Why doesn't ZOS just send out a questionnaire?

Desdemonte

The tool is in place from Beta. You have all our email addresses. Why not poll the electorate, so to speak, instead of inviting 20 people from guilds we don't even know, and who may not even be playing the game any more.

Seems pretty simple to me, but it's not quite as dramatic a PR stunt. Better use of resources though.

brandon

I agree with this. Then maybe people would shut up about things in the game.

Nestor

Yes, it would be nice to get feedback from the entire population who plays the game, not just the opinionated ones who post on forums or Guilds that I am not a member of.

radiostar

We need a hmmm button.

Sallington

I would hate to be the guy that has to read through those returned questionnaires.

"What would you like to see improved in regards to PvP?"

"ZOS GET UR HEAD OUT OF YOUR A$$, GG F2P!!!!"

Soloeus

They take advice from pets then the pets win and get information ahead of time.

Resueht

Yes, lets have ZOS sort through thousands of questionnaires that say the same thing over and over just so I can feel validated about submitting my opinion.

I don't understand why people feel so entitled to have their specific opinion heard when they can very well get majority of feedback from 20 people who I guarantee you have the same complaints and suggestions as you.

They are a company, they need to do things efficiently. They felt this was the best way to approach the problem and quite frankly I agree. No, I am not affiliated with any of the groups represented at the summit, but I'm not going to complain about my voice not being heard when those 20 are probably more qualified to give their opinions than most.

You might have valid points, you might have better ideas, but not everyone is a winner. I get it, you paid your money and you want to get something for that. But quite frankly I'm just glad they are still as concerned about the game as they are. They are still working hard on making this a great experience. They could have just left it and been done with it. They could have just kept going on with their own visions, but they called 20 civilians to their HQ for an open discussion and presentations. They could have imposed and NDA but they didn't so everyone can see what the plans for the future are.

They called these 20 because they knew they had a way to get the info out. Not because they are the best players, not because they have the best ideas, but because they are familiar with all the concerns of many players.

I'm sorry to pick on you specifically in this post, but I'm just tired of seeing people who feel so entitled to directly submit their opinion to ZOS. They are working hard to make a great product. Let them do that.

Not saying just submit to all the bugs and problems; keep voicing those! But understand they are people too, with lives outside of ESO.

Desdemonte

Resueht wrote: »

Yes, lets have ZOS sort through thousands of questionnaires that say the same thing over and over just so I can feel validated about submitting my opinion.

I don't understand why people feel so entitled to have their specific opinion heard when they can very well get majority of feedback from 20 people who I guarantee you have the same complaints and suggestions as you.

They are a company, they need to do things efficiently. They felt this was the best way to approach the problem and quite frankly I agree. No, I am not affiliated with any of the groups represented at the summit, but I'm not going to complain about my voice not being heard when those 20 are probably more qualified to give their opinions than most.

You might have valid points, you might have better ideas, but not everyone is a winner. I get it, you paid your money and you want to get something for that. But quite frankly I'm just glad they are still as concerned about the game as they are. They are still working hard on making this a great experience. They could have just left it and been done with it. They could have just kept going on with their own visions, but they called 20 civilians to their HQ for an open discussion and presentations. They could have imposed and NDA but they didn't so everyone can see what the plans for the future are.

They called these 20 because they knew they had a way to get the info out. Not because they are the best players, not because they have the best ideas, but because they are familiar with all the concerns of many players.

I'm sorry to pick on you specifically in this post, but I'm just tired of seeing people who feel so entitled to directly submit their opinion to ZOS. They are working hard to make a great product. Let them do that.

Not saying just submit to all the bugs and problems; keep voicing those! But understand they are people too, with lives outside of ESO.

A questionnaire is not a long answer exam. It is a list of questions with multiple choice answers, as in "rate the importance of ......." And "do you feel this is game-breaking?" regarding those answers.

A monkey could push the button to give the stats print out.

I gave you a lol because I like how you are able to guarantee that those 20 are best representing my interests. I don't think some of them even play any more.

Nestor

Resueht wrote: »

when they can very well get majority of feedback from 20 people who I guarantee you have the same complaints and suggestions as you.........when those 20 are probably more qualified to give their opinions than most.

Well, I am not in a PvP Guild, so those people don't speak for me, I am not in a PvE Guild, so those people don't speak for me.......

And what makes this group any more qualified or, rather, privileged to give feedback than someone who plays the game? Sure a Guild Leader might have spent more time in the game, but they could also just spend their time running the Guild too and not playing much.

BBSooner

Nestor wrote: »

BBSooner wrote: »

[...]

[...]

People (ITT: players) are largely incapable of thinking of the game beyond their extremely biased and selfish interactions. There are very few occasions where developers can take an opinion from a user and know that itsa positive fix. Users can't be trusted to not attempt to exploit (Cyrodiil as a whole is a blatant example of abuse far and wide), why would they be trusted to give an honest account on balance or what the game needs?

[Moderator Note: Removed moderated quote]

ZOS_TristanK

Hi, folks. We are genuinely interested in your feedback about the Guild Summit, however we require that players stay calm and civil when posting on these forums. This thread is becoming hostile, but we would like to leave it open to continue hearing your input on what you would like to see from us now and in the future.

We'd also like to assure you that we have and will continue to work on collecting and delivering player feedback to the dev team. As Jessica mentioned yesterday:

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Please know that holding this summit does not mean that we value some individuals’ opinions over others, or that some players hold more sway with us than others. Both the Community and Social teams continue to diligently monitor the forums and fan communities for your feedback and report it to our developers. In fact, we have a number of reports we put together every week to highlight the feedback that is posted here, specifically.

One last thing we would like to call out is that in addition to reaching out here and on various social channels is that we do gather and read player feedback submitted in-game using the /feedback command.

As said before, we would like to keep this thread open to hear your additional suggestions. Like what questions would you like to see if we were to put together a questionnaire?

KhajitFurTrader

brandon wrote: »

I agree with this. Then maybe people would shut up about things in the game.

Small chance of (some) people, who don't get their way of looking at things to be universally accepted, to ever shut up, especially if there has been a majority vote against them. I'm sorry if I seem to be overly gloomy, but that's just the way of the information age, where everyone can have a publicly published opinion at almost no cost at all.

Gythral

The biggest issue with any questionnaire is that someone has to choose the questions to ask.
Those questions will always be limited and slanted to suit the party organising it.
There is a mechanism in place, in game, to make comments and suggestion if you feel strongly about it (/feedback)

R1ckyDaMan

ZOS_TristanK wrote: »

Hi, folks. We are genuinely interested in your feedback about the Guild Summit, however we require that players stay calm and civil when posting on these forums. This thread is becoming hostile, but we would like to leave it open to continue hearing your input on what you would like to see from us now and in the future.

We'd also like to assure you that we have and will continue to work on collecting and delivering player feedback to the dev team. As Jessica mentioned yesterday:

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Please know that holding this summit does not mean that we value some individuals’ opinions over others, or that some players hold more sway with us than others. Both the Community and Social teams continue to diligently monitor the forums and fan communities for your feedback and report it to our developers. In fact, we have a number of reports we put together every week to highlight the feedback that is posted here, specifically.

One last thing we would like to call out is that in addition to reaching out here and on various social channels is that we do gather and read player feedback submitted in-game using the /feedback command.

As said before, we would like to keep this thread open to hear your additional suggestions. Like what questions would you like to see if we were to put together a questionnaire?

If you are constantly collecting feedback from here and in game then surely you do not need the summit.

Probitas

If Z wanted the general player base opinions, they would ask for them. It cannot be stated more bluntly. When they elicit for comments from one particular group, it's because that group is what gets the most attention.

Since it's already apparent that most of the problems with stealth are due to adjustments for PVP that came from a guild meeting, and PVP is a guild thing, well, you figure it out. Most of the problems apparent in the game are due to a large focus on guilds. Lack of an auction hall for one.

Want a real world example? Lord of the Rings Online, Turbine, and the Players Council....true example of shady cronyism. Plus, they make handy shields when having to deflect criticism for decisions, stating that it came from players.

Desdemonte

BBSooner wrote: »

Nestor wrote: »

BBSooner wrote: »

[...]

[...]

People (ITT: players) are largely incapable of thinking of the game beyond their extremely biased and selfish interactions. There are very few occasions where developers can take an opinion from a user and know that itsa positive fix. Users can't be trusted to not attempt to exploit (Cyrodiil as a whole is a blatant example of abuse far and wide), why would they be trusted to give an honest account on balance or what the game needs?

[Moderator Note: Removed moderated quote]

I think ZOS would be able to discern this from valid feedback from their other information gathering sources, and in how other people respond to a question. I think in general the majority of the players are against exploits, etc so people with their own agenda would have their answers on the lower side of the bell curve.

Desdemonte

R1ckyDaMan wrote: »

ZOS_TristanK wrote: »

Hi, folks. We are genuinely interested in your feedback about the Guild Summit, however we require that players stay calm and civil when posting on these forums. This thread is becoming hostile, but we would like to leave it open to continue hearing your input on what you would like to see from us now and in the future.

We'd also like to assure you that we have and will continue to work on collecting and delivering player feedback to the dev team. As Jessica mentioned yesterday:

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Please know that holding this summit does not mean that we value some individuals’ opinions over others, or that some players hold more sway with us than others. Both the Community and Social teams continue to diligently monitor the forums and fan communities for your feedback and report it to our developers. In fact, we have a number of reports we put together every week to highlight the feedback that is posted here, specifically.

One last thing we would like to call out is that in addition to reaching out here and on various social channels is that we do gather and read player feedback submitted in-game using the /feedback command.

As said before, we would like to keep this thread open to hear your additional suggestions. Like what questions would you like to see if we were to put together a questionnaire?

If you are constantly collecting feedback from here and in game then surely you do not need the summit.

A questionnaire would be a good way to reach the entire players base and distill all the feedback down to simple statistics. There is a lot of noise on the forums so it could at least quantify and prioritize the concerns.

Desdemonte

Gythral wrote: »

The biggest issue with any questionnaire is that someone has to choose the questions to ask.
Those questions will always be limited and slanted to suit the party organising it.
There is a mechanism in place, in game, to make comments and suggestion if you feel strongly about it (/feedback)

See above. They are asking for our input on those questions. Start listing some ideas and they can start to formulate them into something cohesive.

Desdemonte

ZOS_TristanK wrote: »

As said before, we would like to keep this thread open to hear your additional suggestions. Like what questions would you like to see if we were to put together a questionnaire?

I would start the questionnaire with more basics and then get more in depth with subsequent questions like you did in Beta. Those were well written. The first set of questions would quantify what type of player is answering, to give ZOS an idea of what their experience and interest has been so far. Not that single toon less than 5 hours a week players are any less important, but to give an idea of what knowledge and experience they are bringing to the questionnaire.

Question 1- prioritize your interest in PvE, PvP, RP most to least

Question 2- do you take part in the two activities of less priority

Question 3- what percentage of your gameplay is spent in
a) PvE
b) PvP
c) RP

Question 4- do you play mainly one character, or do you have alts?

Question 5- how many characters do you have above level 50?

Question 6- have you played through
a) EP content (yes/no)
b) DC content (yes/no)
c) AD content (yes/ no)
d) EP Vereran content (yes/no)
e) DC Veteran content (yes/no)
f) AD Veteran content (yes/ no)

Question 7- how many hours do you play per week?
a) 1-5
b) 5-10
c) 10-15
d) 15-20
e) 20-30
f) greater than 30


As to the follow up specific questions (of which there could be many, of varying depths), I would need to give some more thought to it. A person could sift through the concern threads here and with some thought come up with some questions that would address the concepts and get a feel for what people find most important.

Probitas

They could also try playing the characters in question in PVP and forming some real world data of their own first hand. It's hard to deny what the problems are when you experience them first hand.

Desdemonte

Heh heh yeah. Get them out into the game to experience for themselves skills not going off, server crashes in Cyrodiil, 10v1 that can't be killed..... Lots of juicy stuff. If they experienced it, they'd be like " whoa- nasty" lol.