Guild Summit?

staxjax · September 2014

If they really cared about their players, why not make this a contest or raffle of sorts...would be really [snip] cool.

But no, they cater to the guild leaders and IC of the guilds that they think are most influential.

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Cursing & Profanity]

Phinix1 · September 2014

lordrichter wrote: »

I think that this game is in desperate need of a PR campaign. Right now there is a minority of players and bloggers, including many PVP players, that are being allowed to set a large portion of the Public Relations stage for this game. When that is negative, it is not a good thing.

Maybe so, but I don't think catering to this minority of "influential" bloggers and guilds will be a very effective strategy for them, either in terms of PR or in getting the core problems resolved.

I will say it again: The vast majority of things that need fixing are well known, like the poor server performance in large PVP campaigns, and have been known for some time. Getting together and talking about it doesn't seem particularly productive to me.

If these "influential" bloggers and players are so petty that they would hold the subs of all their lemming guild minions hostage to leverage the company, as if threats will get problems solved faster, then I say let them go now.

When you have a spoiled child, you don't give them what they want. That just encourages more bad behavior.

I say ZOS should cut their losses now. The community and the game will be more stable in the long term for it, as only the people who actually have an interest in the success of the game, not just their own egocentric agenda, will be the ones remaining to guide that course.

I think ZOS is trying way too hard to hold on to what amounts to a lot of selfish fair-weather friends who start "unsubbing" thread after "had enough" poll the second one little thing isn't instantly resolved for them.

Problems like server performance take time and money to solve, not talk.

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Rude and Insulting Comments]

pppontus · September 2014

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

I think that this game is in desperate need of a PR campaign. Right now there is a minority of players and bloggers, including many PVP players, that are being allowed to set a large portion of the Public Relations stage for this game. When that is negative, it is not a good thing.

Maybe so, but I don't think catering to this minority of "influential" bloggers and guilds will be a very effective strategy for them, either in terms of PR or in getting the core problems resolved.

I will say it again: The vast majority of things that need fixing are well known, like the poor server performance in large PVP campaigns, and have been known for some time. Getting together and talking about it doesn't seem particularly productive to me.

If these "influential" bloggers and players are so petty that they would hold the subs of all their lemming guild minions hostage to leverage the company, as if threats will get problems solved faster, then I say let them go now.

When you have a spoiled child, you don't give them what they want. That just encourages more bad behavior.

I say ZOS should cut their losses now. The community and the game will be more stable in the long term for it, as only the people who actually have an interest in the success of the game, not just their own egocentric agenda, will be the ones remaining to guide that course.

I think ZOS is trying way too hard to hold on to what amounts to a lot of selfish fair-weather friends who start "unsubbing" thread after "had enough" poll the second one little thing isn't instantly resolved for them.

Problems like server performance take time and money to solve, not talk.

I don't think this is anything like what you describe. My guess is they have picked guilds that they have been in contact with before, those who have been active with bug reports, active beta testers, top of the leaderboard (helping balance encounters), first to clear new content (and help fix more bugs) etc.

Basically (I believe) they want to talk to those who have been very helpful for them to have around, that have posted constructive feedback, in order to get more input on the things that are hurting all of us.

If you think about it, I definitely wouldn't want to see the complainers on this forum go to the summit - it's quite clear most comments aren't any sort of constructive feedback. However those who post constructive, well-thought out arguments and possible solutions, they are the perfect representation. I'd also like to know which guilds are attending, but from what I know it seems that they picked correctly.

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

Elsonso · September 2014

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

I will say it again: The vast majority of things that need fixing are well known, like the poor server performance in large PVP campaigns, and have been known for some time. Getting together and talking about it doesn't seem particularly productive to me.

This is why I do not think the purpose of the Summit is just to get together and talk about the current state of the game and where to go with it. I will be very annoyed if that is the purpose.

As others have correctly pointed out, there are better and cheaper ways to collect information and everything ZOS needs to know about what the forum thinks is right here. Having a meeting to talk about AoE caps or zerg balls is a waste of money.

To quote a popular movie, these people "don't take a dump, son, without a plan." If the discussion during the meeting includes Cyrodiil crashes, Cyrodiil lag, balance, AoE caps, or zergballs, I think you can be absolutely sure that they already know what they are going to be doing and are close to releasing it. Like I said, if this is otherwise, I will be very annoyed.

Despite the forum speculation, I think that the meeting is of an entirely other purpose. Probably more than one other purpose. This is why I posted the Commandments warning earlier. There are a limit number of reasons to actually fly 20 players around the world to talk about a video game. I do not think "how do we fix AoE caps" is enough of a reason to do it and had better not be the reason.

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

If these "influential" bloggers and players are so petty that they would hold the subs of all their lemming guild minions hostage to leverage the company, as if threats will get problems solved faster, then I say let them go now.

I say ZOS should cut their losses now. The community and the game will be more stable in the long term for it, as only the people who actually have an interest in the success of the game, not just their own egocentric agenda, will be the ones remaining to guide that course.

Of course ZOS wants to retain "elite" players. They also want to pick the brains of these people, and this is a proper course of action. As much as I would like to see them close Cyrodiil and boot the PVP players off into someone else's game, it is not in the best interests of the game to do that.

I already posted in the other thread that one possible reason for this meeting is to prepare players and get these guilds on the PTS bandwagon for Update 5. Update 5 is going to have the new grouping, dungeon scaling, and Undaunted dailies. They really need to get some guilds on board PTS and make sure they stay there.

(Aside: I know people have commented that PTS does not matter because they don't fix bugs anyway, but they do. Some changes they make right away, others take longer. This is partly priority and partly just the time it takes to fix things. There is a lead time for this stuff.)

I am not sure if anyone else noticed, but being this sort of stuff is my turf, I have noticed that they are starting to become quiet on new long term projects. These people are going to keep 12-18 months of projects in the pipeline. While I do not expect them to blab everything, I do expect them to be refilling the pipe once something comes out.

The Summit may include a "where do you see the game in a year" type of conversation. They will use this input to design new end-game areas and concepts.

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

LonePirate · September 2014

lordrichter wrote: »

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

I will say it again: The vast majority of things that need fixing are well known, like the poor server performance in large PVP campaigns, and have been known for some time. Getting together and talking about it doesn't seem particularly productive to me.

This is why I do not think the purpose of the Summit is just to get together and talk about the current state of the game and where to go with it. I will be very annoyed if that is the purpose.

As others have correctly pointed out, there are better and cheaper ways to collect information and everything ZOS needs to know about what the forum thinks is right here. Having a meeting to talk about AoE caps or zerg balls is a waste of money.

To quote a popular movie, these people "don't take a dump, son, without a plan." If the discussion during the meeting includes Cyrodiil crashes, Cyrodiil lag, balance, AoE caps, or zergballs, I think you can be absolutely sure that they already know what they are going to be doing and are close to releasing it. Like I said, if this is otherwise, I will be very annoyed.

Despite the forum speculation, I think that the meeting is of an entirely other purpose. Probably more than one other purpose. This is why I posted the Commandments warning earlier. There are a limit number of reasons to actually fly 20 players around the world to talk about a video game. I do not think "how do we fix AoE caps" is enough of a reason to do it and had better not be the reason.

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

If these "influential" bloggers and players are so petty that they would hold the subs of all their lemming guild minions hostage to leverage the company, as if threats will get problems solved faster, then I say let them go now.

I say ZOS should cut their losses now. The community and the game will be more stable in the long term for it, as only the people who actually have an interest in the success of the game, not just their own egocentric agenda, will be the ones remaining to guide that course.

Of course ZOS wants to retain "elite" players. They also want to pick the brains of these people, and this is a proper course of action. As much as I would like to see them close Cyrodiil and boot the PVP players off into someone else's game, it is not in the best interests of the game to do that.

I already posted in the other thread that one possible reason for this meeting is to prepare players and get these guilds on the PTS bandwagon for Update 5. Update 5 is going to have the new grouping, dungeon scaling, and Undaunted dailies. They really need to get some guilds on board PTS and make sure they stay there.

(Aside: I know people have commented that PTS does not matter because they don't fix bugs anyway, but they do. Some changes they make right away, others take longer. This is partly priority and partly just the time it takes to fix things. There is a lead time for this stuff.)

I am not sure if anyone else noticed, but being this sort of stuff is my turf, I have noticed that they are starting to become quiet on new long term projects. These people are going to keep 12-18 months of projects in the pipeline. While I do not expect them to blab everything, I do expect them to be refilling the pipe once something comes out.

The Summit may include a "where do you see the game in a year" type of conversation. They will use this input to design new end-game areas and concepts.

I think you are on to something with the one year vision plans. The crews working on the Arena and Serpent Trial are ready to move to new projects if they have not already done so. ZOS undoubtedly wants those people working on content the player base will actually play. As such, soliciting feedback from players will help steer them toward content players like (Arena) instead of content players despise (Craglorn in general).

If there is a second Guild Summit in 6-12 months, differ guilds or even solo players who have demonstrated a long term commitment to the game will be invited. Large guilds and those who played on the PTS for months below release were the obvious choices for this first one.

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

RinaldoGandolphi · September 2014

IMO i personally think ZOS is going about this the wrong way. Asking the "hardcore leet guilds" and using their input to mark the direction of your game is bad news for longterm outlook.

You look at any game out there, casuals mke up anywhere between 60-80% of sub fees or buys...the hardcore gamers are a minority population...sure they play more then everyone else, but they do not make up the majority of the game population.

I am a part of a pretty large guild, full to be exact, can't add anymore, and outside of 12 players(who are online every day, officers) the majority of the players are online once or twice a week at most.. ....casuals don't have time to play 7 days a week (I am lucky to log 5-6 hours a week if that)....many of these casuals never PVP.

(they just are not interested, they are more into the story and quests, they like stories and quests as much as pvpers like pvp, everyone has a preference)

for them it sucks to log into the game one day, and find a bunch of skills they used nerfed to uselessness in PVE because a bunch of PVP people whined about it.

Instead of taking hardcore guilds and listening to them, they should be holding contests of giving something away in return for filling out a survey and get a much larger sample size of what people want and don't want....

at the end of the day, hardcore players make up a small portion of the player base, the majority are casuals that play when they have time, but continue to pay the fee because they want the game to be avilable when they do have time to play.

The hardest thing is convincing hardcore players that they ARE THE MINORITY

Here is what Paul Jeal director of F1 2012 had to say about this matter:

http://www.incgamers.com/2012/08/convincing-the-hardcore-players-that-theyre-the-minority-is-not-easy-f1-2012

“You’ve definitely got two distinct audiences [for F1 games]. The majority of players play on the pad and from various angles, so you have to cater to them. But trying to convince people that play with a wheel and exclusively play from *** view that they’re the minority is not easy because they’re the only ones on the forums and they only interact with others like themselves.”

He is telling you what every game publisher/dev worth his/her salt in the industry has known for a long time...those of us that post on the forums here are a "form of hardcore". We may not be the hardcore "leet" as they call themselves, but we care about the game.

The fact is 70% of this games population will never post of these forums, thus their voices and concerns are never heard and are instead ignored while ZOS panders to these hardcore guilds. this is the reason this game has lost so many subs in recent months.

This is very easy for ZOS to fix though, and the first step towards fixing that is ending their relationships with hardcore guilds(that are loud vocal minority) or scaling them back significantly, and reaching out to the casual players that make up the majority of their paying customers and get feedback from them, and then move forward with what you got.

As it stands right now, without invite these forums are inaccessible. The casual player base, that makes up the majority, is being shutout of completely having any voice in this games direction, and that's just a downright shame....

this IMO is the single biggest thing ZOS needs to rectify. I think ZOS is a good company, I think they want this game to succeed, I have the uptmost respect for them. I don't want this post to come across as overly critical, All i want is to see the casuals get their input at least in front of someone's eyes and considered, that would only be prudent moving forward.

Desdemonte · September 2014

LonePirate wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

I will say it again: The vast majority of things that need fixing are well known, like the poor server performance in large PVP campaigns, and have been known for some time. Getting together and talking about it doesn't seem particularly productive to me.

This is why I do not think the purpose of the Summit is just to get together and talk about the current state of the game and where to go with it. I will be very annoyed if that is the purpose.

As others have correctly pointed out, there are better and cheaper ways to collect information and everything ZOS needs to know about what the forum thinks is right here. Having a meeting to talk about AoE caps or zerg balls is a waste of money.

To quote a popular movie, these people "don't take a dump, son, without a plan." If the discussion during the meeting includes Cyrodiil crashes, Cyrodiil lag, balance, AoE caps, or zergballs, I think you can be absolutely sure that they already know what they are going to be doing and are close to releasing it. Like I said, if this is otherwise, I will be very annoyed.

Despite the forum speculation, I think that the meeting is of an entirely other purpose. Probably more than one other purpose. This is why I posted the Commandments warning earlier. There are a limit number of reasons to actually fly 20 players around the world to talk about a video game. I do not think "how do we fix AoE caps" is enough of a reason to do it and had better not be the reason.

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

If these "influential" bloggers and players are so petty that they would hold the subs of all their lemming guild minions hostage to leverage the company, as if threats will get problems solved faster, then I say let them go now.

I say ZOS should cut their losses now. The community and the game will be more stable in the long term for it, as only the people who actually have an interest in the success of the game, not just their own egocentric agenda, will be the ones remaining to guide that course.

Of course ZOS wants to retain "elite" players. They also want to pick the brains of these people, and this is a proper course of action. As much as I would like to see them close Cyrodiil and boot the PVP players off into someone else's game, it is not in the best interests of the game to do that.

I already posted in the other thread that one possible reason for this meeting is to prepare players and get these guilds on the PTS bandwagon for Update 5. Update 5 is going to have the new grouping, dungeon scaling, and Undaunted dailies. They really need to get some guilds on board PTS and make sure they stay there.

(Aside: I know people have commented that PTS does not matter because they don't fix bugs anyway, but they do. Some changes they make right away, others take longer. This is partly priority and partly just the time it takes to fix things. There is a lead time for this stuff.)

I am not sure if anyone else noticed, but being this sort of stuff is my turf, I have noticed that they are starting to become quiet on new long term projects. These people are going to keep 12-18 months of projects in the pipeline. While I do not expect them to blab everything, I do expect them to be refilling the pipe once something comes out.

The Summit may include a "where do you see the game in a year" type of conversation. They will use this input to design new end-game areas and concepts.

I think you are on to something with the one year vision plans. The crews working on the Arena and Serpent Trial are ready to move to new projects if they have not already done so. ZOS undoubtedly wants those people working on content the player base will actually play. As such, soliciting feedback from players will help steer them toward content players like (Arena) instead of content players despise (Craglorn in general).

If there is a second Guild Summit in 6-12 months, differ guilds or even solo players who have demonstrated a long term commitment to the game will be invited. Large guilds and those who played on the PTS for months below release were the obvious choices for this first one.

I think Craglorn is the best zone in the game.

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

Desdemonte · September 2014

woodsro wrote: »

IMO i personally think ZOS is going about this the wrong way. Asking the "hardcore leet guilds" and using their input to mark the direction of your game is bad news for longterm outlook.

You look at any game out there, casuals mke up anywhere between 60-80% of sub fees or buys...the hardcore gamers are a minority population...sure they play more then everyone else, but they do not make up the majority of the game population.

I am a part of a pretty large guild, full to be exact, can't add anymore, and outside of 12 players(who are online every day, officers) the majority of the players are online once or twice a week at most.. ....casuals don't have time to play 7 days a week (I am lucky to log 5-6 hours a week if that)....many of these casuals never PVP.

(they just are not interested, they are more into the story and quests, they like stories and quests as much as pvpers like pvp, everyone has a preference)

for them it sucks to log into the game one day, and find a bunch of skills they used nerfed to uselessness in PVE because a bunch of PVP people whined about it.

Instead of taking hardcore guilds and listening to them, they should be holding contests of giving something away in return for filling out a survey and get a much larger sample size of what people want and don't want....

at the end of the day, hardcore players make up a small portion of the player base, the majority are casuals that play when they have time, but continue to pay the fee because they want the game to be avilable when they do have time to play.

The hardest thing is convincing hardcore players that they ARE THE MINORITY

Here is what Paul Jeal director of F1 2012 had to say about this matter:

http://www.incgamers.com/2012/08/convincing-the-hardcore-players-that-theyre-the-minority-is-not-easy-f1-2012

“You’ve definitely got two distinct audiences [for F1 games]. The majority of players play on the pad and from various angles, so you have to cater to them. But trying to convince people that play with a wheel and exclusively play from *** view that they’re the minority is not easy because they’re the only ones on the forums and they only interact with others like themselves.”

He is telling you what every game publisher/dev worth his/her salt in the industry has known for a long time...those of us that post on the forums here are a "form of hardcore". We may not be the hardcore "leet" as they call themselves, but we care about the game.

The fact is 70% of this games population will never post of these forums, thus their voices and concerns are never heard and are instead ignored while ZOS panders to these hardcore guilds. this is the reason this game has lost so many subs in recent months.

This is very easy for ZOS to fix though, and the first step towards fixing that is ending their relationships with hardcore guilds(that are loud vocal minority) or scaling them back significantly, and reaching out to the casual players that make up the majority of their paying customers and get feedback from them, and then move forward with what you got.

As it stands right now, without invite these forums are inaccessible. The casual player base, that makes up the majority, is being shutout of completely having any voice in this games direction, and that's just a downright shame....

this IMO is the single biggest thing ZOS needs to rectify. I think ZOS is a good company, I think they want this game to succeed, I have the uptmost respect for them. I don't want this post to come across as overly critical, All i want is to see the casuals get their input at least in front of someone's eyes and considered, that would only be prudent moving forward.

Not too many casuals though, else the summit would be nothing more than herding cats. Casuals are less likely to understand the scope of the game beyond their own small part of it, and may not be able to add useful input. Twenty different casuals may think 20 different things are the most important things in the game, where in reality they have minimal impact on the rest of the player base.

RinaldoGandolphi · September 2014

@desdemonte

Not too many casuals though, else the summit would be nothing more than herding cats. Casuals are less likely to understand the scope of the game beyond their own small part of it, and may not be able to add useful input. Twenty different casuals may think 20 different things are the most important things in the game, where in reality they have minimal impact on the rest of the player base.

Hang on there just a second, back up a little. In terms of hardcore this is what im talking about...

Hardcore players are "Out of Touch" with the majority of players who play this game. Hardcore players tend to have this attitude "they" know what is best for everyone else, and anyone who disagrees with them "don't understand the game".

In pointed fact this is a ludicrous position to even hold. People who think this way often have "inferiority complexes" and have to feel like they "know whats best" for everyone else in some online world to make themselves feel better about them selves. You really want people like that dictating the direction of this game?

Casuals are not cats, they are paying customers, and they understand much more then hardcore want to give them credit for. Many casuals are Dr.'s, Lawyers, some even IT Network Administrators and Network Security(Yours truly), Electrical Engineers, I even met a guy on here the other day that works for Intel making CPU's in one of their Fabs . These are pretty smart people, I think they deserve more credit then hardcore's want to give them.

I am just saying their voice needs to be heard, their input is worth every bit as much as some hardcore guild, perhaps even more, considering if the casuals were not paying their subs, this game wouldn't exist, so its only smart business to listen to those who are paying your paychecks instead of those who make up a small minority.

I see myself as more middle of the road, but no one on these forums seems to care about the casuals in this game and what they want, so since no one else will speak up on their behalf, I guess I am forced to...for what good it will do mind you...

LonePirate · September 2014

Desdemonte wrote: »

I think Craglorn is the best zone in the game.

I have no doubt some people love the zone. Almost every zone has its fans and its detractors. For instance, I love Shadowfen despite its reputation as being the worst EP zone.

Given your love for Craglorn, surely you have noticed how the bulk of the content goes unplayed. Almost no one quests or clears the delves and it is exceptionally difficult to find people to group up and play the content. People love the Arena and the Trials; but that's it and those areas are a small amount of the content. Also, Trials are inaccessible for massive numbers of the population. So even though you and others love Craglorn, you surely recognize how tiny the zone's fan club is.

If ZOS ends this guild summit with the belief that the ESO community wants more zones exactly like Craglorn, then both they and the attendees have failed the community as a whole in a very important manner.

Desdemonte · September 2014

woodsro wrote: »

@desdemonte

Not too many casuals though, else the summit would be nothing more than herding cats. Casuals are less likely to understand the scope of the game beyond their own small part of it, and may not be able to add useful input. Twenty different casuals may think 20 different things are the most important things in the game, where in reality they have minimal impact on the rest of the player base.

Hang on there just a second, back up a little. In terms of hardcore this is what im talking about...

Hardcore players are "Out of Touch" with the majority of players who play this game. Hardcore players tend to have this attitude "they" know what is best for everyone else, and anyone who disagrees with them "don't understand the game".

In pointed fact this is a ludicrous position to even hold. People who think this way often have "inferiority complexes" and have to feel like they "know whats best" for everyone else in some online world to make themselves feel better about them selves. You really want people like that dictating the direction of this game?

Casuals are not cats, they are paying customers, and they understand much more then hardcore want to give them credit for. Many casuals are Dr.'s, Lawyers, some even IT Network Administrators and Network Security(Yours truly), Electrical Engineers, I even met a guy on here the other day that works for Intel making CPU's in one of their Fabs . These are pretty smart people, I think they deserve more credit then hardcore's want to give them.

I am just saying their voice needs to be heard, their input is worth every bit as much as some hardcore guild, perhaps even more, considering if the casuals were not paying their subs, this game wouldn't exist, so its only smart business to listen to those who are paying your paychecks instead of those who make up a small minority.

I see myself as more middle of the road, but no one on these forums seems to care about the casuals in this game and what they want, so since no one else will speak up on their behalf, I guess I am forced to...for what good it will do mind you...

I totally agree with you that the interests of the more casual players must be represented. I also agree that there are likely many brilliant casual players here. I also agree that the game should not be solely geared toward the elite players. I'm just saying that if they are casual, they have probably not seen nearly as much of the game as people who play it daily and have gotten to end game have. The game simply hasn't been out long enough yet. Thus they are unaware of many issues and their view of the game will be limited. As far as game mechanics, they may not be aware of class balance and requirements for trials. The list goes on.

Major game features like player housing, auction house, etc can be addressed by anyone. I just wouldn't want valuable time squandered over frivolous concerns. For example, an MMO cannot keep getting dumbed down in difficulty because casual players do not have the time to hone their skills, learn the classes and builds that work/ don't work. Single player games have difficulty settings for a reason. I would be very interested to hear what concerns the more casual player actually has for the game, TBH.

Vizier · September 2014

It's PR. Major Guilds have already left ESO. A Mistake IMO but it's their time, not mine. I preferred to wait for balances and fixes. For those guilds with certain PvP styles the new Korean MMO is appealing. Not my cup of tea but to each their own. The point is ESO needs to garner the support of these guilds and may promise some support of their own which they can't do "publicly." wink wink.

ZOS_GinaBruno · September 2014

Hey everyone! Just to clear up any confusion, we have invited 20 guild representatives from all over North America and Europe. We wish we could have invited everyone, but space was limited. The purpose of the Guild Summit is to show them some of the things we're working on, discuss some concerns about current issues, and get their feedback and suggestions. This is not meant to be a secret; the entire summit is not under NDA, so everyone in attendance will be able to talk publicly about everything that was shown and discussed. In addition, we will be publishing a round-up next week on our website.

Cuyler · September 2014

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey everyone! Just to clear up any confusion, we have invited 20 guild representatives from all over North America and Europe. We wish we could have invited everyone, but space was limited. The purpose of the Guild Summit is to show them some of the things we're working on, discuss some concerns about current issues, and get their feedback and suggestions. This is not meant to be a secret; the entire summit is not under NDA, so everyone in attendance will be able to talk publicly about everything that was shown and discussed. In addition, we will be publishing a round-up next week on our website.

I think a lot of the guildies here want to know the criteria for your selection process. Only having 20 openings would mean that you've got to be picking only the best of the best...so maybe give us some info on what we should be striving too so as to be considered in the future?

Edit: If it's not supposed to be secret, why is it shrouded in so much mystery? I play everyday and on the forums everyday. I have not seen a promotion, a list a winners, or anything but a single post via one of the winners after they had already been choosen.

If not meant to be a secret, ZOS sure fooled me 8(

MorHawk · September 2014

Man, I can see D getting roasted for going public with this when he gets there! lol

KriHavok · September 2014

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey everyone! Just to clear up any confusion, we have invited 20 guild representatives from all over North America and Europe. We wish we could have invited everyone, but space was limited. The purpose of the Guild Summit is to show them some of the things we're working on, discuss some concerns about current issues, and get their feedback and suggestions. This is not meant to be a secret; the entire summit is not under NDA, so everyone in attendance will be able to talk publicly about everything that was shown and discussed. In addition, we will be publishing a round-up next week on our website.

Is it possible for this summit to be livestreamed/recorded, either by ZoS or the guilds?

Thudunblundur · September 2014

There is no selection procedure that could have made everyone happy. Frankly I'm glad they are doing this and hope it may do some good. I'm sure those going appreciate they are representing all of us and being guild leaders should have some idea of the concerns of their guildmates.

Mostly though I suspect that the reps will be shown round the departments and the work that is going on to demonstrate that Zenimax etc are doing their damnedest to get everything sorted. If they can help solve any of the issues that exist that would be great.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO · September 2014

Desdemonte wrote: »

Not too many casuals though, else the summit would be nothing more than herding cats. Casuals are less likely to understand the scope of the game beyond their own small part of it, and may not be able to add useful input

Pretty patronising and condescending aren't you, especially the "less likely to understand" comment?

You could make the exact same statement replacing 'casuals' by 'raiders', 'PVPers' and most other sub-groupings.

Given 'casuals' .. or more accurately non-hardcore raiders .. are usually accepted to be the largest PVE sub-group their voice deserves to be the loudest .. so far ZOS have pandered nigh on exclusively to the hardcore PVEers .. Entropy Rising of course are their big friends .. and this little shindig seems to be more pandering to the small minority elites.

xaraan · September 2014

I think my only concern is how qualified some of the attendees really are. Most of the time they tend to be the players/guilds that make a lot of noise, no necessarily the ones that know the game best. (I've spoken to a variety of members from these guilds in the past). I'm not saying they are all together ignorant of the game, but they definitely are not the best suited to give well-rounded feedback in some cases. This definitely feels more like a PR stunt to wrangle in love from 'big' guilds.

Kos · September 2014

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey everyone! Just to clear up any confusion, we have invited 20 guild representatives from all over North America and Europe. We wish we could have invited everyone, but space was limited. The purpose of the Guild Summit is to show them some of the things we're working on, discuss some concerns about current issues, and get their feedback and suggestions. This is not meant to be a secret; the entire summit is not under NDA, so everyone in attendance will be able to talk publicly about everything that was shown and discussed. In addition, we will be publishing a round-up next week on our website.

Hey Gina, I liked the recorded stream on twitch, how about making some footage to show on that stream? Maybe some cut scenes with short commentary about what was going on? This stream is really cool.

manny254 · September 2014

Large amounts of people voice there feedback on these forums, but ZoS only wants to actually listen to 20 people. I increasingly feel like I am paying to play a beta, and I am being treated like I have been given the privilege to do so.

LariahHunding · September 2014

Probably the same 20 people they have been listening to since beta.

See how that's worked out.

I absolutely despise Craglorn. I am close to leaving this game because of the lack of anything to do unless I can get 4 decent players together for a group.

Desdemonte · September 2014

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Desdemonte wrote: »

Not too many casuals though, else the summit would be nothing more than herding cats. Casuals are less likely to understand the scope of the game beyond their own small part of it, and may not be able to add useful input

Pretty patronising and condescending aren't you, especially the "less likely to understand" comment?

You could make the exact same statement replacing 'casuals' by 'raiders', 'PVPers' and most other sub-groupings.

Given 'casuals' .. or more accurately non-hardcore raiders .. are usually accepted to be the largest PVE sub-group their voice deserves to be the loudest .. so far ZOS have pandered nigh on exclusively to the hardcore PVEers .. Entropy Rising of course are their big friends .. and this little shindig seems to be more pandering to the small minority elites.

I'm pretty sure the massive dumbing down and nerffing of PvE content was not at the bequest of the hardcore PvE-ers. And I'm not being patronizing or condescending at all. If a player has been spending a couple hours a week since launch questing, they are unlikely to have hit the difficult parts of the game. This is fact. I am just stating it.

Desdemonte · September 2014

LariahHunding wrote: »

Probably the same 20 people they have been listening to since beta.

See how that's worked out.

I absolutely despise Craglorn. I am close to leaving this game because of the lack of anything to do unless I can get 4 decent players together for a group.

I agree that the way Craglorn has been set up to pretty much exclude grouping day to day, but the content is the most fun PvE in the game, IMO. Catch 22.

Grunim · September 2014

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey everyone! Just to clear up any confusion, we have invited 20 guild representatives from all over North America and Europe. We wish we could have invited everyone, but space was limited. The purpose of the Guild Summit is to show them some of the things we're working on, discuss some concerns about current issues, and get their feedback and suggestions. This is not meant to be a secret; the entire summit is not under NDA, so everyone in attendance will be able to talk publicly about everything that was shown and discussed. In addition, we will be publishing a round-up next week on our website.

Thanks, Gina. I and others are looking forward to seeing the published round-up.

polar · September 2014

There are a lot of people that voice complaints. There are some people that voice complaints coupled with potential solutions and constructive comments. There are even fewer of these people that not only do the above but do so integrating the voice and concerns of many players that they interact with. I think those are the folks flying out. Those that I know of off hand that are going have a decent guild behind them and because of that, they are taking with them the concerns and ideas of a much larger group than just the guildmasters themselves.

I am happy to see this meeting going forward and feel pretty comfortable in the fact that my concerns will be represented, both PvP and PvE, based on who they selected to fly out.

I am happy to see ZOS making such a commitment to better serving the player base.

radiostar · September 2014

Sounds like FE and The Saints all over again. Should be fun!

Vizier · September 2014

In this case ZoS is damned if they do and damned if they don't. They can't win. It's PR but it can also be an opportunity for ZoS to find out what is making the guilds tick. Why the mass exodus? What guild tools are needed? What will make PvP better? Problem is, I'm not certain the giant guilds are the best barometer for what makes for better PvP. In my experience they like those things that lend toward powerful Zerging and mobile blobs. When ZoS nerfed ultimate building from resto staffs many giant guilds left. THAT was the demarcation line. And they went to Zerg somewhere else. I say good riddance. I'd rather ZoS make an attempt at creating a PvP experience where things develop but keep. Restricting the way FC's work, creating better tools for Alliance guilds to work together, Stronger Keep Walls, Perks only given to home campaign while in campaign, harder to earn emperor title and continuing PvP balancing efforts.

They don't need to bring the guilds together to learn these things and I'm afraid they'll only get a piece of it from this process. Many of these "older" multi-game guilds can be pretty elitist and narrow in their thinking. Hopefully it's not a waste of time, this summit.

Previous posters are right. ZoS can't please everyone in this. Most are going to feel left out. Much better IMO to have a series of video conferences with invites to both standout guilds and up and coming guilds with focus on PVE and PvP alternating.

MorHawk · September 2014

manny254 wrote: »

Large amounts of people voice there feedback on these forums, but ZoS only wants to actually listen to 20 people. I increasingly feel like I am paying to play a beta, and I am being treated like I have been given the privilege to do so.

Because a small-scale consult automatically means they're ignoring everyone else. Sounds legit.

Gythral · September 2014

20 people that they can dazzle in a room and brainwash into thinking that everything is coming up roses and it is not a pre-alpha that they are foisting off on their customers!