Can there be a compromise? Maybe after the performance patch raise the cap by 100 to test the waters. If everything seems fine add 100 more?
Kashya_Vulano wrote: »Can there be a compromise? Maybe after the performance patch raise the cap by 100 to test the waters. If everything seems fine add 100 more?
I like this idea, but ZOS wouldn't be partial to it without a considerable compromise. I'd say raise the caps by 50 items and 2 players per housing type, every quarter or so until they hit a point where they know they're pushing the absolute upper ceiling, if they aren't now already. It isn't hard to see, though, that they aren't pushing it.
[snip]
[edited to remove bait]
here is the thing. I can guarantee with certainty they never actually tested the limits and just tossed an arbitrary number out there.
they have proven time and time again they dont even own and xbox or ps4 to test things on. They put out patches on consoles that do major harm that would be noticeable if they spent one hour testing it on the actual console.
we need it properly tested, not some random number tossed out there and a lot of BS on why they can't up it. Do the metrics like any respectable company would do. Housing is major money for Zos, it is time they actually start treating it like it is.
the irony is, they are worried about performance in housing and yet after patch cyrodiil is completely broken and to be honest broken for 4 years but we cant have a couple more plants
ZOS_CullenLee wrote: »the upper-most furnishing limits are in place to avoid serious performance issues
Brandathorbel wrote: »I am starting to feel like the biggest trolls on this forum is the developers. (sarcasm not bashing)
They put up a comment then disapper from the forums.
What i would love if they would regularly come back and actually have a meaningful and informative conversation but we always get the hit and run.
ZOS_CullenLee wrote: »Howdy everyone,
One of the most frequent requests we receive in regards to housing is the desire to increase the furnishing cap. While we have touched on this before, we just wanted to reiterate that the upper-most furnishing limits are in place to avoid serious performance issues. While the core design philosophy behind housing is to give you the creative freedom to decorate the way you want to, we have to ensure that it is a stable experience for you and your visitors as well, regardless of anyone’s platform or hardware specifications.
That being said, improving performance is not a magic bullet solution for raising the furnishing cap in houses. “Performance” is a blanket term that encompasses frame rate, stability, memory usage, and other metrics related to how the game runs. Right now, setups that hit the minimum specifications can still struggle with homes that are fully decorated with relatively high impact furnishings.
We know that many of you have been hoping that our focus on performance improvements this year would directly result in an increased furnishing cap. We still have a lot of work left on the performance front and when it’s completed, we will reevaluate to see if we can increase the furnishing limits.
To address some specific questions and concerns:As always, we continue to strive to improve the housing experience. Moonsugar Meadow, for example, was created after listening to player feedback on the desire for more natural open spaces where you can express your creativity. We are always considering and tinkering with potential new housing features. As soon as we have something to show you, you’ll be the first to know.
- Different categories of furnishings generally have different performance impacts. Special Collectibles are more impactful than Traditional Furnishings, while Collectible Furnishings tend to have less impact than many Traditional Furnishings.
- We know not everyone is satisfied with the ratio between these furnishing types—these are set to strike a balance between the various needs people have. We could change this ratio, but any improvement to one group would negatively impact another group. We have no plans to adjust the balance between the different caps at this time.
- The number of guests in a home also impacts performance. At the moment, increasing the population limit would require reducing furnishing limits.
Please continue to provide feedback! Letting us know what you like, as well as what you don’t like and why, helps us to improve. For many of us, logging into the forums and seeing your creations is often the best part of our day as your creativity continuously blows us away. The forums are one of many sources of inspiration for us, and request threads always factor into our decisions when adding new furnishings, planning new homes, and prioritizing improvements.
Thank you for reading this, and thank you for your passion.
MornaBaine wrote: »the irony is, they are worried about performance in housing and yet after patch cyrodiil is completely broken and to be honest broken for 4 years but we cant have a couple more plants
Well I mean if they can't fix a major part of the game that has always been in and a large chunk of development was put towards from the very beginning I suppose we should not be surprised they "can't" improve what was essentially an afterthought that they suddenly realized they could make a lot of money off of.
Honestly I feel like the bulk of the problem is twofold.
1. The megaserver. HUGE mistake. This was a new engine to them and a new concept (the megaserver) and they just threw everyone together regardless of preferred playstyle and ended up pleasing no one completely. They just didn't have the know how to make this work properly from the very beginning. And the game has suffered for it ever since.
2. Adding consoles. The OTHER absolutely HUGE mistake. I'm not wanting to start another PC Master Race/Console Peasants war but the fact remains that the platforms are and should be kept MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. If they really wanted to make ESO for consoles, great. But it should have been developed absolutely independently from the PC game and it should have been explicitly stated up front that there WOULD BE variations between the two games. Because absolutely console implementation limits what can be done for PC. And this is just really not acceptable.
MornaBaine wrote: »the irony is, they are worried about performance in housing and yet after patch cyrodiil is completely broken and to be honest broken for 4 years but we cant have a couple more plants
Well I mean if they can't fix a major part of the game that has always been in and a large chunk of development was put towards from the very beginning I suppose we should not be surprised they "can't" improve what was essentially an afterthought that they suddenly realized they could make a lot of money off of.
Honestly I feel like the bulk of the problem is twofold.
1. The megaserver. HUGE mistake. This was a new engine to them and a new concept (the megaserver) and they just threw everyone together regardless of preferred playstyle and ended up pleasing no one completely. They just didn't have the know how to make this work properly from the very beginning. And the game has suffered for it ever since.
2. Adding consoles. The OTHER absolutely HUGE mistake. I'm not wanting to start another PC Master Race/Console Peasants war but the fact remains that the platforms are and should be kept MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. If they really wanted to make ESO for consoles, great. But it should have been developed absolutely independently from the PC game and it should have been explicitly stated up front that there WOULD BE variations between the two games. Because absolutely console implementation limits what can be done for PC. And this is just really not acceptable.
100% on all of this! Consoles are and should be kept separate. They are for most other games for both styles. [Snip]
[Edited for baiting]
Ravensilver wrote: »
@Ravensilver
It means a moderator for this message board removed part of Tezzaa's message because it was against the rules.
Baiting means posting such words to start an argument.
LadySinflower wrote: »Show us you're really listening.
Let's face it, ESO is not in the investment phase of its life cycle. ESO is in the return of investment phase. I don't expect ZOS to invest something into systems that will not give an equivalent return in the nearest future. Since ZOS has stated that increasing furniture limits is not an option then it is not expected to give considerable enough return.Ravensilver wrote: »Why is ZOS incapable of upgrading their servers? Why does it not invest in the infrastructure needed to keep their customers happy?