Respect Matt Firor for wanting to fix Cyrodil

Autolycus

So... anybody care to share what said outline or plan actually is?

Tors

Messy1 wrote: »

Anyway, I thought it was very commendable that Matt Firor in his Road Ahead outlined a plan to improve game performance in Cyrodil. Performance issues hinder the players enjoyment in PvP and it discourages other players from joining PvP.

Thats a bit like a VW car salesman telling us that they are striving to reach the emissions they advertised for their diesel cars

It’s hardly "Commendable" to be "aspiring" to make the game able to do what it was advertised as being able to do.

Namly "Massive 3 way multiplayer battles with hundreds a side".


NB: Matt didint use the word aspire, I just like using it and it seems to fit in there

Zheg

Messy1 wrote: »

I've been critical of the game lately, but only because I enjoy playing it and want to see it get better, which has been my stance all along.

Anyway, I thought it was very commendable that Matt Firor in his Road Ahead outlined a plan to improve game performance in Cyrodil. Performance issues hinder the players enjoyment in PvP and it discourages other players from joining PvP.

So good work ZOS team and keep striving for excellence. Polish the game, make it better, and it will live long.

For those of us that have been around since beta/launch, they've said pretty much the same thing multiple times already. Frankly, 2 years in, I doubt they have the resources to even be able to fix the lag as it likely requires a significant overhaul of the base code.

I spent months doing the 'encouraging' and 'supportive' thing on the forums, and they spent even longer procrastinating, giving hollow words, or just flat out ignoring the issue and feedback. I play ESO because there is nothing else on the market that is of interest, as soon as some of these upcoming games hit beta/launch, the remaining crew at ZOS should start working on their resumes.

Autolycus

Someone please put some real information here.

What is this plan? What are the steps? When will each step be taken? What issues have been identified? Does ZOS have the resources to dedicate to said plan, while simultaneously working to deliver already-promised content? When will it be fixed?

If none of these questions can be answered, then this is not a plan.

Septimus_Magna

Messy1 wrote: »

I've been critical of the game lately, but only because I enjoy playing it and want to see it get better, which has been my stance all along.

Anyway, I thought it was very commendable that Matt Firor in his Road Ahead outlined a plan to improve game performance in Cyrodil. Performance issues hinder the players enjoyment in PvP and it discourages other players from joining PvP.

So good work ZOS team and keep striving for excellence. Polish the game, make it better, and it will live long.

I definitely agree with you on this.

It gives an entirely different message if they ignore problems that basically impacts every pvp player.

Now they've addressed this issues they cannot leave it in the current state thats it in.

Autolycus

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

Now they've addressed this issues they cannot leave it in the current state thats it in.

It's been in it's current state for almost two years. It was addressed initially almost two years ago.

xellink

Autolycus wrote: »

So... anybody care to share what said outline or plan actually is?

They mentioned they were going to change how servers communicate with the game. Where i work, despite using the same software, this has a huge impact when we change level of encryption and number of encryption/decryption points.

1. This will make the game more prone to hacking but in reality certain levels of encryption is 'sufficient' than what is normally recommended.

2. Number of checks to no-check system. GW1 used a no-check system. What you see in the game 'may not be exactly' what u see compared to other players but the gameplay is extremely smooth anyhow as priority is placed on handling crucial information first and calculation etc is handed to u on a plate whether. The game updates other player positions once in a while but animates them as though they are smoothly transitioning from one point to another. Since the animation is done on the client side, it does not stress the server at all. The server just updates the coordinates and what animations need to be played.

3. From experience
server load:
80% no lag
90% no lag
95% no lag
99% mild lag
100% moderate lag
102% extremely unplayable.

The game is mostly playable apart from during certain events now (zerg spam etc, !!++lightning animations++!!, this used to be worse when i first started). No matter how much u upgrade the server, if these events consistently push server load beyond 100%, your players will continue to suffer. The good news is once you found the root to the problem, you will have almost 100% smooth play.

sadownik

Well till now there are 3 things sure -
1. ESO a lot of technical problems especially in pvp and lag is most annoying and are dated as far as 1.5 year ago.
2. All the people working in Z. are above average intelligent and competent.
3. As mr Wheeler stated the lag problem is caused by the amount of calculations coming form players spamming different, also "end game" skills.

Considering above there are 3 possibilities:
1. Z. didnt test servers, or turning servers on and loging in the game was considered a test.
(fun fact my friend went full ahead and bought the CU - she tells me that during early alpha there are hoards- "hundreds" she said of tightly packed bots that are spamming all skills in amount not reachable by players. She said that CU performance is not perfect but Z. could only dream about that lvl - mind you its her words dont know how it is really)
2. Z. did test the servers and it was ok but the need of applying anti bot code appear (surprising people who have years of MMO development experience even before ESO mind you) which in turn caused all the problems.
3. Z. did test the servers but since they had much pressing problems (which ones are more pressing than the proper performance?) they just let it go and hoped players wont notice.

No mater which one of the above is true all 3 are very worrying and all question either competence or effort (or both) of Z. and happened under mr Firor reign.

So forgive me if mr Firor wont get standing ovation from me, especially that as others here noticed exactly the same statements we hear for the last 1.5 year.

When or rather if the performance problems will be solved mr Firor will get 1 thumb up and quiet "finally" from me.

Autolycus

xellink wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

So... anybody care to share what said outline or plan actually is?

They mentioned they were going to change how servers communicate with the game. Where i work, despite using the same software, this has a huge impact when we change level of encryption and number of encryption/decryption points.

1. This will make the game more prone to hacking but in reality certain levels of encryption is 'sufficient' than what is normally recommended.

2. Number of checks to no-check system. GW1 used a no-check system. What you see in the game 'may not be exactly' what u see compared to other players but the gameplay is extremely smooth anyhow as priority is placed on handling crucial information first and calculation etc is handed to u on a plate whether. The game updates other player positions once in a while but animates them as though they are smoothly transitioning from one point to another. Since the animation is done on the client side, it does not stress the server at all. The server just updates the coordinates and what animations need to be played.

3. From experience
server load:
80% no lag
90% no lag
95% no lag
99% mild lag
100% moderate lag
102% extremely unplayable.

The game is mostly playable apart from during certain events now (zerg spam etc, !!++lightning animations++!!, this used to be worse when i first started). No matter how much u upgrade the server, if these events consistently push server load beyond 100%, your players will continue to suffer. The good news is once you found the root to the problem, you will have almost 100% smooth play.

Thank you, very insightful.

Nestor

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Yeah they've been working on this a while.

I think it is time for some honesty - they don't know how to fix it. Time to hire some outside help.

I think they know how to fix it, its just the fix is not something the player base wants. No more AoE.

moesmaker

Autolycus wrote: »

Someone please put some real information here.

What is this plan? What are the steps? When will each step be taken? What issues have been identified? Does ZOS have the resources to dedicate to said plan, while simultaneously working to deliver already-promised content? When will it be fixed?

If none of these questions can be answered, then this is not a plan.

Are you the CEO of ZOS ?

treborrealb14_ESO

I just like the idea that they will soon Open the PTS to a PVP test hopefully a week long or so.



On another hand I wonder how the effect of lag/latency is on Xbox Ps4 and is it anywhere near like on the PC platform?

caperon

Nestor wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Yeah they've been working on this a while.

I think it is time for some honesty - they don't know how to fix it. Time to hire some outside help.

I think they know how to fix it, its just the fix is not something the player base wants. No more AoE.

I allways thought that the only real aoe should be the siege engines. That would make the fights like in those promotional videos ZOS had, with people fighting in a bunch of small fights and you would be able to actually use skills, not the laggy mess we have now where ironically, the only skills that work are steel tornado and impulse. Try to wind a wreckling blow when lag, or streak or anything not completly instant.

bowmanz607

Messy1 wrote: »

I've been critical of the game lately, but only because I enjoy playing it and want to see it get better, which has been my stance all along.

Anyway, I thought it was very commendable that Matt Firor in his Road Ahead outlined a plan to improve game performance in Cyrodil. Performance issues hinder the players enjoyment in PvP and it discourages other players from joining PvP.

So good work ZOS team and keep striving for excellence. Polish the game, make it better, and it will live long.

We have seen this for a year and half now. Nothing new. Just like the rest of his road ahead. A bunch of stuff we have been told about since launch with suprisingly still no eta except q1 and q2. Which I do not even view as completed content because they introduced no new skill lines with 2 guilds.

It was merely done for marketing and goodwill purposes to say they are doing something. Like Feng rush said, I wish I had a job that had no deadlines or eta.

Autolycus

moesmaker wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

Someone please put some real information here.

What is this plan? What are the steps? When will each step be taken? What issues have been identified? Does ZOS have the resources to dedicate to said plan, while simultaneously working to deliver already-promised content? When will it be fixed?

If none of these questions can be answered, then this is not a plan.

Are you the CEO of ZOS ?

No, but I am well versed in Strategic Management. There is a difference between a "goal" and a "strategy," and in this context "plan" and "strategy" are synonymous. I've yet to see anything that constitutes and actual plan for this issue. I'm not trying to be overly cynical here, I genuinely am prodding for information - claiming ignorance to some extent.

I was hoping that someone could shed light on some of the actual steps in the alleged plan, and so far a couple things have been mentioned (don't need to recap, just scroll up), and for that I am thankful. Still, I'd hardly consider it a real plan, but at least they have a couple of things to actually work towards, as opposed to just PR spin & fluff to keep us happy.

Three steps to an effective strategy:
1. Set a goal, identify an issue or problem, or determine something that will add value.
2. Develop a clear step-by-step plan that outlines how to counter said issue or achieve that added value, and determine what resources will be necessary to achieve it.
3. Devote the time and effort necessary to achieve said goal or implementation.

Right now, we are on step 1, and we have been at step 1 since launch with regards to Cyro lag.

Fissh

Messy1 wrote: »

I've been critical of the game lately, but only because I enjoy playing it and want to see it get better, which has been my stance all along.

Anyway, I thought it was very commendable that Matt Firor in his Road Ahead outlined a plan to improve game performance in Cyrodil. Performance issues hinder the players enjoyment in PvP and it discourages other players from joining PvP.

So good work ZOS team and keep striving for excellence. Polish the game, make it better, and it will live long.

As if they haven't been trying to fix it the past two years....
Just because he was vocal about a plan does not mean they have been sitting and doing nothing. The vocal plan does nothing more than put people at ease. Matt doesn't deserve respect for doing simple PR (public relations).
Nothing is commendable about campaign work. The idiot masses demand it is all.....

Fissh

Respect for a person you do not personally know?
Hey, come on by, I have a car to sell you.....

Fissh

I am currently working on World Peace and have a plan in place with no ETA.
Now start my thank you/respect thread please.

Elsonso

(replaced by later comment)

Shunravi

Essentially.

Rune_Relic

No effort = no reward.

Autolycus wrote: »

moesmaker wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

Someone please put some real information here.

What is this plan? What are the steps? When will each step be taken? What issues have been identified? Does ZOS have the resources to dedicate to said plan, while simultaneously working to deliver already-promised content? When will it be fixed?

If none of these questions can be answered, then this is not a plan.

Are you the CEO of ZOS ?

No, but I am well versed in Strategic Management. There is a difference between a "goal" and a "strategy," and in this context "plan" and "strategy" are synonymous. I've yet to see anything that constitutes and actual plan for this issue. I'm not trying to be overly cynical here, I genuinely am prodding for information - claiming ignorance to some extent.

I was hoping that someone could shed light on some of the actual steps in the alleged plan, and so far a couple things have been mentioned (don't need to recap, just scroll up), and for that I am thankful. Still, I'd hardly consider it a real plan, but at least they have a couple of things to actually work towards, as opposed to just PR spin & fluff to keep us happy.

Three steps to an effective strategy:
1. Set a goal, identify an issue or problem, or determine something that will add value.
2. Develop a clear step-by-step plan that outlines how to counter said issue or achieve that added value, and determine what resources will be necessary to achieve it.
3. Devote the time and effort necessary to achieve said goal or implementation.

Right now, we are on step 1, and we have been at step 1 since launch with regards to Cyro lag.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2606059#Comment_2606059
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2606075#Comment_2606075

..not sure if you see these ones recently.

Autolycus

Rune_Relic wrote: »

No effort = no reward.

Autolycus wrote: »

moesmaker wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

Someone please put some real information here.

What is this plan? What are the steps? When will each step be taken? What issues have been identified? Does ZOS have the resources to dedicate to said plan, while simultaneously working to deliver already-promised content? When will it be fixed?

If none of these questions can be answered, then this is not a plan.

Are you the CEO of ZOS ?

No, but I am well versed in Strategic Management. There is a difference between a "goal" and a "strategy," and in this context "plan" and "strategy" are synonymous. I've yet to see anything that constitutes and actual plan for this issue. I'm not trying to be overly cynical here, I genuinely am prodding for information - claiming ignorance to some extent.

I was hoping that someone could shed light on some of the actual steps in the alleged plan, and so far a couple things have been mentioned (don't need to recap, just scroll up), and for that I am thankful. Still, I'd hardly consider it a real plan, but at least they have a couple of things to actually work towards, as opposed to just PR spin & fluff to keep us happy.

Three steps to an effective strategy:
1. Set a goal, identify an issue or problem, or determine something that will add value.
2. Develop a clear step-by-step plan that outlines how to counter said issue or achieve that added value, and determine what resources will be necessary to achieve it.
3. Devote the time and effort necessary to achieve said goal or implementation.

Right now, we are on step 1, and we have been at step 1 since launch with regards to Cyro lag.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2606059#Comment_2606059
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2606075#Comment_2606075

..not sure if you see these ones recently.

No I definitely didn't see it yet. Thanks! I'll be checking these out today for sure.

Elsonso

Autolycus wrote: »

Someone please put some real information here.

What is this plan? What are the steps? When will each step be taken? What issues have been identified? Does ZOS have the resources to dedicate to said plan, while simultaneously working to deliver already-promised content? When will it be fixed?

If none of these questions can be answered, then this is not a plan.

For one thing, you, and everyone else in the forum, stands on the outside looking in. We are not privy to the plan or where they are with the plan. This does not mean there is no plan, but we should also be aware that they don't have to share the plan with us.

That said, this is what they have done so far.

1) They took several initial steps to mitigate the problem. These steps were not probably not designed to fix it, but to lessen the impact. To this end, they removed the critters and reduced the size of the campaigns.

2) I am guessing the analysis on this is more like an onion, so as they examined what was happening, they isolated bugs in the game code that had a bearing on the lag and fixed them. This likely follows the "low hanging fruit" and "fix errors that obscure" concept. Some of these changes may be fixes (intended to reduce lag) and others may be just problems that they found that could obscure analysis. They fixed some Line of Sight stuff with guards, as an example. They push these fixes out as needed, and they continue to do this.

At every step that we see, they may have to make a change and then put it on Live to see what happens. The factors that cause the lag are things that are really seen from daily Live player use. Bots on internal servers and PTS are likely not enough stress. At some point, I believe Wheeler admitted this. If this is true, given that the Live servers are being used for debugging, this is necessarily a slow and cautious operation.

My gut feeling is that the "plan" is to swap out a core part of the game engine on the server, which has the potential to impact the entire game. It is likely that this is a very long term project that has transcended other fix and mitigation attempts and is now driving some of the newer fixes that we will be seeing in the first half of this year. People demanding a lag fix have to realize that not everyone sees lag the same. Some people never, or rarely, see any dramatic lag. Changing out a core system impacts everyone, even the players who do not have any problems.

In the end, I cannot be sure that they will actually fix the lag. I am certain that they will never fix it to the level that some players expect and someone will always be complaining about the lag. Contrary to what was suggested by someone else, I do think that when they toss in the towel, they will tell us that the lag is as good as it is going to get. They will tell us.

I do expect that they will continue to work on it, and provide updates every so often, until that time.

Meanwhile, the people who are suffering from lag are powerless to do anything about it, other than ignore it (ha!) or leave the game. This is probably the real issue here in the forum; the players have to wait for ZOS to fix this.

Xendyn

Rune_Relic wrote: »

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2606059#Comment_2606059
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2606075#Comment_2606075

..not sure if you see these ones recently.

I hope it works, because right now PVP is like this:

Lil_Willie

Support the #NOETA movement. Woooo!!!!

WalkingLegacy

Nestor wrote: »

WalkingLegacy wrote: »

Yeah they've been working on this a while.

I think it is time for some honesty - they don't know how to fix it. Time to hire some outside help.

I think they know how to fix it, its just the fix is not something the player base wants. No more AoE.

I want that. In PvP the only true AoE should be siege.

Player combat needs to be more intimate.

Lil_Willie

moesmaker wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

Someone please put some real information here.

What is this plan? What are the steps? When will each step be taken? What issues have been identified? Does ZOS have the resources to dedicate to said plan, while simultaneously working to deliver already-promised content? When will it be fixed?

If none of these questions can be answered, then this is not a plan.

Are you the CEO of ZOS ?

I am, and I say, #NOETA.

Decayed_Inside

I'm happy he's addressing it. IMO before any new pvp content comes out it needs the performance fixes. Many abilities are either bugged or effected by lag to the points of occasional uselessness. Meaning the skills function right 90% of the time but the 10% they don't really stands out. CC needs looking at as immunity is not functioning properly. If i have immunity for 6 seconds i'm certainly not experiencing it.

JamilaRaj

Autolycus wrote: »

So... anybody care to share what said outline or plan actually is?

The plan is probably to stick with the current plan, which is to admit that Cyrodiil sucks every once in a while and promise to fix it or roll out some fix that does not really fix it.
I, for one, think the plan is good and sound, which is best evidenced by the fact that the game or PvP has been declared dying, if not outright dead, on numerous occasions, yet people still happily lag and glitch around. It is certainly a much better plan than to admit that Cyrodiil sucks and is not ever going to be fixed, because it is too late to ditch the game engine and code/buy a new one. That would only cause players to panic.

Autolycus

Hey folks, just wanted to pop back in here and say thanks to all of you who are posting some of the steps that have already been taken, and steps that they are currently working on. As mentioned here:

lordrichter wrote: »

For one thing, you, and everyone else in the forum, stands on the outside looking in. We are not privy to the plan or where they are with the plan. This does not mean there is no plan, but we should also be aware that they don't have to share the plan with us.

This is absolutely true and I respect it. While at times it may come across as though I, or anyone else for that matter, doesn't see the bigger picture, or doesn't understand the time it takes for some changes to be made, I do try to take an objective approach when I post on here.

My previous points were solely intended as a request for info. It can be easily misconstrued as me saying something to effect of, "they don't have a plan, they're withholding info, they don't care, etc." But I was genuinely asking for more information which I believed would likely come from others in the community, and many of you have provided that.

That being said, I would revise my prior post suggesting that what they have is not actually a plan, but instead a goal. It is clear from many of the things you guys mentioned that steps have already been taken, and that resources have, in fact, been dedicated to the issue, and thus, this constitutes a real plan or strategy.

It's good to see this, sincerely, because so frequently we find ourselves on these forums taking shots in the dark, filling discussions with loads of subjective material. It's good to see something objective. I'm not saying it's perfect, but the view from the "outside" is a lot less bleak since you guys have all chimed in, so thank you.