How important are frequent updates?

Rologue

Of course having updates frequently keeps the game feeling new and fresh, however, the race seems to leave many bugs unfixed, and the update largely untested. How long would you think an update should be on the PTS before being released?

Rologue

I'm patient, 2 or 3 months is Ok to make sure most of the problems are gone.

I don't want to wait forever, but they need to take some more time to get things in better order.

ers101284b14_ESO

I'm patient, 2 or 3 months is Ok to make sure most of the problems are gone.

They should put it on the PTS the day after they release the previous one live and leave it for at least the full 6 weeks. With patches they do in between there.

AlexDougherty

Other (see results)

I would have to say slightly longer than they seem to be testing it at the minute, but two to three months is too long. I agree that the bugs need fixing, but MMOs live or die by new content.

If we don't get new content quickly or often enough, then people leave, because people are impatient (wait for three months while paying a sub, they don't think so).

Like all things it's a compromise between new content and fixing the bugs.

Lord_Kreegan

I don't care how long it takes! Quality over quantity. Do the job once and do it right.

Sorry, I spent four decades in development and anyone who thinks things get better if you put off testing until later is only fooling themselves.

Poor discipline in development only leads to compounding of mistakes. Some mistakes hide other mistakes and eventually the whole house of cards comes crashing down. ZOS may think they're saving money in the short term by minimizing testing and using the interns and the receptionist for QA, but all they're doing is digging themselves a very deep grave.

Cut the salaries [dramatically] and get rid of the bonuses for all the bigwigs who created the current mess and invest that money in experienced testers and QA. If the bigwigs leave because of the salary cut, then ZOS probably didn't need them anyway.

guybrushtb16_ESO

Other (see results)

AlexDougherty wrote: »

I would have to say slightly longer than they seem to be testing it at the minute, but two to three months is too long. I agree that the bugs need fixing, but MMOs live or die by new content.

If we don't get new content quickly or often enough, then people leave, because people are impatient (wait for three months while paying a sub, they don't think so).

Like all things it's a compromise between new content and fixing the bugs.

This, what people on the forums say is one thing, what people out there actually do with their money is another. If zos want to keep their subs, they just can't afford 2-3 months without content.

Tandor

I think it is fine how it is. Get some of the bigger problems taken care of, and release it when it is playable.

I've had no problems with any of the updates, and am perfectly happy with the present arrangements.

infraction2008b16_ESO

Other (see results)

guybrushtb16_ESO wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

I would have to say slightly longer than they seem to be testing it at the minute, but two to three months is too long. I agree that the bugs need fixing, but MMOs live or die by new content.

If we don't get new content quickly or often enough, then people leave, because people are impatient (wait for three months while paying a sub, they don't think so).

Like all things it's a compromise between new content and fixing the bugs.

This, what people on the forums say is one thing, what people out there actually do with their money is another. If zos want to keep their subs, they just can't afford 2-3 months without content.

Yes content, not focusing on getting small QoL things (like an unnecessary audio fix) out ASAP while thinking that a single group only zone (which they split into two updates) will satisfy all for another 6 months.

I was thinking of continuing my sub, but I look at swtor (yes of all games) and see they are having a new expansion next week then I look at this and see they are still stuck on finding the right progression system for endgame let alone much to progress through, is craglorn supposed to satisfy us for another 6-12 months while they focus on the champion and justice systems?

To me it's a no brainer.

Arioco396

I don't care how long it takes! Quality over quantity. Do the job once and do it right.

Do the job once and do it right...every patch gives me more problems ..
I have 4 characters with battle bug ... after this latest patch, I have new problems ... 10% of the time fails:
potions
ultimate
skills
6 month playing, 18 days without playing for your errors, any compensation?
no....
more professionalism

the Neuromancer vr14 DK ( because i cant play with my firs char a nightblade, is
useless )

first priority: repair the bug combat

Rologue

I'm patient, 2 or 3 months is Ok to make sure most of the problems are gone.

nice results so far

Iluvrien

I'm patient, 2 or 3 months is Ok to make sure most of the problems are gone.

guybrushtb16_ESO wrote: »

This, what people on the forums say is one thing, what people out there actually do with their money is another. If zos want to keep their subs, they just can't afford 2-3 months without content.

I am not sure that 2-3 months testing on the PTS means 2-3 months without content. After all, the timeline for the release of new content would then be [Development Time]+[2-3 months testing/fixing on PTS]. During this time, people would be playing through the last release of material. As such it might be that the time without new content might be comparatively short, possibly much less than 2-3 months as long as the development was handled with enough resources to ensure it didn't take 2-3 months in the actual coding/construction stages.

@AlexDougherty and you both suggest that people are impatient and after burning through the new content they will either be given new things to do or they will leave. Is this something that we really want ZOS to support though? It seems likely that if ZOS runs into a roadblock at any point then they are likely to lose these players anyway. So why pander to players you will always be likely to lose?

Get the new content (mostly) bug free and show that new additions are well-considered and in keeping with the game and world and you are more likely to build a playerbase that will stick with the game through time, rather than attempting to be big for a year and then crash when your more jumpy subscribers bolt as soon as a slowdown hits.

Meh, just my opinion. Don't expect it to change anything.

Bloodfang

I think it is fine how it is. Get some of the bigger problems taken care of, and release it when it is playable.

I've never really had much problems with ESO before or after Updates. The only grudge I have is they can't keep up to the 4-6 weeks schedule.

AlexDougherty

Other (see results)

Iluvrien wrote: »

guybrushtb16_ESO wrote: »

This, what people on the forums say is one thing, what people out there actually do with their money is another. If zos want to keep their subs, they just can't afford 2-3 months without content.

I am not sure that 2-3 months testing on the PTS means 2-3 months without content. After all, the timeline for the release of new content would then be [Development Time]+[2-3 months testing/fixing on PTS]. During this time, people would be playing through the last release of material. As such it might be that the time without new content might be comparatively short, possibly much less than 2-3 months as long as the development was handled with enough resources to ensure it didn't take 2-3 months in the actual coding/construction stages.

@AlexDougherty and you both suggest that people are impatient and after burning through the new content they will either be given new things to do or they will leave. Is this something that we really want ZOS to support though? It seems likely that if ZOS runs into a roadblock at any point then they are likely to lose these players anyway. So why pander to players you will always be likely to lose?

Get the new content (mostly) bug free and show that new additions are well-considered and in keeping with the game and world and you are more likely to build a playerbase that will stick with the game through time, rather than attempting to be big for a year and then crash when your more jumpy subscribers bolt as soon as a slowdown hits.

Meh, just my opinion. Don't expect it to change anything.

Don't get me wrong in an ideal world testing all the new content for 2-3 montths would be great, and yes once the first lot of content has been tested and debugged it would go faster.

But people really aren't that patient.

It's not about a set of behaviour that ZoS can choose not to support, it's already established (people do it all the time), and there are always plenty of new MMOs for them to migrate to. People really will leave if there isn't new content, and they might not come back (they might, but they might not).

And I'm not sure we can afford to loose any players, a lot have left already, and I'm sure these mega servers are expensive to run.

Which is why I said a bit more testing, and keep the new content and fixes coming.

Audigy

Other (see results)

It depends how much you play really. In my case I have so spare time that even a 6 month patch cycle of new content (zones) would be sufficient.

Others play 10 hours a day and for them even 6 weeks are too long.

Personally to me the small patches matter most, those which are not about raid content (as this is pretty much what we got in each update so far) but about quality of life changes like crafting, provisioning tweaks, the pet UI, CS, Justice ...

Those enhance the game also for me who doesn't has VR 14 chars and these should have priority in my case.

That a hardcore raider who plays every day for several hours wants trials every week is a different topic however.