Speculation Is Banned?

wolfie1.0. · November 2022

dragonlord500 wrote: »

Zos may end up in conflict with US law if they keep this up...

The first ammendment only comes into effect if the government gets involved in the process or a ZOS employee violates privacy laws, defames you, or some other breach of law AND you can prove it and you suffer damages and have enough money to take them to court. It's not as easy as you think.

ZOS_Kevin · November 2022

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

Do the DEVs ever see outcry like this over unreleased content and think that it was a mistake not to release it or regret a choice made to not include something players are hyped over because they saw it in a data mine?

What honestly perplexed me about that crate season and particular instance of data mining was that I couldn't wrap my head around why the devs would withdraw one of the coolest apex mounts I've ever seen- namely, the horse version of this seasons mounts. Many people thought that mount was really cool, and would very much appreciate a way to obtain it.

I look at data mines personally, because it increases my hype for the game.

So we're not going to reference the crate in question specifically. But to answer the broad question being asked, it's not a matter of regret. The choice to remove an item is difficult, but often times it's because we know the item is not working as intended or the team would like to make changes and are not happy to ship what the current iteration is. Which to circle back to the datamine point, sometimes a datamine give players the perception that the item is finished and we pulled it for no reason when the item doesn't appear in the final product. This is often not the case.

ArchangelIsraphel · November 2022

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

Do the DEVs ever see outcry like this over unreleased content and think that it was a mistake not to release it or regret a choice made to not include something players are hyped over because they saw it in a data mine?

What honestly perplexed me about that crate season and particular instance of data mining was that I couldn't wrap my head around why the devs would withdraw one of the coolest apex mounts I've ever seen- namely, the horse version of this seasons mounts. Many people thought that mount was really cool, and would very much appreciate a way to obtain it.

I look at data mines personally, because it increases my hype for the game.

So we're not going to reference the crate in question specifically. But to answer the broad question being asked, it's not a matter of regret. The choice to remove an item is difficult, but often times it's because we know the item is not working as intended or the team would like to make changes and are not happy to ship what the current iteration is. Which to circle back to the datamine point, sometimes a datamine give players the perception that the item is finished and we pulled it for no reason when the item doesn't appear in the final product. This is often not the case.

@ZOS_Kevin Thank you for answering the question. That gives me quite a bit more insight into why certain items were pulled or have remained unreleased for a significant amount of time.

wolfie1.0. · November 2022

ZOS_Kevin

Does this policy include commentary on, discussion, speculation regarding any of the following:

1) what well known ZOS employees state on their personal social media accounts
2) news articles and blogs who write about ZOS and ESO.
3) Official quotes cited in articles and interviews of ZOS and Zenimax employees?

I am not trying to skirt any rules here or anything just trying to get a better understanding.

WildRaptorX · November 2022

Lol

The datamines are the main reason why I get excited about this game after 7 years. They always show somethings to look forward to and create hype for content.

Guess we’ll just have to wait for the boring announcement of another dungeon DLC

Destai · November 2022

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

Do the DEVs ever see outcry like this over unreleased content and think that it was a mistake not to release it or regret a choice made to not include something players are hyped over because they saw it in a data mine?

What honestly perplexed me about that crate season and particular instance of data mining was that I couldn't wrap my head around why the devs would withdraw one of the coolest apex mounts I've ever seen- namely, the horse version of this seasons mounts. Many people thought that mount was really cool, and would very much appreciate a way to obtain it.

I look at data mines personally, because it increases my hype for the game.

So we're not going to reference the crate in question specifically. But to answer the broad question being asked, it's not a matter of regret. The choice to remove an item is difficult, but often times it's because we know the item is not working as intended or the team would like to make changes and are not happy to ship what the current iteration is. Which to circle back to the datamine point, sometimes a datamine give players the perception that the item is finished and we pulled it for no reason when the item doesn't appear in the final product. This is often not the case.

Just some additional thoughts here, @ZOS_Kevin:

So when these leaks happen, sure you can delete it, but why not address the leaks head-on? If something's not going to be a final product, maybe just say that. Create an official thread - "we saw x leak on y social media, here's the truth" kind of thing. It's really in your best interest as a company to be forthcoming - especially in the face of players' excitement. We only want to give you money.

I know I won't change your company's policies but ZOS has to recognize by now that deleting things isn't helping you guys. Things go on Reddit and other social media, and spread like wildfire, and having some official framing around it will ultimately help you. The whole "silence and suppression" thing isn't doing you guys any favors. And one more deletion policy is just going to reinforce some of the negative opinions people have of ZOS. That word does get around. Again, you guys do what you must, just a different perspective.

Curious what your thoughts are.

Avariprivateer · November 2022

Dr_Con wrote: »

i think people complaining about something not being added was responsible for this change. there's like 20 posts of people saying they refuse to spend money on crates because a certain datamined mount wasn't being added

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/discussion/617639/official-discussion-thread-for-new-wraithtide-crown-crates/p1

not naming and shaming, but that topic is a prime example that displays specific examples of comments that ZOS specifically no longer allows. It may have an impact on the bottom line to allow discussion of it on their official forums. Reddit is still an option to discuss these sorts of things, as is player discords. They just don't want people discussing things on their forums.

edit 2:
as per Kevin's post here, this specific instance wasn't responsible for the change (nor does any specific example seem to be it), but it is an example of a situation they want to avoid.

From Tommy_the_Gun
I can understand not allowing data mining being posted on forums, as it may be affecting purchase decisions. Even I remember at some point comparing current stuff in the crown store to the ones that were data minded and thinking to not to buy for example a mount, just because I liked more the one that was data-mined. But even if it will be prohibited to post data mine on forums - I will still look it up elsewhere. It is basically: tilting at windmills. People will just post links on other websites.

If the purpose or purpose in part of this measure is supress information that might disuade players from purchasing Crown Crates, or any other product, that could very well be an FTC violation.
@ZOS_Kevin You might want to hold off on fully implementing this new rule, this could potentially be a serious legal liability for ZOS.

jaws343 · November 2022

Destai wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

Do the DEVs ever see outcry like this over unreleased content and think that it was a mistake not to release it or regret a choice made to not include something players are hyped over because they saw it in a data mine?

What honestly perplexed me about that crate season and particular instance of data mining was that I couldn't wrap my head around why the devs would withdraw one of the coolest apex mounts I've ever seen- namely, the horse version of this seasons mounts. Many people thought that mount was really cool, and would very much appreciate a way to obtain it.

I look at data mines personally, because it increases my hype for the game.

So we're not going to reference the crate in question specifically. But to answer the broad question being asked, it's not a matter of regret. The choice to remove an item is difficult, but often times it's because we know the item is not working as intended or the team would like to make changes and are not happy to ship what the current iteration is. Which to circle back to the datamine point, sometimes a datamine give players the perception that the item is finished and we pulled it for no reason when the item doesn't appear in the final product. This is often not the case.

Just some additional thoughts here, @ZOS_Kevin:

So when these leaks happen, sure you can delete it, but why not address the leaks head-on? If something's not going to be a final product, maybe just say that. Create an official thread - "we saw x leak on y social media, here's the truth" kind of thing. It's really in your best interest as a company to be forthcoming - especially in the face of players' excitement. We only want to give you money.

I know I won't change your company's policies but ZOS has to recognize by now that deleting things isn't helping you guys. Things go on Reddit and other social media, and spread like wildfire, and having some official framing around it will ultimately help you. The whole "silence and suppression" thing isn't doing you guys any favors. And one more deletion policy is just going to reinforce some of the negative opinions people have of ZOS. That word does get around. Again, you guys do what you must, just a different perspective.

Curious what your thoughts are.

I mean, look at the timing of many of these leaks. They are usually months and months before the content may come out. You can't possibly expect them to confirm/deny something they literally don't know of yet. There are many points in a dev process, including even week of release, where content may be scrapped due to not working out.

Avariprivateer · November 2022

FrancisCrawford wrote: »

Simple version:

Well-informed speculation is banned.
Unfounded conjecture is currently still OK.

Perhaps that will change in the future if the unfounded conjecture turns out to be too intelligent.

i.e. The former can be easily doctored to look like the latter...
My psychic told me, just yesterday, that on the morrow we will see a peninsula and it will also be windy out.

virtus753 · November 2022

Avariprivateer wrote: »

Dr_Con wrote: »

i think people complaining about something not being added was responsible for this change. there's like 20 posts of people saying they refuse to spend money on crates because a certain datamined mount wasn't being added

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/discussion/617639/official-discussion-thread-for-new-wraithtide-crown-crates/p1

not naming and shaming, but that topic is a prime example that displays specific examples of comments that ZOS specifically no longer allows. It may have an impact on the bottom line to allow discussion of it on their official forums. Reddit is still an option to discuss these sorts of things, as is player discords. They just don't want people discussing things on their forums.

edit 2:
as per Kevin's post here, this specific instance wasn't responsible for the change (nor does any specific example seem to be it), but it is an example of a situation they want to avoid.

From Tommy_the_Gun
I can understand not allowing data mining being posted on forums, as it may be affecting purchase decisions. Even I remember at some point comparing current stuff in the crown store to the ones that were data minded and thinking to not to buy for example a mount, just because I liked more the one that was data-mined. But even if it will be prohibited to post data mine on forums - I will still look it up elsewhere. It is basically: tilting at windmills. People will just post links on other websites.

If the purpose or purpose in part of this measure is supress information that might disuade players from purchasing Crown Crates, or any other product, that could very well be an FTC violation.
@ZOS_Kevin You might want to hold off on fully implementing this new rule, this could potentially be a serious legal liability for ZOS.

How so, exactly?

None of the data-mined content is information that dissuaded players from purchasing those crates. Players unfortunately came to expect something from the crates based on information found in the game files, and those expectations were not met because they ultimately came from unwarranted speculation and assumptions that an item that appeared in the game files would appear in the crates. But the actual decision not to purchase crates was based on the potential contents of the crates, which were officially published when the crates were released. The data mining was not what caused players not to purchase the crates. The lack of the item they wanted caused that. They would have refrained from buying the crates regardless of the datamine. They were just extra disappointed because the datamine got their hopes up, which is not something that can be regulated by the FTC.

Amottica · November 2022

K9002 wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin
Could you please also clarify the part about sourcing information from official social media channels? I assume this includes the corporate Twitter accounts such as Bethesda and TESOnline. But does it also include individual developer and community manager accounts, like GinaLBruno, mattfiror, SlashLurk and gilliamtherogue?

I suggest you are correct in asking for clarification on this point.

Kevin mentioned that while they are employees, their personal accounts are not official channels concerning this change. He notes that we can note their personal accounts but it would be unusual for these people to pose official information that had not been posted via official channels. He states that outliers would need to be handled on a case-by-case basis.

It seems he means if an employee accidentally slips official information that has not been officially released that a player citing that statement could receive a penalty. That should never be the case, as those employees would be the ones who should receive the reprimand in such cases since they are likely violating their employment agreement.

This entire change pushes the conversation into a gray area as this is not like anyone has stolen information from Zenimax nor broken an agreement of confidentiality or an NDA. Someone could gleam information from another site or from a player not knowing it was datamined and receive a reprimand on the forums for mentioning it. This is problematic and is not in-line with any other aspect of the TOS or Code of Conduct that I see.

DMuehlhausen · November 2022

dragonlord500 wrote: »

Zos may end up in conflict with US law if they keep this up...

Trust me you have no clue what you are talking about. Go back and read the massive wall of texts that you skip through and agree to. It's all the black and white clear as crystal. It's combed through by an army of lawyers nothing is missed. It's their private forums and can ban you for using the word ban if they like and there is nothing you can do about it.

ZOS_Kevin · November 2022

Avariprivateer wrote: »

If the purpose or purpose in part of this measure is supress information that might disuade players from purchasing Crown Crates, or any other product, that could very well be an FTC violation.
@ZOS_Kevin You might want to hold off on fully implementing this new rule, this could potentially be a serious legal liability for ZOS.

We were pretty clear in everything we've posted or replied to regarding this. It has nothing to do with players agency over purchases. Players are always free to make that decision based on the official communication from us. It has everything to do with protecting our channels and player expectations regarding our official content. There is no violation here.

ZOS_Kevin · November 2022

wolfie1.0. wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin

Does this policy include commentary on, discussion, speculation regarding any of the following:

1) what well known ZOS employees state on their personal social media accounts
2) news articles and blogs who write about ZOS and ESO.
3) Official quotes cited in articles and interviews of ZOS and Zenimax employees?

I am not trying to skirt any rules here or anything just trying to get a better understanding.

Appreciate not trying to skirt rules. This is going to be a bit nuanced, so bare with me.

1) what well known ZOS employees state on their personal social media accounts
Their personal accounts are just that, personal accounts. They are not run or monitored by the company in any way. That being said, normally personal accounts will share information after it is shared in a public capacity. So that should be fine. But there will certainly be outliers in that. You never know what when someone says something they shouldn't. In that respect, we will remove items and handled the issue case by case, with the caveat that an employee spoke out of turn. So that will be factored in.

2) news articles and blogs who write about ZOS and ESO.
We would ask that if a news outlet or blog writes about a datamine or unofficial released content, that you do not post about it in the forum. News outlets often are pretty specific when noting leaks, rumors, datamines. So please don't transfer that content over.

3) Official quotes cited in articles and interviews of ZOS and Zenimax employees?
Official quotes should be fine as they often go through our PR channels and we would have announced the topic in some way prior to the article quotes. So that should not be an issue. Again, if there are any odd grey areas, we'll reach out via DM and discuss.

Hope this helps. A lot of these are unfortunately circumstance depend, so a clear cut answer cannot be made. The devil is in the details, as they say. But with that understanding, there is room for conversation when these circumstances do come up. Please remember, the goal is not to ban ppl. It is to limit spoiling our content on our official channels and misinformation around our content.

Avariprivateer · November 2022

virtus753 wrote: »

Avariprivateer wrote: »

Dr_Con wrote: »

i think people complaining about something not being added was responsible for this change. there's like 20 posts of people saying they refuse to spend money on crates because a certain datamined mount wasn't being added

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/discussion/617639/official-discussion-thread-for-new-wraithtide-crown-crates/p1

not naming and shaming, but that topic is a prime example that displays specific examples of comments that ZOS specifically no longer allows. It may have an impact on the bottom line to allow discussion of it on their official forums. Reddit is still an option to discuss these sorts of things, as is player discords. They just don't want people discussing things on their forums.

edit 2:
as per Kevin's post here, this specific instance wasn't responsible for the change (nor does any specific example seem to be it), but it is an example of a situation they want to avoid.

From Tommy_the_Gun
I can understand not allowing data mining being posted on forums, as it may be affecting purchase decisions. Even I remember at some point comparing current stuff in the crown store to the ones that were data minded and thinking to not to buy for example a mount, just because I liked more the one that was data-mined. But even if it will be prohibited to post data mine on forums - I will still look it up elsewhere. It is basically: tilting at windmills. People will just post links on other websites.

If the purpose or purpose in part of this measure is supress information that might disuade players from purchasing Crown Crates, or any other product, that could very well be an FTC violation.
@ZOS_Kevin You might want to hold off on fully implementing this new rule, this could potentially be a serious legal liability for ZOS.

How so, exactly?

None of the data-mined content is information that dissuaded players from purchasing those crates. Players unfortunately came to expect something from the crates based on information found in the game files, and those expectations were not met because they ultimately came from unwarranted speculation and assumptions that an item that appeared in the game files would appear in the crates. But the actual decision not to purchase crates was based on the potential contents of the crates, which were officially published when the crates were released. The data mining was not what caused players not to purchase the crates. The lack of the item they wanted caused that. They would have refrained from buying the crates regardless of the datamine. They were just extra disappointed because the datamine got their hopes up, which is not something that can be regulated by the FTC.

ZOS has already alluded to the fact that they do not want any data mining to influence a potential sale. Technically speaking no one buys Crates directly, first one must purchase Crowns. Crown Crate seasons are themed and data mines generally indicate which season is next up the plate. A person who is willing to gamble but not infinitely so as to constitute an addiction, might normally buy a pack or more of Crowns in anticipation of a completely unknown Crate roster. In the event they see datamined content and they decide this particular season does not have enough goodies to justify the purchase, a person might very well divest their spending to a later date, when a more appealing Crate Season arrives. This goes against the corporate principle of , Always Be Closing. Also from a behavioural perspective, if a person decides to skip one Crown Crate Season they might be more inclined to skip another. Conversely, if a person always buys Crates every season they are more likely to continue to do so.

Dr_Con · November 2022

Avariprivateer wrote: »

Dr_Con wrote: »

i think people complaining about something not being added was responsible for this change. there's like 20 posts of people saying they refuse to spend money on crates because a certain datamined mount wasn't being added

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/discussion/617639/official-discussion-thread-for-new-wraithtide-crown-crates/p1

not naming and shaming, but that topic is a prime example that displays specific examples of comments that ZOS specifically no longer allows. It may have an impact on the bottom line to allow discussion of it on their official forums. Reddit is still an option to discuss these sorts of things, as is player discords. They just don't want people discussing things on their forums.

edit 2:
as per Kevin's post here, this specific instance wasn't responsible for the change (nor does any specific example seem to be it), but it is an example of a situation they want to avoid.

From Tommy_the_Gun
I can understand not allowing data mining being posted on forums, as it may be affecting purchase decisions. Even I remember at some point comparing current stuff in the crown store to the ones that were data minded and thinking to not to buy for example a mount, just because I liked more the one that was data-mined. But even if it will be prohibited to post data mine on forums - I will still look it up elsewhere. It is basically: tilting at windmills. People will just post links on other websites.

If the purpose or purpose in part of this measure is supress information that might disuade players from purchasing Crown Crates, or any other product, that could very well be an FTC violation.
@ZOS_Kevin You might want to hold off on fully implementing this new rule, this could potentially be a serious legal liability for ZOS.

it can be a FTC violation if they announced something in the crate announcement but in reality it doesn't drop. It can be grey area thing warranting a warning if they interacted with players and discussed specific datamined things that they are looking forward to, but in reality never released.

But it's very much a stretch to say that datamined things that don't get added to crown store crates are an FTC violation. These are not made available in the files to tease people into thinking it'll be added. At the most, you can call it insider information that was inaccurate, but even that would be so far from the truth it might as well be on the moon.

Avariprivateer · November 2022

Tandor wrote: »

Whilst I have never complained to ZOS about datamining, I may well have argued against it occasionally on the forum simply because of the unconcealed spoilers it generates which have on occasion spoilt aspects of the game for me. So personally I'm delighted that datamining results won't be permitted on this forum from hereon. There are plenty of other places people can go to if they want that sort of information.

While I realise it's impossible to achieve, it would also be great if PTS feedback could be confined to the PTS forum. Some players don't want to know anything at all about new content until it drops on the Live servers, and I've heard before of players taking a complete break from this forum during the run-up to a new release for just that reason.

If this is simply about spoilers, it would be more conducive to disallow such in topic titles and have an icon to signify which threads have spoilers. As it is, this new measure does nothing about plot line spoilers, which can be disseminated from PTS, whole months before console players even get the update.

Vulkunne · November 2022

HackTheMinotaur wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi, everyone. Today we are announcing a change in our policy concerning the sharing and discussion of unofficially released information, rumors, and datamining on the official ESO forums. Starting today, all posts containing any rumors, datamined content, or otherwise unofficial, unreleased information will be a violation of our forum community guidelines and will be removed, regardless of whether the information is true or false.

You are still welcome to post suggestions, ideas, and guides related to officially released information that we have shared in articles, livestreams, interviews, on the PTS, and on our social media channels.

@ZOS_Kevin Can you clarify the above announcement? For example, If I post speculation thread on "the next class" or "Top 5 Features We Need In ESO" will that content be removed because it's discussing unconfirmed features?

I can almost totally understand why ZOS has this new policy and it falls in line with what they have had to do in the past to address these kinds of issues. That said, protecting your data is really important and I'm kind of surprised they had not already implemented this.

SilverBride · November 2022

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Official quotes cited in articles and interviews of ZOS and Zenimax employees?
Official quotes should be fine as they often go through our PR channels and we would have announced the topic in some way prior to the article quotes. So that should not be an issue. Again, if there are any odd grey areas, we'll reach out via DM and discuss.

@ZOS_Kevin

The pinned Overland Content thread contains several quotes from Rich Lambert. Some were from his personal Twitch stream and some were from an interview he did. Are these acceptable or no longer permitted?

Billium813 · November 2022

*Tin foil hat time*

So, update 36 drops and seems to contain a load of bugs. Many of these bugs are in portions of the game that didn't even receive any patch note updates for update 36 (like Cyrodiil and Siege weapons) ... there has been a rash of addon bugs too that are prompting addon devs to look at the API to see what changed ... players are looking closer at the game data now because of all these unusual bugs ... at the same time, ZOS suddenly takes a new hardline approach to datamining information posted on the forums ... coincidence?

Is ZOS subtly hinting that they are delivering stealth changes for upcoming content releases? Is Cyrodiil perhaps the focus of some upcoming content release?!? Is Half-Life 3 confirmed?!?!

Kingsindarkness · November 2022

Billium813 wrote: »

*Tin foil hat time*

So, update 36 drops and seems to contain a load of bugs. Many of these bugs are in portions of the game that didn't even receive any patch note updates for update 36 (like Cyrodiil and Siege weapons) ... there has been a rash of addon bugs too that are prompting addon devs to look at the API to see what changed ... players are looking closer at the game data now because of all these unusual bugs ... at the same time, ZOS suddenly takes a new hardline approach to datamining information posted on the forums ... coincidence?

Is ZOS subtly hinting that they are delivering stealth changes for upcoming content releases? Is Cyrodiil perhaps the focus of some upcoming content release?!? Is Half-Life 3 confirmed?!?!

That's some heavy-duty tin foil....

Cadbury · November 2022

Billium813 wrote: »

*Tin foil hat time*

So, update 36 drops and seems to contain a load of bugs. Many of these bugs are in portions of the game that didn't even receive any patch note updates for update 36 (like Cyrodiil and Siege weapons) ... there has been a rash of addon bugs too that are prompting addon devs to look at the API to see what changed ... players are looking closer at the game data now because of all these unusual bugs ... at the same time, ZOS suddenly takes a new hardline approach to datamining information posted on the forums ... coincidence?

Is ZOS subtly hinting that they are delivering stealth changes for upcoming content releases? Is Cyrodiil perhaps the focus of some upcoming content release?!? Is Half-Life 3 confirmed?!?!

It's aliens. The answer is always aliens.

Kingsindarkness wrote: »

That's some heavy-duty tin foil....

alternatelder · November 2022

Keylun wrote: »

Lol

The datamines are the main reason why I get excited about this game after 7 years. They always show somethings to look forward to and create hype for content.

Guess we’ll just have to wait for the boring announcement of another dungeon DLC

You're missing one of the main points of why they aren't allowing it. Not everything in datamines gets released, and when it doesn't, people get mad. So much for paying attention...

Avariprivateer · November 2022

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Avariprivateer wrote: »

If the purpose or purpose in part of this measure is supress information that might disuade players from purchasing Crown Crates, or any other product, that could very well be an FTC violation.
@ZOS_Kevin You might want to hold off on fully implementing this new rule, this could potentially be a serious legal liability for ZOS.

We were pretty clear in everything we've posted or replied to regarding this. It has nothing to do with players agency over purchases. Players are always free to make that decision based on the official communication from us. It has everything to do with protecting our channels and player expectations regarding our official content. There is no violation here.

The problem is that the control of information is powerful in regard to both marketing and public perception. For example circa 2007 Lego had a major problem with lime green pieces braking. If they had decided to remove posts mentioning this issue, in either their official forum or on the Lego shop at home review page, that would almost certainly have been an FTC violation. Likewise there have been several cases of reviews on webstores like Amazon, where unfavorable posts have been systematically deleted. As for legality, I don't know what your legal department has been feeding the rest of you, please forgive my boldness, but ZOS has actually been selling Crown Crates in jurisdictions where they are statutorally illegal. I know because I live in one. If you would do me a favor and double check with the lads upstairs, if you wre to get the chance, I would appreciate it, perhaps even with Bethesda Softworks or Xbox Games proper.

Billium813 · November 2022

Cadbury wrote: »

It's aliens. The answer is always aliens.

ZOS_Kevin · November 2022

Destai wrote: »

Just some additional thoughts here, @ZOS_Kevin:

So when these leaks happen, sure you can delete it, but why not address the leaks head-on? If something's not going to be a final product, maybe just say that. Create an official thread - "we saw x leak on y social media, here's the truth" kind of thing. It's really in your best interest as a company to be forthcoming - especially in the face of players' excitement. We only want to give you money.

I know I won't change your company's policies but ZOS has to recognize by now that deleting things isn't helping you guys. Things go on Reddit and other social media, and spread like wildfire, and having some official framing around it will ultimately help you. The whole "silence and suppression" thing isn't doing you guys any favors. And one more deletion policy is just going to reinforce some of the negative opinions people have of ZOS. That word does get around. Again, you guys do what you must, just a different perspective.

Curious what your thoughts are.

For us, while we know that won't stop others posting this kind of content elsewhere, we would rather not have it also on our official channels before we can say anything.

We'll also note that it isn't as simple as dealing with it head on. Believe me, we wish it was. Depending on the content, there are many teams involved and plans for releasing/announcing future content that happens months in advance. All of that hard work can't just be shifted and has to stick to a timeline at that point. Having unreleased or datamined content present on the forum undercuts our ability to manage player expectation and discourse around our content. When we share our announcements we should be able to do so on our terms and that should be the only source of confirmation. We shouldn't have to contend with misinformation or confusion on our platform around our content.

Amottica · November 2022

Avariprivateer wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Avariprivateer wrote: »

If the purpose or purpose in part of this measure is supress information that might disuade players from purchasing Crown Crates, or any other product, that could very well be an FTC violation.
@ZOS_Kevin You might want to hold off on fully implementing this new rule, this could potentially be a serious legal liability for ZOS.

We were pretty clear in everything we've posted or replied to regarding this. It has nothing to do with players agency over purchases. Players are always free to make that decision based on the official communication from us. It has everything to do with protecting our channels and player expectations regarding our official content. There is no violation here.

The problem is that the control of information is powerful in regard to both marketing and public perception. For example circa 2007 Lego had a major problem with lime green pieces braking. If they had decided to remove posts mentioning this issue, in either their official forum or on the Lego shop at home review page, that would almost certainly have been an FTC violation. Likewise there have been several cases of reviews on webstores like Amazon, where unfavorable posts have been systematically deleted. As for legality, I don't know what your legal department has been feeding the rest of you, please forgive my boldness, but ZOS has actually been selling Crown Crates in jurisdictions where they are statutorally illegal. I know because I live in one. If you would do me a favor and double check with the lads upstairs, if you wre to get the chance, I would appreciate it, perhaps even with Bethesda Softworks or Xbox Games proper.

While I agree that this new policy is heavy-handed and will just create confusion and drive the conversation to other forums, the examples provided are not related.

Zenimax has not said we cannot mention bugs in the game, which is exactly what the Lego example is. As for the Amazon example, we are already able to provide constructive feedback on game issues.

The legality of crates seems to be a huge tangent from the topic of this thread. Even then, I seriously doubt that there are nations where crates are illegal but ignore the third largest company by market cap in the world selling such items to their citizens. Zenimax, and MS, have a legal team that has much more expertise on such matters than we do. Even then, anyone who wants to challenge it is able to report it to their officials.

ZOS_Kevin · November 2022

SilverBride wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Official quotes cited in articles and interviews of ZOS and Zenimax employees?
Official quotes should be fine as they often go through our PR channels and we would have announced the topic in some way prior to the article quotes. So that should not be an issue. Again, if there are any odd grey areas, we'll reach out via DM and discuss.

@ZOS_Kevin

The pinned Overland Content thread contains several quotes from Rich Lambert. Some were from his personal Twitch stream and some were from an interview he did. Are these acceptable or no longer permitted?

The quote from Rich in the article is fine. We have confirmed that is an official stance. We're not going to backtrack on some of his other twitch quotes, but in the future, if there is thought around posting from an employee livestream, feel free to run the clip by me. It's hard to make a solid call there because context matters.

ZOS_Kevin · November 2022

Billium813 wrote: »

*Tin foil hat time*

So, update 36 drops and seems to contain a load of bugs. Many of these bugs are in portions of the game that didn't even receive any patch note updates for update 36 (like Cyrodiil and Siege weapons) ... there has been a rash of addon bugs too that are prompting addon devs to look at the API to see what changed ... players are looking closer at the game data now because of all these unusual bugs ... at the same time, ZOS suddenly takes a new hardline approach to datamining information posted on the forums ... coincidence?

Is ZOS subtly hinting that they are delivering stealth changes for upcoming content releases? Is Cyrodiil perhaps the focus of some upcoming content release?!? Is Half-Life 3 confirmed?!?!

That's a lot of tin foil

ZOS_Kevin · November 2022

@Avariprivateer I'm not going to touch the Crown Store comment as that isn't related to the core of what is being discussed here. Also, that's beyond my paygrade. I moderate the forum, not run monetization efforts.

The bottom line is this for the forum policy change, there is no violation on our end here as the content we are asking users to no longer post isn't even official content yet. Every previous example you've given is for a product that has been released and in the hands of users. We are asking users to no longer post datamined content (which is not officially announced and unavailable to the public) and unofficial content rumors (content that may or may not even be real. And if it is, that content is not announced and unavailable to the public). We are not going around and asking other sites to not post that content.

We'll state this once more, nowhere did we note this was for the sake of monetization. Even in the example that a crown crate was brought up, we noted monetization had nothing to do with the change, but rather the example of player confusion around a datamine is something we would like to avoid. We are looking to avoid player confusion and protect the content we are actively working on.