Streamers and Zos

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

But sometimes, it feels like you're being talked at and not with. They refuse to offer reasons why they feel the way they do and to actually try to understand where vets are coming from and are there to only to protect ZOS from criticism.

I don't see how "No." and nothing else is constructive to dialogue with other users or quality feedback for ZOS to consider.

Sometimes "No" is all there is to say. How do we give reasons for why we prefer one way over another? It's just what we enjoy and prefer.

Someone can talk about what they like about the things they prefer. Or they can elaborate on what they dislike about the things they're arguing against. If what someone is posting isn't constructive to conversation then others may feel they're being baited or dismissed for no reason. Sometimes it's better to gather more information and think about how we feel instead of hitting post for the sake of having a speedy response.

As a general rule, I try to always provide reasons for why I am disagreeing. If I can't do that because I don't know enough about the issue being presented, it doesn't apply to me, etc than I don't reply to the thread. Sometimes I still read it to gain a better understanding of other users and why something is an issue. It's why I have supportive positions about PvP despite I only do a very small amount of PvP in this game. It's genuinely not in the place it should be, something the devs themselves also acknowledge.

SeaGtGruff

.

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

It’s frustrating when certain individuals consistently defend every decision, even when it clearly harms the broader player base.

Not all players agree that every decision harms the broader player base.

When a player posts that their experience has been positive, it in no way negates another players negative experience. We can all give our feedback as individuals, and our personal views do not diminish another player's experience.

It’s frustrating to see posts consistently derailed by certain users who dismiss others’ concerns simply because they don’t share the same experience.

Instead of engaging in constructive discussion, they seem to focus solely on defending ZOS or countering someone’s point without offering anything meaningful to the conversation. When you see the same names repeatedly doing this, it becomes clear that their input adds little value beyond being argumentative.

🤔

There are two sides to that street. If someone posts something critical of a particular decision and someone else responds with an opposing view, that should be okay. After all, people who seem to be constantly critical don't hesitate to respond with their opposing views whenever someone posts something positive, do they? It isn't right to say that one situation is okay just because you agree with the responses, but turn around and say that the other situation is not okay because you disagree with the responses. Either both situations are wrong-- in which case there is no discussion at all, just one-sided threads where only one point of view (be it positive or negative) is permitted within that thread, as determined by the tone of the initial post-- or else both situations are okay and people should be allowed to post their responses without the other people accusing them of just being argumentative.

SilverBride

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

spartaxoxo

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

You don't have to. But, if you want it to be usable feedback for ZOS and feel constructive rather than dismissive to others, then it helps to give a reason. You asked and that's how I feel about it.

SilverBride

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

You don't have to. But, if you want it to be usable feedback for ZOS and feel constructive rather than dismissive to others, then it helps to give a reason. You asked and that's how I feel about it.

I didn't ask.

("How do we give reasons for why we prefer one way over another?" is a rhetorical question.)

I think it's best to just agree to disagree, now and in the future.

Lyraen_Skyforge

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

No one should be criticized for sharing their feelings—absolutely agree.

However, when the topic involves objective issues like a shrinking player base, declining Steam numbers, or reduced guild activity, feelings alone shouldn’t carry the same weight as evidence or reasoned analysis.

For instance, if someone shares factual concerns about the game’s trajectory, a counter like “It doesn’t feel that way to me” adds little to the conversation. While it’s fine to express a differing experience, these comments often come across as unhelpful, especially when they lack substance and seem more like blind defenses of ZOS or a contrary opinion for its own sake.

SilverBride

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

No one should be criticized for sharing their feelings—absolutely agree.

However, when the topic involves objective issues like a shrinking player base, declining Steam numbers, or reduced guild activity, feelings alone shouldn’t carry the same weight as evidence or reasoned analysis.

For instance, if someone shares factual concerns about the game’s trajectory, a counter like “It doesn’t feel that way to me” adds little to the conversation. While it’s fine to express a differing experience, these comments often come across as unhelpful, especially when they lack substance and seem more like blind defenses of ZOS or a contrary opinion for its own sake.

Come across as unhelpful to who? ZoS has not said that we need to elaborate with detailed explanations to give feedback. If I say "I have not experienced any negative effects from this change" that is very clear feedback.

This actually discourages back and forth arguments because the feedback is stated and doesn't require any rebuttal. It's just me relating my own personal experience.

Lyraen_Skyforge

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

No one should be criticized for sharing their feelings—absolutely agree.

However, when the topic involves objective issues like a shrinking player base, declining Steam numbers, or reduced guild activity, feelings alone shouldn’t carry the same weight as evidence or reasoned analysis.

For instance, if someone shares factual concerns about the game’s trajectory, a counter like “It doesn’t feel that way to me” adds little to the conversation. While it’s fine to express a differing experience, these comments often come across as unhelpful, especially when they lack substance and seem more like blind defenses of ZOS or a contrary opinion for its own sake.

Come across as unhelpful to who? ZoS has not said that we need to elaborate with detailed explanations to give feedback. If I say "I have not experienced any negative effects from this change" that is very clear feedback.

This actually discourages back and forth arguments because the feedback is stated and doesn't require any rebuttal. It's just me relating my own personal experience.

Note how this post pivots from “feelings” to “experiencing negative effects.” This shift already moves closer to what I’m saying: feedback based on tangible experiences or observations is far more valuable than empty “feelings” posts, whether they support or critique a change.

This thread criticizes streamers or content creators for being “whiners” when they’re critical of the game, but the reality is that their videos don’t have massive reach—they make them because they care about the game.

My point is that the sentiment goes both ways. Some players predictably defend ZOS, even when changes negatively affect others, often in flippant ways that can’t be argued against, which comes off as disingenuous. For example, when someone shares that their guild is struggling due to player attrition caused by recent changes, and the response is, “I feel like things are great for me,” it adds little value. It’s not backed by any evidence, can’t be justified, and feels like an intentional attempt to stir the pot rather than contribute meaningfully.

Lyraen_Skyforge

No one is discounting feelings, but actual data and facts are what is most important. Not just from my prospective, but also ZOS.

ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »

A friendly reminder that providing data always helps us far more than anecdotal feedback, though both are still welcome.

(Thanks for reposting this in another thread. I saw it and thought it was relevant here. 😊)

SilverBride

RomanRex wrote: »

No one is discounting feelings, but actual data and facts are what is most important. Not just from my prospective, but also ZOS.

ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »

A friendly reminder that providing data always helps us far more than anecdotal feedback, though both are still welcome.

That quote was taken from a thread in July 2022 asking for feedback on the upcoming U35 changes that were going active on the PTS, stating the type of feedback they would like to receive specifically on the upcoming changes.

They were not referring to posting feedback on the forums in general.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/612574/update-35-pts-combat-feedback-upcoming-changes/p1

spartaxoxo

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

No one should be criticized for sharing their feelings—absolutely agree.

However, when the topic involves objective issues like a shrinking player base, declining Steam numbers, or reduced guild activity, feelings alone shouldn’t carry the same weight as evidence or reasoned analysis.

For instance, if someone shares factual concerns about the game’s trajectory, a counter like “It doesn’t feel that way to me” adds little to the conversation. While it’s fine to express a differing experience, these comments often come across as unhelpful, especially when they lack substance and seem more like blind defenses of ZOS or a contrary opinion for its own sake.

Come across as unhelpful to who? ZoS has not said that we need to elaborate with detailed explanations to give feedback. If I say "I have not experienced any negative effects from this change" that is very clear feedback.

This actually discourages back and forth arguments because the feedback is stated and doesn't require any rebuttal. It's just me relating my own personal experience.

Note how this post pivots from “feelings” to “experiencing negative effects.” This shift already moves closer to what I’m saying: feedback based on tangible experiences or observations is far more valuable than empty “feelings” posts, whether they support or critique a change.

This thread criticizes streamers or content creators for being “whiners” when they’re critical of the game, but the reality is that their videos don’t have massive reach—they make them because they care about the game.

My point is that the sentiment goes both ways. Some players predictably defend ZOS, even when changes negatively affect others, often in flippant ways that can’t be argued against, which comes off as disingenuous. For example, when someone shares that their guild is struggling due to player attrition caused by recent changes, and the response is, “I feel like things are great for me,” it adds little value. It’s not backed by any evidence, can’t be justified, and feels like an intentional attempt to stir the pot rather than contribute meaningfully.

First I want to say that big streamers definitely have a much larger reach than a regular user on the forums.

Someone saying their guild is doing great is equally valid as someone saying their guild is doing poorly.

Many streamers do a good job of articulating why they and people who play like them are negatively impacted by something in the game. I don't always agree with them though. But they tend to put a lot of effort into laying out exactly the issues as they seem them. I think this is also a big part of why they are often successful at bringing about changes in this and other games.

Franchise408

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

No one should be criticized for sharing their feelings—absolutely agree.

However, when the topic involves objective issues like a shrinking player base, declining Steam numbers, or reduced guild activity, feelings alone shouldn’t carry the same weight as evidence or reasoned analysis.

For instance, if someone shares factual concerns about the game’s trajectory, a counter like “It doesn’t feel that way to me” adds little to the conversation. While it’s fine to express a differing experience, these comments often come across as unhelpful, especially when they lack substance and seem more like blind defenses of ZOS or a contrary opinion for its own sake.

Come across as unhelpful to who? ZoS has not said that we need to elaborate with detailed explanations to give feedback. If I say "I have not experienced any negative effects from this change" that is very clear feedback.

This actually discourages back and forth arguments because the feedback is stated and doesn't require any rebuttal. It's just me relating my own personal experience.

Note how this post pivots from “feelings” to “experiencing negative effects.” This shift already moves closer to what I’m saying: feedback based on tangible experiences or observations is far more valuable than empty “feelings” posts, whether they support or critique a change.

This thread criticizes streamers or content creators for being “whiners” when they’re critical of the game, but the reality is that their videos don’t have massive reach—they make them because they care about the game.

My point is that the sentiment goes both ways. Some players predictably defend ZOS, even when changes negatively affect others, often in flippant ways that can’t be argued against, which comes off as disingenuous. For example, when someone shares that their guild is struggling due to player attrition caused by recent changes, and the response is, “I feel like things are great for me,” it adds little value. It’s not backed by any evidence, can’t be justified, and feels like an intentional attempt to stir the pot rather than contribute meaningfully.

Streamers aren't doing it because they "care about the game", they are doing it because they are making money off of their content. And streamers in particular have extra incentive to be negative because negativity drives far more attention, and thus revenue, than positivity or even being rational and logical.

TaSheen

Franchise408 wrote: »

<snipped for brevity>
Streamers aren't doing it because they "care about the game", they are doing it because they are making money off of their content. And streamers in particular have extra incentive to be negative because negativity drives far more attention, and thus revenue, than positivity or even being rational and logical.

I'd have to agree, though I'm sure most of them started out as devotees of the game. The call of money is a hard thing to ignore, if you're someone who can drum up the viewers (and if you're engaging and fun to watch).

I've never had any use for watching people play a game I play myself, but I know a number of people who think I'm just too old to understand. Considering how close I am to 80.... well, they may be right....

BananaBender

Franchise408 wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

No one should be criticized for sharing their feelings—absolutely agree.

However, when the topic involves objective issues like a shrinking player base, declining Steam numbers, or reduced guild activity, feelings alone shouldn’t carry the same weight as evidence or reasoned analysis.

For instance, if someone shares factual concerns about the game’s trajectory, a counter like “It doesn’t feel that way to me” adds little to the conversation. While it’s fine to express a differing experience, these comments often come across as unhelpful, especially when they lack substance and seem more like blind defenses of ZOS or a contrary opinion for its own sake.

Come across as unhelpful to who? ZoS has not said that we need to elaborate with detailed explanations to give feedback. If I say "I have not experienced any negative effects from this change" that is very clear feedback.

This actually discourages back and forth arguments because the feedback is stated and doesn't require any rebuttal. It's just me relating my own personal experience.

Note how this post pivots from “feelings” to “experiencing negative effects.” This shift already moves closer to what I’m saying: feedback based on tangible experiences or observations is far more valuable than empty “feelings” posts, whether they support or critique a change.

This thread criticizes streamers or content creators for being “whiners” when they’re critical of the game, but the reality is that their videos don’t have massive reach—they make them because they care about the game.

My point is that the sentiment goes both ways. Some players predictably defend ZOS, even when changes negatively affect others, often in flippant ways that can’t be argued against, which comes off as disingenuous. For example, when someone shares that their guild is struggling due to player attrition caused by recent changes, and the response is, “I feel like things are great for me,” it adds little value. It’s not backed by any evidence, can’t be justified, and feels like an intentional attempt to stir the pot rather than contribute meaningfully.

Streamers aren't doing it because they "care about the game", they are doing it because they are making money off of their content. And streamers in particular have extra incentive to be negative because negativity drives far more attention, and thus revenue, than positivity or even being rational and logical.

Vast majority of streamers, especially those who stream ESO are not doing it as their job.

SeaGtGruff

Franchise408 wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

No one should be criticized for sharing their feelings—absolutely agree.

However, when the topic involves objective issues like a shrinking player base, declining Steam numbers, or reduced guild activity, feelings alone shouldn’t carry the same weight as evidence or reasoned analysis.

For instance, if someone shares factual concerns about the game’s trajectory, a counter like “It doesn’t feel that way to me” adds little to the conversation. While it’s fine to express a differing experience, these comments often come across as unhelpful, especially when they lack substance and seem more like blind defenses of ZOS or a contrary opinion for its own sake.

Come across as unhelpful to who? ZoS has not said that we need to elaborate with detailed explanations to give feedback. If I say "I have not experienced any negative effects from this change" that is very clear feedback.

This actually discourages back and forth arguments because the feedback is stated and doesn't require any rebuttal. It's just me relating my own personal experience.

Note how this post pivots from “feelings” to “experiencing negative effects.” This shift already moves closer to what I’m saying: feedback based on tangible experiences or observations is far more valuable than empty “feelings” posts, whether they support or critique a change.

This thread criticizes streamers or content creators for being “whiners” when they’re critical of the game, but the reality is that their videos don’t have massive reach—they make them because they care about the game.

My point is that the sentiment goes both ways. Some players predictably defend ZOS, even when changes negatively affect others, often in flippant ways that can’t be argued against, which comes off as disingenuous. For example, when someone shares that their guild is struggling due to player attrition caused by recent changes, and the response is, “I feel like things are great for me,” it adds little value. It’s not backed by any evidence, can’t be justified, and feels like an intentional attempt to stir the pot rather than contribute meaningfully.

Streamers aren't doing it because they "care about the game", they are doing it because they are making money off of their content. And streamers in particular have extra incentive to be negative because negativity drives far more attention, and thus revenue, than positivity or even being rational and logical.

Most of the streamers I watch— most of whom do not play ESO— are not making much, if any, income from streaming. But then, I usually watch small-time streamers, not because they’re smaller, but because most of the games I’m interested in watching are older and don’t seem to have a lot of followers.

redspecter23

I think this is a fantastic topic to explore and it's great to read all the sides. I've always found that trying to keep an open mind and giving constructive feedback will lead to better back and forth conversation. Being able to recognize other opinions as valid, even if you don't agree, is important.

Content creators can often be very opinionated and much of their audience may agree with them (as if they don't, they likely wouldn't be watching them to begin with). This can create an environment where your core community doesn't challenge you and those that do might be viewed as toxic outsiders and more easily dismissed.

I had a great discussion the other day regarding the new pvp tests. We heard opinions on all sides and came out of it with hopefully a bit of understanding of others, even if we didn't necessarily agree ourselves. This sort of discussion can be a strength of live stream content creators as it allows live back and forth in real time.

Amottica

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

You don't have to. But, if you want it to be usable feedback for ZOS and feel constructive rather than dismissive to others, then it helps to give a reason. You asked and that's how I feel about it.

I do not know what type of comments are "dismissive."

Disagreement with an idea proposed in these forums is acceptable since differing opinions are part of civil conversations. We can even disagree without supplying reasoning, just as we can agree without providing such rationale.

My question is, how does this pertain to the subject of this thread? I ask to prevent deviating and discussing a different topic.

RaikaNA

Franchise408 wrote: »

Streamers aren't doing it because they "care about the game", they are doing it because they are making money off of their content. And streamers in particular have extra incentive to be negative because negativity drives far more attention, and thus revenue, than positivity or even being rational and logical.

DeltiasGaming sold his name, YouTube account, and domain to Absolute Sports for 900,000 dollars. Not accusing him of not caring for the game, but wouldn't it be cool to give a percentage amount to the developers of the game that made you wealthy? Perhaps if Deltias and people like him gave a certain amount back to the developers.. maybe the servers would be a lot better in terms of performance.

https://www.medianews4u.com/nazaras-absolute-sports-acquires-assets-of-us-gaming-content-platform-deltiasgaming-com/
The irony is that content creators when making build videos use the same exact builds that other content creators are using for their channels. they steal from each other.

And yes uploading negative content boosts up views, but at the same time hurts gaming companies. Just ask Bioware about how they did on Dragon Age Veilguard in terms of sales.

Franchise408

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

I do not feel that I have to provide a reason for why I feel how I feel. Someone may post that they think a certain change ruined the game for example, when I have not had any negative issues due to the change. My stating such is valid feedback for me to present. I do not have to post long elaborate explanations, when just saying "I have not had any negative issues with the change" sums up my position.

When we post feedback we have to expect that others may hold a different view. We can't put stipulations on them that we feel they need to meet for them to present their feedback.

No one should be criticized for sharing their feelings—absolutely agree.

However, when the topic involves objective issues like a shrinking player base, declining Steam numbers, or reduced guild activity, feelings alone shouldn’t carry the same weight as evidence or reasoned analysis.

For instance, if someone shares factual concerns about the game’s trajectory, a counter like “It doesn’t feel that way to me” adds little to the conversation. While it’s fine to express a differing experience, these comments often come across as unhelpful, especially when they lack substance and seem more like blind defenses of ZOS or a contrary opinion for its own sake.

Come across as unhelpful to who? ZoS has not said that we need to elaborate with detailed explanations to give feedback. If I say "I have not experienced any negative effects from this change" that is very clear feedback.

This actually discourages back and forth arguments because the feedback is stated and doesn't require any rebuttal. It's just me relating my own personal experience.

Note how this post pivots from “feelings” to “experiencing negative effects.” This shift already moves closer to what I’m saying: feedback based on tangible experiences or observations is far more valuable than empty “feelings” posts, whether they support or critique a change.

This thread criticizes streamers or content creators for being “whiners” when they’re critical of the game, but the reality is that their videos don’t have massive reach—they make them because they care about the game.

My point is that the sentiment goes both ways. Some players predictably defend ZOS, even when changes negatively affect others, often in flippant ways that can’t be argued against, which comes off as disingenuous. For example, when someone shares that their guild is struggling due to player attrition caused by recent changes, and the response is, “I feel like things are great for me,” it adds little value. It’s not backed by any evidence, can’t be justified, and feels like an intentional attempt to stir the pot rather than contribute meaningfully.

Streamers aren't doing it because they "care about the game", they are doing it because they are making money off of their content. And streamers in particular have extra incentive to be negative because negativity drives far more attention, and thus revenue, than positivity or even being rational and logical.

Most of the streamers I watch— most of whom do not play ESO— are not making much, if any, income from streaming. But then, I usually watch small-time streamers, not because they’re smaller, but because most of the games I’m interested in watching are older and don’t seem to have a lot of followers.

The ones who have the actual influence in the community, like Nefas, absolutely do make money off of it.

Franchise408

RaikaNA wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Streamers aren't doing it because they "care about the game", they are doing it because they are making money off of their content. And streamers in particular have extra incentive to be negative because negativity drives far more attention, and thus revenue, than positivity or even being rational and logical.

DeltiasGaming sold his name, YouTube account, and domain to Absolute Sports for 900,000 dollars. Not accusing him of not caring for the game, but wouldn't it be cool to give a percentage amount to the developers of the game that made you wealthy? Perhaps if Deltias and people like him gave a certain amount back to the developers.. maybe the servers would be a lot better in terms of performance.

https://www.medianews4u.com/nazaras-absolute-sports-acquires-assets-of-us-gaming-content-platform-deltiasgaming-com/
The irony is that content creators when making build videos use the same exact builds that other content creators are using for their channels. they steal from each other.

And yes uploading negative content boosts up views, but at the same time hurts gaming companies. Just ask Bioware about how they did on Dragon Age Veilguard in terms of sales.

Dragon Age is a perfect example of the "negativity sells" mentality.

I bought Dragon Age. I loved it. It's a fine game. Far from perfect, but still an overall good, quality RPG.

The negativity surrounding it is absolutely out of control. It's done to boost exposure for the streamers and content creators.

Hurting the gaming companies isn't a problem for these streamers. They don't care, they got their views.

hiyde

Franchise408 wrote: »

DeltiasGaming sold his name, YouTube account, and domain to Absolute Sports for 900,000 dollars. Not accusing him of not caring for the game, but wouldn't it be cool to give a percentage amount to the developers of the game that made you wealthy? Perhaps if Deltias and people like him gave a certain amount back to the developers.. maybe the servers would be a lot better in terms of performance.

Not only has the game raked in 2 Billion Dollars in revenue from us players, the company that owns this game is worth over 3 Trillion Dollars. I think they'll be OK and am sure they have the resources to buy 24K gold-plated diamond-encrusted servers if they'd like. 🤣

colossalvoids

RaikaNA wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Streamers aren't doing it because they "care about the game", they are doing it because they are making money off of their content. And streamers in particular have extra incentive to be negative because negativity drives far more attention, and thus revenue, than positivity or even being rational and logical.

DeltiasGaming sold his name, YouTube account, and domain to Absolute Sports for 900,000 dollars. Not accusing him of not caring for the game, but wouldn't it be cool to give a percentage amount to the developers of the game that made you wealthy? Perhaps if Deltias and people like him gave a certain amount back to the developers.. maybe the servers would be a lot better in terms of performance.

Yeah, a multi billion dollar company surely needs just some more to do the most basics of things, it's absolutely impossible with their so low revenue. 900k more and the game would be fixed after a decade.

After all this time they've wasted as a company 900k for him is a good way out of this toxic relationship to never look back and live a happy life and invest in his actual business. He most probably brought them more income by just existing and supporting players making content for them so players stay bit more.

RaikaNA

hiyde wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

DeltiasGaming sold his name, YouTube account, and domain to Absolute Sports for 900,000 dollars. Not accusing him of not caring for the game, but wouldn't it be cool to give a percentage amount to the developers of the game that made you wealthy? Perhaps if Deltias and people like him gave a certain amount back to the developers.. maybe the servers would be a lot better in terms of performance.

Not only has the game raked in 2 Billion Dollars in revenue from us players, the company that owns this game is worth over 3 Trillion Dollars. I think they'll be OK and am sure they have the resources to buy 24K gold-plated diamond-encrusted servers if they'd like. 🤣

How much of that money goes back into the game? How much of that goes into the pocket of the suits?

Toanis

Amottica wrote: »

First, I would suggest Nefas was unique amongst content creators as he has a broad and deep knowledge of the game. I was unaware that Zenimax took action to embarrass him and would suggest it was a big mistake if they did.

If you get embarassed when someone has to tell you three times that filming/streaming isn't allowed at their event, maybe you should comply the first time. Especially when there already were complaints about you filming at a previous event.

In the end, for any company we are mainly worth what we are willing to pay, and for most of us that's 220 bucks per year for a sub and an expansion. MMOs are special in that we as the players are also part of the product, and some "quality control" is neccessary. You may get some perks as a content creator when you're good advertisement for the game's community, that doesn't mean you need to be a yes-man and ignore any issues, just generally showing your audience that it's fun to play.

When your bubble is the sweatiest part of the PVE endgame community and the wider audience mainly knows you from your videos critizising the game and it's catering to "Toxic Casuals", don't expect to be handled with kid gloves, when you show up with a professional streaming kit on an event for casuals.

hiyde

RaikaNA wrote: »

hiyde wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

DeltiasGaming sold his name, YouTube account, and domain to Absolute Sports for 900,000 dollars. Not accusing him of not caring for the game, but wouldn't it be cool to give a percentage amount to the developers of the game that made you wealthy? Perhaps if Deltias and people like him gave a certain amount back to the developers.. maybe the servers would be a lot better in terms of performance.

Not only has the game raked in 2 Billion Dollars in revenue from us players, the company that owns this game is worth over 3 Trillion Dollars. I think they'll be OK and am sure they have the resources to buy 24K gold-plated diamond-encrusted servers if they'd like. 🤣

How much of that money goes back into the game? How much of that goes into the pocket of the suits?

I have no idea, but that wasn't my point. My point was that the company has mountains of money and doesn't need a share of Deltia selling his channel to properly fund ESO.

Elsonso

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

But sometimes, it feels like you're being talked at and not with. They refuse to offer reasons why they feel the way they do and to actually try to understand where vets are coming from and are there to only to protect ZOS from criticism.

I don't see how "No." and nothing else is constructive to dialogue with other users or quality feedback for ZOS to consider.

Sometimes "No" is all there is to say. How do we give reasons for why we prefer one way over another? It's just what we enjoy and prefer.

Someone can talk about what they like about the things they prefer. Or they can elaborate on what they dislike about the things they're arguing against. If what someone is posting isn't constructive to conversation then others may feel they're being baited or dismissed for no reason. Sometimes it's better to gather more information and think about how we feel instead of hitting post for the sake of having a speedy response.

As a general rule, I try to always provide reasons for why I am disagreeing. If I can't do that because I don't know enough about the issue being presented, it doesn't apply to me, etc than I don't reply to the thread. Sometimes I still read it to gain a better understanding of other users and why something is an issue. It's why I have supportive positions about PvP despite I only do a very small amount of PvP in this game. It's genuinely not in the place it should be, something the devs themselves also acknowledge.

Topics around here are like a bad penny. They always seem to come back.

The new thread is important to someone, or they would not have created it. The long term forum community is not that large, so the same people are going to show up each time. An agreement or disagreement is just that. It can be a "Yes" or a "No". In many cases, the elaboration has already been stated a gazillion times in a gazillion other threads.

Should long term forum posters just step back and be quiet, or dredge up the same comments and repeat them each time?

CrazyKitty

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

It’s frustrating when certain individuals consistently defend every decision, even when it clearly harms the broader player base.

Not all players agree that every decision harms the broader player base.

When a player posts that their experience has been positive, it in no way negates another players negative experience. We can all give our feedback as individuals, and our personal views do not diminish another player's experience.

It’s frustrating to see posts consistently derailed by certain users who dismiss others’ concerns simply because they don’t share the same experience.

Instead of engaging in constructive discussion, they seem to focus solely on defending ZOS or countering someone’s point without offering anything meaningful to the conversation. When you see the same names repeatedly doing this, it becomes clear that their input adds little value beyond being argumentative.

🤔

This is a huge problem on this forum. No doubt about it. It's always the same handful or less of posters too.

SeaGtGruff

CrazyKitty wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

It’s frustrating when certain individuals consistently defend every decision, even when it clearly harms the broader player base.

Not all players agree that every decision harms the broader player base.

When a player posts that their experience has been positive, it in no way negates another players negative experience. We can all give our feedback as individuals, and our personal views do not diminish another player's experience.

It’s frustrating to see posts consistently derailed by certain users who dismiss others’ concerns simply because they don’t share the same experience.

Instead of engaging in constructive discussion, they seem to focus solely on defending ZOS or countering someone’s point without offering anything meaningful to the conversation. When you see the same names repeatedly doing this, it becomes clear that their input adds little value beyond being argumentative.

🤔

This is a huge problem on this forum. No doubt about it. It's always the same handful or less of posters too.

In my opinion, if this forum didn't have a huge problem of posters who attack everything that ZOS says or does, there wouldn't be any need for other posters to object to that type of behavior. And it doesn't take much time or effort to glance through the threads in this forum to see which of those two groups is larger and louder than the other. And if anyone dares to make an 'I love this game" thread, hoo boy, watch out, they're going to be attacked for it.

CrazyKitty

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

CrazyKitty wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

RomanRex wrote: »

It’s frustrating when certain individuals consistently defend every decision, even when it clearly harms the broader player base.

Not all players agree that every decision harms the broader player base.

When a player posts that their experience has been positive, it in no way negates another players negative experience. We can all give our feedback as individuals, and our personal views do not diminish another player's experience.

It’s frustrating to see posts consistently derailed by certain users who dismiss others’ concerns simply because they don’t share the same experience.

Instead of engaging in constructive discussion, they seem to focus solely on defending ZOS or countering someone’s point without offering anything meaningful to the conversation. When you see the same names repeatedly doing this, it becomes clear that their input adds little value beyond being argumentative.

🤔

This is a huge problem on this forum. No doubt about it. It's always the same handful or less of posters too.

In my opinion, if this forum didn't have a huge problem of posters who attack everything that ZOS says or does, there wouldn't be any need for other posters to object to that type of behavior. And it doesn't take much time or effort to glance through the threads in this forum to see which of those two groups is larger and louder than the other. And if anyone dares to make an 'I love this game" thread, hoo boy, watch out, they're going to be attacked for it.

I always assumed the players that were totally happy with the game were in game and having fun. By design forums like this field more complaint posts because there is no reason to come to the forums if everything is hunky dory. If everything is fine we'd all just be in game instead of on the forum.

Soraka

I think there's a lot of overgeneralizing, labeling of self, and labeling of others that goes on in the forums that ultimately divides players into community vs community mindsets that overall hurts everyone. Why does someone need to be a "toxic casual" or toxic anything in order to say you disagree with someone. I get the idea of it, but I think people are overly quick to put someone in that box. I've felt like these things are used to discredit feedback and also show disrespect and condescension of fellow players. I really do believe everyone has their own experiences and generally comes from a place of liking the game. Tends to be a lot of attitude that gets in the way.

Even with streamers, a lot of generalizations about them to discredit their experiences. I really believe he had a lot of hurt feelings and maybe didn't handle everything best, but I don't believe most streamers are bad actors or totally out of touch. No one owes anyone anything, but if one wants to shut down someone's experiences or feelings it may come across negatively or authoritative if there isn't an explanation.