Dark Brotherhood is my favourite faction, and I've been waiting for it since launch. The fact we get to visit the Gold Coast makes it doubly more exciting for me.

That being said, no one will be having fun if the game is unplayable.

On the other hand, they're doing the best they can. I believe in you, ZOS \o/

It seems to me that they're perfectly okay with content > bugs idea. Unfortunately for them in the long term when they can't fix bugs from DLC 1 before DLC 2 launches, will be a never ending pattern and eventually the game will be so buggy they will HAVE to delay content to fix bugs.

I'm excited for DB, but I'm a little afraid too.

I mean, I liked TG, but the patch came with so many annoying bugs that I'm afraid that this will happen to DB too. And honestly, DB is the most anticipated DLC since even before release, it is a super popular guild, so I really don't want people to be disappointed because it came with tons of bugs again.

Fixes for sure.

2 years in and it's still riddled with issues. Fix the base game and make sure all future patches are tested for bugs first. Delay if necessary to ensure a good release.

Anyone wise enough for this choice.

Yet another thread that assumes doing one excludes doing the other.

No point building up something that is missing a solid foundation.
Tried getting some of my old guildmates to rejoin the game when I came back for Thieve's Guild, but the first thing they asked is if it was fixed yet and I had to tell them the unfortunate truth.

Both.

Tandor wrote: »

The people who prefer fixes over new content would be the first to complain if the DLCs were delayed - I can imagine all the "ZOS lied to us" posts if the quarterly dates weren't met.

Anyone who would complain about the game being fixed is the sort of person who would find away to complain about something absolutely perfect, like bacon or cake. Or bacon cake.

Oh_Skrivva wrote: »

Will gladly wait 6-8 months without dlc for a more stable game. Even if they had to take game down from servers for the 6-8 months. I wouldn't even care if my eso monthly subscription was still includeed for the time they had it down to fix it.

lol so you think they have so much cash they can shut the game down for months and pay everyone working on it? What dream world do you live in guy?

Oh_Skrivva wrote: »

Will gladly wait 6-8 months without dlc for a more stable game. Even if they had to take game down from servers for the 6-8 months. I wouldn't even care if my eso monthly subscription was still includeed for the time they had it down to fix it.

Well, we did wait several months without DLC because of the console launch.

But taking the game down for months, even if they could afford it, would harm their public image so much I can't imagine they would be able to get it back up.

jamesharv2005ub17_ESO wrote: »

id prefer they do new content. For me the game is 100% stable. I havent had any crashes except with the 64 bit beta client. The only complaints I ever hear about performance is cyrodill based.

Is not only about crashing is about the thousands of bugs present in the game, issues like poor class balance lagg even in PvE zones, FPS instability and exploits.

If zenni put out another DLC before fixing the issues we are currently experiencing there is not hope for this game.

Lag in cyrodiil is WORSE than EVER, The supposed fixes to prevent Zerging has backfired as i could have told them before the release of these it would.

Crashing is at an all time high,
And the amount of SERVER crashes we have experienced since TG went live, i havent seen since just after release.

Seriously Zenni stop chasing money and get the stability right, THEN chase money....
Priorities boys and girls, priorities.

People cannot enjoy what they pay for when there is lag, server crashes and other such demoralizing things happening.....

Simply put, i voted dlc as priority bc i am not experiencing any serious impact to my gameplay experience like the naysayers are describing? 99% or more of the time, i log in, play fine, have fun snd sometimes even for hours at a time or with groups... no problems other than ones i trace back to myself.

So, for me, new content is more important.

If i thought for a sec that any fix or fices from zos would placate the more vociferous naysayers and hekp the forums be a better, more enjoyable experience, i might change it, but i dont.

Also, zos does both, i am sure. I have seen projects who did the "compkete focus on bug fix no new content" a]proach and it usualky FAILS bc pulling folks good at content in to bug fix is often very inefficient. New content and changes also always include some fixes as a matter of course.

Lets face it, if zos spent any time now on fixing some vet ranking bug, when it will go away in the next DLC that would be bad.

But right now based on my gameplay anf based on the impression that most of the purported critical probkems are PVP i support more dlc over bug fixes.

Finally, the idea of any wholesale shutdown for days or weeks is imo very wrong. Its death for a business to force its customer base, all of it, to go elsewhere for any length of time. I think Zuckerburg said once if FB was down for a day it would be over. Hyperbole yes but an understanding of the need for keeping your product seen as a necessity by your base.

So, i am not against actual bug fixes but not in favor of sacrificing new content to deal with non-critical bugs in a less efficient manner.

Both are important. Depend of the quantity of bug and the quantity of lag.

If we are speaking specifically about Cyrodiil lag, I believe DLC are more importants as the PVP community is only one part of the playerbase, while everyone could enjoy new content, and Zenimax need money generated by the sales of Crowns.

If we are speaking about major crash like we endured at Thieves Guild release, I think that delaying the release of the DLC to ensure a clean release is very important.