Why are meetings happening with guilds ?

stumpy999 · February 2015

The thread isn't about general issues or bugs. It's about a chap submitting loads of bug reports based on his experience on the PTS for 1.6.2 and everything he mentions isn't actioned in 1.6.3.

Relative merits of the items aside. It's a vent as he has a perception that despite his effort on the pts he isn't being listened to.

he has a perception, I have another one. Who is right? Well actually neither

"Weapon swap bug since beta, evilzzz!!!!!!!" . - I've never had any issue with weapon swap and have 4 VR toons.

So forget about the distractions of perceptions.

Open up a bug tracker and publish it, that way we all know what the status is even if it's - "Its a feature....."

You don't get on the bug tracker? Don't open a thread on why they will not accept your bugs. Change what you submit then they can't run and hide behind distractions about new content etc

Dev tracker is nice but it's still a bit fluffy

ZOS_JessicaFolsom · February 2015

Hi folks,

We'd like to explain a little about the guild feedback sessions we attend. Gina, Jason, and I regularly meet with around 10 English-language guilds. We do this on our own time in the evenings. The goal is to get another angle on community feedback and concerns, in addition to what we read on the official forums and external community sites. The guilds we meet with have been selected by us, and range in focus from PVP to PVE, and from hardcore to casual. A few of our meetings are also with a coalition of smaller guilds with a very specific focus, such as trading guilds. We're very careful to get a good mix of interests and play-styles.

It's important to note that these feedback sessions by no means dictate the direction of the game or place priority on what we fix or change and what we don't. They do help give us an additional source of feedback—an added perspective—and often a more detailed one than we can get anywhere else. The meetings have been invaluable to helping us track down some of the more challenging bugs and exploits.

What these meetings are not are Q&As and exclusive interviews. We act as a sounding board, just as we do here on the forums, and report top issues and concerns back to the Dev Team in the way of meeting notes. The Dev Team, particularly the game-play and combat teams, are all very aware of the Sorcerer community concerns and are continuing to work on balance.

As a few have mentioned in this discussion, some fixes and changes are things we can do in a matter of days, others take much longer. We're also careful not to make changes without doing ample research, looking at all the data, and considering the wide-spread pros and cons of those changes. Just because you don't immediately see changes applied to the game based on your own personal feedback doesn't mean the Dev Team hasn't seen it. Please keep that in mind.

Erock25 · February 2015

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

The Dev Team, particularly the game-play and combat teams, are all very aware of the Sorcerer community concerns and are continuing to work on balance.

@ZOS_JessicaFolsom Are you a part of the gameplay/combat team? No? I'll leave this here anyway because seriously what was the reasoning for giving Sorc the extremely short end of the stick when it comes to stamina morphs/passives.....

DK changes that affect stamina builds

Searing Strike

Unstable Flames (morph): This ability now scales off Stamina and Attack Power and costs Stamina. Damage is mitigated by your target’s melee defense statistics.

Fiery Breath

Burning Breath (morph): This ability will now scale off of stamina and weapon power, and is mitigated by your target’s melee defense statistics. This ability now applies the Major Fracture debuff to your target.

Inferno

Flames of Oblivion (morph): This ability now provides the same effect as Inferno, as well as providing the Major Savagery (that is weapon crit) buff while active.

Molten Weapons

This ability will no longer buff allies. Instead, activating Molten Weapons will increase your heavy attack damage by 40% for 7 seconds. The duration increases with each additional rank.

Igneous Weapons (morph): Using a heavy attack while this ability is active will increase its duration by one second.

Molten Armaments (morph): This ability now increases the extra damage against low health targets.

Slightly reduced the cost of Molten Weapons and its morphs.

Earthen Heart

Mountain’s Blessing: This passive now also grants all allies within 30 meters the buff Minor Brutality for 10 seconds at Rank I, or 20 seconds at Rank II.

NB changes that affect stamina builds

Assassins Blade

Killer’s Blade (morph): This is now a stamina-based ability. The heal from this ability will now be applied if your target dies within 2 seconds of the ability being used, regardless of who killed the target.

Teleport Strike

Ambush: This ability now uses stamina instead of magicka, and applies the Minor Berserk buff on the next attack.

Mark Target

This ability now grants the Major Breach and Major Fracture buffs.
Removed the penalty from this ability.
This ability can now be cast on any target.
Reduced the cost of this ability by approximately 50%, and reduced the duration to 20 seconds.
Piercing Mark (morph): The duration of this ability now scales with ability ranks up to a maximum of 30 seconds.
Reaper’s Mark (morph): This ability now grants the Major Berserk buff for 8 seconds after the target is killed.

Veiled Strike

Surprise Attack (morph): This morph is now a stamina-based ability, now applies the Major Fracture debuff, and will no longer reduce your target’s armor if they dodge the initial attack.

Drain Power

The damage caused by Drain Power no longer scales with the number of targets hit. Instead, you will receive a Major Brutality buff when damaging at least one target.
Power Extraction (morph): This ability now scales off weapon damage and stamina instead of magicka and spell damage. The damage has also been increased by 10%.

Templar changes that affect stamina builds

Puncturing Strikes

Biting Jabs (morph): This ability now scales off stamina and weapon power, and now also provides the Major Savagery buff.

Piercing Javelin

Binding Javelin (morph): This ability now scales off stamina and weapon power.

Backlash

Power of Light (morph): This ability now applies the Minor Fracture debuff to your target, and the damage caps are derived from your maximum stamina.

Aedric Spear

Burning Light: The damage from this passive is now derived from your highest stats (stamina or magicka based).

Aedric Spear

Balance Warrior: Increased the weapon damage from this passive to 3% at Rank I, and 6% at Rank II.

Sorc changes that affect stamina builds

Bound Armor

Bound Armaments (morph): This ability now costs Stamina instead of Magicka, gives you a bonus to stamina instead of magicka, and increases the damage done by heavy attacks.

Dark Exchange

Dark Deal (morph): This ability now converts magicka into health and stamina.

Overload

Overload and Power Overload will now properly scale their damage off Weapon Damage and Stamina in the event that they are higher than Spell Power and Magicka.

If you read through all of the above lists, you may have noticed that DK got 2 attacks scaled on stamina and various stamina build buffs, NB got 4 attacks scaled on stamina and various stamina build buffs, Templar got 3 attacks scaled on stamina and various stamina build buffs, while the Sorc got only ONE ultimate and zero basic attacks scaled on stamina and only one stamina buff that comes in the form of near useless toggle. Bound Armaments may find its way into some builds for sure, but it is tough to stomach using 2 slots for it. Dark Deal is totally and completely useless. There is no use for a channel in melee range without a way to quickly create distance. As for the Overload change, I think all ultimates should scale on stamina+weap or magicka + spell anyways and I'm surprised any class ultimates are forcing people to go into a magicka spec. Overall I am very underwhelmed with what was offered to the stamina sorc.

In addition to what we were given (or lack thereof) in 1.6, stamina Sorcs have also lost the only benefits they ever had in the game prior to 1.6. The only thing a stamina Sorc had going for it was that it could stack weapon dmg higher than any other class. With the new buff system, Critical Surge has become completely redundant with other cheaper and longer lasting skills like Rally. Also in 1.6.3, stamina Sorc lost the 10% cost reduction in the Storm Calling tree, which is a HUGE nerf for Crit Surge costs, Bolt Escape costs, and Lightning Form costs, which just happen to be three of the best and only Sorc abilities that a stamina build will use. Crit Surge was already about 40% or so of my magicka bar as a stamina Sorc in 1.6.2 and now it will be even worse.

Joejudas · February 2015

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Hi folks,

We'd like to explain a little about the guild feedback sessions we attend. Gina, Jason, and I regularly meet with around 10 English-language guilds. We do this on our own time in the evenings. The goal is to get another angle on community feedback and concerns, in addition to what we read on the official forums and external community sites. The guilds we meet with have been selected by us, and range in focus from PVP to PVE, and from hardcore to casual. A few of our meetings are also with a coalition of smaller guilds with a very specific focus, such as trading guilds. We're very careful to get a good mix of interests and play-styles.

It's important to note that these feedback sessions by no means dictate the direction of the game or place priority on what we fix or change and what we don't. They do help give us an additional source of feedback—an added perspective—and often a more detailed one than we can get anywhere else. The meetings have been invaluable to helping us track down some of the more challenging bugs and exploits.

What these meetings are not are Q&As and exclusive interviews. We act as a sounding board, just as we do here on the forums, and report top issues and concerns back to the Dev Team in the way of meeting notes. The Dev Team, particularly the game-play and combat teams, are all very aware of the Sorcerer community concerns and are continuing to work on balance.

As a few have mentioned in this discussion, some fixes and changes are things we can do in a matter of days, others take much longer. We're also careful not to make changes without doing ample research, looking at all the data, and considering the wide-spread pros and cons of those changes. Just because you don't immediately see changes applied to the game based on your own personal feedback doesn't mean the Dev Team hasn't seen it. Please keep that in mind.

Thanks for taking the time to clear it up.

Nefrast · February 2015

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

We do this on our own time in the evenings.

A very big thank you.

Thelon · February 2015

We really do appreciate the effort you guys take to hold these meetings. Thanks!

I hope you like the sound of my voice

I hope you hire some community voice actors someday!

Soulshine · February 2015

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Hi folks,

We'd like to explain a little about the guild feedback sessions we attend. Gina, Jason, and I regularly meet with around 10 English-language guilds. We do this on our own time in the evenings. The goal is to get another angle on community feedback and concerns, in addition to what we read on the official forums and external community sites. The guilds we meet with have been selected by us, and range in focus from PVP to PVE, and from hardcore to casual. A few of our meetings are also with a coalition of smaller guilds with a very specific focus, such as trading guilds. We're very careful to get a good mix of interests and play-styles.

It's important to note that these feedback sessions by no means dictate the direction of the game or place priority on what we fix or change and what we don't. They do help give us an additional source of feedback—an added perspective—and often a more detailed one than we can get anywhere else. The meetings have been invaluable to helping us track down some of the more challenging bugs and exploits.

What these meetings are not are Q&As and exclusive interviews. We act as a sounding board, just as we do here on the forums, and report top issues and concerns back to the Dev Team in the way of meeting notes. The Dev Team, particularly the game-play and combat teams, are all very aware of the Sorcerer community concerns and are continuing to work on balance.

As a few have mentioned in this discussion, some fixes and changes are things we can do in a matter of days, others take much longer. We're also careful not to make changes without doing ample research, looking at all the data, and considering the wide-spread pros and cons of those changes. Just because you don't immediately see changes applied to the game based on your own personal feedback doesn't mean the Dev Team hasn't seen it. Please keep that in mind.

With all due repect to your job and time, Q&A with the dev team is exactly what is missing. Collecting what you perceive to be the concerns is not the same as players actively engaged in the issues speaking directly to the people involved in working on them. Other games I have played allowed for direct discussion of questions with class devs in each respective class' section on the forums, and it was a very effective way to get direct info, post feedback on builds and skills, and especially after cap increases or expansions a means to correct problem changes. We do not even have class subforums here to do with with each other, let alone get dev participation.

Alcast · February 2015

Joejudas wrote: »

Its not cool when the perspective is that none of that feedback matter for anything.

That is why >

http://youtu.be/F0wL7DtT9vs

Bouvin · February 2015

Joejudas wrote: »

So recently my guild had a meeting with the one of the community managers...and it seems when 1.6.3 dropped the devs literally did the exact opposite of what was suggested by us. Specifically the nerfs to sorcerers. Do you actually take our notes back to the devs....cause it honestly felt like a waste of time after 1.6.3 hit the PTS.

edit: i dont mean to say or act like i speak for everyone...because i dont. i just wonder where the feedback comes from for the changes...every time a pts change comes out the community loses its mind.

You haven't seen 1.6.4 patch notes yet.

So chill.

Programming doesn't happen overnight. Your feedback MAY BE getting implemented, just didn't happen in 1.6.3.

TheLaw · February 2015

Two of the guilds I'm in have had meetings with ZOS for months. I'm happy they're willing to hear us but never expected much change to come if it. Please try not to be so entitled.

Morshire · February 2015

Just to throw 2 cents into the mix. I belong to one of the guilds that had this interaction. Anyone who says it is with "end game elitist"...blah blah blah. A) I am not considered any of those things. I barely even got my character to VR14 and have not done one DSA / AA / HA run...ever. What did happen, our guild had a meeting and we were told that we could submit questions / concerns and they would be discussed. Way fair, it didn't exclude anyone. We all didn't get to sit in for obvious reasons. The guild is split in 2 with like 700+ members (PVP and PVE + we have trading guilds), and sister guilds. They all had a chance to included questions (So can't say it wasn't a decent representation). Considering that it was done on their free time, I think it was beyond polite for them to stop in. Considering it was not in any official capacity - meaning our guild had the ear of so and so - we got a bonus. Is it fair to all? Depends on what end of the stick you got right? But I saw that "meeting" more like a casual interaction with a "friend" who worked at ZOS rather than a ZOS employee getting feedback.

I agree, I would like to see more "official" interaction. And what @Soulshine said about a specific place to voice this would be nice. I am all for this and think it would make things better overall. But the people picking apart the "guild meeting"....Maybe remember that the people at those meetings were on their time. Which means, technically speaking, they were just fellow gamers online who happened to work at ZOS. Nothing more, nothing less. And if we continue to hound these people every time they show themselves...all we will accomplish is making them resent every trying to talk to us.

Personally, this post was in bad taste, IMO, and riled people up for no reason. The guild that @JoeJudas was talking about has no "intimate relation" with any dev, nor should we be boasting about anything that would make people think that. For everyone else...we are not special. We are not what people are making us out to be. Yes, we had a chat. And for the record, I doubt we had any sway with the teams. Now maybe collectively they took something to heart (meaning from all the guilds they talked to) but time will tell.

That's it. You got the dollar version. Take it as a tip for listening to me.

EDIT: If you feel excluded, the new PVE guild is recruiting, and they are also taking PVP people. So if you get in, the next time ZOS employee stop in, you will get a chance to submit a question or concern as well. Don't be mad if they won't consider a whining tirade though. This was just a "friendly" conversation with a fellow gamer.

Roechacca · February 2015

TheLaw wrote: »

Two of the guilds I'm in have had meetings with ZOS for months. I'm happy they're willing to hear us but never expected much change to come if it. Please try not to be so entitled.

LMAO Entitled ?! People have been paying for a product and devoted time to help issues for a year and you throw entitled out there ? Then I hope If you ever ask someone to fix anything you bought like a car or a house , you don't complain to who sold it , cause by your definition you'll be acting entitled . I suggest using a dictionary in the future , there's my helpful criticism .

Armitas · February 2015

If I was at one of those meetings I'd be terrified that they would actually listen to me. On the forums if I'm wrong someone will let me know, immediately, and with great enthusiasm...and spirit. Having that is actually comforting.

Morshire · February 2015

Armitas wrote: »

If I was at one of those meetings I'd be terrified that they would actually listen to me. On the forums if I'm wrong someone will let me know, immediately, and with great enthusiasm...and spirit. Having that is actually comforting.

Now that deserved a real LOL. I laughed. Had a visual of the hand hovering over the submit button, shaking. I didn't bother to submit anything cause, well let's face it, no one ever listens to me. Why would they start now.

Joejudas · February 2015

Morshire wrote: »

Just to throw 2 cents into the mix. I belong to one of the guilds that had this interaction. Anyone who says it is with "end game elitist"...blah blah blah. A) I am not considered any of those things. I barely even got my character to VR14 and have not done one DSA / AA / HA run...ever. What did happen, our guild had a meeting and we were told that we could submit questions / concerns and they would be discussed. Way fair, it didn't exclude anyone. We all didn't get to sit in for obvious reasons. The guild is split in 2 with like 700+ members (PVP and PVE + we have trading guilds), and sister guilds. They all had a chance to included questions (So can't say it wasn't a decent representation). Considering that it was done on their free time, I think it was beyond polite for them to stop in. Considering it was not in any official capacity - meaning our guild had the ear of so and so - we got a bonus. Is it fair to all? Depends on what end of the stick you got right? But I saw that "meeting" more like a casual interaction with a "friend" who worked at ZOS rather than a ZOS employee getting feedback.

I agree, I would like to see more "official" interaction. And what @Soulshine said about a specific place to voice this would be nice. I am all for this and think it would make things better overall. But the people picking apart the "guild meeting"....Maybe remember that the people at those meetings were on their time. Which means, technically speaking, they were just fellow gamers online who happened to work at ZOS. Nothing more, nothing less. And if we continue to hound these people every time they show themselves...all we will accomplish is making them resent every trying to talk to us.

Personally, this post was in bad taste, IMO, and riled people up for no reason. The guild that @JoeJudas was talking about has no "intimate relation" with any dev, nor should we be boasting about anything that would make people think that. For everyone else...we are not special. We are not what people are making us out to be. Yes, we had a chat. And for the record, I doubt we had any sway with the teams. Now maybe collectively they took something to heart (meaning from all the guilds they talked to) but time will tell.

That's it. You got the dollar version. Take it as a tip for listening to me.

EDIT: If you feel excluded, the new PVE guild is recruiting, and they are also taking PVP people. So if you get in, the next time ZOS employee stop in, you will get a chance to submit a question or concern as well. Don't be mad if they won't consider a whining tirade though. This was just a "friendly" conversation with a fellow gamer.

i posted this because 9 pages of notes that people took the time to put together seem to have been completely ignored. if you think my post was in bad taste then i guess we just disagree. In those 9 pages of notes were things that alot of other members in the community had concerns about. One the devs already put this issue to rest for me...ill see you guys around the forums

Turelus · February 2015

Soulshine wrote: »

With all due repect to your job and time, Q&A with the dev team is exactly what is missing. Collecting what you perceive to be the concerns is not the same as players actively engaged in the issues speaking directly to the people involved in working on them. Other games I have played allowed for direct discussion of questions with class devs in each respective class' section on the forums, and it was a very effective way to get direct info, post feedback on builds and skills, and especially after cap increases or expansions a means to correct problem changes. We do not even have class subforums here to do with with each other, let alone get dev participation.

I have been saying this since the start and linked to the EVE Online test forums so many times as well.
ZOS is acting like a giant company that doesn't need to engage its fanbase, at least that's how it seems to most observers on the forums (and a majority of my PVP guild see it this way).

Recently we have seen Brian Wheeler posting in the PVP forums about population issues, which is fantastic and probably the closest to any back and forth discussion I have seen from ZOS since release.
Most often threads even about major issues stand ignored until community outrage is high enough that Gina, Tristen or Jessica are sent to make a token post, then the thread is left ignored again.

While I love and respect the job the community team do on the forums when it comes to discussion and debates on gameplay systems or mechanics we need to be speaking directly to those making the changes, not via proxy.

Once again I encourage ZOS management to go and look at the EVE Online community and forums, a community which is known for being "hostile, aggressive, venomous" and yet we have a hashtag twitter feed with a fantastic community where the Developers join in and chat with us #tweetfleet and the forums are developers posting updates for feedback then actually explaining changes, issues etc.

On-topic and nothing I haven't said before, but no matter how much you say the specific guilds you interact with don't influence changes, they will be. It was openly said that Negates attention for a nerd/balance came directly from one guild speaking about it with ZOS.

ashlee17 · February 2015

Thank you to all Zos representatives who do their best to interact with and listen to the community. We know that you are not CEOs and I appreciate your efforts in all forms. Please never interpret any of my frustrations with the game as a reflection of your work.

I do appreciate how much you go above and beyond your job discription

Thank you for always doing your best to help players out.

Tandor · February 2015

Joejudas wrote: »

Its not cool when the perspective is that none of that feedback matter for anything.

You mean when the developers don't agree with you and/or implement your wishes immediately.

Just because you provide feedback doesn't mean it is in the wider interests of the game and its community for that feedback to be accepted. Even if it is accepted, its implementation cannot be in isolation and has to be filtered into the rest of the development process, and that takes time.

Tandor · February 2015

seanvwolf wrote: »

Kragorn wrote: »

roechacca wrote: »

I'd like to know what guilds are considered as a credible source of feedback and why ? Everything's been broken since Beta . Maybe try another source .

Well we know from a long time ago ZOS are in bed with Entropy Rising, ZOS was in their vent/ts channel way back in May/June IIRC. Also, from comments made by one or two 'green's round here it's likely ZOS also talk to Hodor and a couple of others.

The common factor is the guilds we know or suspect ZOS are talking to are elite end-game guilds, so in taking their views ZOS pretty much put Dracula in charge of the blood bank, to use a poor metaphor.

No idea where they get their PVP views from but if last week's 'live' is a reliable indicator 1.6 is more or less entirely focused on PVP and PVE is 'collateral damage', so not sure how much of ZOS elite friends' views will matter anyway.

Why talk to elite end-game guilds?

1) They are organized and can give a unified impression of the game state.
2) They can give the largest field impression of classes.
3) They spend the most time playing the content that the game provides.
4) They have their own communities outside the game that can draw other players in.
5) They play other games that are siblings to ESO and can get feedback on how competitive ZOS' game state is.
6) They are more apt to have already compiled their feedback as the game progressed.

End-game guilds have always been a source for feedback. Even before open Beta, they invited these large guilds to preview the game and give their feedback. ZOS likely did this to spread the word and increase numbers. But it is also because end-game guilds are the most active organized players in Trials and PvP. I'm sure there are ZOS employees who go under the radar and join guilds undercover to listen in on guild chat to get a more honest opinion of the game and hear about feedback on various class builds, but for something formalized (like a summit), inviting guild leadership just makes sense.

Elite end-game guilds may well be the most active organised players in Trials and PvP, and are therefore well-placed to provide feedback on those aspects of the game. However, that does not mean that they are automatically the best placed to provide feedback on all the other aspects of the game. They tend to have a very narrow field of interest, and the whole game balance shouldn't be biased towards just that.

$infraction2008b16_ESO$ · February 2015

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Hi folks,

We'd like to explain a little about the guild feedback sessions we attend. Gina, Jason, and I regularly meet with around 10 English-language guilds. We do this on our own time in the evenings. The goal is to get another angle on community feedback and concerns, in addition to what we read on the official forums and external community sites. The guilds we meet with have been selected by us, and range in focus from PVP to PVE, and from hardcore to casual. A few of our meetings are also with a coalition of smaller guilds with a very specific focus, such as trading guilds. We're very careful to get a good mix of interests and play-styles.

It's important to note that these feedback sessions by no means dictate the direction of the game or place priority on what we fix or change and what we don't. They do help give us an additional source of feedback—an added perspective—and often a more detailed one than we can get anywhere else. The meetings have been invaluable to helping us track down some of the more challenging bugs and exploits.

What these meetings are not are Q&As and exclusive interviews. We act as a sounding board, just as we do here on the forums, and report top issues and concerns back to the Dev Team in the way of meeting notes. The Dev Team, particularly the game-play and combat teams, are all very aware of the Sorcerer community concerns and are continuing to work on balance.

As a few have mentioned in this discussion, some fixes and changes are things we can do in a matter of days, others take much longer. We're also careful not to make changes without doing ample research, looking at all the data, and considering the wide-spread pros and cons of those changes. Just because you don't immediately see changes applied to the game based on your own personal feedback doesn't mean the Dev Team hasn't seen it. Please keep that in mind.

There's no issue with talking with hardcore raiding guilds, however I only hope the feedback received is taken with a pinch of salt in particular when class balancing opinions get a bit too specific and I hope you don't become yes men when such guilds say stuff like this ability needs to do this or this passive needs to do that.

I mean from the way the game appeared to be tuned around LA/staff users for the past year it's pretty damn obvious you were reluctant to consider swinging any urgent nerf bat, maybe in case of mass rage quits from top end players who devoted all their time to min/maxing these builds.

Vahrokh · February 2015

yodased wrote: »

There are a bunch of posts about sorcs being nerfed, and a bunch of posts about sorcs being OP sitting right next to each other.

Sorcs are meausurably inferior at DPS, it's objective data anybody can have access to. In PvE they simply SUCK.

Those saying they are OP are non-sorcs who got rolled over in PvP, that is something that is not related at ALL with sorcs viability in PvE.

yodased wrote: »

Step back look at the big picture and realize that even if you are completely and unequivocally 'right' on something as specific as sorc balance, it doesn't matter.
[

I have read this fairly dumb statement (and others similar to the quoted above) for a decade.

Every single time, in the end, it mattered. Those games believing feedback does not matter failed. ESO has worked its way to close to that status already.
Let's dig deeper, because repeating what failed in the past is sure indication of future success right?

Animal_Mother · February 2015

At least some guilds have an opportunity to present interactive feedback with ZOS about the game.

But what about the masses who don't participate in guild settings? Or those that used to play the game, but don't anymore? Surely their opinion matters just as much. Yet, I for one, haven't been presented with a questionnaire since beta. I'm on the forums alot and never heard of anyone receiving an "exit interview" when they unsub from the game.

Instead, all we ever hear are how the top guilds are being asked for their opinions with the end result, apparently leading to less subscribers.

If I really wanted to the game improve, I would start communicating with people who left the game.

Since my opinion really doesn't matter to ZOS, I'll post it here: the game desperately needs something other dungeons and large-scale pvp for solo players and small groups (especially after v14) - scenarios, battle fronts, what-ever with capture the flag, king-of-the-hill or keep-away objectives; zone events to encourage grouping; easy grouping tools (public/non-public dynamic groups); tools for managing groups; yes Templars needed an execute - but the cost of our only aoe cc ability is too much to pay; seige should stack; auction house - less fees for trade guilds, but searching for specific items becomes less tiresome; allow me to name my crafted items; and I want my LOL button back

Animal_Mother · February 2015

Morshire wrote: »

Just to throw 2 cents into the mix. I belong to one of the guilds that had this interaction. Anyone who says it is with "end game elitist"...blah blah blah. A) I am not considered any of those things. I barely even got my character to VR14 and have not done one DSA / AA / HA run...ever. What did happen, our guild had a meeting and we were told that we could submit questions / concerns and they would be discussed. Way fair, it didn't exclude anyone. We all didn't get to sit in for obvious reasons. The guild is split in 2 with like 700+ members (PVP and PVE + we have trading guilds), and sister guilds. They all had a chance to included questions (So can't say it wasn't a decent representation). Considering that it was done on their free time, I think it was beyond polite for them to stop in. Considering it was not in any official capacity - meaning our guild had the ear of so and so - we got a bonus. Is it fair to all? Depends on what end of the stick you got right? But I saw that "meeting" more like a casual interaction with a "friend" who worked at ZOS rather than a ZOS employee getting feedback.

I agree, I would like to see more "official" interaction. And what @Soulshine said about a specific place to voice this would be nice. I am all for this and think it would make things better overall. But the people picking apart the "guild meeting"....Maybe remember that the people at those meetings were on their time. Which means, technically speaking, they were just fellow gamers online who happened to work at ZOS. Nothing more, nothing less. And if we continue to hound these people every time they show themselves...all we will accomplish is making them resent every trying to talk to us.

Personally, this post was in bad taste, IMO, and riled people up for no reason. The guild that @JoeJudas was talking about has no "intimate relation" with any dev, nor should we be boasting about anything that would make people think that. For everyone else...we are not special. We are not what people are making us out to be. Yes, we had a chat. And for the record, I doubt we had any sway with the teams. Now maybe collectively they took something to heart (meaning from all the guilds they talked to) but time will tell.

EDIT: If you feel excluded, the new PVE guild is recruiting, and they are also taking PVP people.

Sorry Morshire,

It does sound elitist when you mention the reason your guild has direct access to the devs and community reps is that you have 700+ members and several sister guilds. It sounds elitist when you are saying JoeJudas' guilds don't have this connection because they are small. Compare your representation to me. I essentially represent myself, the only guild I am in has 5 members all my friends have left this game and I have no connection to devs or community reps, at all.

Morshire · February 2015

Animal_Mother wrote: »

Morshire wrote: »

Just to throw 2 cents into the mix. I belong to one of the guilds that had this interaction. Anyone who says it is with "end game elitist"...blah blah blah. A) I am not considered any of those things. I barely even got my character to VR14 and have not done one DSA / AA / HA run...ever. What did happen, our guild had a meeting and we were told that we could submit questions / concerns and they would be discussed. Way fair, it didn't exclude anyone. We all didn't get to sit in for obvious reasons. The guild is split in 2 with like 700+ members (PVP and PVE + we have trading guilds), and sister guilds. They all had a chance to included questions (So can't say it wasn't a decent representation). Considering that it was done on their free time, I think it was beyond polite for them to stop in. Considering it was not in any official capacity - meaning our guild had the ear of so and so - we got a bonus. Is it fair to all? Depends on what end of the stick you got right? But I saw that "meeting" more like a casual interaction with a "friend" who worked at ZOS rather than a ZOS employee getting feedback.

I agree, I would like to see more "official" interaction. And what @Soulshine said about a specific place to voice this would be nice. I am all for this and think it would make things better overall. But the people picking apart the "guild meeting"....Maybe remember that the people at those meetings were on their time. Which means, technically speaking, they were just fellow gamers online who happened to work at ZOS. Nothing more, nothing less. And if we continue to hound these people every time they show themselves...all we will accomplish is making them resent every trying to talk to us.

Personally, this post was in bad taste, IMO, and riled people up for no reason. The guild that @JoeJudas was talking about has no "intimate relation" with any dev, nor should we be boasting about anything that would make people think that. For everyone else...we are not special. We are not what people are making us out to be. Yes, we had a chat. And for the record, I doubt we had any sway with the teams. Now maybe collectively they took something to heart (meaning from all the guilds they talked to) but time will tell.

EDIT: If you feel excluded, the new PVE guild is recruiting, and they are also taking PVP people.

Sorry Morshire,

It does sound elitist when you mention the reason your guild has direct access to the devs and community reps is that you have 700+ members and several sister guilds. It sounds elitist when you are saying JoeJudas' guilds don't have this connection because they are small. Compare your representation to me. I essentially represent myself, the only guild I am in has 5 members all my friends have left this game and I have no connection to devs or community reps, at all.

Sorry to imply that, cause I was trying to say the opposite. JoeJudas and I belong to the same guild. We both had the same access to that dev interaction. The thing with the numbers was in response to someone saying we are "an elitist few"...obviously not by the numbers. And the recruiting going on shows that there is an openness that allows others to gain access and partake of said interaction. We don't "have access to a dev." We had interaction with one. I was trying to distinguish this. If we had access to a dev, this would imply that we could engage them at will. Having interaction implies that they dictate who they engage with. That was what I meant.

I belong to 4 guilds. I enjoy the smallest one for the "connectedness" (is that even a real word? Don't get me wrong, the big guild is a must, for me, as it gives me greater access to group content by allowing me plenty of players to engage in them with. LFG works like S**T, so the guild gives me a good place for this. Also, even though the guild is big, we are not just a "group of elitist". The interaction with other guilds, auctions, access to crafters, etc makes us a community. The numbers I threw out were to show that the devs (and I am assuming here so please don't take this as fact) gave us that interaction because we were a decent representation of all the aspects of the game, and being a guild organized us so that the time given was maximized.

I am trying really hard not to show some "gap" between us and others. I mean, yes, technically speaking, we are a guild. But we are not some "end game elitist that have access to a dev and we influence the entire mechanics of the game because of it." That was what I was trying to say I guess. And maybe I am wrong. maybe my guild will boot me after this for my comments. I mean, in the grand scheme of things, I am a no body, in the guild or out of it. I appreciate dedicated end gamers. That shouldn't brand us "elitist end gamers" (unless the elitist isn't meant as a put down) And honestly, the open recruiting the guild is doing means that all you have to do is apply, and you too can be part. Hardly exclusive club, right?

deepseamk20b14_ESO · February 2015

On a happy note....THANKS FOR THE NB CHANGES! HAHAHAHAHA!

Sacadon · February 2015

Animal_Mother wrote: »

Morshire wrote: »

Just to throw 2 cents into the mix. I belong to one of the guilds that had this interaction. Anyone who says it is with "end game elitist"...blah blah blah. A) I am not considered any of those things. I barely even got my character to VR14 and have not done one DSA / AA / HA run...ever. What did happen, our guild had a meeting and we were told that we could submit questions / concerns and they would be discussed. Way fair, it didn't exclude anyone. We all didn't get to sit in for obvious reasons. The guild is split in 2 with like 700+ members (PVP and PVE + we have trading guilds), and sister guilds. They all had a chance to included questions (So can't say it wasn't a decent representation). Considering that it was done on their free time, I think it was beyond polite for them to stop in. Considering it was not in any official capacity - meaning our guild had the ear of so and so - we got a bonus. Is it fair to all? Depends on what end of the stick you got right? But I saw that "meeting" more like a casual interaction with a "friend" who worked at ZOS rather than a ZOS employee getting feedback.

I agree, I would like to see more "official" interaction. And what @Soulshine said about a specific place to voice this would be nice. I am all for this and think it would make things better overall. But the people picking apart the "guild meeting"....Maybe remember that the people at those meetings were on their time. Which means, technically speaking, they were just fellow gamers online who happened to work at ZOS. Nothing more, nothing less. And if we continue to hound these people every time they show themselves...all we will accomplish is making them resent every trying to talk to us.

Personally, this post was in bad taste, IMO, and riled people up for no reason. The guild that @JoeJudas was talking about has no "intimate relation" with any dev, nor should we be boasting about anything that would make people think that. For everyone else...we are not special. We are not what people are making us out to be. Yes, we had a chat. And for the record, I doubt we had any sway with the teams. Now maybe collectively they took something to heart (meaning from all the guilds they talked to) but time will tell.

EDIT: If you feel excluded, the new PVE guild is recruiting, and they are also taking PVP people.

Sorry Morshire,

It does sound elitist when you mention the reason your guild has direct access to the devs and community reps is that you have 700+ members and several sister guilds. It sounds elitist when you are saying JoeJudas' guilds don't have this connection because they are small. Compare your representation to me. I essentially represent myself, the only guild I am in has 5 members all my friends have left this game and I have no connection to devs or community reps, at all.

FWIW, it did not read elitist to me at all. Your interpretation of it does. My glasses need regular cleaning which is easier said than done.

Animal_Mother · February 2015

Morshire wrote: »

Sorry to imply that, cause I was trying to say the opposite. JoeJudas and I belong to the same guild. We both had the same access to that dev interaction. The thing with the numbers was in response to someone saying we are "an elitist few"...obviously not by the numbers. And the recruiting going on shows that there is an openness that allows others to gain access and partake of said interaction. We don't "have access to a dev." We had interaction with one. I was trying to distinguish this. If we had access to a dev, this would imply that we could engage them at will. Having interaction implies that they dictate who they engage with. That was what I meant.

I belong to 4 guilds. I enjoy the smallest one for the "connectedness" (is that even a real word? Don't get me wrong, the big guild is a must, for me, as it gives me greater access to group content by allowing me plenty of players to engage in them with. LFG works like S**T, so the guild gives me a good place for this. Also, even though the guild is big, we are not just a "group of elitist". The interaction with other guilds, auctions, access to crafters, etc makes us a community. The numbers I threw out were to show that the devs (and I am assuming here so please don't take this as fact) gave us that interaction because we were a decent representation of all the aspects of the game, and being a guild organized us so that the time given was maximized.

I am trying really hard not to show some "gap" between us and others. I mean, yes, technically speaking, we are a guild. But we are not some "end game elitist that have access to a dev and we influence the entire mechanics of the game because of it." That was what I was trying to say I guess. And maybe I am wrong. maybe my guild will boot me after this for my comments. I mean, in the grand scheme of things, I am a no body, in the guild or out of it. I appreciate dedicated end gamers. That shouldn't brand us "elitist end gamers" (unless the elitist isn't meant as a put down) And honestly, the open recruiting the guild is doing means that all you have to do is apply, and you too can be part. Hardly exclusive club, right?

Thanks for clarifying that, Morshire.

Perhaps the biggest downside to this game is that you need to be in a guild to do anything... even when it comes to being solicited for suggestions on improving the game. It doesn't seem to matter how much feedback or bugs you submit the only opinion that seems to matter is that of the guilds and the larger the guild the more weight it carries - in other words, the more members the guild can claim to represent; the more, it's leaders (not representatives, but leaders) will be heard.

Vis · February 2015

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Hi folks,

We'd like to explain a little about the guild feedback sessions we attend. Gina, Jason, and I regularly meet with around 10 English-language guilds. We do this on our own time in the evenings. The goal is to get another angle on community feedback and concerns, in addition to what we read on the official forums and external community sites. The guilds we meet with have been selected by us, and range in focus from PVP to PVE, and from hardcore to casual. A few of our meetings are also with a coalition of smaller guilds with a very specific focus, such as trading guilds. We're very careful to get a good mix of interests and play-styles.

It's important to note that these feedback sessions by no means dictate the direction of the game or place priority on what we fix or change and what we don't. They do help give us an additional source of feedback—an added perspective—and often a more detailed one than we can get anywhere else. The meetings have been invaluable to helping us track down some of the more challenging bugs and exploits.

What these meetings are not are Q&As and exclusive interviews. We act as a sounding board, just as we do here on the forums, and report top issues and concerns back to the Dev Team in the way of meeting notes. The Dev Team, particularly the game-play and combat teams, are all very aware of the Sorcerer community concerns and are continuing to work on balance.

As a few have mentioned in this discussion, some fixes and changes are things we can do in a matter of days, others take much longer. We're also careful not to make changes without doing ample research, looking at all the data, and considering the wide-spread pros and cons of those changes. Just because you don't immediately see changes applied to the game based on your own personal feedback doesn't mean the Dev Team hasn't seen it. Please keep that in mind.

The mods really go above and beyond for us. I know I am one of the most bitter as of late (my poor sorc), but it is true they really do care. Thank you ZOS mods!

Sacadon · February 2015

ZOS, @ZOS_JessicaFolsom, @ZOS_GinaBruno, please don't be discouraged by our reactions to this.

I'm sure some other games do more or better, but that should not diminish the value of the positive things you are doing. Especially given you're doing this on your own dime. That's huge and worth recognizing.

I know it's not reasonable to expect devs to constantly interact with us directly, especially when they're heads-down crunch mode for 1.6 and console.

However, a little bit goes a long way. So, I know you've stated that there will be more community interaction from devs in the future, but I don't think everyone has seen this. May I suggest you add such positive tidbits to a community focused sticky or your signature as a way for people to remember all these little areas of improvement coming (clearly no dates though).

Morshire · February 2015

Animal_Mother wrote: »

Morshire wrote: »

Sorry to imply that, cause I was trying to say the opposite. JoeJudas and I belong to the same guild. We both had the same access to that dev interaction. The thing with the numbers was in response to someone saying we are "an elitist few"...obviously not by the numbers. And the recruiting going on shows that there is an openness that allows others to gain access and partake of said interaction. We don't "have access to a dev." We had interaction with one. I was trying to distinguish this. If we had access to a dev, this would imply that we could engage them at will. Having interaction implies that they dictate who they engage with. That was what I meant.

I belong to 4 guilds. I enjoy the smallest one for the "connectedness" (is that even a real word? Don't get me wrong, the big guild is a must, for me, as it gives me greater access to group content by allowing me plenty of players to engage in them with. LFG works like S**T, so the guild gives me a good place for this. Also, even though the guild is big, we are not just a "group of elitist". The interaction with other guilds, auctions, access to crafters, etc makes us a community. The numbers I threw out were to show that the devs (and I am assuming here so please don't take this as fact) gave us that interaction because we were a decent representation of all the aspects of the game, and being a guild organized us so that the time given was maximized.

I am trying really hard not to show some "gap" between us and others. I mean, yes, technically speaking, we are a guild. But we are not some "end game elitist that have access to a dev and we influence the entire mechanics of the game because of it." That was what I was trying to say I guess. And maybe I am wrong. maybe my guild will boot me after this for my comments. I mean, in the grand scheme of things, I am a no body, in the guild or out of it. I appreciate dedicated end gamers. That shouldn't brand us "elitist end gamers" (unless the elitist isn't meant as a put down) And honestly, the open recruiting the guild is doing means that all you have to do is apply, and you too can be part. Hardly exclusive club, right?

Thanks for clarifying that, Morshire.

Perhaps the biggest downside to this game is that you need to be in a guild to do anything... even when it comes to being solicited for suggestions on improving the game. It doesn't seem to matter how much feedback or bugs you submit the only opinion that seems to matter is that of the guilds and the larger the guild the more weight it carries - in other words, the more members the guild can claim to represent; the more, it's leaders (not representatives, but leaders) will be heard.

And I agree about the interaction part. @Soulshine dropped this and I think it would be great to throw attention at it and maybe the devs/mods will hear it and take action:

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/152883/time-for-class-sub-forums-under-combat-and-mechanics#latest

I think the going to bigger groups is more for the convenience of "one stop shopping" right? I mean, the bigger guild implies that they represent the broader gaming community. Not saying this is true. The bigger guilds just have the opportunity to do everything more frequently, so they have more exposure? (Is that not sounding elitist?) I agree with you though. There should be more ways to get attention drawn to something without having to be part of some large guild. But, when in ESO, do what the Tamrielans do.......