I wish I could give multiple "Agrees" with this post. Seriously.
Whenever I see an update and zos states that it's something players have been requesting for a long time, I think.... Who? Who has requested this? Not me for sure. I don't remember being asked my opinion on (insert random change). I also don't think the vocal members of the forums actually amount to a significant portion of the population so that what they ask for is actually what the community wants.
I see people on my guilds saying they'd want to post on the forums but don't have an account here so they can't, and ask someone who does. I can probably count with the fingers of one hand the names from my guilds who also regularly appear in the forums. And I'm on several 400+ guilds.
And this last change with the account-wide achievements? I can safely say not one person in my endgame guild finds this change good, or welcome. And I'm talking about people who have pretty much the game completed. The common arguments are:
"What's the point of having more than one character now?"
"Why should I keep playing now, after having completed every achievement in the game? I am certainly not going to start a second character now or join other prog groups since it will literally have no meaning."
"I'm afraid of logging into my alts now, since a lot of achievements may now be permanently registered as being first unlocked by "MuleMaster" instead of my main." (Particularly those like Black Market Mogul and the such).
"This is probably going to break the game so badly, I'll take a couple of weeks break from ESO just so I don't risk losing anything..."
Personally, I abhor this idea. I enjoyed hunting for monster trophies on my alts. I enjoyed fishing on my alts. Or clearing every delve on a map, or every skyshard... I got a little bit of happy chemicals each time that flag popped up for ACHIEVEMENT COMPLETE. Now I'll seldom see it again. All the time I've spent chasing that high will mean nothing. Since the announcement dropped, I find myself logging in and just forcing myself to do something random, or just wander around with not much will to work on anything. Trying to convince myself that deep down, it may not be that bad. Then look at my achievement lists and realize I'm just lying to myself. There's zero incentive to log into my templar. Or my sorc. Or my necro. Or my warden...... Why should I anyway? Nothing they have now will mean anything in a few weeks, neither will there be an interest in chasing achievements on them that my main already has because.... Oh yeah. They won't even be achievements anymore!
Should have started by consolidating those achievements that are actually the reason why people might want this, such as trifectas, instead of loading them all into the same bag. Then depending on reception, work from there. But for the love of Talos ask the players, not just scan the forums for what's being whined about before making this sort of change. Somehow, I am finding it extremely hard to accept that checking a database for achievements is such a huge burden that performance will suddenly be that much better when this change drops.
I did not want this, I did not ask for this, and this will severely hinder my ability to enjoy the game and keep coming back.
(Have you noticed how people seem so much more interested/troubled with the achievement change than with the whole new chapter and its card game gimmick? Makes a person think.)
@Kesstryl Thanks again for responding and sharing more player perspective. As noted earlier, we'll share this with the team regarding communication.
One last point on moderation, as we don't want to steer off-course of the original topic. Generally discussing moderation practice is against community rules, as those conversations are more helpful when addressed in a one-on-one capacity. However, for threads closed down, mods generally share their justification related to community guidelines. However, there's always room to discuss mod action and have it adjusted. Many of you have also reached out when threads are closed via DM and we work to resolve those. If you have concerns about a specific action taken, please submit an appeal ticket via help.elderscrollsonline.com and we would be happy to review it with you.
We are reviewing the conversations here related to communication, so please continue to share your thoughts and ideas. Thank you @Kesstryl for your insightful post and spinning this conversation up.
Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Trust us a little more?
Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
Couldn't agree more and this is exactly as I and others have experienced and described it. It's a closed system, without apparent external oversight, where even evidenced 'appeals' are summarily rejected accompanied by canned responses where they haven't even bothered to adjust the standard reply to reflect the actual issue.nightstrike wrote: »Lastly, to a few points made regarding the silencing or burying of posts. This is not happening. If players break community guidelines while trying to express their thoughts, posts will be edited or removed. Not in an effort to silence, but because guidelines were broken.
I respectfully, but completely, disagree. You have an Orwellian system here where just talking about how bad it is results in censorship.
The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments.
Lastly, to a few points made regarding the silencing or burying of posts. This is not happening.
The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
You start by saying the customers were given exactly what they said they wanted, and finish by saying that customers are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and have no idea how things work.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the decision which you say you wouldn't have handled any differently.
The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments.
That's not actually what I heard. There was apparently a player (who shall remain unnamed to avoid censorship) who actually intensely spammed Zos's feeds non-stop with requests for account wide achievements. The guy harassed them in every way possible with this request, and is allegedly the reason this goofy change was even put up for consideration. This is how things normally go on here. One person who is either loud, influential, or both makes a lot of noise about something, and that gets interpreted as "the community asked for...", rather than "One persistent person asked for...".
The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
You start by saying the customers were given exactly what they said they wanted, and finish by saying that customers are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and have no idea how things work.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the decision which you say you wouldn't have handled any differently.
[snip]
Players said they want account based achievments and players said that they want to keep character based achievments. The majority of players choose exactly one of these 2 options. The choice of having both at the same time was not taken by many and countered by some players that liked character based only with various reasons. So tehre was a majority for one of the absolut choices.
As a resault there where enought players supporting account based achievments, but nearly noone supporting the middle ground of having both. Now the players come and dislike the option choosen because they couldnt bother accepting or supporting a middle ground solution earlier. And here we are with "the customers got exactly what they wanted" which is account based achivments and "they where incapable of saying what they realy want" which would have been a mixed system.The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments.
That's not actually what I heard. There was apparently a player (who shall remain unnamed to avoid censorship) who actually intensely spammed Zos's feeds non-stop with requests for account wide achievements. The guy harassed them in every way possible with this request, and is allegedly the reason this goofy change was even put up for consideration. This is how things normally go on here. One person who is either loud, influential, or both makes a lot of noise about something, and that gets interpreted as "the community asked for...", rather than "One persistent person asked for...".
[snip]
[Minor edit for bait.]
The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
You start by saying the customers were given exactly what they said they wanted, and finish by saying that customers are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and have no idea how things work.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the decision which you say you wouldn't have handled any differently.
[snip]
Players said they want account based achievments and players said that they want to keep character based achievments. The majority of players choose exactly one of these 2 options. The choice of having both at the same time was not taken by many and countered by some players that liked character based only with various reasons. So tehre was a majority for one of the absolut choices.
As a resault there where enought players supporting account based achievments, but nearly noone supporting the middle ground of having both. Now the players come and dislike the option choosen because they couldnt bother accepting or supporting a middle ground solution earlier. And here we are with "the customers got exactly what they wanted" which is account based achivments and "they where incapable of saying what they realy want" which would have been a mixed system.The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments.
That's not actually what I heard. There was apparently a player (who shall remain unnamed to avoid censorship) who actually intensely spammed Zos's feeds non-stop with requests for account wide achievements. The guy harassed them in every way possible with this request, and is allegedly the reason this goofy change was even put up for consideration. This is how things normally go on here. One person who is either loud, influential, or both makes a lot of noise about something, and that gets interpreted as "the community asked for...", rather than "One persistent person asked for...".
[snip]
[Minor edit for bait.]
Along with that, the development process is a complicated one. One with many moving parts and your feedback is one important part of that process. The dev team uses a variety of tools and metrics along with user feedback to make choices that are beneficial to the long-term success of ESO. Some of this info is not available to players as they are internal metrics and tools. This disconnect can sometimes cause friction between player expectation and dev implementation. Again, this does circle back to how we communicate information around systems/features and we will continue to work on that process.
Raevenglass wrote: »@ZOS_Kevin Thank you for that response! I think this is the type of communication the community is craving in this thread in particular.
I think it's clear that AwA is going to happen, and some of the conversations here have helped me see where some really want this. I understand the desire for having the dyes. busts, titles across an account. Will I judge you if your level 2 character is supporting the "Godslayer" title, maaayyyybbbbeee a little. But I'll get over it.
The point is - I can see what those in favor of AwA are excited about. And most of it, I can live with.
What I am still feeling real pain over is the fact I am going to lose my immersion part of the game that I so enjoy. I still don't understand why I have to lose the gameplay of having alts that are "new" to the world and not viewed by Tamriel as a seasoned veteran.
Do the developers understand what we are upset about? Do they see our points? Is there a solution that might work?
Basically - are we being heard?
Thanks.
The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
You start by saying the customers were given exactly what they said they wanted, and finish by saying that customers are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and have no idea how things work.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the decision which you say you wouldn't have handled any differently.
[snip]
Players said they want account based achievments and players said that they want to keep character based achievments. The majority of players choose exactly one of these 2 options. The choice of having both at the same time was not taken by many and countered by some players that liked character based only with various reasons. So tehre was a majority for one of the absolut choices.
As a resault there where enought players supporting account based achievments, but nearly noone supporting the middle ground of having both. Now the players come and dislike the option choosen because they couldnt bother accepting or supporting a middle ground solution earlier. And here we are with "the customers got exactly what they wanted" which is account based achivments and "they where incapable of saying what they realy want" which would have been a mixed system.The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments.
That's not actually what I heard. There was apparently a player (who shall remain unnamed to avoid censorship) who actually intensely spammed Zos's feeds non-stop with requests for account wide achievements. The guy harassed them in every way possible with this request, and is allegedly the reason this goofy change was even put up for consideration. This is how things normally go on here. One person who is either loud, influential, or both makes a lot of noise about something, and that gets interpreted as "the community asked for...", rather than "One persistent person asked for...".
[snip]
[Minor edit for bait.]The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
You start by saying the customers were given exactly what they said they wanted, and finish by saying that customers are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and have no idea how things work.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the decision which you say you wouldn't have handled any differently.
[snip]
Players said they want account based achievments and players said that they want to keep character based achievments. The majority of players choose exactly one of these 2 options. The choice of having both at the same time was not taken by many and countered by some players that liked character based only with various reasons. So tehre was a majority for one of the absolut choices.
As a resault there where enought players supporting account based achievments, but nearly noone supporting the middle ground of having both. Now the players come and dislike the option choosen because they couldnt bother accepting or supporting a middle ground solution earlier. And here we are with "the customers got exactly what they wanted" which is account based achivments and "they where incapable of saying what they realy want" which would have been a mixed system.The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments.
That's not actually what I heard. There was apparently a player (who shall remain unnamed to avoid censorship) who actually intensely spammed Zos's feeds non-stop with requests for account wide achievements. The guy harassed them in every way possible with this request, and is allegedly the reason this goofy change was even put up for consideration. This is how things normally go on here. One person who is either loud, influential, or both makes a lot of noise about something, and that gets interpreted as "the community asked for...", rather than "One persistent person asked for...".
[snip]
[Minor edit for bait.]
Where exactly did you get your information that players wanted one of two choices but not both? I'd like to see this poll.
The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.
The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
You start by saying the customers were given exactly what they said they wanted, and finish by saying that customers are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and have no idea how things work.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the decision which you say you wouldn't have handled any differently.
[snip]
Players said they want account based achievments and players said that they want to keep character based achievments. The majority of players choose exactly one of these 2 options. The choice of having both at the same time was not taken by many and countered by some players that liked character based only with various reasons. So tehre was a majority for one of the absolut choices.
As a resault there where enought players supporting account based achievments, but nearly noone supporting the middle ground of having both. Now the players come and dislike the option choosen because they couldnt bother accepting or supporting a middle ground solution earlier. And here we are with "the customers got exactly what they wanted" which is account based achivments and "they where incapable of saying what they realy want" which would have been a mixed system.The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments.
That's not actually what I heard. There was apparently a player (who shall remain unnamed to avoid censorship) who actually intensely spammed Zos's feeds non-stop with requests for account wide achievements. The guy harassed them in every way possible with this request, and is allegedly the reason this goofy change was even put up for consideration. This is how things normally go on here. One person who is either loud, influential, or both makes a lot of noise about something, and that gets interpreted as "the community asked for...", rather than "One persistent person asked for...".
[snip]
[Minor edit for bait.]The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.Not just a yes or no answer, like would you like Account Wide Achievements (duh), but asking HOW we would like to see things implemented.
Whats the point? You get endless discussions between ppl and, like its already, ppl get mad when their way is not used. Besides that options come with technical limitations or implications that most ppl dont understand.
From a dev perspective the way they handle this situation is exactly the right one and i would not handle it any differently. The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments. There was also a lot of strain on the database and the request gave an opportunity to do exactly that. End result is a system that works exactly like originally requested.
Ppl are mad about it now because they dont like the change, so the table has turned. But in the past where the feature was requested a common goal to combine both and get a clear request going was never done. So thats how it is now.Trust us a little more?
As a software dev i can tell you that my trust in customers is nearly zero. They are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and since they are mostly not from a tech background they often have no idea how things work.
You start by saying the customers were given exactly what they said they wanted, and finish by saying that customers are often incapable of saying exactly what they want and have no idea how things work.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the decision which you say you wouldn't have handled any differently.
[snip]
Players said they want account based achievments and players said that they want to keep character based achievments. The majority of players choose exactly one of these 2 options. The choice of having both at the same time was not taken by many and countered by some players that liked character based only with various reasons. So tehre was a majority for one of the absolut choices.
As a resault there where enought players supporting account based achievments, but nearly noone supporting the middle ground of having both. Now the players come and dislike the option choosen because they couldnt bother accepting or supporting a middle ground solution earlier. And here we are with "the customers got exactly what they wanted" which is account based achivments and "they where incapable of saying what they realy want" which would have been a mixed system.The feedback was that ppl would like to get account based achievments.
That's not actually what I heard. There was apparently a player (who shall remain unnamed to avoid censorship) who actually intensely spammed Zos's feeds non-stop with requests for account wide achievements. The guy harassed them in every way possible with this request, and is allegedly the reason this goofy change was even put up for consideration. This is how things normally go on here. One person who is either loud, influential, or both makes a lot of noise about something, and that gets interpreted as "the community asked for...", rather than "One persistent person asked for...".
[snip]
[Minor edit for bait.]
Where exactly did you get your information that players wanted one of two choices but not both? I'd like to see this poll.
You just have to read all the threads about it. They where mostly one sided. Players either layed out they like account based achievments because they like to play on various characters or they said they want to keep character based achievments because they see characters as entitites. A small number of players mentioned a hybrid system, but that was dismissed by some character based players because tehy realy did not want to get titles account based. There where countless of tehse threads over time.
The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.
With all due respect, you say their motivation is database performance in one reply, but then saying they're simply giving customers what they wanted in the next. The company is coming across as disingenuous.
There are three reasonable scenarios:
1. The company primarily wanted to reduce the data footprint, and getting to say they're implementing a 'feature' of accountwide achievements is icing.
2. The company primarily wanted to do accountwide achievements, and improving database performance is the icing.
3. The company wanted to give both accountwide and specific achievements, truly couldn't do both, and acted on the belief more players would be happy with accountwide in the long run. Improving database performance is the icing.
Under no scenarios did the customers ask for 'please get rid of character-specific achievements.' That was not a user requirement.
I would love to believe it was number 3, but that's not what the Q&A says. The Q&A vacillates between 1 and 2. This is eroding trust.
Seminolegirl1992 wrote: »The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.
With all due respect, you say their motivation is database performance in one reply, but then saying they're simply giving customers what they wanted in the next. The company is coming across as disingenuous.
There are three reasonable scenarios:
1. The company primarily wanted to reduce the data footprint, and getting to say they're implementing a 'feature' of accountwide achievements is icing.
2. The company primarily wanted to do accountwide achievements, and improving database performance is the icing.
3. The company wanted to give both accountwide and specific achievements, truly couldn't do both, and acted on the belief more players would be happy with accountwide in the long run. Improving database performance is the icing.
Under no scenarios did the customers ask for 'please get rid of character-specific achievements.' That was not a user requirement.
I would love to believe it was number 3, but that's not what the Q&A says. The Q&A vacillates between 1 and 2. This is eroding trust.
It's number 1 I think. They're not going to do anything in game that would increase the data footprint, i.e. implementing account wide achievements *in addition to* the achievement tab we have now, which is actually what people wanted (basically, we wanted AWA as a way to see what our characters have done while on a different character, without having to guess who did what and when...not essentially erase individual progress). Their goal here is to reduce the data footprint and cross their fingers that it has a real impact, because they're not sure what the heck else to do, so they're willing to try just about any incremental reduction in hopes they will add up. Same can be said for player housing. Increasing limits reduces performance. Etc.
wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »Seminolegirl1992 wrote: »The point is ZoS heard the user requirement "Players want Accountwide Achievements" and instead of doing any kind of critical thinking (that we can tell, as they won't even tell us they considered other options) is that they decided to implement Accountwide Achievements at the expense of cutting out an existing feature.
They explained exactly that a reson behind the change is the reduction in database space. In that case they decided that the reduction in space is long term better than having mixed mechanics, which would have increased database requirements btw.
With all due respect, you say their motivation is database performance in one reply, but then saying they're simply giving customers what they wanted in the next. The company is coming across as disingenuous.
There are three reasonable scenarios:
1. The company primarily wanted to reduce the data footprint, and getting to say they're implementing a 'feature' of accountwide achievements is icing.
2. The company primarily wanted to do accountwide achievements, and improving database performance is the icing.
3. The company wanted to give both accountwide and specific achievements, truly couldn't do both, and acted on the belief more players would be happy with accountwide in the long run. Improving database performance is the icing.
Under no scenarios did the customers ask for 'please get rid of character-specific achievements.' That was not a user requirement.
I would love to believe it was number 3, but that's not what the Q&A says. The Q&A vacillates between 1 and 2. This is eroding trust.
It's number 1 I think. They're not going to do anything in game that would increase the data footprint, i.e. implementing account wide achievements *in addition to* the achievement tab we have now, which is actually what people wanted (basically, we wanted AWA as a way to see what our characters have done while on a different character, without having to guess who did what and when...not essentially erase individual progress). Their goal here is to reduce the data footprint and cross their fingers that it has a real impact, because they're not sure what the heck else to do, so they're willing to try just about any incremental reduction in hopes they will add up. Same can be said for player housing. Increasing limits reduces performance. Etc.
So won't adding a new card game with achievements and 4 decks of cards to each player add data?
Are we removing character individuality to make room for the CCG?
Flying streamers, content creators, and press people to your office, making them sign an NDA and showing them the latest chapter is not necessary for gauging player feedback. Flying people to your office to show them content is not getting feedback, it's marketing. Giving content creators early access to chapters and private servers ahead of the PTS is not getting feedback, it's marketing.Some of that has been hindered by the pandemic. As we are not back in the office yet, it would be difficult to do some hands-on player experience with community members outside of PTS.
We are currently working on Accountwide Achievements. We are aiming for this feature to ship with Update 33, however, this is not at all guarenteed as the feature is still work in progress.
We expect the feature to work as follows:
When you log into a character all your achievements will be merged into one account- wide pool that will be shown across all characters.
The character that you first achieved the achievement on will be shown as tooltip when you hover over the achievement.
Not all achievements will be merged, however, due to technical reasons. These include:We are making this change due to performance concerns, as currently the database is storing too much achievement information which is slowing down character load.
- Dragonguard Daily Achievements
- Motif Achievements
- etc.
We understand this may be a controverial change so we wanted to gauge your response so we have enough time before the Update 33 PTS to make adjustments to the system.
Thank you for your thoughts and feedback, see you all in Tamriel!
CyberOnEso wrote: »Flying streamers, content creators, and press people to your office, making them sign an NDA and showing them the latest chapter is not necessary for gauging player feedback. Flying people to your office to show them content is not getting feedback, it's marketting. Giving content creators early access to chapters and private servers ahead of the PTS is not getting feedback, it's marketting.Some of that has been hindered by the pandemic. As we are not back in the office yet, it would be difficult to do some hands-on player experience with community members outside of PTS.
You don't need to work constantly in secrecy only sharing information with a select few people, when you are making large changes to the game, or even small changes, you can just say this is something you are planning.
Obviously you have been working on this feature for months. You could have posted a forum post when the Deadlands preview stream ended just sayingWe are currently working on Accountwide Achievements. We are aiming for this feature to ship with Update 33, however, this is not at all guarenteed as the feature is still work in progress.
We expect the feature to work as follows:
When you log into a character all your achievements will be merged into one account- wide pool that will be shown across all characters.
The character that you first achieved the achievement on will be shown as tooltip when you hover over the achievement.
Not all achievements will be merged, however, due to technical reasons. These include:We are making this change due to performance concerns, as currently the database is storing too much achievement information which is slowing down character load.
- Dragonguard Daily Achievements
- Motif Achievements
- etc.
We understand this may be a controverial change so we wanted to gauge your response so we have enough time before the Update 33 PTS to make adjustments to the system.
Thank you for your thoughts and feedback, see you all in Tamriel!
This is only de jure correct. Yes posts will get locked because because of guidelines are broken. However it seems to me that the actual enforcement of the rule is highly dependant on how the moderators (or bots - I am still unsure if random name+ random letter are real people or bots) feel about the thread is benefiacial about their agenda.Lastly, to a few points made regarding the silencing or burying of posts. This is not happening. If players break community guidelines while trying to express their thoughts, posts will be edited or removed. Not in an effort to silence, but because guidelines were broken. You are free to repost with content that does not break community guidelines. If anyone feels or suspects a post are being silenced or buried, please feel free to reach out to me and I will look into that personally. I will at the very least be able to provide an explanation.
Hopefully, this helps provide some context. Trust is needed on both sides for ESO to succeed and we can get there. We really do appreciate the feedback across the board. Please feel free to continue to add to the conversation.