The Reason Why The PTS is Pretty Much Pointless I Can Tell You Why.

FakeFox · October 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:
The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

It's great that devs read feedback, however how are we supposed to know?. There is barely any real conversation or at least feedback to let us know if it has been read and is or isn't relevant. I don't expect a detailed response in every single thread, however having a way to know if something has been read and having more detailed explanation why something often suggested has or hasn't been done in the patch notes would be nice.

So please give us a way to know if feedback was seen and if/how it is processed further. This is your first and last warning.

Nifty2g · October 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:
The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

Anyone else get flashbacks of Morrowind PTS reading this?

I sure did.

Turelus · October 2017

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

The problem is how players would take that.

Someone reports they don't like X change to Y skill and a dev notes it. People are going to take that as "they listened and won't change this" then nothing happens because they noted it, tested it more and found they were happy with it for the game.

It goes live and everyone screams "what's the point you just note things and don't listen."

Far too many people only care about game balance from their point of view and are adverse to any changes.
Sure there have been changes I don't like made, I've spoken of my dislike for the forcing of light/heavy attacked changes however once it became clear ZOS were not going to change it I adapted as best I could.
Maybe it just comes from years of MMO gaming and being used to this stuff though.

Back in EVE Online we used to have a saying "adapt or die" and I have lived with that in MMO gaming since.

Dorrino · October 2017

Turelus wrote: »

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

The problem is how players would take that.

Someone reports they don't like X change to Y skill and a dev notes it. People are going to take that as "they listened and won't change this" then nothing happens because they noted it, tested it more and found they were happy with it for the game.

It goes live and everyone screams "what's the point you just note things and don't listen."

That's why we need dev comments in addition to dev acknowledgements:)

Obviously dev tags alone won't cut it. But even that would be immensely better that lack of anything (besides quarterly reassurances from Gina) that we have now.

idk · October 2017

JonnytheKing wrote: »

Zos Needs to give some intensive to player to actively play the pts , a lot of bugs wouldn't make it to the live game if there was more people playing on the pts .Its simple ,, so zos here is some ideas, crowns , mounts, keeping items from the pts, achievements, (just some ideas) clearly people will have to play/do certain things/achievements to actually get the reweds. What do you guys think? But i think this would stop a lot of bugs making to live and over all improving the game

This is an absurd idea.

First,Zos would need to develope a script for players to test. Something that shows they actually did something besides offer useless feedback. Not familiar enough with the specifics being asked to test, tough. Git gud

Second. Your wanting Zos to openly state they favor PC/Mac players over console players. Think that is sound business logic? Of course not.

If players don't want to test that's their choice. Probably lower quality testing from players who are bribed and don't really want to be there.

Minno · October 2017

TheMaster wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

TheMaster wrote: »

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

There's critque and there's basing.

Example:
- "zos I feel like Templars have no cohesive design intent. Here's why _____ Can we receive a statement of how you envision the Templar?" = Critque.
- "omg zos, you don't listen to us! Terrible developers" = bashing.

Neither of these entitle you to a dev reaction though. It would be amazing if they could react individually to everything. But we as players have to take a step back and realize it's a game.

And yes critque does not mean good praise nor bad praise. Just truth and opinion based off information presented.

Tired of hearing that. They have to be realistic. First of all, you intentionally made your “bashing” example look much less intelligent than you needed to. Second, they are not going to get an in-depth critique every single time someone criticizes them or the game. Chances are, the person criticizing has already done that and now feel as though it has been ignored due to the fact it’s been several months and hasn’t even been verbally addressed.

Unless the user is directing personal insults at a specific developer or tagging a bunch of developers and insulting them, it should not be seen as bashing. People are getting fed up. If they don’t want that to happen, they should make a better effort to address issues that have been in the game for months and have seemingly been ignored (the faded vampire tattoo BS has been in the game since launch and still has yet to be fixed despite getting multiple threads a month about it. Even considering prioritization, that’s absurd.)

There is no intelligent bashing example lol. If it was intelligent it would have been a critique.

Heres a negative critique:
- "I do not like the way my character feels in pvp. Other classes have better mobility options, but the snares in the game make my character feel sluggish and not fun. I think you should review how many snares there are or give more mobility options. Here is a video showing my play experience. thanks!"

Heres a positive critique:
- "my toon has the tools he needs to function in pvp! I have a gap closer, a way to sneak around, and ways to deal dmg on the go."

Heres bashing:
- "you developers dont know what you are doing. all these snares are terrible, and if you played your own game you would see how much the game isnt fun. Camelot unchained is going to kill this game"

Maybe the bashing example is correct in some ways. But it will never be constructive. It also suggests the devs aren't doing their job which is an attempt to belittle someone in order to push your idea forward. You do not have to directly mention it to someone for it to be considered bashing.

Frustration is not a reason to ignore why you are making the case for changes to be made. If the issue is not fixed, please make more threads! there are chances the devs saw it, and misread the content (we are human) or they arent getting to it yet. and of course, they could think your idea isnt convincing enough but one can see that and then adapt their critique.

IronCrystal · October 2017

Nifty2g wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:
The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

Anyone else get flashbacks of Morrowind PTS reading this?

I sure did.

Morrowind was the largest *** show in terms of PTS testing and them not responding to any of the criticisims of the balance changes.

I still look through guild rosters and see people who haven't logged in since Morrowind dropped. That update was the final straw for many players.

Avran_Sylt · October 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

The reason this will likely not work is that it requires additional time added to their workload. So either that means they need to hire more people, or they need to stay after hours longer.

Which is totally justified by drastically improved interactions between the dev team and the community and consequent higher trust to ESO brand and ZeniMax brand as a whole.

That's a lot of money. Indirectly.

Additionally this will bring a flood of non-paid QA assistants that will allow to save on expanding the QA department.

I find it a false logic that 'something shouldn't be done, because it costs some money'.

As if it is expected for 'things to sort themselves out' somehow, which clear doesn't work.

I don't mean that it shouldn't be done, I mean that the reason this is not likely to happen is that in the short term it wouldn't allow for stable development. I do find that in the long term it would be beneficial, but the long terms also needs the reassurance of consistency. which this player-base generally lacks. As not all players are heavily invested with the development process of the game.

Dorrino wrote: »

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

No one at the company wins in that scenario, and the payoff just means more work for them, as more players join in on the PTS, there are more and more reports to sift through.

But that's the end goal. To have a flood of high quality reports. I don't see how can it be negative in any sense.

More work on the bugs and bugfixes - but, hm, that's what we all (dev and community) are supposed to welcome.

The end goal of a high flood of high-quality reports would certainly be a boon, yes, but that makes the assumption that there will not be a deluge of low quality reports that need to be sorted through as well. You can't fire community members, who would still complain that they are not being heard.

Though that does bring up the interesting idea of different 'ranks' for users. Much like how the community selects community ambassadors, perhaps the devs could select "Community Liaisons", who deal more with the nitty-gritty. Essentially acting as opt-in PR managers that the devs could have a more open discourse with. Certainly being a rank that could be terminated at the discretion of those at ZOS.

Dorrino wrote: »

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

If it were to be automated (# of reports) then it could accommodate any number of players and would be fine. But as the automated system doesn't work, and the manned system isn't scale-able, it's unlikely to happen.

There is a 'manned system' in place anyways to sort out the bugreports. This addition requires a bit of overhead (mostly automated) with a huge payoff. If this is not a win-win scenario, i'm not sure what is.

Once again, in the long-term I agree. But in the short term how do you transition into this system? What is the best way to do so? How do you manage the expectations of the community while at the same time changing a whole system approach? This isn't something that you can do in a week, let alone in a month. Especially if you need to get everyone on board. Suggesting the idea is great, but what really needs to be done is speculate on how it would actually be implemented at each stage, and that requires knowledge of the workflow of the company.

Side-note, what is the manned system that you refer to? Is this just a generic speculation, or has it been mentioned anywhere? I'm curious as I may have missed it announced or detailed somewhere.

templesus · October 2017

Minno wrote: »

TheMaster wrote: »

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

There's critque and there's basing.

Example:
- "zos I feel like Templars have no cohesive design intent. Here's why _____ Can we receive a statement of how you envision the Templar?" = Critque.
- "omg zos, you don't listen to us! Terrible developers" = bashing.

Neither of these entitle you to a dev reaction though. It would be amazing if they could react individually to everything. But we as players have to take a step back and realize it's a game.

And yes critque does not mean good praise nor bad praise. Just truth and opinion based off information presented.

This comment is so biased and skewed I think you need to read up on logical fallacies, ASAP.

Bashing is simply heavily critiquing the target with some reasoning or logic behind it.

Critiquing is simply showing the target what they are doing wrong. How it comes across depends how soft your skin is.

Nearly everyone making claims against ZOS has background evidence to support what they are saying. I for one know I introduced said evidence in my comment.

Furthermore Zenimax clearly doesn’t even listen to positive feedback. Prior to Horns of The Reach live patch, several people were pleased and several youtubers even posted videos of how good the PTS patch notes were. Then, without a word, or even a chance for things to be tested, bam they reverted numerous good changes (Precise buff, Numerous set Buffs, etc) and even Nerfed things like shadow. The whole patch, which was speculated to be good, down the drain because Zenimax decided to do what they want to do with complete disdain for what the player base had to say.

Utter disrespect.

Tasear · October 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:
The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

While we might not always understand. Just want to say thanks. It's truly a wonderful world you guys created.

ThePrinceOfBargains · October 2017

Minno wrote: »

TheMaster wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

TheMaster wrote: »

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

There's critque and there's basing.

Example:
- "zos I feel like Templars have no cohesive design intent. Here's why _____ Can we receive a statement of how you envision the Templar?" = Critque.
- "omg zos, you don't listen to us! Terrible developers" = bashing.

Neither of these entitle you to a dev reaction though. It would be amazing if they could react individually to everything. But we as players have to take a step back and realize it's a game.

And yes critque does not mean good praise nor bad praise. Just truth and opinion based off information presented.

Tired of hearing that. They have to be realistic. First of all, you intentionally made your “bashing” example look much less intelligent than you needed to. Second, they are not going to get an in-depth critique every single time someone criticizes them or the game. Chances are, the person criticizing has already done that and now feel as though it has been ignored due to the fact it’s been several months and hasn’t even been verbally addressed.

Unless the user is directing personal insults at a specific developer or tagging a bunch of developers and insulting them, it should not be seen as bashing. People are getting fed up. If they don’t want that to happen, they should make a better effort to address issues that have been in the game for months and have seemingly been ignored (the faded vampire tattoo BS has been in the game since launch and still has yet to be fixed despite getting multiple threads a month about it. Even considering prioritization, that’s absurd.)

There is no intelligent bashing example lol. If it was intelligent it would have been a critique.

Heres a negative critique:
- "I do not like the way my character feels in pvp. Other classes have better mobility options, but the snares in the game make my character feel sluggish and not fun. I think you should review how many snares there are or give more mobility options. Here is a video showing my play experience. thanks!"

Heres a positive critique:
- "my toon has the tools he needs to function in pvp! I have a gap closer, a way to sneak around, and ways to deal dmg on the go."

Heres bashing:
- "you developers dont know what you are doing. all these snares are terrible, and if you played your own game you would see how much the game isnt fun. Camelot unchained is going to kill this game"

Maybe the bashing example is correct in some ways. But it will never be constructive. It also suggests the devs aren't doing their job which is an attempt to belittle someone in order to push your idea forward. You do not have to directly mention it to someone for it to be considered bashing.

Frustration is not a reason to ignore why you are making the case for changes to be made. If the issue is not fixed, please make more threads! there are chances the devs saw it, and misread the content (we are human) or they arent getting to it yet. and of course, they could think your idea isnt convincing enough but one can see that and then adapt their critique.

At the point of frustration, you are no longer making a case. The case was made a long time ago and was never addressed. Or it was addressed, you were told it was going to be fixed, and then a year later, it still isn’t fixed. At this point, you’re now venting your frustration. This can still be considered criticism. I’m not arguing that bashing isn’t a thing, but from what I’ve seen in this topic since it started, the people feel as though ZOS ignores them and the issues presented. The lack of continuous in-depth elaboration /= bashing automatically. You will not find that requirement in any legitimate definition of criticism.

At this point, if the devs want the criticism to be elaborated on, they should ask or get someone with enough time to ask for them. As I said, you can’t expect these people to treat the devs like humans with flaws if they won’t do the same in return. If someone is frustrated with them and the discussion isn’t as polite as they’d like, the devs threatening disciplinary action in return is not going to bring cordiality to the conversation. Neither is taking a defensive stance and responding like there’s no way they could do any better than they’re doing now. It’s just going to make people more confrontational towards them. Nobody in this thread was throwing out personal insults or targeted attacks.

Instead of giving people a dire “final warning” (or in addition to, if the situation really calls for it, which this did not), she should’ve just said something akin to “we’re working hard and will try harder to address your concerns in the future,” then I’d probably be defending the devs and not the frustrated players if they continued being difficult and insisting the devs don’t care. I don’t expect her responses to be perfect either, but I’m just saying they could’ve responded to this better.

Elsterchen · October 2017

Turelus wrote: »

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

The problem is how players would take that.

Someone reports they don't like X change to Y skill and a dev notes it. People are going to take that as "they listened and won't change this" then nothing happens because they noted it, tested it more and found they were happy with it for the game.

It goes live and everyone screams "what's the point you just note things and don't listen."

Far too many people only care about game balance from their point of view and are adverse to any changes.
Sure there have been changes I don't like made, I've spoken of my dislike for the forcing of light/heavy attacked changes however once it became clear ZOS were not going to change it I adapted as best I could.
Maybe it just comes from years of MMO gaming and being used to this stuff though.

Back in EVE Online we used to have a saying "adapt or die" and I have lived with that in MMO gaming since.

"Adapt or die " -> yields zero intention to test anything. If that motto is active zeni can scrap PTS alltogether.

... and feedback or not, people always get emotional. I thought zenis intention on PTS was to get things tested by players, to actually work with the feedback. A comment that a reported problem has been read by devs will most certainly reduce the amount of comments in that thread. -> Less to read, less emotional outbreaks... more time to actually be constructive (both, players and devs).
Or in other words: Ofc there are jerks, but there is quite a number of reasonable people, too. The later ones do not deserve to be treated like misbehaving 3-yr-old children.

Minno · October 2017

templesus wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

TheMaster wrote: »

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

There's critque and there's basing.

Example:
- "zos I feel like Templars have no cohesive design intent. Here's why _____ Can we receive a statement of how you envision the Templar?" = Critque.
- "omg zos, you don't listen to us! Terrible developers" = bashing.

Neither of these entitle you to a dev reaction though. It would be amazing if they could react individually to everything. But we as players have to take a step back and realize it's a game.

And yes critque does not mean good praise nor bad praise. Just truth and opinion based off information presented.

This comment is so biased and skewed I think you need to read up on logical fallacies, ASAP.

Bashing is simply insulting the target with no reasoning or logic behind it.

Critiquing is simply showing the target what they are doing wrong. How it comes across depends how soft your skin is.

Nearly everyone making claims against ZOS has background evidence to support what they are saying. I for one know I introduced said evidence in my comment.

"Furthermore Zenimax clearly doesn’t even listen to positive feedback. Prior to Horns of The Reach live patch, several people were pleased and several youtubers even posted videos of how good the PTS patch notes were. Then, without a word, or even a chance for things to be tested, bam they reverted numerous good changes (Precise buff, Numerous set Buffs, etc) and even Nerfed things like shadow. The whole patch, which was speculated to be good, down the drain because Zenimax decided to do what they want to do with complete disdain for what the player base had to say." Is this not a fallacy? Unless you have the evidence to backup that ZOS indeed decided to forgo player critque for no reason, you would be spinning their actions as malicious to the game and community. But then again, your comment IS an example of bashing.

Bashing is severe criticism; of which has no logical stance and is harmful.

Critiquing is not simply showing the target what is wrong (that is criticizing). It is a collection of logical and thoughtful examples in order to create a discussion. In regards to art, it is used to promote discussion of the piece and offer the person defending their work ways in which to enhance it.

If the person or art being critiqued, does not follow your advice to the "T", usually they need to explain why. In this case, sometimes it comes in the form of "we tested it and felt this did not match our vision for the game".

Turelus · October 2017

Elsterchen wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

The problem is how players would take that.

Someone reports they don't like X change to Y skill and a dev notes it. People are going to take that as "they listened and won't change this" then nothing happens because they noted it, tested it more and found they were happy with it for the game.

It goes live and everyone screams "what's the point you just note things and don't listen."

Far too many people only care about game balance from their point of view and are adverse to any changes.
Sure there have been changes I don't like made, I've spoken of my dislike for the forcing of light/heavy attacked changes however once it became clear ZOS were not going to change it I adapted as best I could.
Maybe it just comes from years of MMO gaming and being used to this stuff though.

Back in EVE Online we used to have a saying "adapt or die" and I have lived with that in MMO gaming since.

"Adapt or die " -> yields zero intention to test anything. If that motto is active zeni can scrap PTS alltogether.

... and feedback or not, people always get emotional. I thought zenis intention on PTS was to get things tested by players, to actually work with the feedback. A comment that a reported problem has been read by devs will most certainly reduce the amount of comments in that thread. -> Less to read, less emotional outbreaks... more time to actually be constructive (both, players and devs).
Or in other words: Ofc there are jerks, but there is quite a number of reasonable people, too. The later ones do not deserve to be treated like misbehaving 3-yr-old children.

Player feedback is insanely bias and doesn't always mean the best for the game though.

It's rare for a player on these forums go to "Okay yeah my class was a bit OP and that was needed" it's tears and rage every time because their favourite win moves get changed.

That's not to say every outcry is unwarranted or bias, but most of the kneejerk tears we see disappear a month later because people found out it wasn't actually so bad and adapted.
The number of thread saying ESO was dead with the sustain changes, that it would be impossible to do vMSA, ect. however argue about if the changes were fun or not, but everyone adapted pretty fast and rarely do people complain about how hard sustain is now.

rhapsodious · October 2017

Player feedback is insanely bias and doesn't always mean the best for the game though.

It's rare for a player on these forums go to "Okay yeah my class was a bit OP and that was needed" it's tears and rage every time because their favourite win moves get changed.

That's not to say every outcry is unwarranted or bias, but most of the kneejerk tears we see disappear a month later because people found out it wasn't actually so bad and adapted.
The number of thread saying ESO was dead with the sustain changes, that it would be impossible to do vMSA, ect. however argue about if the changes were fun or not, but everyone adapted pretty fast and rarely do people complain about how hard sustain is now.

Remember how nobody was going to play a sorc ever again after the shield nerf? All those "My character, 2014-2016 - he was a great sorcerer, and then came the Dark Brotherhood" sigs?

But both sides have a point.

People tend to knee-jerk react way too often here (I've noticed Gina asking specifically for people to please test the changes before posting their thoughts based on the patch notes, heh), but there's also the issue that people who clearly know what they're talking about with regards to a class or other aspect of the game don't get responses, either. For example, I feel that Joy Division always makes well-thought-out PTS posts that are careful to not attack, and he gets a lot of positive feedback from the community, but they go unanswered. They probably get read - it'd be a shame if they don't! - but there's no dev comments there to indicate that they're listening. And not to say he's the only one. He just comes to mind. You're always going to have people yelling about how the sky is falling with each minor change. But there are many, many people here who give constructive criticism, and that they don't get indicators that they've been heard is disappointing.

Meanwhile, when devs do engage with the community, it can backfire, like the infamous thread where Rich Lambert said "you know you don't have to be here, right?" People take that one out of context all the damn time. It was a lighthearted thread where he was answering random questions that didn't require him to divulge company secrets pretty rapidly, and someone had to come in with an "omg when are you gonna fix the game!!" post, resulting in his comment. Was it 100% professional? Nope. But it shows the devs are people, too, and it was kind of awesome. And then whenever Wrobel posts a comment, while many people are at least cordial, some seem prepared to hit the rage key upon seeing his name.

As a business, I think it's ZOS that has more responsibility in this situation. As long as we can keep the vitriol out of our frustrations, that's our "part". But now the communication ball is in ZOS's court. I know there's a lot they can't talk about, be it due to NDAs or just not having an answer, but a little would go a long way, and things like the developer comments on balance changes have been an excellent step in the right direction.

Elsterchen · October 2017

@Turelus

Player feedback is insanely bias and doesn't always mean the best for the game though.

It's rare for a player on these forums go to "Okay yeah my class was a bit OP and that was needed" it's tears and rage every time because their favourite win moves get changed.

That's not to say every outcry is unwarranted or bias, but most of the kneejerk tears we see disappear a month later because people found out it wasn't actually so bad and adapted.
The number of thread saying ESO was dead with the sustain changes, that it would be impossible to do vMSA, ect. however argue about if the changes were fun or not, but everyone adapted pretty fast and rarely do people complain about how hard sustain is now.

I agree that player feedback isn't always constructive (some of mine included). The question is: How can we improve our communication?

I am pretty sure that i am not the only one who will think twice about restating / rephrasing/ re-explaining any issue I feel noteworthy to discuss, if there was some hint, that the issue has been noted and is worked on. I would use the time I win to read up something different... or play the game.
Remember, communication is a two-way-process.

The issue with "Adept or die" is loosely linked to comunication as well, if it doesn't matter what i say, because I anyway have no influence on the outcome and have to just live with what I get served, there is no incentive to communicate my thoughts at all. In this scenario PTS, writing on the forum... even this little comment is a waste of my, yours and zenis time. We should just scrap it. Plain, honest and without hard feelings.

Mojmir · October 2017

What entails a first and final warning? Sounds like a threat, in any real world retail or support position if you said that or "you know you don't to be here" I think you'd find your job getting a first and final warning.
I'm still waiting on replies from bug fixes I've made from months ago,

even tagged devs in them. Still silence, oh and now I get this awesome bug where I'm doing a dolmen and my character gets thrown half way across the map and unable to do anything but wait til I land and die.

rhapsodious wrote: »

Player feedback is insanely bias and doesn't always mean the best for the game though.

It's rare for a player on these forums go to "Okay yeah my class was a bit OP and that was needed" it's tears and rage every time because their favourite win moves get changed.

That's not to say every outcry is unwarranted or bias, but most of the kneejerk tears we see disappear a month later because people found out it wasn't actually so bad and adapted.
The number of thread saying ESO was dead with the sustain changes, that it would be impossible to do vMSA, ect. however argue about if the changes were fun or not, but everyone adapted pretty fast and rarely do people complain about how hard sustain is now.

Remember how nobody was going to play a sorc ever again after the shield nerf? All those "My character, 2014-2016 - he was a great sorcerer, and then came the Dark Brotherhood" sigs?

But both sides have a point.

People tend to knee-jerk react way too often here (I've noticed Gina asking specifically for people to please test the changes before posting their thoughts based on the patch notes, heh), but there's also the issue that people who clearly know what they're talking about with regards to a class or other aspect of the game don't get responses, either. For example, I feel that Joy Division always makes well-thought-out PTS posts that are careful to not attack, and he gets a lot of positive feedback from the community, but they go unanswered. They probably get read - it'd be a shame if they don't! - but there's no dev comments there to indicate that they're listening. And not to say he's the only one. He just comes to mind. You're always going to have people yelling about how the sky is falling with each minor change. But there are many, many people here who give constructive criticism, and that they don't get indicators that they've been heard is disappointing.

Meanwhile, when devs do engage with the community, it can backfire, like the infamous thread where Rich Lambert said "you know you don't have to be here, right?" People take that one out of context all the damn time. It was a lighthearted thread where he was answering random questions that didn't require him to divulge company secrets pretty rapidly, and someone had to come in with an "omg when are you gonna fix the game!!" post, resulting in his comment. Was it 100% professional? Nope. But it shows the devs are people, too, and it was kind of awesome. And then whenever Wrobel posts a comment, while many people are at least cordial, some seem prepared to hit the rage key upon seeing his name.

As a business, I think it's ZOS that has more responsibility in this situation. As long as we can keep the vitriol out of our frustrations, that's our "part". But now the communication ball is in ZOS's court. I know there's a lot they can't talk about, be it due to NDAs or just not having an answer, but a little would go a long way, and things like the developer comments on balance changes have been an excellent step in the right direction.

see thats part of the problem(not defending/bashing anything here BTW) when they do appear on the forums its because of praise or "easy" stuff. rich posted a /lurk in a thread months ago,great, last we've heard from it. how about actually writing words to follow up?. seemed like a pretty straightforward considerate thread too.

rhapsodious · October 2017

Mojmir wrote:

rhapsodious wrote: »

Player feedback is insanely bias and doesn't always mean the best for the game though.

It's rare for a player on these forums go to "Okay yeah my class was a bit OP and that was needed" it's tears and rage every time because their favourite win moves get changed.

That's not to say every outcry is unwarranted or bias, but most of the kneejerk tears we see disappear a month later because people found out it wasn't actually so bad and adapted.
The number of thread saying ESO was dead with the sustain changes, that it would be impossible to do vMSA, ect. however argue about if the changes were fun or not, but everyone adapted pretty fast and rarely do people complain about how hard sustain is now.

Remember how nobody was going to play a sorc ever again after the shield nerf? All those "My character, 2014-2016 - he was a great sorcerer, and then came the Dark Brotherhood" sigs?

But both sides have a point.

People tend to knee-jerk react way too often here (I've noticed Gina asking specifically for people to please test the changes before posting their thoughts based on the patch notes, heh), but there's also the issue that people who clearly know what they're talking about with regards to a class or other aspect of the game don't get responses, either. For example, I feel that Joy Division always makes well-thought-out PTS posts that are careful to not attack, and he gets a lot of positive feedback from the community, but they go unanswered. They probably get read - it'd be a shame if they don't! - but there's no dev comments there to indicate that they're listening. And not to say he's the only one. He just comes to mind. You're always going to have people yelling about how the sky is falling with each minor change. But there are many, many people here who give constructive criticism, and that they don't get indicators that they've been heard is disappointing.

Meanwhile, when devs do engage with the community, it can backfire, like the infamous thread where Rich Lambert said "you know you don't have to be here, right?" People take that one out of context all the damn time. It was a lighthearted thread where he was answering random questions that didn't require him to divulge company secrets pretty rapidly, and someone had to come in with an "omg when are you gonna fix the game!!" post, resulting in his comment. Was it 100% professional? Nope. But it shows the devs are people, too, and it was kind of awesome. And then whenever Wrobel posts a comment, while many people are at least cordial, some seem prepared to hit the rage key upon seeing his name.

As a business, I think it's ZOS that has more responsibility in this situation. As long as we can keep the vitriol out of our frustrations, that's our "part". But now the communication ball is in ZOS's court. I know there's a lot they can't talk about, be it due to NDAs or just not having an answer, but a little would go a long way, and things like the developer comments on balance changes have been an excellent step in the right direction.

see thats part of the problem(not defending/bashing anything here BTW) when they do appear on the forums its because of praise or "easy" stuff. rich posted a /lurk in a thread months ago,great, last we've heard from it. how about actually writing words to follow up?. seemed like a pretty straightforward considerate thread too.

Yeah, I'm not disagreeing there. Ultimately it's easier to answer questions that don't require insight into the problem (like, I don't expect anyone there to know /everything/ about the code base or the status of issues, assuming they can even talk about it) so you instead get answers to stuff like "How many times have you ran vma" and "what add-ons do you use". It's not right or wrong, but I think the more complicated issues also deserve responses.

I know there's only so much transparency they can have, and it sucks on both sides.

templesus · October 2017

Minno wrote: »

templesus wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

TheMaster wrote: »

deluxesalt wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

This is a big one, people love throwing hate around but don't realize there are real people behind each username. Bashing other people is not an okay way to try and pass your ideas.

It goes both ways. Threatening people with disciplinary action for not sugarcoating their criticism is not going bring cordiality into the discussion. In fact, it seems like it did the opposite, as some people became confrontational towards her after that post.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn’t matter how much Gina or any of these other guys at ZOS say they’re listening to us. Many players feel as though they’re not being listened to. That’s the problem that needs to be solved. How they can make these players feel as though they’re being heard.

There's critque and there's basing.

Example:
- "zos I feel like Templars have no cohesive design intent. Here's why _____ Can we receive a statement of how you envision the Templar?" = Critque.
- "omg zos, you don't listen to us! Terrible developers" = bashing.

Neither of these entitle you to a dev reaction though. It would be amazing if they could react individually to everything. But we as players have to take a step back and realize it's a game.

And yes critque does not mean good praise nor bad praise. Just truth and opinion based off information presented.

This comment is so biased and skewed I think you need to read up on logical fallacies, ASAP.

Bashing is simply insulting the target with no reasoning or logic behind it.

Critiquing is simply showing the target what they are doing wrong. How it comes across depends how soft your skin is.

Nearly everyone making claims against ZOS has background evidence to support what they are saying. I for one know I introduced said evidence in my comment.

"Furthermore Zenimax clearly doesn’t even listen to positive feedback. Prior to Horns of The Reach live patch, several people were pleased and several youtubers even posted videos of how good the PTS patch notes were. Then, without a word, or even a chance for things to be tested, bam they reverted numerous good changes (Precise buff, Numerous set Buffs, etc) and even Nerfed things like shadow. The whole patch, which was speculated to be good, down the drain because Zenimax decided to do what they want to do with complete disdain for what the player base had to say." Is this not a fallacy? Unless you have the evidence to backup that ZOS indeed decided to forgo player critque for no reason, you would be spinning their actions as malicious to the game and community. But then again, your comment IS an example of bashing.

Bashing is severe criticism; of which has no logical stance and is harmful.

Critiquing is not simply showing the target what is wrong (that is criticizing). It is a collection of logical and thoughtful examples in order to create a discussion. In regards to art, it is used to promote discussion of the piece and offer the person defending their work ways in which to enhance it.

If the person or art being critiqued, does not follow your advice to the "T", usually they need to explain why. In this case, sometimes it comes in the form of "we tested it and felt this did not match our vision for the game".

crit·i·cism
ˈkridəˌsizəm/Submit
noun
1.
the expression of disapproval of someone or something based on perceived faults or mistakes.

And no, my post is not a logical fallacy. In fact you proposing an intended statement in the form of a question stating my post is a logical fallacy is in itself 2 logical fallacies known as Loaded Question and Personal Incredulity. I encourage you to read up on them as to understand them more and provide more compelling arguments rather then continue this white-knighting of ZOS. If people at ZOS have too soft of skin to handle much needed criticism then they can ban me right here right now.

Yourlogicalfallacyis.com

IronCrystal · October 2017

Turelus wrote: »

Elsterchen wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

The problem is how players would take that.

Someone reports they don't like X change to Y skill and a dev notes it. People are going to take that as "they listened and won't change this" then nothing happens because they noted it, tested it more and found they were happy with it for the game.

It goes live and everyone screams "what's the point you just note things and don't listen."

Far too many people only care about game balance from their point of view and are adverse to any changes.
Sure there have been changes I don't like made, I've spoken of my dislike for the forcing of light/heavy attacked changes however once it became clear ZOS were not going to change it I adapted as best I could.
Maybe it just comes from years of MMO gaming and being used to this stuff though.

Back in EVE Online we used to have a saying "adapt or die" and I have lived with that in MMO gaming since.

"Adapt or die " -> yields zero intention to test anything. If that motto is active zeni can scrap PTS alltogether.

... and feedback or not, people always get emotional. I thought zenis intention on PTS was to get things tested by players, to actually work with the feedback. A comment that a reported problem has been read by devs will most certainly reduce the amount of comments in that thread. -> Less to read, less emotional outbreaks... more time to actually be constructive (both, players and devs).
Or in other words: Ofc there are jerks, but there is quite a number of reasonable people, too. The later ones do not deserve to be treated like misbehaving 3-yr-old children.

Player feedback is insanely bias and doesn't always mean the best for the game though.

It's rare for a player on these forums go to "Okay yeah my class was a bit OP and that was needed" it's tears and rage every time because their favourite win moves get changed.

That's not to say every outcry is unwarranted or bias, but most of the kneejerk tears we see disappear a month later because people found out it wasn't actually so bad and adapted.
The number of thread saying ESO was dead with the sustain changes, that it would be impossible to do vMSA, ect. however argue about if the changes were fun or not, but everyone adapted pretty fast and rarely do people complain about how hard sustain is now.

ESO end game trials did die though with the sustain changes. It's quite obvious looking at how many players are in end-game trials nowadays.

DDuke · October 2017

Balance changes are always going to be a biased topic, but for bug reports it'd be nice to have a "devs have seen this" reaction (maybe even status? I.e. "investigating" "fixing" "more information required" etc) on the forums - would definitely encourage more people to test things on PTS and help find bugs.

Joy_Division · October 2017

NBrookus wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Perhaps there should be a developer reaction on the forums... kind of the one click version of /lurk. It would be easy for the devs note a comment or thread they felt was good input, without identifying themselves and potentially getting too involved in a discussion to get around to doing their work.

I know this will get buried, but it's worth repeating, emphasizing as I think it's an excellent idea.

Not only does it give posters confirmation that something they have written has been read by a dev, but it can also give the community a sense of what type of feedback is going to get the devs attention.

For instance, once people see posts that just rage baseless assertions that sorcs are "OP EZ mode" get zero dev feedback, maybe they will be motivated to compose more thoughtful feedback and improve the overall quality of these forums.

Mojmir · October 2017

heres a test for ZOS, acknowledge you read these threads and i dont mean moderation.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/377891/enough-with-the-flying-d#latest

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/377197/guild-bug-report

Doctordarkspawn · October 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:
The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

Is that why you absolutely refuse to budge on many issues?

Like the sustain nerf, which was almost universally reviled?

If you want something to go through, it goes through. Why should I give feedback when you've made up your minds allready? I respect, the dev team, I do not respect the approach you've taken, nor the approach you take now.

The Iron Fist isn't going to make us shout any quieter.

But to end on a good note, I -am- glad they read bug reports. Very glad. And I can get behind that, if nothing else.

Kilandros · October 2017

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:
The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

As @Drummerx04 succinctly put it, there have only been two instances in which the Developers made requested changes during a PTS cycle, so it's not like posters are overreacting when they suggest that the Developers don't listen. I continue to firmly believe that the PTS is there to look for bugs and not player feedback on balance. Want to prove me wrong? Then prove me wrong.

I need only think back a few months to Morrowind when top-end PvE and PvP guilds said that the combat changes would kill off a significant portion of the player populations. Those changes went through and PC NA lost 6 or so top end guilds.

At the end of the day it's your game and you guys get to make the design decisions. But good luck explaining the state of the game to your bosses when the Developers are the only ones left playing it.

templesus · October 2017

Kilandros wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Ok, want to address a few things here.

First, we've thought about ways to incentivize participation on the PTS, but have always run into issues. For example:
The more bugs you report, the more rewards you get! This won't work because players might simply report random things as bugs just so they can reach the threshold.

Log in/complete a thing/get to this point and you get a reward! This isn't quite fair to our console players who don't have access to the PTS. We could just do rewards that already exist, but where's the incentive with that?

As for us "not caring" about PTS feedback, this couldn't be farther from the truth. Many of our devs stay late just to read your feedback, whether it be on new systems, areas, or yes, even combat balance and changes. We've mentioned this before, but just because we don't change something doesn't mean we aren't reading and taking it to heart. PTS is extremely valuable not just for feedback, but also bug reports. Look at each week's patch notes - you are a big part of why things get found!

Everyone, let's please stop bashing the team or making assumptions. This is your first and last warning.

As @Drummerx04 succinctly put it, there have only been two instances in which the Developers made requested changes during a PTS cycle, so it's not like posters are overreacting when they suggest that the Developers don't listen. I continue to firmly believe that the PTS is there to look for bugs and not player feedback on balance. Want to prove me wrong? Then prove me wrong.

I need only think back a few months to Morrowind when top-end PvE and PvP guilds said that the combat changes would kill off a significant portion of the player populations. Those changes went through and PC NA lost 6 or so top end guilds.

At the end of the day it's your game and you guys get to make the design decisions. But good luck explaining the state of the game to your bosses when the Developers are the only ones left playing it.

Hmm the only other one I can think of was the major mending nerf to Dks.

NBrookus · October 2017

They also significantly changed CDB in response to feedback; the original was really awful and the revised version is pretty good.

templesus · October 2017

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/341254/serious-problem-with-proposed-igneous-shield-change-attention-needed-now-to-fix-this-community/p1

@ZOS_GinaBruno this is just an example of some of our frustration. I made this post shortly after the Morrowind patch notes were released, it was a balance breaking bug, with multiple people responding appalled by how this could exist. Throughout the entire PTS we were forced to continue without so much as an acknowledgement. And once the live changes were released, you had changed the nerf and gave literally 0 credit to me or anyone else who had elaborated on this issue. Its just absolutely unacceptable to treat your player base like that and I hope things change in the future.

ZioGio · October 2017

I had so many thoughts reading through this thread that I hope I can remember how to address them all. Forgive me, I'm a graybeard software engineer.

First off, software is not like a pizza. You can't just add and pick off toppings at your leisure. No matter how much you try to modularize the code, there are always interdependencies. Sometimes there's no fix for a bug, even one that appears seemingly easy, without rewriting a significant chunk of code. At some point the source code may get refactored (streamlined) and that's the time when those types of bugs can be addressed.

Software is designed and built in sprints (a few weeks to a few months at a time), in which new designs are locked in and old/current bugs and old/current/new features are triaged and ranked. New bugs that come in after the sprint begins (unless they are critical) are punted to the next sprint, where they will be triaged and ranked against old/current bugs and old/current/new features.

Which leads to engineer feedback. Even if you submit a bug today and an engineer reads it tonight, unless it is critical (causes a crash) they can't comment on it because they're focused on their current sprint workload and don't know how the bug is going to be ranked after triage in the next sprint. Even if the engineer was just to say "I read this," everyone's going to think the fix will be in the next patch and will complain (as they do now) if it's not.

Sometimes bugs just keep getting punted sprint after sprint. Not because the bug is ignored, but because there are only so many engineers and so many hours; those engineers are responsible for both fixing bugs and programming in new features so they can only focus on what tasks they have for this sprint. Lower priority tasks only get assigned when all the high priority tasks are complete.

When new DLCs or expansions contain bugs, keep in mind that with major releases, the engineers are under a deadline agreed to (or set by) marketing. Release dates (arbitrary from an engineer's point of view) are chosen for a myriad of reasons, like holidays, conventions or movie releases. As the deadline draws near, sometimes an advertised feature gets cut and punted to a future patch because innovation doesn't like to play by man's rules.

Someone in this thread said that if engineers provided feedback on the bug reports, then it would reduce the amount of clutter on the forums. The fact that after the moderator posted that the engineers read the forums and there are still pages of replies proves that theory is bunk. I mean, someone even replied "How do we know that's even true?" As if the moderator saying it wasn't proof enough?

Finally, who the **** are you to think you deserve to be included in the bug tracking and resolution process? Take a step back and remember who you are: you're the consumer, whether you pay into the game or not. Your reward for helping bug bash is pride. This isn't open-source code. And I don't mean to sound condescending with above question; it's meant purely as a shock to bring you back into reality.

Plus, just because a bug is fixed does not mean it's going into the next patch. During code merge, they may find the fix introduced a regression or conflict so it can't be included in the release. Semi-transparency is actually worse than no transparency because it'll lead to a lot of false assumptions.

Relax, play the game, file a bug, and know that it's getting to the right people. If the game is unplayable or unenjoyable for you, take a break. When you file a bug, be as specific, yet succinct, as possible; location, description, action, reliable repro steps, expected result, and actual result.

One topic I didn't touch on is feedback from the team when changes are made to mechanics without explanation. That, I agree, could be better, although I think they do a good job with the patch notes explaining the rationale.

Doctordarkspawn · October 2017

ZioGio wrote: »

I had so many thoughts reading through this thread that I hope I can remember how to address them all. Forgive me, I'm a graybeard software engineer.

First off, software is not like a pizza. You can't just add and pick off toppings at your leisure. No matter how much you try to modularize the code, there are always interdependencies. Sometimes there's no fix for a bug, even one that appears seemingly easy, without rewriting a significant chunk of code. At some point the source code may get refactored (streamlined) and that's the time when those types of bugs can be addressed.

Software is designed and built in sprints (a few weeks to a few months at a time), in which new designs are locked in and old/current bugs and old/current/new features are triaged and ranked. New bugs that come in after the sprint begins (unless they are critical) are punted to the next sprint, where they will be triaged and ranked against old/current bugs and old/current/new features.

Which leads to engineer feedback. Even if you submit a bug today and an engineer reads it tonight, unless it is critical (causes a crash) they can't comment on it because they're focused on their current sprint workload and don't know how the bug is going to be ranked after triage in the next sprint. Even if the engineer was just to say "I read this," everyone's going to think the fix will be in the next patch and will complain (as they do now) if it's not.

Sometimes bugs just keep getting punted sprint after sprint. Not because the bug is ignored, but because there are only so many engineers and so many hours; those engineers are responsible for both fixing bugs and programming in new features so they can only focus on what tasks they have for this sprint. Lower priority tasks only get assigned when all the high priority tasks are complete.

When new DLCs or expansions contain bugs, keep in mind that with major releases, the engineers are under a deadline agreed to (or set by) marketing. Release dates (arbitrary from an engineer's point of view) are chosen for a myriad of reasons, like holidays, conventions or movie releases. As the deadline draws near, sometimes an advertised feature gets cut and punted to a future patch because innovation doesn't like to play by man's rules.

Someone in this thread said that if engineers provided feedback on the bug reports, then it would reduce the amount of clutter on the forums. The fact that after the moderator posted that the engineers read the forums and there are still pages of replies proves that theory is bunk. I mean, someone even replied "How do we know that's even true?" As if the moderator saying it wasn't proof enough?

Finally, who the **** are you to think you deserve to be included in the bug tracking and resolution process? Take a step back and remember who you are: you're the consumer, whether you pay into the game or not. Your reward for helping bug bash is pride. This isn't open-source code. And I don't mean to sound condescending with above question; it's meant purely as a shock to bring you back into reality.

Plus, just because a bug is fixed does not mean it's going into the next patch. During code merge, they may find the fix introduced a regression or conflict so it can't be included in the release. Semi-transparency is actually worse than no transparency because it'll lead to a lot of false assumptions.

Relax, play the game, file a bug, and know that it's getting to the right people. If the game is unplayable or unenjoyable for you, take a break. When you file a bug, be as specific, yet succinct, as possible; location, description, action, reliable repro steps, expected result, and actual result.

One topic I didn't touch on is feedback from the team when changes are made to mechanics without explanation. That, I agree, could be better, although I think they do a good job with the patch notes explaining the rationale.

Honestly I dont see anyone arguing they dont bugfix enough. (Allthough at this point I think it's an issue with the engine, not the game at this point.)

My main problem remains how I can oppose a game-changing change all I like. They'll refuse to lisen.

**The Reason Why The PTS is Pretty Much Pointless I Can Tell You Why.**

The Reason Why The PTS is Pretty Much Pointless I Can Tell You Why.