Would you sacrifice 6 months of content for 6 months of pure optimisation?

FakeFox

Six?! I'd take twelve!

Yes, if it would work. But I'm pretty sure they would need to rebuild the entire game to really fix performance.

Reignleif

Yes

Of course.

Optimization in cities in this game is atrocious. I have a ryzen 5 2600, and in the cities my fps drops to below 30 some times.

Crixus8000

Yes

This game is flooded with so many bugs and lag that I just couldn't care about new content. It's hardly playable already. I would love to be able to just enjoy the game without issues.

randomkeyhits

No

This would give them license to "improve things" at the cost of delivering content making it an either/or thing.

Not good.

Optimisation is part of the development process even if it tends towards the latter stages and giving them an excuse to just cut it out will hurt more in the long run.

Who knows, what we are seeing may already be the results of cuts in development and I'd rather not reward that.

They should be hiring additional developers with an engine focus and some extra? QA people to ensure quality doesn't drop any further with authority to push back if its just not good enough.

sionIV

Yes

Good content will still end up being bad to play because of poor performance.

Vhozek

Yes

theyancey wrote: »

That would equal 6 months of cancelled subs.

It's an investment.

prototypefb

No

the thing is that optimization will be wiped out on the next minor patch, since devs aparently don't make all bug fixes futureproof.
with every new path old, supposedly fixed bugs return and then it takes forever to 'fix' them again, i mean buy a notebook, or create a .txt file with previous bug fixes so it doesnt' take years to fix each issue again and again...

Radinyn

No

Everything works perfectly.

malicia

Six?! I'd take twelve!

After seeing in the last event how much more fun Cyrodil is with less lag, I’d gladly foregoe new dungeons and trials in favour of the game in general running better. These silly little performance issues bugs every aspect of ESO, from terrible lag in Cyro to infinite loading screens to trials. Then you get those happy moments where lag spikes in vSCP, just long enough to make the tank miss a block. No-death? Not this time!

Or you do a rotation on a dummy, and someone else ports into the instance. Immediate lag increase.

Its always nice to add new stuff to your household. But sometimes a little bit of maintenance is needed as well.

commodore64

Yes

SgtSilock wrote: »

The question is simply as above, would you rather have silky smooth performance after 6 months of pure dedication to optimizing, or 6 months of more content?

Six months of just fixing everything and ensuring Steam users can log in after every update would be nice!
I'd happily pay a monthly sub just for a dedicated fix team, it's such a great game it's really let down by these issues.

Undefwun

Yes

said it before and i'll say it again.. i have always subbed.... but I would pay if for a 'fix-ish' DLC seperately....

Grandma

Yes

honestly i'd be fine with just a chapter and zone dlc. I know those require way more effort, but during the break in between there's plenty of time for the balance team to work on stuff, or maybe even the engineers to optimize fps for computers. Plus, with the ridiculous amount of dungeon dlcs we're getting now, there's going to be way more than anyone can handle eventually.

WolfDK

Have to say it would really depend on how much "optimizing" would get done, cause if is only 1-2% better performance .. then ... ehh..

Haenk

No

For me, there are only a few bugs - but nothing too serious. But I don't do PVP and have a fast computer...

BrokenString

Six?! I'd take twelve!

YES PLEASE!

Very long loading screens, low fps, very high latency and there's nothing we can do. Even with a monster of a pc you still gonna have these issues.

I bet 30% of my play time is loading screens and disconects

Thehartclan

Six?! I'd take twelve!

Great poll. It reiterates what I'm talking about in my "Future of ESO?" thread.

Sylianwe

Six?! I'd take twelve!

Most definitely. So I voted yes.

Quality over quantity. It's better to have fewer optimised content than to have more content with repetitive and unattended issues.

ArchMikem

Yes

Give me Elsweyr first, then they can go.

russelmmendoza

Six?! I'd take twelve!

release the new elder scrolls game,

shutdown eso for 12 months,

repair it to the core or whatever,

finish the new elder scrolls,

lets play eso again.

EpicRekkoning

Yes

I think optimizing the game will make future updates easier for ZOS with less issues on with releases.

DaveMoeDee

No

No, but I would sacrifice rebalancing, new BGs, and tweaks in Cyrodiil for the sake of a large narrative DLC instead of dungeons one quarter.

richo262

Yes

Probably not back to back, so if they did 3 months one year and 3 months the next on pure optimisation, sure.

JamieAubrey

Six?! I'd take twelve!

I only PvP so I can sacrifice the 6 months of content for performance updates

linoge63

Six?! I'd take twelve!

and I'd gladly give you back all those insane DLC dungeons too, as a tip!

Greysson

Yes

I dont do PvP or trials, so i am not much affected by performance issues.
But if it would mean shorter- / no endless loading screens too, i would appreciate that.

iLagxLucid

Yes

Luigi_Vampa wrote: »

Starlight_Knight wrote: »

Yes because its a bloody scam atm the amount of lag and broken queues.
No money in fix's though... this isnt a game made for enjoyment its a game made to make money.
MONEY MONEY MONEY!!!! if they could find a way to fix bugs and lag AND charge for it.... maybe they would..
But only if it was easy and they could go to the pub early.

Every game is a game made for money. What are you even talking about? Major companies don't spend money making a game just for fun.

Really, what about warframe? Oh I guess it doesn't exist in the world you're living in

Jamdarius

Yes

Aliyavana wrote: »

No, as my pc isnt a potato and im on a good platform

this got nothing to do with PC or not u play on NA so u got no problems, play a bit on EU and it is tragedy, when there are peak hours you simply have long loadscreens, sometimes you crash cause why not and many times you get stuck while porting to homes alone despite having PC dedicated to witcher 3 ultra settings ...

amir412

Yes

Aliyavana wrote: »

No, as my pc isnt a potato and im on a good platform

I wouldnt complain if i was playing in NA,
But for EU the lag and performance reached brain dead levels now.

idk

No

No MMORPG that has decent business people would permit it because players leave as a result of nothing to do. Some come back but others never do.

Zos lost a lot of players, players that subscribed, when they abandoned ESO for a year to get consoles running. It was the second biggest mistake they made. The first was releasing the game in such an abysmal state. In other words, the poll is not something that will sway Zos.

Jamdarius

Yes

Royaji wrote: »

Wrong question. The one you should be asking is "Are you and millions other players willing to keep on paying subscription/buying DLCs at the same rate as before if ZOS were to stop releasing any content and only fixes with them?"

Not seeing a lot of hands here, huh? Sorry, but for the guy who runs the party at ZOS this is the only thing that matters.

Than different question for you: Are you willing to pay for game with loads of content but you will DC/lag/get kicked back to login screen and you will not be able to play PvP in it due to lag/ping spikes?

I stopped paying sub 4 months ago and I see I did good job 'cause I see no server improvements so the question is where the money we pay goes to? But I guess those issues are exclusive only to EU servers and steam users... not the NA.