**The Reason Why The PTS is Pretty Much Pointless I Can Tell You Why.**

ClanofThir

Just curious. I am involved in several open source projects that use various bug tracking systems. All of these are query-able and reflects what is being reported, worked, scheduled, etc. I recognize that Zenimax probably doesn't want the player-base to know exactly who is working on what, but would it be harmful to have a published bug list and schedule available? In that manner, the player-base can see the effects of their bug reporting (not necessarily class-balance stuff, but honest-to-goodness bugs). I understand the difficulty of responding to everyone's reports, but perhaps a transparent bug list will provide the feedback that many are requesting.

My $0.02.

deluxesalt

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

Ulfgarde

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

But bugs, some major, haven't been fixed for months, let alone YEARS. A ton of things get by PTS and live that people report, yet nothing happens.

I believe that your devs may be passionate about feedback, but many times a ton of exploits and bugs get passed and continue for months until they're fixed. There's also a ton of player feedback that gets disregarded or gets noticed, but later gets removed.

There needs to be better priority for your fixes. I get your team isn't perfect, but they will be criticized for continued problems. I appreciate the effort immensely, however.

Drummerx04

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

I can think of 2 specific times when the devs announced a change and then modified or revoked the changed due to player feedback in 2 years.

1. Removing lightning staff AoE during the channel (a ~70% AoE loss)
2. The first draft of Haunting Curse (first hit at 6 seconds, second at 12 seconds)(and a buff for Velocious Curse was never requested)

I'm sure there are a couple more items of which I'm not aware, but overwhelmingly, the Combat Balance team makes a decision and it stays no matter how many threads/polls/etc pop up in protest. And don't get me wrong, they have made a couple pretty decent changes this patch, specifically the Armor ability requirements (which by the way have been suggested by the community for years without even an honorable mention from the devs).

Poisons, oblivion damage, the procpocalypse ,overperforming sets, overperforming builds, underperforming builds, resource nerfs/heavy attack meta, removing targeting restrictions on gap closers and then literally banning people for using them.

These are all things that the community has predicted, reported, protested, explained, polled, demonstrated - you name it and we've done it - but the release of the changes went live with no alterations and at best an explanation like, "This will be a buff if you have less than 20k magicka"

And these are just the combat balance issues, there are dozens of highly irritating and debilitating bugs and performance issues that have never been fixed.

All respect intended @ZOS_GinaBruno, this is why people are upset.

We understand that not everything is under the design of the devs, there is a corporate agenda that must be followed in order to keep their jobs, but how does turning petrify into a melee attack or removing the stun from frags help the profit margins of Zenimax?

Drummerx04

.

Minno

Ulfgarde wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

But bugs, some major, haven't been fixed for months, let alone YEARS. A ton of things get by PTS and live that people report, yet nothing happens.

I believe that your devs may be passionate about feedback, but many times a ton of exploits get passed and continue for months until they're fixed.

There needs to be better priority for your fixes. I get your team isn't perfect, but they will be criticized for continued problems. I appreciate the effort immensely, however.

Except the pts section isn't for bug reports. It's to test the new content and make sure it works.

Best way is to start a thread in the bug section, and be as impartial as you can. Then in the skills/combat sections list another thread as objective as you can be.

Go into the PTS skill bug report thread to see a good example of what I mean. 99% of it was calling out a bug and showing evidence.

altemriel

JonnytheKing wrote: »

Zos Needs to give some intensive to player to actively play the pts , a lot of bugs wouldn't make it to the live game if there was more people playing on the pts .Its simple ,, so zos here is some ideas, crowns , mounts, keeping items from the pts, achievements, (just some ideas) clearly people will have to play/do certain things/achievements to actually get the reweds. What do you guys think? But i think this would stop a lot of bugs making to live and over all improving the game

and also, copy our characters to PTS, right when the PTS launches, not at the end of PTS

Ulfgarde

Minno wrote: »

Ulfgarde wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

But bugs, some major, haven't been fixed for months, let alone YEARS. A ton of things get by PTS and live that people report, yet nothing happens.

I believe that your devs may be passionate about feedback, but many times a ton of exploits get passed and continue for months until they're fixed.

There needs to be better priority for your fixes. I get your team isn't perfect, but they will be criticized for continued problems. I appreciate the effort immensely, however.

Except the pts section isn't for bug reports. It's to test the new content and make sure it works.

Best way is to start a thread in the bug section, and be as impartial as you can. Then in the skills/combat sections list another thread as objective as you can be.

Go into the PTS skill bug report thread to see a good example of what I mean. 99% of it was calling out a bug and showing evidence.

In a sense, yes, but again, there are still existing problems within the game that continue on and on without regard. It doesn't matter how much you report a problem, it will still exist for as long as it does.

I was referring to bugs as a way as an example of how often PTS reports are treated. My point is how despite serious reports on multiple topics, they are often disregarded.

NBrookus

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

templesus

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

I’m sorry but this is utterly insulting for you to post this Gina. People have put their heart and soul in this game, have spent hours upon hours testing and providing feedback, only for it to be ignored. At this point it is safe to say the balance team does what they want. NOBODY asked for blazing spear stun removal, NOBODY asked for Purify Cost Increase,
EVERYBODY asked for said changes to be reverted.

Ignored.

I myself have made multiple forum posts, I repeat MULTIPLE forum posts on the PTS forum and so far only one has actually been heeded: Major mending on Dks igneous being taken off by other Dks, and not only was it a game breaking bug, it wasn’t fixed until the patch went live so nobody could test it even though I made the post day 1 of the PTS
We don’t even get a thank you at the end of PTS for our hours of testing and feedback. Our class balance threads just get a /ignore and you expect everyone to go on continuing playing the game as normal.

Elsterchen

Biro123 wrote: »

Insandros wrote: »

JonnytheKing wrote: »

Zos Needs to give some intensive to player to actively play the pts , a lot of bugs wouldn't make it to the live game if there was more people playing on the pts .Its simple ,, so zos here is some ideas, crowns , mounts, keeping items from the pts, achievements, (just some ideas) clearly people will have to play/do certain things/achievements to actually get the rewards. What do you guys think? But i think this would stop a lot of bugs making to live and over all improving the game

lots of people play betas, TEst servers etc.. to play new content, test gears etc.. when they se a bug, they don't care unfortunately.

They do - it just takes time to resolve, test and package up. imho, the main reasons for pts are:

1. Ensure they haven't totally broken anything
Generally the kind of thing that will only become apparent with a certain player volume. If they have and its major, they will hold off with the release date and fix it. And I'm talking major stuff like 'nobody can log in' and 'my characters have all disappeared'.. I'm not talking stuff like, 'this stun doesn't go through block'

2. Player based testing to see if their changes are 'working as intended'
But what do I mean by 'working as intended'. I'm a software engineer by trade.. have been for a long time. What you get is 'requirements' (we want the software to do this) and then the technical design/build (ie making it do 'this'). In ESO, a 'requirement' may be to, idk, double the size of shields.. Now this kind of test is to determine if the size of the shields are actually doubled (as per the requirement) - This is very different to the discussion around whether or not the playerbase agrees with the requirement (ie *should* they be doubled).

3. Listen to player feedback
This fill in the gap from 2. ie views on whether the shield *should* be doubled and what impact it has on gameplay. Unfortunately, many posts/threads on the pts forum are so 'un-objective' and 'un-constructive' - and often posted by people not even testing, that I'm not really surprised if they are largely ignore..

But overall, anything falling under #1 (which is rare) will see a quick turnaround on the fix.
Generally stuff falling under #2 will get rolled up into the next couple of patches (depending what they already have lined up for them and how far on they are)
Stuff falling under #3 will take longer as they'd have to go back to the drawing board effectively, to try to figure out the ramifications of doing a different kind of change or changing the severity of the change. Then they come up with a new 'requirement' - and then the design build starts.. a much longer timeframe till we see it.

But generally, it gives them a head start on fixes for #2 and #3.. Most won't be ready in time for going live - but the head-start means they will be patched sooner rather than later.


All imho ofc..

1. Ensure they haven't totally broken anything <- Really?
I do remember broken battlegrounds going live, despite tons of feedback. The release date was not shifted a single minute. This was one major new thingy about the morrowind chapter. It was released broken. it was released despite zeni knewing it was broken. @Biro123, all i see here is: nothing is able to change a set release date, no matter how bad the piece zeni wants to sell is broken.

@ZOS_GinaBruno, I really understand that you have to step in before the discussion gets out of hand. I understand that many decisions are made by people that do not truely understand what they actually expect from their employees, they dish out demands based on economical "facts". I don't want to be in their shoes, nor yours, but as a customer I do expect a functioning product. I was willing to test and did so during beta and all follow up PTS cycles. Not anymore. My reason for this, isn't a lack of reward, but a lack of communication. I remember the awesome support zeni once provided and I do acknowledge that you put alot of love into phrasing the patch notes. Unfortunatelly thats just not enough. Many players, including me, do not have the impression we are heard. 3 month after the cyrodiil test I dared to ask @ZOS_KaiSchober for a little feedback/headsup/something about the results of testing. There was no answer, just like many other reported/discussed issues, it got ignored.

In relationships its a give-and-take ... imho players give alot, please consider to at least have the curtesy of taking time to answer.

Chantclaire

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:

• The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.
• Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

I understand that you read a lot of post and responses about the pts, but how did the negative feedback on removing Non CP Bgs go unnoticed. You guys have even stated before that CP causes balance issues so why add it into your 'high action' game mode where now everybody is unkillable. CP in BGs is bad for lowbies who don't have enough CP to compete, especially when they face 4 man groups of unkillable tanks. CP ruins balance in BGs, makes the games slower and IMO should be reverted, or at least add 2 queues; one Non-CP and one CP enabled so everyone is happy. I personally cannot stand CP PvP and haven't stepped foot in them for some time.

kevlarto_ESO

I played other mmos where the dev's were more hands on played on the test servers with the players, a lot of people would join in to run quests and give feedback on the spot, but I don't expect much from zos they can't even get the spinning wheels of wait fixed.

Juhasow

Problem is many bugs went on live despite beeing reported during PTS session. I am not even blaming ZoS for not listening people because they simply cant manage full feedbak and fix everything instantly. It's impossible.

Minno

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:

• The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.
• Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

Is there a way for the devs to read the feedback but not stay late? I abhor staying late at work if it isn't planned into the schedule and would hate if other people had to stay late due to our pts/bug reports .

Would like for you guys and gals to go home!

Dorrino

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

[*] The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

But why would you want to evaluate the number of reports alone?

Your team would read the bug reports and manually add tickets for some of them. Count those only and provide the rewards in the end of each PTS. Along with the leaderboards for bugreporting.

Like

@JohnTheGoodGuy reported 5 major bugs, 7 med priority bugs and 21 minor bugs. He gets *cool title/badge/etc'.
@JackTheLessGoodGuy reported 0 major bugs and 3 minor bugs. He gets a smaaal badge and a biiig thanks!

Make it a race. People will flood the PTS just to get to the leaderboards and be recognized.

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

[*] Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

Allow console players to log in using a pc client (if you don't already).

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes.

But why those devs, staying up late, can't write a simple confirmation-type reply in the corresponding PTS forums threads?

Why those devs insist on being invisible and instead year after year you have to tell us 'no, they read it all the time!'. Why they themselves can't make it clear that they read it?

If those devs are that much antisocial/shy/tied by some agreement that a one sentence reply is uncomfortable for them, we can have a 'Dev' tag along with 'Insightful', 'Agree' and 'Awesome'. So a post could get an immediate confirmation that a dev actually read it.

People don't ask for everything they want to be implemented. People ask for a simple confirmation that whatever they did (posted) was actually read.

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

Exactly

Docmandu

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:

• The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.
• Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

And yet we're still staring at infinite loading screens each and everyday.... something is going wrong somewhere...

KingMagaw

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:

• The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.
• Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

Once again, please dont take my constructive feedback as bashing.

Players have reported multiple broken mechanics in the game, only for it to go LIVE, like battlegrounds and dungeon finder. Other people here are listing more. It is clear to me, that yous do what you want and address what yous want.

There is a clear lack of communication from ZoS. Over the last 2 weeks, maybe i made 4/5 posts tagging you and others into them to get 0 response. This is not an incentive for me to make more posts, quite the opposite. If you are understaffed to deal with such enquiries, get more staff, there is no excuse for this and staying late jsut reinforces you need more staff to deal with enquiries in a timely fashion.

If your running into issues for incentivisation get more people involved to get a solution if you cannot. Many players simply play the PTS to find bugs/exploits, then exploit them when game goes LIVE as like i said, they paid for the game, paid for the DLC and have zero reason to sacrifice more playtime to document such things and pass them onto yous.

I reported many bugs i encountered when IC was first launched, some forced me to lose a lot of Tel Vars and negatively impact my gameplay. Documented them, videos etc and i got nothing in return. That was when i personally made the decision to never do so again.

Over my ~2.5 years experience with ESO i have experienced. Lack of communication, witnessed rushed out content that is clearly in an unfinished state that feedback was crying out to address, bugs that have been in the game since i started playing.

I cannot logically see why anyone would pay ZOS to work for ZOS in documenting such things now.

xSkullfox

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/376622/another-bugtracker

Fuxo

The problem with balance is that its testing is artificial. Devs use scripted combat scenarios to see dps potential and other things. This may provide satisfactory results, but this approach is flawed. It is performed in a local environment and does not take into account real response/ping live servers have. It also ignores fun part of the game.

The game must evolve to provide satisfactory feedback to players. Not just by introducing new content (which is always amazing!). With scaled difficulty and diminishing returns everywhere, any nerf is extremely negative. And I am not talking about nerfs to over performing things. Players feel weaker even they put a lot of effort into getting more CPs, better gear, better builds, etc.

So please, next time a new DLC/chapter is introduced, remember to improve the fun part of the game. It's very important.

Elsterchen

Dorrino wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

[*] The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

But why would you want to evaluate the number of reports alone?

Your team would read the bug reports and manually add tickets for some of them. Count those only and provide the rewards in the end of each PTS. Along with the leaderboards for bugreporting.

Like

@JohnTheGoodGuy reported 5 major bugs, 7 med priority bugs and 21 minor bugs. He gets *cool title/badge/etc'.
@JackTheLessGoodGuy reported 0 major bugs and 3 minor bugs. He gets a smaaal badge and a biiig thanks!

Make it a race. People will flood the PTS just to get to the leaderboards and be recognized.

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

[*] Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

Allow console players to log in using a pc client (if you don't already).

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes.

But why those devs, staying up late, can't write a simple confirmation-type reply in the corresponding PTS forums threads?

Why those devs insist on being invisible and instead year after year you have to tell us 'no, they read it all the time!'. Why they themselves can't make it clear that they read it?

If those devs are that much antisocial/shy/tied by some agreement that a one sentence reply is uncomfortable for them, we can have a 'Dev' tag along with 'Insightful', 'Agree' and 'Awesome'. So a post could get an immediate confirmation that a dev actually read it.

People don't ask for everything they want to be implemented. People ask for a simple confirmation that whatever they did (posted) was actually read.

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

Exactly

Sir /Madame ... I like your idea. This would add to a transparency in the feedback section -> providing the necessary and much asked feedback for players. It even includes a raw evaluation, so everyone can reflect on their "work" (testing). Lastly, its a low budged, easy to understand and motivating procedure.

Avran_Sylt

Jamini wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.
[*] The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.
[*]

Any half-decent bugtracker/ticketing system lists the reporting party. It's trivial to identify who first brought up a unique issue if your internal bug tracker has even the most base of features.

Should you choose the first person to report a bug when awarding? What if they reported a bug only minutes before another?
Each of the reports would then need to be gone through by hand to make sure there are not pointless reports, and since it can't be automated (easily) as it requires context (the player's report), it isn't a scale-able process. Too much time.

---

Jamini wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Virtually none of the overwhelming feedback given on the PTS in the last year that I've been here has went in, except for REMOVING a much-needed nerf to an over-performing class and changing said nerf into an outright buff.. Multiple reported bugs have made it to live as well.

Frankly, I've seen feedback not only ignored but have actions taken directly in the opposite manner that your player-base wanted/recommended on more than one occasion.

Please don't treat your player-base like idiots.

Malevolent Offering being tweaked to be more user friendly, Books in CWC being made more legible, several edge-case bugs (2/4 bugs that I reported myself regarding the asylum weapons). Hell, even my input about how the 2H was double dipping into CP stuff like the lightning staff that I reported a month prior. Thing is, all that included detailed information on how to replicate things (I.E. Videos/screenshots).

The feedback isn't ignored, fixing things take time, especially if you've only only got a team of about 5 people working on the balance changes across the entire game while also needing to introduce new functionality. The less "new" a bug is the more time is needed to re-acquaint yourself with a specific area of code, even more so if it isn't documented well. If the bug itself isn't reported in detail, then there will be a significant amount of time actually testing out what various features are impacted by something. Or how to even replicate it. Time much better spent on your current work.

And Unfortunately, a majority of the playerbase are idiots some of the time, myself included. Duplication of threads, arguing without context or reason, general complaining by just saying "ZOS sucks the D" or shite like that, without any reasoning behind it, just acting as a damned echoing chamber. Not to mention assumption that invested time will yield a response. You should never expect a dev response, or a change exactly as you hope. Assume that what you said is heard, but also assume that it will not be acted upon.

---

Mojmir wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:

• The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.
• Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

if a dev reads something it should marked somehow,doesn't even have to say which dev(but not include forums mods, this makes people mad when they think an actual dev responded to their thread).

@ZOS_GinaBruno

The Dev reactions section of the User Profile, is this when a Dev clicks: Insightful/Agree/Awesome on a comment? Could this be something that could be improved upon in the forum?

---

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

I agree with this, but there must be some leeway, such as if it's a new forum user (who is still not used to the general way of the forum, or if it's someone who hasn't had a reputation of bashing). Of course, that requires more work in terms of moderation, so the likely scenario is to just have it be a once and your out kinda thing, which sucks, but is a given for a large community.

---

ClanofThir wrote: »

Just curious. I am involved in several open source projects that use various bug tracking systems. All of these are query-able and reflects what is being reported, worked, scheduled, etc. I recognize that Zenimax probably doesn't want the player-base to know exactly who is working on what, but would it be harmful to have a published bug list and schedule available? In that manner, the player-base can see the effects of their bug reporting (not necessarily class-balance stuff, but honest-to-goodness bugs). I understand the difficulty of responding to everyone's reports, but perhaps a transparent bug list will provide the feedback that many are requesting.

My $0.02.

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_GinaBruno

That would likely be an interesting idea. I know that it may not be possible however, given that there may be some internal things that are not to be discussed openly, and that it would require a whole new document to be created in addition to what it is already your are already doing. @ZOS_JessicaFolsom would it be possible to try (just for one week, as an experiment) disclosing some of the document that you send along to the dev team? Certainly not the day that you actually compile it, but perhaps the next work day it could be something that you do first?

---

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

@ZOS_GinaBruno
There is a Dev Reaction section under the User Profile, I'm not sure how it works, but I think it could be expanded upon.

alainjbrennanb16_ESO

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:

• The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.
• Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:

• The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.
• Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

YOu simple need to play the game and have gm's in the game then they will see what is happening, unless you have gm's hidden so they are not abused then i will shut up

ThePrinceOfBargains

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

Avran_Sylt

Dorrino wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

[*] The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

But why would you want to evaluate the number of reports alone?

Your team would read the bug reports and manually add tickets for some of them. Count those only and provide the rewards in the end of each PTS. Along with the leaderboards for bugreporting.

Like

@JohnTheGoodGuy reported 5 major bugs, 7 med priority bugs and 21 minor bugs. He gets *cool title/badge/etc'.
@JackTheLessGoodGuy reported 0 major bugs and 3 minor bugs. He gets a smaaal badge and a biiig thanks!

Make it a race. People will flood the PTS just to get to the leaderboards and be recognized.

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

[*] Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

Allow console players to log in using a pc client (if you don't already).

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes.

But why those devs, staying up late, can't write a simple confirmation-type reply in the corresponding PTS forums threads?

Why those devs insist on being invisible and instead year after year you have to tell us 'no, they read it all the time!'. Why they themselves can't make it clear that they read it?

If those devs are that much antisocial/shy/tied by some agreement that a one sentence reply is uncomfortable for them, we can have a 'Dev' tag along with 'Insightful', 'Agree' and 'Awesome'. So a post could get an immediate confirmation that a dev actually read it.

People don't ask for everything they want to be implemented. People ask for a simple confirmation that whatever they did (posted) was actually read.

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

Exactly

The reason this will likely not work is that it requires additional time added to their workload. So either that means they need to hire more people, or they need to stay after hours longer. No one at the company wins in that scenario, and the payoff just means more work for them, as more players join in on the PTS, there are more and more reports to sift through. If it were to be automated (# of reports) then it could accommodate any number of players and would be fine. But as the automated system doesn't work, and the manned system isn't scale-able, it's unlikely to happen.

Minno

TheMaster wrote: »

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

There's critque and there's basing.

Example:
- "zos I feel like Templars have no cohesive design intent. Here's why _____ Can we receive a statement of how you envision the Templar?" = Critque.
- "omg zos, you don't listen to us! Terrible developers" = bashing.

Neither of these entitle you to a dev reaction though. It would be amazing if they could react individually to everything. But we as players have to take a step back and realize it's a game.

And yes critque does not mean good praise nor bad praise. Just truth and opinion based off information presented.

Taysa

A persistent test environment has a better chance of shaping an actual testing community, and not just randoms who log in when something interests them.

Wiping every week/every 2 weeks just means I have to spend a minimum of an hour to create a new character. Um, no thanks?

Koolio

Minno wrote: »

TheMaster wrote: »

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

There's critque and there's basing.

Example:
- "zos I feel like Templars have no cohesive design intent. Here's why _____ Can we receive a statement of how you envision the Templar?" = Critque.
- "omg zos, you don't listen to us! Terrible developers" = bashing.

Neither of these entitle you to a dev reaction though. It would be amazing if they could react individually to everything. But we as players have to take a step back and realize it's a game.

And yes critque does not mean good praise nor bad praise. Just truth and opinion based off information presented.

It's a product and customers aren't happy. No reason to step back. I don't like direct insults to the devs. They do what they can. But if they had a building that customers could walk into I'm pretty sure customer service line would be out the door.

Dorrino

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

The reason this will likely not work is that it requires additional time added to their workload. So either that means they need to hire more people, or they need to stay after hours longer.

Which is totally justified by drastically improved interactions between the dev team and the community and consequent higher trust to ESO brand and ZeniMax brand as a whole.

That's a lot of money. Indirectly.

Additionally this will bring a flood of non-paid QA assistants that will allow to save on expanding the QA department.

I find it a false logic that 'something shouldn't be done, because it costs some money'.

As if it is expected for 'things to sort themselves out' somehow, which clear doesn't work.

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

No one at the company wins in that scenario, and the payoff just means more work for them, as more players join in on the PTS, there are more and more reports to sift through.

But that's the end goal. To have a flood of high quality reports. I don't see how can it be negative in any sense.

More work on the bugs and bugfixes - but, hm, that's what we all (dev and community) are supposed to welcome.

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

If it were to be automated (# of reports) then it could accommodate any number of players and would be fine. But as the automated system doesn't work, and the manned system isn't scale-able, it's unlikely to happen.

There is a 'manned system' in place anyways to sort out the bugreports. This addition requires a bit of overhead (mostly automated) with a huge payoff. If this is not a win-win scenario, i'm not sure what is.

ThePrinceOfBargains

Minno wrote: »

TheMaster wrote: »

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

There's critque and there's basing.

Example:
- "zos I feel like Templars have no cohesive design intent. Here's why _____ Can we receive a statement of how you envision the Templar?" = Critque.
- "omg zos, you don't listen to us! Terrible developers" = bashing.

Neither of these entitle you to a dev reaction though. It would be amazing if they could react individually to everything. But we as players have to take a step back and realize it's a game.

And yes critque does not mean good praise nor bad praise. Just truth and opinion based off information presented.

Tired of hearing that. They have to be realistic. First of all, you intentionally made your “bashing” example look much less intelligent than you needed to. Second, they are not going to get an in-depth critique every single time someone criticizes them or the game. Chances are, the person criticizing has already done that and now feel as though it has been ignored due to the fact it’s been several months and hasn’t even been verbally addressed.

Unless the user is directing personal insults at a specific developer or tagging a bunch of developers and insulting them, it should not be seen as bashing. People are getting fed up. If they don’t want that to happen, they should make a better effort to address issues that have been in the game for months and have seemingly been ignored (the faded vampire tattoo BS has been in the game since launch and still has yet to be fixed despite getting multiple threads a month about it. Even considering prioritization, that’s absurd.)