Constructive criticism can only help a game. Please stop trying to invalidate it.

MoreTune

Over the past few days, there has been an ongoing battle between players who are disappointed in the upcoming Chapter, and players who are defending it. Differing opinions are normal and healthy—it's totally fine to be excited about High Isles or the card game—but what surprises me is the number of players who are going out of their way to invalidate reasonable, objective criticism.

"Chapters are about the new zone, not gameplay features."

"People will always find something to complain about."

"If you're not happy with the expansion, do us a favor and quit."

This isn't particularly surprising—people form strong attachments to the games they love, *especially* MMOs. **However, we have to remember that in the end, defending ZOS does absolutely nothing to help the playerbase.** It does not make the game better, or keep it around longer. It only serves to undermine the community's voice, one of our two sources of power (the other being our wallets). And giving ZOS more power means they'll cut more corners, because their primary goal is to improve their margins. This isn't a friendship, it's a business relationship.

Yes, I understand that ZOS has to make money, and that there are technical reasons they can't add new features like classes and weapons. But that doesn't mean players *have* to be happy with what they give us.

It's THEIR job to defend their decisions and price tags, and our job to hold them accountable. Otherwise, the balance of power tips and the developer starts taking advantage, which is already starting to happen. I can see no objective argument for why Morrowind (which dramatically changed the game with a new class and PVP mode) and High Isles (which is adding a minigame) should have the same price tag. Whatever ZOS' limitations, they are giving us less and less, while demanding the same amount of money, and they'll continue to do so if we let them.

Moreover, it’s important to recognize that criticism is not an attack on the game. You can love a game deeply and still criticize its developer’s decisions. **In fact, the more you love a game, the more you should fight for it.**

I know the repeated posts are frustrating. And I know it's hard to see people criticize something you love. If you're excited for High Isles, that's great, and you should feel free to say it! But for the greater good, let's not propagate the idea that it's wrong to ask for more. Because ZOS will never give it to us otherwise.

BlissfulDeluge

While I cannot say I agree that ESO: Morrowind and ESO: High Isle should be priced differently, as I think the main features of both cater to entirely different demographics whose priorities differ, I do agree invalidating criticism with poor statements meant to bait people into conflict does not help.

There are things I like about the upcoming chapter, and there are things I don't like. Some agree with me on some, others disagree with me on the same and agree with me on others. And some don't agree at all.

It's normal, and people shouldn't be disrespectful over it. It isn't healthy, and it just pushes people towards silence.

Chips_Ahoy

MoreTune wrote: »

Moreover, it’s important to recognize that criticism is not an attack on the game. You can love a game deeply and still criticize its developer’s decisions. **In fact, the more you love a game, the more you should fight for it.**

The best way to protest against any decision made by any company is by closing the wallet.

If you don't agree with something but you still buy it and consume it, what's the point?

Amottica

Everyone has their opinion and many of us are very passionate about our opinions. However, some are more constructive in stating their opinion than others. The anonymity of the internet tends to allow some people to feel safe to say what they want even if it is rather heated.

spartaxoxo

Most of what you listed is bait. Just report it. Constructive criticism is something you should expect of your ideas as well however, and disagreement is perfectly natural.

For example this:

MoreTune wrote: »

"Chapters are about the new zone, not gameplay features."

Is a perfectly valid counter argument. I don't agree with this take whatsoever. But my agreement with it doesn't disqualify it from being a perfectly acceptable opinion. For some people, a new gameplay feature is NOT necessary in order for a chapter to be offered. And they will be fine for something more minor like the card game.

Not only is it fine for someone to be excited for the card game, it's also fine for them not to find any particular comment WE make to be particularly compelling.

Players are disagreeing right now because there are a couple of controversial systems being introduced into the game, some like them and some don't. Some will find your point valid, and others will not. Just depends on the player really. Such a thing is a normal part of discussion.

Not everyone is going to agree with us, or even find our opinion to be valid. That someone doesn't find your opinion valid does not meant they are doing something wrong and their voice is just as important as yours. Disagreement is not the same thing as bait (the other 2 comments were bait).

katanagirl1

Chips_Ahoy wrote: »

MoreTune wrote: »

Moreover, it’s important to recognize that criticism is not an attack on the game. You can love a game deeply and still criticize its developer’s decisions. **In fact, the more you love a game, the more you should fight for it.**

The best way to protest against any decision made by any company is by closing the wallet.

If you don't agree with something but you still buy it and consume it, what's the point?

It’s not quite as simple as that.

I’m highly invested in the game at this point, this is pretty much the only game I play. There are lots of things that the new chapters bring with them - new quests, new dungeons, new motifs, new furnishing plans. If there is one small part I don’t like I am not going to refuse to buy the whole package.

If I don’t like some card game that is added, as long as the other stuff is there I’m okay with it - as long as I can opt out of the card game if I choose.

Amottica

@spartaxoxo makes a very good statement in that when we state our opinion it does not disqualify anyone else's opinion. At least it should not. When it steps away from that it is no longer constructive or productive to the thread or the forums.

Chips_Ahoy

katanagirl1 wrote: »

Chips_Ahoy wrote: »

MoreTune wrote: »

Moreover, it’s important to recognize that criticism is not an attack on the game. You can love a game deeply and still criticize its developer’s decisions. **In fact, the more you love a game, the more you should fight for it.**

The best way to protest against any decision made by any company is by closing the wallet.

If you don't agree with something but you still buy it and consume it, what's the point?

It’s not quite as simple as that.

I’m highly invested in the game at this point, this is pretty much the only game I play. There are lots of things that the new chapters bring with them - new quests, new dungeons, new motifs, new furnishing plans. If there is one small part I don’t like I am not going to refuse to buy the whole package.

If I don’t like some card game that is added, as long as the other stuff is there I’m okay with it - as long as I can opt out of the card game if I choose.

I hope I will see the game as you see it, I think I would enjoy it more.

Sooner than later this game will disappear and all that "Investment" too.

Paulytnz

MoreTune wrote: »

Over the past few days, there has been an ongoing battle between players who are disappointed in the upcoming Chapter, and players who are defending it. Differing opinions are normal and healthy—it's totally fine to be excited about High Isles or the card game—but what surprises me is the number of players who are going out of their way to invalidate reasonable, objective criticism.

"Chapters are about the new zone, not gameplay features."

"People will always find something to complain about."

"If you're not happy with the expansion, do us a favor and quit."

This isn't particularly surprising—people form strong attachments to the games they love, *especially* MMOs. **However, we have to remember that in the end, defending ZOS does absolutely nothing to help the playerbase.** It does not make the game better, or keep it around longer. It only serves to undermine the community's voice, one of our two sources of power (the other being our wallets). And giving ZOS more power means they'll cut more corners, because their primary goal is to improve their margins. This isn't a friendship, it's a business relationship.

Yes, I understand that ZOS has to make money, and that there are technical reasons they can't add new features like classes and weapons. But that doesn't mean players *have* to be happy with what they give us.

It's THEIR job to defend their decisions and price tags, and our job to hold them accountable. Otherwise, the balance of power tips and the developer starts taking advantage, which is already starting to happen. I can see no objective argument for why Morrowind (which dramatically changed the game with a new class and PVP mode) and High Isles (which is adding a minigame) should have the same price tag. Whatever ZOS' limitations, they are giving us less and less, while demanding the same amount of money, and they'll continue to do so if we let them.

Moreover, it’s important to recognize that criticism is not an attack on the game. You can love a game deeply and still criticize its developer’s decisions. **In fact, the more you love a game, the more you should fight for it.**

I know the repeated posts are frustrating. And I know it's hard to see people criticize something you love. If you're excited for High Isles, that's great, and you should feel free to say it! But for the greater good, let's not propagate the idea that it's wrong to ask for more. Because ZOS will never give it to us otherwise.

I understand your points here. But the same runs true the other way too. I am not saying you can't dislike what is coming or complain about it. But some people are going way too far. They are not offering what this forum asks for (constructive criticism, heck it's even the title of this thread).

Not only that, if you have no people debating from the other side it then looks like NO ONE likes what is coming and that all of it is indeed a waste of time and money on the Dev's side. Which then of course goes to justify all of the non constructive silliness further.

The power can't slip one way or the other so you do need supporters as well. Supporters try and show the positives that can come with what's coming but I know, this is the internet you can rarely change someone's opinion when they really have their mind set lol. But you never know, someone else who is just reading all the debates might learn something and not fall for all the "this is doom and gloom, the game is dead/dying nonsense" that some people are posting.

Anywho thank you for this thread. Maybe it will remind some of these posters that what they are typing is meant to be constructive criticism and not just a bunch of silliness which only distracts people from the actual important discussions.

Sarannah

I criticize ZOS and ESO quite a lot, yet feel there is no negative feedback about the expansion that has any real merit.

Difficulty: This is a gripe about the current game which some players have, while ZOS does this as they have done any other expansion. Same difficulty in the new expansion.
No new skilline: ZOS gets so much criticism about skillines, for example the new psijjic skillline. Players are calling it useless. So if ZOS were to make a skilline with too much power, the expansion would be called pay-to-win. As players would feel they would have to have the expansion to be able to 'meta'-build. (personally I'd love new skilllines)
No new class: Seriously?... ZOS is still getting much hate for the necromancer, why on earth would they do something like that again? Personally I love the necromancer, and would love any new classes. But anything they would do, would only be received negatively.
Card game: We were told we would not see any new systems during the year of performance improvements. Yet, they give us a new system some players asked for. This is only a plus. But when you look at all the responses, ZOS still gets (much) negative feedback about it. Even though cardbattle games are quite populair at the moment.

So no matter what ZOS does, they will be at the receiving end of the negativity. But this is a trend I have noticed lately, mostly from certain major countries, that everything anyone does is only met with negativity.

The current expansion is in line with any other expansion content released in the past. So yes, players can and may complain, but to say it has any real merit. To me that is a big NO!

Onyx_Werewolf_Gnome

I believe free speech is important & that includes when give feedback for a product we are paying for

sajackson

I just don't understand why we keep getting repeated posts about essentially the same thing. That's not constructive, it's just annoying.

I believe there is a dedicated feedback post ZOS created for the new chapter. If you genuinely have constructive criticism how about putting it there?

sajackson

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/596449/official-feedback-thread-for-eso-2022-global-reveal-high-isle#latest

DarcyMardin

I’m content to wait for the PTS for the chapter before I criticize. Until I actually play around with new content, I can’t form a considered opinion on whether I’ll enjoy it or not. I didn’t expect to like the antiquities mini game, for example, but it was more fun than I’d expected. Also, I was hyped about Morrowind and not so hyped about Summerset, but in the end I preferred Summerset.

I just hope I like High Isle better than the last two chapters.

adriant1978

It's also a good idea to avoid hyperbolic statements claiming that something is either great or terrible for a certain kind of player, implying a settled opinion among particular groups within the playerbase.

Apparently as a solo PvE player I'm meant to love the idea of the new card game, while as a veteran player (here since open beta) I'm supposed to be upset at the idea of account-wide achievements. Neither of these is true.

Having an opinion is great, but remember you speak only for yourself.

RisenEclipse

adriant1978 wrote: »

It's also a good idea to avoid hyperbolic statements claiming that something is either great or terrible for a certain kind of player, implying a settled opinion among particular groups within the playerbase.

Apparently as a solo PvE player I'm meant to love the idea of the new card game, while as a veteran player (here since open beta) I'm supposed to be upset at the idea of account-wide achievements. Neither of these is true.

Having an opinion is great, but remember you speak only for yourself.

Yes, I agree with this statement. The blanket statements of "all players feel this way", or "this ruins the game for all PvErs, PvPers, ect" isn't constructive at all, over dramatic, and false. You have your opinions for how the new chapter might effect you, and how you feel about it. Don't state your opinions as if you can mind read everyone else, or that you and your friends you know that agree with you somehow make up the community. People will either agree with you, or disagree. But don't try to speak on behalf of the community.

wazbaumukerb14_ESO

MoreTune wrote: »

This isn't a friendship, it's a business relationship.

Yes, I understand that ZOS has to make money, and that there are technical reasons they can't add new features like classes and weapons. But that doesn't mean players *have* to be happy with what they give us.

It's THEIR job to defend their decisions and price tags, and our job to hold them accountable. Otherwise, the balance of power tips and the developer starts taking advantage, which is already starting to happen. I can see no objective argument for why Morrowind (which dramatically changed the game with a new class and PVP mode) and High Isles (which is adding a minigame) should have the same price tag. Whatever ZOS' limitations, they are giving us less and less, while demanding the same amount of money, and they'll continue to do so if we let them.

.

Everyone needs to read this.

VaranisArano

OP: "Don't invalidate my constructive criticism."

Also OP (paraphrased): "If you defend ZOS, you're undermining the community voice and helping ZOS take advantage of us."

Maybe you weren't trying to turn around and invalidate ZOS' defenders in the name of your greater good, but that's how this reads to me.

I'm pretty mixed on High Isle myself, but I'd like to think that respectful debate and/or ignoring/reporting bait is a better option than asking people to stop sharing their opinions because it goes against what I consider to be "the greater good."

SeaGtGruff

People who post purely negative opinions about features that haven't even been released yet are not, in my opinion, making "constructive criticisms," unless the meaning of "constructive criticism" has been broadened to mean any and all complaining regardless of tone, content, context, and delivery.

People have a right to their opinions, and should be able to express their opinions-- which isn't the same thing as saying they should be allowed to express their opinions in whatever fashion they choose, such as in a physically or verbally abusive way. It also doesn't mean that any and all criticism is somehow "constructive" in nature.

But the voicing of opinions is a two-way street, because you can express your opinions about other people's opinions, and they can express their opinions about your opinions. Accusing someone of trying to invalidate your criticism because they criticized your criticism means that you, in turn, are trying to invalidate their criticism, doesn't it? People can't have meaningful and constructive discussions if they won't allow feedback to their feedback.

Ankahet

Another thing about true, constructive criticism, is that if it's truly constructive criticism, it won't start with things like "I don't like" or "I don't want".

Instead it'll be an explanation of why said feature doesn't work well, and provide possibilities to change it that would or may be better.

spartaxoxo

Ankahet wrote: »

Another thing about true, constructive criticism, is that if it's truly constructive criticism, it won't start with things like "I don't like" or "I don't want".

Instead it'll be an explanation of why said feature doesn't work well, and provide possibilities to change it that would or may be better.

I disagree. Some things are subjective in nature. And talking about the way the game makes you feel is perfectly valid feedback.

spartaxoxo

VaranisArano wrote: »

OP: "Don't invalidate my constructive criticism."

Also OP (paraphrased): "If you defend ZOS, you're undermining the community voice and helping ZOS take advantage of us."

Maybe you weren't trying to turn around and invalidate ZOS' defenders in the name of your greater good, but that's how this reads to me.

I'm pretty mixed on High Isle myself, but I'd like to think that respectful debate and/or ignoring/reporting bait is a better option than asking people to stop sharing their opinions because it goes against what I consider to be "the greater good."

I feel like it comes off that way because the OP mixes valid criticism with bait. And also doesn't at all address responses that are baiting from the "dislikes the new expansion" crowd.

Eta
For example stuff like

"Corporate boot lickers"
"Whoever made this should be fired"
"Maybe it's good if you like to eat crayons but...."

Etc.

Despite this though I do think it's a good reminder that we can all disagree without resorting to insulting. Not only because it's against the rules but because respectful discussion makes the game better. I just think the opening post should have done so from a perspective neutral POV.

sajackson

What I do see at the moment is a lot of criticism. Whether or not it's constructive, well history will be the judge of that..

francesinhalover

Chips_Ahoy wrote: »

MoreTune wrote: »

Moreover, it’s important to recognize that criticism is not an attack on the game. You can love a game deeply and still criticize its developer’s decisions. **In fact, the more you love a game, the more you should fight for it.**

The best way to protest against any decision made by any company is by closing the wallet.

If you don't agree with something but you still buy it and consume it, what's the point?

Indeed you can protest online all you want but they can at any moment / your acc. People need to be careful.

Toxic_Hemlock

mickeyx

MoreTune wrote: »

Over the past few days, there has been an ongoing battle between players who are disappointed in the upcoming Chapter, and players who are defending it. Differing opinions are normal and healthy—it's totally fine to be excited about High Isles or the card game—but what surprises me is the number of players who are going out of their way to invalidate reasonable, objective criticism.

"Chapters are about the new zone, not gameplay features."

"People will always find something to complain about."

"If you're not happy with the expansion, do us a favor and quit."

This isn't particularly surprising—people form strong attachments to the games they love, *especially* MMOs. **However, we have to remember that in the end, defending ZOS does absolutely nothing to help the playerbase.** It does not make the game better, or keep it around longer. It only serves to undermine the community's voice, one of our two sources of power (the other being our wallets). And giving ZOS more power means they'll cut more corners, because their primary goal is to improve their margins. This isn't a friendship, it's a business relationship.

Yes, I understand that ZOS has to make money, and that there are technical reasons they can't add new features like classes and weapons. But that doesn't mean players *have* to be happy with what they give us.

It's THEIR job to defend their decisions and price tags, and our job to hold them accountable. Otherwise, the balance of power tips and the developer starts taking advantage, which is already starting to happen. I can see no objective argument for why Morrowind (which dramatically changed the game with a new class and PVP mode) and High Isles (which is adding a minigame) should have the same price tag. Whatever ZOS' limitations, they are giving us less and less, while demanding the same amount of money, and they'll continue to do so if we let them.

Moreover, it’s important to recognize that criticism is not an attack on the game. You can love a game deeply and still criticize its developer’s decisions. **In fact, the more you love a game, the more you should fight for it.**

I know the repeated posts are frustrating. And I know it's hard to see people criticize something you love. If you're excited for High Isles, that's great, and you should feel free to say it! But for the greater good, let's not propagate the idea that it's wrong to ask for more. Because ZOS will never give it to us otherwise.

This. I will never understand players who defend video games as if someone insulted their family member or something. My passion is in playing games not defending companies who are in it just for money and business.

Grizzbeorn

MoreTune wrote: »

we have to remember that in the end, defending ZOS does absolutely nothing to help the playerbase.** It does not make the game better, or keep it around longer. It only serves to undermine the community's voice, one of our two sources of power (the other being our wallets). And giving ZOS more power means they'll cut more corners, because their primary goal is to improve their margins. This isn't a friendship, it's a business relationship.

All this is saying is that any positive opinion about changes a company makes is wrong, and that only critical opinions are correct.
You are invalidating anyone who disagrees with YOU.

Drammanoth

Grizzbeorn wrote: »

MoreTune wrote: »

we have to remember that in the end, defending ZOS does absolutely nothing to help the playerbase.** It does not make the game better, or keep it around longer. It only serves to undermine the community's voice, one of our two sources of power (the other being our wallets). And giving ZOS more power means they'll cut more corners, because their primary goal is to improve their margins. This isn't a friendship, it's a business relationship.

All this is saying is that any positive opinion about changes a company makes is wrong, and that only critical opinions are correct.
You are invalidating anyone who disagrees with YOU.

No. It merely means that (plural) you (or here, ZOS) would only like to hear praises how good they are, how good quality stuff they do. And all the criticism is considered to be just whimsical bs, because of players' immaturity or whatnot. Sure, constructive feedback only. But is even constructive feedback heeded?

Still, watch some streamers, more so those mainstream ones who actually do praise ZOS for their decisions. Want evidence for what they can be praised? Anti-RNG (stickerbook), armour hybridisation, CP 2.0. Earlier, One Tamriel, housing.

Heeding our complaints and acknowledging that they HAVE made a mistake is by no stretch of the imagination anything negative - IF they do something about it.

It's like in marketing - acknowledge your mistake, make amendments, gain customers' loyalt. For ZOS it means MONEY.

Would mean...

Ankahet

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ankahet wrote: »

Another thing about true, constructive criticism, is that if it's truly constructive criticism, it won't start with things like "I don't like" or "I don't want".

Instead it'll be an explanation of why said feature doesn't work well, and provide possibilities to change it that would or may be better.

I disagree. Some things are subjective in nature. And talking about the way the game makes you feel is perfectly valid feedback.

Criticism and feedback are based in experience and trial of the content.

Disliking something especially when it isn't available yet, is only an opinion without a basis, considering the content isn't available yet.

Jaimeh

MoreTune wrote: »

Moreover, it’s important to recognize that criticism is not an attack on the game. You can love a game deeply and still criticize its developer’s decisions. **In fact, the more you love a game, the more you should fight for it.**

This ^ Players should always voice their concerns, opinions, complains, wishes, etc., about a game they love and want to see succedding for a long time, regardless if their views are not always popular. Sometimes the way posts attack every single criticism with 'well, we love it, so if you don't like don't buy~' veers closely to toxic positivity, is unreasonable, and ultimately not good fot the health of the game.

Drammanoth

Ankahet wrote: »

Criticism and feedback are based in experience and trial of the content.

Disliking something especially when it isn't available yet, is only an opinion without a basis, considering the content isn't available yet.

Doesn't change the fact that we can express our mild dissatisfaction with what is to come, considering there have been MANY ideas as to what could have been / can be added to the game to make it. Adding new wepons, removing obsolete materials, etc. It is with their own tools that they created it, so why couldn't ZOS remove it, redo it?

Ah, right, because stockholders.