Alternative solution to glamour log

[Abriael]

To be fair though, a glamour entity will cost far lesser data than an actual item if coded correctly.

While I can't be 100% sure because I have no insight on how the inventory is coded, that is probably incorrect (almost surely, considering Yoshida's answer). An inventory item is normally stored as a numerical ID in a table that calls on a database with all the item's data. For each character only the ID is stored, not the whole item data, which is already present in the database, and is common for all characters. To store the fact that the item is available for glamoring, you'd have to store the same numerical ID in a dedicated table. This means that the memory footprint of the data would most probably be the same.

It's not that I wouldn't love a glamor log, but accusing Yoshida of lying without the slightest evidence, technical expertise, or insight on how the game is coded sounds very, very dumb, and not at all constructive.

well, that's true in the sense that it's going to take up space in whatever location they choose to store it, but if it's separate from on-hand inventory then it doesn't need to be accessed unless called for. So, it wouldn't need to update in the same fashion as your general inventory which they have used as an excuse not to add inventory slots before. It's more like the chest in your hotel room that you only dig in once in awhile. So, by their own examples that they have given it's about half false.

Server memory footprint should be the same regardless of how many times it's accessed. Lower frequency of access probably means lower server CPU load, but that normally isn't the problem.

[savageink]

Server memory footprint should be the same regardless of how many times it's accessed. Lower frequency of access probably means lower server CPU load, but that normally isn't the problem.

Server memory footprint wasn't the specific issue they previously used, it was network data usage, the character itself is written to the server frequently during play and it doesn't really pick and choose what it's sending. It sends the whole package. Things like your chest in your Inn room do not write to the server every few seconds.

[Niwashi]

While I can't be 100% sure because I have no insight on how the inventory is coded, that is probably incorrect (almost surely, considering Yoshida's answer). An inventory item is normally stored as a numerical ID in a table that calls on a database with all the item's data. For each character only the ID is stored, not the whole item data, which is already present in the database, and is common for all characters. To store the fact that the item is available for glamoring, you'd have to store the same numerical ID in a dedicated table. This means that the memory footprint of the data would most probably be the same.

A gear item in inventory has not just its own item ID, but the item ID of it's glamour, another for its dye, 5 item IDs for what materia is on it, a character ID for who crafted it, a counter for tracking spiritbond, and another for tracking its condition. And while we don't know details like how many bytes each of those identifiers is, we do know that they all have to be multi-byte fields, since there are a lot more than 256 items in the game, characters on a server, and actions towards spiritbonding or dropping condition to 0.

A tick in a log, on the other hand, takes one bit. That's nowhere near the same size as an item.

A glamour log of the 9099 visible gear items currently in the game would take up 1138 bytes of storage, though of course they'd need room for new items being added, so it would probably be more like 2kb or so (which would be enough to hold 16,384 items). At a reasonable guess at the size of gear in inventory as 44 bytes each, that would be enough space to hold 46 of them.

Out of all of that, the only parts I was estimating without knowledge of their specific coding practices are:
1) I guessed 4 bytes per item ID, character ID, or counter.
2) That an an 80% increase from the amount of current gear allows them enough room for adding new items through the next couple expansions or so.

While either of those guesses could be a little off, it's unlikely that either would be off by more than a factor of two, so that 16384 to 46 ratio is reasonably close, no matter how their system is set up.


Besides which, there was the other interview, where Yoshi pointed out that it was possible, but that it was their UI team that was too busy for it at the time. That's an explanation from him that actually makes sense. I'm perfectly willing to accept what he says when he makes sense, but not when he doesn't.

Server memory footprint should be the same regardless of how many times it's accessed. Lower frequency of access probably means lower server CPU load, but that normally isn't the problem.

The issue on this is the transfer between the game servers and backup servers. *Active* data, the kind that can change while playing, is backed up every few seconds that you're logged in. Our characters also have other data, though, (like armoire storage or retainer inventory) that can only change while interacting with that feature and isn't accessible while out adventuring. That data is only backed up when we interact with it, and not all the rest of the time.

There have been multiple suggestions regarding a glamour log, and while some (like automatic inclusion of items whenever we get them) would require it to be classified as active data, others (where we manually place items there, like the armoire) would allow it to be backed up only on access and not the rest of the time. (Note: the limited access would only need to be on adding new items to the log. Using them for glamour could still be available from anywhere, since that doesn't change the contents of the log so doesn't require additional backups.)

[Abriael]

Besides which, there was the other interview, where Yoshi pointed out that it was possible, but that it was their UI team that was too busy for it at the time. That's an explanation from him that actually makes sense. I'm perfectly willing to accept what he says when he makes sense, but not when he doesn't.

Both explanations make perfect sense, and both can coexist. The fact that the amount of resources required for each item on a log may be lower (depending on how it's coded) than that of an inventory slot, doesn't mean that the explanation isn't valid, as much as it's a simplification due to talking to a generalist crowd. The point is that it takes server resources, as an inventory slot does, and it's up to the team to judge whether those can be stretched further or not. Yoshida is not a programmer, so he's simply relaying to the press what his team tells him.

Once again: WoW is not the only MMO with an appearance log and many other MMOs have been able to implement it much earlier on in their life cycles.

None of which is Final Fantasy XIV or coded like Final Fantasy XIV. Might want to drop the "other MMORPGs are doing it" as it was some kind of evidence that it's easily doable here. As it's not in any shape or form evidence of anything.

[Valinis]

None of which is Final Fantasy XIV or coded like Final Fantasy XIV. Might want to drop the "other MMORPGs are doing it" as it was some kind of evidence that it's easily doable here. It's not.

Just curious how you are so knowledgeable about how exactly XIV is coded, are you part of the programming team?

[Abriael]

Just curious how you are so knowledgeable about how exactly XIV is coded, are you part of the programming team?

I most certainly am not. And I never claimed I did. A *fact* is that those accusing Yoshida of lying or pulling excuses aren't as well, and when one throws accusations around, he should probably comes with substantiated evidence, of which I saw one.

On the other hand, I have plenty of experience in interacting with Yoshida over several years due to my job, and he certainly does not strike me as someone who would intentionally lie or pull excuses. He has never been afraid of making unpopular statements, and his team is one of the most hard-working in the industry. So yeah, if they tell me something is impossible or problematic to implement, I certainly give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Valinis]

I most certainly am not. And I never claimed I did. A *fact* is that those accusing Yoshida of lying or pulling excuses aren't as well, and when one throws accusations around, he should probably comes with substantiated evidence, of which I saw one.

On the other hand, I have plenty of experience in interacting with Yoshida over several years due to my job, and he certainly does not strike me as someone who would intentionally lie or pull excuses. He has never been afraid of making unpopular statements, and his team is one of the most hard-working in the industry. So yeah, if they tell me something is impossible or problematic to implement, I certainly give them the benefit of the doubt.

You certainly did claim it.

None of which is Final Fantasy XIV or coded like Final Fantasy XIV.

I don't think you have the right to claim to know how the game is or is not coded if you are not on the development team.

[Naunet]

None of which is Final Fantasy XIV or coded like Final Fantasy XIV. Might want to drop the "other MMORPGs are doing it" as it was some kind of evidence that it's easily doable here. As it's not in any shape or form evidence of anything.

Honestly doesn't matter. This is a fundamental QoL feature that SE should be able to provide.

[Abriael]

I don't think you have the right to claim to know how the game is or is not coded.

As a matter of fact, I do, since ALL MMORPGs are their own complex animals, and they're all coded differently. That's not something you need specific knowledge to be aware of.

Honestly doesn't matter. This is a fundamental QoL feature that SE should be able to provide.

Says who exactly? I don't see that written in any of the tomes of law of making a good MMORPG.

[Valinis]

As a matter of fact, I do, since ALL MMORPGs are their own complex animals, and they're all coded differently. That's not something you need specific knowledge to be aware of.

So now you are stating (as fact) that no two MMORPGs can be coded in a similar manner?