FANDOM


Forums: Yew Grove > The Required Achievement
Replacement filing cabinet
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 2 May 2018 by Salix of Prifddinas.

There has been some discussion over what should be placed in the "Requirements" field for Achievement infoboxes. Achievement requirements as of now currently include a mixture of quests/miniquests, skills, and items.

Example

The Queen Black Dragonling achievement requires the Queen Black Dragon scale item, which requires 99 Summoning to activate.

In-game however, the requirements are displayed as:

nkp3tOw.png

The in-game achievement does not list the needed item or the actual requirement of 99 Summoning needed to unlock the pet, only the 60 Summoning requirement needed to access the Queen Black Dragon.

Proposals

Here are a few proposals using the above achievement as an example (feel free to add your own):

_____________________________

1 Strictly follow in-game requirements:

Requirements: 60 Summoning Summoning

_____________________________

2 Allow achievement, quest/miniquest, and skill requirements that are necessary to complete the achievement:

Requirements:

_____________________________

3 Allow achievement, quest/miniquest, skill, and item requirements that are necessary to complete the achievement:

Requirements:

_____________________________
* Song from the Depths is used as a quest example and is not required for the actual achievement

Allowed skills

For future proofing, another question would be what skills to allow in the requirements. For example, some quests require many skills to complete. If a quest is required for an achievement, should all the respective skills needed for the quest be listed on the achievement as well?

Discussion

Support proposal 2- Undecided on Allowed skills - Cuxrie (talk) 00:42, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Proposal 2- Allowed skill i think should come from post-quest/miniquest or if it requires like playing a minigame or doing d&d then list the requirements of that. --Luis12345lts (talk) 00:56, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Additional as per jlun Clarify on the achievement page why it might differ on game (example the pyramid plunder achievement ingame they only considered the requirement for going in, whilst the required level to loot 20 urns in one go actually requires a higher level). For the items needed I don't see much the necessity to have them listed specially if they can be 1-step bought on GE, maybe I can agree with listing quest item or items that require effort to make/get. Should skill achievement listing get 'large' maybe instead of having display also the skill's name, I think it could suffice with the icon. Also if for instance X requirement would need 90 in artisan skills instead of listing individually, make it listed 90 in artisan related skills. --Luis12345lts (talk) 18:06, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

1, but with comments - I think we should follow Jagex on this one. It'll get way too messy if we try and add multiple requirements which are all indirect requirements to the main achievement. The issue does come up with stuff like the QBD pet where you actually need 99 summoning to unlock the pet (unlocking the pet grants the achievement, not obtaining the pet) - we should mention this in the article somewhere, not the navbox. Haidro (talk) 02:40, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Agree wth below. I Support 2 over 3 since that's branching into item requirements (which just gets crazy with some of the achievements). Sure we could do a collapsable section but why not just put that in the main content. Haidro (talk) 22:29, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
I'm assuming it's because people tend to look at infobox before main area User:KelseW/Signature 22:32, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
Infobox is not a navbox, Kelsey... Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) 16:15, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Support 1 - Agree with Haidro, we take things straight from the game such as quest length, so I don't see why this shouldn't be the same. However, things that indirectly are requirements should be noted in the article as to avoid confusion User:KelseW/Signature 02:43, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Quest length isn't a subjective matter unlike this. bad_fetustalk 15:19, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
Quest length can definitely be subjective, before we had the official length by jagex, it was done on a case by case basis. Also I'm not suggesting all the indirect requirements be removed from each page, just moved out of the infobox User:KelseW/Signature 15:23, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
How do you define an indirect requirement? For the above example, Proposal 1 that you are supporting suggests listing only 60 Summoning which is flat-out wrong when you need 99 Summoning to do it. I can understand not listing skill requirements for quests that are already listed for instance but the issue is moreso about Jagex listing wrong information. bad_fetustalk 15:28, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
For me, personally, an indirect requirement for an achievement is something that isn't listed in-game, but is actually necessary such as the 99 summoning. We can't do a lot about jagex not listing real requirements, but I don't think the indirect ones should clutter the infobox, but rather be listed in the main text. User:KelseW/Signature 15:34, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
Infobox is not a navbox, Kelsey... Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) 16:15, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Strong oppose 1 - Having incomplete/wrong information just because Jagex also does is ridiculous in my opinion. I honestly don't see why it's "messy" to have correct information in the infobox as opposed to misleading statements. From 2 and 3 I personally favor 3 but in this case I can see why some might find it cluttered compared to 2. Support 2/3 - bad_fetustalk 15:19, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Infobox is not a navbox... Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) 16:15, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Support 2 or 3 - Additionally, in the page itself, add that the ingame requirement was listed incorrectly as trivia --Jlun2 (talk) 15:52, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Oh yea, and report it ingame --Jlun2 (talk) 15:53, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Soft support 2/3 - After some talking with fetus ingame, I'm leaning towards 2 or 3, however I'm worried that having so many requirements in a infobox will make the page look ugly. Fetus suggested having it be collapsible if it has more than x requirements to keep the page looking tidy. User:KelseW/Signature 16:03, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Just in case anyone is confused, he's referring to me and not 3i+1 bad_fetustalk 16:07, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
Infobox is not a navbox, Kelsey... Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) 16:15, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Clarify difference between 2/3 - I'm not entirely sure what the item requirement is referring to. I would support case 2 for something like the example listed, where getting the item drop is basically the achievement in itself. However, I would support case 3 when you need to get extraneous items to finish the achievement, for example Good Enough For A Goblin. For things like Open Bar where there's a lot of required items, we could just collapse it. If we are going to list the requirements I don't think "there's too many" is a good reason to not include them. --LiquidTalk 05:21, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

It's basically what you stated, 3 is including the items needed to finish the achievement in the infobox. 2 would exclude it from the infobox, where the items needed instead would probably be stated in the main text area, like what's there now for Open Bar. - Cuxrie (talk) 07:01, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose option 1; support 2 - Skills levels that are directly required to complete achievements should be included, but items can just be shown in the main article if the achievement requires an absurd amount. If an achievement only needs 1-2 (maybe 3) items, like Good Enough For A Goblin's bronze spear, sure, put them in the infobox. Also, I don't think adding quest level requirements is necessary since they aren't directly used for the achievement itself and adding so many levels will make the infobox really cluttered. NeutralinoTalk?Pale wisp 08:21, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Support 2 and don't add skill reqs from required quests - Per Neutralino. If there are too many reqs, the infobox could simply just refer to a section on the page. Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) 16:15, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Support 2 - In instances where the actual requirement differs from the tooltip in game, what the tooltip says should also be mentioned. (60 Summoning vs. 99 Summoning in this instance).

Perhaps something like this:

Requirements:


*Listed as 60 in-game, however 99 Summoning is required to unlock the pet

Otherwise, I foresee editors constantly changing the 99 to 60 believing they are correcting an error. Pernix cowl detail MAGE-KIL-R Zaros symbol 11:16, April 17, 2018 (UTC)

I support Mage's addition. Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) 11:18, April 17, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose 1, support 2 - We shouldn't rely on Jagex to be completely correct. xHR7zpA.png6encXAo.png 17:32, April 17, 2018 (UTC)

Support 2 - The best option. Jagex's isn't always right and people come to RSW to get info, not to get confused like in-game. Maximus Gugu of ArmadylQuick chat button: Your Friendly Neighborhood Artist. 18:58, April 19, 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely number 2 - People have to bounce around enough, listing all the actual real reqs is the most helpful to the player. Degenret01 (talk)

Support 2 - Skill requirements should only be listed, however, if they are not already included as part of the quest requirement (if applicable). That is, if no quests are required, list all skill reqs. If all the skill level reqs are covered by one or more required quests, there is no need to list every skill as that is redundant and the lists for some would get unnecessarily longs. (Also, oppose 1 because the Wiki should be a source of more detailed information, not just copying everything from Jagex verbatim - in the example case someone may actually come to the wiki to find out why 60 summoning isn't technically correct, so if we repeat information that is wrong it just isn't helpful). User:Myles Prower/Signature 05:05, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose 1, Support 2 - Seconding the above comment. Raven (blue) Crowborn (Talk) 00:21, April 23, 2018 (UTC)

Support 2 - Pointing up to Mage-Kil-R's comment/adjustment. Completionist cape Angel of Law Talk Law rune 20:05, April 27, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - Option 2 will be implemented. Meaning the achievement infobox should list the actual requirements in addition to or instead of the requirements that are listed in-game while also explicitly mentioning the differences to future proof it and prevent edit conflicts/wars as shown by MAGE-KIL-R above. E.g. listing that 99 Summoning is required to complete the QBD pet achievement, while also mentioning that the in-game interface shows only 60 Summoning which is the only requirement to enter QBD lair, but doesn't suffice for completing the achievement, which is unlocking the QBD pet.

However, implicit requirements, requirements that are required for other requirements, e.g. the (skill) requirements for a quest that is required to complete the achievement, should NOT be listed separately as explained above by Myles Prower. Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) 07:13, May 2, 2018 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.