Must be Monday again.

Note the "patch" bit, when your client has downloaded the patch and installed it, then the maintenance will be close to over. The blue line will save you from refreshing this time.

Of course the natch potes could be a "bit" later.

well im happy they announce the time,imo servers are 99% up all time-maybe lagging at peak times but up
back at 2013 was playing D3,servers crashed all time-lost many hardcore toons(and all gear with) and i switched to ESO

Sylosi wrote: »

Aeorath wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

CMFan1966 wrote: »

This is my first MMO and I love it. I understand that maintenance must happen

There is no "must" about, Zenimax chose to go this route, it is perfectly possible to have a system where the customer need never experience downtime (at least not for purely maintenance / patches), how do you think Amazon, Google, etc are up 24/7 or why Guild Wars 2 doesn't have "maintenance" downtime.

I remember the maintenance from Blizzard's servers on World of Warcraft, it wasn't better or worse than this, but they had an estimated time for it.

I do believe it's quite difficult to have an uptime of 24/7 for an online game. Stuff breaks and needs taking care of; if stuff breaks and after repairing it needs some more downtime to repair the 'repairs', that's a bad business model.

Wrong, you just need a system in place that allows for it, take Guild Wars 2, in 5 years it has had downtime maybe 5 times in total (when there were big DDOS attacks on NA datacenter, when they did a big hardware upgrade, when they had a major software upgrade at a very low level, etc), other than those few isolated incidents there has been no downtime.

As you obviously have no idea of how these things work, I'll give you the simplified explanation of one way these things are done, when you want to patch a game, site, or whatever, you don't patch live servers, you patch offline servers, after these are patched they become the default servers for players logging on who have downloaded the client patch.

You can even let players still in the game continue to play on the existing non-patched servers for a while if the update is minor enough (or they are in instanced content like a dungeon), etc, if the patch is not minor or they are playing something that requires everyone to be using the newest patch because they aren't playing in completely separate instances (like Cyrodil for example) then you flash a message up on the screen saying there is a patch in 3 mins, where they will be logged out of the game, they then download the client bit of the patch, when they log on they are placed onto one of the servers that has been patched, and presto there you have a system where there is no server downtime outside of exceptional circumstances.

People should stop making excuses for games living 20 years in the past.

As you 'obviously' have all the good ideas of how things 'should' work, maybe they should hire you.

And again, their business model, whatever they choose it to be, is the way it is. So stop dreaming how things should work, cause they don't, no matter how big your block of text is.

So the store and account management are going offline at 10am est? Fat chance of servers being online while those two are down. Guess game won't be up for another good 4 hours minimum

Sylosi wrote: »

Aeorath wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

Aeorath wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

CMFan1966 wrote: »

This is my first MMO and I love it. I understand that maintenance must happen

There is no "must" about, Zenimax chose to go this route, it is perfectly possible to have a system where the customer need never experience downtime (at least not for purely maintenance / patches), how do you think Amazon, Google, etc are up 24/7 or why Guild Wars 2 doesn't have "maintenance" downtime.

I remember the maintenance from Blizzard's servers on World of Warcraft, it wasn't better or worse than this, but they had an estimated time for it.

I do believe it's quite difficult to have an uptime of 24/7 for an online game. Stuff breaks and needs taking care of; if stuff breaks and after repairing it needs some more downtime to repair the 'repairs', that's a bad business model.

Wrong, you just need a system in place that allows for it, take Guild Wars 2, in 5 years it has had downtime maybe 5 times in total (when there were big DDOS attacks on NA datacenter, when they did a big hardware upgrade, when they had a major software upgrade at a very low level, etc), other than those few isolated incidents there has been no downtime.

As you obviously have no idea of how these things work, I'll give you the simplified explanation of one way these things are done, when you want to patch a game, site, or whatever, you don't patch live servers, you patch offline servers, after these are patched they become the default servers for players logging on who have downloaded the client patch.

You can even let players still in the game continue to play on the existing non-patched servers for a while if the update is minor enough (or they are in instanced content like a dungeon), etc, if the patch is not minor or they are playing something that requires everyone to be using the newest patch because they aren't playing in completely separate instances (like Cyrodil for example) then you flash a message up on the screen saying there is a patch in 3 mins, where they will be logged out of the game, they then download the client bit of the patch, when they log on they are placed onto one of the servers that has been patched, and presto there you have a system where there is no server downtime outside of exceptional circumstances.

People should stop making excuses for games living 20 years in the past.

As you 'obviously' have all the good ideas of how things 'should' work, maybe they should hire you.

And again, their business model, whatever they choose it to be, is the way it is. So stop dreaming how things should work, cause they don't, no matter how big your block of text is.

I was merely pointing out your claims that high levels of downtime are a necessity in games is nonsense, if you can't cope with that, then I'd suggest not posting on technical things you are clearly ignorant about.

When you have clearly no idea how to choose wording because other people do not seem up to your standard, you just look childish.

Now go enjoy your server downtime and keep quiet.

DRXHarbinger wrote: »

Seeing as this exploit is about to be fixed....Anyone know what it was that I missed out on?

Exploit was fixed last week, unless there was a second one.

SJD_Phoenix wrote: »

My only gripe is the lack of ETA on their maintenance.

When they release a patch or update, I am convinced that they don't know how long it is going to be, either. I think they have enough variability in what they do that the range of time would be too large to have any real meaning.

For PC, there is a patch today, so expect it to be longer. I guess anywhere from 4 to 6 hours, and as 4 have already passed, probably not at the bottom end of that. I just noticed that they are doing everyone at once, which probably signals a longer down time for everyone.

BurtFreeman wrote: »

and will be worse!
from couple of hours of 2014 to almost 8 hours of now.
may be they need a different approch in doing stuff, for example do it night time.
currently it's a bit to much for a full day maintenance each week.

I think they include QA, after the patch work is done. This is probably part of why they cannot tell us how long it will take, and is definitely why they can't tell us what is in the patch before they start. They might actually remove stuff from the patch before they bring the servers back up.


Also... Account system maintenance is tomorrow.

it never fixes anything, just throws more *** on the wall and hope something sticks, but the NERF's sure do. Been here for three years and the beat goes one, guess they want us to think they are really working for us. LA LA LA

I can understand how the maintenance are integral for a smooth gameplay, but I'm in Australia, and I finish work at 4.30 pm. Today's maintenance started at 5 pm, and now it's 10.30 with servers still under maintenance. This isn't the first week it has happened.

These maintainances are a joke. I work with servers, and the way we work is to have a staging version of server where we get all the required updates ready, and when the server comes down, we just push all changes to live servers. The server are never down for more than an hour, going up to 2 hours when there are major changes.

Considering how much money the plus membership costs, losing 1 day a week isn't fair to the gamers in Australia.

Zenimax should either have dedicated Oceanic Server where the maintenance timing aren't this ludicrous, or they should work on providing better customer service by not wasting peoples' time.

Mureel wrote: »

iarnold wrote: »

I can understand how the maintenance are integral for a smooth gameplay, but I'm in Australia, and I finish work at 4.30 pm. Today's maintenance started at 5 pm, and now it's 10.30 with servers still under maintenance. This isn't the first week it has happened.

These maintainances are a joke. I work with servers, and the way we work is to have a staging version of server where we get all the required updates ready, and when the server comes down, we just push all changes to live servers. The server are never down for more than an hour, going up to 2 hours when there are major changes.

Considering how much money the plus membership costs, losing 1 day a week isn't fair to the gamers in Australia.

Zenimax should either have dedicated Oceanic Server where the maintenance timing aren't this ludicrous, or they should work on providing better customer service by not wasting peoples' time.

Dude do you really think the EU servers are in EU? Then no reason for same time maintenance. I really don't believe there are any servers in the actual EU.

Unless they have a realllllly long ethernet patch cable, they are in Frankfurt Germany. Whether you consider that to be in "the actual EU", is up to you.

Concurrent maintenance is an efficiency for ZOS staff.

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Lets see, we had unplanned maintenance because an exploit was discovered.

Then we had some downtime because of an unexpected issue.

I guess Zos could have put off handling the unexpected issue Thursday night to appease those that have an aversion to maintenance. Would be funny since they would then complain because they cannot log into the game.

While Zos does have more maintenance than their peers, it seems rather short sighted to complain about them doing something about some issues with the game.

the amount of whining is a constant.

if they patch things with maintenance, they get it for doing maintenance.
if they hold off, they get it for not fixing things quick enough.
if a patch fixes a lot of things, they get it for too many changes at once.
if a patch fixes a few, they get it for not responding to obvious needs.

its almost like in some/many cases the happy/unhappy is not tied to events and results mostly, just pre-formed attitudes in search of an outlet de jour.

surely that cant be the case.

stop being a fanboy and start adding some constructive criticism...we are here for over 3 years aren't we? if we QQ it means WE CARE and we have hopes and we want *** DONE. if we would go dead silence then the game would go dead...yes I hate it every time we get maintenance cuz it usually screws more things than it fix...and yes im 1 of those who kept his sub since early access unlike those that come QQ and go...tbh I rather have ZoS doing 24 hours maintenance if that would mean the rest of 6 days we can play without interruptions and without bugs and other ***.

Ok Ok ok so after i stop laughing can you explain what part of the following ars constructive criticism:

"I swear maintenance is being performed every single day. It's not once a week any more."
"They need to do maintenance for their maintenance. Logical, right? Ask any ZoS employee...
"
or even the one about just firing the whole team...

"Constructive criticism aims to show that an intent or purpose of something is better served by an alternative approach."
"Often containingn helpful and specific suggestions, constructive criticism..."

if you dont know the difference between the whining and constructive criticism, there are plenty of examples to be found on the internet.

Now, to give you an example of what alternatives or specific suggestions look like, you could look in my sig on the post you quoted, where you will see for instance some specific suggestionsn i have for several things i think they should do differently. (Disclaimer: it is a little out of date in some parts cuz i have not updated it i think since HotR but it is still good to serve as an example of things likme the specific suggestions for improvements that criticism can have in order to be considered constructive.)

Now, the fact that you invoke constructive criticism as a point and specifically point to me to insist i "start" providing it without actually noticing specific suggestions for change in the very sig of the post you cite - well some might think that could be seen as a case where the happy/unhappy has nothing to do with the event/content of my post... almost like its a generic reflexive response to maybe assume everyone who doesn't jump on the generic bash train must be a fanboy with no criticisms of the game.

but surely that cant be the case, can it?

Maybe the eclipse will "fix" everything..........for a couple minutes !
I am sure a thread will pop up and claim the eclipse cause lag or something

MoTeets wrote: »

Maybe the eclipse will "fix" everything..........for a couple minutes !
I am sure a thread will pop up and claim the eclipse cause lag or something

Today is when we find out that the ZOS data center is run entirely on solar, and how good the batteries are.