A question for ZoS regarding feedback.

pklemming

So, you have had plenty of feedback regarding these potential changes, through every section of this PTS cycle. What I am wanting to know is what changes will have been adopted(if any) before this patch is pushed live?

What I am trying to ascertain is the efficacy of both this forum and the feedback we give. Whether any of it is ever acted upon, or whether this is just purely for show.

Like other patches, there have been a lot of changes that have not been wanted by the players. Despite this dislike, you appear to push them to live, regardless.

Is there actually any point us giving feedback, or even posting on this forum, if nothing we write is listened to, and acted upon?

What I suspect will happen, is exactly the same as usual. Feedback is ignored, our opinion makes zero difference and you push the patch live regardless.

Considering your current trend in numbers, is this really a policy that is good to adopt? The next patch will not be received with pleasure by the players, which makes me wonder why this stance is taken. As I have mentioned previously, ultimately, a game is for fun. Constantly giving players bad news is hardly good for business.

reazea

The silence from ZOS is deafening. Communication with the player base is something ZOS could improve on for sure.

TDVM

[snip] I don't think the forum is the place to ask them for changes and feedback, because it would be a waste of time.

[edited for bashing]

Elsonso

I don't think that a boycott is the right answer. The reason is that feedback with ZOS is one way. They read what is said here, and from other sources. Someone nets out the substance, and that gets forwarded to the development team.

So, the feedback is heard. They have said as much, and I have no reason to doubt this.

One thing that players should not want to do is make themselves less relevant in the decision making process.

The communication issue that I have with ZOS is that they normally don't close the loop on feedback. Here in the forum, they have an easy way to communicate back to the players. We can assume that there is always something to say about feedback, but they just don't say it.

SkaiFaith

What I found is that many times what we ask for during PTS cycles can get worked on in future PTSes. Not necessarily they implement our requests rightly when asked, but they take time and evaluate what to give credit to and what to ignore.

You could see the change you asked for implemented even 12 months after your request, but I think every interesting suggestion gets noted somewhere by someone, and sometimes it ends up on live servers further down the road, other times it gets discarded.

I understand you can get discouraged, but constantly asking for changes on PTS also shows which players remain and play daily and which are ready to leave forever - I don't think devs should necessarily listen to every player that is ready to leave the next patch and never come back...

Edit: by the way, feedback is always needed. The moment we stop giving it the health of the game would lower significantly, as many pts bugs solved thanks to us have shown.

alpha_synuclein

SkaiFaith wrote: »

What I found is that many times what we ask for during PTS cycles can get worked on in future PTSes. Not necessarily they implement our requests rightly when asked, but they take time and evaluate what to give credit to and what to ignore.

You could see the change you asked for implemented even 12 months after your request, but I think every interesting suggestion gets noted somewhere by someone, and sometimes it ends up on live servers further down the road, other times it gets discarded.

And that is great, but if within those 12 months all we get is radio silence, it is easy to conclude that the feedback was ignored.

The usual cycle is:
1. Unpopular change on PTS
2. Tons of feedback about why it won't be liked
3. Unpopular change go live without any comments addressing the feedback
4. Few months of silence
4. Some backgroud work that maybe result in an adjustment few months later

It is perfectly understandable that not all adjustments can be done within 5 weeks. But talking to players can be, and it costs very little.
A lot of badly received updates could be avoided if adjustments were consulted (at least to some extent) with players that they are made for.
And when it comes to PTS, if a change seems like a miss more than hit and they are working on adjusting it, it would go a long way if we could get a bit more than the occasional "we're working on it".

Detailed roadmaps over hype-marketing, please

mmtaniac

What is feedback?! Random balance generator is better.

Durham

The usual cycle is:
1. Unpopular change on PTS
2. Tons of feedback about why it won't be liked
3. Unpopular change go live without any comments addressing the feedback
4. Few months of silence
4. Some backgroud work that maybe result in an adjustment few months later

My take:
1. Unpopular change on PTS
2. Tons of feedback about why it won't be liked
3. Unpopular change go live without any comments addressing the feedback
4. The general boards light up after 2 weeks about the new changes.
5. They do not respond at all its silent
6. 2 years later they make the changes suggested by the testers.

Examply in PVP all you hear is glass breaking if ZoS was PVPing they would have fixed this its one of the most annoying sets they have ever put in. I have to turn my music up or mute the game its that bad.
They move incredibly slow on mistakes.

Navaac223

Durham wrote: »

The usual cycle is:
1. Unpopular change on PTS
2. Tons of feedback about why it won't be liked
3. Unpopular change go live without any comments addressing the feedback
4. Few months of silence
4. Some backgroud work that maybe result in an adjustment few months later

My take:
1. Unpopular change on PTS
2. Tons of feedback about why it won't be liked
3. Unpopular change go live without any comments addressing the feedback
4. The general boards light up after 2 weeks about the new changes.
5. They do not respond at all its silent
6. 2 years later they make the changes suggested by the testers.

Examply in PVP all you hear is glass breaking if ZoS was PVPing they would have fixed this its one of the most annoying sets they have ever put in. I have to turn my music up or mute the game its that bad.
They move incredibly slow on mistakes.

You forgot the part where the suggested changes are terribly misinterpreted, like the necro changes that were supposed to help it in pvp... by buffing pve focused skills. (To be fair, the 30s armor is a good change, now we have an armor at the same level as every other class)

Scyware

Why bother with feedback at all. [snip] This game has been suffering from Players VS Devs for YEARS at this point. It's time to let it go.

[edited for bashing]

xDeusEJRx

Here's' my crackpot theory:
PTS server is just a medium to preview the updates, not an actual testing server, the actual testing is on live servers hence why a lot of the worst updates don't change until they've already made it to live

FoJul

xDeusEJRx wrote: »

Here's' my crackpot theory:
PTS server is just a medium to preview the updates, not an actual testing server, the actual testing is on live servers hence why a lot of the worst updates don't change until they've already made it to live

Mostly because the forums is filled with ppl wanting buffs to their classes, and its a headache for the devs to sort through it. Im guilty of wanting buffs to swallow soul, I wont sit here and lie.

But it wouldn't be filled with all of that mumbo jumbo if there was actual balancing taking place. I like the game more in High isle when all classes had potential to be strong. Just nerf ult gen in corro and take me back.

pklemming

I was really hoping we would see or hear something. At this point, there is zero point in anyone posting here, doing tests or providing feedback. it is very apparent that they are not interested in the what the player wants, which is a really bad stance to take when money from the player funds their game.

I see zero point posting here, or using PTS from this point on. We are literally doing testing and paying them for the privilege, which is kind of messed up.

Anyway, guess the patch is going ahead, the continual nerfing of their flagship class will continue because they introduced an overpowered class as they thought we would like a series of nerfs. It is kind of like me buying a Porsche, paying for it monthly, then the dealer coming along and giving me a Robin Reliant.

It is duplicitous at best and mis selling at worst. The class is no longer what we purchased when the expansion was released and they were very aware that it would be nerfed in the future.

LPapirius

TDVM wrote: »

[snip] I don't think the forum is the place to ask them for changes and feedback, because it would be a waste of time.

[edited for bashing]

This is an enlightening post for sure.

RomanRex

the only way to really get change is to stop playing. for a break at least.

complaining while continuing to pay for the game achieves nothing.

i stopped and have been enjoying other games or irl stuff. for now.

Elsonso

No one says you have to pay ZOS anything, once you buy the game.

RomanRex

time = money

Elsonso

RomanRex wrote: »

time = money

ZOS does not pay players to play the game. At least, not me. If time = money, then playing this game means running at a decidedly obvious deficit.

FoJul

pklemming wrote: »

I was really hoping we would see or hear something. At this point, there is zero point in anyone posting here, doing tests or providing feedback. it is very apparent that they are not interested in the what the player wants, which is a really bad stance to take when money from the player funds their game.

I see zero point posting here, or using PTS from this point on. We are literally doing testing and paying them for the privilege, which is kind of messed up.

Anyway, guess the patch is going ahead, the continual nerfing of their flagship class will continue because they introduced an overpowered class as they thought we would like a series of nerfs. It is kind of like me buying a Porsche, paying for it monthly, then the dealer coming along and giving me a Robin Reliant.

It is duplicitous at best and mis selling at worst. The class is no longer what we purchased when the expansion was released and they were very aware that it would be nerfed in the future.

I mean, they don't take much feedback at least not right upfront.

We can test this by not giving any feedback, just so we know for sure. I mean the templar class set didn't work at all, and people put in a bug report, and now its working better than what the TT mentiones. I can cast the plar proc within 2 seconds of each other, because of how it works.

I mentioned that part and nothing has been done. So we finna get a plar proc set that can do double procs lol. Maybe plar will be decent for a patch or two because of the set who knows.

They did give it some attention, but not much. They bragged about how OP the dk class set is on Live stream I'm pretty sure, so they are very much aware of how strong it is.

You have to remember this is "THEIR" game, and we are just playing it. They take feedback regarding bugs they might've missed. Thats what the forums is about. It's not about ppl trying to get buff's to their classes. Or people like myself that wine about a skill underperforming, "cough cough swallow soul". They want feedback of exploits and bugs. Like a couple months ago when you can get 3 clever procs and infinite sustain thru potions. They fix that kinda stuff.

In their eyes, the balance is fine.

pklemming

FoJul wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

I was really hoping we would see or hear something. At this point, there is zero point in anyone posting here, doing tests or providing feedback. it is very apparent that they are not interested in the what the player wants, which is a really bad stance to take when money from the player funds their game.

I see zero point posting here, or using PTS from this point on. We are literally doing testing and paying them for the privilege, which is kind of messed up.

Anyway, guess the patch is going ahead, the continual nerfing of their flagship class will continue because they introduced an overpowered class as they thought we would like a series of nerfs. It is kind of like me buying a Porsche, paying for it monthly, then the dealer coming along and giving me a Robin Reliant.

It is duplicitous at best and mis selling at worst. The class is no longer what we purchased when the expansion was released and they were very aware that it would be nerfed in the future.

I mean, they don't take much feedback at least not right upfront.

We can test this by not giving any feedback, just so we know for sure. I mean the templar class set didn't work at all, and people put in a bug report, and now its working better than what the TT mentiones. I can cast the plar proc within 2 seconds of each other, because of how it works.

I mentioned that part and nothing has been done. So we finna get a plar proc set that can do double procs lol. Maybe plar will be decent for a patch or two because of the set who knows.

They did give it some attention, but not much. They bragged about how OP the dk class set is on Live stream I'm pretty sure, so they are very much aware of how strong it is.

You have to remember this is "THEIR" game, and we are just playing it. They take feedback regarding bugs they might've missed. Thats what the forums is about. It's not about ppl trying to get buff's to their classes. Or people like myself that wine about a skill underperforming, "cough cough swallow soul". They want feedback of exploits and bugs. Like a couple months ago when you can get 3 clever procs and infinite sustain thru potions. They fix that kinda stuff.

In their eyes, the balance is fine.

Whilst it is true it is 'their' game. If they want empty servers they need to understand that it is not solely their game. The object it for them to make money and you do that be gaining and maintaining a healthy playerbase.

Isolating themselves from the players, not listening to feedback and forgetting a game is supposed to be fun are surefire ways to make players go elsewhere.

As for feedback. i just stopped giving any. After several reported bugs made the live server, it became fairly obvious they were not reading, or interested in anything we had to say.

The new features in IA do not make the game more fun, they make it more of a chore. They wanted a roguelite in ESO, but apparently did not play any roguelite games and understood what ingredients made it addictive, even after the 100th attempt. Again, we could have said. I am sure a lot of mmorpg players play roguelites too, but they wanted to do their own thing...

it is just annoying. They keep snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, again, and again.

ESO_Nightingale

they didn't even fix the listed physical damage on the tooltip of lingering throw chilling throw even though we reported it like in the first couple of days. (it does frost damage, but it still is listed as saying it does physical)

Thumbless_Bot

We vote with our pocketbook. We all complain but continue to pay real dollars for the game. Why would they listen when we're going to pay anyway? It really is as simple as that.

Stafford197

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

We vote with our pocketbook. We all complain but continue to pay real dollars for the game. Why would they listen when we're going to pay anyway? It really is as simple as that.

^^ Exactly this.

ZOS is a business and ESO exists to make money.
There is nothing else to it. If you’re unhappy with the direction of the game, stop financially supporting it until changes are made. Spend money on this game when you’re happy with it.

Diablo 4 is a great recent example of this. The game launched successfully but then immediately fell off because it did not live up to player expectations. However, D4 has made massive changes and as a result they’ve exploded with popularity and support.

If you are unhappy with the game and continue to pay money to it, I really don’t know what to tell you.

Elsonso

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

We vote with our pocketbook. We all complain but continue to pay real dollars for the game. Why would they listen when we're going to pay anyway? It really is as simple as that.

This is why I allowed all of my ESO Plus subscriptions to expire.

I considered returning Gold Road preorder prior to launch, but got busy and forgot. They win that round, but I normally purchase it on console, and have not done that. I have played Gold Road, so I know that nothing in it is worth enough to me to pay what they are asking.

Similarly, with Crowns, they have not come out with enough interesting stuff in the Crown store to even deplete the Crowns I have left, so I have no reason to even buy Crowns. I don't need any more pets or mounts. I already have more than I will ever need. All of the rest of the stuff is just "meh".

FoJul

Stafford197 wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

We vote with our pocketbook. We all complain but continue to pay real dollars for the game. Why would they listen when we're going to pay anyway? It really is as simple as that.

^^ Exactly this.

ZOS is a business and ESO exists to make money.
There is nothing else to it. If you’re unhappy with the direction of the game, stop financially supporting it until changes are made. Spend money on this game when you’re happy with it.

Diablo 4 is a great recent example of this. The game launched successfully but then immediately fell off because it did not live up to player expectations. However, D4 has made massive changes and as a result they’ve exploded with popularity and support.

If you are unhappy with the game and continue to pay money to it, I really don’t know what to tell you.

Nah eso is run by a corp that is fixing to release another MMO, and make most of their money from single player games. If we stop paying them to keep the ESO servers up, all of us will lose the game forever. It would be cheaper to stop the game and move resources to another department or project.

Thats the scary part.

ZOS_Kevin

So here is the short version of this conversation. Yes, of course feedback, especially during PTS, is acted upon. We we were not going to look at your feedback, we would not go through the time it takes to set up a PTS cycle every time. Let alone ask you to spend your valuable time testing. Feedback is essential to how the teams discuss and frame their work.

Various teams across ZOS read and discuss PTS feedback and see what is possible in the immediate, short-term and long-term, what is possible if we build out tools to support a suggested change and the cost associated with that, and what is not possible. And from there, work toward solutions within the development timeframe we have. Many dev team members follow up with us on Community to ask about your sentiment during PTS (and throughout the year during release and patches. But for sake of this conversation, we are sticking to PTS.), and see what they can adjust. And we see a lot of the conversations be had across various teams.

However, we also need to frame some of the many aspects that we are factoring in feedback. For example one of the things to keep in mind when considering your feedback we are doing so with future plans in mind, while most of the feedback given is for the immediate, so that also can determine when and how feedback is implemented. Feedback is an important element, but one element of the overall process to get changes made. So for example, with the introduction of Luminous Inks, the main feedback was "drops are too low. Increase the number and give us more ways to get them" (being a bit reductive here just for brevity). Over the course of the last several months, for the short-term we have increased ink sourcing, and had them accessible via daily login rewards. We are observing how that works for players while also working on long-term ways to address the need for more inks as we know that is still an ask after those updates. This is a process that takes time to make sure we don't go too far in the other direction, and undermine the gameplay experience in other ways.

So to recap, feedback is highly valued here, not ignored. Your opinions do matter and we want to hear them. That said, not everything will be implemented (that's just how game development works). However we push to implement as much feedback as we can into tangible action where it makes sense, and sometimes that takes time. And don't get us wrong, we don't always get it right, but we continue to iterate process and adjust to better meet expectation.

Now we know we said this would keep short, so let's end with this. We'll make sure to take this back to the team and have a general conversation on how to make this process better as well.

blktauna

Thank you @ZOS_Kevin

Please pass on that some manner of acknowledgement will do wonders to stop people feeling like they are not heard.
This is mostly what the problem is. Even better is a 'we cant do this right now because XYZ"

Turtle_Bot

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

So here is the short version of this conversation. Yes, of course feedback, especially during PTS, is acted upon. We we were not going to look at your feedback, we would not go through the time it takes to set up a PTS cycle every time. Let alone ask you to spend your valuable time testing. Feedback is essential to how the teams discuss and frame their work.

Various teams across ZOS read and discuss PTS feedback and see what is possible in the immediate, short-term and long-term, what is possible if we build out tools to support a suggested change and the cost associated with that, and what is not possible. And from there, work toward solutions within the development timeframe we have. Many dev team members follow up with us on Community to ask about your sentiment during PTS (and throughout the year during release and patches. But for sake of this conversation, we are sticking to PTS.), and see what they can adjust. And we see a lot of the conversations be had across various teams.

However, we also need to frame some of the many aspects that we are factoring in feedback. For example one of the things to keep in mind when considering your feedback we are doing so with future plans in mind, while most of the feedback given is for the immediate, so that also can determine when and how feedback is implemented. Feedback is an important element, but one element of the overall process to get changes made. So for example, with the introduction of Luminous Inks, the main feedback was "drops are too low. Increase the number and give us more ways to get them" (being a bit reductive here just for brevity). Over the course of the last several months, for the short-term we have increased ink sourcing, and had them accessible via daily login rewards. We are observing how that works for players while also working on long-term ways to address the need for more inks as we know that is still an ask after those updates. This is a process that takes time to make sure we don't go too far in the other direction, and undermine the gameplay experience in other ways.

So to recap, feedback is highly valued here, not ignored. Your opinions do matter and we want to hear them. That said, not everything will be implemented (that's just how game development works). However we push to implement as much feedback as we can into tangible action where it makes sense, and sometimes that takes time. And don't get us wrong, we don't always get it right, but we continue to iterate process and adjust to better meet expectation.

Now we know we said this would keep short, so let's end with this. We'll make sure to take this back to the team and have a general conversation on how to make this process better as well.

Thanks for the insight @ZOS_Kevin

Just to reiterate what @blktauna said as well:

blktauna wrote: »

Thank you @ZOS_Kevin

Please pass on that some manner of acknowledgement will do wonders to stop people feeling like they are not heard.
This is mostly what the problem is. Even better is a 'we cant do this right now because XYZ"

Just acknowledging the feedback would go such a long way towards addressing the concerns the community has. Even better if that acknowledgement comes with a short "we can't fix it currently due to XYZ, but have noted it down for future changes to be looked into."

For example:
There has been countless feedback posts and threads (even in the official feedback threads of the respective PTS cycles) about the 2 Sorcerer class sets, where it has been unanimously agreed upon that the design of both of these 2 sets are just completely contradictory to the skill lines they are supposed to represent.

A short statement addressing the concerns about the sets on those threads (including the official feedback thread) such as the following:
"We understand the concerns over the Sorcerer class sets, Monolith of Storms and Beacon of Oblivion, functioning contradictory to the themes of the skill lines they are supposed to represent, but we are currently unable to make changes to these 2 sets due to XYZ. But we have passed on these concerns to the team who will keep these concerns in mind for the remaining Sorcerer class set and the team will aim to revisit these sets in the future to see how to best address these concerns."

Just a simple statement like I presented above that shows that the feedback is being acknowledged and, if the concerns cannot be addressed right now due to whatever reason, it shows that it has been noted to be looked at in the future if/when there is time to revisit the issues being raised.
Such a statement goes a massively long way to connecting with the community to prevent threads like this one from needing to be asked. Of course the answers like I exampled above will never please everyone, but the vast majority will understand that things take time to happen and having that communication that things are at least being looked at/worked on, even if it is going to be sometime in the future gives some hope/understanding that eventually things will happen and concerns/issues will be addressed.

Stafford197

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

So here is the short version of this conversation. Yes, of course feedback, especially during PTS, is acted upon. We we were not going to look at your feedback, we would not go through the time it takes to set up a PTS cycle every time. Let alone ask you to spend your valuable time testing. Feedback is essential to how the teams discuss and frame their work….

Much appreciated Kevin, but player sentiment cannot be remedied through an eloquently written post anymore. This kind of scenario has occurred too many times over the past 10 years.

I can’t speak for everyone, but player sentiment is the same no matter where I look: Discord, Guild chats, Zone chats, random groups, etc. Many players enjoy ESO, but also believe the game is brought down in various ways because ZOS refuses to walk back unpopular changes.

• Why is there no option to disable the Environmental Sustainability features? Is there a reason you haven’t removed these features in the short term until they can be optimized, due to the current iteration’s negative impact on many players’ experiences?

• What is the status of your efforts towards improving Cyrodiil PvP performance? Is there any concrete plan in place, and if so then what is your plan? Are you happy with the current state of PvP?

• Why was the animation / prop change pushed forward for the Templar’s Puncturing Strikes, despite widespread opposition from your players? How did your internal discussions around this topic change in accordance to this feedback, if at all? Can you understand why some players believe ZOS doesn’t listen to feedback after something like that occurs?

These cover a variety of topics which people often refer to when saying “there is no communication” or “ZOS doesn’t listen”. And for those who do not share these questions, that is great, but many of us do feel this way and so it is valid to ask.

Turtle_Bot

Stafford197 wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

So here is the short version of this conversation. Yes, of course feedback, especially during PTS, is acted upon. We we were not going to look at your feedback, we would not go through the time it takes to set up a PTS cycle every time. Let alone ask you to spend your valuable time testing. Feedback is essential to how the teams discuss and frame their work….

Much appreciated Kevin, but player sentiment cannot be remedied through an eloquently written post anymore. This kind of scenario has occurred too many times over the past 10 years.

I can’t speak for everyone, but player sentiment is the same no matter where I look: Discord, Guild chats, Zone chats, random groups, etc. Many players enjoy ESO, but also believe the game is brought down in various ways because ZOS refuses to walk back unpopular changes.

• Why is there no option to disable the Environmental Sustainability features? Is there a reason you haven’t removed these features in the short term until they can be optimized, due to the current iteration’s negative impact on many players’ experiences?

• What is the status of your efforts towards improving Cyrodiil PvP performance? Is there any concrete plan in place, and if so then what is your plan? Are you happy with the current state of PvP?

• Why was the animation / prop change pushed forward for the Templar’s Puncturing Strikes, despite widespread opposition from your players? How did your internal discussions around this topic change in accordance to this feedback, if at all? Can you understand why some players believe ZOS doesn’t listen to feedback after something like that occurs?

These cover a variety of topics which people often refer to when saying “there is no communication” or “ZOS doesn’t listen”. And for those who do not share these questions, that is great, but many of us do feel this way and so it is valid to ask.

well said, also add to this list:
• the sorcerer class sets (that function completely contradictory to their respective themes) and the expert summoner passive that makes it so that no-pet sorcerers must never use their best (and only real viable) ultimate in PvE otherwise they give up too much damage. Are the devs aware of these issues with the functionality of the sets and the passive? Are they even looking into these sets and the expert summoner passive? Are they happy with these sets in the state they are in?

I get that this issue is class specific, but there was countless feedback posts (not just threads, but feedback given on the official PTS feedback threads too) about these issues and there was literally zero communication (not even a brief comment/acknowledgement) from ZOS about these issues.

pklemming

@ZOS_Kevin

Even a single post makes a massive difference. I do wish there were a greater interaction with developers. It does very much feel that nothing seems to matter, regardless of player wishes, but I am just happy to have some feedback and a little bit of an explanation of the process.

Thank you, again.