@Borsook - I think it really depends on what those achievements are. Different companies take different approaches. Some are quite elaborate. Some are "# of Kills" or something simple like that. The more elaborate the achievements and their hierarchies, and the more intricate or involved in the actual game design they are, the more time and effort that goes into them. "Some" companies make them very elaborate because they think it is what is expected of a company like them. In short, there are a whole host of variables to consider as to if the addition of Achievements will impact game development.
Also, as far as worrying about mods and cheats, these things are often part of some form of leader board hierarchy. As such, if you don't at least try to make it tougher to hack than an average email account, they become (even) less meaningful (than they already are --- personal opinion). If, for example, I want to have an achievement that says "Win without taking damage" and I can get that in God mode (where no damage is given), what is the point?
so if the Devs take the stance that no one wants to have to work to achieve the achievements, then why spend any time at all on them?
I don't thing the game has the data mining required for achievements. Personally, the only thing I like about achievements is that it gives me ideas on how to do things differently, but I can take them or leave them. I won't not buy a game for having (or not having) them, nor will I buy a game because it does (or doesn't).
For BG, I don't see how they would fit all that well. Anyway, maybe some brilliant modder will figure such a thing out. Unless you want THESE cards, in which case, carry on smartly!
I don't thing the game has the data mining required for achievements. Personally, the only thing I like about achievements is that it gives me ideas on how to do things differently, but I can take them or leave them. I won't not buy a game for having (or not having) them, nor will I buy a game because it does (or doesn't).
For BG, I don't see how they would fit all that well. Anyway, maybe some brilliant modder will figure such a thing out. Unless you want THESE cards, in which case, carry on smartly!
In fairness, if you look at the save files in keeper or infinity then you see a ton of data in there - including things like whether you killed Drizzt or not. If you were going to layer in achievements, an idea which I do not like, then it seems there is already fertile data for many potential achievement cards or whatever they are called.
Personally, the only games where I like achievements are ones that are not story focused. A game that is repetitive can benefit from achievements adding to the objectives in gameplay. Games that I have enjoyed more for having achievements have been things like fighting games or repetitive iphone apps like a tower defense game.
While I don't care for Achievements, these arguments are just silly. Take the example of spiderweb games, RPGs written by ONE person, who when they got to steam added achievements and said on his blog it was extremely easy. It does not even require days of work...
Exactly. It was written by ONE person who knows his code inside and out, knows what type of achievements will work with his coding already in place and might of even had a goal of getting his games on Steam, so having a workaround for achievements could of been implemented at the start.
Now take BG, where the code was written over a decade ago, by many different people using an engine that bugs itself with the slightest update or tweak. See the difference?
I want to add my opinion on the matter, I think (this is me personally) unlockable non existent digital achievements are not needed within gaming, the argument to say they are popular makes no sense to me, you cannot state something to be popular if it is forced upon you, it is only common not popular and these days it is seen as the norm for developers to attach them to their game. I dare say that nearly all xbox 360 and playstation 3 games come with achievements.
My argument aside try and imagine the multiplayer setting on the xbox or playstation without achievements, how would the community play differently?
imagine viewing people who are online without the gamerscore number to indicate what they have played and done? would others speak and treat others differently? People mentioned they like looking out for people with difficult achievements and comparing there own achievement scores, how does this affect how people see each other? is it good?
Most the achievements tend to appear from just completing tasks you would do anyway which is worthless in my opinion, I agree with people that its a psychological trick which the developers may want to use to get people playing more, is this a good thing? do you like the idea of yourself getting stuck or addicted to something? how far do they go? is it right for them to play with the human mind to make them more sales or their games last longer.
I agree with many people that if the game is good enough and interesting enough then people will continue to play it, using psychological ticky box non existent trophies to ensnare "some" people to continue playing is just a low-blow market strategy which seems underhanded.
Now, I can understand the harder and rarer achievements being desirable because I guess it is like a badge saying you have done this but then again who cares? Why would someone be involved enough to collect meaningless numbers and symbols to give them a false sense of respect and pride that you too have sat down long enough and learnt how to beat the game mechanics of a game to unlock a colourful not very well designed symbol, to hope that some random person, or if you are lucky a friend to care enough and think you are mildly badass? I don't want to be in a gaming community which compares and is involved around self recognition, I want to talk to people about the game itself, its story, or strategies and tactics to become better, or even discussing constructive criticism to help developers understand what we really liked and what we think could of been done better. Now I am not saying you cannot talk about these things because of achievements but it does breed achievement hunting, stale competitors who only do certain things to bring themselves quickly to the resulting achievement and it also breeds negative competition and boasting.
I just find the whole idea childish, but I can respect people enough to understand that if others want to collect them it is their choice and I hope they enjoy themselves doing that.
Now the only solution I can think of is achievements shouldn't be attached to the game initially, you should have to activate the ability to get them. Meaning people who do want to compete can and people who don't care don't have their game immersion broken.
I also think that achievements should be left up to the community, so they decide what is difficult and interesting, I am too tired to go into any more detail though.
Then you guys should protest and advocate that Blizzard,Bioware and Bethesda to name a few stop "wasting time" on Achievements - which I suspect only takes a few days to add at the most.
Those games were written with the intent of supporting achievements. The developers you mentioned are also massive companies with hundreds of developers at their disposal, for games that are bought and played by millions.
Baldur's Gate EE by comparison has a significantly smaller user-base, and the development team is extremely small.
You are talking about a massive task to add checks to code for checking that the game is unmodded, that a save game is not edited (likely not possible without blocking existing saves), that cheats have never been used in any part of a game.
At the minimum, that's still weeks-months of development and beta testing with the staff that they have.
Then there's the development it would take to check the state of the game for new achievements earned. How frequently should it be checked? How will this impact the performance of the game?
Then there's adding a user interface screen for showing you the achievements you've earned, haven't earned, and adding the user interface notifications for showing when you earned an achievement. Where should the screen be located? How should the screen look? How should achievements be organized? How should the notifications appear in such a way that they won't interfere with gameplay?
And of course: What achievements should there be?
Altogether, it's a several month process requiring the time of several developers and designers, along with numerous beta testers. Don't think for a minute that this is effortless just because Blizzard, Bioware, and Bethesda, have the sheer manpower to do it quickly. Even for World of Warcraft, Blizzard spent months on the achievement system.
"few days to add at the most"....smh.
While I don't care for Achievements, these arguments are just silly. Take the example of spiderweb games, RPGs written by ONE person, who when they got to steam added achievements and said on his blog it was extremely easy. It does not even require days of work...
Also I don't see any problem with cheats and mods, if players want to mod the game so they get the achievements easier it's their loss, almost no game checks for that and nobody has a problem with it. Probably because nobody wants achievements that much to actually do it.
These arguments are hardly silly. Go talk to any software engineer, every single one of those would need to be answered before development begins.
Which spiderweb games in particular are you talking about? When were the games originally written? Was it the person that originally wrote them that added the achievements? How large are said games? Is it more likely that the maker of these games wrote the source code so that it would be easier to modify later for expansion, than the defunct Black Isle Studios? What libraries did spiderweb games use to make their RPGs, how extensive are they? What 1990s era software libraries did Black Isle Studios use? How well do they interact with new libraries?
We're not talking about adding achievements to a game that was written by one person and patched to work with achievements. We're talking about adding achievements to a 15 year old game that was written by a whole team of developers, and is now being edited to work properly with modern computers by a small team of a handful of developers.
@Borsook - I think it really depends on what those achievements are. Different companies take different approaches. Some are quite elaborate. Some are "# of Kills" or something simple like that. The more elaborate the achievements and their hierarchies, and the more intricate or involved in the actual game design they are, the more time and effort that goes into them. "Some" companies make them very elaborate because they think it is what is expected of a company like them. In short, there are a whole host of variables to consider as to if the addition of Achievements will impact game development.
Also, as far as worrying about mods and cheats, these things are often part of some form of leader board hierarchy. As such, if you don't at least try to make it tougher to hack than an average email account, they become (even) less meaningful (than they already are --- personal opinion). If, for example, I want to have an achievement that says "Win without taking damage" and I can get that in God mode (where no damage is given), what is the point?
so if the Devs take the stance that no one wants to have to work to achieve the achievements, then why spend any time at all on them?
Well, you REALLY want, everything CAN be made complicated, sure. But the point that was made before was "adding achievements is unrealistic because it requires a lot of work", you're trying to twist the point here, but the point stands - achievements can be added easily if somebody wants to. Personally I don't see the need, but it is easily doable.
PS. I have over 400 games on steam and never have I seen achievements tied to leaderboards, if it's "often" can give some example?
Then you guys should protest and advocate that Blizzard,Bioware and Bethesda to name a few stop "wasting time" on Achievements - which I suspect only takes a few days to add at the most.
Those games were written with the intent of supporting achievements. The developers you mentioned are also massive companies with hundreds of developers at their disposal, for games that are bought and played by millions.
Baldur's Gate EE by comparison has a significantly smaller user-base, and the development team is extremely small.
You are talking about a massive task to add checks to code for checking that the game is unmodded, that a save game is not edited (likely not possible without blocking existing saves), that cheats have never been used in any part of a game.
At the minimum, that's still weeks-months of development and beta testing with the staff that they have.
Then there's the development it would take to check the state of the game for new achievements earned. How frequently should it be checked? How will this impact the performance of the game?
Then there's adding a user interface screen for showing you the achievements you've earned, haven't earned, and adding the user interface notifications for showing when you earned an achievement. Where should the screen be located? How should the screen look? How should achievements be organized? How should the notifications appear in such a way that they won't interfere with gameplay?
And of course: What achievements should there be?
Altogether, it's a several month process requiring the time of several developers and designers, along with numerous beta testers. Don't think for a minute that this is effortless just because Blizzard, Bioware, and Bethesda, have the sheer manpower to do it quickly. Even for World of Warcraft, Blizzard spent months on the achievement system.
"few days to add at the most"....smh.
While I don't care for Achievements, these arguments are just silly. Take the example of spiderweb games, RPGs written by ONE person, who when they got to steam added achievements and said on his blog it was extremely easy. It does not even require days of work...
Also I don't see any problem with cheats and mods, if players want to mod the game so they get the achievements easier it's their loss, almost no game checks for that and nobody has a problem with it. Probably because nobody wants achievements that much to actually do it.
These arguments are hardly silly. Go talk to any software engineer, every single one of those would need to be answered before development begins.
Which spiderweb games in particular are you talking about? When were the games originally written? Was it the person that originally wrote them that added the achievements? How large are said games? Is it more likely that the maker of these games wrote the source code so that it would be easier to modify later for expansion, than the defunct Black Isle Studios? What libraries did spiderweb games use to make their RPGs, how extensive are they? What 1990s era software libraries did Black Isle Studios use? How well do they interact with new libraries?
We're not talking about adding achievements to a game that was written by one person and patched to work with achievements. We're talking about adding achievements to a 15 year old game that was written by a whole team of developers, and is now being edited to work properly with modern computers by a small team of a handful of developers.
Well, I am basing my opinion on those of game devs, which I can refer you to. I meant ALL spiderweb games, check Avadon or Avernum. The games are isometric RPGs, their size is comparable to BG1. And after many years of modding Infinity engine I don't see any big problems with the code, almost everything that happens makes a flag, achievements could be just tied to those. Hell, I could write such code in 10 minutes, the only issue I see as a modder is that I could display them only as text in game's dialogue window. But for somebody who has the source code (like overhaul) it shouldn't be too problematic. Again, I am not advocating doing it, just talking about it being possible.
While I don't care for Achievements, these arguments are just silly. Take the example of spiderweb games, RPGs written by ONE person, who when they got to steam added achievements and said on his blog it was extremely easy. It does not even require days of work...
Exactly. It was written by ONE person who knows his code inside and out, knows what type of achievements will work with his coding already in place and might of even had a goal of getting his games on Steam, so having a workaround for achievements could of been implemented at the start.
Now take BG, where the code was written over a decade ago, by many different people using an engine that bugs itself with the slightest update or tweak. See the difference?
I mostly replied to this before... have you ever tried doing anything with the code e.g. using weidu to mod the game? It's not that terrible, for years modders were adding huge content to the game (many mods add more than BG:EE did), and it did not break like you say (though there were some problems, mostly due to the fact that nobody had the source code). The fact that Overhaul introduced almost more bugs than they fixed speaks about their skills and knowledge of the engine, not of the game itself.
While I don't care for Achievements, these arguments are just silly. Take the example of spiderweb games, RPGs written by ONE person, who when they got to steam added achievements and said on his blog it was extremely easy. It does not even require days of work...
Exactly. It was written by ONE person who knows his code inside and out, knows what type of achievements will work with his coding already in place and might of even had a goal of getting his games on Steam, so having a workaround for achievements could of been implemented at the start.
Now take BG, where the code was written over a decade ago, by many different people using an engine that bugs itself with the slightest update or tweak. See the difference?
I mostly replied to this before... have you ever tried doing anything with the code e.g. using weidu to mod the game? It's not that terrible, for years modders were adding huge content to the game (many mods add more than BG:EE did), and it did not break like you say (though there were some problems, mostly due to the fact that nobody had the source code). The fact that Overhaul introduced almost more bugs than they fixed speaks about their skills and knowledge of the engine, not of the game itself.
And I have replied to this before.... yes they have been doing it for YEARS. All those mods, how many updates did they have to go through to iron out majority of the bugs that was created? Lemme give you a hint. It took YEARS. And I never said it broke the game; some mods just hid their bugs like the Lighting strikes turning people into werewolves that has popped up on these forums. People tend to forget that and others tend to over look bugs added with free user content, because it is free.
While I don't care for Achievements, these arguments are just silly. Take the example of spiderweb games, RPGs written by ONE person, who when they got to steam added achievements and said on his blog it was extremely easy. It does not even require days of work...
Exactly. It was written by ONE person who knows his code inside and out, knows what type of achievements will work with his coding already in place and might of even had a goal of getting his games on Steam, so having a workaround for achievements could of been implemented at the start.
Now take BG, where the code was written over a decade ago, by many different people using an engine that bugs itself with the slightest update or tweak. See the difference?
I mostly replied to this before... have you ever tried doing anything with the code e.g. using weidu to mod the game? It's not that terrible, for years modders were adding huge content to the game (many mods add more than BG:EE did), and it did not break like you say (though there were some problems, mostly due to the fact that nobody had the source code). The fact that Overhaul introduced almost more bugs than they fixed speaks about their skills and knowledge of the engine, not of the game itself.
And I have replied to this before.... yes they have been doing it for YEARS. All those mods, how many updates did they have to go through to iron out majority of the bugs that was created? Lemme give you a hint. It took YEARS. And I never said it broke the game; some mods just hid their bugs like the Lighting strikes turning people into werewolves that has popped up on these forums. People tend to forget that and others tend to over look bugs added with free user content, because it is free.
Wait that lighting turning people into werewolfs was a bug? I just assumed malar and talos were having a bit of fun at my expense
@Borsook - I think it really depends on what those achievements are. Different companies take different approaches. Some are quite elaborate. Some are "# of Kills" or something simple like that. The more elaborate the achievements and their hierarchies, and the more intricate or involved in the actual game design they are, the more time and effort that goes into them. "Some" companies make them very elaborate because they think it is what is expected of a company like them. In short, there are a whole host of variables to consider as to if the addition of Achievements will impact game development.
Also, as far as worrying about mods and cheats, these things are often part of some form of leader board hierarchy. As such, if you don't at least try to make it tougher to hack than an average email account, they become (even) less meaningful (than they already are --- personal opinion). If, for example, I want to have an achievement that says "Win without taking damage" and I can get that in God mode (where no damage is given), what is the point?
so if the Devs take the stance that no one wants to have to work to achieve the achievements, then why spend any time at all on them?
Well, you REALLY want, everything CAN be made complicated, sure. But the point that was made before was "adding achievements is unrealistic because it requires a lot of work", you're trying to twist the point here, but the point stands - achievements can be added easily if somebody wants to. Personally I don't see the need, but it is easily doable.
PS. I have over 400 games on steam and never have I seen achievements tied to leaderboards, if it's "often" can give some example?
I never said it was unrealistic. My comment would be "adding achievements OF ANY VALUE would require extra effort which I deem to be unnecessary as achievements in my opinion don't add any value".
As for having over 400 games on steam, wow. That's quite an accomplishment. Have you played all of them? Do you compete on all of them? How many of them have achievements of any value or merit? Basically, how do you have the time?
Since I don't look at leader boards nor do I track my stats online as I don't feel the need to brag about how many hours I play games, I couldn't give you examples of the uses of achievements on them. That was an assumption on my part based on the fact that something has to drive ratings. And that something has to be related to game play. Not every game has competitive multi-player, so I assumed. I do know that certain maps on Heart of the swarm were only unlocked once you had accomplished certain challenges (analogous to achievements).
MY comment was that I don't wish to pay for game content that I don't have access to until I complete a certain achievement not directly tied to the path of the game play.
Some achievements should be easy enough to implement, like "Noober: Got killed by Carbos or Shank" or "Scimitar Skewer: Killed Drizzt Do'Urden".
But more complicated achievement require checking of several variables. For example if you wanted to create an achievement like "Explorer: Visited all areas in the game", you would have to check literally 100s of variables to find out if a particular CHARNAME had visited every outdoor area, every level of every dungeon, and every floor of every single house. Or for "Kobold Massacre: Kill 100 Kobolds", you'd have to introduce a new variable (NUMBER_KILLED_KOBOLDS) and update it every time Charname (or one of the party members? Do their kills count?) kills a kobold, and save it with every save game.
Oh, how do you prevent the gamer from just Clua'ing the achievement variable?
That doesn't take a day. It takes a few days. Or man-days if you have several programmers working on a particular achievement, in which case they will have to spend time coordinating their work, or they will work at cross-purposes.
Now multiply this by the number of achievements you want in the game.
Which is why I say, achievements are fine. They can implement all the achievements they like, and I will most probably try to pretend they don't exist. But first things first, no achievements until they have ironed out any bugs still present in the game!
First things first.Let's hope the contractual matters are sorted then the long awaited patch is released and finally that we can get our hands on BG2EE.Achievements?I think they're the least of everyones worries.
Then you guys should protest and advocate that Blizzard,Bioware and Bethesda to name a few stop "wasting time" on Achievements - which I suspect only takes a few days to add at the most.
Those games were written with the intent of supporting achievements. The developers you mentioned are also massive companies with hundreds of developers at their disposal, for games that are bought and played by millions.
Baldur's Gate EE by comparison has a significantly smaller user-base, and the development team is extremely small.
You are talking about a massive task to add checks to code for checking that the game is unmodded, that a save game is not edited (likely not possible without blocking existing saves), that cheats have never been used in any part of a game.
At the minimum, that's still weeks-months of development and beta testing with the staff that they have.
Then there's the development it would take to check the state of the game for new achievements earned. How frequently should it be checked? How will this impact the performance of the game?
Then there's adding a user interface screen for showing you the achievements you've earned, haven't earned, and adding the user interface notifications for showing when you earned an achievement. Where should the screen be located? How should the screen look? How should achievements be organized? How should the notifications appear in such a way that they won't interfere with gameplay?
And of course: What achievements should there be?
Altogether, it's a several month process requiring the time of several developers and designers, along with numerous beta testers. Don't think for a minute that this is effortless just because Blizzard, Bioware, and Bethesda, have the sheer manpower to do it quickly. Even for World of Warcraft, Blizzard spent months on the achievement system.
"few days to add at the most"....smh.
While I don't care for Achievements, these arguments are just silly. Take the example of spiderweb games, RPGs written by ONE person, who when they got to steam added achievements and said on his blog it was extremely easy. It does not even require days of work...
Also I don't see any problem with cheats and mods, if players want to mod the game so they get the achievements easier it's their loss, almost no game checks for that and nobody has a problem with it. Probably because nobody wants achievements that much to actually do it.
These arguments are hardly silly. Go talk to any software engineer, every single one of those would need to be answered before development begins.
Which spiderweb games in particular are you talking about? When were the games originally written? Was it the person that originally wrote them that added the achievements? How large are said games? Is it more likely that the maker of these games wrote the source code so that it would be easier to modify later for expansion, than the defunct Black Isle Studios? What libraries did spiderweb games use to make their RPGs, how extensive are they? What 1990s era software libraries did Black Isle Studios use? How well do they interact with new libraries?
We're not talking about adding achievements to a game that was written by one person and patched to work with achievements. We're talking about adding achievements to a 15 year old game that was written by a whole team of developers, and is now being edited to work properly with modern computers by a small team of a handful of developers.
Well, I am basing my opinion on those of game devs, which I can refer you to. I meant ALL spiderweb games, check Avadon or Avernum. The games are isometric RPGs, their size is comparable to BG1. And after many years of modding Infinity engine I don't see any big problems with the code, almost everything that happens makes a flag, achievements could be just tied to those. Hell, I could write such code in 10 minutes, the only issue I see as a modder is that I could display them only as text in game's dialogue window. But for somebody who has the source code (like overhaul) it shouldn't be too problematic. Again, I am not advocating doing it, just talking about it being possible.
Comparable size? Which ones are you looking at? Avernum and Avadon are less than 1/10 the size of BG1. So basically, your only experience here is modding, and you think that hacking together an achievement system in a mod is the same as programming in a complete solution. Got it. You can write it in 10 minutes? Okay, let's see it then. Take 10 minutes and write some pseudocode for us. How often would the game check the variables? What events would trigger such a check? How would the user look at what achievements they have?
I guess when you do modding, since only a relatively small handful will download it, and only those that actually want what the mod offers, that you don't really have to worry about it affecting the performance of other parts of the game, or how it interacts with the rest of the code. You'll upload it, people'll report the bug if they care enough, and you'll either get to it or you won't, since you seem to think that you won't need to test for bugs. You don't think you have to worry about performance on a game that classic gamers are going to play, many on older systems. Every mod I've seen had to work through several bugs, not sure why you think otherwise. When you're a developer, and doing work that is later going to be sold, you have a much longer process than some hobbyist that thinks they're a hotshot.
The fact that Overhaul introduced almost more bugs than they fixed speaks about their skills and knowledge of the engine, not of the game itself.
This is what I'm talking about. You obviously have no clue about the differences between patching a game with a mod and integrating that fix into the source code. Especially when that source code is old, written by someone else, and you're making upgrades to the engine and interface as well.
If you're so much better than Overhaul, perhaps you should send them your resume. You hinted at modding experience above, let's hear it, I'd like to see where your experience is since you apparently think that my statement of all the work that would be involved and questions to be answered is "silly".
@Borsook - I think it really depends on what those achievements are. Different companies take different approaches. Some are quite elaborate. Some are "# of Kills" or something simple like that. The more elaborate the achievements and their hierarchies, and the more intricate or involved in the actual game design they are, the more time and effort that goes into them. "Some" companies make them very elaborate because they think it is what is expected of a company like them. In short, there are a whole host of variables to consider as to if the addition of Achievements will impact game development.
Also, as far as worrying about mods and cheats, these things are often part of some form of leader board hierarchy. As such, if you don't at least try to make it tougher to hack than an average email account, they become (even) less meaningful (than they already are --- personal opinion). If, for example, I want to have an achievement that says "Win without taking damage" and I can get that in God mode (where no damage is given), what is the point?
so if the Devs take the stance that no one wants to have to work to achieve the achievements, then why spend any time at all on them?
Well, you REALLY want, everything CAN be made complicated, sure. But the point that was made before was "adding achievements is unrealistic because it requires a lot of work", you're trying to twist the point here, but the point stands - achievements can be added easily if somebody wants to. Personally I don't see the need, but it is easily doable.
PS. I have over 400 games on steam and never have I seen achievements tied to leaderboards, if it's "often" can give some example?
I never said it was unrealistic. My comment would be "adding achievements OF ANY VALUE would require extra effort which I deem to be unnecessary as achievements in my opinion don't add any value".
As for having over 400 games on steam, wow. That's quite an accomplishment. Have you played all of them? Do you compete on all of them? How many of them have achievements of any value or merit? Basically, how do you have the time?
Since I don't look at leader boards nor do I track my stats online as I don't feel the need to brag about how many hours I play games, I couldn't give you examples of the uses of achievements on them. That was an assumption on my part based on the fact that something has to drive ratings. And that something has to be related to game play. Not every game has competitive multi-player, so I assumed. I do know that certain maps on Heart of the swarm were only unlocked once you had accomplished certain challenges (analogous to achievements).
MY comment was that I don't wish to pay for game content that I don't have access to until I complete a certain achievement not directly tied to the path of the game play.
Sorry for not answering you earlier, I missed your post somehow Well, the games were collected over a period of a few years, and yes I tried to play them all. And no, most of the achievements weren't meaningful, or maybe rather none of the were, some of them - e.g. Dungeons of Dredmor have funny ones, but still they are not meaningful. Basically achievement usually illustrate your progress through the game, so their only purpose is that you can show other players what you have managed to do... If one, like me, doesn't care about such "bragging" achievements are not useful in any way. Still I can see that somebody else could want them in the game, and the only point I was trying to make before was that they are not that difficult to implement. As for leaderboards - I think that they are driven mostly by multiplayer matches, or in some arcade games by points you get, not by achievements. The purpose of the latter could be just "look everybody, I've killed Sarevok!"
While I don't care for Achievements, these arguments are just silly. Take the example of spiderweb games, RPGs written by ONE person, who when they got to steam added achievements and said on his blog it was extremely easy. It does not even require days of work...
Exactly. It was written by ONE person who knows his code inside and out, knows what type of achievements will work with his coding already in place and might of even had a goal of getting his games on Steam, so having a workaround for achievements could of been implemented at the start.
Now take BG, where the code was written over a decade ago, by many different people using an engine that bugs itself with the slightest update or tweak. See the difference?
I mostly replied to this before... have you ever tried doing anything with the code e.g. using weidu to mod the game? It's not that terrible, for years modders were adding huge content to the game (many mods add more than BG:EE did), and it did not break like you say (though there were some problems, mostly due to the fact that nobody had the source code). The fact that Overhaul introduced almost more bugs than they fixed speaks about their skills and knowledge of the engine, not of the game itself.
And I have replied to this before.... yes they have been doing it for YEARS. All those mods, how many updates did they have to go through to iron out majority of the bugs that was created? Lemme give you a hint. It took YEARS. And I never said it broke the game; some mods just hid their bugs like the Lighting strikes turning people into werewolves that has popped up on these forums. People tend to forget that and others tend to over look bugs added with free user content, because it is free.
Well, it's hard to compare, if a mod takes a year to finish, you have to take into account that the person doing it might be just spending 3 hours a week on it. So a company working full time making a patch in a month could actually be spending 10 years of modder time And there are quite a few mods that never introduced any bugs. I can't whip up a spreadsheet comparing the two, but, my subjective impression is still that people the like of Weimer were producing code of higher quality than Overhaul. Which I guess was partly because when e.g. Weimer was coding Weidu and his mods he was playing the game over and over again and when Overhaul started working on BG:EE they did not remember much about infinity code
If you're so much better than Overhaul, perhaps you should send them your resume. You hinted at modding experience above, let's hear it, I'd like to see where your experience is since you apparently think that my statement of all the work that would be involved and questions to be answered is "silly".
I've never claimed I am better than Overhaul, (only that they added a lot of bugs, when alternative solutions e.g. Tutu are virtually bug-free) I have never seen anyone from Overhaul saying "we won't do achievements because they are very hard to implement and we don't have the manpower to do it". I've always assumed that they could have done it easily if they wanted it, and just that they chose not to do it. Which, personally I think was a good choice. The only thing that I was disputing was a claim that adding achievements is so hard that it is neigh impossible. And I stand by my claim, as I can see no proof otherwise. As for the rest - I'm not going to argue with you. Avernum took me more time to complete than BG1. Different play style possibly. Although I think the reviews mention similar playthrough times for both games.
If you're so much better than Overhaul, perhaps you should send them your resume. You hinted at modding experience above, let's hear it, I'd like to see where your experience is since you apparently think that my statement of all the work that would be involved and questions to be answered is "silly".
I've never claimed I am better than Overhaul, (only that they added a lot of bugs, when alternative solutions e.g. Tutu are virtually bug-free) I have never seen anyone from Overhaul saying "we won't do achievements because they are very hard to implement and we don't have the manpower to do it". I've always assumed that they could have done it easily if they wanted it, and just that they chose not to do it. Which, personally I think was a good choice. The only thing that I was disputing was a claim that adding achievements is so hard that it is neigh impossible. And I stand by my claim, as I can see no proof otherwise. As for the rest - I'm not going to argue with you. Avernum took me more time to complete than BG1. Different play style possibly. Although I think the reviews mention similar playthrough times for both games.
Yes, you implied that Overhaul lacked skill and knowledge about the engine when you said: "The fact that Overhaul introduced almost more bugs than they fixed speaks about their skills and knowledge of the engine, not of the game itself." Tutu isn't a solution, it's a band-aid, and the changes made by Tutu are less problematic than all the changes made for BG EE.
"Avernum took me more time to complete than BG1." Playtime has absolutely nothing to do with the size of a game's source code. Playtime has no relevance to the amount of developer work that is required to add in achievements. Lastly, playtime is highly subjective, especially in an RPG.
Tutu took quite a long time to be "virtually bug-free". As I said, there is a large difference between putting a band-aid over a bug, and correcting the underlying problem that causes the bug. Lastly, do you have any supporting evidence for your claim that they introduced more bugs than they fixed?
@Borsook - Fair enough. I am just saying that the comment "Adding achievements is easy" is like saying "How long is a piece of string". it is all relative.
The more complex the game, the more meaningful or impactful the achievements, the more time necessary to implement them. And if they are being used as bragging rights, they should be relevant to the game content in depth and complexity.
You can have an achievement "Killed Saravok" and anyone can implement that. But if it goes beyond to something like "Killed Drizzt", you have a bigger problem. You have to have and check variables in the game itself to make that determination. And then if it is 'Killed Drizzt at level 5' or 'with x companions' or whatever, it gets more complex.
Then you have to implement error checking for mods and hacking so that the achievements are level and the same difficulty for all players. And you have to prevent players from merely hacking the achievements into their online profile without actually achieving them.
See how it can get very complex? And complexity means effort, pure and simple.
At the end of the day, if people want them, I don't have a problem with them. So long as (a) they don't lock out content that I already paid for until I go social and attempt to achieve them and (b) development (long or short, easy or hard) doesn't take time, money or resources away from development of the actual game. I don't want the game held up or to be less complete because of content that I care nothing about (i.e. achievements).
See how it can get very complex? And complexity means effort, pure and simple.
Pretty much what I already said. Also, for the record, Borsook's comment made me cringe - I interpreted that as "I can make a mod, that's pretty much the same as what Overhaul needs to do." I do not know whether the interpretation was correct or not, but I am hoping it is not. Also, no offence to you, Borsook.
Before I start, I would like to say that this might be a bit too long for some people. If that is the case, go right to the bottom for the short version. As a programmer, I am almost always thinking about ways of implement certain features in my own software, sometimes I over-think them and they come out long-winded. Below, you'll find my thoughts on the 'how and why' regarding the implementation of achievements. Note that this potentially long-winded post doesn't even take into account of my earlier points about the worth of achievements, merely the basic concept of implementation.
Anyway, for those who might want to see some of the Steam Achievement source code, you can find the Steamworks SDK on GitHub. This should be of particular interest.
Now, I will say this much: implementing achievements would be quite easy due to the SDK/API that they provide. However, the checks required in a game such as Baldur's Gate would be the not-quite-so-easy part.
Most of the checks could be down via in-game globals, e.g. TALKEDTOGORION (Talked to Gorion). But these will have to be dealt with on a platform basis. iPad, Android, and non-Steam versions of PC and Mac (is BG:EE even available to Mac users via Steam?) will not be able to take advantage of these achievements due to how it is dealt with purely through the Steamworks SDK.
Further carrying on from the above, do they make a branch or set a compiler flag? If it were me, I would probably set a compiler flag (#ifdef STEAMBUILD (includes or code) #endif) to skip the Steam segments when building a non-Steam version. So they could write the code and forget about it while focusing on something more important (but why would they even bother when it's a [comparatively] small subset?).
The code will need to check three things (aside from the obvious 'has the player completed the task in order to get the achievement):
Is Debug Mode set to 1?
Is the user playing with mods (as these can positively or negatively affect the overall difficulty)?
Has the save game been modified?
Does the player meet the requirements in order to be rewarded the achievement?
Now, some people might think "who cares if there is a mod?" or "what does it matter if Debug Mode is on?" Well, the problem is this: if a user cheats, then they didn't earn the achievement. Okay, so not everyone cheats even if they are using mods or they have Debug Mode on, there are legitimate uses for both. Mods can be used to increase the difficulty, and Debug Mode can tell you what scripts, items, spells, and dialogue a particular NPC has, and can also tell you your current location, etc., etc. I'll deal with each of these one by one, and cross reference when necessary.
Debug Mode
Who cares? Okay, here's the deal. CTRL+Y, CTRL+R, and CTRL+J. If a player uses any of the aforementioned, then why should they be entitled to achievements? But! there's a solution here. How about a variable that detects if a person used any of the above key combinations? At any point throughout the game, if a player uses the above mentioned key combinations, they are forever unable to gain achievements within the current game they are playing. The variable can be stored in the save game, so that the only way to actually get achievements is to start a new game. This is where we run into the first problem, see Save Game below.
However, storing a variable this way seems a bit draconian; the player is going to be punished for something that may have happened (literally) weeks ago. The problem with not doing it this way is the quick save and quick load features. Big battle ahead? Not enough healing spells? Don't worry, CTRL+R to the rescue. Quick save and quick reload, no more persecution regarding the earning of achievements. It is easier to lock out achievements for the entire game rather than try to detect if a cheat has been used in the current session. If I recall, Skyrim did something like this whereby using the console disabled achievements until the player starts a new game (what Skyrim didn't do was check for mods, since the developers encouraged modding, even when it made 'earning' achievements so simple and easy a trained monkey could do it (i.e. takes away any so-called value that they might otherwise have, including bragging rights and seeing how 'good' a player is) - someone can correct me on that if it is incorrect).
Okay, so some pseudo-code, something very generalised (assumes that there is a keypress() function or method):
//Note that these could be system keys and
//programmed as either a char, string, system-known
//constant, or an integer/hex, depending entirely on
//how the code is set up.
if ( keypress(VK_CONTROL) &&
keypress(0x59) ||
keypress(0x52) ||
keypress(0x4A))
{
m_save.PlayerCheated = 1;
}
Where m_save could store all the current game information such as character stats, items, etc. Just so I'm explaining it can it can be understood by everyone. That looks quite easy, doesn't it? This variable will be saved along with all the other information. In this case, it's a boolean—true or false. When the player loads a game with this flag, achievements are disabled every time that person plays with that particular save game. More on save games below.
Mods
A major issue here that people will complain about is "I was just testing out a mod, why can't I get achievements anymore?" or "Yeah, but this mod actually increases the difficulty!" The answer to that, in the most simplistic terms, would be that it is far too time consuming to create the required checks in order to make sure you are not cheating, than it would be to simply deactivate them. This is also a sticking point since a lot of people play with a mod (or lots of mods) of some sort. "But why even do this? Surely you don't need all these checks." I am of the opinion that achievements should be earned, not 'won' through cheating. If the developer is still going to award an achievement regardless, then the achievement is empty and meaningless. Most definitions of 'achievement' also suggest that something is accomplished through exertion, practice, skill, or perseverance, that is the same definition that I use.
With the mods, you come to yet another problem. How do you detect if a user has any mods? Simple answer here would be to see if the override folder has anything in it. Pretty simple, huh? Well, not quite. Every now and then, [a developer] will include files that are not packaged in the same format as the rest (e.g. packaged into the archives). (I avoided specifically saying "Overhaul," since) BioWare did this years ago with the originals - put several spells and items into the override folder rather than package them with the rest - and Overhaul will likely do the same (if they haven't already, I cannot remember) and, as well as that, you also have loose files made by fans and BG:EE Team Members that can patch certain problems. Okay, so, have a file list? If the files on the internal list are found in the override folder, the game will ignore them when looking to see if there is anything in the override folder.
Now, you might notice that I said "internal list." A list that is included (possibly as an array) when the game is being compiled. Sounds simple enough. The only problem with that, is it requires updating whenever there is a possibility that they may push out an update which has an uncompressed file, or files, within the override folder, making it not-so-viable, and also eliminates the ability to use the previously-mentioned patches made by official Team Members. The alternative would be to have an external file, possibly a 2DA file. A further problem with having it external is that it can be modified, to - you guessed it - include files from mods, making any such check completely redundant/pointless.
So we will just assume, for the sake of making it 'hack proof,' that it is an internal list. If items, spells, creatures, effects, areas, tilesets, etc., are found in the override folder that are not on the list then it won't award an achievement. Out of everything so far, an internal check list is the most viable, so we will take that just as an example.
Since I don't have the time to type out cross-platform psuedo-code for each of the examples, this will do just as well. I'll take the second solution as my example for this. So we'll take the second solution in that link using the WinAPI (which isn't going to be helpful if there is a Steam version available for Mac, so there would need to be a cross-platform version) and combine it with a check list. This solution would require an additional check against all of the currently listed files in an array in order to determine whether or not something is there that could be classified as a mod. If there is, set a variable that disallows achievements.
This is going to be a sticking point, though. What if a Team Member (i.e. forum users with a blue tint to their posts) provides a loose file that patches something? They cannot be expected to also update and push out yet another compiled version of the game just for that, which means that while the user might get a patch early they will also have achievements disabled. Is that a good trade-off? I don't think so.
Save Game
Okay, the save game by itself is not a big issue, but editing it does have the ability to give the player an unfair advantage; stats, resistances, items, spells, etc. Which is almost impossible to really moderate since it is possible to get a vastly overpowered character merely by importing a previously used character - note the different stat increasing books found within the game.
No, the big problem is in relation to storing variables. Variables that I mentioned above. For example, in my "Debug Mode" solution above I mentioned that an anti-cheat variable could be stored; for example, we'll just call it PLAYERCHEATED. If the player did cheat, it is set to 1, else it won't appear on the list or will be set to 0. With *Keeper, or a simple hex editor, anyone could effectively remove such a variable. Did the player cheat, and do they still want to 'earn' achievements? No problem, they can use *Keeper and remove the variable. They could also use the console to reset the variable. The game would effectively need to store something else within the save game in order to detect whether there has been tampering. The easiest would probably be to store some checksum information in a certain number of bytes at the start, middle, or end of the file. So, effectively, the game stores the information in-memory, generates a checksum for that, then writes the file as [checksum] [save game information]. When loading, it takes the first N bytes as the checksum and then reads the second portion to see if it matches. This could also be done using a calculation of file creation dates, times, size, etc.
This is where it gets silly, since many programmers with enough time can duplicate the algorithm required for this read/write process. Even if they can't duplicate that algorithm, the game should still load the save but simply disable the achievements.
The Requirements
All of the above would require adding a check, or checks, to each achievement that can be earned. But now we are on to the easiest part. Did the player kill X number of bears? Did the player kill Drizzt? Has the player completed the game? After all the above-mentioned is checked, it's a simple matter of using a call to something like SetAchievement("ACHMVT1");
There are numerous global variables stored in the save game, so detecting something like 'did the player kill Drizzt' would be as easy as if (DRIZZTKILLED == 1) {SetAchievement(DRIZZTKILLED);}
But wait a minute!
All of the above-mentioned solutions hinge on some form of in-game variable, right? So that variable could be altered by use of ArtMoney, Cheat Engine, T-Search, or the dozens of other memory editing programs, making the whole thing pointless. Moreover, not everyone has to do the searching due to the very convenient 'save address table' feature which most of these programs come with. Which means that something like Steam's anti-cheat system would need to be implemented so as to detect any modification to the current game memory (and is one of the reasons why XLive's memory checker came into existence).
This is the point where most developers go "yeah, we'll just do a Steam version. Splitting our time between a non-Steam version and a Steam version just isn't going to be viable," aside from the obvious contractual agreements that are generally in place. And why Steam's DRM actually becomes a part of the game without you even realising, and seems completely unobtrusive.
The short version: it is doable, and this post probably makes it sound far more difficult than it is. There is an easy-ish solution (easy does not mean 'short length of time'), but is it worth it?
Wait that lighting turning people into werewolfs was a bug? I just assumed malar and talos were having a bit of fun at my expense
Talos: "Alright, you hold it like this... Yeah. Alright, now throw it!" *FZZT!* Malar: "Whoa!" Talos: "I know, right?!" Malar: ? ...Meanwhile, on the Prime Material Plane... Khalid: "WHOA! [REDACTED]!" Jaheira: "That's why I wear leather." ...Back on the Astral Plane... Selûne: "What's going on in there, you two?!"
Ahh, just like an episode of Young Hercules, except with Jaheira and Khalid in it.
Here are a few other problems that I think would need to be checked for, in addition to what has already been mentioned in the thread.
1. Is the character imported from another game? Should the "I have used mods/cheats" flag be stored in exported character files? Should users be allowed to import characters and then attain achievements.
2. Has the character rerolled ability scores? In the character creation screen, one can easily reroll until they get even god-like ability scores. There's a DiceRoller program that automatically clicks and checks the rolls to see how they came up, and since it works by simulating user input, it's not something the game would be able to check for. If it checked the list of running programs, it would be a privacy issue and it would be defeated by simply changing the name of the program. Should a player only be allowed 1 reroll? No rerolls? However, ability scores are one of the first screens in character generation. It would not be difficult to extend the dice roller program that would go through the beginning steps, roll, check the scores, if they're not good, start over. It would be significantly slower and wouldn't allow you to save a high roll, but it would let you get a roll above some specified minimum. You could add load times, but then you're affecting everyone and for little reason, as those who are so inclined would still be able to do it.
3. Game difficulty is a setting that can be changed at any time. Do you add it to the character generation screen when a user is choosing to play with / without achievements? Do you then not let the user change it? Do you allow a 1 minute period at the start of the game for them to set a difficulty in the options and not let them change it later?
Here are a few other problems that I think would need to be checked for, in addition to what has already been mentioned in the thread.
1. Is the character imported from another game? Should the "I have used mods/cheats" flag be stored in exported character files? Should users be allowed to import characters and then attain achievements.
2. Has the character rerolled ability scores? In the character creation screen, one can easily reroll until they get even god-like ability scores. There's a DiceRoller program that automatically clicks and checks the rolls to see how they came up, and since it works by simulating user input, it's not something the game would be able to check for. If it checked the list of running programs, it would be a privacy issue and it would be defeated by simply changing the name of the program. Should a player only be allowed 1 reroll? No rerolls? However, ability scores are one of the first screens in character generation. It would not be difficult to extend the dice roller program that would go through the beginning steps, roll, check the scores, if they're not good, start over. It would be significantly slower and wouldn't allow you to save a high roll, but it would let you get a roll above some specified minimum. You could add load times, but then you're affecting everyone and for little reason, as those who are so inclined would still be able to do it.
3. Game difficulty is a setting that can be changed at any time. Do you add it to the character generation screen when a user is choosing to play with / without achievements? Do you then not let the user change it? Do you allow a 1 minute period at the start of the game for them to set a difficulty in the options and not let them change it later?
Comments
Also, as far as worrying about mods and cheats, these things are often part of some form of leader board hierarchy. As such, if you don't at least try to make it tougher to hack than an average email account, they become (even) less meaningful (than they already are --- personal opinion). If, for example, I want to have an achievement that says "Win without taking damage" and I can get that in God mode (where no damage is given), what is the point?
so if the Devs take the stance that no one wants to have to work to achieve the achievements, then why spend any time at all on them?
For BG, I don't see how they would fit all that well. Anyway, maybe some brilliant modder will figure such a thing out. Unless you want THESE cards, in which case, carry on smartly!
Personally, the only games where I like achievements are ones that are not story focused. A game that is repetitive can benefit from achievements adding to the objectives in gameplay. Games that I have enjoyed more for having achievements have been things like fighting games or repetitive iphone apps like a tower defense game.
Now take BG, where the code was written over a decade ago, by many different people using an engine that bugs itself with the slightest update or tweak. See the difference?
My argument aside try and imagine the multiplayer setting on the xbox or playstation without achievements, how would the community play differently?
imagine viewing people who are online without the gamerscore number to indicate what they have played and done? would others speak and treat others differently? People mentioned they like looking out for people with difficult achievements and comparing there own achievement scores, how does this affect how people see each other? is it good?
Most the achievements tend to appear from just completing tasks you would do anyway which is worthless in my opinion, I agree with people that its a psychological trick which the developers may want to use to get people playing more, is this a good thing? do you like the idea of yourself getting stuck or addicted to something? how far do they go? is it right for them to play with the human mind to make them more sales or their games last longer.
I agree with many people that if the game is good enough and interesting enough then people will continue to play it, using psychological ticky box non existent trophies to ensnare "some" people to continue playing is just a low-blow market strategy which seems underhanded.
Now, I can understand the harder and rarer achievements being desirable because I guess it is like a badge saying you have done this but then again who cares? Why would someone be involved enough to collect meaningless numbers and symbols to give them a false sense of respect and pride that you too have sat down long enough and learnt how to beat the game mechanics of a game to unlock a colourful not very well designed symbol, to hope that some random person, or if you are lucky a friend to care enough and think you are mildly badass? I don't want to be in a gaming community which compares and is involved around self recognition, I want to talk to people about the game itself, its story, or strategies and tactics to become better, or even discussing constructive criticism to help developers understand what we really liked and what we think could of been done better.
Now I am not saying you cannot talk about these things because of achievements but it does breed achievement hunting, stale competitors who only do certain things to bring themselves quickly to the resulting achievement and it also breeds negative competition and boasting.
I just find the whole idea childish, but I can respect people enough to understand that if others want to collect them it is their choice and I hope they enjoy themselves doing that.
Now the only solution I can think of is achievements shouldn't be attached to the game initially, you should have to activate the ability to get them. Meaning people who do want to compete can and people who don't care don't have their game immersion broken.
I also think that achievements should be left up to the community, so they decide what is difficult and interesting, I am too tired to go into any more detail though.
Which spiderweb games in particular are you talking about? When were the games originally written? Was it the person that originally wrote them that added the achievements? How large are said games? Is it more likely that the maker of these games wrote the source code so that it would be easier to modify later for expansion, than the defunct Black Isle Studios? What libraries did spiderweb games use to make their RPGs, how extensive are they? What 1990s era software libraries did Black Isle Studios use? How well do they interact with new libraries?
We're not talking about adding achievements to a game that was written by one person and patched to work with achievements. We're talking about adding achievements to a 15 year old game that was written by a whole team of developers, and is now being edited to work properly with modern computers by a small team of a handful of developers.
PS. I have over 400 games on steam and never have I seen achievements tied to leaderboards, if it's "often" can give some example?
As for having over 400 games on steam, wow. That's quite an accomplishment. Have you played all of them? Do you compete on all of them? How many of them have achievements of any value or merit? Basically, how do you have the time?
Since I don't look at leader boards nor do I track my stats online as I don't feel the need to brag about how many hours I play games, I couldn't give you examples of the uses of achievements on them. That was an assumption on my part based on the fact that something has to drive ratings. And that something has to be related to game play. Not every game has competitive multi-player, so I assumed. I do know that certain maps on Heart of the swarm were only unlocked once you had accomplished certain challenges (analogous to achievements).
MY comment was that I don't wish to pay for game content that I don't have access to until I complete a certain achievement not directly tied to the path of the game play.
But more complicated achievement require checking of several variables. For example if you wanted to create an achievement like "Explorer: Visited all areas in the game", you would have to check literally 100s of variables to find out if a particular CHARNAME had visited every outdoor area, every level of every dungeon, and every floor of every single house. Or for "Kobold Massacre: Kill 100 Kobolds", you'd have to introduce a new variable (NUMBER_KILLED_KOBOLDS) and update it every time Charname (or one of the party members? Do their kills count?) kills a kobold, and save it with every save game.
Oh, how do you prevent the gamer from just Clua'ing the achievement variable?
That doesn't take a day. It takes a few days. Or man-days if you have several programmers working on a particular achievement, in which case they will have to spend time coordinating their work, or they will work at cross-purposes.
Now multiply this by the number of achievements you want in the game.
Which is why I say, achievements are fine. They can implement all the achievements they like, and I will most probably try to pretend they don't exist. But first things first, no achievements until they have ironed out any bugs still present in the game!
So basically, your only experience here is modding, and you think that hacking together an achievement system in a mod is the same as programming in a complete solution. Got it.
You can write it in 10 minutes? Okay, let's see it then. Take 10 minutes and write some pseudocode for us. How often would the game check the variables? What events would trigger such a check? How would the user look at what achievements they have?
I guess when you do modding, since only a relatively small handful will download it, and only those that actually want what the mod offers, that you don't really have to worry about it affecting the performance of other parts of the game, or how it interacts with the rest of the code. You'll upload it, people'll report the bug if they care enough, and you'll either get to it or you won't, since you seem to think that you won't need to test for bugs. You don't think you have to worry about performance on a game that classic gamers are going to play, many on older systems. Every mod I've seen had to work through several bugs, not sure why you think otherwise.
When you're a developer, and doing work that is later going to be sold, you have a much longer process than some hobbyist that thinks they're a hotshot. This is what I'm talking about. You obviously have no clue about the differences between patching a game with a mod and integrating that fix into the source code. Especially when that source code is old, written by someone else, and you're making upgrades to the engine and interface as well.
If you're so much better than Overhaul, perhaps you should send them your resume. You hinted at modding experience above, let's hear it, I'd like to see where your experience is since you apparently think that my statement of all the work that would be involved and questions to be answered is "silly".
"Avernum took me more time to complete than BG1." Playtime has absolutely nothing to do with the size of a game's source code. Playtime has no relevance to the amount of developer work that is required to add in achievements. Lastly, playtime is highly subjective, especially in an RPG.
Tutu took quite a long time to be "virtually bug-free". As I said, there is a large difference between putting a band-aid over a bug, and correcting the underlying problem that causes the bug. Lastly, do you have any supporting evidence for your claim that they introduced more bugs than they fixed?
The more complex the game, the more meaningful or impactful the achievements, the more time necessary to implement them. And if they are being used as bragging rights, they should be relevant to the game content in depth and complexity.
You can have an achievement "Killed Saravok" and anyone can implement that. But if it goes beyond to something like "Killed Drizzt", you have a bigger problem. You have to have and check variables in the game itself to make that determination. And then if it is 'Killed Drizzt at level 5' or 'with x companions' or whatever, it gets more complex.
Then you have to implement error checking for mods and hacking so that the achievements are level and the same difficulty for all players. And you have to prevent players from merely hacking the achievements into their online profile without actually achieving them.
See how it can get very complex? And complexity means effort, pure and simple.
At the end of the day, if people want them, I don't have a problem with them. So long as (a) they don't lock out content that I already paid for until I go social and attempt to achieve them and (b) development (long or short, easy or hard) doesn't take time, money or resources away from development of the actual game. I don't want the game held up or to be less complete because of content that I care nothing about (i.e. achievements).
Before I start, I would like to say that this might be a bit too long for some people. If that is the case, go right to the bottom for the short version. As a programmer, I am almost always thinking about ways of implement certain features in my own software, sometimes I over-think them and they come out long-winded. Below, you'll find my thoughts on the 'how and why' regarding the implementation of achievements. Note that this potentially long-winded post doesn't even take into account of my earlier points about the worth of achievements, merely the basic concept of implementation.
Anyway, for those who might want to see some of the Steam Achievement source code, you can find the Steamworks SDK on GitHub. This should be of particular interest.
Now, I will say this much: implementing achievements would be quite easy due to the SDK/API that they provide. However, the checks required in a game such as Baldur's Gate would be the not-quite-so-easy part.
Most of the checks could be down via in-game globals, e.g. TALKEDTOGORION (Talked to Gorion). But these will have to be dealt with on a platform basis. iPad, Android, and non-Steam versions of PC and Mac (is BG:EE even available to Mac users via Steam?) will not be able to take advantage of these achievements due to how it is dealt with purely through the Steamworks SDK.
Further carrying on from the above, do they make a branch or set a compiler flag? If it were me, I would probably set a compiler flag (#ifdef STEAMBUILD (includes or code) #endif) to skip the Steam segments when building a non-Steam version. So they could write the code and forget about it while focusing on something more important (but why would they even bother when it's a [comparatively] small subset?).
The code will need to check three things (aside from the obvious 'has the player completed the task in order to get the achievement):
- Is Debug Mode set to 1?
- Is the user playing with mods (as these can positively or negatively affect the overall difficulty)?
- Has the save game been modified?
- Does the player meet the requirements in order to be rewarded the achievement?
Now, some people might think "who cares if there is a mod?" or "what does it matter if Debug Mode is on?" Well, the problem is this: if a user cheats, then they didn't earn the achievement. Okay, so not everyone cheats even if they are using mods or they have Debug Mode on, there are legitimate uses for both. Mods can be used to increase the difficulty, and Debug Mode can tell you what scripts, items, spells, and dialogue a particular NPC has, and can also tell you your current location, etc., etc. I'll deal with each of these one by one, and cross reference when necessary.Debug Mode
Who cares? Okay, here's the deal. CTRL+Y, CTRL+R, and CTRL+J. If a player uses any of the aforementioned, then why should they be entitled to achievements? But! there's a solution here. How about a variable that detects if a person used any of the above key combinations? At any point throughout the game, if a player uses the above mentioned key combinations, they are forever unable to gain achievements within the current game they are playing. The variable can be stored in the save game, so that the only way to actually get achievements is to start a new game. This is where we run into the first problem, see Save Game below.
However, storing a variable this way seems a bit draconian; the player is going to be punished for something that may have happened (literally) weeks ago. The problem with not doing it this way is the quick save and quick load features. Big battle ahead? Not enough healing spells? Don't worry, CTRL+R to the rescue. Quick save and quick reload, no more persecution regarding the earning of achievements. It is easier to lock out achievements for the entire game rather than try to detect if a cheat has been used in the current session. If I recall, Skyrim did something like this whereby using the console disabled achievements until the player starts a new game (what Skyrim didn't do was check for mods, since the developers encouraged modding, even when it made 'earning' achievements so simple and easy a trained monkey could do it (i.e. takes away any so-called value that they might otherwise have, including bragging rights and seeing how 'good' a player is) - someone can correct me on that if it is incorrect).
Okay, so some pseudo-code, something very generalised (assumes that there is a keypress() function or method):
//Note that these could be system keys and //programmed as either a char, string, system-known //constant, or an integer/hex, depending entirely on //how the code is set up. if ( keypress(VK_CONTROL) && keypress(0x59) || keypress(0x52) || keypress(0x4A)) { m_save.PlayerCheated = 1; }Where m_save could store all the current game information such as character stats, items, etc. Just so I'm explaining it can it can be understood by everyone. That looks quite easy, doesn't it? This variable will be saved along with all the other information. In this case, it's a boolean—true or false. When the player loads a game with this flag, achievements are disabled every time that person plays with that particular save game. More on save games below.
Mods
A major issue here that people will complain about is "I was just testing out a mod, why can't I get achievements anymore?" or "Yeah, but this mod actually increases the difficulty!" The answer to that, in the most simplistic terms, would be that it is far too time consuming to create the required checks in order to make sure you are not cheating, than it would be to simply deactivate them. This is also a sticking point since a lot of people play with a mod (or lots of mods) of some sort. "But why even do this? Surely you don't need all these checks." I am of the opinion that achievements should be earned, not 'won' through cheating. If the developer is still going to award an achievement regardless, then the achievement is empty and meaningless. Most definitions of 'achievement' also suggest that something is accomplished through exertion, practice, skill, or perseverance, that is the same definition that I use.
With the mods, you come to yet another problem. How do you detect if a user has any mods? Simple answer here would be to see if the override folder has anything in it. Pretty simple, huh? Well, not quite. Every now and then, [a developer] will include files that are not packaged in the same format as the rest (e.g. packaged into the archives). (I avoided specifically saying "Overhaul," since) BioWare did this years ago with the originals - put several spells and items into the override folder rather than package them with the rest - and Overhaul will likely do the same (if they haven't already, I cannot remember) and, as well as that, you also have loose files made by fans and BG:EE Team Members that can patch certain problems. Okay, so, have a file list? If the files on the internal list are found in the override folder, the game will ignore them when looking to see if there is anything in the override folder.
Now, you might notice that I said "internal list." A list that is included (possibly as an array) when the game is being compiled. Sounds simple enough. The only problem with that, is it requires updating whenever there is a possibility that they may push out an update which has an uncompressed file, or files, within the override folder, making it not-so-viable, and also eliminates the ability to use the previously-mentioned patches made by official Team Members. The alternative would be to have an external file, possibly a 2DA file. A further problem with having it external is that it can be modified, to - you guessed it - include files from mods, making any such check completely redundant/pointless.
So we will just assume, for the sake of making it 'hack proof,' that it is an internal list. If items, spells, creatures, effects, areas, tilesets, etc., are found in the override folder that are not on the list then it won't award an achievement. Out of everything so far, an internal check list is the most viable, so we will take that just as an example.
Since I don't have the time to type out cross-platform psuedo-code for each of the examples, this will do just as well. I'll take the second solution as my example for this. So we'll take the second solution in that link using the WinAPI (which isn't going to be helpful if there is a Steam version available for Mac, so there would need to be a cross-platform version) and combine it with a check list. This solution would require an additional check against all of the currently listed files in an array in order to determine whether or not something is there that could be classified as a mod. If there is, set a variable that disallows achievements.
This is going to be a sticking point, though. What if a Team Member (i.e. forum users with a blue tint to their posts) provides a loose file that patches something? They cannot be expected to also update and push out yet another compiled version of the game just for that, which means that while the user might get a patch early they will also have achievements disabled. Is that a good trade-off? I don't think so.
Save Game
Okay, the save game by itself is not a big issue, but editing it does have the ability to give the player an unfair advantage; stats, resistances, items, spells, etc. Which is almost impossible to really moderate since it is possible to get a vastly overpowered character merely by importing a previously used character - note the different stat increasing books found within the game.
No, the big problem is in relation to storing variables. Variables that I mentioned above. For example, in my "Debug Mode" solution above I mentioned that an anti-cheat variable could be stored; for example, we'll just call it PLAYERCHEATED. If the player did cheat, it is set to 1, else it won't appear on the list or will be set to 0. With *Keeper, or a simple hex editor, anyone could effectively remove such a variable. Did the player cheat, and do they still want to 'earn' achievements? No problem, they can use *Keeper and remove the variable. They could also use the console to reset the variable. The game would effectively need to store something else within the save game in order to detect whether there has been tampering. The easiest would probably be to store some checksum information in a certain number of bytes at the start, middle, or end of the file. So, effectively, the game stores the information in-memory, generates a checksum for that, then writes the file as [checksum] [save game information]. When loading, it takes the first N bytes as the checksum and then reads the second portion to see if it matches. This could also be done using a calculation of file creation dates, times, size, etc.
This is where it gets silly, since many programmers with enough time can duplicate the algorithm required for this read/write process. Even if they can't duplicate that algorithm, the game should still load the save but simply disable the achievements.
The Requirements
All of the above would require adding a check, or checks, to each achievement that can be earned. But now we are on to the easiest part. Did the player kill X number of bears? Did the player kill Drizzt? Has the player completed the game? After all the above-mentioned is checked, it's a simple matter of using a call to something like SetAchievement("ACHMVT1");
There are numerous global variables stored in the save game, so detecting something like 'did the player kill Drizzt' would be as easy as
if (DRIZZTKILLED == 1) {SetAchievement(DRIZZTKILLED);}But wait a minute!
All of the above-mentioned solutions hinge on some form of in-game variable, right? So that variable could be altered by use of ArtMoney, Cheat Engine, T-Search, or the dozens of other memory editing programs, making the whole thing pointless. Moreover, not everyone has to do the searching due to the very convenient 'save address table' feature which most of these programs come with. Which means that something like Steam's anti-cheat system would need to be implemented so as to detect any modification to the current game memory (and is one of the reasons why XLive's memory checker came into existence).
This is the point where most developers go "yeah, we'll just do a Steam version. Splitting our time between a non-Steam version and a Steam version just isn't going to be viable," aside from the obvious contractual agreements that are generally in place. And why Steam's DRM actually becomes a part of the game without you even realising, and seems completely unobtrusive.
The short version: it is doable, and this post probably makes it sound far more difficult than it is. There is an easy-ish solution (easy does not mean 'short length of time'), but is it worth it?
*FZZT!*
Malar: "Whoa!"
Talos: "I know, right?!"
Malar:
...Meanwhile, on the Prime Material Plane...
Khalid: "WHOA! [REDACTED]!"
Jaheira: "That's why I wear leather."
...Back on the Astral Plane...
Selûne: "What's going on in there, you two?!"
Ahh, just like an episode of Young Hercules, except with Jaheira and Khalid in it.
1. Is the character imported from another game? Should the "I have used mods/cheats" flag be stored in exported character files? Should users be allowed to import characters and then attain achievements.
2. Has the character rerolled ability scores? In the character creation screen, one can easily reroll until they get even god-like ability scores. There's a DiceRoller program that automatically clicks and checks the rolls to see how they came up, and since it works by simulating user input, it's not something the game would be able to check for. If it checked the list of running programs, it would be a privacy issue and it would be defeated by simply changing the name of the program. Should a player only be allowed 1 reroll? No rerolls?
However, ability scores are one of the first screens in character generation. It would not be difficult to extend the dice roller program that would go through the beginning steps, roll, check the scores, if they're not good, start over. It would be significantly slower and wouldn't allow you to save a high roll, but it would let you get a roll above some specified minimum. You could add load times, but then you're affecting everyone and for little reason, as those who are so inclined would still be able to do it.
3. Game difficulty is a setting that can be changed at any time. Do you add it to the character generation screen when a user is choosing to play with / without achievements? Do you then not let the user change it? Do you allow a 1 minute period at the start of the game for them to set a difficulty in the options and not let them change it later?