New glamour system please!

I don't want to hold on to equips anymore let me obtain the equip save the image.

It's been brought up a lot, it's too much for the devs to fit into the game currently. They also are trying to push the retainers on people. So this won't be happening anytime soon sadly.

if this was to happend i would free up 80% of my inventory

It's been suggested hundreds of times. They probably don't want to do it.

i dont understand how is it to much for them to add it in the game currently i wish a gm or someone would explain they should explain why they cant add something so many players want.

It's limitations with there server and memory iirc.

Just look at past live letters yoshi says limitation like every other question

The reason limitations is always the response, is because it really is server limitations. Unlike other MMOs, FFXIV does not store player data clientside, it is stored on the servers. They did this because SE believed players would edit the files like what happened back in FFXI with .dat file swapping. If player data was clientside, inventories would be bigger and glamours could be saved, similar to what WoW is doing with the transmog wardrobe.

I never got the limitations problem... They claimed they'd rather just give us more inventory space than something like a Glamour Log, but... Wouldn't a Glamour Log store less data? I mean, all the gear currently stored on my retainer has various data attached to it; Stats, Spiritbond level, Durability, possibly stuff like Materia and Dyes, heck even Glamours, and of course the visual data for the gear... A Glamour Log, on the other hand, would just entail us taking some gear, burning it into the Log, and having ready access to that Glamour option. All that needs to be stored is the visual data in that case... Surely that is easier to work than extra inventory space?

I believe that's why the Inn Armoire requires you to fully repair gear before you can store it in there, and why it reduces Spiritbond back to 0%, so it's storing less data. The thing is... I don't need to take gear out of the Armoire, or rather I shouldn't need to... All that gear is meaningless to me outside casting Glamours, that visual data is the only thing I care about but for some reason SE seems to think I care about the stats/etc. and would actually want to take the gear out of the thing... I don't. I want to have the ability to cast Glamour, and just have it pull up anything I've got in my Inn Armoire...

Would make certain aspects of the game work a bit better, too... Relic Replicas, for example... Wouldn't need the current fix right now if they'd just worked in a Glamour Log that got updated with the Relics we'd upgraded. I don't need an Apocalypse Zeta Replica in that case, Apocalypse Zeta would have been in my Glamour Log the moment I obtained the weapon.

Of course, I know why we're really not getting a Glamour Log, it's because extra retainers net SE an extra 2$/30 days per retainer. They'll work on giving us new inventory space, which we don't need (though we need more Armoury Chest space if we're getting more Jobs) and which is fairly terrible to organize in terms of Glamours, and they'll charge us extra for that every step of the way... Glamour Prisms, on the other hand, I have no idea why those stupid things exist... They just make casting Glamours an annoying pain...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nalien

I never got the limitations problem... They claimed they'd rather just give us more inventory space than something like a Glamour Log, but... Wouldn't a Glamour Log store less data? I mean, all the gear currently stored on my retainer has various data attached to it; Stats, Spiritbond level, Durability, possibly stuff like Materia and Dyes, heck even Glamours, and of course the visual data for the gear... A Glamour Log, on the other hand, would just entail us taking some gear, burning it into the Log, and having ready access to that Glamour option. All that needs to be stored is the visual data in that case... Surely that is easier to work than extra inventory space?

---

That is incredibly naive understanding of how databases work.

First off, an empty variable contains as much data as a full variable. This means that a brand new empty character contains as much data as a maxed out character with a full inventory. An empty inventory is just full of blank/neutral data. The same is true for retainer inventories.

The creation of a "Glamour Log" would add a massive amount of new data to every character. Every character's data would need to include a yes/no variable for every single piece of gear included in the Glamour Log, even if the character never even uses it. That is somewhere around 6500 new variables and their database addresses for each character currently as of 3.1 and that number will only grow as more and more patches come out. That is increasing each character's data by a massive amount.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BHGlobbd

The reason limitations is always the response, is because it really is server limitations. Unlike other MMOs, FFXIV does not store player data clientside, it is stored on the servers. They did this because SE believed players would edit the files like what happened back in FFXI with .dat file swapping. If player data was clientside, inventories would be bigger and glamours could be saved, similar to what WoW is doing with the transmog wardrobe.

---

Oh that thing will get abused surely. I'm just waiting for the first exploits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

That is incredibly naive understanding of how databases work.

An empty inventory is just full of blank/neutral data.

---

As someone who is completely ignorant of how databases work, this is fascinating. Can you explain this blank/neutral data more? It seems so counterintuitive.

I don't see this being that difficult to make ( meaning a system where you don't have to KEEP the gear, only to have obtained it once, like a book of glamours or something of that sort. )

They likely will never do this only because of the revenue generated by retainers. With every new content update, we get more glamours which means you need more space if you don't want to throw anything out... which mean more retainers...

Frankly I find it ridiculous with the amount of content we got with 3.0 and we didn't receive an extra retainer with the unlocking of the expansion. If they wont do that... they most certainly won't do this :C

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

...

---

If I paid attention to all the inventory topics, the main issue comes from the data updates.

For the glamour purposes "easily fixed" by having a glamour NPC to store the data and - because SE loves that - nice hefty monthly fee for the "Additional optional glamour services". For some of us it would be still cheaper option than keeping several glamour retainers.

I think a fair compromise would be glamor be set as a consumable action and then you set it to gear without actually needing the piece anymore. It's a Gil sink and encourages more crafting. This and it frees up inventory and is the best alternative for the servers.

Say I want to glamor some 40lvl body armor to my raid gear. I consume the 40lvl body armor and now I can glamor it to whatever I want (within the normal limitations). The 40 armor goes poof and I get to recast it as much as I want without needing the space.

Granted it'll still use up data space but let's face it, most characters won't have an obscene wardrobe option.

I don't want to pay any more money for retainers to store something I have earned through my sub and time spent playing the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

That is somewhere around 6500 new variables and their database addresses for each character currently as of 3.1

---

I'm not the most adept at programming theory, but surely binary variables (I.e. Booleans) would take up far less than an entire piece of gear with stats. 6500 yes/no values actually doesn't sound like too much of a strain, all things considered.

I also don't understand why it can't be done the same way as actually obtaining gear. Surely the game doesn't have a check list for 6500+ pieces of gear to see if you own it, it only adds the function after you obtain the gear, why not have a clause at that point to add that gears ID to the glamour log, and have that saved as an (array?).

My thinking is that it is more for a design standpoint, that displaying 6500 types of glamour is horrible for UI.

Cannot increase inventory space due to server limitation is (kinda) understandable.

but they have no excuse for glamour log. It's just a list of equipments you used to own so the data would be just 0 or 1 multiply with the amount of equipment in the game. so it'll be like 2 kilobytes or something like that. why can't they do it? I have no clue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lambdafish

I'm not the most adept at programming theory, but surely binary variables (I.e. Booleans) would take up far less than an entire piece of gear with stats. 6500 yes/no values actually doesn't sound like too much of a strain, all things considered.

I also don't understand why it can't be done the same way as actually obtaining gear. Surely the game doesn't have a check list for 6500+ pieces of gear to see if you own it, it only adds the function after you obtain the gear, why not have a clause at that point to add that gears ID to the glamour log, and have that saved as an (array?).

My thinking is that it is more for a design standpoint, that displaying 6500 types of glamour is horrible for UI.

---

Note numbers are without overhead that would be taking by other metadata...

6500 identifiers - let's assume it's an unsigned int(and tbh I'd likely see a long here because I assume everything in the game has an identifier) - 0 to 65535 that's 2 bytes per identifier. A yes/no would still be taking up 1 byte of storage. That's 3 bytes per single item. For a single character.

So true for a single character having 6500 items would be ~20 kilobytes. Not a lot right? Doesn't take into account overhead data of course.

Now you have 5 million accounts... with each having at least 1 character. You can see where this is going. It's a lot of data to deal with. You need to initialize or at least reserve this space for each character.

It gives computing overhead, network overhead, storage overhead.

Would it be nice to have? Yes. Can they do the UI side of things? Yes. Wouldn't be too hard. They could just limit it to per job tabs, along with other tab and then only show items you actually got.

But you need to be able to handle so and so many people accessing this data at the same time, being able to offer adequate response times and such. Could probably do some variosu tricks and optimisations as well but that would likely increase the data storage requirements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evangela

Cannot increase inventory space due to server limitation is (kinda) understandable.

but they have no excuse for glamour log. It's just a list of equipments you used to own so the data would be just 0 or 1 multiply with the amount of equipment in the game. so it'll be like 2 kilobytes or something like that. why can't they do it? I have no clue.

---

Did some blind maths... 0 or 1 will still take 1 byte in memory/storage/etc... without any overhead metadata. A single file on disk no matter how small will usually take 4kilobytes because that's the smallest block assigned to store it. So even a file with a 1 in it will still take 4 kilobytes.

Even WoW is adding this feature with Legion. I think it's eventually going to be implemented in this game especially with how it's being pushed by the community all the time. The question is when. The answer is "not anytime soon".
If I was leading the dev team, I would try to milk the current system + selling retainers for as long as I can (even though as a player I find it pretty revolting) because this is a pretty big and expensive feature to implement. Definitely expansion material.

the system is kinda already there with pets/TT cards, or even better OLD gear u used to have from quests and events , u can reclaim that gear using the NPC Calamity salvage...the game keeps the track of this , and u can buy gear from that NPC over and over.

if a game can keep track of what pets , mounts , and gear, the glamour log is almost already implemented.

Maybe u can select the gear and glamour from it , HOWEVER i think a solution ...select the item u want and a copy of that piece of gear could be created in your inventory and then use it as glamour...then u can drop it (u can reclaim it over and over ) all that gear of course will be 0 gil value and untradeable.

thats 1 option , it would be easy to implement a wardrobe and let ppl change glamour on the fly , but yeah is more easy to create 1000 different prism because reasons.....and if the system isnt convoluted and confusing as hell...then it must be scrapped and reworked , this a FF online game after all ¬¬

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BHGlobbd

The reason limitations is always the response, is because it really is server limitations. Unlike other MMOs, FFXIV does not store player data clientside, it is stored on the servers. They did this because SE believed players would edit the files like what happened back in FFXI with .dat file swapping. If player data was clientside, inventories would be bigger and glamours could be saved, similar to what WoW is doing with the transmog wardrobe.

---

graphic aside, which is clientside, the inventory content should be never clientside in any MMO.
It is not about swapping the graphic model of a gear, but about putting something into the inventory whatever you want (like 12 atmas without doing a FATE)

I'm not sure about FFXI but any MMO that storing player data and inventory on client side is stupid. I don't believe that they do it like that in FFXI. Even that old MMO RagnarokOnline didn't do it. Only UI and other user preferences should be stored client side.

My interface for a Glamour Log.

Glamour Log.

--> Duty Collection: Dungeons, Trials, Raids, PvP, Artifacts (AF), Tomestone gear, Commons (this last one includes basically all the gear any class can use, DoH/DoL).
-----> Raid Collections: T1~T13, A1~A8, AS1~AS8, Laberyth~Void Ark.
---------> T13 Collections: Log divides the tabs per role. With small icons inside each tab showing all the pieces of the gear, greyed out pieces for pieces yet to be obtained.

So for example, i want to find my Allagan Spear. I would have to:

Open Glamour Log, Select "Raid Collections", Select "Binding Coil of Bahamut: Turn 5 Collections", Select "Maiming Collections", Pick my Allagan Spear skin from the collection, select glamour over current gear, hit yes, consume the proper Prism and done.

In some cases players would have to go through 4 tabs instead of 3 depending on if the gear is role gear or class/job gear, probably will be the case for most of the artifact gear, this way you generate a list not longer than the duty finder, each subdivided in increasingly smaller logs till you reach a window that will just have the info on whatever you have 10 to 12 pieces of gear or not, weapons of each duty will be listed on their corresponding role/class/job tab for their corresponding window.

Of course this sounds way too simplistic, but i think is doable, and it would actually turn the horrificly clumsy and bothersome glamour system we currently have into a more accessible and easy to use system, without touching the need of prisms.

Damn, the very window could have a counter showing the kind of prism we need for each piece gear, and a search feature, and it would be pretty much done. FFXIV would go from having one of the worse vanity systems in the market to have one of the best.

ok so the question i ask now how can they increase the server limitation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papichulo123

ok so the question i ask now how can they increase the server limitation?

---

Upgrade either their codding (incredibly cluttered with way too much info) or upgrade their hardware. Both of them perfectly viable. Thing is, SE knows we pay a lot for extra retainers, so doing this goes directly against their pocket, i would personally stop paying for 3 retainers right away with a proper glamour book, and so would many players, basically, from their PoV it would be investing to lose money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evangela

I'm not sure about FFXI but any MMO that storing player data and inventory on client side is stupid. I don't believe that they do it like that in FFXI. Even that old MMO RagnarokOnline didn't do it. Only UI and other user preferences should be stored client side.

---

FFXI stored graphic data client side and people would swap dat graphic information to other gear graphic information and that's what people were probably referring to.

Server limitations. Please understand. Please look forward to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BHGlobbd

The reason limitations is always the response, is because it really is server limitations. Unlike other MMOs, FFXIV does not store player data clientside, it is stored on the servers. They did this because SE believed players would edit the files like what happened back in FFXI with .dat file swapping. If player data was clientside, inventories would be bigger and glamours could be saved, similar to what WoW is doing with the transmog wardrobe.

---

Please find me an MMO that stores player data clientside. Seriously. Find me ANY MMO that does this. The .dat file swapping in FFXI was nothing to do with where the player data was stored, it just replaced the mesh and texture data for the equipment in the client so when the server said a player was wearing X item that player's client was redirected to load a different item. It was a purely cosmetic change and it only affected the player with the modified client. No MMO out there will ever store player inventory client side as to do so would kill the game before it launched due to the inevitable cheats and hacks that would result from it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

That is incredibly naive understanding of how databases work.

First off, an empty variable contains as much data as a full variable. This means that a brand new empty character contains as much data as a maxed out character with a full inventory. An empty inventory is just full of blank/neutral data. The same is true for retainer inventories.

The creation of a "Glamour Log" would add a massive amount of new data to every character. Every character's data would need to include a yes/no variable for every single piece of gear included in the Glamour Log, even if the character never even uses it. That is somewhere around 6500 new variables and their database addresses for each character currently as of 3.1 and that number will only grow as more and more patches come out. That is increasing each character's data by a massive amount.

---

This post is incredibly misleading and irrelevant to the discussion. The amount of data actually required to store items in a player's inventory might vary but the server has to have enough space allocated for every inventory to be at full capacity if needed so it makes no difference whether an inventory is full or not. The ACTUAL data usage is irrelevant; it's the potential maximum amount of data that may need to be stored that the devs have to account for.

The most expensive items to store are likely equipment with materia slots as these need to store data for the item ID, durability, spiritbond, materia and a glamour ID. We can assume that the item ID, glamour ID and materia references are the most expensive of those attributes as they likely are several bytes each in size to account for all the possible IDs that exist (or will exist in the future). Durability and spiritbond are likely a byte each to cover the 1-100 value.

The devs will have allocated server space to each player inventory and retainer on the assumption that they could potentially hold a full inventory of melded equipment as above. That's a very large amount of data.

Conversely a glamour log would merely hold a single bit boolean value for every different item skin in the game. That sounds like a lot but it's actually very small compared to the size of actual item data. In fact it's well over 100x smaller based on a conservative estimate for how much space a melded piece of equipment would take up. For every melded item in the game SE could store well over 100 entries in a glamour log.

There's also another thing to point out here and that's how SE stores player inventory versus retainers. Player inventory is stored on the character server as part of your character data as this data is loaded and updated as part of the regular server sync that runs every 15s. They have to do this as the player inventory can be opened anywhere. That is very intensive on the servers. Retainers, however, can only be accessed from fixed locations so their inventories are stored on a separate server. This is why retainers take a few seconds to load sometimes. This is much less intensive on the server and the memory used to store retainers is much less of an issue as the server isn't syncing the data every 15s.

A glamour log would not need to be accessible from everywhere. They could very easily make it a feature accessed from inn rooms or housing furniture like the unending journey or armoire (which coincidentally also use the exact same boolean flag system that I described above). Given that a glamour log could likely store every cosmetic item in the game using less memory than a player's inventory is allocated AND it could be stored on a separate server, meaning no real impact on the primary server or character server, I see no realistic reason why we cannot have a glamour log.

Do I even need to also point out the sheer number of games that already have this feature now? SE is making excuses for something that is quickly becoming a standard of the genre. They can do it, they just won't. Given the money they're making from selling extra retainers I have to agree that it is in their interest to pretend it's not possible.

i think wow does , i remember an addon that let u change race , animations , and the gear u are wearing (cosmetic only) , only u can see it (clientside) it was of course banned but think still around as i have seen like 1 year ago a famous streamer using it to race change ...

Anyway they better work on a solution , since every patch brings new sets and more...and im full now lol my retainers are about to explode ...i dont want to sacrifice any item because I shouldnt be forced to do so.....and i shouldnt be coerced to buy more retainers with RL $$$, but oh well...we only can keep fighting!!!

edit: i like the idea of wardrobe in our rooms or any INN , since is a personal zone , and it would make sense lorewise and for RP players. Every1 happy that way.

The reason they always give about limitations for a glamour log goes back to the same as expanding our inventory. That there is so much info being saved to the server every 15 seconds, that is why their inventory "solution" is more retainers. Because that data is only accessed when you use them.

That being the case, what about moving Glamour to an Inn/Home furnishing? Give us a Wardrobe or something that takes our gear and adds it to our Glamour list permanently. Even with the inconvenience of having to return to the Wardrobe every time you wanted to Glamour, it's still a good deal better than clogging up several retainers worth of inventory, while not needing to be part of the constantly being saved player data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bass9020

It's limitations with there server and memory iirc.

Just look at past live letters yoshi says limitation like every other question

---

It's just a check for whether or not you have access to that particular item's appearance. At the worst, it's the same amount of data as adding a ton of 0/1 achievements. It doesn't need to be accessible at all times either, much like the storage of one's armoire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alberel

They can do it, they just won't. Given the money they're making from selling extra retainers I have to agree that it is in their interest to pretend it's not possible.

---

This.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alberel

Please find me an MMO that stores player data clientside. Seriously. Find me ANY MMO that does this.

---

The original Diablo stored everything client side and just used Battlenet to link clients together. Not contributing to the conversation, just had to answer the all cap challenge.

Why cant we just put in more things in the armory? Even AF2 or upgraded AF1 doesnt go inside, its annoying!!

While I think that having a glamour Wardrobe in inn rooms would be an awesome solution but foiled by the fact you cannot glamour in inn rooms, so either the allow glamour in inn rooms, make the Wardrobe an instance like the Aesthetician that allows you to process glamour

Limitations excuse is a load of bull they can do it but they want you to buy retainers instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cromi_Jobly

The original Diablo stored everything client side and just used Battlenet to link clients together. Not contributing to the conversation, just had to answer the all cap challenge.

---

Heh, Diablo wasn't really an MMO. It was an ARPG that had some sophisticated multiplayer features. The fact that the multiplayer became as big as it did was something of a surprise to Blizzard I think, hence why it was so much better fleshed out and supported in D2.

I see this thread has been moved to the User Interface board to die. This is a primary game feature discussion, not UI! /sigh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bass9020

It's limitations with there server and memory iirc.

Just look at past live letters yoshi says limitation like every other question

---

Features that take up active memory are severely restricted by their servers, but this feature only takes up a bit of database storage, and a rather trivial amount at that. Their crappy old servers don't account for not having it. They just haven't bothered to write the code for it yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BHGlobbd

Unlike other MMOs, FFXIV does not store player data clientside, it is stored on the servers.

---

All MMOs store their important data server side. In the case of glamour, the server says which items (or which glamour appearances) you have available and which you're currently wearing. Your client software says how to display those items on your screen. (Which items/glamours you're currently wearing, in fact, HAS to be server side in any online game. Otherwise the server wouldn't be able to tell other people's clients how to display your character when you're in their field of vision.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

That is incredibly naive understanding of how databases work.

First off, an empty variable contains as much data as a full variable. This means that a brand new empty character contains as much data as a maxed out character with a full inventory. An empty inventory is just full of blank/neutral data. The same is true for retainer inventories.

---

This would only be true if SE is really terrible at designing efficient databases. More typically, an empty slot would only hold a null pointer, whereas a slot that's used would hold a pointer to another record of whatever is there. If it's something like a crafting ingredient, that record would contain just an item ID and stack size. If it's a gear item, it would be a larger record, with fields for item id, durability, spiritbond, materia, color, and glamour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ultimatecalibur

The creation of a "Glamour Log" would add a massive amount of new data to every character. Every character's data would need to include a yes/no variable for every single piece of gear included in the Glamour Log, even if the character never even uses it. That is somewhere around 6500 new variables and their database addresses for each character currently as of 3.1 and that number will only grow as more and more patches come out. That is increasing each character's data by a massive amount.

---

Only if you regard 813 bytes per character as "a massive amount" since that's how much space it would take to store 6500 items in a glamour log. (They'd probably give it an entire kilobyte though to allow expansion room. A kilobyte would allow for 8192 items.) They could even set it so that it only allocates that killobyte or so of space when you unlock glamours at level 50, so new or trial characters wouldn't be taking up even that little amount of space, only characters at level 50 or above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruskie

A yes/no would still be taking up 1 byte of storage.

---

If there were only 1 yes/no, then you're right that it takes up at least a byte (or possibly more). But 8 yes/no values can be stored in that same byte. (And they generally would be whenever you're dealing with a system of lots of yes/no answers like a glamour log or armoire. It's a simple bitmap.) When you actually select an item from your log to use, then the system would have to translate that bit into its corresponding item ID, but it wouldn't be storing the item IDs per character.

It's not do to limitations to do the hardware or the servers. That's ridiculous. How they can constantly be adding content to the game and then blame it on hardware? Yoshi isn't a programmer. Nor is the UI lead developer Hiroshi Minagawa. All the coders are probably busy working on other projects. And my guess is by now the existing code has been updated with a lot of "quick" fixes that going back and updating it would require a huge amount of time just to sort thru, find and correct those "quick" fixes to work with any major changes made to the UI.

For example, you'll find that the various interface listings are all capped at a 100 items. Like the when you talk to a repair NPC, you can select between currently equipped, then your armory slit over three different pages, then your inventory. Why they capped this list at a hundred items is anyone's guess. If they added a hundred more inventory slots, they would need to go and either double the amount each page can show at one time to 200, or split the inventory over two pages. Of course it only shows your inventory that needs to be repaired. Which would be rare and thus the second page would always usually be empty, so splitting it over two pages would be bizarre and confusing.

The point is, the existing code has no doubt become very hard to maintain. And no one whom works at SE wants to touch it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Laraul

For example, you'll find that the various interface listings are all capped at a 100 items. Like the when you talk to a repair NPC, you can select between currently equipped, then your armory slit over three different pages, then your inventory. Why they capped this list at a hundred items is anyone's guess.

---

While "PS3 limitations" has become a bit of a run of joke for every sort of UI limitations, I believe that's what is at work here. For reasons I'm not claiming I fully understand since I haven't coded for playstation, having to do something with how graphic memory handled ui objects or some sort, having too long lists would have not worked on that platform. Or something like that. Roughly the same reason we lost the TP number when we got the bars for while party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sida

While "PS3 limitations" has become a bit of a run of joke for every sort of UI limitations, I believe that's what is at work here. For reasons I'm not claiming I fully understand since I haven't coded for playstation, having to do something with how graphic memory handled ui objects or some sort, having too long lists would have not worked on that platform. Or something like that. Roughly the same reason we lost the TP number when we got the bars for while party.

---

I assure you, the PS3 is not limited to lists of 100 items. Just like how the PS3 can display TP numbers. The PS3 includes all the other UI adjustments/improvements in 3.2. In all seriousness, you do realize how powerful the PS3 is right? It was released late 2006, not 1976. Why do people assume hardware is to blame when it's the software that's the issue?

The TP numbers were removed because they obfuscated the tops of the status icons. Not because the hardware was incapable.
http://i.imgur.com/rz3dI1J.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/xgUg4or.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/J7aitfN.jpg