WRONG FEEDBACK SOURCE Streamers don't represent most players

idk

willlienellson wrote: »

JinMori wrote: »

One last thing, the reason why i seem to keep defending these streamers, youtubers etc.. is because i actually learned something from them, when i joined this game about a year ago i didn't know much of course, but i wanted to become a better player.......

I can appreciate that. I really can. And I've never tried to suggest that those guys don't provide a service. It's just kind of beside my point.

When I first started investing and trading I read some books by a guy that runs a hedge fund. I learned tons, became a huge fan, and certainly owe some degree of my success to his lessons.

That doesn't mean I want him in DC helping to write finance law. You know what I mean?

I fail to see how this truly relates outside of a stretch that he is considered an expert and you are saying @FENGRUSH may be an expert.

There is a player of ESO who's unravels all the mysteries pertaining to math in ESO. He's provided us with great information and even a tool for calculating what CP allotments would serve our dps best. Through your his posts of indepth mathematical formulas Zos has certainly learned from him about how some aspects of the game actually work. This s allows them to make adjustments.

Zos has learned plenty from fantastic players since early beta to present day. I recall in beta the devs learned that cost reduction. Didn't have a cap or soft cap from the works of one player. They acknowledged this.

Any MMO needs people like these. Players that have insight to unravel the mysteries and understand the actual mechanics that find what works and what really isn't working. With this I'm not even talking about balance.

So when Zos needs specific feedback they will go to specific people. Not because they stream but because they have displayed deep knowledge of gaming and have proved to provide worthwhile feebback of the type they're needing. Something most players, including myself cannot provide as well.

Agree or disagree with Zos, that's your prerogative. If well designed battlegrounds are desired then the path Zos is taking will provide the best chance.

Oh. BTW, Zos has what is essentially focus groups in game. Various representatives of guilds from casual to hard core from which they regularly communicate. Of course not every guild is represented because that would be just to many people. It's a good cross section across the several groups.

Moglijuana

Anyone need some salt for their steak? Come to this thread!

ZOS* is currently in possession of one of the best "Open World" MMOPVP games on the market (One of the ONLY ones on console too). It would behoove them to invite players that are knowledgeable in that specific area of the game to continue to build on what makes it so successful. Sorry that they are seen as "elite" for simply understanding game mechanics and being able to outsmart the average PuG in Cyrodiil. Welcome to PvP in every single pvp game ever.

And of course bringing the Top End PvE players in is a smart move as well. Who else would you invite to discuss the next tier of THE HARDEST content coming out for PvE? Some player who made it to 561 using light attacks only? No thanks. The PvE in this game is already pretty laughable when compared to other MMO's so them making more difficult and engaging content for strong players will only lengthen their life span as a game.

ThePaleItalian

@willlienellson

What would you do differently?

I know that mods are all over the forums, maybe not always giving us the feedback we want, but they are there. They are now even putting spoiler tags in their patch notes to explain why they did certain things or doing in a certain direction.

I am curious after trying to sift through 17 pages of this "stuff" What you feel would be the correct way to market? or even have feedback over the current situation?

anitajoneb17_ESO

Moglijuana wrote: »

The PvE in this game is already pretty laughable when compared to other MMO's so them making more difficult and engaging content for strong players will only lengthen their life span as a game.

Could you please explain your reasoning ?
How is making content more difficult - thus probably more appealing and long lasting for the 10% best players will lengthen the lifetime of the game ? Considering that it might scare off the 90 remaining % of players... I don't understand.

I think ZOS people and the panel of players over there are all smart enough to not fall into that meaningless shortcut. Making the game *better* has nothing to do with making it more difficult. That's what some people in this thread fear.

Besides, were you there in early 2014 ? The game was really difficult back then. It nearly died because of it. If ZOS hadn't made that original mistake, maybe ESO would still be sub-only and we would not have to endure the current, somewhat cash-oriented design.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Maybe zos can do a lottery for who comes next time so you'll have a shot along with everyone else. That will certainly fill the agenda well.

It'd be more representative than selecting and handful of streamers.

All The Best

Keras

@bowmanz607

Why bother answering to people who failed to understand what this post is about.

I acknowledge the experience of people like Deltia or Sypher, I really do. I'm subscribed to Deltia's channel and watch his videos, because he's a sympathetic guy who I enjoy listening to.
But 1.) opposed to what's been stated several times: Deltia is not some over the top superplayer. He's good, definitely, he knows how to play this game, at least he does very well in PvE. PvP is another thing, because...
2.) Deltia, and much worse Sypher, belong to those people who enjoy running in huge groups, zerging people down or ganking the sh** out of their enemies. Sypher promoted early on builds that were copied by below casual-skilled players on seemingly every server to boost exactly the problems people who know the good AvA from the beginning of the game hate so much.

I acknowledge their experience, but I too play this game since it has launched on console, I complete Vet Maelstrom once a week for my gold weapon, run vet dungeons blindfolded and relish the lore since I started with Morrowind. To make it clear: I DO NOT think that I should personally be asked where this game should head and how it has to be fixed!!!
All I'm saying is that I have the experience as well - this is important, as I still wouldn't even want to be invited!


I wrote all this to make a very easy point obvious: It's mainly NOT about who's opinion is valuable. It's about the fact that inviting certain people WHILST not listening to the feedback sources implemented BY ZoS themlselves is ridiculous and nothing more than bad marketing!


If there are more people invited than Sypher, Deltia, Alcast and whoever else that is not a streamer is completely pointless to willlienellson's final argument. The fact that these streamers are invited is - that's what OP said - NOT a good sign for the broad community, for the reasons OP said and I hinted on.

OP stated a problem and then offered a solution as follows:

"The resources were used to have this elite youtube gathering session at Zenimax would have been better spent reading the forums, selecting a few issues with broad community consensus, and then having an internal meeting on how to best address those concerns. But that's too much to hope for."

That is what people seem to miss out. That is the crucial point this is about.

bowmanz607

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Maybe zos can do a lottery for who comes next time so you'll have a shot along with everyone else. That will certainly fill the agenda well.

It'd be more representative than selecting and handful of streamers.

All The Best

will also be filled with people who might not even know what the mechanics of the game are. But who cares right? Who needs a working knowledge of the ins and outs if the game to test it and give meaningful feedback??

Mojmir

So is this whole thing gonna be "grandma's boy 2"?

Majic

Maybe ZOS is using these players to sniff out holes and exploits the designers might otherwise miss, and fix them.

Without knowing what's actually going on behind the scenes, one guess is as good as another.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

willlienellson wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

I do not know whether they brought anyone in for One Tamriel, or Homestead, but in the case of the latter, if they did not do that, they should have done that. Homestead is a massive amount of investment, and I still feel that it missed the mark. It is too niche for the amount of effort they put into it.

And in the PTS everyone was screaming that Homestead missed the mark, while Deltia was "geeking out" over housing on his youtube. His words. Not mine.

And almost all the feedback on the PTS was ignored....and has now been mirrored as complaint threads by the general player base. And now Deltia is at Zos HQ helping form the direction of future content

^ So much this.

I read as much of the PTS feedback as I could and almost every major criticism of Homesteads went through totally unaddressed to Live.

For me almost any player housing is better than no player housing - but ZeniMax came very, very close to breaking that belief.

I had Crowns standing by to spend on Housing. I farmed half a million gold in a couple of weeks to add to my funds to spend on housing.

I played with housing on the PTS.
I read all the feedback in the PTS Forums.

Zenimax did NOTHING to address any of the very real concerns surrounding the lack if even the most basic functionality of housing (at least we got working doors, unlike most of Cyrodiil).

So I spent just 60,000-gold on Autumn's Gate and left it at that.

Listening to some of the gushing on some of the Streamer's videos you'd think Homesteads was the best housing ever.

And what did we actually get?

Something no better than Turbine managed for LOTRO almost a decade ago!

All The Best

Moglijuana

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Moglijuana wrote: »

The PvE in this game is already pretty laughable when compared to other MMO's so them making more difficult and engaging content for strong players will only lengthen their life span as a game.

Could you please explain your reasoning ?
How is making content more difficult - thus probably more appealing and long lasting for the 10% best players will lengthen the lifetime of the game ? Considering that it might scare off the 90 remaining % of players... I don't understand.

I think ZOS people and the panel of players over there are all smart enough to not fall into that meaningless shortcut. Making the game *better* has nothing to do with making it more difficult. That's what some people in this thread fear.

Besides, were you there in early 2014 ? The game was really difficult back then. It nearly died because of it. If ZOS hadn't made that original mistake, maybe ESO would still be sub-only and we would not have to endure the current, somewhat cash-oriented design.

I didn't say make content MORE difficult. I meant it as more content that IS difficult. Sorry, probably should have put a comma in there. The hardest content in this game when compared to other End Games is pretty lacking. VMOL being the only trial in the game that requires strong group coordination and is a representative of a good END GAME trial. But there's only ONE of those creating a multitude of problems. For the rest of the players who feel they will never be able to finish "The Hardest" content, remember that there are hundreds upon hundreds of hours worth of content that anyone can do at their leisure which technically should train them to be better in the long run. However, what keeps long term players playing, is adding additional engaging, difficult and rewarding content. This is something that I and many others (especially many of those invited) feel what is lacking from ESO.

And yes I tried the beta. It was "kind of" hard. It made me play it more often than other games because of that reason. I actually had a goal to BE better and be able to finish said content. Atm, however, you don't need thumbs to complete 90% of the content in this game.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

JinMori wrote: »

Let's be real, let's say that there were 1 extremely good player, and a lot of decent players, and that extremely good player provides you evidence statistics and actual numbers, while the other provide you only opinion. Who are you gonna take more seriously? If you say the average dude, then you are lying.

I would take the opinions. And I'm not lying.
I don't need anyone to provide actual numbers / stats because I already have that ! I'm the guy who designed and coded the thing, remember ?
An opinion is NOT an "imprecise truth", it is a subjective view on something, the result of the interaction between that "something" and "someone".
But I would take *everyone*"s opinion, including the opinion of the 1 guy at the top.

^ This.

Because those "decent players" and even the "poor player" have paid to play the game just like the 1 "extremely good player" and MOST IMPORTANTLY ZeniMax needs ongoing income from ALL of them if the game is going to achieve its potential.

Ignoring the concerns of 95% of your customer just because 5% give better feedback analysis is just about the most stupid business plan I can think of.

All The Best

bowmanz607

Keras wrote: »

@bowmanz607

Why bother answering to people who failed to understand what this post is about.

I acknowledge the experience of people like Deltia or Sypher, I really do. I'm subscribed to Deltia's channel and watch his videos, because he's a sympathetic guy who I enjoy listening to.
But 1.) opposed to what's been stated several times: Deltia is not some over the top superplayer. He's good, definitely, he knows how to play this game, at least he does very well in PvE. PvP is another thing, because...
2.) Deltia, and much worse Sypher, belong to those people who enjoy running in huge groups, zerging people down or ganking the sh** out of their enemies. Sypher promoted early on builds that were copied by below casual-skilled players on seemingly every server to boost exactly the problems people who know the good AvA from the beginning of the game hate so much.

I acknowledge their experience, but I too play this game since it has launched on console, I complete Vet Maelstrom once a week for my gold weapon, run vet dungeons blindfolded and relish the lore since I started with Morrowind. To make it clear: I DO NOT think that I should personally be asked where this game should head and how it has to be fixed!!!
All I'm saying is that I have the experience as well - this is important, as I still wouldn't even want to be invited!


I wrote all this to make a very easy point obvious: It's mainly NOT about who's opinion is valuable. It's about the fact that inviting certain people WHILST not listening to the feedback sources implemented BY ZoS themlselves is ridiculous and nothing more than bad marketing!


If there are more people invited than Sypher, Deltia, Alcast and whoever else that is not a streamer is completely pointless to willlienellson's final argument. The fact that these streamers are invited is - that's what OP said - NOT a good sign for the broad community, for the reasons OP said and I hinted on.

OP stated a problem and then offered a solution as follows:

"The resources were used to have this elite youtube gathering session at Zenimax would have been better spent reading the forums, selecting a few issues with broad community consensus, and then having an internal meeting on how to best address those concerns. But that's too much to hope for."

That is what people seem to miss out. That is the crucial point this is about.

that is the problem with this op and your post. they are based on the premise that the only feedback zos is listening to are receiving is from a some streamers they invited for a couple days. You thats it. they said goodbye to everyone else and are making all decisions in this game from those few people in those few days. You guys nailed it. good job!

i mean come on now. that is ridiculous.

There are many places zos looks to get feedback including, but hardly limited to, these forums. These forums are not even close to what represents the ESO community and to think so is ludacris. forums are just one element. dont forget about othe forums, feedback in game, their meetings with many large-small guilds which represent a good cross section of the game and many more areas.

this SMALL sessions with some people is just one source. However, this one source is filled with competent and very knowledgeable people regarding the game and how it plays.You dont want some john doe person who has been plkaying for 1 month with 40hrs in the game giving feedback. You want meaningful feedback about what the devs did. what bugs their are. what exploits etc. something many people cant/wont do,

further, in addition to the premise "zos is only listening to these players in this limited contact with them," Op also relies on this idea that streamers dont represent most players. This is true. But nor does any individual streamer, forum poster etc represent most players. Including this forum thread. However, much of what the players invited do have to say and their opinions about the game are shared by many people. Many more then those shared by the op. The opinions of these players are the opinions, in many cases, of many many players in this game far removed from the 1%. therefore, although they may not represent most players, they do represent many players opinions about the game.

Op "solution" is to do something they already do. Additionally, the "solution" misses the point of the players going in. They are their to test the new stuff we know nothing about yet. How can zos look to the forums about bugs, exploits, etc pertaining to information we dont have? It would be a disaster to release half baked ideas on the pts for people to test this early for such things.

Last, OP post is filled with fallacies to a point to where it is even hard to take him seriously. Add to that is constant clipping of quotes and glossing over counter arguments to what he said to merely feed his own misguided arguments makes it hard for anyone to truly understand what he wants or is trying to say.

bowmanz607

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Moglijuana wrote: »

The PvE in this game is already pretty laughable when compared to other MMO's so them making more difficult and engaging content for strong players will only lengthen their life span as a game.

Could you please explain your reasoning ?
How is making content more difficult - thus probably more appealing and long lasting for the 10% best players will lengthen the lifetime of the game ? Considering that it might scare off the 90 remaining % of players... I don't understand.

I think ZOS people and the panel of players over there are all smart enough to not fall into that meaningless shortcut. Making the game *better* has nothing to do with making it more difficult. That's what some people in this thread fear.

Besides, were you there in early 2014 ? The game was really difficult back then. It nearly died because of it. If ZOS hadn't made that original mistake, maybe ESO would still be sub-only and we would not have to endure the current, somewhat cash-oriented design.

what are you talking about the game nearly died because of how difficult it was? What was difficult about it? IN fact, it is the opposite. Many people left this game because of the lack of competetiveness and update after update only made it more and more casual. pre-cp there were many more people playing this game. As it got easier, more people left.

Rohaus

Good for all the fine folks that got invited. I do hope that Zeni will listen to them because I know that the streamers, especially the ones I watch from time to time, do indeed know the game quite well.

I am certainly one that would LOVE to be in their shoes... getting an invite from the company that you as a streamer play the game of? sorry, but that would be hella cool if you ask me!

Here's to hoping that those invited have a voice that actually does get heard... time will tell.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Maybe zos can do a lottery for who comes next time so you'll have a shot along with everyone else. That will certainly fill the agenda well.

It'd be more representative than selecting and handful of streamers.

All The Best

will also be filled with people who might not even know what the mechanics of the game are. But who cares right? Who needs a working knowledge of the ins and outs if the game to test it and give meaningful feedback??

ZeniMax already has that.

What they need now is as broad a happy customer base as is possible.

Because for all the good Deltia and the other do for the game they alone can not provide enough income for ZeniMax to make the game a sustainable investment.

Let's say for argument's sake that because of this meeting the overall PvP experience is improved - that's good.

But the crass and insensitive way it has been publiccised now sees a lot of players thinking "well, now i know why they ignore a lot of the forum feedback - they don't give &^%$ what I think; why should I continue giving them money"

Net outcome. The percentage of players that play PvP are happier - but overall revenue streams go down.

When ZeniMax have to account for what they have done to their investors/owners this whole exercise goes down as a massive Fail!

All The Best

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Keras wrote: »

"The resources were used to have this elite youtube gathering session at Zenimax would have been better spent reading the forums, selecting a few issues with broad community consensus, and then having an internal meeting on how to best address those concerns. But that's too much to hope for."

Broad community consensus ?
If you've met that guy, you're lucky... he appears less often than Jesus Christ.

Joke apart, that's maybe exactly what they are doing with this panel. Maybe they're addressing, for instance, balance issues. Broad, global balance, from A-Z (instead of the bandaid approach) ? We don't know what they're doing, but maybe they're doing something very relevant. I'm a very pessimistic person when it comes to serious issues in life, but I allow myself to be very optimistic when it comes to a video game. That's what makes gaming so enjoyable.

I've explained several times why it makes sense to invite external players, because their input is unique and different from what internal testers or developers or designers. could bring. Now can we wait to see some results before screaming ? What can this panel do so wrong ? Worst case scenario, it's useless and a waste. Well, it's not our money now is it ? Best case scenario, next patch and updates are awesome - partly due to this. Who knows ?

Sureshawt

BuggeX wrote: »

Sureshawt wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Sureshawt wrote: »

It depends on how ZoS handles it. Clearly most streamers are knowledgeable about the game and can provide valuable input. However, many of these streamers want to influence the game philosophy to fit their own personal egos or playstyles which is not healthy for the game in the long run.

A game designed to cater to elites ends up only being played by elites. Keeping the game as casual friendly as possible allows new players to come in an enjoy the game. Keeping the game grind free allows players that may have left to try out other games to return without falling to far behind.

Maintaining a healthy player population as a well as a fun and compelling environment is paramount to the long term health of PvP in the game imho. As long as ZoS sticks to their philosophy for PvP that created the success that it is in the first place then all should be fine

I agree with most of what you have said fully.

Where I diverge from you is with your statement that ZoS should stick ti their philosophy for PvP that "created the success that it is".

It isn't a success:
1. The last patch gutted several PvE builds simply because PvPers whine about them.
2. The forums are full, pretty much every day, of posters complaining about the poor state of PvP - we have, based on industry averages at which appox 20% of players engage with PvP regularly, 20% of players responsible for close to 50% of the whines and complaints.
3. If PvP in its current form were the success you claim there would be no need to introduce Battlegrounds.

I was in Cyrodiil (farming shard and delves) the other day, weekend EU peak play times, for approx 6 hours - and I saw just 6 people, and one of those was the same faction as me. There was a group of 4 DC players heading through Delves as well, one tried to gank me because I was alone, so I burned 3 of them down and the last guy got me. That led to them fleeing the Delve before I could call for reinforcements, not that I would have done. If he hadn't tried to gank me I would've left them well alone and gone about my way. For the next three hours I saw no one, and then I saw the group of 4 again, but this time they had another player with them - I assume they didn't see me as they never came after me.

There is nothing "healthy" about Cyrodiil.

The best thing they could do is create a PvE instance of Cyrodil, so PvE player could see the content, get the shards and play the Delves in peace. And the PvPers wouldn't have to put up with noobs who don't know what they are doing. Of course that would mean less and less "easy kills" for the PvP stalwarts - so it wouldn't go down too well afterall.

All The Best

I base my assessment on what I actually see and experience in Cyrodil and not the forum. Forums are generally far more negative as it is more common for players to post a complaint then a compliment.

If Cyrodil was a failure then my campaign would be empty yet I have to wait in a queue just to get in.

If balance was a total failure everyone would be running the same class/build yet I never have a problem filling all class bounty quests and face a variety of class builds as well.

Based on what I see and experience in Cyrodil it is absolutely a success by any objective measure. However, that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement as one can always build on the foundation of a success.

Edit: I'm aware that some campaigns are sparsely populated but that is player preference for rule sets and not an overall indictment of Cyrodil PvP.

EU has 3 campaigns left. Azura TF and Haderus.

Haderus has not even 200 ppls on the leaderboard including all 3 allys.

Azura AD Pop is gone, noone knows where they gone, i still search them since i like non CP. prolly arround 600 -700 Players.

TF, legfest pure. prolly 800 Players.


considering the Ap Close end to the campaing of azura and TF, just 60 per ally Play on a daylie Basis pvp.

haderus mby has 30, damn lets give them 40.

so each ally has about 160 pvp Players that Play pvp daylie and much.


now explain aigan how cyrodiil is a succees

It's a success because many of us are playing it and having a blast doing so. If I wasn't I wouldn't be there or even playing this game like the thousands of others throughout the day.

Yes I know their are empty campaigns but that is a result of players choosing to play the rule sets that they like the best and for me and most others that is NA Trueflame.

Again I'm not saying there isn't room for improvement especially in terms of performance. However, when I think of failure I think of SWTOR where they pulled the open PvP area from the game or Warhammer Online which failed badly for a myriad of reasons and shut down entirely.

I think you are confusing perfect with success.

Cyrodil is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, however, it is a success in terms of the numbers of players that want to participate and want to see it further improved.

There is no denying they have provided a compelling world PvP environment that is a hell of a lot of fun to play despite its shortcomings. That is a success in my book.... but yea opinions vary.

bowmanz607

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Maybe zos can do a lottery for who comes next time so you'll have a shot along with everyone else. That will certainly fill the agenda well.

It'd be more representative than selecting and handful of streamers.

All The Best

will also be filled with people who might not even know what the mechanics of the game are. But who cares right? Who needs a working knowledge of the ins and outs if the game to test it and give meaningful feedback??

ZeniMax already has that.

What they need now is as broad a happy customer base as is possible.

Because for all the good Deltia and the other do for the game they alone can not provide enough income for ZeniMax to make the game a sustainable investment.

Let's say for argument's sake that because of this meeting the overall PvP experience is improved - that's good.

But the crass and insensitive way it has been publiccised now sees a lot of players thinking "well, now i know why they ignore a lot of the forum feedback - they don't give &^%$ what I think; why should I continue giving them money"

Net outcome. The percentage of players that play PvP are happier - but overall revenue streams go down.

When ZeniMax have to account for what they have done to their investors/owners this whole exercise goes down as a massive Fail!

All The Best

that way it has been publicized? it is the community on the forums, specifically this thread, that are trying to make it look bad. Additionally, you are still basing your premise that they dont listen to players and still seem to think the forums are the end all be all for community feedback. Both are wrong.

your argument is that game gets better, but it got better from the wrong people, so people will leave b/c of that? if the game is better why would people leave? Because they yelled on the forum about something and they didnt get the change they wanted???

Keras

@bowmanz607
You mean to tell me that the game is heavily unbalanced, full of bugs and at times broken as fu** even though ZoS is listening to their community?

ZoS took weeks to only reply to the huge amount of complaints concerning the Xbox loading bug. (for those who can't relate: That's the bug that essentially kept you from playing, because you had a 50/50 chance of being permanently stuck in a loading screen)
ZoS is able to nerf the MagBlade since console launch, so much that it's already no longer competitive.
ZoS is able to implement a monster set for DLC-buyers (pay2win...) that ticks for 1/5 of your overall damage.
ZoS is able to announce a patch to "nerf proc sets" and instead weakens almost everyone else PvP-wise.
ZoS rather implements new (also broken) content instead of fixing old troubles (like announcing a new class while not being able to handle the existing ones)
PvP still lags like hell on Xbox-EU
Maelstrom is still one of the buggiest things on Xbox-EU
...

This list could fill whole pages, but I have already enough trouble writing this much English. However, the point is: You mean to tell me that they listen to feedback and serious concerns from the forums and stuff, and the situation we today STILL have is the outcome?

I would love to have such an optimistic view on ZoS' work in fixing the game and listening to player feedback, but as far as I'm concerned, I've played this game too long than to have any real hope that they will learn how to properly fix anything important in their game...

Keras

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

I'm a very pessimistic person when it comes to serious issues in life, but I allow myself to be very optimistic when it comes to a video game. That's what makes gaming so enjoyable.

@anitajoneb17_ESO
Good for you, really! But I'm sadly a pessimistic person in real life and in video gaming.

I've just experienced too much BS in recent years to stay optimistic. The Destiny case alone attests my pessimism... ^^

bowmanz607

Keras wrote: »

@bowmanz607
You mean to tell me that the game is heavily unbalanced, full of bugs and at times broken as fu** even though ZoS is listening to their community?

ZoS took weeks to only reply to the huge amount of complaints concerning the Xbox loading bug. (for those who can't relate: That's the bug that essentially kept you from playing, because you had a 50/50 chance of being permanently stuck in a loading screen)
ZoS is able to nerf the MagBlade since console launch, so much that it's already no longer competitive.
ZoS is able to implement a monster set for DLC-buyers (pay2win...) that ticks for 1/5 of your overall damage.
ZoS is able to announce a patch to "nerf proc sets" and instead weakens almost everyone else PvP-wise.
ZoS rather implements new (also broken) content instead of fixing old troubles (like announcing a new class while not being able to handle the existing ones)
PvP still lags like hell on Xbox-EU
Maelstrom is still one of the buggiest things on Xbox-EU
...

This list could fill whole pages, but I have already enough trouble writing this much English. However, the point is: You mean to tell me that they listen to feedback and serious concerns from the forums and stuff, and the situation we today STILL have is the outcome?

I would love to have such an optimistic view on ZoS' work in fixing the game and listening to player feedback, but as far as I'm concerned, I've played this game too long than to have any real hope that they will learn how to properly fix anything important in their game...

All MMO have many issues.

Just cause they cant fix things properlly does not mean they are not trying or listening. There is a difference between listening and implementing.

Nothing will ever be perfectly balanced or implemented. that does not mean they dont listen.

Gandrhulf_Harbard

bowmanz607 wrote: »

that way it has been publicized? it is the community on the forums, specifically this thread, that are trying to make it look bad. Additionally, you are still basing your premise that they dont listen to players and still seem to think the forums are the end all be all for community feedback. Both are wrong.

your argument is that game gets better, but it got better from the wrong people, so people will leave b/c of that? if the game is better why would people leave? Because they yelled on the forum about something and they didnt get the change they wanted???

Well because significantly less than 50% of total players even bother with PvP.
So what improvement there is means absolutely NOTHING to the majority of the playerbase.

Because the Official Forums to the game damn well SHOULD BE the be all and end all for community feedback.
I work in customer service in the live entertainment industry - if a customer has an issue with anything my employer sells they come to me. They DON'T go to the coffee shop three doors down the street.

Yes some players will leave because they didn't get the changes they wanted - in fact this thread is full of people claiming lots of players left because ZeniMax spent too much time listening to "casuals" instead of the "elite" - you can't have that point both ways.

Paying customers can be expected to take their money elsewhere any time they feel they are not being respected or valued by the company they are spending money with.

I can't think of a better way to make the majority of paying customers feel undervalued and disrespected than by saying "screw you - we only want a few people's opinions, and we want them so badly we will pay for them to have a jolly at our HQ to tell us their opinions" - can you?

All The Best

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

bowmanz607

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

that way it has been publicized? it is the community on the forums, specifically this thread, that are trying to make it look bad. Additionally, you are still basing your premise that they dont listen to players and still seem to think the forums are the end all be all for community feedback. Both are wrong.

your argument is that game gets better, but it got better from the wrong people, so people will leave b/c of that? if the game is better why would people leave? Because they yelled on the forum about something and they didnt get the change they wanted???

Well because significantly less than 50% of total players even bother with PvP.
So what improvement there is means absolutely NOTHING to the majority of the playerbase.

Because the Official Forums to the game damn well SHOULD BE the be all and end all for community feedback.
I work in customer service in the live entertainment industry - if a customer has an issue with anything my employer sells they come to me. They DON'T go to the coffee shop three doors down the street.

Yes some players will leave because they didn't get the changes they wanted - in fact this thread is full of people claiming lots of players left because ZeniMax spent too much time listening to "casuals" instead of the "elite" - you can't have that point both ways.

Paying customers can be expected to take their money elsewhere any time they feel they are not being respected or valued by the company they are spending money with.

I can't think of a better way to make the majority of paying customers feel undervalued and disrespected than by saying "screw you - we only want a few people's opinions, and we want them so badly we will pay for them to have a jolly at our HQ to tell us their opinions" - can you?

All The Best

you dont know how many people ply pvp. you dont know the percentages. you are guessing. stop it.

idk

@bowmanz607

Really, we are wasting our time here.

This thread reminds me of the first time Zos invited people to meet with them. They invited representatives from action he guilds that demonstrated good knowledge of the worksings if the game.

The leader of the guild I was in complain he wasn't invited. A guy who acted 6 months focusing in leveling one character was not vet level. Took a year to fully level and had not demonstrated he grasped the basics of the game. He even complained in the forums that his guild of 500 numbers (read lesss than 100 actually playing the game still) was not represented even though he lacked even the most basic understanding to be able to provide worthwhile feedback since he had not used payed the game much.

This s thread is about the same thing regardless of how it's being painted.

anitajoneb17_ESO

bowmanz607 wrote: »

what are you talking about the game nearly died because of how difficult it was? What was difficult about it? IN fact, it is the opposite. Many people left this game because of the lack of competetiveness and update after update only made it more and more casual. pre-cp there were many more people playing this game. As it got easier, more people left.

You must be kidding ! I don't have raw data regarding this but when you're a guild master you get a feelling for overall game population. The curve went as follows
April-May 2014 : launch. Hype. Many people buy, play. Hype hype.
June 2014 : people reach vet levels and Craglorn is released. Be it in vet zones or in Craglorn, you can't face even a threesome of Scorpios if you're alone, unless you're in the top 10% players (and even then). People leave. The press speaks of "insane difficulty in ESO". Players suffer under the truly insane grind that are vet levels. ZOS doesn't get it and nerfs every single nice XP grinding spot in the game, especially in Craglorn.
October 2014 : Upper Craglorn and DSA are released. It's even worse. Boethiah's Scythe is the most seldom and most revered title in the game. Players learn to avoid mobs in Craglorn and to farm Nirncrux there. That's "Crux PvP" (people who NOW complain about node stealing have no clue what they're talking about). People leave. Remaining guilds steal players from each other.
January 2015 : Tamriel Unlimited / B2P model is announced. Even more players leave. Game's a desert. For the remaining ones, Belkarth feels like a small village where you know everyone. ZOS nerfs everything.
March 2015 : Tamriel Unlimited released. A tsunami of new players joins the game. ZOS keeps on nerfing everything. Sanctum Ophidia remains a thing but the two other trials are a walk in the park. Vet pledges are done in 10 minutes and new players wonder why the speed run achievements are set at 20 minutes. But new players, again and again.
Then comes a long long desert phase with simply nothing new. Players wait.
September 2015 : Imperial City. Huge success, in spite of strongly divided opinions on it. It's the only challenging content. Rest is nerfed nerfed nerfed.
October 2015 : Orsinium launch. Makes everyone, and I mean *everyone* happy with its size, design and variety. And what people like is... it's eaaaaasy.

I assume you know the rest.
The point is : people leave in MASSES when it's too difficult. People stay when it's easy (even the ones who are bored).

Gandrhulf_Harbard

bowmanz607 wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

that way it has been publicized? it is the community on the forums, specifically this thread, that are trying to make it look bad. Additionally, you are still basing your premise that they dont listen to players and still seem to think the forums are the end all be all for community feedback. Both are wrong.

your argument is that game gets better, but it got better from the wrong people, so people will leave b/c of that? if the game is better why would people leave? Because they yelled on the forum about something and they didnt get the change they wanted???

Well because significantly less than 50% of total players even bother with PvP.
So what improvement there is means absolutely NOTHING to the majority of the playerbase.

Because the Official Forums to the game damn well SHOULD BE the be all and end all for community feedback.
I work in customer service in the live entertainment industry - if a customer has an issue with anything my employer sells they come to me. They DON'T go to the coffee shop three doors down the street.

Yes some players will leave because they didn't get the changes they wanted - in fact this thread is full of people claiming lots of players left because ZeniMax spent too much time listening to "casuals" instead of the "elite" - you can't have that point both ways.

Paying customers can be expected to take their money elsewhere any time they feel they are not being respected or valued by the company they are spending money with.

I can't think of a better way to make the majority of paying customers feel undervalued and disrespected than by saying "screw you - we only want a few people's opinions, and we want them so badly we will pay for them to have a jolly at our HQ to tell us their opinions" - can you?

All The Best

you dont know how many people ply pvp. you dont know the percentages. you are guessing. stop it.

See, I knew you were going to ONLY focus on that point - that was why I put it in. You and I both know FOR A FACT that less than 50% of players regularly engage in PvP. Heck I am in a guild of over 120 players and less than 20 of them regularly PvP.

How about you address some of the other points - if you can.

All The Best

idk

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

bowmanz607 wrote: »

what are you talking about the game nearly died because of how difficult it was? What was difficult about it? IN fact, it is the opposite. Many people left this game because of the lack of competetiveness and update after update only made it more and more casual. pre-cp there were many more people playing this game. As it got easier, more people left.

You must be kidding ! I don't have raw data regarding this but when you're a guild master you get a feelling for overall game population. The curve went as follows
April-May 2014 : launch. Hype. Many people buy, play. Hype hype.
June 2014 : people reach vet levels and Craglorn is released. Be it in vet zones or in Craglorn, you can't face even a threesome of Scorpios if you're alone, unless you're in the top 10% players (and even then). People leave. The press speaks of "insane difficulty in ESO". Players suffer under the truly insane grind that are vet levels. ZOS doesn't get it and nerfs every single nice XP grinding spot in the game, especially in Craglorn.
October 2014 : Upper Craglorn and DSA are released. It's even worse. Boethiah's Scythe is the most seldom and most revered title in the game. Players learn to avoid mobs in Craglorn and to farm Nirncrux there. That's "Crux PvP" (people who NOW complain about node stealing have no clue what they're talking about). People leave. Remaining guilds steal players from each other.
January 2015 : Tamriel Unlimited / B2P model is announced. Even more players leave. Game's a desert. For the remaining ones, Belkarth feels like a small village where you know everyone. ZOS nerfs everything.
March 2015 : Tamriel Unlimited released. A tsunami of new players joins the game. ZOS keeps on nerfing everything. Sanctum Ophidia remains a thing but the two other trials are a walk in the park. Vet pledges are done in 10 minutes and new players wonder why the speed run achievements are set at 20 minutes. But new players, again and again.
Then comes a long long desert phase with simply nothing new. Players wait.
September 2015 : Imperial City. Huge success, in spite of strongly divided opinions on it. It's the only challenging content. Rest is nerfed nerfed nerfed.
October 2015 : Orsinium launch. Makes everyone, and I mean *everyone* happy with its size, design and variety. And what people like is... it's eaaaaasy.

I assume you know the rest.
The point is : people leave in MASSES when it's too difficult. People stay when it's easy (even the ones who are bored).

The game was never difficult except maybe SO from a bit.

Most players left around 1.6 / 2.0 because there was a void of meaningful content that streatched for about a year.

People got bored doing the same thing for 6 months and knowing Sos had absolutely nothing on the plate for another 6 months.

Unfortunately Zos is doing the same, another year will pass between meaningful content. At least their getting our interest with the expansion and new trial.