Gold Road patch notes: New Environmental Sustainability Features... Can we turn these off?

Necrotech_Master

Northwold wrote: »

Just to correct some not entirely accurate information on here, if you reduce a 120 FPS raster game to 30 FPS while away from keyboard, on an efficient current gen graphics card, you are going to see power savings. Taking the 4070 as an energy efficient example, the reduction in power consumption is likely to be of the order of 40W during the time the frame rate is reduced.

It's a little worrying that people think such reductions don't change anything. Every reduction in power consumption very obviously changes the total amount of energy consumed and therefore energy that needs to be generated. The effect, to state the obvious, is cumulative, from reducing energy consumption in lightbulbs, to hairdryers, to televisions.

And no, a single person playing ESO at a lower frame rate is not going to change the world. But reducing completely unnecessary energy consumption (by definition, you aren't doing anything in the game when this happens) throughout many games and many gamers does lead to important reductions in energy consumption. In exactly the same way as one person changing one lightbulb to LED doesn't achieve much. But the cumulative effect of everyone doing so is appreciable.

Honestly, I'm baffled that people can't see why this matters. We are not each our own island. The energy consumption of all of us on everything adds up. We can't simply look at it as what one person does with one thing. That's ridiculous.

if your gaming session is 2 hours, and its reduced by 40 watts for <5 minutes, its effectively not changing anything

that amount compared to say the amount you consume in a day, is probably less than 1%, i wouldnt even expect to notice a difference on my electric bill honestly

your HVAC system likely consumes 10x more power than your PC does over the course of a day, so turning that off would make a much larger impact, but good luck enjoying your house when its freezing cold or super hot out (if i didnt run my AC and an evaporative cooler, my computer room would be sitting at 80-82 degrees F when the outside temps are 75-80 degrees F

if the screen dimming reduced my electric bill for the month by 20% then i would consider using it, but with as minimal change that it would do, i dont think it would even be noticeable difference at all, especially compared with other higher power cost things such as a heating or cooling system, or even a dishwasher/washer/dryer

dkblight

I bought a house with Tesla Solar Panels, I produce more electricity than I consume. If I want my lights, AC, and PC on ALL day, I can do so with no impact.

Perhaps in the future, run a weekly announced poll on possible "features" the teams are thinking about implementing in the future and actually READ the input creating real compromises.

Trade/Mail
Ink drop rate
FPS/Screen issues

There are a lot of upset people in many of my trade guilds consider strongly, quitting the game on the trade/mail changes alone.

Little changes like these have HUGE repercussions that you should OPENLY discuss with the consumers. Layout a general budget on what you can do, would like to do, and it's not in the cards to do.

People may be willing to spend more on plus if it means that money will go into actual changes the community here and now agree upon.

We complain because we LOVE ESO.

edward_frigidhands

Northwold wrote: »

Just to correct some not entirely accurate information on here, if you reduce a 120 FPS raster game to 30 FPS while away from keyboard, on an efficient current gen graphics card, you are going to see power savings. Taking the 4070 as an energy efficient example, the reduction in power consumption is likely to be of the order of 40W during the time the frame rate is reduced.

It's a little worrying that people think such reductions don't change anything. Every reduction in power consumption very obviously changes the total amount of energy consumed and therefore energy that needs to be generated. The effect, to state the obvious, is cumulative, from reducing energy consumption in lightbulbs, to hairdryers, to televisions.

And no, a single person playing ESO at a lower frame rate is not going to change the world. But reducing completely unnecessary energy consumption (by definition, you aren't doing anything in the game when this happens) throughout many games and many gamers does lead to important reductions in energy consumption. In exactly the same way as one person changing one lightbulb to LED doesn't achieve much. But the cumulative effect of everyone doing so is appreciable.

Honestly, I'm baffled that people can't see why this matters. We are not each our own island. The energy consumption of all of us on everything adds up. We can't simply look at it as what one person does with one thing. That's ridiculous.

You still have not been able to answer how these adjustments will translate to a change in the world's climate.

The conversation should remain focused on whether the changes should be a choice until or unless you have some answers regarding how making these changes in Elder Scrolls Online will change the climate of the world.

Northwold

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

Northwold wrote: »

Just to correct some not entirely accurate information on here, if you reduce a 120 FPS raster game to 30 FPS while away from keyboard, on an efficient current gen graphics card, you are going to see power savings. Taking the 4070 as an energy efficient example, the reduction in power consumption is likely to be of the order of 40W during the time the frame rate is reduced.

It's a little worrying that people think such reductions don't change anything. Every reduction in power consumption very obviously changes the total amount of energy consumed and therefore energy that needs to be generated. The effect, to state the obvious, is cumulative, from reducing energy consumption in lightbulbs, to hairdryers, to televisions.

And no, a single person playing ESO at a lower frame rate is not going to change the world. But reducing completely unnecessary energy consumption (by definition, you aren't doing anything in the game when this happens) throughout many games and many gamers does lead to important reductions in energy consumption. In exactly the same way as one person changing one lightbulb to LED doesn't achieve much. But the cumulative effect of everyone doing so is appreciable.

Honestly, I'm baffled that people can't see why this matters. We are not each our own island. The energy consumption of all of us on everything adds up. We can't simply look at it as what one person does with one thing. That's ridiculous.

if your gaming session is 2 hours, and its reduced by 40 watts for <5 minutes, its effectively not changing anything

that amount compared to say the amount you consume in a day, is probably less than 1%, i wouldnt even expect to notice a difference on my electric bill honestly

your HVAC system likely consumes 10x more power than your PC does over the course of a day, so turning that off would make a much larger impact, but good luck enjoying your house when its freezing cold or super hot out (if i didnt run my AC and an evaporative cooler, my computer room would be sitting at 80-82 degrees F when the outside temps are 75-80 degrees F

if the screen dimming reduced my electric bill for the month by 20% then i would consider using it, but with as minimal change that it would do, i dont think it would even be noticeable difference at all, especially compared with other higher power cost things such as a heating or cooling system, or even a dishwasher/washer/dryer

Clearly, this is a national attitude difference. I don't have an HVAC system and nor does anyone I know. If people are using air con at 24 degrees celsius god help us all, frankly.

Necrotech_Master

Northwold wrote: »

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

Northwold wrote: »

Just to correct some not entirely accurate information on here, if you reduce a 120 FPS raster game to 30 FPS while away from keyboard, on an efficient current gen graphics card, you are going to see power savings. Taking the 4070 as an energy efficient example, the reduction in power consumption is likely to be of the order of 40W during the time the frame rate is reduced.

It's a little worrying that people think such reductions don't change anything. Every reduction in power consumption very obviously changes the total amount of energy consumed and therefore energy that needs to be generated. The effect, to state the obvious, is cumulative, from reducing energy consumption in lightbulbs, to hairdryers, to televisions.

And no, a single person playing ESO at a lower frame rate is not going to change the world. But reducing completely unnecessary energy consumption (by definition, you aren't doing anything in the game when this happens) throughout many games and many gamers does lead to important reductions in energy consumption. In exactly the same way as one person changing one lightbulb to LED doesn't achieve much. But the cumulative effect of everyone doing so is appreciable.

Honestly, I'm baffled that people can't see why this matters. We are not each our own island. The energy consumption of all of us on everything adds up. We can't simply look at it as what one person does with one thing. That's ridiculous.

if your gaming session is 2 hours, and its reduced by 40 watts for <5 minutes, its effectively not changing anything

that amount compared to say the amount you consume in a day, is probably less than 1%, i wouldnt even expect to notice a difference on my electric bill honestly

your HVAC system likely consumes 10x more power than your PC does over the course of a day, so turning that off would make a much larger impact, but good luck enjoying your house when its freezing cold or super hot out (if i didnt run my AC and an evaporative cooler, my computer room would be sitting at 80-82 degrees F when the outside temps are 75-80 degrees F

if the screen dimming reduced my electric bill for the month by 20% then i would consider using it, but with as minimal change that it would do, i dont think it would even be noticeable difference at all, especially compared with other higher power cost things such as a heating or cooling system, or even a dishwasher/washer/dryer

Clearly, this is a national attitude difference. I don't have an HVAC system and nor does anyone I know.

yeah i have no idea where you live, but in the US having a heating/cooling system in the house is fairly standard (there are places where people dont have it but the majority do)

during the periods of the year when its like the right temp outside (about 50-60 degrees F outside), i dont need to run the heating or cooling as much to keep it comfortable, and those are also the periods where i notice a vast difference on my electric bill

ive left my computer on for a week (combination of use and idling), doesnt affect my electricity costs at all, but if its say cold outside (like 20 degrees F or something), and my heating system is running a lot, that could end up being a $30-60 difference in my electric bill

this is just in my case, as i do pay attention to my electric bills, and i run energy efficient light bulbs and keep lights off when im not in the rooms etc, but this is more to just reduce my electric bill, not change energy conservation reasons

Syldras

Northwold wrote: »

It's a little worrying that people think such reductions don't change anything. Every reduction in power consumption very obviously changes the total amount of energy consumed and therefore energy that needs to be generated.

I agree with you is this regard. One cannot argue that a reduction, no matter how small, is still a reduction, and when we're considering that ESO has a playerbase of a few million people, it does accumulate. Albeit I think that it's still a very minor change, especially when compared to all kinds of other measures.

And this is one point: To save energy, other measures would make much more sense. It also feels a bit strange if a company is so proud of auto-dimming people's screens in a game which has little effect in the amount of energy saved, but at the same time, I mean, look at the pompous game shows they do, with flashy lights and huge walls of screens and all that. Look at their marketing, how they present themselves in stores, etc.

Also, as I've written before, I think that education matters. Educate people, inform them - many would want to reduce their energy consumption anyway, in a way that they find fitting for their own life and their habits (which they themselves know best), because it also saves them money.

In any way, it should remain a choice.

And another thing that would help is switching from coal or oil to "renewable" energy (water, wind, sun). In Europe, there are a few countries that have already reached 80% or more, my country is at 55%, I think. And the USA are at about 20% (which seems a bit strange to me as the landscapes with vast plains, oceans in the East and West, huge rivers and dams, seem to be ideal for it).

Syldras

And to join the AC discussion: I'm not sure if there's any European country where air conditions are common (unless in cars that might get extremely hot in the sun, and in a few hotels)? In my country no one has one and 32 degrees C in summer are completely normal (on particularly hot days it can even be 38 c; over 40 does happen rarely, but is considered unusual). 32 c are 90 degrees f, according to Google's converter. 38 c is 101 f. 40 c is 104 f.

katanagirl1

Syldras wrote: »

And to join the AC discussion: I'm not sure if there's any European country where air conditions are common (unless in cars that might get extremely hot in the sun, and in a few hotels)? In my country no one has one and 32 degrees C in summer are completely normal (on particularly hot days it can even be 38 c; over 40 does happen rarely, but is considered unusual). 32 c are 90 degrees f, according to Google's converter. 38 c is 101 f. 40 c is 104 f.

How do you keep your computers cool enough to even play ESO?

Syldras

katanagirl1 wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

And to join the AC discussion: I'm not sure if there's any European country where air conditions are common (unless in cars that might get extremely hot in the sun, and in a few hotels)? In my country no one has one and 32 degrees C in summer are completely normal (on particularly hot days it can even be 38 c; over 40 does happen rarely, but is considered unusual). 32 c are 90 degrees f, according to Google's converter. 38 c is 101 f. 40 c is 104 f.

How do you keep your computers cool enough to even play ESO?

There are never any problems.

It really sounds like a strange question to people here. And I'm not even living in a tropical country but in the Middle Europe. How do the people in India, Malaysia or Thailand use computers? There, the temperatures can rise up to 40 or even 45 degrees C (104 - 113 F) in summer and poorer people have no air condition.

Or not even Asia. When I've been to Italy, there were many days with temperatures between 38 and 42 C. I've been in rural areas, no AC anywhere. People might have a fan in their room. Other than that you just close the curtains when it's sunny, air the room in the morning, evening and night when it's cooler, and keep windows and doors closed during the hottest hours.

Elsonso

Northwold wrote: »

Honestly, I'm baffled that people can't see why this matters. We are not each our own island. The energy consumption of all of us on everything adds up. We can't simply look at it as what one person does with one thing. That's ridiculous.

I am not impressed by the energy consumption savings this affords. The savings from a million players playing every day is still insignificant compared to an entire planet of energy consumption. The words "Environmental Sustainability" over-sell the feature, I think.

This is just a new "auto-dim feature" for inactive players that cannot be turned off by the players in the settings dialog. It should have had an option to turn it off.

TaSheen

*shrug* I live in the US desert southwest (though at 7k feet, so....) I don't have an AC unit or heat pump. We do get up into the 100s in July and August, but we manage with fans (and when it gets next door to unbearable for me - husband has no issues - I have a portable swamp cooler).

Power bills here are extremely low (well.... except for the local "robber barons" with their multi million dollar "getaways" - but yeah, they deserve whatever they get, and actually, they do make the bills cheaper for the rest of us. Supposedly).

FlopsyPrince

ESG scores once again are very important!

FlopsyPrince

Ironically, we could use some warning before we are kicked. Many times I am booted because I waited just a couple of seconds too long. We get a warning if we try to log out many places, but none for "inactivity".

edward_frigidhands

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

ESG scores once again are very important!

I don't know if it's that in this scenario.

Without access to information that led to the decision, it's all just guesswork.

I do think that allowing an option to adjust it or turn it off entirely would be a fair compromise. It's in the game for people to toggle based on their need and comfort that way.

Elsonso

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

Ironically, we could use some warning before we are kicked. Many times I am booted because I waited just a couple of seconds too long. We get a warning if we try to log out many places, but none for "inactivity".

I've had that happen. I am used to WoW, where there is a warning and a change in the character's idle.

In this game, my hands on the keyboard, waiting for the game to finish logging me out so that I can log back in again. A simple warning, or countdown, would have saved all of the server overhead related to me logging back in and loading a character 10 seconds later.

Jaraal

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

Ironically, we could use some warning before we are kicked. Many times I am booted because I waited just a couple of seconds too long. We get a warning if we try to log out many places, but none for "inactivity".

The coding for something like that is already in place, and used in Cyrodiil. After a certain amount of time of being dead, you get a notification that an automatic revival will be taking place shortly, and you get a ticking clock sound and a timer icon on your screen for 30 seconds before you are ported back to base.

It shouldn't be difficult to enable the same thing as a warning before the sudden kick for inactivity.

SkaiFaith

I'm sure people that just bought an 8K 65" TV with a gigantic "energy efficiency class F-" sticker on it really care and appreciate having this new environmental feature forced on.

Sarcasm aside - It's. A. Matter. Of. Choice.

Many people have already very well argued this point in this thread.
The feature itself could even dim the screen every 0.01 second of inactivity and save 50%+ energy - it doesn't really matter. What matters is giving the customer an informed choice.

katanagirl1

Syldras wrote: »

katanagirl1 wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

And to join the AC discussion: I'm not sure if there's any European country where air conditions are common (unless in cars that might get extremely hot in the sun, and in a few hotels)? In my country no one has one and 32 degrees C in summer are completely normal (on particularly hot days it can even be 38 c; over 40 does happen rarely, but is considered unusual). 32 c are 90 degrees f, according to Google's converter. 38 c is 101 f. 40 c is 104 f.

How do you keep your computers cool enough to even play ESO?

There are never any problems.

It really sounds like a strange question to people here. And I'm not even living in a tropical country but in the Middle Europe. How do the people in India, Malaysia or Thailand use computers? There, the temperatures can rise up to 40 or even 45 degrees C (104 - 113 F) in summer and poorer people have no air condition.

Or not even Asia. When I've been to Italy, there were many days with temperatures between 38 and 42 C. I've been in rural areas, no AC anywhere. People might have a fan in their room. Other than that you just close the curtains when it's sunny, air the room in the morning, evening and night when it's cooler, and keep windows and doors closed during the hottest hours.

In general it’s not an odd question. It’s just that electronics don’t like hot temperatures.

Syldras

katanagirl1 wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

katanagirl1 wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

And to join the AC discussion: I'm not sure if there's any European country where air conditions are common (unless in cars that might get extremely hot in the sun, and in a few hotels)? In my country no one has one and 32 degrees C in summer are completely normal (on particularly hot days it can even be 38 c; over 40 does happen rarely, but is considered unusual). 32 c are 90 degrees f, according to Google's converter. 38 c is 101 f. 40 c is 104 f.

How do you keep your computers cool enough to even play ESO?

There are never any problems.

It really sounds like a strange question to people here. And I'm not even living in a tropical country but in the Middle Europe. How do the people in India, Malaysia or Thailand use computers? There, the temperatures can rise up to 40 or even 45 degrees C (104 - 113 F) in summer and poorer people have no air condition.

Or not even Asia. When I've been to Italy, there were many days with temperatures between 38 and 42 C. I've been in rural areas, no AC anywhere. People might have a fan in their room. Other than that you just close the curtains when it's sunny, air the room in the morning, evening and night when it's cooler, and keep windows and doors closed during the hottest hours.

In general it’s not an odd question. It’s just that electronics don’t like hot temperatures.

Yeah, the thing that's weird is that there seem to be people who think that temperatures above 25 degrees C are hot. Asking how our electronics don't die on a normal 28 to 32 C summer day just sounds bizarre. Asking me (or the average European) how we protect our dogs on summer walks so they don't get set aflame by the sun would be on the same level of weirdness.

MJallday

Perhaps if they shortened respawn timers on bosses, increased drop rates and sped up the game generally, we’d finish our game session sooner and turn off our computers earlier - therefore saving power

This change does nothing. [snip]

[edited for trolling]

SilverBride

I do not understand why a screen going dark and fps dropping while afk is so distressing. What does it matter if we aren't actually at the screen and actively playing? The second we return and make some kind of movement it immediately returns to normal so why is this such a huge problem?

Vrelanier

I like it! It's good.

I think if you can't handle a screen dim after 5 mins of being afk, you should be logged straight off after said 5 mins.

I also think that having a choice about this kind of thing would be good.

I also think that some people's reaction to the screen dim in this thread is so wild that we're all better off now that we don't have a choice. I wonder if this kind of people are the reason it was not optional in the first place.

Also, I question what else does ZoS do about the climate change. What other environmental policies do they have, and where can I read about them? I hope the screen dim is only one step of many, but I couldn't find anything. Only some stuff about environment artists.

SilverBride

I have no reason to think that there is any motive other than Environmental Sustainability as was announced. These changes do not affect gameplay at all and are better for the environment so why the huge uproar? Because they didn't ask the players first? They don't have to get permission from anyone to do anything to their game.

I am frankly shocked by the pushback for something that is beneficial to our planet.

Syldras

MJallday wrote: »

Perhaps if they shortened respawn timers on bosses, increased drop rates and sped up the game generally, we’d finish our game session sooner and turn off our computers earlier - therefore saving power

I'm rarely afk, I get everything else done before a gaming session (I eat beforehand, I fetch something to drink so I don't have to get up and walk to the kitchen inbetween, not out of lazyness, but actually because I don't necessarily want to have the game running for nothing), if there's a bigger interruption ahead, I log off. The only situation where I'm afk for some moment is if someone's ringing the doorbell or some other unexpected interruption happens (and if it's looking like it will take longer, I get back to my computer and log off fast).

That said, waiting at WB, dolmens, etc, is absolutely the main situation where I'm logged in but not doing anything. During the jubilee event where you could get special weapon and outfit styles from bosses and world events, this happened excessively. I camped for 9 and a half hours at the same world boss (over several days, 2-3 hours per day) until I finally got what I wanted. I ran dolmens for over 13(!) hours in total - not getting anything in the end, by the way. So we have almost 23 hours where I spent most of the time just waiting. I think it was usually about 5 minutes of waiting, then 1 minute of fighting, then 5 minutes of waiting again. This was much worse than my usual play style where I'm constantly doing something - no matter if questing, crafting, putting stuff in the guild store, fighting in the archive or a group dungeon, but at least I'm constantly playing, not idling around in-game.

Waiting at bosses or world events is also the main situation where the screen dimming annoys me, btw. As I'm unwilling to waste my time, I usually do something else while waiting, such as reading a book or having a browser open and writing emails or reading news or things like that, while having ESO open in the background. I keep a look at the windows task bar (and the mini window that shows up then) every now and then to see whether the boss has respawned or the dolmen is ready again. With screen dimming, it's too dark to see much. I could probably increase game brightness altogether, but I like dungeons and especially caves to be really dark, also, that would be absolutely counterproductive when it comes to the energy issue.

SilverBride

tincanman wrote: »

The 'push-back' is against the IMPLEMENTATION - if it had been set to off by default with an ingame setting to enable/disable then I, personally, would have been quite happy to accept it.

They chose to make their game more sustainable and they are not wrong for making that the default. If players are proactive in their own lives then that is great, but that does not mean they aren't allowed to do their part, too.

And it does not affect gameplay at all. ESO wasn't made to be played in the background so unless a player isn't paying attention to it at all there will be few times it will even kick in.

SilverBride

They aren't accusing anyone of not doing their part. They are just stepping up to do what they can, too.

Syldras

As this fits the current discussion again...

Northwold wrote: »

If people are using air con at 24 degrees celsius god help us all, frankly.

I've read that the ACs of New York City alone consume more power than the whole country of Sweden (not only heating, but the whole energy consumption, including industry, trade and private households).

And the power consumption of ACs in the whole USA exceeds that of the whole African continent.

That would be something where people could save lots of energy, if they want to (my opinion remains: it should be a personal choice). At 30 to 35 C, neither people nor electronics die. 25 C are absolutely nothing.

Insulating houses would also be beneficial, as it keeps the the heat inside in winter, so you need less heating, and it also shields from the heat in summer. It's standard in many European countries.

SilverBride

Jaraal wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not understand why a screen going dark and fps dropping while afk is so distressing. What does it matter if we aren't actually at the screen and actively playing? The second we return and make some kind of movement it immediately returns to normal so why is this such a huge problem?

Because

Jaraal wrote: »

There are plenty of times when I may be monitoring guild or zone chat while eating or doing something else, or watching keeps for enemy action, chatting with my group in Discord, being quiet during guild auctions, or something similar. Just because someone isn't pressing keys doesn't mean they aren't actively involved with the game.

And all it takes is one tiny move of the mouse or hitting a key etc. to bring the screen right back.

Elsonso

tincanman wrote: »

The 'push-back' is against the IMPLEMENTATION - if it had been set to off by default with an ingame setting to enable/disable then I, personally, would have been quite happy to accept it.

If they had done it and not mentioned it, it would probably have flown under the radar.

SilverBride wrote: »

They chose to make their game more sustainable and they are not wrong for making that the default. If players are proactive in their own lives then that is great, but that does not mean they aren't allowed to do their part, too.

I am all for meaningful reductions, but I don't see this one of those things. If they want to do something significant, bring it on. If they are doing more than "screen dimming", wonderful. I look forward to hearing from them about the rest of the stuff they are doing.

Desiato

Answer to the OP: yes

8 pages later......