DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Titles can be fun. Especially in an RPG.
Horizontal progression is great - especially for an RPG. RP is not always about being uber.
Vertical progression is going to reach a cap while the devs work on more content.
I enjoy Achievements because they add content to a game to people that are completionists.
I hope there are Achievements in Ashes, I hope you can inspect other players' Achievements and I definitely hope Achievements reward absolutely no stats or buffs, only titles and cosmetics.
Has anyone brought up the point that achievement systems may be an unnecessary bloat for servers?
Consider that, if each character needs its own unique record of all possible achievements in the game. From what I understand, these systems can be very intense at scale. Looking up every player's achievement records and comparing them to actions in real time constantly to update progress.
I understand that for modern games and databases this is not a huge deal, but most modern games are not trying to push 250v250+ hybrid MMO combat. The extra little-bit of stress on the servers could be the difference between having smoother battles and PowerPoint presentations.
Steven has expressed an interest in having 500v500 siege battles if possible. Even though I am personally very skeptical that such large battles will be fun or interesting compared to a 3v3 or 5v4 arena match. I still would like to see smooth large-scale battles sometime in my life.
Games like WOW and FFXIV have robust achievement systems and are modern MMOs, but both game struggle with large groups of players. If achievement systems are a limiting, factor in large scale PvP or would just cause a general amount of potential lag in the open world. I would definitely prefer not to have them.
Has anyone brought up the point that achievement systems may be an unnecessary bloat for servers?
Consider that, if each character needs its own unique record of all possible achievements in the game. From what I understand, these systems can be very intense at scale. Looking up every player's achievement records and comparing them to actions in real time constantly to update progress.
I understand that for modern games and databases this is not a huge deal, but most modern games are not trying to push 250v250+ hybrid MMO combat. The extra little-bit of stress on the servers could be the difference between having smoother battles and PowerPoint presentations.
Steven has expressed an interest in having 500v500 siege battles if possible. Even though I am personally very skeptical that such large battles will be fun or interesting compared to a 3v3 or 5v4 arena match. I still would like to see smooth large-scale battles sometime in my life.
Games like WOW and FFXIV have robust achievement systems and are modern MMOs, but both game struggle with large groups of players. If achievement systems are a limiting, factor in large scale PvP or would just cause a general amount of potential lag in the open world. I would definitely prefer not to have them.
Thoughts?
This is entirely possible as an issue.
Us players don't really have much of an understanding of what game features use what resources in terms of server-side computing. I remember talking to one developer that said that about 60% of their actual CPU compute on the server was for AI pathing (they did have a very good system for that though). You mention this to anyone that hasn't worked on that game though (even some developers that think they know the best way to do everything) and they just laugh and say there is no way.
I also remember an EQ2 developer once saying that every time a player kills a mob, the server has to check that mob against every quest the player has - which includes every achievement. This was quite a resource hog early in EQ2's life, though I have never heard more than the general statement that "it uses more server resources than you would think" from them.
Now, obviously this isn't the only way to do this in regards to the games back end, and my understanding is that EQ2 moved away from that system at some point.
However, one way or the other, there needs to be a system in place so that every quest is checked for every kill. When you have quests (or achievements - which are the same thing from a mechanical perspective) that ask you to kill 1,000 of a specific mob type, and the game has 25 different mobs that can be considered that mob type spread all over the game world - and also adds more mobs to the game later on that also need to update this quest - it starts to get fairly involved.
If it’s architected well, the amount of data to manage achievements for the player population is a relatively small implementation compared to seriously scaled data systems. It just comes down to how much Intrepid wants to invest in this area. Capacity and processing power is amazing these days.
Side note: I remember when I upgraded my pc to 512kb of RAM at 33mhz. My speaker has more processing power today.
If it’s architected well, the amount of data to manage achievements for the player population is a relatively small implementation compared to seriously scaled data systems. It just comes down to how much Intrepid wants to invest in this area. Capacity and processing power is amazing these days.
Side note: I remember when I upgraded my pc to 512kb of RAM at 33mhz. My speaker has more processing power today.
I am sure they are doing everything they can to optimize everything they can.
Still, I wonder how considerable the trade-offs would be for a game like Ashes looking to truly put the "Massive" back in MMORPG.
Do achievements come and the cost of:
More lag?
More bugs?
Longer time between patches?
More expensive servers required to run the game?
More time spent on play testing?
These things could all be very minor. They could also be a case of "it uses more server resources than you would think" as Noanni has been told.
Not saying it's one way or the other, just asking questions. Maybe ill ask about it for next month's livestream Q&A.
Has anyone brought up the point that achievement systems may be an unnecessary bloat for servers?
Consider that, if each character needs its own unique record of all possible achievements in the game. From what I understand, these systems can be very intense at scale. Looking up every player's achievement records and comparing them to actions in real time constantly to update progress.
I understand that for modern games and databases this is not a huge deal, but most modern games are not trying to push 250v250+ hybrid MMO combat. The extra little-bit of stress on the servers could be the difference between having smoother battles and PowerPoint presentations.
Steven has expressed an interest in having 500v500 siege battles if possible. Even though I am personally very skeptical that such large battles will be fun or interesting compared to a 3v3 or 5v4 arena match. I still would like to see smooth large-scale battles sometime in my life.
Games like WOW and FFXIV have robust achievement systems and are modern MMOs, but both game struggle with large groups of players. If achievement systems are a limiting, factor in large scale PvP or would just cause a general amount of potential lag in the open world. I would definitely prefer not to have them.
Thoughts?
I agree if it is true however, I know there are ways to code around these problems. But that's a question of if Intrepid has that skill on staff.
Otoh I also love stats. I don't even like achievements. Just random information about things I have done. Achievements are just the standard way I am used to getting this information. Give me an alternative way to access this information that doesn't involve a dps tracker/combat tracker and I'd be happy to take it. I'd gladly make a spread sheet about number of times I dodge rolled in a fire elemental heavy zone and how many times I died to burn.
P. S. I am in no way advocating for or against such trackers. The information I like having is just so far outside their scope it'd limit what data I got.
I agree if it is true however, I know there are ways to code around these problems. But that's a question of if Intrepid has that skill on staff.
Otoh I also love stats. I don't even like achievements. Just random information about things I have done. Achievements are just the standard way I am used to getting this information. Give me an alternative way to access this information that doesn't involve a dps tracker/combat tracker and I'd be happy to take it. I'd gladly make a spread sheet about number of times I dodge rolled in a fire elemental heavy zone and how many times I died to burn.
P. S. I am in no way advocating for or against such trackers. The information I like having is just so far outside their scope it'd limit what data I got.
If achievements were just a tab to see how much gold you have looted or how many times you died to fall damage. I would have no problem with them. Assuming they take little dev time and don't really lag the servers.
I have no problem with having additional information. Up to and including DPS meters.
pretty sure the an achievement system won't be the issue for large scale combat. It's the calculations the servers have to do in real time combat for damage/healing. The more complex it is, the more calculations it has to do.
pretty sure the an achievement system won't be the issue for large scale combat. It's the calculations the servers have to do in real time combat for damage/healing. The more complex it is, the more calculations it has to do.
That does depend.
If the game has PvP quests/achievements that ask for you to kill players of a specific race, or players from a specific node, or any players in a siege - or even more specific things like players using siege engines (we have no idea if any of this will be the case), then that means every kill has to go through all of those checks.
If these quests/achievements update all people involved in a kill as opposed to just the person dealing the killing blow, or even if they have the same rules as loot rights has, that means each kill could require literally hundreds of quest lookups.
Again, it's just a case of these things using more system resources than those of us that have not done things things would initially think they would take.
Whether this is an issue or not is not something I would want to be drawn on. Intrepid are the only ones that can make that call (well, perhaps Amazon could). All I am saying is that based on what I have been told in the past on several occasions, I can absolutely see how it could be a serious issue that limits some aspects of how the game is developed.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Ashes already has Achievements in the game design.
The way they should be implemented is you should get minor transmog rewards for doing them. So you never get a mount for doing them, but maybe some unique colors or random equipment looks.
Not a single one should be easy though. Every single one should require thinking to get. I don't mind grindy ones like kill 500 of a mob type for one. Since not many are going to do a thing like that even though it would be obvious it would reward something. None of them should be tutorial related or something as simple as discovering a specific zone. Every single one should have meaning.
If you don't do that and just copy what every other game did. Then it will just lead to no one caring about achievements like always. Every player should value them to some extent. Some people are going to not care about them no matter what, but for some people their goal in the game will be to do them all.
Just avoid having time trial achievements. The reason being is although there is a community for such a thing. The vast majority of players hate that kind of thing. They often hate it to the point of it being a downside for the entire game.
So if you do put something into the game for speed runners to have fun. Make sure it's seperate from the overall experience so that the communities don't clash negatively. I mean normally it might be good for a negative clash like this, but the kind of clashing this will result in would border on a hate crime. xD
U.S. East
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Hunh.
Never expected transmogs or mounts for Achievements. Weird concept.
My Bartle Score is: Explorer 87%; Socializer 73% ; Achiever 47%; Killer 0%
Some people are Achiever 87%; Killer 73% ; Socializer 47%; Explorer ....even with no other rewards besides completion board.
It's not a deal breaker for me if they are in or not either way but I always viewed quests are for the character in game and achievements are for the person behind the keyboard. It's such a minor distinction though that I'm not going to fuss if they are just included as quests.
Hunh.
Never expected transmogs or mounts for Achievements. Weird concept.
A lot of games do this.
To be fair, ita only games aimed at tweens and above, so likely out of your experience.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited August 2021
In an RPG, the difference between player and character should not be a minor distinction.
For the most part, in-game Achievements should be just for the character.
There might be a few legacy perks for alts associated with reaching max level.
Quests are typically individual tasks/missions.
Achievements are typically repetitive accomplishments. Significant firsts. Collection completions, etc.
Milestones rather than missions.
I enjoy Achievements because they add content to a game to people that are completionists.
This can be achieved by using quests in place of achievements.
Why not both? What harm does it do? If you don't like them, you can just ignore them
It is adding a second system to the game that does exactly the same thing.
That is why not.
Noaani: 'Quests and Achievements are the same and use the same code!'
Also Noaani: 'It would be adding a second system! Let's not use more resources!'
You must forgive them @BaSkA13 , Noaani uses a different definition than most people about what achievements are. They aren't actually arguing against achievements. It just sounds like it because they keep ignoring people's clearly conceptual definition and then quickly shifting to assuming they mean a technical one when they say the equivalent of 'two system.'
Why are they doing this? I don't know but it is probably ignorable.
I disagree that they are the same. The subtle differences are important and its much like saying that there is no difference between a regular mob and a boss mob. Both are npcs that you aim to kill... we all know that they are wildly different and impact the game in such a manner.
Achievements have been used as method of providing those who have an itch to play but perhaps have cleared most of the game's content, an outlet to continue to play. If Intrepid had to do this with quests it would take infinitely more resources as quests are more in depth, include npcs, story etc... achievements are just something that sit in a menu with a completion bar, which is significantly easier.
In regards to the original post's point, I think achievements could easily be used a functional system for actual character progression. It could be that talent points are instead accrued through achievements rather than just by levelling. This would shift people's focus from pure exp gains while levelling to also completing achievements. Achievements could be completing a whole zone's story, exploring an entire area, completing a dungeon etc... Furthermore, if titles were to provide a small buff for whatever was relevant to the title I could see that being quite interesting. Such as a title that you receive upon hitting max level called "FOMO" that you can use on a low level alt and it provides a 5% exp gain increase while that character is not your highest level character. If you make the bonus small and only while the title is equipped it wont get out of hand either.
Achievements have been used as method of providing those who have an itch to play but perhaps have cleared most of the game's content, an outlet to continue to play.
I can agree to this definition, but I don't feel that it applies to Ashes the way it would apply to other games in the genre.
There should not be a point where players will have "experienced" all the content and are looking for more to do. If you do that, then you are the guild leader or officer for a guild on a server with zero competition. At which point, if you wanted more content, you would be better off re-rolling on a server where people are actually capable of competing with you.
It is like saying there needs to be more "content" in a sport because the top players are winning every season. If that is the case, the top players should probably not all be on the same team for the next few years because that is boring for both the
players and the viewers.
It applies here because Ashes is a competitive open world. If there is no one on your server that can compete with you to keep you from burning through all the content, then you are clearly the best team in the league and need to be broken up.
The way Ashes is designed, you don't just farm content for gear. You attempt to get to content for materials to make gear, and you must defeat every other guild in the area that has the same goal to do so. If no one can do that and you just steam roll through the game, then you are playing at a loss. Part of the dream of Ashes is that you don't just fight the dragon. You fight anyone who gets in your way on the way to the dragon. If that don't happen, you did not actually "experience" all the content.
If this all plays out correctly, you should not be able to do everything before the game updates. There should always be more than enough to do preparing for securing these raid bosses.
I definitely agree that Ashes will avoid this issue more than other games in its genre and for a lot of people exactly what you mentioned will be reality, much like it is in any game with PvP. However, the content you speak of isn't necessarily accessible on demand and in a solo capacity. Look at a game like New World where they have tried a similar model of making other players the content with little else to pursue.
The reality is when you are aiming for a game to be an MMO you have to carefully balance catering to a wide variety of people and what they want to do. This will inevitably include people who love MMO's character progression, gear, dungeons, raids etc... but aren't big fans of PvP (but who knows once they experience Ashes PvP they might love it). Assuming that all players will want to focus on PvP and therefore not creating alternate time sinks might be a bit restrictive.
Out of all my RL friends who play MMO's I'd say maybe 10% enjoy PvP as much as I do with the others primarily enjoying chasing gear, mounts, achievements, titles, toys, pets, exploring zones, levelling alts, doing dungeons/raids. All of these things can be completed which means its possible to run out of content that you like.
Just my opinion.
If a rancher gets a check in the box for breeding a horse of every color, it doesn't really hurt me, and it gave them something to do other than sell horses all day. If that were just the case, I would not have a problem.
This thread is kind of old, but I do remember my main argument being that I don't want achievements to interfere with the rest of the game.
I know WOW and FFXIV log a check a ton of data constantly for the achievement system to work.
Every time you jump, did you fall far enough for an achievement? The game has to check the server to see if he has the achievement. Nearly every action as an associated look up. Walked? How far? Is it far enough to get the 10000 steps achievement?
This stuff may be taking away from the game for me. That is a huge worry of mine.
Personally, I wish I could just toggle it off and save bandwidth. I would bet money if you offered me a chance to play a client with and without achievements enabled in WOW or FFXIV I could feel the difference. I know it sounds crazy, but people told me I would not notice the difference between 120Hz, 144Hz and 240Hz monitors...
I instantly do feel the difference.
In FFXIV I can feel the ping. Sometimes it makes the optimum rotation impossible and I lose DPS to ping. I would bet there are times that if the achievement system was not sending checks to the server constantly, I would not lose that DPS.
I can't prove any of this, and I know it's a little tin-foil hat, but It's where my gut is. I would love to be dead wrong about all of this. It is just speculation. Maybe I am like those 5G guys who think their skin is melting or something. I just worry that achievements degrade the overall experience of the game in a way that no one has really studied. I wish there was a way we could test all this, but I don't know of any games that would allow you to disable only the traffic from the achievement system.
Achievements have been used as method of providing those who have an itch to play but perhaps have cleared most of the game's content, an outlet to continue to play.
Please explain to me exactly why this can't be achieved in the games quest system.
If the developers wanted to go down this route, and perhaps wanted to add the task for players to kill a specific raid boss with no deaths, in a certain amount of time from the zone opening up - what exactly is stopping them from using the quest system rather than an achievement system?
I'm not saying the developers shouldn't add in a task for players to do this - I am asking why it needs another system, when the quest system already exists.
No one in this thread was able to answer this, hopefully you can.
Comments
Horizontal progression is great - especially for an RPG. RP is not always about being uber.
Vertical progression is going to reach a cap while the devs work on more content.
I hope there are Achievements in Ashes, I hope you can inspect other players' Achievements and I definitely hope Achievements reward absolutely no stats or buffs, only titles and cosmetics.
Consider that, if each character needs its own unique record of all possible achievements in the game. From what I understand, these systems can be very intense at scale. Looking up every player's achievement records and comparing them to actions in real time constantly to update progress.
I understand that for modern games and databases this is not a huge deal, but most modern games are not trying to push 250v250+ hybrid MMO combat. The extra little-bit of stress on the servers could be the difference between having smoother battles and PowerPoint presentations.
Steven has expressed an interest in having 500v500 siege battles if possible. Even though I am personally very skeptical that such large battles will be fun or interesting compared to a 3v3 or 5v4 arena match. I still would like to see smooth large-scale battles sometime in my life.
Games like WOW and FFXIV have robust achievement systems and are modern MMOs, but both game struggle with large groups of players. If achievement systems are a limiting, factor in large scale PvP or would just cause a general amount of potential lag in the open world. I would definitely prefer not to have them.
Thoughts?
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Yeah they can cause bloat, but bloating is the result of over design and not necessarily one thing.
500vs500 just sounds chaotic. It's far more zerg tactics than skill at that point.
This is entirely possible as an issue.
Us players don't really have much of an understanding of what game features use what resources in terms of server-side computing. I remember talking to one developer that said that about 60% of their actual CPU compute on the server was for AI pathing (they did have a very good system for that though). You mention this to anyone that hasn't worked on that game though (even some developers that think they know the best way to do everything) and they just laugh and say there is no way.
I also remember an EQ2 developer once saying that every time a player kills a mob, the server has to check that mob against every quest the player has - which includes every achievement. This was quite a resource hog early in EQ2's life, though I have never heard more than the general statement that "it uses more server resources than you would think" from them.
Now, obviously this isn't the only way to do this in regards to the games back end, and my understanding is that EQ2 moved away from that system at some point.
However, one way or the other, there needs to be a system in place so that every quest is checked for every kill. When you have quests (or achievements - which are the same thing from a mechanical perspective) that ask you to kill 1,000 of a specific mob type, and the game has 25 different mobs that can be considered that mob type spread all over the game world - and also adds more mobs to the game later on that also need to update this quest - it starts to get fairly involved.
Side note: I remember when I upgraded my pc to 512kb of RAM at 33mhz. My speaker has more processing power today.
I am sure they are doing everything they can to optimize everything they can.
Still, I wonder how considerable the trade-offs would be for a game like Ashes looking to truly put the "Massive" back in MMORPG.
Do achievements come and the cost of:
More lag?
More bugs?
Longer time between patches?
More expensive servers required to run the game?
More time spent on play testing?
These things could all be very minor. They could also be a case of "it uses more server resources than you would think" as Noanni has been told.
Not saying it's one way or the other, just asking questions. Maybe ill ask about it for next month's livestream Q&A.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
I agree if it is true however, I know there are ways to code around these problems. But that's a question of if Intrepid has that skill on staff.
Otoh I also love stats. I don't even like achievements. Just random information about things I have done. Achievements are just the standard way I am used to getting this information. Give me an alternative way to access this information that doesn't involve a dps tracker/combat tracker and I'd be happy to take it. I'd gladly make a spread sheet about number of times I dodge rolled in a fire elemental heavy zone and how many times I died to burn.
P. S. I am in no way advocating for or against such trackers. The information I like having is just so far outside their scope it'd limit what data I got.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
If achievements were just a tab to see how much gold you have looted or how many times you died to fall damage. I would have no problem with them. Assuming they take little dev time and don't really lag the servers.
I have no problem with having additional information. Up to and including DPS meters.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
That does depend.
If the game has PvP quests/achievements that ask for you to kill players of a specific race, or players from a specific node, or any players in a siege - or even more specific things like players using siege engines (we have no idea if any of this will be the case), then that means every kill has to go through all of those checks.
If these quests/achievements update all people involved in a kill as opposed to just the person dealing the killing blow, or even if they have the same rules as loot rights has, that means each kill could require literally hundreds of quest lookups.
Again, it's just a case of these things using more system resources than those of us that have not done things things would initially think they would take.
Whether this is an issue or not is not something I would want to be drawn on. Intrepid are the only ones that can make that call (well, perhaps Amazon could). All I am saying is that based on what I have been told in the past on several occasions, I can absolutely see how it could be a serious issue that limits some aspects of how the game is developed.
We literally all know that.
It doesn't mean we can't still discuss it amongst ourselves though.
No one is forcing you to be a part of the discussion if you don't want to be.
The way they should be implemented is you should get minor transmog rewards for doing them. So you never get a mount for doing them, but maybe some unique colors or random equipment looks.
Not a single one should be easy though. Every single one should require thinking to get. I don't mind grindy ones like kill 500 of a mob type for one. Since not many are going to do a thing like that even though it would be obvious it would reward something. None of them should be tutorial related or something as simple as discovering a specific zone. Every single one should have meaning.
If you don't do that and just copy what every other game did. Then it will just lead to no one caring about achievements like always. Every player should value them to some extent. Some people are going to not care about them no matter what, but for some people their goal in the game will be to do them all.
Just avoid having time trial achievements. The reason being is although there is a community for such a thing. The vast majority of players hate that kind of thing. They often hate it to the point of it being a downside for the entire game.
So if you do put something into the game for speed runners to have fun. Make sure it's seperate from the overall experience so that the communities don't clash negatively. I mean normally it might be good for a negative clash like this, but the kind of clashing this will result in would border on a hate crime. xD
U.S. East
Never expected transmogs or mounts for Achievements. Weird concept.
My Bartle Score is: Explorer 87%; Socializer 73% ; Achiever 47%; Killer 0%
Some people are Achiever 87%; Killer 73% ; Socializer 47%; Explorer ....even with no other rewards besides completion board.
Why not both? What harm does it do? If you don't like them, you can just ignore them
It is adding a second system to the game that does exactly the same thing.
That is why not.
A lot of games do this.
To be fair, ita only games aimed at tweens and above, so likely out of your experience.
For the most part, in-game Achievements should be just for the character.
There might be a few legacy perks for alts associated with reaching max level.
Quests are typically individual tasks/missions.
Achievements are typically repetitive accomplishments. Significant firsts. Collection completions, etc.
Milestones rather than missions.
Quests are quests.
Achievements are achievements.
Both quests and achievements can have rewards upon completion.
Noaani: 'Quests and Achievements are the same and use the same code!'
Also Noaani: 'It would be adding a second system! Let's not use more resources!'
You must forgive them @BaSkA13 , Noaani uses a different definition than most people about what achievements are. They aren't actually arguing against achievements. It just sounds like it because they keep ignoring people's clearly conceptual definition and then quickly shifting to assuming they mean a technical one when they say the equivalent of 'two system.'
Why are they doing this? I don't know but it is probably ignorable.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
Quests are a player-facing system.
Achievements are a player-facing system.
These two systems both essentially do the same thing. They are a list of tasks that the developers want you to complete.
Regardless of whether they use the same code or not, it is having two player-facing systems in order to perform one task.
Code has not been my argument in this discussion.
Achievements have been used as method of providing those who have an itch to play but perhaps have cleared most of the game's content, an outlet to continue to play. If Intrepid had to do this with quests it would take infinitely more resources as quests are more in depth, include npcs, story etc... achievements are just something that sit in a menu with a completion bar, which is significantly easier.
In regards to the original post's point, I think achievements could easily be used a functional system for actual character progression. It could be that talent points are instead accrued through achievements rather than just by levelling. This would shift people's focus from pure exp gains while levelling to also completing achievements. Achievements could be completing a whole zone's story, exploring an entire area, completing a dungeon etc... Furthermore, if titles were to provide a small buff for whatever was relevant to the title I could see that being quite interesting. Such as a title that you receive upon hitting max level called "FOMO" that you can use on a low level alt and it provides a 5% exp gain increase while that character is not your highest level character. If you make the bonus small and only while the title is equipped it wont get out of hand either.
I can agree to this definition, but I don't feel that it applies to Ashes the way it would apply to other games in the genre.
There should not be a point where players will have "experienced" all the content and are looking for more to do. If you do that, then you are the guild leader or officer for a guild on a server with zero competition. At which point, if you wanted more content, you would be better off re-rolling on a server where people are actually capable of competing with you.
It is like saying there needs to be more "content" in a sport because the top players are winning every season. If that is the case, the top players should probably not all be on the same team for the next few years because that is boring for both the
players and the viewers.
It applies here because Ashes is a competitive open world. If there is no one on your server that can compete with you to keep you from burning through all the content, then you are clearly the best team in the league and need to be broken up.
The way Ashes is designed, you don't just farm content for gear. You attempt to get to content for materials to make gear, and you must defeat every other guild in the area that has the same goal to do so. If no one can do that and you just steam roll through the game, then you are playing at a loss. Part of the dream of Ashes is that you don't just fight the dragon. You fight anyone who gets in your way on the way to the dragon. If that don't happen, you did not actually "experience" all the content.
If this all plays out correctly, you should not be able to do everything before the game updates. There should always be more than enough to do preparing for securing these raid bosses.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
The reality is when you are aiming for a game to be an MMO you have to carefully balance catering to a wide variety of people and what they want to do. This will inevitably include people who love MMO's character progression, gear, dungeons, raids etc... but aren't big fans of PvP (but who knows once they experience Ashes PvP they might love it). Assuming that all players will want to focus on PvP and therefore not creating alternate time sinks might be a bit restrictive.
Out of all my RL friends who play MMO's I'd say maybe 10% enjoy PvP as much as I do with the others primarily enjoying chasing gear, mounts, achievements, titles, toys, pets, exploring zones, levelling alts, doing dungeons/raids. All of these things can be completed which means its possible to run out of content that you like.
Just my opinion.
I see where you are coming from.
If a rancher gets a check in the box for breeding a horse of every color, it doesn't really hurt me, and it gave them something to do other than sell horses all day. If that were just the case, I would not have a problem.
This thread is kind of old, but I do remember my main argument being that I don't want achievements to interfere with the rest of the game.
I know WOW and FFXIV log a check a ton of data constantly for the achievement system to work.
Every time you jump, did you fall far enough for an achievement? The game has to check the server to see if he has the achievement. Nearly every action as an associated look up. Walked? How far? Is it far enough to get the 10000 steps achievement?
This stuff may be taking away from the game for me. That is a huge worry of mine.
Personally, I wish I could just toggle it off and save bandwidth. I would bet money if you offered me a chance to play a client with and without achievements enabled in WOW or FFXIV I could feel the difference. I know it sounds crazy, but people told me I would not notice the difference between 120Hz, 144Hz and 240Hz monitors...
I instantly do feel the difference.
In FFXIV I can feel the ping. Sometimes it makes the optimum rotation impossible and I lose DPS to ping. I would bet there are times that if the achievement system was not sending checks to the server constantly, I would not lose that DPS.
I can't prove any of this, and I know it's a little tin-foil hat, but It's where my gut is. I would love to be dead wrong about all of this. It is just speculation. Maybe I am like those 5G guys who think their skin is melting or something. I just worry that achievements degrade the overall experience of the game in a way that no one has really studied. I wish there was a way we could test all this, but I don't know of any games that would allow you to disable only the traffic from the achievement system.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
If the developers wanted to go down this route, and perhaps wanted to add the task for players to kill a specific raid boss with no deaths, in a certain amount of time from the zone opening up - what exactly is stopping them from using the quest system rather than an achievement system?
I'm not saying the developers shouldn't add in a task for players to do this - I am asking why it needs another system, when the quest system already exists.
No one in this thread was able to answer this, hopefully you can.