Market Reseach

Kisakee

Grizzbeorn wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

417 people were voting in that poll. The number is given next to the poll title.

I figured that was a given.
But that is the only known number. (other than 70% of that number which is 291.9)
292 people, of the 417 who bothered to vote, don't like the card game.

So what percentage of forum-dwellers does 292 represent?
We don't know, because we don't know how many forum-dwellers there are, so we can't go on to extrapolate how much of the over-all community dislikes the game.

Even if we have 10.000 forum users and 70% won't like the card game that's still nothing compared to the hundreds of thousands of active players.

Arunei

pklemming wrote: »

Playing(or not playing) the card game is not the issue. It is that resources were funnelled to something most of the play base did not want instead of prioritising the massive number of bugs currently in game. The game issues are what are driving people away, not the lack of a card game.

Why does everyone think that ZOS is just one big group where everyone all works on the same stuff? It baffles my mind how many people don't realize how companies work. The people responsible for bug fixes and people responsible for creating new content and game systems are DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Different departments handling different things. The card game didn't "steal" resources that could have done to fixing performance issues and bugs because those resources weren't going there to begin with.

Jaraal wrote: »

Cuddlypuff wrote: »

Darkstorne wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Kisakee wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

Playing(or not playing) the card game is not the issue. It is that resources were funnelled to something most of the play base did not want

Stop assuming, you don't know what most of the people want. Nobody knows.

We do when it comes to the card game.


https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/602720/how-interested-are-you-in-playing-tales-of-tribute-the-card-game/p1

Forum polls really don't mean much. I'll bet they have some good in-game data that shows a significant chunk of the player base really enjoys the non-combat systems in this game, like housing, fishing, and antiquities. In which case, it makes a lot of sense to add something new to that pool, alongside the standard Chapter expectations like a new zone, trial, and storyline.

Honestly, I think the card game would be much more warmly received on the forums too, if it wasn't for the perception that it's essentially replaced a new class or skill line.

Maybe they should have pitched it as a lightweight system that would take load off all the other systems to improve overall performance. At least one can hope. Could you imagine card game lag?

Well they said the main reason they axed most of our achievements was to make room for the card game (and other) achievements going forward, because the "billion"+ achievements were a performance problem. So, yes, the card game will hog resources. How much is yet to be determined.

They never said they were implementing AwA just because of the card game. They did it because they claimed it would make the database more performant and it would make adding new game systems (INCLUDING the card game, because that's a new game system) easier and that they would perform better.

As much as I feel for the people whose way of playing got [snipped] on by how they did AwA, it's very misinforming to claim to said they did it because of the card game alone. And you're twisting the "hog resources" part because OP meant it in a different way from what you're trying to use it. On top of that, literally EVERYTHING they add would "hog resources". Classes, Skill lines, a higher furniture limit, any new system or mechanic, ALL of it would "hog resources". Are you saying then that they shouldn't add any kind of new content ever?

Pevey

Market research is overrated.

"If you ask the customer what they want, they would tell you a faster horse." (or something like that)
-- Henry Ford

chessalavakia_ESO

My impression is that generally game development follows a mixture of data and what the developers want to do which makes it rather hard to actually guess where a specific decision comes from.

Generally speaking, part of the brand value of a company comes from people liking the developers. As a result, the developers generally get credit for the good choices and the data generally gets blamed for the bad ones regardless of if it's true or not.

Additionally, what the data says and what people think aren't necessarily going to be the same.

For example, if you asked me what I like about ESO I'd mention liking the story in the quests, making builds, and battlegrounds.

If you looked at the data for what I actually do, you'll notice the picture doesn't really match that. I primarily do repeatable quests not story quests. I've got multiple characters that are sitting waiting for a build, and I rarely do a battleground when I don't have the daily bonus.

The data would also likely show that the content burn rate in ESO dramatically exceeds the production rate from players that play actively.

As a result, it's possible the decision to make a 15-20 minute card game might make sense with the data even if people say they don't want it.

Finally, different people like and play different content when you push for cutting x or y because not many people like it one must be careful because some/most of what many of us like isn't popular.

What % of the players in ESO do you think have done Fang Lair on HM?

VaranisArano

Jaraal wrote: »

Yeah they wiped out all the achievements we worked so hard to get on our alts and killed replayability.... for an unpopular addition that cheapens the whole ESO experience. Not to mention the plethora of bugs introduced by AWA, as well as the drop in performance.

Makes you wonder what's really going on behind the scenes.

In part, what's going on behind the scenes sounds like a technology and time crunch.

The Devs are rearchitecting the code in order to maybe fix the PVP performance problems and better update the game to handle all the systems that have gotten added to it over its lifetime. That's a lot of time and effort that's basically invisible to the players until they can actually start testing it out Live.

Plus, the Devs are limited by the capabilities of old consoles (something that's been alluded to a couple times by Rich Lambert) so they have to be careful about what they add.

My personal thought is that the Card Game was a relatively easy addition that they could bang out for this year in between everything else they are working on that's also a source to evergreen content for players. Antiquities and Companions are both a system that ZOS can add new stuff ad infinitum without much effort, and I expect ToT to follow the same pattern.


Rich's Interview on High Isle: https://wccftech.com/the-elder-scrolls-online-high-isle-preview-qa-fsr-1-0-support-card-game-and-much-more/

MaraxusTheOrc

pklemming wrote: »

So, the idea of market research is to see if there is a need for the product before spending resources and time in to developing something.

I am curious at what point market research decided what ESO really needed was a card game. Personally, if I want a card game, there are a lot of good ones on the market already. The current feedback shows little to no interest in the game and I would rather you take the time to fix the plethora of issues the game currently has, rather than adding something very few people want.

You are losing people due to bugs and poor decision-making and this appears to continue that trend admirably. Please try listening to what people actually want.

For example, I would love to go in to Fang Lair and not have to wait for the zoo fight to spawn multiple times before it realises we are actually in valid locations. Same with Volenfell, last boss, where the fight resets, removing the HM, often causing a deliberate wipe in order to reset and try and get the thing in HM again.. Similar issues on Falkreath Hold golem boss that likes to reset mid way through the fight.

Or maybe the dungeon finder that randomly leaves people behind when the dungeon starts...

What I don't want is a new %$Q£^^£ card game!

I don’t care about fang lair or falkreath hold. I’m looking forward to the card game.

Guess our market research cancel each other out.

propertyOfUndefined

As somebody who manages software development teams irl, I know how important it is to avoid burnout and keep your developers feeling inspired, creative, motivated and happy. We often give developers a “sprint” every quarter where they have full control and don’t have to worry about the backlog of business-defined user stories to help combat this.

A part of me wonders if that’s what this is. It’s a standalone aspect of the game that won’t risk introducing new balance issues, adversely impacting combat performance and the like. At the same time, it might be giving the devs some much-needed time to innovate and “breathe” without having to worry about introducing the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

If that’s the case, then I get it. As a player, I would have been more excited for a new system or skill line that affects the way I play my characters. But… you gotta do what you gotta do. Burnout is a terrible thing that leads to uninspired and buggy products, and can ultimately lead to attrition.

pklemming

The poll gives a 'snapshot' or the feeling in the community. It is way from perfect, but it is the best we have.

Regarding MR, they have sent questionnaires out to the player-base before now to gauge the response of a major change. True it was... erm... some time back. If they are not asking the players, just how do you think they are gathering data on what we may want to play? It seems the obvious choice as we are already playing the game, but, afaik, no questioning was done regarding this, it is being introduced as a fait accompli.

I do not mind the card game being introduced, what bothers me is focus taken away from the things that are actually driving players away; a shiny bauble to overlook the glaring issues in-game.

I am seeing more and more people migrate to more stable games. I play this far less than I did and mostly play a different game now. I have been a subscriber for a lot of years, but my crowns are now going to buying dlcs and then dropping my sub, I am tired of funding a game that introduces, and then never fixes, issues.

wenchmore420b14_ESO

The forum community is representative of the community as a whole when you look at it in percentages using Statistical Sampling.
The "Nielsen Ratings" for T.V. shows take a base group of apprx 41,000 households and can rate the viewing habits of 130 million viewers. The same is true here.
We may make up a small part of the community here in forums, but if you apply Statistical Sampling, we represent the same percentage of the whole group.
So, yes, the feedback in forums can reflect the views of the community as a whole.
Just my 2 drakes..
Huzzah!

Northwold

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

The forum community is representative of the community as a whole when you look at it in percentages using Statistical Sampling.
The "Nielsen Ratings" for T.V. shows take a base group of apprx 41,000 households and can rate the viewing habits of 130 million viewers. The same is true here.
We may make up a small part of the community here in forums, but if you apply Statistical Sampling, we represent the same percentage of the whole group.
So, yes, the feedback in forums can reflect the views of the community as a whole.
Just my 2 drakes..
Huzzah!

That's not at all how it works. When you measure TV ratings you also check the identities of the people being used to make sure they represent a valid sample of the whole audience (the "statistical sample"), not just niches of it. Eg you can't magically map the viewing habits of 50 year olds across to teenagers. Making sure you have a representative group becomes even stricter when you turn to gathering actual opinions for eg opinion polls. But that's another topic.

SammyKhajit

Forum polls are indicative so they’re certainly not meaningless.

You also have players who are not forum posters. This one read the forum (for game tips, lores etc) for two years before working out how to apply to be a member. They don’t make it very easy to join.

It’s likely that ZoS looks at a wide range of data, including Twitter responses, sales (of course), Steam, number of people viewing Twitch, Reddit posts etc etc, and forum would be there as part of the data collection.

kargen27

pklemming wrote: »

Playing(or not playing) the card game is not the issue. It is that resources were funnelled to something most of the play base did not want instead of prioritising the massive number of bugs currently in game. The game issues are what are driving people away, not the lack of a card game.

The team chasing bugs is not the same team that designs new content for the game.

Personally I doubt beyond a one time try out of curiosity I will play the card game but I do know a great number of people have been asking for a card game and/or other mini games to be introduced.

shadyjane62

I speak as only one player. I do not like companions, never even finished Blackwood. I don't play cards and don't need another mini-game I won't play. I desperately want some improvement to pvp and am actually doubtful they are working on it.

Market research in my house voted to not buy new expansion. I will be happy to continue to work on rest of game and when I run out of things to do and I'm really close to that point, I will stop.

wenchmore420b14_ESO

Northwold wrote: »

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

The forum community is representative of the community as a whole when you look at it in percentages using Statistical Sampling.
The "Nielsen Ratings" for T.V. shows take a base group of apprx 41,000 households and can rate the viewing habits of 130 million viewers. The same is true here.
We may make up a small part of the community here in forums, but if you apply Statistical Sampling, we represent the same percentage of the whole group.
So, yes, the feedback in forums can reflect the views of the community as a whole.
Just my 2 drakes..
Huzzah!

That's not at all how it works. When you measure TV ratings you also check the identities of the people being used to make sure they represent a valid sample of the whole audience (the "statistical sample"), not just niches of it. Eg you can't magically map the viewing habits of 50 year olds across to teenagers. Making sure you have a representative group becomes even stricter when you turn to gathering actual opinions for eg opinion polls. But that's another topic.

What you said is true, but we ARE the classic "test group" and represent a vail sample of the whole game base.
Look at the demi-graphics of forum posters:
Ages: 21 - 75+
Years Played: 6mo - 9yrs
Play Style: PvP, PvE, RP, Casual, Number Chasers, Solo, etc
Main Interest: All of It!

The fact that "forum users" applied to, and actively sought out to be a part of "this feedback group", they become part of a "test group".
By the example above, what I was trying to say, is that percentages apply here.
If there is a 50% dislike or like on a subject, I'll bet it is reflective of the game base as a whole.
Still just my 2 drakes...
Huzzah!

kargen27

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

Northwold wrote: »

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

The forum community is representative of the community as a whole when you look at it in percentages using Statistical Sampling.
The "Nielsen Ratings" for T.V. shows take a base group of apprx 41,000 households and can rate the viewing habits of 130 million viewers. The same is true here.
We may make up a small part of the community here in forums, but if you apply Statistical Sampling, we represent the same percentage of the whole group.
So, yes, the feedback in forums can reflect the views of the community as a whole.
Just my 2 drakes..
Huzzah!

That's not at all how it works. When you measure TV ratings you also check the identities of the people being used to make sure they represent a valid sample of the whole audience (the "statistical sample"), not just niches of it. Eg you can't magically map the viewing habits of 50 year olds across to teenagers. Making sure you have a representative group becomes even stricter when you turn to gathering actual opinions for eg opinion polls. But that's another topic.

What you said is true, but we ARE the classic "test group" and represent a vail sample of the whole game base.
Look at the demi-graphics of forum posters:
Ages: 21 - 75+
Years Played: 6mo - 9yrs
Play Style: PvP, PvE, RP, Casual, Number Chasers, Solo, etc
Main Interest: All of It!

The fact that "forum users" applied to, and actively sought out to be a part of "this feedback group", they become part of a "test group".
By the example above, what I was trying to say, is that percentages apply here.
If there is a 50% dislike or like on a subject, I'll bet it is reflective of the game base as a whole.
Still just my 2 drakes...
Huzzah!

I disagree with this based simply on human nature. We like to complain. Nobody ever goes back to the store to tell them hey great job on getting my order right. Nielsen Ratings come from a controlled group selected after completing a survey to try and insure typical average viewership. Human nature being what it is I doubt what we have here is representative of that kind of sample. Most threads start with either a complaint or a suggested change. That isn't bad at all but doesn't make for a good representation of the game population.

LesserCircle

Grizzbeorn wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Kisakee wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

Playing(or not playing) the card game is not the issue. It is that resources were funnelled to something most of the play base did not want

Stop assuming, you don't know what most of the people want. Nobody knows.

We do when it comes to the card game.


https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/602720/how-interested-are-you-in-playing-tales-of-tribute-the-card-game/p1

Forum polls are meaningless. Not even the entirety of the forum community responds to forum polls, and the whole forum community itself is a tiny fraction of the entire game community.

True, but they didn't ask me about a card game either so it must have been a small group of people that they asked to right?

Jaimeh

I don't know how similar the new game is to TESL, but if they are a bit similar, one assumption could be simply convenience: make a new system easily to have something to go along with the new chapter.

Northwold

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

Northwold wrote: »

wenchmore420b14_ESO wrote: »

The forum community is representative of the community as a whole when you look at it in percentages using Statistical Sampling.
The "Nielsen Ratings" for T.V. shows take a base group of apprx 41,000 households and can rate the viewing habits of 130 million viewers. The same is true here.
We may make up a small part of the community here in forums, but if you apply Statistical Sampling, we represent the same percentage of the whole group.
So, yes, the feedback in forums can reflect the views of the community as a whole.
Just my 2 drakes..
Huzzah!

That's not at all how it works. When you measure TV ratings you also check the identities of the people being used to make sure they represent a valid sample of the whole audience (the "statistical sample"), not just niches of it. Eg you can't magically map the viewing habits of 50 year olds across to teenagers. Making sure you have a representative group becomes even stricter when you turn to gathering actual opinions for eg opinion polls. But that's another topic.

What you said is true, but we ARE the classic "test group" and represent a vail sample of the whole game base.
Look at the demi-graphics of forum posters:
Ages: 21 - 75+
Years Played: 6mo - 9yrs
Play Style: PvP, PvE, RP, Casual, Number Chasers, Solo, etc
Main Interest: All of It!

The fact that "forum users" applied to, and actively sought out to be a part of "this feedback group", they become part of a "test group".
By the example above, what I was trying to say, is that percentages apply here.
If there is a 50% dislike or like on a subject, I'll bet it is reflective of the game base as a whole.
Still just my 2 drakes...
Huzzah!

The fact that forum users actively applied to be a part of it is what disqualifies it from being especially useful! You need to get your feedback from a variety of sources that are properly representative, not an echo chamber. Otherwise you end up pandering only to a hardcore fanbase whose tastes do not line up with the broader audience.

Which is not to say that what people say here is not useful and has no insight. Just that it is really rather far-fetched to suggest it is properly reflective of the hundreds of thousands / millions (I assume) of active players. The reaction to AWA here (my 18 characters are ruined) compared to elsewhere (why would you play the game on more than one character) was one recent and very vivid example of that.

FLuFFyxMuFFiN

Grizzbeorn wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

What I don't want is a new %$Q£^^£ card game!

So don't play the card game?

MaraxusTheOrc wrote: »

pklemming wrote: »

So, the idea of market research is to see if there is a need for the product before spending resources and time in to developing something.

I am curious at what point market research decided what ESO really needed was a card game. Personally, if I want a card game, there are a lot of good ones on the market already. The current feedback shows little to no interest in the game and I would rather you take the time to fix the plethora of issues the game currently has, rather than adding something very few people want.

You are losing people due to bugs and poor decision-making and this appears to continue that trend admirably. Please try listening to what people actually want.

For example, I would love to go in to Fang Lair and not have to wait for the zoo fight to spawn multiple times before it realises we are actually in valid locations. Same with Volenfell, last boss, where the fight resets, removing the HM, often causing a deliberate wipe in order to reset and try and get the thing in HM again.. Similar issues on Falkreath Hold golem boss that likes to reset mid way through the fight.

Or maybe the dungeon finder that randomly leaves people behind when the dungeon starts...

What I don't want is a new %$Q£^^£ card game!

I don’t care about fang lair or falkreath hold. I’m looking forward to the card game.

Guess our market research cancel each other out.

Same with PvP. I don't care for PvP so all future updates to it should be cancelled and Cyrodiil should be reworked into a PvE zone with a new story

pklemming

I do understand that those fixing bugs are not necessarily those creating new content, but each department will normally be allocated funds, and it seems bugs are not a priority.

Additionally I don't understand why there would not be a crossover. Are coding teams so specialised they are unable to work on content previously in game?

We used to do everything: coding, graphics, sound, design, etc.

At this point it feels like we are going round in circles with no external input (again). I've stated my stance. As it stands I will be dropping my sub within the next two months, and just come on for trials or dungeon groups.

There are only so many times you can say, "Please fix this", before you realise the company doesn't care and your money is best spent elsewhere.

Arunei

pklemming wrote: »

I do understand that those fixing bugs are not necessarily those creating new content, but each department will normally be allocated funds, and it seems bugs are not a priority.

Additionally I don't understand why there would not be a crossover. Are coding teams so specialised they are unable to work on content previously in game?

We used to do everything: coding, graphics, sound, design, etc.

At this point it feels like we are going round in circles with no external input (again). I've stated my stance. As it stands I will be dropping my sub within the next two months, and just come on for trials or dungeon groups.

There are only so many times you can say, "Please fix this", before you realise the company doesn't care and your money is best spent elsewhere.

Is it really so hard to believe that people whose jobs are coming up with plots, writing dialogue, coming up with new mechanics, and working on asset creation would have absolutely no idea how to troubleshoot code for bug fixes or other issues? That's like expecting someone who strictly works in tech support to also just be able to be tossed over to sales and retention and know what the heck they're doing. It's different tools and different skill sets. The same goes for those dedicated to bug fixes and other performance issues. They aren't there because they know how to write a story or make a new asset.

As for funds/resources, you can't expect it to be a simple matter of X gets Y amount. You can't just yank them from one department and give them to another at will. They need to be worked on together; people will get bored and leave if there's no new content, people will get frustrated and leave if long-standing bugs and issues that impact their game play are glossed over or ignored. You can't say one thing is more important than the other, they're equally important.

pklemming

I most certainly can expect it, because it is what I used to do.

Additionally, not prioritising funds to fix issues that are driving customers away from your product seems to be somewhat counterproductive.

Northwold

pklemming wrote: »

I most certainly can expect it, because it is what I used to do.

Additionally, not prioritising funds to fix issues that are driving customers away from your product seems to be somewhat counterproductive.

Game development now has people literally doing only environment art or animations and teams of hundreds. I'm not sure when you were involved but it doesn't sound the same as how it is today.

Mythgard1967

Hmmmm

There have certainly been a fair number of folks who have asked for a tavern game. Maybe not a card game especially; but this would be a tavern game.

Folks have also asked for more achievements, more cosmetics; a DIFFERENT way to gain transmutes other than rando and pvp, a meaningful experience outside of pure combat and any number of needs that will actually be met with....a card game.

Just because you don't think that anyone has asked for a card game (and I bet we could find plenty of posts from people who did)....doesn't mean that something LIKE a card game wasn't asked for.

So it doesn't hit that itty bitty cross-section that responded to a forum poll in these forums...which generally represent the most vocal and passionate folks in the game that are passionate about the way they specifically play. I would guess that most posters in these forums are actually NOT a representative of the average member of the playerbase...who are more interested in either playing the game and sampling many play modes than in figuring out how to gain membership to post on these forums. Steam and Reddit are probably closer to the playerbase that is the target audience of this game than these forums are....but the reality is most people playing the game only read these forums when they are googling a question and get directed to a forum to read a response.

I have played this game off and on since 2014....I think I became a member of these forums in uh 2021.

I cant say that I am overly excited for the card game; but I dont think its ruining everything; nor, do I think that it was unasked for...to the contrary...I have seen many posts that have voiced needs that could be met by this card game. The truth will come out after it goes live. If it is completely unused and is nothing but a "drag on resources"; it won't be supported or evolved.

I am certainly not against them trying something new; even if it isnt something I would have asked for....I am happy to see if it might fill some of my own needs.

Arunei

pklemming wrote: »

I most certainly can expect it, because it is what I used to do.

Additionally, not prioritising funds to fix issues that are driving customers away from your product seems to be somewhat counterproductive.

But the thing is, just because that's what you used to do doesn't mean that's how it's done everywhere else and doesn't mean that's how everyone else does it. Thinking the way you did something is the only way to do it is just a little bit arrogant. There's a reason most places, not just game studios, have departments that all handle separate aspects of a business. Jack of all trades, master of none. It's better to have people who specialize in specific things and have a lot of experience in those fields than to expect people to know how to do a little bit of everything.

And it's not counterproductive to not focus overly much on any given problem. Focus too much on game fixes and that's all you'll ever be doing because there will always be something in the code that needs to be fixed. People then start to leave because nothing new ever gets added, people, people start leaving the company because they have little work when there's no need for them to work on new things. They could stand to cut down some on their release schedule because honestly we don't need four dungeons every year, and that would give them some extra months to work on the other three releases, which would include working out bugs so they don't make it to live. Aside from that, just how much would you expect them to reroute to fixes and performance?

pklemming

But the thing is, just because that's what you used to do doesn't mean that's how it's done everywhere else and doesn't mean that's how everyone else does it. Thinking the way you did something is the only way to do it is just a little bit arrogant.

I am a tad arrogant, I get that. I do expect things like bugs to be fixed within a reasonable time. I don't expect code to be pushed live without fully testing. Humans are not specialised creatures, being skilled in multiple areas does not mean you are no longer proficient. That is, though, by-the-bye.

Why they don't have a persistent test server is beyond me. Going back to Everquest days, there was a server between QA and LIve, and it was a server where people actually lived. The expectations were that we would occasionally get buggy code, and due to the nature of the server and the populace that played it, we caught a lot of things before they went live due to the sheer number of people that could actually test the patch. There is no buffer here. Code > QA > Live, but the level of testing capable by the QA team means that only glaring game-breaking bugs will usually be found.

This is, again, somewhat of a digression. A lot of the content is currently broken in one form or the other. The gameplay, at times is not fun at all. It does not make me want me to go back and play it again.

If you are wondering why I am complaining, this is a snippet of vDC HM. This was taken after a few deaths, and I was basically just trying to avoid the invisible walls at this point.

https://youtu.be/4yZcV5Hn5bk

It is one of just many, many issues I come across every day in game. After 8 years, I honestly expect more, I have no real wish to change games, but I am tired of fighting the bugs and the unresponsive team. After a while, you just need to give up and move on.

Marto

ZOS has undoubtedly done market research. And that market research showed that a substantial number of players enjoy non-combat activities. Housing, RPing, fashion, lore, exploration, questing.

And they believe that these people are itching for more varied non-combat activities.

Is this disappointing for people that only care about the combat? Of course it is. But the opposite is also true.

Lately, I've been suspecting that the reason ZOS pushes the whole "play how you want" thing so much is because a lot of the ESO community (specially the endgame PVErs, PVPers, and forum users) strongly disagree with that. I've seen tons of comments in the last few weeks from people who are unable or unwilling to accept other ways to play and enjoy the game.

You see it very often. Endgame players who dislike any balance change intended to raise the floor and lower the ceiling. Hardcore players being needlessly hostile to RPers, disturbing and interrupting their activities. Or even RPers themselves being extremely judgmental to those that come up with their own headcanons and adventures in the world of TES.

ZOS always wants to encourage players to play the game, vary their playstyle, and experience everything ESO has to offer. That's why seals of endeavors come from a variety of sources. That's why there's no separate PVP server. And that's why there's a new card game being added to ESO.

pklemming

ZOS has undoubtedly done market research. And that market research showed that a substantial number of players enjoy non-combat activities. Housing, RPing, fashion, lore, exploration, questing.

How? Because they didn't seem to ask any of the player-base. The poll on the forums seems to show the majority of people are not really in favour of it either.

Additionally, is this in response to my original post or in answer to the last post where, as mid-top end, player, I am complaining about the non-resolution of bugs, because it appears like you read the first post and nothing else?

Mythgard1967

pklemming wrote: »

But the thing is, just because that's what you used to do doesn't mean that's how it's done everywhere else and doesn't mean that's how everyone else does it. Thinking the way you did something is the only way to do it is just a little bit arrogant.

I am a tad arrogant, I get that. I do expect things like bugs to be fixed within a reasonable time. I don't expect code to be pushed live without fully testing. Humans are not specialised creatures, being skilled in multiple areas does not mean you are no longer proficient. That is, though, by-the-bye.

Why they don't have a persistent test server is beyond me. Going back to Everquest days, there was a server between QA and LIve, and it was a server where people actually lived. The expectations were that we would occasionally get buggy code, and due to the nature of the server and the populace that played it, we caught a lot of things before they went live due to the sheer number of people that could actually test the patch. There is no buffer here. Code > QA > Live, but the level of testing capable by the QA team means that only glaring game-breaking bugs will usually be found.

This is, again, somewhat of a digression. A lot of the content is currently broken in one form or the other. The gameplay, at times is not fun at all. It does not make me want me to go back and play it again.

If you are wondering why I am complaining, this is a snippet of vDC HM. This was taken after a few deaths, and I was basically just trying to avoid the invisible walls at this point.

https://youtu.be/4yZcV5Hn5bk

It is one of just many, many issues I come across every day in game. After 8 years, I honestly expect more, I have no real wish to change games, but I am tired of fighting the bugs and the unresponsive team. After a while, you just need to give up and move on.

Back in the Everquest days...that is how things worked. Today???? You don't always have a test server. Test servers have always been a challenge is Test never behaves fully like Prod. New technologies have different solutions....some of which use new copies of a production environment to test from vs a static environment; which means your code test is from most current Production with the new code checked into it for testing.

That isnt a bad thing.....and holding Everquest up as the shining example??? I mean HOW many times did they break bards? Bard Breaking was a meme in EQ before meme's were a thing.....and it wasn't just bards. For any patch, you could pretty much guarantee several days to several weeks of not being able to play...and super fun rollbacks when really bad bugs made it through. Even the thought that there could be a rollback; which was regular for EQ was enough that you didnt do anything meaningful after a patch.....it would have been a crazy gamble to stay awake for 24 hours straight camping Ragefire for your Cleric epic; mobilizing your manaburn team (via phonecalls at 5 in the morning) to keep the dragon from being KSed so you could get your cleric epic....on patch day.

Syldras

pklemming wrote: »

How? Because they didn't seem to ask any of the player-base. The poll on the forums seems to show the majority of people are not really in favour of it either.

There's more than this forum, you know? Twitter, Facebook, Reddit,... I agree that they could be more active in the official forums, though.