as rewards to re-play difficult and time-consuming content?
• How important do you think it is in ESO to have identifiable, unique rewards that players can display to others as badges of honor for achieving content (skins, titles, etc.)? Are rare rewards that are unlikely to be obtained by many something you try to provide in ESO, or do you feel that desirable collectibles that are hard to obtain are problematic and divisive amongst the community? Or somewhere in between?
• The community has been asking for account-wide titles, specifically, for a long time. Is there any reason it took so long to bring about this change? Was it not a priority, or does it mark a change in philosophy for how you'd like titles to be used, compared to the past?
• Why did it take so long to clarify that Account Wide Achievements are part of a performance improvement goal?
• Throughout the evolution of the game, the overarching direction has seemed to be that rewards are trending to be account-wide, while preserving character-specific identity and progress. Changes like making armor account bound, introducing style pages and stickerbook, etc., all support this direction. However, changes like Account Wide Achievements and the Amory could be viewed as going in a different direction, and choices like having purchased outfit slots be character-specific seem to align with neither direction. What is the overall vision and direction for the account vs character experience? Can we expect the phasing out of any other character-specific features (like per-character companion reputation) or the addition of character-specific features to enhance the experience of rolling an alt? Does ZOS generally still support and plan to provide enhancements to the players who enjoy making their characters specific and unique?
• Going into this, were you aware of all the different opinions about Account Wide Achievements, or has some of the feedback been a surprise? For example, did you know that some people primarily just wanted shared titles, while others wanted an account-wide roll-up alongside character achievements, while still others were hoping that everything would be account-wide? How do you determine an implementation strategy with all of those nuanced opinions? We'd love to see "under the hood" a little about how decisions are made! Did you have data you could analyze, or was the implementation primarily based on the performance issues/technology constraints? Has this experience given you any ideas for how you can better obtain nuanced player feedback for complex changes in the future?
• What do you feel is the primary role of achievements are in ESO? What is your hope for how players engage with and enjoy them?

Anyway, I think the whole "we know you care about achievements because we are storing so many" was just a swing and a miss, as far as really addressing what people waiting for answers care about. I completely understand that resources are limited, but I whipped up my sample text and questions in about an hour. Also, I definitely remain skeptical that current performance and performance gains are driving this, and am more convinced than ever that this is about adding achievements for the card game - at best a "robbing Peter to pay Paul" scenario where room needs to be made for future content before the performance issue hits. BUT if I try to give ZOS the benefit of the doubt on this, my message to them is now: Stop trying to be gentle and slow and subtle with performance-based changes. So many people have quit ESO waiting for those gains. So many others have seen the loss of a variety of things they loved about ESO and that is driving them to quit. Some things have been reversed, some haven't. It feels like you are crying wolf, even if you are 100% genuine. It's no wonder that years after the "year of performance" it feels like attributing a controversial change to "performance" seems like misdirection or outright dishonest to many. Just rip off the band-aid. Slash and burn. Do whatever it takes to give us significant performance gains and room for growth. Delete and remove whatever is necessary, and be immediate and upfront about why it's being done. Then we can mourn once, stay or go, and then just look forward to new functionality, instead of this ongoing roller coaster of fearing with every update that we're going to lose something else. Everything from little changes like the deletion of historical mail, to the massive experiments in Cyrodiil, changes in group size, and now the specific way AwA were implemented. We've had enough. At least, I know I have, when it comes to hearing about what's being done in the name of possible performance improvements. Heck, as much as I hate the data loss, I'd rather have EVERYTHING cleared and start over once than lose anything else later.

Dojohoda

From https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/598865/account-wide-achievements-q-a

Lately, we have been working on ways to trim the data footprint while still recording all the monsters you slay, items you hoard and achievements you ding. By consolidating achievements, we can retain and improve the way the game handles this type of data and the overall experience. With the database’s overall footprint reduced, it will more performant across the board, which may manifest itself in faster load screens and improved performance on other database-heavy operations. Most importantly, however, this change helps keep the game performant as we continue to add new content and achievements in the future.

Yes, based on what I saw in the PTS, I suspected as much.

While I understand that this might help game performance in some way and that might be a good thing; I am unhappy that the achievement journal that we have now will be gone forever. Since the data will be "gone", right? no addons can make up for loss of tracking/researching/planning individual characters.

As always, this is a lovely game, quite amazing actually, and I wish the best for the people working on it.

SilverBride

Has there been a noticeable improvement in performance, especially in Cyrodiil?

Zezin

SilverBride wrote: »

Million dollar question:

Has there been a noticeable improvement in performance, especially in Cyrodiil?

You can't recreate the performance problems of Cyrodiil on the pts, that why the tests they did a while back were on the live servers.

Varana

Unfortunately, there's no real way of testing that on the PTS. There's very few players, the servers are worse, and probably other things, but performance is almost untestable on the PTS.
Especially if the effect is rather minor, like here.

SilverBride

Zezin wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Million dollar question:

Has there been a noticeable improvement in performance, especially in Cyrodiil?

You can't recreate the performance problems of Cyrodiil on the pts, that why the tests they did a while back were on L
The live servers.

Why not?

Has they been any noticeable change in loading screens in general?

[Edited for clarity]

deleted221106-002999

SilverBride wrote: »

....

Has they been any noticeable change in loading screens in general?

No.

(I posted about this elsewhere)

edit: from here

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

It doesn't have anything to do with performance unless alienating sufficient players so they leave and free up server resources is intended.

We all know this won't make a difference to performance from prior experience of every time we've been told the same or similar in the past only to log in and discover things are actually worse.

I noticed absolutely ZERO difference in load screens times etc on PTS. None.

I fully expect this monumental performance improvement experience to be fully observable when this unwelcome mess goes live.

Wolf_Eye

Luvtantius_Micocia wrote: »

zsitvaij wrote: »

Luvtantius_Micocia wrote: »

Q: Are there plans to track individual character progression or identifying which character completed an achievement first?

A: Completed achievements will display the name of the character that first completed the achievement, as well as the date it was first completed. The initial account achievement merging process takes this into account and will auto-update the achievement to display the earliest completion date and character. Tracking individual character progression nullifies the database improvements that Account Wide Achievements bring and isn’t something we can implement without losing those benefits.

Why would it matter to show the character that completed a certain achievement first with the date added, since it are now account wide achievements? And would that still not be a form of individual character progression and thus reduce database improvements?

If I stick around, the first addon I'll install/write if unavailable, is one that hides the useless 'earned by'.

I sure appreciate the effort and respect your coding skills, but personally I am not that bothered by the "earned by". I simply try to wrap my head around the statement that it would improve database performance and how it is not a form of individual character progress tracking.

I would want to have a list of all toons who completed it so I can have some form of tracking. But if I can't have that, then I would much rather not have a name at all. I just don't see the point otherwise, and I would find it irritating to only have one name there. If this is the system they want, then just have the date.

Kesstryl

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

....

Has they been any noticeable change in loading screens in general?

No.

(I posted about this elsewhere)

edit: from here

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

It doesn't have anything to do with performance unless alienating sufficient players so they leave and free up server resources is intended.

We all know this won't make a difference to performance from prior experience of every time we've been told the same or similar in the past only to log in and discover things are actually worse.

I noticed absolutely ZERO difference in load screens times etc on PTS. None.

I fully expect this monumental performance improvement experience to be fully observable when this unwelcome mess goes live.

There's a chance there will be a performance improvement from cancelled subs and a fair amount of people leaving the game from this. That will definitely free resources from accounts going into cold storage. I honestly think this really needs to be put on hold and have more time to fix the bugs and decouple a lot of things from achievements to quest completion so the world isn't so broken for alts. Does every achievement have to be account based now? Can't we just move more things to account based and keep those things necessary for game continuity and coherence for alts remain character based until it can be better addressed or moved around in the code? This would be much better than the dread everyone is feeling right now.

Jaraal

SilverBride wrote: »

Million dollar question:

Has there been a noticeable improvement in performance, especially in Cyrodiil?

Cyrodiil is basically empty on the test server. No one would notice anything different about performance.

And the key words in the announcement were "may" and "future." Meaning they don't expect to see any noticable performance improvements from AWA any time soon. So essentially, rip out part of the game players have expected to be there forever for..... maybe some benefit in the future.


This will be the biggest performance increase:

Kesstryl wrote: »

There's a chance there will be a performance improvement from cancelled subs and a fair amount of people leaving the game from this. That will definitely free resources from accounts going into cold storage.

Was looking into Elden Ring last night. The Lands Between look like a perfect place to escape from the constant nickel and dime (or hundred dollar bill, in this case) erosion of our beloved game for reasons we can't actually see or feel. Plus there's no card game to suck up resources and developer attention from actual gameplay and performance issues.

Bragerth

So Im confused by the Q&A when you delete a character with the earned by tool tip go away or stay or is it even there. wish the Q&A was a bit more explanatory.

SilverBride

[deleted by poster]

Jaraal

SilverBride wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Cyrodiil is basically empty on the test server. No one would notice anything different about performance.

And the key words in the announcement were "may" and "future." Meaning they don't expect to see any noticable performance improvements from AWA any time soon. So essentially, rip out part of the game players have expected to be there forever for..... maybe some benefit in the future.

So they are going to destroy the way a huge amount of their playerbase plays on the off chance that it may (or may not) fix performance in one zone for one niche playstyle...

Yeah, they're quite good at selling the future. The present is what we want to see fixed.... but has that ever happened?

How many cries of "Wolf!" does it take before people stop listening?

deleted221106-002999

Kesstryl wrote: »

There's a chance there will be a performance improvement from cancelled subs and a fair amount of people leaving the game from this. That will definitely free resources from accounts going into cold storage. I honestly think this really needs to be put on hold and have more time to fix the bugs and decouple a lot of things from achievements to quest completion so the world isn't so broken for alts. Does every achievement have to be account based now? Can't we just move more things to account based and keep those things necessary for game continuity and coherence for alts remain character based until it can be better addressed or moved around in the code? This would be much better than the dread everyone is feeling right now.

I have asked repeatedly about the viability of moving the character specifics, as it is on live, to the client side but with zero response from zos. I asked pretty much at the start of this thread as a solution for all if 'server performance' was an issue.

Since they've now said it's for performance, shifting it to the client - the checking, data storage etc - would still save the servers. The servers will still generate a check to see who/when where from character/account got an achievement. I'd think if the character check was shifted client side based on the server prompt then we who enjoy the character specifics would be able to preserve that fundamental aspect of our game and replayability just as it is on live. There would be an extra tab in the journal for character. The pts account one they're pushing would be as they intend with whatever real or imagined server/performance improvements. It would mean we'd be individually responsible for the character specific data going forward but, if forewarned, I don't see that as an issue.

Since it's for our individual character history and replayability it doesn't matter if it's tamper-proof or not, in fact human readable/editable might be useful for other contexts.

Something like this client-side solution would work for me: it would give me what I have now and I could pretty much ignore the account stuff other than as a summary going forward.

I imagine this would be possible to do but I doubt the will exists at zos to implement it.

Anyway, I've suggested it here and asked directly but with zero response.

Tandor

Kesstryl wrote: »

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

....

Has they been any noticeable change in loading screens in general?

No.

(I posted about this elsewhere)

edit: from here

Comrade_Ogilvy wrote: »

It doesn't have anything to do with performance unless alienating sufficient players so they leave and free up server resources is intended.

We all know this won't make a difference to performance from prior experience of every time we've been told the same or similar in the past only to log in and discover things are actually worse.

I noticed absolutely ZERO difference in load screens times etc on PTS. None.

I fully expect this monumental performance improvement experience to be fully observable when this unwelcome mess goes live.

There's a chance there will be a performance improvement from cancelled subs and a fair amount of people leaving the game from this. That will definitely free resources from accounts going into cold storage. I honestly think this really needs to be put on hold and have more time to fix the bugs and decouple a lot of things from achievements to quest completion so the world isn't so broken for alts. Does every achievement have to be account based now? Can't we just move more things to account based and keep those things necessary for game continuity and coherence for alts remain character based until it can be better addressed or moved around in the code? This would be much better than the dread everyone is feeling right now.

I agree. However, if they disagree and claim that only the complete abolition of character-based achievements can deliver the benefits they believe may result from these changes, then perhaps they can explain why they have left the Crown Store based achievements as character-based.

Vulkunne

kind_hero wrote: »

Guys.. DEVS...

I read your "Q&A" which is more like a statement than a thread open to questions, and I can't really say how I feel because of the rules here.

But you are killing replayability, really... Someone has a fix on this move and won't budge regardless of how many people prove to you that what you are doing, and especially the way you are doing it, is wrong.

Let me put it from my point of view:

My main has done most of the achievements I care for (and am able to do with my playstyle).
I have two more chars, alt 2 and alt 3 with a lot of content still to be done. Last month I did the Cyrodiil dolmens for achievements, even though I had those completed on my main. It was satisfying to get each of those done.

Now, with this change, there will be very little motivation for me to do any content that I have done with my main in the past.

I am sure a lot of people will relate. Why create a new alt? He already has Tamriel Hero right from the starting cell. Your shared titles do not even have some minimal requirements, such as level or zone completion. It's a mess. Really.

You are talking about database and performance like it is something that you should save rather than expand, even though the game is at its peak and it is very successful. Instead of adding features for the achievement system, you are trimming it. There are other games which implemented this AwA right. But you are not doing that. What you are doing and the way you are doing it is almost the same as deleting alts from each account "to save space". The game will become larger and larger. What will you merge next? Characters?

Oh baby. Why not expand if the game is growing at an all time high? Why should the players especially new players invest in a game that's going to cut more content? And not just regular content but things personal to them.

TequilaFire

Actually this may be

SilverBride wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Cyrodiil is basically empty on the test server. No one would notice anything different about performance.

And the key words in the announcement were "may" and "future." Meaning they don't expect to see any noticable performance improvements from AWA any time soon. So essentially, rip out part of the game players have expected to be there forever for..... maybe some benefit in the future.

So they are going to destroy the way a huge amount of their playerbase plays on the off chance that it may (or may not) fix performance in one zone for one niche playstyle...

I don't know why you focus PvP as this is a game wide change and everyone is just throwing the PvP card out there.
It more falls into line not wanting to increase capacity for a growing game, cheaper to remove stuff.

SilverBride

TequilaFire wrote: »

Actually this may be

SilverBride wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Cyrodiil is basically empty on the test server. No one would notice anything different about performance.

And the key words in the announcement were "may" and "future." Meaning they don't expect to see any noticable performance improvements from AWA any time soon. So essentially, rip out part of the game players have expected to be there forever for..... maybe some benefit in the future.

So they are going to destroy the way a huge amount of their playerbase plays on the off chance that it may (or may not) fix performance in one zone for one niche playstyle...

I don't know why you focus PvP as this is a game wide change and everyone is just throwing the PvP card out there.
It more falls into line not wanting to increase capacity for a growing game, cheaper to remove stuff.

The game won't keep growing if the clientele keeps shrinking.

Seminolegirl1992

SilverBride wrote: »

Zezin wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Million dollar question:

Has there been a noticeable improvement in performance, especially in Cyrodiil?

You can't recreate the performance problems of Cyrodiil on the pts, that why the tests they did a while back were on L
The live servers.

Why not? If that's true then why test at all if the main reason for this is performance reasons which are almost exclusively in Cyrodiil? What makes them think achievements are the problem?

Has they been any noticeable change in loading screens in general?

Because you don't have the population of live server Cyrodiil on the pts

SilverBride

[deleted by poster]

Seminolegirl1992

SilverBride wrote: »

Seminolegirl1992 wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Zezin wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Million dollar question:

Has there been a noticeable improvement in performance, especially in Cyrodiil?

You can't recreate the performance problems of Cyrodiil on the pts, that why the tests they did a while back were on L
The live servers.

Why not? If that's true then why test at all if the main reason for this is performance reasons which are almost exclusively in Cyrodiil? What makes them think achievements are the problem?

Has they been any noticeable change in loading screens in general?

Because you don't have the population of live server Cyrodiil on the pts

So they are blindly going through with something that they know is devastating for a large portion of the playerbase on the off chance that it "may" help and no way to test if it even will.

Yes