Studio Director’s Letter: ESO’s 2022 Retrospective & the Future

Elsonso

FluffyBird wrote: »

some process changes within the Dev Team

mean some people being replaced with ones caring and competent.

Often, the most interesting parts of the ZOS press releases are the small, vague, sound bites they throw in there. These things could end up being things that can radically change the whole game.

[sarcasm]Oh, and, we also added account wide achievements. Thanks for joining us today, bye.[/sarcasm]

It will be interesting to see if any of these "process changes" become apparent to us.

Jabbs_Giggity

Two things:

1.) Why does ZOS hate Tenplar?? Melee Templar is now extinct after u35 and u36. What was the reasoning behind a 25% nerf to all damage across the board, and unneeded changes in u36 that double nerfed class. With Templar feedback. Even just back to Class Reps program should have been enough for a direction with the class.

2.) PVP content. Forcing players out of PVP for "meta gear" only available in PVE zones, dungeons and trials is exhausting. Please do not remove large scale combat and just give us BG-like arcades. Not bashing BGs, but it gets boring constantly queuing for RNG matches. We don't want to play Elder Call of Duty. AvA has become stale, mostly because of server performance forcing population to quit and move to other games. AvA could be helped with more content, like @React said, not just destroy able bridges.
Give rankings meaning and rewards, add new siege tactics, change up the keep designs, add trading to PVP zones, add espionage quests that go beyond "scout this farm". So many opportunities have been wasted the last 7 years.

FayJolyn

Just wanted to say that I appriciate the letter and am cautiously optimstic. I wish there where more details about the update to this most requested feature as we now get a lot of people speculating and getting their hopes up and guessing all sorts of things. Personally I'm hoping for a rebalance of overland diffulculty so that questing is not so boring. Also the reward system in this game has gone off balance with the best rewards being locked behind a paywall, this makes me unmotivated to actually play the game and instead wait for that one item I actually want out of the store. I hope I will have ingame rewards to look forward too and less store sales.
Anyway Happy holidays Zos. I wish you a good 2023. Can't wait for the hardware server upgrade .

Oakenaxe

I'm happy about the end of the year-long story format and that's about it. No mention of the U35 poor reception, the missing Q&A, the lack of communication with players, the horrendous performance of Cyrodiil... It did not gain my trust back. Let's wait and see, for now I'll continue to play another game.

Billium813

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

Two things:

Why does ZOS hate Tenplar?? Melee Templar is now extinct after u35 and u36.

You're living in a bubble. Stamplar still exists, the sky isn't falling.

Did they over-nerf it? Yes, they did (Really? Burst with Power of the Light is all we had left!). Is it dead? No.

The Templar nerfs is just another in a long long line of ZOS nerfing whatever stands out at the top. Expect StamDK nerfs sooner or later since that's arguably the best now. ZOS just hammers whatever nail stands tallest.

Necrotech_Master

i think i agree with most that this sounds good, and will be a nice change of pace from the previous years

i also think it will be important that they have the q3 update be mostly focused on QoL and bug fixes to try to get some of that low hanging fruit taken care of

i am looking forward to the next year, it will be nice to see some dungeons/content related to the existing zones since there are over 20, and some of the dlc ones are kind of content-sparse anyway

Supreme_Atromancer

Stamicka wrote: »

React wrote: »

DuckFayth wrote: »

I'm glad we got some acknowledgement and see that there will be at least some adjustments going forward. It's been clear that there were struggles meeting the demanding release schedule that has defined the last several years not so much because of a lacking team but because of a challenging environment that started suddenly in March 2020 and has continued to affect the world since.

My concerns are that while there's promises to do better and the beginning of a plan, I don't see much of how the team will adjust, and that at surface level there's no plans for those adjustments for the first two quarters of the year. I'm disappointed by the June release date for the chapter, I feel like it would benefit from a 2-3 weeks longer PTS and slightly delayed release. That would really help instill confidence that time is being made for the right things. If Q3 will be focused on QoL and bugfixes anyways why not hold out a little longer and avoid the same mistakes? If U36 didn't get enough time to properly QA and release in a proper and whole playable experience how will the players have confidence an entire chapter is getting the time it deserves? The easiest answer to that, to me at least, would be building in more wiggle room.

My final question is what happened to the re-architecture? We haven't seen any sort of update on this since about October (source below), and it feels like if the team knew anything they would provide it in such a letter as this. I know the pvp crowd, and to a lesser extent some of the pve crowd, has been holding their breath over the server hardware but there was supposed to be so much more.

Last update I know of from the server re architecture: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/617464/code-rewrite-server-re-architecture-is-there-any-update-on-this
Original Post about the re architecture: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/595442/eso-pvp-update-updated-june-2022/p1

Matt (mistakenly?) refers to the re-architecture as "multi threading" work in today's post. He references the November 17th update from GinaBruno when speaking about the work, and says that it will begin deployment in Q2 (and will be released in chunks across following patches).

It is quite confusing, given that ESO received a "multi threading" update in a touted performance patch years ago, which did nothing for performance. Since this "server re-architecture" has been touted as the savior for server performance, I certainly hope it is more significant than more multi-thread work. Even more confusing is that Matt is referencing a difficult to find update from Gina that is buried pages deep in a player made thread, when in reality these updates should be coming in pinned posts as "announcements".

Matt did after all promise us periodic updates in last year's "January PVP post", which he never delivered upon

ESO's multi-threading work did have noticeable benefits on the game's performance, but only for the client side. I noticed huge FPS improvements almost everywhere I went in game. I do not think that Matt is mistaken here, they are doing multi-threading work on the server side this time. There are no inconsistencies here. This is exactly what Matt said in the initial post:

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

In short – just like we did for the client a year or so back when we introduced multithreaded rendering to increase client frame rates – we are going to rearchitect our server.

Wait, so "we need to essentially rewrite some of the foundational server code to account for it" = "server-side multithreading?"

@ZOS_Kevin sorry to ping. Given that there is (and has been) significant confusion, could we get clarification on whether Matt is referring to the same things here?

Jaraal

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

React wrote: »

DuckFayth wrote: »

I'm glad we got some acknowledgement and see that there will be at least some adjustments going forward. It's been clear that there were struggles meeting the demanding release schedule that has defined the last several years not so much because of a lacking team but because of a challenging environment that started suddenly in March 2020 and has continued to affect the world since.

My concerns are that while there's promises to do better and the beginning of a plan, I don't see much of how the team will adjust, and that at surface level there's no plans for those adjustments for the first two quarters of the year. I'm disappointed by the June release date for the chapter, I feel like it would benefit from a 2-3 weeks longer PTS and slightly delayed release. That would really help instill confidence that time is being made for the right things. If Q3 will be focused on QoL and bugfixes anyways why not hold out a little longer and avoid the same mistakes? If U36 didn't get enough time to properly QA and release in a proper and whole playable experience how will the players have confidence an entire chapter is getting the time it deserves? The easiest answer to that, to me at least, would be building in more wiggle room.

My final question is what happened to the re-architecture? We haven't seen any sort of update on this since about October (source below), and it feels like if the team knew anything they would provide it in such a letter as this. I know the pvp crowd, and to a lesser extent some of the pve crowd, has been holding their breath over the server hardware but there was supposed to be so much more.

Last update I know of from the server re architecture: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/617464/code-rewrite-server-re-architecture-is-there-any-update-on-this
Original Post about the re architecture: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/595442/eso-pvp-update-updated-june-2022/p1

Matt (mistakenly?) refers to the re-architecture as "multi threading" work in today's post. He references the November 17th update from GinaBruno when speaking about the work, and says that it will begin deployment in Q2 (and will be released in chunks across following patches).

It is quite confusing, given that ESO received a "multi threading" update in a touted performance patch years ago, which did nothing for performance. Since this "server re-architecture" has been touted as the savior for server performance, I certainly hope it is more significant than more multi-thread work. Even more confusing is that Matt is referencing a difficult to find update from Gina that is buried pages deep in a player made thread, when in reality these updates should be coming in pinned posts as "announcements".

Matt did after all promise us periodic updates in last year's "January PVP post", which he never delivered upon

ESO's multi-threading work did have noticeable benefits on the game's performance, but only for the client side. I noticed huge FPS improvements almost everywhere I went in game. I do not think that Matt is mistaken here, they are doing multi-threading work on the server side this time. There are no inconsistencies here. This is exactly what Matt said in the initial post:

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

In short – just like we did for the client a year or so back when we introduced multithreaded rendering to increase client frame rates – we are going to rearchitect our server.

Wait, so "we need to essentially rewrite some of the foundational server code to account for it" = "server-side multithreading?"

@ZOS_Kevin sorry to ping. Given that there is (and has been) significant confusion, could we get clarification on whether Matt is referring to the same things here?

Yeah I was under the impression that they were going to scrap the spaghetti code that has been tinkered with over the years and recode the existing assets from scratch. If it's simply a server side multithreading, than that's highly disappointing.

Zachary_Shadow

Xuhora wrote: »

i can only echo the sentiment that ZOS has to prove things, rather than just say things and it will be ok.
but one thing sticks out to me, actually it concerns me and lets me doubt the quality of whats going to happen in 2023...

Q4: Rather than the usual zone DLC, we'll be featuring a new system. We are working on the concept and design for this now; we’ll give more details during our Global Reveal Event early next year. 

so you are in the concept stage of a new system, yet you should have it done in half a year by your own roadmap, since it should go on PTS then? Either the System is not as complex as we anticipate (spellcrafting in half a year..?doubt it) or it will be bugriddled beyond believe (again, spellcrafting in half a year)

What i am also reading from this is, that the decision to switch to this new model was made in haste. maybe the sales were not satisfying for you, or the dwindling playerbase is actually concerning from the companys point of view.

we will see how all this turns out, if we can take you (as a company) by your words again, fine. but until proven ill remain absent from ESO, no letters or words can fix my distrust

If it was something like Spellcrafting, from your example, you need to understand that they technically have had Spellcrafting on the backburner for years. They showed it at QuakeCon many years ago, where it actually had some great work and animations already completed, so if it was Spellcrafting for Q4, we can already assume most of the work has been completed. I've wanted Spellcrafting in ESO for a long time, so I would be super excited to see how they implement that if it was Q4.

Of course, going off what Matt said, it likely sounds like it won't be Spellcrafting for Q4 and instead something wholly new. Now, although they said they are working on the concept and design for it now, that doesn't articulate just how long they've been working on the concept of it. The fact that he also mentioned that we will hear more details regarding the Q4 system in January (something that all previous Global Reveal Events haven't done as they typically only focus on Q1 and Q2) gives me more hope that this has been a system that has been in development for some time and they are now moving forward with fully implementing it. Given the words "tentpole system", we can assume this will be a system that can be done all around Tamriel, like companions, Tales of Tribute, antiquities, housing, etc. It could even be a system that adds onto the previous systems (like romanceable companions that have been teased in the past as something the devs hope to implement in the future) that would be then considered its own system within a system.

We will have to wait and see though, but I think based on their wording and the game development pipeline, we should give them more leeway with this new system and understand that Matt's words may have been misconstrued here.

Elsonso

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

In short – just like we did for the client a year or so back when we introduced multithreaded rendering to increase client frame rates – we are going to rearchitect our server.

Wait, so "we need to essentially rewrite some of the foundational server code to account for it" = "server-side multithreading?"

@ZOS_Kevin sorry to ping. Given that there is (and has been) significant confusion, could we get clarification on whether Matt is referring to the same things here?

@ZOS_Kevin is free to elaborate, but I don't see the confusion. Prior to this, we really did not know what the "rewrite" was about. Now we know that "re-architecture we originally mentioned earlier this year" means "multi-threading work".

As for "scrapping spaghetti code"... when you have 26 million lines of code, you do not "scrap spaghetti code". This sort of thing fosters nightmares on an unimaginable level. The mere concept is "dragonrend" to a project manager. Instead, you very carefully, with surgical precision, make smaller changes that break everything and have to be fixed.

blktauna

This is poor expectation management. Please be specific about what is being addressed and how.

When one says '"we need to essentially rewrite some of the foundational server code to account for it" one is not thinking in the we need to tweak some multithreading. We are thinking an actual code rewrite.

Lixen

There's been issues plaguing the game since launch and every new patch/chapters adds new ones with few simple ones getting fixes. Promising words, but I won't believe until I see them delivered.

Hope the new feature is not something like tales of tribute, a salvaged failed project... something a very few might've asked for and majority of players don't enjoy and find it a waste of their time in spite of the rewards.

Jaraal

Elsonso wrote: »

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

In short – just like we did for the client a year or so back when we introduced multithreaded rendering to increase client frame rates – we are going to rearchitect our server.

Wait, so "we need to essentially rewrite some of the foundational server code to account for it" = "server-side multithreading?"

@ZOS_Kevin sorry to ping. Given that there is (and has been) significant confusion, could we get clarification on whether Matt is referring to the same things here?

@ZOS_Kevin is free to elaborate, but I don't see the confusion. Prior to this, we really did not know what the "rewrite" was about. Now we know that "re-architecture we originally mentioned earlier this year" means "multi-threading work".

As for "scrapping spaghetti code"... when you have 26 million lines of code, you do not "scrap spaghetti code".

After you've rewritten it in modern, streamlined (and properly tested) code, why would you keep the old?

gariondavey

Billium813 wrote: »

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

Two things:

Why does ZOS hate Tenplar?? Melee Templar is now extinct after u35 and u36.

You're living in a bubble. Stamplar still exists, the sky isn't falling.

Did they over-nerf it? Yes, they did (Really? Burst with Power of the Light is all we had left!). Is it dead? No.

The Templar nerfs is just another in a long long line of ZOS nerfing whatever stands out at the top. Expect StamDK nerfs sooner or later since that's arguably the best now. ZOS just hammers whatever nail stands tallest.

@Dekrypted you want to respond to this or should I?

SpiritKitten

Billium813 wrote: »

You reach a point where you have all the leads... then what?

sell the motifs

Elsonso

Jaraal wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

In short – just like we did for the client a year or so back when we introduced multithreaded rendering to increase client frame rates – we are going to rearchitect our server.

Wait, so "we need to essentially rewrite some of the foundational server code to account for it" = "server-side multithreading?"

@ZOS_Kevin sorry to ping. Given that there is (and has been) significant confusion, could we get clarification on whether Matt is referring to the same things here?

@ZOS_Kevin is free to elaborate, but I don't see the confusion. Prior to this, we really did not know what the "rewrite" was about. Now we know that "re-architecture we originally mentioned earlier this year" means "multi-threading work".

As for "scrapping spaghetti code"... when you have 26 million lines of code, you do not "scrap spaghetti code".

After you've rewritten it in modern, streamlined (and properly tested) code, why would you keep the old?

Well... The point is that they didn't rewrite. Pretty sure that no one is going to be rewriting 26 million lines of code at ZOS. That is a multi-year project that would have had to start before the pandemic to be rolling out starting with the 2023 Chapter.

tinythinker

O.o

Thanks Mr. Firor. That puts a lot of expectation on the 2023 full roadmap reveal in January, so I look forward to it.

peacenote

This was a very high "executive summary" type of letter, so I certainly will wait until there is more information before celebrating or judging too much.

It feels like some of the feedback has been heard. Maybe. I'm not sure.

I'm glad to hear they will be breaking out of the year long story arc, at least for a bit. It was too limiting. I can see it coming back again, but having ESO be locked into that model was problematic. That said....

• I sincerely hope we won't be receiving less dungeons and trials than usual. That team is the only team that has been hitting it out of the park, with regards to releasing content, and the dungeons are the main reason I am still here. Same for many of my friends. We quest and do the "lighter" content to fill the time in between but it is the group activity that keeps us here. No new features/system is going to make up for that. And now that the studio just mentioned the bulk of their time goes to the "one and done" content, it will feel even sadder if we don't get our normal dungeons and trials. The value of the dungeons was NOT part of the story arc... it was the group content to beat with a team.
• Related to that, I can see how they broke out content by "hand crafted" vs. "repeatable" but I hope they aren't making the mistake that those types of content define the patterns of players. I look at content as "group" vs. "solo." Writs - solo. Arena - solo. Antiquities - solo. Dungeons - Group. PvP - Group. Etc. Anyway, these two statements, together, concern me a lot:
  
  "hand-crafted, such as quests, stories and things you do one time per character"
  
  "And, on the other hand, our veteran players consistently tell us that they would like more content that isn't played through just once—they would like more content they can enjoy for years"
  
  I am extremely concerned that the conclusion of this thought process is the continued narrowing of options for people who LIKE to play with multiple characters and do EVERYTHING over and over as different characters. The bolded emphasis is mine, but I will be extremely disappointed if this year pushes us in a direction that encourages even more use of a single character that replays content (and/or makes it so character choice is irrelevant) and introduces more changes that are harmful to folks who have a multiple character playstyle. This could be just un-careful wording but it sounds like they are equating "doing something with one character" as content that is NOT content that can be enjoyed for years... which it can be if you make other characters, as long as there is a way to track progress!! In fact, I enjoyed re-doing content for years and years and years before AwA when my to-do list was decimated and my progress was erased.
  
  Trying not to jump to judgment but that was a concerning paragraph to me.
  
• New system: I'd like to see a new rewards system, which brings back full per-character tracking, decouples achievements from map progress, dungeon and trial challenges, and encourages re-playing of content with friends with the rewards. For example you get a chest of goodies every time you complete 30 dungeons, or 100 quests, with an account-wide counter. If I could track my speed modes and whatnot per character in game again, I would be so happy.... even though my old data is lost. It's ok. It's better than not fixing it.
  
  However the level of anticipation makes me think the new system must be spellcrafting of some kind. Not sure what else has been asked for such a long time by so many people.
  
  I am neither for or against spellcrafting, but just want to point out to ZOS that as much as it has been requested, it's not likely to "land" with the "casuals" (even though I hate that label), nor will it be a substitution for those of us who want to play dungeons or whatnot for actual content. I'm not going to see FG I in a whole new light because I'm going back there with different spells on my bar.
  
• Is the hidden translation that Q3 will be U35 part II?
  

Anyway, that's my first impression. I'm not sure if they are listening. I still think we need more direct acknowledgements of U33 and U35, although certainly this letter would not be where you'd delve into that. The words sound similar to feedback I've both heard and given, on this forum, but the exact combination concerns me a bit.

I know I'm just one customer, but I'd like to see character-tracking restored, the whole map issue fixed, continued delivery of the great dungeon and trial content we've been seeing, quality of life improvements that make it so I am spending less time preparing to play the game and more time playing. More inventory space, more quest slots, little things that make up for the fact that all the new systems and content result in more admin overhead to participating in the game. Quest/story content that can take less time to complete, overall, but with compelling content and less "my character can't remember what happened two steps ago" dialog choices. A new class would be nice. Less massively disruptive combat changes. Something new for PvP. Better rewards and incentives for replaying content.

Not sure that's what we're getting. And, admittedly, I may not be representative of what others want. I can only represent myself, and to an extent my like-minded friends, here, so that's what I'm doing.

Supreme_Atromancer

.

Elsonso wrote: »

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

In short – just like we did for the client a year or so back when we introduced multithreaded rendering to increase client frame rates – we are going to rearchitect our server.

Wait, so "we need to essentially rewrite some of the foundational server code to account for it" = "server-side multithreading?"

@ZOS_Kevin sorry to ping. Given that there is (and has been) significant confusion, could we get clarification on whether Matt is referring to the same things here?

@ZOS_Kevin is free to elaborate, but I don't see the confusion. Prior to this, we really did not know what the "rewrite" was about. Now we know that "re-architecture we originally mentioned earlier this year" means "multi-threading work".

As for "scrapping spaghetti code"... when you have 26 million lines of code, you do not "scrap spaghetti code". This sort of thing fosters nightmares on an unimaginable level. The mere concept is "dragonrend" to a project manager. Instead, you very carefully, with surgical precision, make smaller changes that break everything and have to be fixed.

The confusing part is the introduction of "multi-threading" to refer specifically to "re-writing foundational server code" (if that's what's intended here). Its referred to in the first article, but the connection is not explicit, just comparative. Not to be critical of Matt- it can be hard work to explain complex concepts- but I suspect explicitly stating the two concepts mean the same thing before interchanging them across different articles would help avoid some of the confusion. I have empathy- I have to communicate ideas I think are elementary all the time; its very easy to lose my audience if I don't labour what is explicit and avoid ambiguity, even if I think it *should* be easy.

There's clearly a lot of anxiety around "ancient spaghetti code" in the community, valid or not. Statements like "With an ageing code base (which is 26 million lines of code… really!) it is difficult to be 100% efficient" find fertile ground in confusion, anxiety about the longevity of a game people pour their hearts into, and is actively being wielded as a gavel of evidence that the game is doomed, that it was always doomed, and that zos have thrown up their hands, gave up years ago and are stringing us all along. While I don't think its on them to address every conspiracy theory, I think that clarification on what is a confusing issue, discussed across multiple disparate sources, using different language- would be a good idea. When there's time to do so.

I also liked the article and am excited about the new year ahead.

Silversmith

Every game company gives a year of the end speech about reflection and promises to improve the future of the game. Spoiler alert: those companies don't follow through on future promises most of the time.

Spiritrush

Thanks for the message @ZOS_MattFiror.

Great letter, given what you had to work with. Good direction, especially Q3, re-assigning available resources toward the long-awaited desire to focus on fixes. I am trusting Q2 chapters will deliver in a Wrothgar kind of way with plenty of content, shifting from the year-long cadence. I am also assuming the new system involves or in some way supports the replayability of existing content. Thanks for all the hard work - and thanks for not giving up on the future of this game.

In the event my comments are helpful in any way:

React wrote: »

I'm very glad to see that the code rewrite was mentioned, and that we can expect to see the first portion rolled out in Q2. I hope that this results in the performance improvement that we were told it would.

I was looking for this, specifically. As others have mentioned, I'm not sure if you were talking about the refactoring of combat code elements here, or simply a multi-threading effort. I was under the impression that the underlying code refactoring was announced about 10+ months ago, and that after all of the previous testing this effort was described as more than a multi-threading effort?

I also agree that omitting mention of the U35 debacle was a missed opportunity - a patch that inarguably nears the top of the list for eroding the most customer goodwill in the history of the game (in the sense of the business term, goodwill). For a reference to some sentiments, please see the Lynx exit video.

I believe in you Matt! But, perhaps more importantly, I hope your ESO leadership team believes in you and is listening to you as you direct them anew to adjust and adapt their approach, to learn new ways to better listen to players and better understand ESO's gameplay experience. As I am sure you are well aware, the challenge of repairing and developing goodwill that other major MMOs learned how to do along the way is definitely worth studying (e.g. FF14, WoW, PoE, NW, etc.) - there are definitely gems there for your team.

Some consider these the three essential components of a top-tier MMO, so some brief feedback:
- Gameplay: I think your combat team can benefit from better understanding true gameplay experiences vs. spreadsheets/forum complaints, with a clear vision and corresponding roadmap. Far, far less homogenization please, class identity used to be interesting. Also, new hardware is great (thank you), but as you know and announced code refactoring is clearly the key here (there is a reason new hardware feels wonderful for 2-3 weeks, then performance starts to quickly decay again - akin to why it is recommended you reinstall Windows on your PC anew every year - who does that?) - true and regular progress updates (even if targets are missed) I would consider essential until you are genuinely happy with the performance of the game (multi-year effort).
- Rewards: You need a better survey, and to make it available to everyone on login. I have no problem with the crown store, but consider making some of the best/most interesting/most recognizable mounts, skins, and emote rewards uniquely available through achievements, with color/texture variants available in the crown store. Also, the implementation of the AWA was poorly implemented reducing the desire for ALT replayability - simply put a poor business decision, worth fixing. Looking forward to the new reward systems.
- Community: Yes, you truly have one of the best communities in MMOs. Most are supportive and forgiving, but a major goodwill threshold was passed in 2022 with U34/U35/U36 (the excellence of your dungeon team and other modular development teams gets overshadowed by poor decisions). Your words reflect that understanding, but does your leadership team understand what is required next to repair goodwill, and to develop goodwill anew?

Finally, while Gina does a good job given what she has to work with, better player-focused communication from leadership (as other MMOs have done) would ultimately serve the health of the game. Goodwill has been recognized by player-bases among many examples: PoE leadership intentionally took its lumps on live streams while sharing a new, clear road map; FF14 communicates clearly and has shut down servers and provided mass micro-refunds to players due to bugs; NW is truly listening to player gameplay experiences and has continued to implement wholesale changes at a rapid pace; WoW has moved into a third phase of development/player-oriented philosophy. Find a way for leadership to effectively communicate the new direction and unquestionable devotion and hard work of the team, and learn (and discover!) new and better ways to approach player-focused gameplay, rewards, and community. Kindly support and even treasure your talented affiliated content creators and, for the future as performance improves, do not underestimate the value of PvP streamers.

Please, a proper multi-year road map that at least mentions new classes, new weapons, combat code refactoring, and (eventually, ahem, sorry) spell-crafting.

There are a million current and future players rooting for you! Good luck!

P.S. It is worth watching Lex Fridman's recent interview with Todd Howard, the part where Todd says he will share a portion of the interview with his development team.

BretonMage

peacenote wrote: »

"hand-crafted, such as quests, stories and things you do one time per character"

"And, on the other hand, our veteran players consistently tell us that they would like more content that isn't played through just once—they would like more content they can enjoy for years"

I am extremely concerned that the conclusion of this thought process is the continued narrowing of options for people who LIKE to play with multiple characters and do EVERYTHING over and over as different characters. The bolded emphasis is mine, but I will be extremely disappointed if this year pushes us in a direction that encourages even more use of a single character that replays content (and/or makes it so character choice is irrelevant) and introduces more changes that are harmful to folks who have a multiple character playstyle.

I'm a player who would like to replay quests with my one character, but I sincerely hope that if they implement that system, it would not be at the expense of those who don't.

aetherial_heavenn

Destai wrote: »

Solid letter, and honestly, a little better than I expected. Like @React I'm more in the "show, don't tell" category. We get these yearly, and while some of the changes are exciting to hear about - like the release cadence - there's still massive issues with communication and engagement.

My thoughts are:

I would be remiss if I didn’t talk about the issues with Update 36, which launched just this last November. It introduced far too many bugs and issues, and even as I write this, we are still chasing down issues with blocking in combat. Trust me, I am just as concerned about this as you all are, and we will be making some process changes within the Dev Team to ensure that things like this happen far more rarely. With an ageing code base (which is 26 million lines of code… really!) it is difficult to be 100% efficient, but we can be far, far better and we know it.

I hope with a slower release cycle, these things happen less often. The scrapping of the class rep program and quiet treatment of the PTS forums doesn't help the situation. How U35 and U36 unfolded are the biggest reason some players are adamant about getting that Q&A. You need to be on the offensive in repairing our perceptions after these two updates, rather than whatever the current approach is. In-game communities are really suffering right now, and because things take time to get fixed, the best you can do is sit down and talk to us. Close the loop on conversations and questions. Do more than give us pets.

Now that we have hundreds and hundreds (and hundreds!) of hours of questing content, enough for four or five regular RPGs, we are hearing from our new players that the sheer number of zones and stories and characters is intimidating. And, on the other hand, our veteran players consistently tell us that they would like more content that isn't played through just once—they would like more content they can enjoy for years; content that utilizes our already existing zones to add new things to do, and most importantly, introduces some new gameplay.  

Thank goodness. I can't tell you how hard it is to get people into this game without them getting completely tangled up in the content. There's TOO MUCH in the starter zones, the whole idea "pick content in any order" is fine, but needs to be completely revisited. New iconography for different quest types, getting prologues under control. The immersion will be better off if this gets adjusted.

Speaking from personal experience, the players I've recruited have been off-put by the amount of NPCs barking at them, following them, and popping up in multiple locations - on top of not knowing what story line any given NPC is a part of. I gave some suggestions earlier where I believe it'd be better if prologues and DLC content were retrievable only from the store and Stories menus. There's solid framework for this, and I think it'd help with the whirlwind of content.

As a vet player hitting a lull, I can tell you that there are enough systems in the game, but the rewards structure is what needs tuning. Too much is in the store, left to RNG, and takes too long to get. Case in point - transmute stones. One of the strengths of this game is the skill and gear systems. So much room for experimentation hampered by the grinding required to construct one set. I get that it keeps people in the game, but it's overtuned IMO.

I know it's symptomatic of the yearly cycle you guys have been in, but the constant combat changes also contribute to this fatigue. It's bad enough that I have to grind for something, it's worse that by the time I get it, it's changed. Why bother at that point? It sounds like that's been taken to heart, just based off this once-a-year message, but I truly hope it has and is being adjusted.

Lastly, I do appreciate systems like the stickerbook and antiquities, so I'm happy to hear they're targeting similar embedded systems like that.

So, below is the 2023 content cadence. Please note that the first half of the year remains essentially unchanged, but the second half of the year now has an update devoted to addressing issues/quality of life improvements and an update devoted to a large new tentpole system.

Q1: Dungeon DLC.
Q2: Full-featured Chapter in June. The 2023 ESO Chapter will be a complete story: you will be able to play all the way through it without a storyline that is broken out and reserved for later in the year. We will return to larger/better and more detailed Chapters by doing this. We are REALLY excited about next year's Chapter—for details, you'll have to wait for our Global Reveal Event in January. But one hint: this will be part one of a multi-year story arc and will contain one of the most requested new features.
Q3: Focus on Quality-of-Life improvements and bug fixes.
Q4: Rather than the usual zone DLC, we'll be featuring a new system. We are working on the concept and design for this now; we’ll give more details during our Global Reveal Event early next year.
Looking back at ESO's evolution since 2014, you can see that we often shake things up, try new things, and make changes as needed. So, we will assess how this new cadence is received—both by the development team and in the community. If we have to make more adjustments, we will.

I'm beyond happy to see the cadence is changing. The game so sorely needs it. I do truly hope this is a return to form for you guys. I've been a stalwart TES fan for nearly 20 years, an ESO fan for 7, and this year really made me question if I want to stay a part of it. I hope that the zones and features are truly robust, not just pretty sets with locked doors. You guys really do deliver some awesome ideas, and some mature better over time than others. This year, and arguably last year too, were thinner feeling. They weren't bad, but it was all too apparent the release cycle left us with less for the same price. Here's to hoping next year is as promising as this post implies.

Almost all the hardware should be delivered and in place by December and then we'll need a month or two to install and test everything before we shift over to the new hardware. Please note that we will be prioritizing all three Realms in the EU datacenter first, and then will return to the NA datacenter to finish moving Xbox and PlayStation Realms there. We are as frustrated as you that this has taken so long—but it is happening and will be done and ready for all players, probably in late February or March of 2023.

Our multi-threading work continues, as we announced a month or so back. Just to remind everyone, this is the initiative that will result in better overall server performance. As we already announced, we will be phasing these changes in over the course of 2023, starting with the Chapter in Q2. We’ll keep everyone updated in patch notes going forward.

These are the items we need quarterly updates on. I'm glad that your letter acknowledges the frustration, but the CMs need to be on top of making sure communication around this is organized and updated. Hopefully we can get a roadmap of the multi-threading and get communication along those milestones. I'm not confident that we will, but I for one want that.

Lastly, I'm very disappointed there's no mention of the promised Q&A. We get our one-off letter for the year, full of promises, but I'm not seeing any framework for communicating milestones, addressing concerns, and alleviating tensions. I'm happy ZOS is adjusting the release cycle finally, and hopefully we can get better communication along with it.

You said it all for me. Thank you

Tenthirty2

Well worded and professional statement.
Many good ideas and plans.
I am eager to see what fruit they bear in the coming year.

Cireous

I want a release date for the release of the information in January. I can't stop thinking about what this could possibly be and it's both keeping me up at night and interfering with work. No one knows exactly what's going to happen here, and the speculation is infinite and overwhelming. I can't stop reading all the things. Please make it end soon, I have things to do. Also, where are the secret datamine discussions going to be hosted at later? Asking for a friend.

matterandstuff

It's more positive than anything they've said in a while, but without reinstating at least some basic character progress tracking (like a non-autocompleting map) the game's replayability outside of raiding is still nil.

The one-and-done situation for quests wasn't always the way: it was essentially created in U33 and it seems to now be dawning on them (if in a roundabout way) that it fundamentally shifted the entire replayability structure of the game.

Hurbster

Seeing is believing.

peacenote

BretonMage wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

"hand-crafted, such as quests, stories and things you do one time per character"

"And, on the other hand, our veteran players consistently tell us that they would like more content that isn't played through just once—they would like more content they can enjoy for years"

I am extremely concerned that the conclusion of this thought process is the continued narrowing of options for people who LIKE to play with multiple characters and do EVERYTHING over and over as different characters. The bolded emphasis is mine, but I will be extremely disappointed if this year pushes us in a direction that encourages even more use of a single character that replays content (and/or makes it so character choice is irrelevant) and introduces more changes that are harmful to folks who have a multiple character playstyle.

I'm a player who would like to replay quests with my one character, but I sincerely hope that if they implement that system, it would not be at the expense of those who don't.

Deal. I sincerely think I would die inside if all quest markers returned right after I did them. I want to feel like I've finished something, especially in a game that technically never ends.

Anyway I came back to change my system guess. I think it's going to be something with overland / overland difficulty. The main reason is because of how the stickied topic is still up in the forums, long after others have been removed, even ones without resolution like the map completion thread. Also there were some hints in the letter like talking about returning to old content.

My hope is that whatever is implemented doesn't make it harder to play with or find friends. Not a fan of progress/content that only appears based on my character such that I can't tackle it with friends, like the companion quests that appear when your relationship with them improves. I am fine with overland today, although I could enjoy improvements. But if I travel to my friends, we need to be able to see the same content and each other. I don't want some of us to see new packs of adds that others can't see, or anything along those lines.

FluffyBird

I decided to have all bit of a Throwback Thwednesday with https://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/61335
And I must say that this year's letter looks a bit more promising and definite than

We’re still going to have our usual high-quality quarterly content and will continue telling amazing stories, but we just may need to be a bit more selective with how we focus our efforts this coming year.

But still same sweet nothings.

LarsS

As pvp player I have one top priority on my quality of life improvemnet list. Please fix the in combat bug! I have missed a huge amount of great fights, because of that bug. If you cant fix it please let us mount while in battle while we are in Cyrodiil.