WRONG FEEDBACK SOURCE Streamers don't represent most players

Gandrhulf_Harbard · February 2017

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Gandrhulf_Harbard
Absolutely absurd to say such a comparison is correct. @MissBizz was correct with her reply.

It's as insular as the original post of this thread.

@Giles.floydub17_ESO

Then we'll have to agree to disagree.

I won't insult you by calling your opinion absurd though.

All The Best

idk · February 2017

Life and death and violations of federal laws and regulations compared to something with a video game? I see how they are so comparable. Really almost the same.

DenMoria · February 2017

Spectral_Lord wrote: »

AshTal wrote: »

Agree with the original post so much

Balancing and nerfs are all around the 1%ers who have 70 hours a week to spend getting best gear and work out the best rotations (and maybe cheat) we all know these people 7-10 normal players attack them in PvP and all get killed by a single person, we can't seem to damage them they kill us in 2 hits showing 90K of damage in a couple of seconds with multiple abilities that all should have taken 2 seconds to cast but some how managed to kick off all at the same time.

We need the average player who put in 99% of the revenue not the elite few to be looked after.

You want the average Joe's (who barely knows anything about the game) feedback be more important than that of people who actually know how the game works?

"Hey, that player is more skilled than me. ZOS nerf [insert skill, gear, etc. here]"

Maybe not on mechanics, but, the majority of users should have some say in the game and how it functions for them, not just the people who know all the tricks and exploits to maximize the mechanics to achieve the impossible.

I have vast respect for the elites, but, very little actually seems to be geared towards "normal" (by normal, I mean average) players.

It's okay though. I play for fun and decided long ago that I will never reach the lofty heights so I don't worry about it.

DenMoria · February 2017

bowmanz607 wrote: »

willlienellson wrote: »

Oompuh wrote: »

These are 2 pictures of the meeting with ZOS. If "everyone" is a streamer than people should be able to name everyone in this picture. Correct?

I don't follow the youtubers and streamers enough to know, and I don't know if they all show their faces. I don't know.
Sounds reasonable. I'm waiting for someone to say,

"Yeah, I was there. I've never made youtube videos"

Or, "______ was there. He posts on the forums but no videos" Etc.

These are promising developments. But I don't follow FENGRUSH's twitter and I don't know what the streamers look like. Shocking I know. So, I'm waiting for confirmation to reevaluate my opinions.

hahahahha

sooooo you make all these claims in your op about how they dont represent the majority, zos caters to these players etc etc etc, yet you dont watch any of them or know their stance on anything.

good grief mate, do you hear yourself???

At least WATCH a few of the videos and read some of their work. I may not be of their level or agree with everything, but I do learn a lot and admire.

Gandrhulf_Harbard · February 2017

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Life and death and violations of federal laws and regulations compared to something with a video game? I see how they are so comparable. Really almost the same.

Its OK for you to admit you don't understand the phrase "the same PRINCIPLE is involved" you know; we can then help explain it to you.

But instead you want to keep on digging and try to suggest it has anything to do with the specific misdeeds of the different incidents.

That's fine; it's not a cogent argument. but its fine.

All The Best

willlienellson · February 2017

bowmanz607 wrote: »

hahahahha

sooooo you make all these claims in your op about how they dont represent the majority, zos caters to these players etc etc etc, yet you dont watch any of them or know their stance on anything.

good grief mate, do you hear yourself???

See, this is the kind of sh!t that actually pisses me off. Could you be any less intellectually honest?

I said I don't watch them ENOUGH to recognize ALL of them BY THEIR FACES.

I can recognize Fengrush, Sypher, and Deltia, and I already said I subscribe to Deltia's channel and watch it often.

But that doesn't mean I can look at a picture of 20 random people sitting at a table and tell you all of their names, or that I follow the community religiously enough to know that those I cannot recognize must not be part of it.

You are an intellectually bankrupt troll.

SirAndy · February 2017

Oompuh wrote: »

These are 2 pictures of the meeting with ZOS. If "everyone" is a streamer than people should be able to name everyone in this picture. Correct?

Er, no ... That's the whole point of this thread.

Neither of these people even remotely looks like someone who would be able to "represent" me.

Yolokin_Swagonborn · February 2017

ESO live just happened and they confirmed that a lot of time was spent on balance, gameplay, design, Q&A. The developers were very open to questions and suggestions, according to the two streamers on ESO live.

So we can cross off the "Just marketing" theory. I mean, unless ZOS took all that time to talk to them and is just going to throw it all away after, we can safely say the opinions expressed by those invited will effect future game decisions.

So I guess this is either a good thing or a bad thing depending on how represented you feel by those that attended.

Since I do agree with SOME of what the streamers say, this is a good thing for me. We don't have a perfect system where every group is represented but at least personally, I feel that some issues I cared about were brought up to ZOS. We will see as more details come out.

Calboy · February 2017

What zos needs to do is take the top 1% and delete their accounts. This game will be much better (funner, balanced). And who cares, it's only 1% of the player base, *** them.

willlienellson · February 2017

Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »

ESO live just happened and they confirmed that a lot of time was spent on balance, gameplay, design, Q&A. The developers were very open to questions and suggestions, according to the two streamers on ESO live.

So we can cross off the "Just marketing" theory. I mean, unless ZOS took all that time to talk to them and is just going to throw it all away after, we can safely say the opinions expressed by those invited will effect future game decisions.

So I guess this is either a good thing or a bad thing depending on how represented you feel by those that attended.

Since I do agree with SOME of what the streamers say, this is a good thing for me. We don't have a perfect system where every group is represented but at least personally, I feel that some issues I cared about were brought up to ZOS. We will see as more details come out.

Again, this just begs the question I already posed,

Should people that are charging hundreds of dollars to players to teach them how to be elite get special feedback privileges for game direction and special early access to game mechanics?

If you had a business that charged individuals to help them bridge a power gap, would you try to increase or minimize that power gap?

When I originally opined this thread I was talking about what I thought were negative but organic relationships and circumstances that were kind of elusively running behind the scenes.

It's come to my attention that the circumstances I was wary of are officially monetized. It's not a theory.

ThePaleItalian · February 2017

willlienellson wrote: »

Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »

ESO live just happened and they confirmed that a lot of time was spent on balance, gameplay, design, Q&A. The developers were very open to questions and suggestions, according to the two streamers on ESO live.

So we can cross off the "Just marketing" theory. I mean, unless ZOS took all that time to talk to them and is just going to throw it all away after, we can safely say the opinions expressed by those invited will effect future game decisions.

So I guess this is either a good thing or a bad thing depending on how represented you feel by those that attended.

Since I do agree with SOME of what the streamers say, this is a good thing for me. We don't have a perfect system where every group is represented but at least personally, I feel that some issues I cared about were brought up to ZOS. We will see as more details come out.

Again, this just begs the question I already posed,

Should people that are charging hundreds of dollars to players to teach them how to be elite get special feedback privileges for game direction and special early access to game mechanics?

If you had a business that charged individuals to help them bridge a power gap, would you try to increase or minimize that power gap?

When I originally opined this thread I was talking about what I thought were negative but organic relationships and circumstances that were kind of elusively running behind the scenes.

It's come to my attention that the circumstances I was wary of are officially monetized. It's not a theory.

Congrats!!!

Can we end this now? Its all going to be everyones opinion. I am sure some of the player base is happy to be represented by those players. Some will not be. It seems that this topic has reached 21 pages of going around in circles. Only time will tell how this is going to be affect everything.

If your theory pans out, you can quote this entire thread and tell everyone how right you are.

Side note. You mentioned hundreds of dollars for people to be taught. I have NEVER seen that. I am not asking for you to name shame, but I do need some kind of proof of anything charging hundreds to teach.

I know streamers and those on twitch can ask for donations. But really? This is an honest question by the way.

willlienellson · February 2017

@ThePaleItalian
There is a website. I'm not making it up. $400 for "Master Training"

So, does that matter? It is okay, proper, or a positive thing for the community to have people charging $400 to individuals to help them become Masters of the game when they have extra influence on game direction and early access to mechanics???

It won't take much for me to get banned and thread closed. I can't say more. But feel free to PM me.

ThePaleItalian · February 2017

willlienellson wrote: »

@ThePaleItalian
There is a website. I'm not making it up. $400 for "Master Training"

So, does that matter? It is okay, proper, or a positive thing for the community to have people charging $400 to individuals to help them become Masters of the game when they have extra influence on game direction and early access to mechanics???

It won't take much for me to get banned and thread closed. I can't say more. But feel free to PM me.

@willlienellson

I understand various points in this threads. I guess I am more on the optimistic side. I hope their feedback was given and taken seriously. If we got storage in our homes the forums would rejoice. Balance is a whole other story and I doubt that will ever happen. But other threads for that topic.

willlienellson · February 2017

ThePaleItalian wrote: »

@willlienellson

I understand various points in this threads. I guess I am more on the optimistic side. I hope their feedback was given and taken seriously. If we got storage in our homes the forums would rejoice. Balance is a whole other story and I doubt that will ever happen. But other threads for that topic.

Well, I just hope you don't end up having to pay some dude $400 to learn how to best exploit the changes he influenced with feedback.

willlienellson · February 2017

So, lets read some of the feedback from this unnamed, unlinked website with names redacted.

"I plan to hire redacted and redacted again when there are significant game changes to my magicka sorcerer and when I roll new character classes in the future"

Well, that's probably a good idea since those people are actively getting to influence those "significant game changes". How beneficial for them that you are willing to pay hundreds of dollars for them to teach you what they are either helping change or getting extra insight into (or both) this week at Zos.

"Boy, this is where this man really shines. In less than 5 minutes, I saw that all I knew about this game was just the tip of the iceberg.....See you soon in Cyrodiil for another lesson!  ”

The size of that iceberg is just getting bigger this week in Balitmore. Better get out your Visa card and pay another $400.

I'm not sure it's a good thing that people who get early insight into game mechanics and have special feedback privileges are charging people up to $400 to get access to information and skills that represent an "iceberg" relative to the small amount that an average player might pick up on his own.

Now, just to be crystal clear. I'm not suggesting there is anything wrong with someone charging to teach someone else to play the game. He can charge $10,000 to teach someone for all I care, and congrats to him if someone will pay it.
But there is A LOT WRONG with a person who does that being invited to give special feedback and get early access to game mechanics.

It's represents everything I found frustrating in the original post, but formalized in an officially monetized business.

idk · February 2017

I think it is a good thing that players who have good insight into the game mechanics have special feedback priveledges which is exactly what happened this week.

To be clear, Someone needs to understand mechanics of the current game at a high level to be able to provide worthy feedback in early development of new content and mechanics. So inviting the top theorycrafters, as Zos did, is most certainly, without a doubt, in the best interest of the game.

To accuse people of manipulating Zos into changing mechanics to benefit and enrich themselves without an evidence of the matter is empty and worthless banter. Assumptions, which is all that is really being made in the matter have no basis in fact. No one has disputed the actual statements I have made yet plenty have disputed the assumptions that have been made, especially recently.

Melodramatic antics do nothing but take away from someones message they are attempting to try to express. As such I will avoid.

willlienellson · February 2017

#Giles.floydub17_ESO
Even though you post every few hours I've had you ignored for days, so I have no idea what you're saying.

On the other hand, I never could understand most of what you were trying to say even when I could read your post...so not much has changed.

ScooberSteve · February 2017

Why everone so jealous? You all want to go brown nose the devs all day? Jealous jealous jealous. Good job to the streamers contributing positively. I dont see anyone else posting usefull builds and guides.

willlienellson · February 2017

ScooberSteve wrote: »

Why everone so jealous? You all want to go brown nose the devs all day? Jealous jealous jealous. Good job to the streamers contributing positively. I dont see anyone else posting usefull builds and guides.

So you think it's good that ZOS ignores mountains of feedback by normal players so they can invite a small number of select streamers to give special feedback and get early access to mechanics when their primary agenda is to gain notoriety and income from views and in some cases charge up to $400 to train individuals how to master the mechanics they have undue influence in crafting?

I mean, if you're cool with that, then okay.

I bet if we took this model and applied to anything else in the 'adult world' you would have something better to say than "y so jelly"?

idk · February 2017

willlienellson wrote: »

#Giles.floydub17_ESO
Even though you post every few hours I've had you ignored for days, so I have no idea what you're saying.

On the other hand, I never could understand most of what you were trying to say even when I could read your post...so not much has changed.

Like I began ignoring your posts that seem to occur almost every 10 minutes.

Honestly, I really do not expect you to understand. It is clear that no amount of logic or rational thought will alter your thoughts of your baseless diatribe.

Edit, replying to your comment just above this one, I do think it is good Zos invited a select number of theorycrafters for the testing and feedback session this past week. Zos does not ignore normal players, however, normal players do not spend the time to understand the mechanics that exist in the game already let alone be able to provide high level feedback that was required.

The one thing I have not seen you provide is a list of people you feel that Zos should have invited for this high level feedback of mechanics. I challenge you to list names and what knowledge of game mechanics they have demonstrated that make them an appropriate candidate. Oh, merely playing the game is not sufficient.

If you cannot do this then you merely demonstrate your entire rant in here is mute and meaningless banter.

Fruity_Ninja · February 2017

It is great that ZOS is inviting a varied amount of long term ESO players to engage them on the upcoming game content, and overall balance. Keep up the good work @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom

OP- your posts reek of envy. There is no 'us' and 'them'. We are all players of the same game, and the fact that ZOS show interest in community involvement during the development process is something we should encourage.

anitajoneb17_ESO · February 2017

willlienellson wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Please explain how that is naive ?

Sure, I'd be happy to.
I can't mention names or link to websites, but they probably aren't hard to find if you research.
Some of these streamers/youtubers have websites set up where they charge HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS to players to teach them special "tricks" and "strategies" to excel at the game.

And these same people get extra feedback opportunities and early access to information.
So, it's a problem in both directions.

First, they potentially get access to information which they can and do charge large sums to players to share.

Second, they have a vested financial interest in giving feedback that keeps the game imbalanced so they can charge large sums to help players cross the ever growing power-gap between average and best.

Feel free to personal message me if you want to have a more detailed chat.

Thanks for the explanation.
The thing is, you cannot prove it's true here (and for the sake of the discussion I don't want to take it private via PM), and I can't prove it isn't true. In my opinion it's just a construed "conspiracy theory".
Even if it were true (are some people really hooked to the point where they spend hundreds of dollars for getting "video game lessons"... ???), the jump you make by saying that streamers would influence development to have "insider info" that they could exploit towards more monetization is a very, very large hyperbole.

notimetocare · February 2017

Unlike most players, streamers have financial incentive not to muck up the game

Unlike most players, they play everything im different ways.

Unlike most players, they can hype future content to a large audience

kratier · February 2017

this game should do what nioh did, and run huge survey campaigns while allowing game trials.
maybe do that with some sort of bite sized DLC and allow players to voice their opinions

willlienellson · February 2017

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

This week's gathering :

Player A : - Skill X is OP is combination with Set W
Dev : "please show me"
(Player A demonstrates on site)
Dev : Ok let's let's tweak this parameter.... try again please
(Player A tries again - Skill is still OP)
Dev : let's tweak a couple of other parameters... how does that feel now ?
Player A tries again and the skill is now properly balanced.

(I'm not "imagining" the process, it's what @FENGRUSH described of what they did)

DID I JUST READ THIS CORRECTLY?

Fengrush decided what was balanced and the developers tweaked it until it reached his satisfaction?

So Fengrush took Wrobel's job? Interesting.

Iliaz · February 2017

willlienellson wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

This week's gathering :

Player A : - Skill X is OP is combination with Set W
Dev : "please show me"
(Player A demonstrates on site)
Dev : Ok let's let's tweak this parameter.... try again please
(Player A tries again - Skill is still OP)
Dev : let's tweak a couple of other parameters... how does that feel now ?
Player A tries again and the skill is now properly balanced.

(I'm not "imagining" the process, it's what @FENGRUSH described of what they did)

DID I JUST READ THIS CORRECTLY?

Fengrush decided what was balanced and the developers tweaked it until it reached his satisfaction?

So Fengrush took Wrobel's job? Interesting.

OMG DID HE JUST DESCRIBE THE PROCESS OF INTERNAL TESTING?!?!?!?

Dude come down from your high horse, that is how testing, internal testing, QA and so on goes. And that is how it should be.

anitajoneb17_ESO · February 2017

willlienellson wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

This week's gathering :

Player A : - Skill X is OP is combination with Set W
Dev : "please show me"
(Player A demonstrates on site)
Dev : Ok let's let's tweak this parameter.... try again please
(Player A tries again - Skill is still OP)
Dev : let's tweak a couple of other parameters... how does that feel now ?
Player A tries again and the skill is now properly balanced.

(I'm not "imagining" the process, it's what @FENGRUSH described of what they did)

DID I JUST READ THIS CORRECTLY?

Fengrush decided what was balanced and the developers tweaked it until it reached his satisfaction?

So Fengrush took Wrobel's job? Interesting.

You read that correctly but you took something totally out of its context from another thread and pasted it here to fit YOUR context. Smh...

Anyway, yes, that's how every testing process works. Fengrush did that together with +/- 20 other testers who probably had different feelings, opinions and results, and they probably don't know what ZOS final design will be. Talk about "insider knowledge" !

Pops_ND_Irish · February 2017

Never seen so many people hate a game so much and keep on playing just to hate more !

Sylosi · February 2017

It would be better if they had selected less people, but actually targeted the ones who had demonstrated a level of objectivity, which is why it smacks of marketing to one extent or another.

thankyourat · February 2017

DenMoria wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

So what I'm getting from this thread is that some players are scared streamers will get rid of some of the casual friendly mechanics and actually make the game more skill base thus making it to where casual players won't be able to complete content or compete in PvP anymore. But wouldn't that be a good thing there should be more separation between good and average players. And even playing casually eventually you will be able to compete the content, honestly that sounds better for everyone it would add a sense of accomplishment to the game that's been missing for awhile now.

Someones an elitest, eh?

No. It would not be a good thing to alienate the majority of players for the few that have the time to obsessively play the game and "maximize" their builds.

It's fine if that's the way they want to go. I've pretty much given up anyway.

I'm not even an elitist. I probably only play 2 hours a day give or take, maybe a little more on the weekend. I use to play more hardcore, but I play more casually these days than anything because I don't like the direction the game is going. But I'm not going to complain about it I'll just play something else. I have become decently skilled over the almost 2 years the game has been out on console from just playing the game. You can be good at this game and play casually. 1 to 3 hours a day is plenty of time to optimize your build and increase your skill. Some players no matter how long they play will never be skilled at this game and that is fine, and while this may sound harsh there shouldn't be casual friendly mechanics that let less skilled players compete with more skilled players. It's now fair to the players that practice this game and perfect there animations and rotations. Too many players just want to blow through the content in this game of it takes you a month to beat vet Maelstrom so be it. If a talented player kills you in PvP OK what's the big deal you can't beat that player yet maybe next month you can. This game is getting out of control with casual friendly mechanics, because if players wipe a few times they either give up or they come to the forums and complain. The difference between hardcore players and casual players is that hardcore players enjoy challenging content. Everyone had to go through growing pains while they develop their skill at this game. The hardcore players just welcome it. It's not elitest to wish the game remain challenging and for skill to be the determining factor in content.