New Achievements

tmbrinks

With all due respect. After a patch where you just gutted a play-style for many players by removing achievements on alt characters for "performant" issues, I find it insulting that the word "whopping" is used when adding new achievements to the game. Isn't that the antithesis of what we just went though? Why are these not pared down to keep things "performant"?

The fact that this is the language chosen after the feedback provided from the last cycle is astounding to me. More proof that it wasn't even read by those in charge I guess.

Edit: Misspelled word

alberichtano

tmbrinks wrote: »

With all due respect. After a patch where you just gutted a play-style for many players by removing achievements on alt characters for "performant" issues, I find it insulting that the word "whopping" is used when adding new achievements to the game. Isn't that the antithesis of what we just went though? Why are these not pared down to keep things "performant"?

The fact that this is the language chosen after the feedback provided from the last cycle in astounding to me. More proof that it wasn't even read by those in charge I guess.

Couldn't agree more.

Feels like "aw come on kid, I threw out all your old toys that you cherished and loved, but hey, here comes a lot of NEW toys you didn't ask for!"

Yay!?

Smaxx

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

alberichtano

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

Ten individual ones please.

tmbrinks

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

Dalsinthus

What exactly are you asking the Devs to do here? Provide fewer achievements in the Chapter? Roll back AWA? Communicate differently?

tmbrinks

Dalsinthus wrote: »

What exactly are you asking the Devs to do here? Provide fewer achievements in the Chapter? Roll back AWA? Communicate differently?

Communicate at all. And have some consistency in what they are doing, because adding a "whopping" 120+ achievements after they gutted achievements just last patch is inconsistency at it's finest.

I know they can't "roll it back", they've already irrevocably destroyed the old data on our characters and that ship has sailed.

Doesn't mean I can't make a comment pointing out that inconsistency.

Tandor

Also, given that they've now fixed the issue reported in the last PTS cycle in relation to Count Verandis, would it really be too much to ask ZOS to communicate now over whether that is it, or are there other issues previously reported to them that they are still working on? We still don't know which of those issues they regard as working as intended, which they acknowledge to be broken but which aren't going to be addressed, and which they acknowledge as bugs which they are working on.

Kesstryl

tmbrinks wrote: »

With all due respect. After a patch where you just gutted a play-style for many players by removing achievements on alt characters for "performant" issues, I find it insulting that the word "whopping" is used when adding new achievements to the game. Isn't that the antithesis of what we just went though? Why are these not pared down to keep things "performant"?

The fact that this is the language chosen after the feedback provided from the last cycle is astounding to me. More proof that it wasn't even read by those in charge I guess.

Edit: Misspelled word

I agree with this, and this is exactly what I feared. They removed our individual character achievements to make room for a ton of new ones. I'm still sad about this.

Tandor wrote: »

Also, given that they've now fixed the issue reported in the last PTS cycle in relation to Count Verandis, would it really be too much to ask ZOS to communicate now over whether that is it, or are there other issues previously reported to them that they are still working on? We still don't know which of those issues they regard as working as intended, which they acknowledge to be broken but which aren't going to be addressed, and which they acknowledge as bugs which they are working on.

This did encourage me, and I really hope they fix all the issues that still remain. We got our Vampire Dad back and fixed one NPC to not have DB/TG dialogue for innocent alts. This thread has been keeping track of the bugs AwA caused on NPCs on live, and I also posted it in the bug report for AwA forum here on PTS: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/600993/results-of-account-wide-achievements-testing-on-live-npc-interactions/p1

Remathilis

Clearly the answer is to never add a new achievement to the game again.

wolfie1.0.

tmbrinks wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

Which means that zos could have saved database and performance space by ditching half or all of the npc dialog from the game.

wolfie1.0.

Remathilis wrote: »

Clearly the answer is to never add a new achievement to the game again.

If the reasoning behind removing them is based on performance then yes. No new achievements until the game is stabilized. If the new chapter and future dlcs are good enough then they won't be needed.

Mushroomancer

tmbrinks wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

As much as I think the "performance" excuse is complete and utter BS, do you have a source on those numbers, or are they just something you came up with?

Regardless, what's the point of this post? That ZOS shouldn't add any more achievements because "Oh no, now [insert totally lore-accurate and immersive character name] can't get their own achievements and therefore can't be different from all my other characters, my immersion is ruined and there's no point to the game anymore because all that differentiates a character is what arbitrary milestone they can reach"?

I get people that used achievements as a way to track what they did and didn't do on each character, and ZOS should both add a way to properly track all of that, and patch actual immersion-breaking interactions with NPCs, but again, the solution isn't ZOS not adding any more achievements because RP McGee can't earn them twelve times over on all of his "unique" alts.

ArchangelIsraphel

Mushroomancer wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

As much as I think the "performance" excuse is complete and utter BS, do you have a source on those numbers, or are they just something you came up with?

Regardless, what's the point of this post? That ZOS shouldn't add any more achievements because "Oh no, now [insert totally lore-accurate and immersive character name] can't get their own achievements and therefore can't be different from all my other characters, my immersion is ruined and there's no point to the game anymore because all that differentiates a character is what arbitrary milestone they can reach"?

I get people that used achievements as a way to track what they did and didn't do on each character, and ZOS should both add a way to properly track all of that, and patch actual immersion-breaking interactions with NPCs, but again, the solution isn't ZOS not adding any more achievements because RP McGee can't earn them twelve times over on all of his "unique" alts.

The thing is, adding this many new achievements after claiming that they removed individual achievements for the sake of "performance" (performance? Where? I haven't seen any) is hypocrisy.

It makes the entire thing seem like nothing but an excuse. Which it is.

When are they going to start deleting account wide achievements to make room for new ones? When are they going to start deleting something else players cared about?

You have to realize that if they were willing to do this, then nothing is sacred when it comes to the game, and next time it might be something you cared about that gets the chop.

tmbrinks

Mushroomancer wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

As much as I think the "performance" excuse is complete and utter BS, do you have a source on those numbers, or are they just something you came up with?

Regardless, what's the point of this post? That ZOS shouldn't add any more achievements because "Oh no, now [insert totally lore-accurate and immersive character name] can't get their own achievements and therefore can't be different from all my other characters, my immersion is ruined and there's no point to the game anymore because all that differentiates a character is what arbitrary milestone they can reach"?

I get people that used achievements as a way to track what they did and didn't do on each character, and ZOS should both add a way to properly track all of that, and patch actual immersion-breaking interactions with NPCs, but again, the solution isn't ZOS not adding any more achievements because RP McGee can't earn them twelve times over on all of his "unique" alts.

Here's a comment from Code about the space taken currently, after a 'deep dive' into the code of the achievement system he knows how the system works. And between knowing Code, knowing what he does, and how much add-on development he's done for the game, I trust his numbers absolutely.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/7564374/#Comment_7564374

For the old achievement system they would not have been 192 bits, they would have been 128 bits.

128 bits x 18 characters x ~4000 achievements = 9,216,000 bits = 1,152,000 bytes ~ 1.098 MB of space for an entire account.

If you've followed any of my very detailed posts in the crafting section about writs, rewards, refining, etc... you'd know that I don't just throw around numbers arbitrarily, it's researched, checked, and confirmed before I post. And if I do make a mistake, I have owned up to it and will post corrections.

As far as to what's the point.... I answered that in a later post. Just pointing out the hypocrisy as @ArchangelIsraphel said later.

tmbrinks

wolfie1.0. wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

Which means that zos could have saved database and performance space by ditching half or all of the npc dialog from the game.

They could have... but perhaps they did a calculated decision on which change was going to have the least people go "meh, don't care enough about that" to continue to play (and pay). Perhaps the next cut done under the guise of "performance" will impact more players.

Mushroomancer

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

Mushroomancer wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

As much as I think the "performance" excuse is complete and utter BS, do you have a source on those numbers, or are they just something you came up with?

Regardless, what's the point of this post? That ZOS shouldn't add any more achievements because "Oh no, now [insert totally lore-accurate and immersive character name] can't get their own achievements and therefore can't be different from all my other characters, my immersion is ruined and there's no point to the game anymore because all that differentiates a character is what arbitrary milestone they can reach"?

I get people that used achievements as a way to track what they did and didn't do on each character, and ZOS should both add a way to properly track all of that, and patch actual immersion-breaking interactions with NPCs, but again, the solution isn't ZOS not adding any more achievements because RP McGee can't earn them twelve times over on all of his "unique" alts.

The thing is, adding this many new achievements after claiming that they removed individual achievements for the sake of "performance" (performance? Where? I haven't seen any) is hypocrisy.

It makes the entire thing seem like nothing but an excuse. Which it is.

Oh of course the "performance benefits" are an excuse, that's not even up for debate. They would have mentioned that from the start if the gains were so important, but of course they conveniently remembered they were a thing the moment they started feeling the backlash coming. I was just curious as to where OP got those numbers, that's all.

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

Mushroomancer wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

As much as I think the "performance" excuse is complete and utter BS, do you have a source on those numbers, or are they just something you came up with?

Regardless, what's the point of this post? That ZOS shouldn't add any more achievements because "Oh no, now [insert totally lore-accurate and immersive character name] can't get their own achievements and therefore can't be different from all my other characters, my immersion is ruined and there's no point to the game anymore because all that differentiates a character is what arbitrary milestone they can reach"?

I get people that used achievements as a way to track what they did and didn't do on each character, and ZOS should both add a way to properly track all of that, and patch actual immersion-breaking interactions with NPCs, but again, the solution isn't ZOS not adding any more achievements because RP McGee can't earn them twelve times over on all of his "unique" alts.

When are they going to start deleting account wide achievements to make room for new ones? When are they going to start deleting something else players cared about?

You have to realize that if they were willing to do this, then nothing is sacred when it comes to the game, and next time it might be something you cared about that gets the chop.

Yeah, good luck to them with that. My ESO playtime is on low power mode right now. I basically log in just to run trials once, maybe twice a week. And that's not even because I am having fun with the game, but just because I have fun with my guildies.

tmbrinks wrote: »

Mushroomancer wrote: »

tmbrinks wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

Simple math. 100 account-wide achievements would be the same amount of data as 10 per character achievements on 10 characters. Do you prefer 100 achievements to obtain or 10 individual ones?

The combined size of the achievements per account (when every character had them) was less than the size of a (short) song encoded as an mp3.

(and that's actually false, because in the new AWA, the achievements take up MORE space individually because they have the "earned by" tagged with them as well, each achievement stored is actually 50% larger than it was before).

Simple math.

As much as I think the "performance" excuse is complete and utter BS, do you have a source on those numbers, or are they just something you came up with?

Regardless, what's the point of this post? That ZOS shouldn't add any more achievements because "Oh no, now [insert totally lore-accurate and immersive character name] can't get their own achievements and therefore can't be different from all my other characters, my immersion is ruined and there's no point to the game anymore because all that differentiates a character is what arbitrary milestone they can reach"?

I get people that used achievements as a way to track what they did and didn't do on each character, and ZOS should both add a way to properly track all of that, and patch actual immersion-breaking interactions with NPCs, but again, the solution isn't ZOS not adding any more achievements because RP McGee can't earn them twelve times over on all of his "unique" alts.

Here's a comment from Code about the space taken currently, after a 'deep dive' into the code of the achievement system he knows how the system works. And between knowing Code, knowing what he does, and how much add-on development he's done for the game, I trust his numbers absolutely.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/7564374/#Comment_7564374

For the old achievement system they would not have been 192 bits, they would have been 128 bits.

128 bits x 18 characters x ~4000 achievements = 9,216,000 bits = 1,152,000 bytes ~ 1.098 MB of space for an entire account.

If you've followed any of my very detailed posts in the crafting section about writs, rewards, refining, etc... you'd know that I don't just throw around numbers arbitrarily, it's researched, checked, and confirmed before I post. And if I do make a mistake, I have owned up to it and will post corrections.

As far as to what's the point.... I answered that in a later post. Just pointing out the hypocrisy as @ArchangelIsraphel said later.

Hm, thanks for the source. That's good to know, and it does prove that ZOS is *** us on this one most definitely.
But no, I don't have the time, nor, quite frankly, the will to follow your post history just to know that you don't throw around numbers.

kringled_1

This was obvious even with the ascending tide release. AT had just about as many achievements as every other dungeon dlc for the past 3 years. If zos just realized that they have a problem with database space, my expectation is that they at least cut back on new achievements to remove the less significant ones. But instead we get business as usual, no possible future database problems behavior.