Anyone else feel like dev communication needs to be heavily reworked?

Chips_Ahoy

Elsonso wrote: »

I do wish that ZOS would come out more often and just tell people when something they are asking for ain't gonna happen, or if it is going to happen, whether it will be this decade or the next.

Giving false hope is what keeps many playing.

I only saw an interview once and to each question his answer was the same:

we'll see, in the future, maybe.

[snip]

"It's totally fine to be frustrated"

[snip]... it is not.

[edited for profanity bypass & bashing]

SilverBride

Communication skills go both ways.

Kadraeus

jircris11 wrote: »

Lets also remember that the gaming community cant seem to be nature when speaking to devs. There have been many cases in many mmos where devs stopped responding because of threats, insults and such. Untill we as gamers kearn that its not ok to be jerks to devs we most likely wont get the open line we hope for.

Unfortunately, you also get people who believe this behavior is justified simply because they paid for the game.

Tandor

Shantu wrote: »

The informative feedback of these forums has always been awful. It's not going to change. Given the minute vocal minority that come here to express themselves, there is no real financial incentive to change anything. That's why the primary concern here is moderation for crowd control.

The near constancy of sweeping, inexplicable combat development changes the last couple of years has seriously diluted the entertainment value. All things considered, I think it's much easier to simply not care about what they do. It certainly is a fruitless effort if you do. Better to focus on investing time in things that are actually fun.

It's not even to do with "financial" incentives. There's simply no practical incentive when so many players hold so many differing views, not least because they reflect so many differing playstyles. The devs here have told us before that when they introduced one change because half the players wanted it and made loud noises about it, as soon as they introduced the changes the other half made loud noises against it. They learnt a lot from that, and I don't blame them. They stick with their vision of the game, and they base that in part on their own views and past experience, and in part on ingame metrics. Minor changes are one thing, but the moment a game's overall direction is set by the loudest voices on the forum is the moment I know it's time to move on.

FlopsyPrince

Tandor wrote: »

Shantu wrote: »

The informative feedback of these forums has always been awful. It's not going to change. Given the minute vocal minority that come here to express themselves, there is no real financial incentive to change anything. That's why the primary concern here is moderation for crowd control.

The near constancy of sweeping, inexplicable combat development changes the last couple of years has seriously diluted the entertainment value. All things considered, I think it's much easier to simply not care about what they do. It certainly is a fruitless effort if you do. Better to focus on investing time in things that are actually fun.

It's not even to do with "financial" incentives. There's simply no practical incentive when so many players hold so many differing views, not least because they reflect so many differing playstyles. The devs here have told us before that when they introduced one change because half the players wanted it and made loud noises about it, as soon as they introduced the changes the other half made loud noises against it. They learnt a lot from that, and I don't blame them. They stick with their vision of the game, and they base that in part on their own views and past experience, and in part on ingame metrics. Minor changes are one thing, but the moment a game's overall direction is set by the loudest voices on the forum is the moment I know it's time to move on.

That may be true in some areas, but few would realistically oppose QoL changes. Except for those who oppose any such suggestion here of course.

I just added an addon to the PC to show where a dragon will ultimately land, allowing me to get there in time to damage it for credit. That should be in the game, not require an addon.

The console (PS4 in my case) did not have that, though it is clearly known in the system.

I am sure some voices would say that is not needed, but those would just be the ones who argue against any request, not the major feelings of the playerbase.

It constantly irks me now that I had to lose my mounts/houses/Crowns/etc. to get the much better addon support on the PC. Having more QoL items on the console would have eliminated the need for that.

This is things like

- Telling where a treasure or survey is at on the map.
- Simplifying crafting dailies.
- etc.

Sure, they wouldn't all happen now, but some comments about this would be more helpful than "we will see".

Destai

Tandor wrote: »

Shantu wrote: »

The informative feedback of these forums has always been awful. It's not going to change. Given the minute vocal minority that come here to express themselves, there is no real financial incentive to change anything. That's why the primary concern here is moderation for crowd control.

The near constancy of sweeping, inexplicable combat development changes the last couple of years has seriously diluted the entertainment value. All things considered, I think it's much easier to simply not care about what they do. It certainly is a fruitless effort if you do. Better to focus on investing time in things that are actually fun.

It's not even to do with "financial" incentives. There's simply no practical incentive when so many players hold so many differing views, not least because they reflect so many differing playstyles. The devs here have told us before that when they introduced one change because half the players wanted it and made loud noises about it, as soon as they introduced the changes the other half made loud noises against it. They learnt a lot from that, and I don't blame them. They stick with their vision of the game, and they base that in part on their own views and past experience, and in part on ingame metrics. Minor changes are one thing, but the moment a game's overall direction is set by the loudest voices on the forum is the moment I know it's time to move on.

Balance and combat changes are one thing, QoL are another. QoL changes would see fewer dissenting opinions, IMO. I think most of us just want some of the constant QOL Changes acknowledged. There's no reason a CM can't come here and organize the requests in some fashion. Change Management 101. I can easily sift through these forums on my lunch and discover the most commonly requested changes in spades.

I'll list 'em right now.
- Class Change token
- Streamlined treasure maps
- Streamlined surveys
- Less Annoying NPCs
- A better tutorial

@ZOS_Kevin When can we expect some progress on these issues?

SilverBride

Destai wrote: »

Balance and combat changes are one thing, QoL are another. QoL changes would see fewer dissenting opinions, IMO. I think most of us just want some of the constant QOL Changes acknowledged. There's no reason a CM can't come here and organize the requests in some fashion. Change Management 101. I can easily sift through these forums on my lunch and discover the most commonly requested changes in spades.

I'll list 'em right now.
- Class Change token
- Streamlined treasure maps
- Streamlined surveys
- Less Annoying NPCs
- A better tutorial

@ZOS_Kevin When can we expect some progress on these issues?

These aren't issues. They are things some players want, but not having them isn't stopping anyone from playing. And personally I don't have any desire for most of these anyway, and certainly don't see them as something a developer needs to take time to address.

The real issues are things like server stability and game performance. It would be nice to have communication about what is being worked on with these.

Destai

SilverBride wrote: »

Destai wrote: »

Balance and combat changes are one thing, QoL are another. QoL changes would see fewer dissenting opinions, IMO. I think most of us just want some of the constant QOL Changes acknowledged. There's no reason a CM can't come here and organize the requests in some fashion. Change Management 101. I can easily sift through these forums on my lunch and discover the most commonly requested changes in spades.

I'll list 'em right now.
- Class Change token
- Streamlined treasure maps
- Streamlined surveys
- Less Annoying NPCs
- A better tutorial

@ZOS_Kevin When can we expect some progress on these issues?

These aren't issues. They are things some players want, but not having them isn't stopping anyone from playing. And personally I don't have any desire for most of these anyway, and certainly don't see them as something a developer needs to take time to address.

The real issues are things like server stability and game performance. It would be nice to have communication about what is being worked on with these.

Oh of course, I don't disagree. There's more than one area of communication ZOS needs to improve on. Sounds like he's got his work cut out for him then.

Obviously, the age-old problems surrounding performance are more complex and deserve more updates. Getting some QoL updates are easy wins for ZOS for the interim and would certainly show some better PR than they currently have.

FlopsyPrince

SilverBride wrote: »

Destai wrote: »

Balance and combat changes are one thing, QoL are another. QoL changes would see fewer dissenting opinions, IMO. I think most of us just want some of the constant QOL Changes acknowledged. There's no reason a CM can't come here and organize the requests in some fashion. Change Management 101. I can easily sift through these forums on my lunch and discover the most commonly requested changes in spades.

I'll list 'em right now.
- Class Change token
- Streamlined treasure maps
- Streamlined surveys
- Less Annoying NPCs
- A better tutorial

@ZOS_Kevin When can we expect some progress on these issues?

These aren't issues. They are things some players want, but not having them isn't stopping anyone from playing. And personally I don't have any desire for most of these anyway, and certainly don't see them as something a developer needs to take time to address.

The real issues are things like server stability and game performance. It would be nice to have communication about what is being worked on with these.

That is a poor reason for ignoring them. We could all still be playing Rogue/Hack (for those who are old enough to have played those) if QoL didn't matter.

QoL is part of the gameplay experience.

Sure, you don't have to have quest markers, but not having them makes it much harder and very few MMOs today do not have them, for one example.

Arguing that they can be safely ignored is shortsighted and and will harm the game overall.

Though you prove my point that someone will argue against any request made for making the game better!

SilverBride

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

QoL is part of the gameplay experience.

Sure, you don't have to have quest markers, but not having them makes it much harder and very few MMOs today do not have them, for one example.

Arguing that they can be safely ignored is shortsighted and and will harm the game overall.

Though you prove my point that someone will argue against any request made for making the game better!

I'm not arguing against QOL changes. In fact I've suggested several myself. But I don't think the developers need to come to the forums and address each and every one that is suggested. They would have no time left for anything else.

FlopsyPrince

SilverBride wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

QoL is part of the gameplay experience.

Sure, you don't have to have quest markers, but not having them makes it much harder and very few MMOs today do not have them, for one example.

Arguing that they can be safely ignored is shortsighted and and will harm the game overall.

Though you prove my point that someone will argue against any request made for making the game better!

I'm not arguing against QOL changes. In fact I've suggested several myself. But I don't think the developers need to come to the forums and address each and every one that is suggested. They would have no time left for anything else.

My error then. I have seen people argue against even obvious things in the past.

The devs don't need to discuss each and everyone per se, but that is not the sole part of "dev communication". Knowing each was considered and some thoughts on each would give much better communication, which was the point of this thread.

Togal

Starlight_Whisper wrote: »

Want better communication? Get dev tack news, zos Twitter support and more news here

https://discord.gg/VwGTQdfBkx

Bonus daily endeavor news now too

@Starlight_Whisper How does this give us better communication, its just a bot relaying news you can find on the forums. It didn't help at all.

Destai

SilverBride wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

QoL is part of the gameplay experience.

Sure, you don't have to have quest markers, but not having them makes it much harder and very few MMOs today do not have them, for one example.

Arguing that they can be safely ignored is shortsighted and and will harm the game overall.

Though you prove my point that someone will argue against any request made for making the game better!

I'm not arguing against QOL changes. In fact I've suggested several myself. But I don't think the developers need to come to the forums and address each and every one that is suggested. They would have no time left for anything else.

That's the whole point of forum managers. They have to recognize trends and organize those requests. They have to know something about the game so they recognize valid ones vs noise.

There's at least half a dozen forum admins - what are their other responsibilities? Are they not required to come here beyond patch notes? Do they not have the tools, the training? I know we have Kevin and he's doing a good job so far, but he's one guy and there's mountains of things that need changing.

And look, this game is 7+ years old. There's some things that need a refresh. I'm not saying overhaul base game - it's needed though - but there's some old workflows that are stiff in comparison to the more elegant ones we've been given in the recent years. Easy pickings for a junior developer to get their feet wet. And honestly, it's just good business to know what your customers want beyond the next manufactured FOMO sale.

SilverBride

Destai wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I'm not arguing against QOL changes. In fact I've suggested several myself. But I don't think the developers need to come to the forums and address each and every one that is suggested. They would have no time left for anything else.

That's the whole point of forum managers. They have to recognize trends and organize those requests. They have to know something about the game so they recognize valid ones vs noise.

There's at least half a dozen forum admins - what are their other responsibilities? Are they not required to come here beyond patch notes? Do they not have the tools, the training? I know we have Kevin and he's doing a good job so far, but he's one guy and there's mountains of things that need changing.

And look, this game is 7+ years old. There's some things that need a refresh. I'm not saying overhaul base game - it's needed though - but there's some old workflows that are stiff in comparison to the more elegant ones we've been given in the recent years. Easy pickings for a junior developer to get their feet wet. And honestly, it's just good business to know what your customers want beyond the next manufactured FOMO sale.

They know what we are asking for, and they have addressed some things like why they can't increase housing item limits for example. I just don't think it's reasonable to expect them to address every single request made. Take note of them, yes, but to actually come and discuss why we can or can't have more hairstyles for example is not reasonable.

Destai

SilverBride wrote: »

Destai wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I'm not arguing against QOL changes. In fact I've suggested several myself. But I don't think the developers need to come to the forums and address each and every one that is suggested. They would have no time left for anything else.

That's the whole point of forum managers. They have to recognize trends and organize those requests. They have to know something about the game so they recognize valid ones vs noise.

There's at least half a dozen forum admins - what are their other responsibilities? Are they not required to come here beyond patch notes? Do they not have the tools, the training? I know we have Kevin and he's doing a good job so far, but he's one guy and there's mountains of things that need changing.

And look, this game is 7+ years old. There's some things that need a refresh. I'm not saying overhaul base game - it's needed though - but there's some old workflows that are stiff in comparison to the more elegant ones we've been given in the recent years. Easy pickings for a junior developer to get their feet wet. And honestly, it's just good business to know what your customers want beyond the next manufactured FOMO sale.

They know what we are asking for, and they have addressed some things like why they can't increase housing item limits for example. I just don't think it's reasonable to expect them to address every single request made. Take note of them, yes, but to actually come and discuss why we can or can't have more hairstyles for example is not reasonable.

Completely disagree. It's just polite to acknowledge the same requests, especially when a ZOS employee has been tagged repeatedly. It's not unreasonable for someone at ZOS to take 20 minutes out of their day, do a few searches, and then put together a sticky with the feasibility of those requests. Especially when we've been asking for the same things for years.

Jaraal

xeNNNNN wrote: »

As a secondary part; the community feels utterly ignored on the PTS forums (possibly the most important place they should be talking to the community) and frankly based on the changes, we are ignored on those forums or at least thats the perception it gives us. They've got to find a middle ground between their design vision and what the community wants or they will just drive people off.

Frankly, I would rather see them come into a thread complaining about a change on the PTS and say, "We hear your concerns, but we are going to go ahead and do x because of y" than just totally ignore feedback and give the impression that they don't even listen to what the players have to say.

Destai

Jaraal wrote: »

xeNNNNN wrote: »

As a secondary part; the community feels utterly ignored on the PTS forums (possibly the most important place they should be talking to the community) and frankly based on the changes, we are ignored on those forums or at least thats the perception it gives us. They've got to find a middle ground between their design vision and what the community wants or they will just drive people off.

Frankly, I would rather see them come into a thread complaining about a change on the PTS and say, "We hear your concerns, but we are going to go ahead and do x because of y" than just totally ignore feedback and give the impression that they don't even listen to what the players have to say.

I think a lot of people would appreciate that, but I think the expectation most people would have is their voices would be heard. Take for instance the Vigor change a while back:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/542870/please-give-us-back-rapid-maneuver/p30
@ZOS_GinaBruno said: "Hi everyone, thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts and feedback about this change. We’ve been reading your feedback since this change went onto the PTS, and we understand the concerns you’ve presented here. Ultimately, this swap happened so Stamina builds have access to a heal earlier in the leveling experience. While we recognize being able to have Rapids as the first skill to use on other characters is convenient, Vigor is considered a must-have for Stamina build survivability, so giving access to the heal earlier is a major quality of life improvement for those players. We are happy with how this change is performing and have no current plans to revert it."

It's great that she chimed in and offered some insight, but the whole problem is the ignored feedback. We had 46 Pages of people offering compromises and alternatives. She answers after 30 pages. Then we had an additional 16 pages of her ignoring the community. And really, it's the tone here - "We are happy with..." - that's my problem when they do engage us here. It comes across as cold and uncaring.

CombatRecon11B

Where do their priorities lie? I think the answer to this question and the why are inherently conjoined.

To me, it appears that you all want zos to cultivate a beautiful working balance between the gaming community (their base) and their business, and their product, to put it rather simply. And I'm not sure zos is really all that interested in achieving such a balance.

Actually, I'm of a mind zos is in "maintain and pattern" mode. They release content periodically to refresh and maintain the product, and they follow this pattern til the end. ESO is still a successful cash cow for them this way, but It's stale... so stale in fact, that an overhaul was just released, and it energized the base, but for how long?

And I don't think the gamer base is asking for anything that radically would ulter the core aspect of the game. Instead the base is the aspect of the game, and zos is lost on that. What I mean is the base are the messengers and lifeblood of the core vision for Elder Scrolls Online.

Zos is lost on this principle, which really isn't all that surprising given very few devs get it right.

Unfortunately, many devs run this type of pattern to ruin. Where they're no longer in "maintain and pattern" mode and steam roll head onto "damage control." Though, I've not seen zos exhibit anything of the sort since ESO's shaky launch.

JTD

CombatRecon11B wrote: »

Unfortunately, many devs run this type of pattern to ruin. Where they're no longer in "maintain and pattern" mode and steam roll head onto "damage control." Though, I've not seen zos exhibit anything of the sort since ESO's shaky launch.

The term 'maintenance mode' brings back memories of Age of Conan, Warhammer online and The Secret World....ouch.

https://massivelyop.com/2020/03/26/perfect-ten-the-stages-of-the-mmo-life-cycle/

I'd say ESO is between step 6 - 7 atm.

oldbobdude

Dev teams do not have time to argue with forum members and and that's what it would be.

I think the forums are a vocal minority of the game players. It's just not reasonable to ask the game creators to spend valuable resources trying to defend their decisions.

Either you like the game or you don't. Either you stay or you don't.

FlopsyPrince

CombatRecon11B wrote: »

Where do their priorities lie? I think the answer to this question and the why are inherently conjoined.

To me, it appears that you all want zos to cultivate a beautiful working balance between the gaming community (their base) and their business, and their product, to put it rather simply. And I'm not sure zos is really all that interested in achieving such a balance.

Actually, I'm of a mind zos is in "maintain and pattern" mode. They release content periodically to refresh and maintain the product, and they follow this pattern til the end. ESO is still a successful cash cow for them this way, but It's stale... so stale in fact, that an overhaul was just released, and it energized the base, but for how long?

And I don't think the gamer base is asking for anything that radically would ulter the core aspect of the game. Instead the base is the aspect of the game, and zos is lost on that. What I mean is the base are the messengers and lifeblood of the core vision for Elder Scrolls Online.

Zos is lost on this principle, which really isn't all that surprising given very few devs get it right.

Unfortunately, many devs run this type of pattern to ruin. Where they're no longer in "maintain and pattern" mode and steam roll head onto "damage control." Though, I've not seen zos exhibit anything of the sort since ESO's shaky launch.

Whatever doesn't grow is dead. That is an important point all devs should keep in mind, whatever the game!

FlopsyPrince

oldbobdude wrote: »

Dev teams do not have time to argue with forum members and and that's what it would be.

I think the forums are a vocal minority of the game players. It's just not reasonable to ask the game creators to spend valuable resources trying to defend their decisions.

Either you like the game or you don't. Either you stay or you don't.

That is BS in today's business environment and is one of the reasons many companies are losing market share and even endangering their own existence.

Ignoring customers is very dangerous.

Not that no one said the devs had to argue here, just that they needed to communicate better. A "take it or leave it" attitude is one of the reasons FF XIV Online is gaining so many people and ESO is not (due to WoW's current ongoing implosion).

I am sure FF XIV has its problems, but at least they have a record of revamping themselves on behalf of their users.

oldbobdude

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

oldbobdude wrote: »

Dev teams do not have time to argue with forum members and and that's what it would be.

I think the forums are a vocal minority of the game players. It's just not reasonable to ask the game creators to spend valuable resources trying to defend their decisions.

Either you like the game or you don't. Either you stay or you don't.

That is BS in today's business environment and is one of the reasons many companies are losing market share and even endangering their own existence.

Ignoring customers is very dangerous.

Not that no one said the devs had to argue here, just that they needed to communicate better. A "take it or leave it" attitude is one of the reasons FF XIV Online is gaining so many people and ESO is not (due to WoW's current ongoing implosion).

I am sure FF XIV has its problems, but at least they have a record of revamping themselves on behalf of their users.

Your choice.

FlopsyPrince

oldbobdude wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

oldbobdude wrote: »

Dev teams do not have time to argue with forum members and and that's what it would be.

I think the forums are a vocal minority of the game players. It's just not reasonable to ask the game creators to spend valuable resources trying to defend their decisions.

Either you like the game or you don't. Either you stay or you don't.

That is BS in today's business environment and is one of the reasons many companies are losing market share and even endangering their own existence.

Ignoring customers is very dangerous.

Not that no one said the devs had to argue here, just that they needed to communicate better. A "take it or leave it" attitude is one of the reasons FF XIV Online is gaining so many people and ESO is not (due to WoW's current ongoing implosion).

I am sure FF XIV has its problems, but at least they have a record of revamping themselves on behalf of their users.

Your choice.

Obviously. Who said it wasn't?

But I have a fair bit of time into this game so I want it to be the best it can be.

ArcVelarian

They sure as heck don't communicate regarding Classes. If they did they'd be aware that DK is in the worst spot it has ever been in.

Starpulsechic

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hey @6Kyojin6. Thanks for your thoughts and feedback here. I've been reading through this thread and appreciate the constructive feedback several of you have given so far.

While I'm still new and getting my feet wet, I am taking some of the suggestions down for the ZOS team and we will figure out some better ways to garner communication with you. That is one of our goals with the Forum Manager position. If anyone has any additional constructive thoughts about communication and interaction, continue to sound off in this thread. I'll be reading throughout the day.

Also just want to highlight what one of the mods said earlier. Please be sure to stay constructive and respectful. It's totally fine to be frustrated, but please do not bash anyone.

The core issue I've seen for years is that people post feedback on technical issues relating to combat, character, game mechanics or give suggestion/improvement requests in which most go unanswered. For example I have made multiple posts about requesting death match ques to be brought back to BGS but had no idea if they were being seen until i went into SlashLurks stream the other day and asked, which he said they are being seen and discussed.

My suggestion is that ZOS implement a feedback loop system whereby there is a centralized public area which outlines the submitted issues/feedback. It would outline the assigned ZOS Rep for that issue and then they are responsible for maintaining update on that issue. The community of users then know that they are being acknowledged or their concern/request is being looked into with ZOS feedback as to whether it is being considered, rejected or implemented, fixed by a ZOS rep. That issue then has an associated raised forum thread so that if others want to add feedback they can and then the assigned ZOS rep can refer to the thread for additional information they may need to consider.

In turn this would reduce the volumes of replicated threads being made about same issues or same feedback requests being made.

The below is just an rough example of how you could considering sectioning it out;
1) Section for Known Reported Bugs that deals with any issues that effect the wider population (separate to technical issues). The 'Bug Report' section are threads driven by user, what I am suggesting here is that ZOS open a thread under a Communication Section. Anyone who re-creates threads anywhere on this forum with the same request get them shut/deleted and and is politely redirected to the already opened request. These threads opened by ZOS though are open for user comment, this will allow people to expand on any variants of information on cause or effect what relating to the issue.

Note: This is going to primarily address the medium to long term issues in the game that aren't over night hot patch fixes. Just this alone would reduce volumes of the same threads that get opened repetitively for example: cyrodil performance.

2) Section for Improvement requests - (could be assigned as under consideration, pending implementation, rejected)
Requested improvement, needs to be categorized (combat, character, housing, overworld, pvp, dungeons, trials ect), then think of sub entry fields that can assist in filtering/channeling user suggestions/ideas this would create more value for ZOS. If consideration, pending implementation thread can be opened by ZOS though for user comment, this will allow people to expand on any variants of information relating to the topic. Rejected suggestions get closed but there needs to be feedback given as to why its not proceeding.

ZOS_Volpe

Greetings, We've had to remove a few non-constructive and baiting comments. Please remember that while it’s alright to disagree or even debate with each other, provoking conflict, baiting, inciting, mocking, etc. is never acceptable on our forums.