Which of these answers do you believe applies to the current state of ESO.

Finneholt

Its no surprise to anyone who spends an adequate amount of time in-game that there are a multitude of issues to the current health of ESO. While some of the issues have the potential to push gamers away, other issues seem to diminish the enjoyment of play-time. I am simply curious as to how all of you are feeling toward ZOS/Bethesda regarding the state of ESO (PVE and PVP alike).

Jim_Pipp

ZOS/Bethesda cares about the many people who have invested countless hours playing their game, and are doing their best to work at fixing their game out of respect for the gamers.

Well your opinion on the matter is obvious!

I'd love to know what you hoped to get by creating a poll with biased options.

Elsonso

ZOS/Bethesda are aware of all the issues of the game, but consider the game "good enough".

I don't think that ZOS is understaffed or underfunded. I think ESO is understaffed and underfunded. They have a set budget for the game, which is less than revenue, and I think that the game is making a profit. This budget is less than the work that they have to do, which means that they "prioritize" and "pace themselves". That leads to "good enough" because this way of thinking does not encourage excellence. Excellence would require spending more time on projects, which means fewer projects, and more community complaining. They are trying to set a happy balance between spending time on projects and getting more projects done.

I have seen what they did with Crown Crates and the absolutely beautiful, fully voiced and animated interface that they created. It shines brighter than the majority of the game. I now understand what is possible, and what we are not getting. I have to ask why we are not getting this type of polish in more of what they are doing. Imagine what the Guild Traders would be like, or what the mail system would be like, or the Looking for Group would be like, if they put a Crown Crate amount of effort into them! They don't. Why? The cynical idea that it is because of Crown Crate Revenue does not really satisfy, as an answer.

Right now ZOS has all their eggs in one basket. The ESO basket. They know that ain't gonna last. What the studio is not spending on ESO, I speculate is being spent on The Next Game, whatever that is. (*cough*Fallout) Two games will provide more stability for the studio. I believe that they have been working on this for a while, that resources have been diverted from ESO to this new game, and that they are currently hiring permanent and temporary employees to develop this new game. A new game that is now ramped up (or will be) into full production. A new game that will launch as ESO enters "twilight", or full maturity, or whatever they decide to call it when ESO is put on the back burner. This new game will carry the studio forward.

BlackSparrow

ZOS/Bethesda cares about the many people who have invested countless hours playing their game, and are doing their best to work at fixing their game out of respect for the gamers.

They do want us to be happy. It's up to you whether you believe that's because they care about the players for their own sake or because happy players spend money.

But they can't fix everything instantly. They do roll out patches fairly regularly, but those take time to make. Hotfixes are faster, but they could easily have unforeseen consequences in a game this big and unwieldy. Game design isn't as easy as "press this button to balance all proc sets."

The main issue with ZOS is that they're bad at communicating on issues and fixes. They'd rather hype up the next big release and get some buzz going than verbally acknowledge that there are things that are upsetting a major part of their player base. With them, a lack of communication does not mean they're not looking into the issue. It just means they're not telling US they're looking into it.

Finneholt

Bias? Should I live in denial as to the current state of the game? If I was truly bias I would have just made some asinine comment in a post without the options for others to select (like you did Jim_Pip) toward any positive choices at all. Did my "bias" force you to select an option? Or maybe people think ZOS/Bethesda aren't responsible for their product and the state of their product, and I should take my so-called "bias" some place else. Look, if I can't express how I feel about the game I own, that I play on my console, in my own home than what's the point of any expression at all? Sorry for speaking the truth from my own experiences based on how I'm feeling...it won't happen again.

Jim_Pipp

ZOS/Bethesda cares about the many people who have invested countless hours playing their game, and are doing their best to work at fixing their game out of respect for the gamers.

Of course you are welcome to post your thoughts. What are they?

You made a general statement about undefined problems with the game and then tried to force others to choose weighted statements about the authors of the game. A more productive poll would have asked about a particular issue to see whether people agreed that it needed a response. Alternatively, if you just want to talk generally about how you feel about ZOS then it would be more insightful to hear peoples opinions in their own words rather than through a limited set of passive-aggressive options chosen by you.

Saying that ZOS is aware of all of the problems is unrealistic and assumes we players all agree with what the problems are.

In fairness, the comments your poll has attracted have been insightful, although they have also challenged the wording of your poll.

<micdrop> I'm out.

Mojmir

ZOS/Bethesda doesn't care.

multiple options are relevant, none of them white-knighting.