Azureblight for U44

pklemming · October 4

From several forum posts, we have expressed a dislike for the changes to Azureblight. Whilst it may have been a problem in PVP, removing the player tag fixed that. There was zero need to do anything else to it.

So, the question is:

Knowing the majority of the players are unhappy with this change, are you going to ignore us and push this change to Live, regardless of our concerns?

I am wording it this way, as I would like a specific answer, and if it is pushed live, why you consider what we say to have no relevance on the decision. I am still of the thought that these forums are pointless in regards to giving feedback and actually being listened to by ZoS

I understand we got the one response back after several posts highlighting the lack of interaction on the company's forum, but I am currently considering that to be more of an aberration, than anything else.

Kisakee · October 4

pklemming wrote: »

Knowing the majority of the players are unhappy with this change, are you going to ignore us and push this change to Live, regardless of our concerns?

Yes, they will. Just like they did it with Plaguebreak. And now please stop making new theeads about this topic every other day, it's not going to change anything. The horse is dead.

pklemming · October 5

Kisakee wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

Knowing the majority of the players are unhappy with this change, are you going to ignore us and push this change to Live, regardless of our concerns?

Yes, they will. Just like they did it with Plaguebreak. And now please stop making new threads about this topic every other day, it's not going to change anything. The horse is dead.

It is less about the set and more about ignoring the player base, and the efficacy of the forums. If we want ESO forums, then there is zero point them being on here when all we do is discuss things and no feedback is ever implemented by the devs.

What is the point of anyone posting here. It makes zero difference. It could be this set, or plague-break, or templar jabs. They literally do not listen to the players.

At one point we had class reps, but I guess that the feedback from them was not favourable, asn was a key element in them being disbanded, literally giving the player base no set of representatives.

There is also no problem in telling them they are doing something wrong. They are with this. They are losing players month by month and don't seem to get that the player base is unhappy with them.

A prime example of the path they are going down, is the one CA did around a year back, and look how it turned out for them. I am wondering at what point they will realise that taking the players in to consideration in a game that they play is important?

JiubLeRepenti · October 5

@ZOS_Kevin by chance, do you have any news on this?

I made a thread where almost all posters expressed their dislike for the change:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/666482/zos-just-obliterated-the-azureblight-set-with-the-upcoming-u44#latest

Can you please tell us if this was forwarded to the devs team?

Many thanks

JiubLeRepenti · October 5

Kisakee wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

Knowing the majority of the players are unhappy with this change, are you going to ignore us and push this change to Live, regardless of our concerns?

Yes, they will. Just like they did it with Plaguebreak. And now please stop making new theeads about this topic every other day, it's not going to change anything. The horse is dead.

There were like 3-4 topics in a month, what are you talking about?

Azureblight is one of the most appreciated set in the game, it's normal that people are talking about this nerf (which, at this point, is not a nerf but just the destruction of the set itself).

Also, maybe there would be less threads if ZOS and its CM were answering people's concerns. Kevin was tagged three times on another topic, but he didn't reply. I'm not blaming him of course. But then, just don't complain if people keep asking for answers.

Coo_PnT · October 5

Currently this forum is just a place to complain. My complete guess is that there are less than 20 people on the development team working on ESO, is that an exaggeration, less than 10? This game is just prolonging its life already. But still, I don't want this ESO to end. Am I just chasing a phantom of the past?

OsUfi · October 5

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Currently this forum is just a place to complain. My complete guess is that there are less than 20 people on the development team working on ESO, is that an exaggeration, less than 10? This game is just prolonging its life already. But still, I don't want this ESO to end. Am I just chasing a phantom of the past?

Oh boy, less than 10 people? Man, you've never worked in games development...

Coo_PnT · October 5

OsUfi wrote: »

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Currently this forum is just a place to complain. My complete guess is that there are less than 20 people on the development team working on ESO, is that an exaggeration, less than 10? This game is just prolonging its life already. But still, I don't want this ESO to end. Am I just chasing a phantom of the past?

Oh boy, less than 10 people? Man, you've never worked in games development...

My bad for not explaining in detail, but I guessed and ridiculed that there were less than 20 key developers. Perhaps quite a few things are outsourced?
In your opinion, how many people keep ESO developing today? Could you be more specific?

OsUfi · October 5

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Could you be more specific?

Sure.

I'm not sure the above link is 100% accurate, but certainly gives a good representation of the amount of staff required for an expansion like Gold Road. You'll find similar credits lists in most expansions of this size in other games.

This also only includes devs working on Gold Road. They'll likely have many other staff working behind the scenes on other things not related to Gold Road that may not feature on this list.

We also don't know the extent of each devs work. So my own argument definitely swings both ways. But there's not a chance in blue heckery they're getting expansions out like Gold Road with less than 10 devs.

dk_dunkirk · October 5

OsUfi wrote: »

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Could you be more specific?

Sure.

I'm not sure the above link is 100% accurate, but certainly gives a good representation of the amount of staff required for an expansion like Gold Road. You'll find similar credits lists in most expansions of this size in other games.

This also only includes devs working on Gold Road. They'll likely have many other staff working behind the scenes on other things not related to Gold Road that may not feature on this list.

We also don't know the extent of each devs work. So my own argument definitely swings both ways. But there's not a chance in blue heckery they're getting expansions out like Gold Road with less than 10 devs.

Lynda Carter voicing Azura: Nice! Also voice and singer of Magnolia in Fallout 4. IYKYK.

Coo_PnT · October 5

OsUfi wrote: »

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Could you be more specific?

Sure.

I'm not sure the above link is 100% accurate, but certainly gives a good representation of the amount of staff required for an expansion like Gold Road. You'll find similar credits lists in most expansions of this size in other games.

This also only includes devs working on Gold Road. They'll likely have many other staff working behind the scenes on other things not related to Gold Road that may not feature on this list.

We also don't know the extent of each devs work. So my own argument definitely swings both ways. But there's not a chance in blue heckery they're getting expansions out like Gold Road with less than 10 devs.

Why are you quoting me if you don't know exactly what you're talking about? Is this really accurate? You are not a ZOS employee, are you? Many people will be involved in the new projec. Joining a project does not mean the same thing as joining the current operation. Is this what you have been desperately searching for on google?
Also, your first statement “Oh boy,” is that the first thing you should say to someone you have never met? I found it very insulting.
The first development would have had over 200 people. This is not accurate either.

Also, you are a technician of some sort, correct? You didn't answer the question of how many developers are specifically ESO's now. Please also tell me your opinion on how much is allocated to which department.

Rowjoh · October 5

Kisakee wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

Knowing the majority of the players are unhappy with this change, are you going to ignore us and push this change to Live, regardless of our concerns?

Yes, they will. Just like they did it with Plaguebreak. And now please stop making new theeads about this topic every other day, it's not going to change anything. The horse is dead.

The horse can be resurrected, or at least replaced by a Guar.

OsUfi · October 5

I'm... Lost with this reply?

Coo_PnT wrote: »

OsUfi wrote: »

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Could you be more specific?

Sure.

I'm not sure the above link is 100% accurate, but certainly gives a good representation of the amount of staff required for an expansion like Gold Road. You'll find similar credits lists in most expansions of this size in other games.

This also only includes devs working on Gold Road. They'll likely have many other staff working behind the scenes on other things not related to Gold Road that may not feature on this list.

We also don't know the extent of each devs work. So my own argument definitely swings both ways. But there's not a chance in blue heckery they're getting expansions out like Gold Road with less than 10 devs.

Why are you quoting me if you don't know exactly what you're talking about?

I quoted you because you replied to me and I was trying to provide an answer.

Coo_PnT wrote: »

You didn't answer the question of how many developers are specifically ESO's now. Please also tell me your opinion on how much is allocated to which department.

The link I provided was the credits for Gold Road. You can look at that page, count, even to which department they work for. I haven't counted. I figure it's roughly the same working on the next expansion, plus a few extra maintaining the game. I even said in my post I don't believe it's accurate. You can take it as a rough estimate, but it's a lot more than "less than 10" as you said in your first post.

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Also, your first statement “Oh boy,” is that the first thing you should say to someone you have never met? I found it very insulting.

I have no idea what's offensive about the phrase "oh boy", I'll assume it's a modern language gender thing, so I shall simply apologies, sorry, I didn't mean to cause offense with that.

Coo_PnT · October 5

[/quote]Oh boy, less than 10 people? Man, you've never worked in games development...[/quote]

OsUfi wrote: »

I'm... Lost with this reply?

Coo_PnT wrote: »

OsUfi wrote: »

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Could you be more specific?

Sure.

I'm not sure the above link is 100% accurate, but certainly gives a good representation of the amount of staff required for an expansion like Gold Road. You'll find similar credits lists in most expansions of this size in other games.

This also only includes devs working on Gold Road. They'll likely have many other staff working behind the scenes on other things not related to Gold Road that may not feature on this list.

We also don't know the extent of each devs work. So my own argument definitely swings both ways. But there's not a chance in blue heckery they're getting expansions out like Gold Road with less than 10 devs.

Why are you quoting me if you don't know exactly what you're talking about?

I quoted you because you replied to me and I was trying to provide an answer.

Coo_PnT wrote: »

You didn't answer the question of how many developers are specifically ESO's now. Please also tell me your opinion on how much is allocated to which department.

The link I provided was the credits for Gold Road. You can look at that page, count, even to which department they work for. I haven't counted. I figure it's roughly the same working on the next expansion, plus a few extra maintaining the game. I even said in my post I don't believe it's accurate. You can take it as a rough estimate, but it's a lot more than "less than 10" as you said in your first post.

Coo_PnT wrote: »

Also, your first statement “Oh boy,” is that the first thing you should say to someone you have never met? I found it very insulting.

I have no idea what's offensive about the phrase "oh boy", I'll assume it's a modern language gender thing, so I shall simply apologies, sorry, I didn't mean to cause offense with that.

So please give me concrete evidence that the current status quo of less than 20 people is impossible. You are not a ZOS employee, are you? I first wrote that there are less than 20 people. It is not up to you to decide if you are offended or not. It is everyone but yourself. Whether it is a smell, a look, or a word. It's just hard to say that face to face except to close friends, family, and lovers. This is almost completely out of line with the title argument. I apologize to everyone.

pklemming · October 7

Given this days with no response as to why they feel the additional damage decrease was justified, making this set in to something with literally zero use.

The interaction from ZoS last time was an aberration, it does not matter what we think or say. Things we object to make zero difference to what they do.

These forums may as well be elsewhere, where the moderation is not quite so heavy handed and voicing complaints is not followed by a ban, or warning.

LadyGP · October 7

pklemming wrote: »

From several forum posts, we have expressed a dislike for the changes to Azureblight. Whilst it may have been a problem in PVP, removing the player tag fixed that. There was zero need to do anything else to it.

So, the question is:

Knowing the majority of the players are unhappy with this change, are you going to ignore us and push this change to Live, regardless of our concerns?

I am wording it this way, as I would like a specific answer, and if it is pushed live, why you consider what we say to have no relevance on the decision. I am still of the thought that these forums are pointless in regards to giving feedback and actually being listened to by ZoS

I understand we got the one response back after several posts highlighting the lack of interaction on the company's forum, but I am currently considering that to be more of an aberration, than anything else.

Server performance was a big issue behind it being changed as well - just an FYI.

pklemming · October 7

LadyGP wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

From several forum posts, we have expressed a dislike for the changes to Azureblight. Whilst it may have been a problem in PVP, removing the player tag fixed that. There was zero need to do anything else to it.

So, the question is:

Knowing the majority of the players are unhappy with this change, are you going to ignore us and push this change to Live, regardless of our concerns?

I am wording it this way, as I would like a specific answer, and if it is pushed live, why you consider what we say to have no relevance on the decision. I am still of the thought that these forums are pointless in regards to giving feedback and actually being listened to by ZoS

I understand we got the one response back after several posts highlighting the lack of interaction on the company's forum, but I am currently considering that to be more of an aberration, than anything else.

Server performance was a big issue behind it being changed as well - just an FYI.

It may have had an impact in this case, but Azureblight has been around for years. it also does not account for the countless other nerfs of sets in to oblivion, where balancing just seemed to be too hard.

There comes a point where you are just too tired to fight any more. I have reached this point. I will play free with friends and place my money with companies I feel to actually care about the player.

I still have some of my friends here, and while they remain, I will.I am no longer doing it out of any loyalty to the game or the company, or any thought that they will improve their attitude towards the player, because I am of the firm belief they will not. I do not consider this a dev problem, but a company problem. Being a dev here must be highly frustrating.

Soarora · October 7

The repeated decision to never roll-back leads more and more people to quit and less and less people to post on the forums and interact with PTS expressing opinions. Across all people I have known in trial and dungeon endgame, nearly if not every single person sees ZOS as a joke that doesn’t listen. People quit and come back, but no one likes ZOS.

sarahthes · October 7

The changes in today's patch notes are actually being lauded as just about perfectly balanced for PvE (at least on paper).

Great job, ZOS!

Elendir2am · October 7

LadyGP wrote: »

Server performance was a big issue behind it being changed as well - just an FYI.

Ballgroups are main issue behind server performance, yet they are buffed and buffed.