Did You Know | ESO has a NEVER CHANGE Policy

StihlReign

Hi Guys, did you know ESO has a Never Change Policy? Or, in simplest terms "you've been going about it all wrong".

Many of the changes we discuss here, and there are some very real pain points - should probably be viewed through this lens, and we should probably lower our expectations - SIGNIFICANTLY.

This policy if unchanged, would be 9 years old, and while it feels inflexible, understanding it could go a long way toward understanding the perceived indifference to issues we raise.

ZOS_MattFiror wrote: »

...some insight into our development process, especially how we treat bugs vs. how we treat new art assets and shaders.

On the development side, we have a strict policy to never change art assets once they have been in the live game, except – and this is important – if they are obviously “wrong”. Think bad animations, shoulder pads clipping through armor, weapons hanging too far off a character model’s hip – that kind of thing. This “no change” policy has been in effect since the Redguard Female Armor Debacle of 2015. This was where we updated the visuals of one type of Redguard Female armor and pushed it live without thinking of the consequences of players who liked the way it looked and had been using it for over a year. This caused a lot of – very much merited – criticism from players that liked the older style much better. That’s when we started our “no change” policy. Even if we think an asset needs to updated because it doesn’t fit ESO’s established art style or the artist responsible thinks they could have done better, we no longer change live assets because players are used to the way the game and their characters look, and that is more important than what WE think.

Funny story about this – and I’m sure you are all seeing where this is going – we have a backlog of art bugs and issues that we address over time. If these are flagged as low priority, it can take a long time to get to them. Just after our HDR versions of ESO launched, we flagged an HDR issue where some assets were not responding correctly to our HDR renderer – their color values were not configured properly and were “blown out”, meaning they were far too bright for the established ESO art style. This was entered as a bug, and sat there (not high priority) on the bug list for a few years. Eventually it was addressed and made its way into the build that launched with Update 19 (Wolfhunter).

A side effect of this change is that it changes how our HDR “slider” bar displays HDR changes – on some TVs, you won’t notice any change after moving the slider 10-15%. This is exacerbated by the fact that there is no commonly accepted HDR standard for TVs – cheaper HDR TVs tend to be dimmer with not as much control, and higher-end TVs have a large range of brightness. You’ll definitely notice a difference after our change, especially if you have one of the lower-end TVs.

Short story: It was flagged as a bug, not an “art asset change”, so it never came to the attention of the Art Director (or me) until it went live. Obviously this should have been seen as an “art change”, not a bug fix. We should not have changed it, even if we think that the change is merited, due to our “no change once live” policy.

So now this leaves us in a sticky situation: if we change it back, there will be players that like the new way better than the old. And they will be correct, just as are the ones who like the old way – this is subjective. We are now in a no-win situation, which is why we haven’t given you guys much information up until this point. What we need to do is step back, look at our options, and figure out what is the best thing to do that makes the highest number of players happy. I’m not 100% sure what this is yet, but hang tight and we’ll let you know.

And my sincere apologies for rolling this out with no information, no background, and no heads-up. We take this very seriously, and we’ll make some process changes to ensure something like this doesn’t happen again in the future,

just like we did during the Redguard Female Armor Debacle.

HT | @heaven13 @Jaraal

Perhaps we'd do better asking Zos to re-look at the policy, vs. making any changes to art assets once they're live.

~On a side note...It's been 5 years since this was published, possibly in place for 9 - thus far, how would you grade the process changes to ensure something like this doesn’t happen again in the future?

AnduinTryggva

Why do you think they should update this policy?

I can follow their arguments on rolling something back or not which is purely in the graphical style domain.

Some folks will always appreciate the new one, some prefer the old one.

But thank you nonetheless of bringing this up. It makes things more understandable and can lower expectation of some that the current character selection background will be changed. Which is ok I think even if you don't like it because next year there will be a new chapter and new backgrounds anyway. And then I am sure they will think how to consider the many complaints on the background color plate.

Avran_Sylt

Why do that when they can simply have both?

Keep the old version.

Release an updated version as a new armor style, probably with a different name, that refines the original.

That's what they did with the Barbaric style and the Ancestral Reach style. (I think).



However they absolutely need to update the armor styles used for the early overland sets/questlines, either updating the base or changing what style is used. That's the armor that new players get exposed to.

Thormar

Thank you for the link.
There is also the following in the TOS, a link to which is at the bottom of every page on this forum.

ZeniMax may patch, update, or modify a Service at any time with or without notice to You. Notwithstanding the foregoing, ZeniMax has no obligation to make available any patches, updates, or modifications or correct any errors or defects in the Services.

AcadianPaladin

Timbercrow Wanderer Costume. . . .

Pepegrillos

Where would jabs and the other dw skill animation fit in this context?

Kaelthorn_Nightbloom

StihlReign wrote: »

did you know ESO has a Never Change Policy?

You make it sound like this is a bad thing.

StihlReign wrote: »

Perhaps we'd do better asking Zos to re-look at the policy, vs. making any changes to art assets once they're live.

The way it works now is fine. I still use some of the original styles in some of my character outfits.

It sucks when MMO developers feel they need to go back and "modernize" character art assets. They did this in Everquest and WoW and it was universally hated. Releasing new versions and leaving the original assets in the game for players to use is the way to go. In ESO, the "Ancestral" outfit styles are a good example of an opt-in for new assets.

Kite42

I dunno. Any Eve Online graphical change I can recall was pretty much always an upgrade. I wasn't here for the 'Redguard debacle'.

Furthermore, situations that are no-win, are also no-lose in this context. So the glass is simply at 50% capacity.

Tyrobag

Pepegrillos wrote: »

Where would jabs and the other dw skill animation fit in this context?

[snip] There are obvious visual bugs that have never been fixed (Xivkyn med belt, refabricated shoes/gloves, barbaric gloves, the list goes on), which according to that statement should have been fixed. At the same time, as you pointed out, they've made horrible visual changes to skills, which is far worse than armor changes since you can't just pick another one that isn't hideous without affecting your build. [snip]

[edited for bashing]

TaSheen

Sure, I've known about it forever. I don't think about it one way or another. All I hope is that really means they'll never mess with my characters.

KlauthWarthog

This does not really matter a whole lot. They will change whatever they think they should, including their own policies, and not walk back even if proves to be a horrible idea.

Personofsecrets

That's all quite interesting.

I found a relevant thread from 2015 which discussed the issue of appearance changes. I'm not sure if it is the same issue that Matt Frior discussed.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/201279/nasty-little-surprise-on-the-pts/p1

I have to think that it's a good policy. I sort of wish that the policy toward appearance changes was also similar thinking in other parts of the game.

For example, MANY of us used to really love how DK Wings worked. It was interesting. It was fun. It was an important tool. And it was ripped away.

I guess that balance can't be the same as appearance, oh well. But too, I will point out, that the TOT designers may not have realized how disappointing some of their changes to the game have been such as Psijics/Cephora's Insight and Customs Seizure.

I sort of wish that for game balance there was a rule. Like either say that they will be changing things up from time to time or say, as has been done with appearance updates, that old ways of being will be respected because some people might like those old ways!

Honestly, even if one doesn't like the appearance change rule, it's really good to know that THERE IS A RULE. That's cool and sweet. I'd like to know all of the rules that they have. Rules are awesome as they inform us what to expect.

Tandor

Kite42 wrote: »

I dunno. Any Eve Online graphical change I can recall was pretty much always an upgrade. I wasn't here for the 'Redguard debacle'.

Furthermore, situations that are no-win, are also no-lose in this context. So the glass is simply at 50% capacity.

Exactly, which is why their policy makes sense. If they change things that half of the players like and half the players dislike, then they end up with changes that half the players like and half the players dislike - they're just swapped round.

Elsonso

Overall, I think the "No Change" policy is a good thing. It does prevent them from making art changes that I would like to see, but it also stops them from making art changes I don't want to see.

GooGa592

The refusal to revert the templar jabs animation is a perfect example of how well ZOS listens to feedback.

Not to mention what happens to anyone who has the audacity to so much as mention PvP or Cyrodiil during a ZOS live feed.

Pixiepumpkin

I dont see this as a good thing for the player, I see this as a clause in a legal binding contract between them and the customer that absolves zenimax from having to make changes/spend ADDITIONAL resources on the game where they have already spend resources.

Its about maximizing profit, not making players happy, that is how I read it anyway.

Remathilis

I'd just be happy if they put old Redgard back in as a new motif/style page (call in ancestral Redguard or something).

Tenthirty2

"except – and this is important – if they are obviously “wrong”. Think bad animations, shoulder pads clipping through armor, weapons hanging too far off a character model’s hip – that kind of thing. "

I have a list, if Matt is interested...

StihlReign

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Why do you think they should update this policy?

PTS

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

StihlReign wrote: »

did you know ESO has a Never Change Policy?

You make it sound like this is a bad thing.

StihlReign wrote: »

Perhaps we'd do better asking Zos to re-look at the policy, vs. making any changes to art assets once they're live.

The way it works now is fine. I still use some of the original styles in some of my character outfits.

virtus753

Pepegrillos wrote: »

Where would jabs and the other dw skill animation fit in this context?

For me the decision itself to change the animations reasonably complied with their policy about “fixing” something no longer right. In both cases the timing/cadence for the old animations was off after they changed the number of strikes. So yes, update the timing of the animations to account for that per the policy. That makes sense.

But they ended up with animations that have major issues because they were changed far beyond the scope of that objective.

Turning the iconic style-less Aedric Spear into a Nighthollow staff and making the jabs a shovel motion contributed in no way to the reasonable goals stated in changing the animation. I see no reason for removing a design unique to Templar from this one skill (creating a marked inconsistency with other Aedric Spear visuals), much less for replacing it with a style named for and assigned to vampiric figures. The fact that the same style was used for the lightning spears in the Archdruid Devyric fight in the same patch, a similarly striking choice lore-wise, suggests to me that this was simply the style du jour, which greatly detracts (for me) from the visual identity of both the class and the boss. This is not just odd but problematic, since visual styling is essential in making each class and boss feel unique. Giving so many things Nighthollow staves makes the identity of these things feel generic and confused.

Likewise, for Flurry there’s a similar drawback that ends up defeating the purpose of changing the animation, for me: the new animation makes the character look like they’re flailing about without an appropriate center of gravity using a stepping motion that makes them seem unstable on their feet. Windmilling at enemies like this doesn’t look masterful or impressive to me, which significantly hinders the power fantasy of RPG combat.

YMMV. This is just my thoughts on how they complied with their policy in one sense but also introduced changes that went beyond it.

Alaztor91

I can remember Templar Jabs, NB Grim Focus, Sorc Bound Armor and DK Poison skills. All of those could be considered ''art assets'' that received changes after they were already live, you could probably include Arcanist Crux counter too.

ZOS will enforce/not enforce this policy whenever they feel like it, don't expect them to be consistent about it.

Carcamongus

It's impossible to please everyone, but it's not hard at all to displease a large amount of people: just endlessly tinker with the way motifs, styles and costumes look. I find the original motifs to be generally ugly, and even have my complaints about my beloved Imperial style (e.g. cuirass looks paper-thin), but it's better to keep those unchanged. In any case, the devs created a workaround with the ancestral (pity they're behind treasure maps) and House Hexos motifs. Hopefully more such reworked motifs will be available as quest rewards in the future.

While I agree with this policy, I'd like to understand how changing the look of the templars' spear fits into it. It should've been possible to update the animation without changing the spear, no?

kargen27

GooGa592 wrote: »

The refusal to revert the templar jabs animation is a perfect example of how well ZOS listens to feedback.

Not to mention what happens to anyone who has the audacity to so much as mention PvP or Cyrodiil during a ZOS live feed.

I like the new jabs animation. Easier to see when stacked in trials and fits the timing of the skill better. Before the change players were complaining that the old animation didn't time up well with the attack. That was fixed showing that ZoS does pay attention to feedback.

Kavreiss

If they followed this policy the would have never added the permaglow to nightblade.

Shagreth

No wonder the game feels stale. Be it graphically wise (animations, class skills, player models etc.) gameplay, they just refuse to modernize the game. I'm rather easy, if they updated certain animations and effects, I'd be mostly happy, slap in a character model touch-up and I'm done.

I don't know about others, but I am tired of slotting beast trap and a bunch of other 'must-haves' for high-end content, also, certain abilities simply look like CRAP. One fine example is the magma armor of DK, you basically look like a flaming turd."

Also, I'd like to add some very big offenders like Timbercrow Wanderer Costume, it still has that ugly diaper. It's not like PvP peeps get many things to unlock, they also gotta be censored in this way.. in a PEGI 18 game.

spartaxoxo

Pepegrillos wrote: »

Where would jabs and the other dw skill animation fit in this context?

They changed them to ensure the animation wasn't incorrect. They changed the balance of the skill, and the animations of the skill would have been obviously wrong and give incorrect information if they hadn't been changed to match. They have noted that wrong animations are subject to change in that policy.

Skullstachio

virtus753 wrote: »

Pepegrillos wrote: »

Where would jabs and the other dw skill animation fit in this context?

For me the decision itself to change the animations reasonably complied with their policy about “fixing” something no longer right. In both cases the timing/cadence for the old animations was off after they changed the number of strikes. So yes, update the timing of the animations to account for that per the policy. That makes sense.

But they ended up with animations that have major issues because they were changed far beyond the scope of that objective.

Turning the iconic style-less Aedric Spear into a Nighthollow staff and making the jabs a shovel motion contributed in no way to the reasonable goals stated in changing the animation. I see no reason for removing a design unique to Templar from this one skill (creating a marked inconsistency with other Aedric Spear visuals), much less for replacing it with a style named for and assigned to vampiric figures. The fact that the same style was used for the lightning spears in the Archdruid Devyric fight in the same patch, a similarly striking choice lore-wise, suggests to me that this was simply the style du jour, which greatly detracts (for me) from the visual identity of both the class and the boss. This is not just odd but problematic, since visual styling is essential in making each class and boss feel unique. Giving so many things Nighthollow staves makes the identity of these things feel generic and confused.

Likewise, for Flurry there’s a similar drawback that ends up defeating the purpose of changing the animation, for me: the new animation makes the character look like they’re flailing about without an appropriate center of gravity using a stepping motion that makes them seem unstable on their feet. Windmilling at enemies like this doesn’t look masterful or impressive to me, which significantly hinders the power fantasy of RPG combat.

YMMV. This is just my thoughts on how they complied with their policy in one sense but also introduced changes that went beyond it.

This quote above: in part, definitely points out the hypocrisy of the aforementioned "Never Change" policy in regards to the templar animations and then some.
Most importantly, IMO, the never change policy can and should be scrapped because Hypocritically: no matter what someone does when it comes to such things like art asset changes, animation changes, etc. there is always going to be that one soul who complains about it because they either have nothing better to do, or because they actually like it.
Zenimax Need to remember that they are the ones developing the game and sometimes when it comes to those particular changes, players just need to chill, because as has been pointed out already with the ancestral styles and what have you, it is possible for them to return in some capacity, janky clipping and all.

Plus another good reason for scrapping the never change policy is also because it makes them look like a hypocrite when it comes to art and animation changes like the ones pointed out in the Below Quote which is on the same topic, and may inadverdently do more damage than actual good, not to mention, and I do not say this lightly as it is a concern, but it may also make the art team look quite a little bit complacent in that field.

Alaztor91 wrote: »

I can remember Templar Jabs, NB Grim Focus, Sorc Bound Armor and DK Poison skills. All of those could be considered ''art assets'' that received changes after they were already live, you could probably include Arcanist Crux counter too.

ZOS will enforce/not enforce this policy whenever they feel like it, don't expect them to be consistent about it.

spartaxoxo

Kite42 wrote: »

I dunno. Any Eve Online graphical change I can recall was pretty much always an upgrade. I wasn't here for the 'Redguard debacle'.

Furthermore, situations that are no-win, are also no-lose in this context. So the glass is simply at 50% capacity.

The Redguard debacle was because they removed a boob window from the chest piece of Redguard armor iirc. They updated that armor for aesthetic reasons and it got people mad, so they decided they wouldn't update for aesthetic reasons anymore.

dcrush

Templar jabs and NB permaglow changes show that this policy is applied very selectively and should not be something that players go to as a reference.

Nharimlur_Finor

There will always be players who believe that the change they need is both correct and one that 'everyone' wants.
Where a change seems illogical to players, they often assume that ZOS has the players' best interests at heart, when in fact they have their own revenue stream in focus instead.

For me, I dislike changes that turn an activity from being enjoyable; to one that, when analysed, appears to be in the interest of subscription renewal rather than being satisfying gameplay. As in, deliberately wasting my time.

virtus753

Shagreth wrote: »

No wonder the game feels stale. Be it graphically wise (animations, class skills, player models etc.) gameplay, they just refuse to modernize the game. I'm rather easy, if they updated certain animations and effects, I'd be mostly happy, slap in a character model touch-up and I'm done.

I don't know about others, but I am tired of slotting beast trap and a bunch of other 'must-haves' for high-end content, also, certain abilities simply look like CRAP. One fine example is the magma armor of DK, you basically look like a flaming turd."

Also, I'd like to add some very big offenders like Timbercrow Wanderer Costume, it still has that ugly diaper. It's not like PvP peeps get many things to unlock, they also gotta be censored in this way.. in a PEGI 18 game.

The game is rated 14 in some countries and is M (suggested 17) in the U.S. They have to design for all their ratings, not just the highest. That said, a look at Almalexia makes me think that maturity ratings are either not consistently applied or might not have been the reasoning behind the Timbercrow’s…behind.