Achievement Change - Lazy Design/Out of touch

[Knot_D]

I mean what I am overall saying is that if it going to stay this way then just add more achievements for participation with higher numbers to reflect average win rates. I just want to contextualize on average what se expects from these kinds of achievements. If you are wanting players to win 1000 games, then they are probably going to have to play 2000 x ~10 minutes each give or take in a team v team arena. Or for frontline, since there are three teams with "pure luck" it's going to take you around 3000 games for every 1000 wins in each GC. As the above poster shows this is pretty close to the numbers he has even slightly above average. Personally, I don't think having achievements that ask you to do 9,000 games of frontline is very good design. I think SE is using numbers that are inflated and honestly don't match other parts of their game or philosophy. I think this is more because they just overlook these things and keep following the broken system that are already implemented. I just want that to change in the future.

It's not overlook, it's very intentional to make completionism people do stuff for a long time (or stay subbed) IMO. Those who tried to get achievement in shortcut won't get it easily.

[Iscah]

It's not overlook, it's very intentional to make completionism people do stuff for a long time (or stay subbed) IMO. Those who tried to get achievement in shortcut won't get it easily.

This too. As long as the ludicrously high achievements are just there for completionism's sake and have no rewards, I don't care if they're set unrealistically high.

The best mindset in this game is to drop the idea of completing all the achievements. They're not there to be achieved, they're there so the person who already achieved it can keep counting onwards to a theoretical next goal.

In that case it's probably better for the number to be unreasonably high, to save them from having to invent yet another target number when a substantial number of people reach the long one.

[Malakii]

This too. As long as the ludicrously high achievements are just there for completionism's sake and have no rewards, I don't care if they're set unrealistically high.

I mean this just sounds like someone who doesn't care about achievements in general and doesn't do them. You don't care if they are set unrealistically high achievements and when someone completes these insane challenges you want them to not have any rewards for doing so. At least we both agree that some of the achievements are ludicrously high, but none of them are unrealistic just poorly implemented.

The best mindset in this game is to drop the idea of completing all the achievements. They're not there to be achieved, they're there so the person who already achieved it can keep counting onwards to a theoretical next goal.

In that case it's probably better for the number to be unreasonably high, to save them from having to invent yet another target number when a substantial number of people reach the long one.

They are there to be achieved with time and effort. That's the whole point of achievements. If achievements seemed like they couldn't be achieved then people wouldn't do them. Nowhere am I arguing that any of these achievements can't be done. I know they can. I know that some have already completed all achievements for prior patches and probably will do so with time after this patch. They are going to create new content with patches so new achievements come in. There is always a new goal and they are always going to create new achievements because it is a live game that is constantly being updated. I disagree it's not better for them to be high just for the sake of being high to stop them from adding in another number. They should use logic to determine a lifetime goal and when people complete that lifetime goal then they don't have to worry about that one anymore and SE shouldn't create a new number just for the hell of it. The player has already engaged with that content more than enough. Creating a new mole hill after a lifetime goal has been achieved is diminishing a lot of the players that do actually do achievements. A lot of people were upset cause they grinded nonstop for 10,000 cursed hoards and almost made it, to just to get slapped in the face with another 10,0000. Is this impossible, no? Is it unreasonable, yes, IMO. That is what the topic is about. Is what SE is asking reasonable? Should they continue to make achievements with these high numbers? Are these monotonous grind fest achievements what you want to keep seeing in the future? It is personally not what I want to see, but my opinion is no more valid than your as a paying sub. So I will just leave it be.

[Malakii]

It's not overlooked, it's very intentional to make completionism people do stuff for a long time (or stay subbed) IMO. Those who tried to get achievement in shortcut won't get it easily.

I mean it is definitely possible but in no way do I think this is a good way to make achievements or that it should continue, but if you do so be it. My opinion is no more valid than yours and I will leave it at that.

[Iscah]

I mean this just sounds like someone who doesn't care about achievements in general and doesn't do them. You don't care if they are set unrealistically high achievements and when someone completes these insane challenges you want them to not have any rewards for doing so. At least we both agree that some of the achievements are ludicrously high, but none of them are unrealistic just poorly implemented.

The game's philosophy towards rewarding achievements seems to be "create a fairly high target for rewards, and a phenomenally high target for people who want to sink hundreds of hours into achievements for the same of achievements".

I will do achievements if they get me a thing that I want. But I don't want the game to keep putting ever-higher reward targets for things that, as you pointed out, are so high a bar that very few people have bothered to reach them.

I could achieve those high targets with time and effort, but I would not feel like I had spent my time well.

[Malakii]

The game's philosophy towards rewarding achievements seems to be "create a fairly high target for rewards, and a phenomenally high target for people who want to sink hundreds of hours into achievements for the same of achievements".

I will do achievements if they get me a thing that I want. But I don't want the game to keep putting ever-higher reward targets for things that, as you pointed out, are so high a bar that very few people have bothered to reach them.

I could achieve those high targets with time and effort, but I would not feel like I had spent my time well.

Agreed, which is why I am hoping for a change.

[Commander_Justitia]

Imagine releasing achievements that are fun to do. Like e.g. kill a boss a certain different way.
Instead you can farm 20.000 deep dungeon hidden chests, have fun guys!! Next deep dungeon, 40.000, just because it is you !!

[Asari5]

Imagine releasing achievements that are fun to do. Like e.g. kill a boss a certain different way.
Instead you can farm 20.000 deep dungeon hidden chests, have fun guys!! Next deep dungeon, 40.000, just because it is you !!

they dont want you to be able to kill bosses in different ways. because there always will be one way better/faster than the others so players would only do that one way anyway. choices are bad.... sarcasm off

[Toutatis]

20,000 hidden chests… it’s not something I would be proud of. I think that actively pursuing such an achievement is a symptom of mental illness. I don’t know why they even put unhealthy achievements like this in the game.

[Payadopa]

The discords are where all the spawners and scouters post. So it's not exclusive rights, it's just that's where the people who actually do the work to spawn or find them put it. The goal is to reach out to as many people as possible to get the marks. So the opposite of exclusivity.
But honestly if you have a problem with how they are managed, you can always try doing it yourself if you want.

If that were actually true I'd have no issue with it. It isn't, though. All you get is annoyed by people yelling at the top of their lungs that a train might come within the next [X] hours. It's first come first serve. Always has been.