Update 33 PC Launch Postmortem

RoseTheSnowElf

I want to add my thanks as well for being so upfront about what has happened over the past week. While I'm on PS4, I've been genuinely, and increasingly concerned about our upcoming update after paying attention to all that's been reported by the PC community. I'm not entirely relieved of my concern, but it's still reassuring to read your openness about what you the developers have been up to behind the scenes.

I agree with others, this type of communication is an example of what we would love to see more of.

However, I would like to add my 2 cents as well; I was really hoping (and many others were hoping as well) that there would be more communication in regards to AWA. I don't want to risk getting off topic here. I just want to say this; that while we are being told certain features of the new AWA are "intended", or many players are just assuming they are "intended", many other players are adamant that certain things about AWA are in fact flawed or broken. Certain aspects about AWA are having far too much of a negative impact not only in the personal enjoyment of the game by many players but also in the functionality of the game.

It's so hard to believe this is "intended".

I know this is still only on PC now, but come Tuesday, I'm pretty confident many console players will feel this way as well.

Can we please discuss this?

Hotdog_23

Excellent communication! Gave a timeline of actual events/problems and thoughts behind your actions and reasoning in an easy way to understand. Thanks.

Stay safe and enjoy Springtime

Tevalaur

@ZOS_MattFiror Thank you! Thank you for posting this. As one of the ones heavily affected for more than a week I greatly appreciate the insights shared and feeling like we mattered. Coming out of my first round of chemo today, this was a highlight to my Friday evening; while it was frustrating to say the least to not be able to relax with my favorite game lately this type of communication soothes over any anger/resentment.

Please continue to share some insightful details when major snarls or snafus happen (obvious exception being anything that could be mimicked as an exploit). THANK YOU AGAIN FOR SHARING THIS!

Jaraal

Hymzir wrote: »

When I spotted this thread I thought: "Holy... jumping water beetles! They actually finally responded."

When I noticed that the post opened with the line:

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Since Update 33 launched, I think the PC North American megaserver performance problems deserve some explanation. This post outlines what has been going on the last week or so for our North American PC players.

I thought: "Err... What? I know that was kinda big deal, but it was probably just some technical thing that blind-sided them, and something they eventually fixed. What about an actual response and evaluation of all the issues people have had with AWA? Is that just gonna get swept under a rug"

Having read the post, it seems both thoughts proved to be true.

Though credit should be given, when credit is due, and this is an excellent post. It explains clearly what went wrong and what ZOS did about it, and came across as truly professional. It's a prime example of what sort of communication ZOS should be doing. On all points.

Now if only ZOS would approach the issues regarding AWA with equal candour.

It's a big step from explaining a hardware failure to explaining the rationale behind deleting eight years of hard work on our alts and throwing NPC dialogues into disarray. And, who knows? Maybe they actually want the operator of the computer to be the interactor rather than the individual characters. If they don't explain that part, how would we know the thought process behind it?

My question to the management would be, since we can only play the game completely one single time now, rather than being able to start from scratch on a new character as before.... will the prices of the new DLC and our subscriptions be lowered to mirror the reduced functionality? I can't think of any other full priced AAA titles that only give you a single playthrough. It doesn't seem the same value as before is there, so I'm wondering if you guys are taking that into consideration going forward?

Sarannah

PC EU. Thanks for the explanation. Sometimes things just go wrong, which some players can handle better than others.

This post has me wondering though. I thought the PC EU server was the biggest ESO server. Or is the PC EU server only the server with the most current players, while PC NA has the most accounts(cold/beta) but less current players?

Tandor

Jaraal wrote: »

Hymzir wrote: »

When I spotted this thread I thought: "Holy... jumping water beetles! They actually finally responded."

When I noticed that the post opened with the line:

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

Since Update 33 launched, I think the PC North American megaserver performance problems deserve some explanation. This post outlines what has been going on the last week or so for our North American PC players.

I thought: "Err... What? I know that was kinda big deal, but it was probably just some technical thing that blind-sided them, and something they eventually fixed. What about an actual response and evaluation of all the issues people have had with AWA? Is that just gonna get swept under a rug"

Having read the post, it seems both thoughts proved to be true.

Though credit should be given, when credit is due, and this is an excellent post. It explains clearly what went wrong and what ZOS did about it, and came across as truly professional. It's a prime example of what sort of communication ZOS should be doing. On all points.

Now if only ZOS would approach the issues regarding AWA with equal candour.

It's a big step from explaining a hardware failure to explaining the rationale behind deleting eight years of hard work on our alts and throwing NPC dialogues into disarray. And, who knows? Maybe they actually want the operator of the computer to be the interactor rather than the individual characters. If they don't explain that part, how would we know the thought process behind it?

My question to the management would be, since we can only play the game completely one single time now, rather than being able to start from scratch on a new character as before.... will the prices of the new DLC and our subscriptions be lowered to mirror the reduced functionality? I can't think of any other full priced AAA titles that only give you a single playthrough. It doesn't seem the same value as before is there, so I'm wondering if you guys are taking that into consideration going forward?

Not only that, but what about all the extra character slots players bought on the basis of being able to play the game fully with those additional characters? Yes, I know about the EULA and their ability to make changes but that's really not the point in this case. A lot of players won't have touched their alts since this change came in, and certainly won't be creating any more as for them there's no point in doing so.

ssewallb14_ESO

That's really unfortunate timing on that hardware failure. Appreciate the update.

Drammanoth

Well, what can I say...

Only that I have been proven wrong. GOOD!

Thus, bravo I say.

Arunei

Vaoh wrote: »

Arunei wrote: »

I appreciate the honesty here, but I do have a few questions.

First, why are beta accounts and characters still being held? We don't have access to those accounts or characters, there should be no reason to keep them, at least none I can think of. Unless those are kept on a completely separate, inactive server, why waste database space on them, especially when your answer to database issues was to implement AwA in the way you did?

As for the 150% Exp Scrolls, that's 10 hours of increased experience. Which is a fraction of time compared to the five days a lot of people lost. You really should be giving people 20 or so of these things, it's not like it would cost you anything, and that would still only be 40 hours of increased experience, not even a full two days. Daily Seals should also be increased for five days, not just the weekly ones.

Edit because I was wrong, a friend informed me that the 150% scrolls are only one hour long, not two as I had thought. That's even less time people are being compensated for. We really should be getting a lot more of these if this is how you want to handle the compensation.

Well now that those beta test accounts are kept in a separate database, it should be fine to keep them around right?

If a Beta test player comes back and asks for their beta pet, I’d assume this would be their way to get it.

Hmmmm, that's one reason I suppose they might be keeping them, for the beta pet. I'm not sure how they link that to a live account though, I don't think they need the beta accounts for it. I would assume your account itself would have a flag that you were in the beta that would give you the pet once you make an account with the live game. But maybe that's not the case, I don't think we have any way of knowing.

As for being in a separate database, I'm not sure if they are. Unless I misunderstood what Matt said, it sounded like the beta accounts are just being kept in cold storage with live accounts as well. That's why I was asking if they're in a completely separate database only used for beta accounts, so they wouldn't be competing with live accounts for space.

virtus753

Sarannah wrote: »

PC EU. Thanks for the explanation. Sometimes things just go wrong, which some players can handle better than others.

This post has me wondering though. I thought the PC EU server was the biggest ESO server. Or is the PC EU server only the server with the most current players, while PC NA has the most accounts(cold/beta) but less current players?

I thought I recalled ZOS saying that EU sees higher concurrency because so many people who play there tend to do so within the same smaller period of time, while NA has more overall active accounts. Players from all over the world can of course play on either or both servers, but the population of EU in general is certainly much more concentrated in a smaller number of time zones than that of NA, and I think the game population was said to reflect that.

karekiz

Don't post these things I liked it when people were posted lets roll back the server two weeks!

Sarannah

Arunei wrote: »

Vaoh wrote: »

Arunei wrote: »

I appreciate the honesty here, but I do have a few questions.

First, why are beta accounts and characters still being held? We don't have access to those accounts or characters, there should be no reason to keep them, at least none I can think of. Unless those are kept on a completely separate, inactive server, why waste database space on them, especially when your answer to database issues was to implement AwA in the way you did?

As for the 150% Exp Scrolls, that's 10 hours of increased experience. Which is a fraction of time compared to the five days a lot of people lost. You really should be giving people 20 or so of these things, it's not like it would cost you anything, and that would still only be 40 hours of increased experience, not even a full two days. Daily Seals should also be increased for five days, not just the weekly ones.

Edit because I was wrong, a friend informed me that the 150% scrolls are only one hour long, not two as I had thought. That's even less time people are being compensated for. We really should be getting a lot more of these if this is how you want to handle the compensation.

Well now that those beta test accounts are kept in a separate database, it should be fine to keep them around right?

If a Beta test player comes back and asks for their beta pet, I’d assume this would be their way to get it.

Hmmmm, that's one reason I suppose they might be keeping them, for the beta pet. I'm not sure how they link that to a live account though, I don't think they need the beta accounts for it. I would assume your account itself would have a flag that you were in the beta that would give you the pet once you make an account with the live game. But maybe that's not the case, I don't think we have any way of knowing.

As for being in a separate database, I'm not sure if they are. Unless I misunderstood what Matt said, it sounded like the beta accounts are just being kept in cold storage with live accounts as well. That's why I was asking if they're in a completely separate database only used for beta accounts, so they wouldn't be competing with live accounts for space.

A beta account is simply an account created before the beta, and used in the beta tests for ESO. The account is like any regular account, just much older. My game-account is a beta account as well, and I do have the beta monkey still. But my account is still in use, so is placed in the live database for faster loading. The beta players who stopped playing(and any other accounts that stopped playing), their accounts will be placed in the cold database as they do not have to be in the main database anymore(until they ever log in again, which would push them to the live database). Assuming I understood the explanation post right. Instead of beta, you might as well just read 'old'.

Bethgael

Arunei wrote: »

I too was a beta player, but that doesn't really matter because our live accounts are not the same as our beta accounts. As I mentioned in my other post, we can't do anything with them, we can't access them or play those characters. We won't be losing anything if they're deleted, whereas ZOS would be gaining database space for actual live accounts.

Maybe they're afraid they'll accidentally end up deleting all of our monkeys.

I'm... erhm.... only half joking.

Back on track, thank you for the explainy--it is appreciated. However, I'm also in the camp of "please address the AWA issue in the same way."

deleted221205-002626

VaxtinTheWolf wrote: »

The PC character database (especially the North American megaserver) is far, far larger than console as ESO had a big launch year in 2014 (pre-console launch) and all those accounts are still there. In addition, all the Beta accounts (and characters) are still there as well.

I appreciate not nuking old accounts. I know I've abandoned some games because I get an E-mail saying that "YOU MUST LOG IN NOW OR ELSE" when I have no intension of rushing back to this or that game when I'm not in a mood for it, and thus my account and all data on it is purged. At least I know I would be able to return here, assuming the game is still alive far into the future, knowing my memories and progress has been retained if I happened to take a break from the game.

I agree with you on this... Sure its nice to make room in the databases by removing old toon but myself for example was away nearly 6yrs. I came back and everything was as I left it and have since bought every expansion, dlc and all kinds of other upgrades.. If my toon was deleted that woulda been it.. I would have just uninstalled and walked away again.

Creakinator

Thanks for the update, but the compensation is not enough. You gave us something that costs you nothing. I'm sure there are not any mages using their precious materials to make these scrolls for you. And then to make them a part of the daily log in reward is ridiculous! Why not send them out this week? A free week of ESO+ to the ESO+ subscribers and two-three days of ESO+ to everyone else would have voted with your pocket book and been a more proper compensation.

barigood54_ESO

Dont listen to the neaysayers, most of us really appreciate your candor on this issue. I was never really having major issues with those type of things, but I did some well needed maintenance to my system, (Drivers, new router, update ISP MBPS), and got good results last week!

DarcyMardin

Thanks very much for the detailed explanation. Honestly, it made me feel a lot better about the game. Please keep the lines of communication open.

white7wolf_ESO

This communication is great and something that is refreshing to see. It doesn't happen often enough in the software industry.
I've spent my fair share of timing chasing red herrings thinking a bug is related to new changes only to find something completely different. From one software developer to another, Kudos to your team!
Is it bad reading about your transition process made me want to know more? It sounds like a fun project to me 😅

TrvpEriith

Tenthirty2 wrote: »

@ZOS_MattFiror

Thank you.
As someone who has been involved with several all-hands type IT issues over the years, THIS is the kind of communication I was looking for.
A clear and concise explanation and a no-excuses ownership of the issue and steps to recover reputation.
As of last night in another post I was starting to lose faith, but your post has restored it.
It also explains the complexity of the compounding challenges and why they took the shape, and time, they did.

@ZOS_GinaBruno (cc @ZOS_Kevin )
You have asked us awhile back what better communication looked like to the player base.
This thread from Matt, this is it.
Compensation is nice and all, but to be totally honest I would have been happy with just Matt's explanation.
It makes me feel like my time and money as a customer is respected, and well spent.

I agree. The admittance of fault not once but twice was a very nice transparent change. I appreciate the dilligent work and look forward to another update on the PvP performance fixes in the future.

silvereyes

Sarannah wrote: »

PC EU. Thanks for the explanation. Sometimes things just go wrong, which some players can handle better than others.

This post has me wondering though. I thought the PC EU server was the biggest ESO server. Or is the PC EU server only the server with the most current players, while PC NA has the most accounts(cold/beta) but less current players?

I don't think either is necessarily true. PC EU has the most concurrent players during peak hours, due to the population density fitting into fewer time zones than PC NA. I don't think that means it has more players overall than NA, though.

doabhi

those Pesky SPF modules amirite?

peacenote

FrancisCrawford wrote: »

Onomog wrote: »

Thank you for your openness on this. The transparency is refreshing.

I would love to see the same effort given to explaining why the AwA process was pushed through with out seeming to take into consideration everything that it broke.

That would be a totally different kind of post.

The story in this post was that they made simple, retroactively clear engineering mistakes (looking in the wrong place for a root cause) before getting to the unarguably 100% correct answer (identifying the true root cause and fixing it). Anything that was a matter of opinion (what makes Activity Finder so vulnerable to slowdowns, and is it OK that it hasn't been fixed for so long?) was ignored in the post and, even so, we think it's an excellent and greatly appreciated post.

What you're asking for would have a lot of debatable opinion in it.

Ehh. Not sure I agree. It literally could be something like this:

"We have been reading all of the AwA Ascending Tide feedback, and we realize that many of you feel that we haven't adequately addressed your questions and concerns. For that, we are truly sorry. We want to be the type of company where our customers feel heard.

AwA is a complicated topic, and it simply wasn't possible for us to reverse course and address all of the preferences and comments in time for release. That said, rest assured we are dedicated to maintaining the ability for our customers to enjoy multiple play throughs and playing multiple characters in ESO, and are open to tweaking the implementation going forward (which achievements are character vs account specific, for example) as ESO evolves. We also plan to fix some of the immersion issues that have been identified, and improve your ability to track your progress through dungeons, trials, and the world with multiple characters.

Again we apologize that communication felt lacking, and unfortunately the loss of historical data was a necessary trade-off to bring this functionality to the community. However we believe we can improve as time goes by and appreciate the ongoing feedback."

Literally just directly touching on the fact that they are aware of what people have been saying, even if they won't or can't change it, would be a huge improvement in transparency.

dmharms

I pretty much never post on the forums, but just want to leave my mark here in saying that I appreciate these kinds of explanations and post-mortems when things don't go smoothly, and I wish more game companies did so.

I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but just want to make it known that it's really cool that you guys do this pretty transparently. Thanks.

Finedaible

I appreciate the more candidness of this post.

Any update on those "special rulesets or weekend events" for Cyrodill and Battlegrounds you mentioned on January 12th? (https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/595442/eso-pvp-update-january-2022/p1) I would enjoy some more doubled AP this year to be honest .

Kesstryl

peacenote wrote: »

FrancisCrawford wrote: »

Onomog wrote: »

Thank you for your openness on this. The transparency is refreshing.

I would love to see the same effort given to explaining why the AwA process was pushed through with out seeming to take into consideration everything that it broke.

That would be a totally different kind of post.

The story in this post was that they made simple, retroactively clear engineering mistakes (looking in the wrong place for a root cause) before getting to the unarguably 100% correct answer (identifying the true root cause and fixing it). Anything that was a matter of opinion (what makes Activity Finder so vulnerable to slowdowns, and is it OK that it hasn't been fixed for so long?) was ignored in the post and, even so, we think it's an excellent and greatly appreciated post.

What you're asking for would have a lot of debatable opinion in it.

Ehh. Not sure I agree. It literally could be something like this:

"We have been reading all of the AwA Ascending Tide feedback, and we realize that many of you feel that we haven't adequately addressed your questions and concerns. For that, we are truly sorry. We want to be the type of company where our customers feel heard.

AwA is a complicated topic, and it simply wasn't possible for us to reverse course and address all of the preferences and comments in time for release. That said, rest assured we are dedicated to maintaining the ability for our customers to enjoy multiple play throughs and playing multiple characters in ESO, and are open to tweaking the implementation going forward (which achievements are character vs account specific, for example) as ESO evolves. We also plan to fix some of the immersion issues that have been identified, and improve your ability to track your progress through dungeons, trials, and the world with multiple characters.

Again we apologize that communication felt lacking, and unfortunately the loss of historical data was a necessary trade-off to bring this functionality to the community. However we believe we can improve as time goes by and appreciate the ongoing feedback."

Literally just directly touching on the fact that they are aware of what people have been saying, even if they won't or can't change it, would be a huge improvement in transparency.

I would have been so happy for this, and if we got something like this I would not have cancelled my sub.

Jaraal

Kesstryl wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

FrancisCrawford wrote: »

Onomog wrote: »

Thank you for your openness on this. The transparency is refreshing.

I would love to see the same effort given to explaining why the AwA process was pushed through with out seeming to take into consideration everything that it broke.

That would be a totally different kind of post.

The story in this post was that they made simple, retroactively clear engineering mistakes (looking in the wrong place for a root cause) before getting to the unarguably 100% correct answer (identifying the true root cause and fixing it). Anything that was a matter of opinion (what makes Activity Finder so vulnerable to slowdowns, and is it OK that it hasn't been fixed for so long?) was ignored in the post and, even so, we think it's an excellent and greatly appreciated post.

What you're asking for would have a lot of debatable opinion in it.

Ehh. Not sure I agree. It literally could be something like this:

"We have been reading all of the AwA Ascending Tide feedback, and we realize that many of you feel that we haven't adequately addressed your questions and concerns. For that, we are truly sorry. We want to be the type of company where our customers feel heard.

AwA is a complicated topic, and it simply wasn't possible for us to reverse course and address all of the preferences and comments in time for release. That said, rest assured we are dedicated to maintaining the ability for our customers to enjoy multiple play throughs and playing multiple characters in ESO, and are open to tweaking the implementation going forward (which achievements are character vs account specific, for example) as ESO evolves. We also plan to fix some of the immersion issues that have been identified, and improve your ability to track your progress through dungeons, trials, and the world with multiple characters.

Again we apologize that communication felt lacking, and unfortunately the loss of historical data was a necessary trade-off to bring this functionality to the community. However we believe we can improve as time goes by and appreciate the ongoing feedback."

Literally just directly touching on the fact that they are aware of what people have been saying, even if they won't or can't change it, would be a huge improvement in transparency.

I would have been so happy for this, and if we got something like this I would not have cancelled my sub.

I don't know. "We're sorry" doesn't bring back years of wasted gameplay and achievements, or make playing our alts going forward any better. It's still one and done for most achievements, and no amount of apologizing will restore the game to what it was originally intended to be (and what we have been paying all these years to play.)

Hurbster

It's the minimum level of communication I would expect.

ArchangelIsraphel

Jaraal wrote: »

Kesstryl wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

FrancisCrawford wrote: »

Onomog wrote: »

Thank you for your openness on this. The transparency is refreshing.

I would love to see the same effort given to explaining why the AwA process was pushed through with out seeming to take into consideration everything that it broke.

That would be a totally different kind of post.

The story in this post was that they made simple, retroactively clear engineering mistakes (looking in the wrong place for a root cause) before getting to the unarguably 100% correct answer (identifying the true root cause and fixing it). Anything that was a matter of opinion (what makes Activity Finder so vulnerable to slowdowns, and is it OK that it hasn't been fixed for so long?) was ignored in the post and, even so, we think it's an excellent and greatly appreciated post.

What you're asking for would have a lot of debatable opinion in it.

Ehh. Not sure I agree. It literally could be something like this:

"We have been reading all of the AwA Ascending Tide feedback, and we realize that many of you feel that we haven't adequately addressed your questions and concerns. For that, we are truly sorry. We want to be the type of company where our customers feel heard.

AwA is a complicated topic, and it simply wasn't possible for us to reverse course and address all of the preferences and comments in time for release. That said, rest assured we are dedicated to maintaining the ability for our customers to enjoy multiple play throughs and playing multiple characters in ESO, and are open to tweaking the implementation going forward (which achievements are character vs account specific, for example) as ESO evolves. We also plan to fix some of the immersion issues that have been identified, and improve your ability to track your progress through dungeons, trials, and the world with multiple characters.

Again we apologize that communication felt lacking, and unfortunately the loss of historical data was a necessary trade-off to bring this functionality to the community. However we believe we can improve as time goes by and appreciate the ongoing feedback."

Literally just directly touching on the fact that they are aware of what people have been saying, even if they won't or can't change it, would be a huge improvement in transparency.

I would have been so happy for this, and if we got something like this I would not have cancelled my sub.

I don't know. "We're sorry" doesn't bring back years of wasted gameplay and achievements, or make playing our alts going forward any better. It's still one and done for most achievements, and no amount of apologizing will restore the game to what it was originally intended to be (and what we have been paying all these years to play.)

Agreed. While I'd appreciate such a message, it would not return what has been taken or remedy the fact that the game is no longer as enjoyable as it once was for various reasons. It's definitely going to take some more solid examples of improving communication and gameplay from zos before I ever open my wallet again.

Kesstryl

Jaraal wrote: »

Kesstryl wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

FrancisCrawford wrote: »

Onomog wrote: »

Thank you for your openness on this. The transparency is refreshing.

I would love to see the same effort given to explaining why the AwA process was pushed through with out seeming to take into consideration everything that it broke.

That would be a totally different kind of post.

The story in this post was that they made simple, retroactively clear engineering mistakes (looking in the wrong place for a root cause) before getting to the unarguably 100% correct answer (identifying the true root cause and fixing it). Anything that was a matter of opinion (what makes Activity Finder so vulnerable to slowdowns, and is it OK that it hasn't been fixed for so long?) was ignored in the post and, even so, we think it's an excellent and greatly appreciated post.

What you're asking for would have a lot of debatable opinion in it.

Ehh. Not sure I agree. It literally could be something like this:

"We have been reading all of the AwA Ascending Tide feedback, and we realize that many of you feel that we haven't adequately addressed your questions and concerns. For that, we are truly sorry. We want to be the type of company where our customers feel heard.

AwA is a complicated topic, and it simply wasn't possible for us to reverse course and address all of the preferences and comments in time for release. That said, rest assured we are dedicated to maintaining the ability for our customers to enjoy multiple play throughs and playing multiple characters in ESO, and are open to tweaking the implementation going forward (which achievements are character vs account specific, for example) as ESO evolves. We also plan to fix some of the immersion issues that have been identified, and improve your ability to track your progress through dungeons, trials, and the world with multiple characters.

Again we apologize that communication felt lacking, and unfortunately the loss of historical data was a necessary trade-off to bring this functionality to the community. However we believe we can improve as time goes by and appreciate the ongoing feedback."

Literally just directly touching on the fact that they are aware of what people have been saying, even if they won't or can't change it, would be a huge improvement in transparency.

I would have been so happy for this, and if we got something like this I would not have cancelled my sub.

I don't know. "We're sorry" doesn't bring back years of wasted gameplay and achievements, or make playing our alts going forward any better. It's still one and done for most achievements, and no amount of apologizing will restore the game to what it was originally intended to be (and what we have been paying all these years to play.)

I do agree that losing individual character data hurt, and trust me, I'm not any happier about it than you are. I'm losing individual dates of completions, each alt's special accomplishments, easy tracking for dungeons, delves, and world bosses, and figuring out where I am in different zones and whether I need to go to one to start its story or not. My drawing the line happened when NPCs and quests were being bugged out on PTS and seeing each patch not only not address those bugs, but not even acknowledge they were bugged. Moving to present time, it might be some things were patched between then and live, but I have no way of knowing it because nothing was mentioned in the patch notes. People are testing things to figure out if anything got fixed or not, but we shouldn't have to go figure that out for ourselves, they should have told us. If things are being fixed and they decided to just keep it hush hush, I feel like I'm being gaslighted for even complaining about it at all, even though I was there right along with everyone else on PTS. All I wanted was an acknowledgement and a word that things would be fixed in time. I didn't care if I'd have to wait until a few patches in on live, or even until Update 34, just communicate that things are being looked into and fixes will come. They would have had my sub money for this month and however long into the future plus my crown purchases. Now I'm trying other games, and started getting back into an MMO I used to play. Is that how they want things to go down with their customers.

This thread is a huge example of why ZOS needs to communicate with us. Most people here responded positively to the honesty, and this proves that ZOS really needs to do this sort of things more often, and especially for things that get a huge and diverse response like AwA.

Finedaible

Kesstryl wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Kesstryl wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

FrancisCrawford wrote: »

Onomog wrote: »

Thank you for your openness on this. The transparency is refreshing.

I would love to see the same effort given to explaining why the AwA process was pushed through with out seeming to take into consideration everything that it broke.

That would be a totally different kind of post.

The story in this post was that they made simple, retroactively clear engineering mistakes (looking in the wrong place for a root cause) before getting to the unarguably 100% correct answer (identifying the true root cause and fixing it). Anything that was a matter of opinion (what makes Activity Finder so vulnerable to slowdowns, and is it OK that it hasn't been fixed for so long?) was ignored in the post and, even so, we think it's an excellent and greatly appreciated post.

What you're asking for would have a lot of debatable opinion in it.

Ehh. Not sure I agree. It literally could be something like this:

"We have been reading all of the AwA Ascending Tide feedback, and we realize that many of you feel that we haven't adequately addressed your questions and concerns. For that, we are truly sorry. We want to be the type of company where our customers feel heard.

AwA is a complicated topic, and it simply wasn't possible for us to reverse course and address all of the preferences and comments in time for release. That said, rest assured we are dedicated to maintaining the ability for our customers to enjoy multiple play throughs and playing multiple characters in ESO, and are open to tweaking the implementation going forward (which achievements are character vs account specific, for example) as ESO evolves. We also plan to fix some of the immersion issues that have been identified, and improve your ability to track your progress through dungeons, trials, and the world with multiple characters.

Again we apologize that communication felt lacking, and unfortunately the loss of historical data was a necessary trade-off to bring this functionality to the community. However we believe we can improve as time goes by and appreciate the ongoing feedback."

Literally just directly touching on the fact that they are aware of what people have been saying, even if they won't or can't change it, would be a huge improvement in transparency.

I would have been so happy for this, and if we got something like this I would not have cancelled my sub.

I don't know. "We're sorry" doesn't bring back years of wasted gameplay and achievements, or make playing our alts going forward any better. It's still one and done for most achievements, and no amount of apologizing will restore the game to what it was originally intended to be (and what we have been paying all these years to play.)

I do agree that losing individual character data hurt, and trust me, I'm not any happier about it than you are. I'm losing individual dates of completions, each alt's special accomplishments, easy tracking for dungeons, delves, and world bosses, and figuring out where I am in different zones and whether I need to go to one to start its story or not. My drawing the line happened when NPCs and quests were being bugged out on PTS and seeing each patch not only not address those bugs, but not even acknowledge they were bugged. Moving to present time, it might be some things were patched between then and live, but I have no way of knowing it because nothing was mentioned in the patch notes. People are testing things to figure out if anything got fixed or not, but we shouldn't have to go figure that out for ourselves, they should have told us. If things are being fixed and they decided to just keep it hush hush, I feel like I'm being gaslighted for even complaining about it at all, even though I was there right along with everyone else on PTS. All I wanted was an acknowledgement and a word that things would be fixed in time. I didn't care if I'd have to wait until a few patches in on live, or even until Update 34, just communicate that things are being looked into and fixes will come. They would have had my sub money for this month and however long into the future plus my crown purchases. Now I'm trying other games, and started getting back into an MMO I used to play. Is that how they want things to go down with their customers.

This thread is a huge example of why ZOS needs to communicate with us. Most people here responded positively to the honesty, and this proves that ZOS really needs to do this sort of things more often, and especially for things that get a huge and diverse response like AwA.

The playerbase does not trust ZoS anymore (and by extension the Directors) and I am inclined to agree with that assessment. Don't get me wrong though, recent efforts to increase communication - like this post - have been a breeze of fresh air, but only time will tell if ZoS's promises are empty or not. Delivering on those promises this year will be more important than anything else for the future of the game, especially after so many years of failures. One cannot maintain a game which competes with the likes of WoW and not do any better than the competition.