Maintenance for the week of May 27:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – May 27
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – May 27
Upcoming Elsweyr Preview Event @ ZOS
-
Shimmer✭✭✭✭✭
✭The press embargo lifts on March 25 at 9am est. I plan on having videos ready to launch at that hour with all the juicy deets!!!9 -
Emma_Overload✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Overheard in the Imperial CIty:
"Let the necromancers have the bodies!"
Indeed
#CAREBEARMASTERRACE0 -
zaria✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Hype is building.The press embargo lifts on March 25 at 9am est. I plan on having videos ready to launch at that hour with all the juicy deets!!!
Grinding just make you go in circles.
Asking ZoS for nerfs is as stupid as asking for close air support from the death star.5 -
KyraCROgnon✭✭✭Casual_Ranger wrote: »If there’s anything housing related you would like me to try and bring up while I am there let me know.
More furniture placing tools ? Now we can undo/redo and group furniture, and that's an improvement, but a hidable grid and option to align left /right / top / bottom and center 2 furnitures would make trying to build a wall or a plateform muchhhh easier
Edited by KyraCROgnon on March 11, 2019 5:39PM0 -
MissBizz✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭KyraCROgnon wrote: »Casual_Ranger wrote: »If there’s anything housing related you would like me to try and bring up while I am there let me know.
More furniture placing tools ? Now we can undo/redo and group furniture, and that's an improvement, but a hidable grid and option to align left /right / top / bottom and center 2 furnitures would make trying to build a wall or a plateform muchhhh easier
Just FYI... We are home from this trip so it's a bit too lateLone Wolf HelpFor the solo players who know, sometimes you just need a hand.PC | NA | AD-DC-EP | Discord0 -
Iluvrien✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.3 -
Woeler✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?0 -
MaselClass Representative
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
They always know. They have little spies inside ZoS that tell them everything.PC EU
All Trial Trifecta Titles Done!
Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChVEG6ckuAgGs5OyA6VeisA1 -
Iluvrien✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.Edited by Iluvrien on March 12, 2019 9:30AM2 -
MissBizz✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
Edited by MissBizz on March 12, 2019 10:53PMLone Wolf HelpFor the solo players who know, sometimes you just need a hand.PC | NA | AD-DC-EP | Discord6 -
Iluvrien✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
I am sure that the player whose name you put in here is quite confused as to why you are replying to them, and not me.
Of course the two groups focus on different parts of the game. ZOS themselves have stated that at the moment there are only class reps, not other kinds of reps. I commented on that very point in a thread on the subject.
My problem with ZOS (not with the previewers) is that one of those groups seems to have considerably higher priority than the other. I would have liked to have seen you all there at about the same time (tech permitting) so that the feedback from all avenues could be analysed as part of a "whole game experience" approach. With equal importance and priority. ZOS's choice in timing does not seem to reflect this.
The 12 PCs in a room point is an argument for more than one room, or carrying out the testing on consecutive days. Not for a three week break between the two.Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Except that wasn't my argument. I was suggesting that they used those three weeks to make the version you got to play more polished... any report that you all eventually gave would likely to be an improvement compared to the version in the first round. Do I expect ZOS will take on board some of what is said to implement it the time before PAX and then before PTS? Almost certainly. Do I think that the timing of your visit was timed so as to improve the PR outcome after the first round? Yup.Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
For the first part of this, see my previous comment. I would have liked to see you give your feedback on the other aspects consecutively/concurrently as the CR's. I would have trusted ZOS's intentions far more had that been the case.
As for the videos? Shimmer's response in this thread specifically mentioned having videos ready to go (with details) when the embargo lifts. Those were the "videos" I was referring to in my latter comment. Although I will point out that the focus of that section of my argument was on Gina's comment about you all being able to answer questions before PAX.
As previously stated, when Elsweyr is unveiled and it is obvious that your valuable feedback (no sarcasm) has been acted upon, then I will be more than happy to pat ZOS on the back for a job well done in giving Elsweyr real depth (and far fewer locked doors).
Until then, ZOS's own behaviour has taught me to be cynical.0 -
MissBizz✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
I am sure that the player whose name you put in here is quite confused as to why you are replying to them, and not me.
Of course the two groups focus on different parts of the game. ZOS themselves have stated that at the moment there are only class reps, not other kinds of reps. I commented on that very point in a thread on the subject.
My problem with ZOS (not with the previewers) is that one of those groups seems to have considerably higher priority than the other. I would have liked to have seen you all there at about the same time (tech permitting) so that the feedback from all avenues could be analysed as part of a "whole game experience" approach. With equal importance and priority. ZOS's choice in timing does not seem to reflect this.
The 12 PCs in a room point is an argument for more than one room, or carrying out the testing on consecutive days. Not for a three week break between the two.Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Except that wasn't my argument. I was suggesting that they used those three weeks to make the version you got to play more polished... any report that you all eventually gave would likely to be an improvement compared to the version in the first round. Do I expect ZOS will take on board some of what is said to implement it the time before PAX and then before PTS? Almost certainly. Do I think that the timing of your visit was timed so as to improve the PR outcome after the first round? Yup.Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
For the first part of this, see my previous comment. I would have liked to see you give your feedback on the other aspects consecutively/concurrently as the CR's. I would have trusted ZOS's intentions far more had that been the case.
As for the videos? Shimmer's response in this thread specifically mentioned having videos ready to go (with details) when the embargo lifts. Those were the "videos" I was referring to in my latter comment. Although I will point out that the focus of that section of my argument was on Gina's comment about you all being able to answer questions before PAX.
As previously stated, when Elsweyr is unveiled and it is obvious that your valuable feedback (no sarcasm) has been acted upon, then I will be more than happy to pat ZOS on the back for a job well done in giving Elsweyr real depth (and far fewer locked doors).
Until then, ZOS's own behaviour has taught me to be cynical.
In my opinion, trying to hear 24 players feedback at one would have been worse. Allowing 12 players at a time allows the teams to focus, and ensure everyone is absolutely heardLone Wolf HelpFor the solo players who know, sometimes you just need a hand.PC | NA | AD-DC-EP | Discord4 -
Woeler✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
I am sure that the player whose name you put in here is quite confused as to why you are replying to them, and not me.
Of course the two groups focus on different parts of the game. ZOS themselves have stated that at the moment there are only class reps, not other kinds of reps. I commented on that very point in a thread on the subject.
My problem with ZOS (not with the previewers) is that one of those groups seems to have considerably higher priority than the other. I would have liked to have seen you all there at about the same time (tech permitting) so that the feedback from all avenues could be analysed as part of a "whole game experience" approach. With equal importance and priority. ZOS's choice in timing does not seem to reflect this.
The 12 PCs in a room point is an argument for more than one room, or carrying out the testing on consecutive days. Not for a three week break between the two.Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Except that wasn't my argument. I was suggesting that they used those three weeks to make the version you got to play more polished... any report that you all eventually gave would likely to be an improvement compared to the version in the first round. Do I expect ZOS will take on board some of what is said to implement it the time before PAX and then before PTS? Almost certainly. Do I think that the timing of your visit was timed so as to improve the PR outcome after the first round? Yup.Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
For the first part of this, see my previous comment. I would have liked to see you give your feedback on the other aspects consecutively/concurrently as the CR's. I would have trusted ZOS's intentions far more had that been the case.
As for the videos? Shimmer's response in this thread specifically mentioned having videos ready to go (with details) when the embargo lifts. Those were the "videos" I was referring to in my latter comment. Although I will point out that the focus of that section of my argument was on Gina's comment about you all being able to answer questions before PAX.
As previously stated, when Elsweyr is unveiled and it is obvious that your valuable feedback (no sarcasm) has been acted upon, then I will be more than happy to pat ZOS on the back for a job well done in giving Elsweyr real depth (and far fewer locked doors).
Until then, ZOS's own behaviour has taught me to be cynical.
In my opinion, trying to hear 24 players feedback at one would have been worse. Allowing 12 players at a time allows the teams to focus, and ensure everyone is absolutely heard
I mean the whole thing is based on the completely fabricated argument that different feedback dates must mean different priorities, so I wouldn’t give it too much attention.Edited by Woeler on March 13, 2019 4:40AM5 -
Shimmer✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
I am sure that the player whose name you put in here is quite confused as to why you are replying to them, and not me.
Of course the two groups focus on different parts of the game. ZOS themselves have stated that at the moment there are only class reps, not other kinds of reps. I commented on that very point in a thread on the subject.
My problem with ZOS (not with the previewers) is that one of those groups seems to have considerably higher priority than the other. I would have liked to have seen you all there at about the same time (tech permitting) so that the feedback from all avenues could be analysed as part of a "whole game experience" approach. With equal importance and priority. ZOS's choice in timing does not seem to reflect this.
The 12 PCs in a room point is an argument for more than one room, or carrying out the testing on consecutive days. Not for a three week break between the two.Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Except that wasn't my argument. I was suggesting that they used those three weeks to make the version you got to play more polished... any report that you all eventually gave would likely to be an improvement compared to the version in the first round. Do I expect ZOS will take on board some of what is said to implement it the time before PAX and then before PTS? Almost certainly. Do I think that the timing of your visit was timed so as to improve the PR outcome after the first round? Yup.Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
For the first part of this, see my previous comment. I would have liked to see you give your feedback on the other aspects consecutively/concurrently as the CR's. I would have trusted ZOS's intentions far more had that been the case.
As for the videos? Shimmer's response in this thread specifically mentioned having videos ready to go (with details) when the embargo lifts. Those were the "videos" I was referring to in my latter comment. Although I will point out that the focus of that section of my argument was on Gina's comment about you all being able to answer questions before PAX.
As previously stated, when Elsweyr is unveiled and it is obvious that your valuable feedback (no sarcasm) has been acted upon, then I will be more than happy to pat ZOS on the back for a job well done in giving Elsweyr real depth (and far fewer locked doors).
Until then, ZOS's own behaviour has taught me to be cynical.
@Iluvrien
Hey peanut, I said I’d have videos (I’m a YouTuber) I didn’t say i would have footage. My videos will be about the necro class with details and other details of the expansion. No footage as we were not permitted to take any.
As someone who has attended chapter playtest both years they have had them, I can tell you I have personally had my feedback implimented on multiple occasions, and in a few occasions while I sat there and watched them do it live. I cannot comment on specifics as I’m sure your curiousity is getting the better of you, but I’m under NDA, and some of it is beyond Elsweyr and I won’t be able to comment on it. The fact that there were two groups, and not just one this year is amazing, and allows for far better testing and feedback so you can have a more polished chapter.
The fact is, ZOS is going above and beyond, and out of their way to make sure the best product gets out. I can assure you no other gaming company does any of this for their player base, and they genuinely care what we think, and how we feel about it.
Edited by Shimmer on March 13, 2019 5:20AM7 -
Iluvrien✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
I am sure that the player whose name you put in here is quite confused as to why you are replying to them, and not me.
Of course the two groups focus on different parts of the game. ZOS themselves have stated that at the moment there are only class reps, not other kinds of reps. I commented on that very point in a thread on the subject.
My problem with ZOS (not with the previewers) is that one of those groups seems to have considerably higher priority than the other. I would have liked to have seen you all there at about the same time (tech permitting) so that the feedback from all avenues could be analysed as part of a "whole game experience" approach. With equal importance and priority. ZOS's choice in timing does not seem to reflect this.
The 12 PCs in a room point is an argument for more than one room, or carrying out the testing on consecutive days. Not for a three week break between the two.Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Except that wasn't my argument. I was suggesting that they used those three weeks to make the version you got to play more polished... any report that you all eventually gave would likely to be an improvement compared to the version in the first round. Do I expect ZOS will take on board some of what is said to implement it the time before PAX and then before PTS? Almost certainly. Do I think that the timing of your visit was timed so as to improve the PR outcome after the first round? Yup.Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
For the first part of this, see my previous comment. I would have liked to see you give your feedback on the other aspects consecutively/concurrently as the CR's. I would have trusted ZOS's intentions far more had that been the case.
As for the videos? Shimmer's response in this thread specifically mentioned having videos ready to go (with details) when the embargo lifts. Those were the "videos" I was referring to in my latter comment. Although I will point out that the focus of that section of my argument was on Gina's comment about you all being able to answer questions before PAX.
As previously stated, when Elsweyr is unveiled and it is obvious that your valuable feedback (no sarcasm) has been acted upon, then I will be more than happy to pat ZOS on the back for a job well done in giving Elsweyr real depth (and far fewer locked doors).
Until then, ZOS's own behaviour has taught me to be cynical.
@Iluvrien
Hey peanut, I said I’d have videos (I’m a YouTuber) I didn’t say i would have footage. My videos will be about the necro class with details and other details of the expansion. No footage as we were not permitted to take any.
Hey there @Shimmer , I didn't say that you would have footage either. I even re-emphasised, in my last post, that what we would be likely to get was answers to questions. As per Gina's comment. I was at pains to try and be clear that you would have "videos" out. Not "in-game footage". Apologies for what seems to be ongoing confusion on that point.As someone who has attended chapter playtest both years they have had them, I can tell you I have personally had my feedback implimented on multiple occasions, and in a few occasions while I sat there and watched them do it live. I cannot comment on specifics as I’m sure your curiousity is getting the better of you, but I’m under NDA, and some of it is beyond Elsweyr and I won’t be able to comment on it. The fact that there were two groups, and not just one this year is amazing, and allows for far better testing and feedback so you can have a more polished chapter.
The fact is, ZOS is going above and beyond, and out of their way to make sure the best product gets out. I can assure you no other gaming company does any of this for their player base, and they genuinely care what we think, and how we feel about it.
I'd challenge the "no other gaming company" but the rest of this sounds like good news to me. So, since you can't mention your feedback with regards to this round of playtesting, what were some of the recommendations you made last year that got implemented? It would be nice to know the sorts of things that ZOS has changed in the past, and that we can thank you for.0 -
Iluvrien✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
Of course it is.
That is what the preview event was for. Everything about this event screams additional publicity, rather than additional testing and feedback.
I guess you know because you were there?
Rhetorical question requires rhetorical answer.
Why was the Elsweyr preview event 3 weeks later than the Class Reps?
It would make sense to collect, collate and consider both sets of feedback simultaneously if the previewers were expected to have a similar level of impact on the final state as the Class Rep playtesters. 3 weeks suggests enough time for the CR feedback to be considered and some polish to be added.
Why specifically upgrade the "some insight into their experience" into your ability to answer questions before PAX?
The previewers were described as prominent members of the community. People who are seen, whose videos/streams are watched. In concert with this:- Elsweyr was previewed on January 16th 2019.
- Elsweyr will be available for PC early acces on May 20th.
What is pretty much right in the middle of those two dates? March 25th. When the press embargo is being lifted. When people have already said that they will have videos ready showing off Elsweyr.
There may be a flaw in my reasoning somewhere based on the obvious fact that I wasn't there. However, based on the limited information that we have, the chain seems pretty solid to me.
Let's put it this way, when it turns out that the feedback relating to all of the non-combat (i.e. non CR) elements that was provided as part of your preview session has been either implemented or outright rejected then I will accept that my conclusion is at fault.
Until then I will continue to consider that inviting prominent members of the community to share their experience of an Elsweyr at point in time that was right in the middle of the announcement-release period (lull) and had already been subjected to one round of community playtesting definitely had far more to do with the publicity than it did the feedback.
@Illurian Your logic is heavily flawed. As quite obvious, the two test groups focus on different parts of the game. Another good reason to only have 12 people at a time (in two groups) would be the whole 12 computers in the test room thing.
I am sure that the player whose name you put in here is quite confused as to why you are replying to them, and not me.
Of course the two groups focus on different parts of the game. ZOS themselves have stated that at the moment there are only class reps, not other kinds of reps. I commented on that very point in a thread on the subject.
My problem with ZOS (not with the previewers) is that one of those groups seems to have considerably higher priority than the other. I would have liked to have seen you all there at about the same time (tech permitting) so that the feedback from all avenues could be analysed as part of a "whole game experience" approach. With equal importance and priority. ZOS's choice in timing does not seem to reflect this.
The 12 PCs in a room point is an argument for more than one room, or carrying out the testing on consecutive days. Not for a three week break between the two.Anyways, back to your flawed logic. According to it, 3 weeks between the Class reps and our visit there was enough time to implement changes for us to preview, but you are saying 3 weeks between our visit and pax isn't enough time for any changes to made? Nonsense. That's not even counting the fact there is more time between pax and PTS... and then May 20th. Plenty of time to make changes still.
Except that wasn't my argument. I was suggesting that they used those three weeks to make the version you got to play more polished... any report that you all eventually gave would likely to be an improvement compared to the version in the first round. Do I expect ZOS will take on board some of what is said to implement it the time before PAX and then before PTS? Almost certainly. Do I think that the timing of your visit was timed so as to improve the PR outcome after the first round? Yup.Having 2 groups allowed different feedback. I can imagine that what the class reps focused testing/feedback on vs what I focused my feedback on was quite different. It allowed ZOS to get a wider array of feedback.
As well, we can't share videos etc... soooo tough call saying we were there for press only. That my friend, would be the actual press events (like the one going on today).
For the first part of this, see my previous comment. I would have liked to see you give your feedback on the other aspects consecutively/concurrently as the CR's. I would have trusted ZOS's intentions far more had that been the case.
As for the videos? Shimmer's response in this thread specifically mentioned having videos ready to go (with details) when the embargo lifts. Those were the "videos" I was referring to in my latter comment. Although I will point out that the focus of that section of my argument was on Gina's comment about you all being able to answer questions before PAX.
As previously stated, when Elsweyr is unveiled and it is obvious that your valuable feedback (no sarcasm) has been acted upon, then I will be more than happy to pat ZOS on the back for a job well done in giving Elsweyr real depth (and far fewer locked doors).
Until then, ZOS's own behaviour has taught me to be cynical.
In my opinion, trying to hear 24 players feedback at one would have been worse. Allowing 12 players at a time allows the teams to focus, and ensure everyone is absolutely heard
In my professional life I am a teacher and subject manager. What is means is that in a single day I generally have to keep track of multiple types of feedback relating to both students (mood, facility, comprehension, assignments) and staff (mood, planning, reflection). This can mean between 50 and 150 different points of contact in one day. Every week day*. And I am only one person.
As such, I wonder what it is about the change from 12 people giving varied feedback to 24 people giving varied feedback that would impose sufficient additional difficulties so as to require such a long period between sessions.
[* Not including those times when a student/staff member or parent has a specific concern that has to be resolved independently of the normal routine.]0 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭For everyone else reading this exchange, take note of this...The fact is, ZOS is going above and beyond, and out of their way to make sure the best product gets out.
Having two rounds of player feedback, with time between them to make changes, is better than having one round.Edited by Elsonso on March 13, 2019 8:39AM6 -
lientier✭✭✭✭lordrichter wrote: »
While I really hope you guys are right that they actually do stuff with your feedback. And I appreciate the effort ZOS puts in getting feedback from you. I still see a PR component, and I suppose you can't deal with a company whithout them also considering their PR effects. Same as companies that give to charity, while its still obvious they do it mainly for their public image, still I am happy atleast they do it anyway. The only difference being, we don't know (yet) what the effects are.PC-EU @lientier0 -
SantieClaws✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭At the end of the day yes, even if perhaps there are no obvious or immediately measurable effects, is it not better that they do this than not do this?
And if they just wanted the good publicity well then there are many other ways of doing that in which do not involve having many kittens scampering around the office and knocking all of your things off the table yes.
Yours with paws
Santie ClawsShunrr's Skooma Oasis - The Movie. A housing video like no other ...
Find it here - https://youtube.com/user/wenxue2222
Clan Claws - now recruiting khajiit and like minded others for parties, fishing and other khajiit stuff. Contact this one for an invite.
PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!
https://www.imperialtradingcompany.eu/3 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭lordrichter wrote: »
While I really hope you guys are right that they actually do stuff with your feedback. And I appreciate the effort ZOS puts in getting feedback from you. I still see a PR component, and I suppose you can't deal with a company whithout them also considering their PR effects. Same as companies that give to charity, while its still obvious they do it mainly for their public image, still I am happy atleast they do it anyway. The only difference being, we don't know (yet) what the effects are.
If you had been there, I doubt you would have written what you just wrote.
Honestly. Even though this group was filled with people who will be telling you all about Elsweyr, when they can, you would not have said that. At no time did I feel they were selling me the game, and at no time did I feel obligated to sell it for them.
I quoted Shimmer because that is the way it was. It pretty much summed up the whole trip.1 -
GreenTea✭✭✭Did our respective communities go bonkers about us having the chance to go and play test, and thus successfully hype up the community as a result of said trips?
OH HECK YES.
But to boil it down to just PR and make assumptions based on travel dates, number of people there, and the like is really not seeing the forest for the trees.
It felt like I always had more than enough time to speak about everything I wanted to, going into detail, and allow for people to join in on the conversation without 'cutting into' someone else's time. I got to know the people who worked there along with fellow content creators.
I think these trips are a unique experience for both sides, it's not very often they get to speak to us in such a candid way, and they very much were asking us questions just as much as we were asking them.Watch me derp around playing ESO twitch.tv/tea_the_khajiit
In-game info: @Greeentea (with Three E's)
Main: Ki'tea
Morrowind Roleplayer since launch!3 -
lientier✭✭✭✭lordrichter wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »
While I really hope you guys are right that they actually do stuff with your feedback. And I appreciate the effort ZOS puts in getting feedback from you. I still see a PR component, and I suppose you can't deal with a company whithout them also considering their PR effects. Same as companies that give to charity, while its still obvious they do it mainly for their public image, still I am happy atleast they do it anyway. The only difference being, we don't know (yet) what the effects are.
If you had been there, I doubt you would have written what you just wrote.
Honestly. Even though this group was filled with people who will be telling you all about Elsweyr, when they can, you would not have said that. At no time did I feel they were selling me the game, and at no time did I feel obligated to sell it for them.
I quoted Shimmer because that is the way it was. It pretty much summed up the whole trip.
I don't mean you will be selling it, just inviting people over is -also- for PR. I really think its not either or, so its good that they do it, but still it's naive to think they dont -also- do it for a better public image. I think I can believe ZOS that they actually care about your feedback, that doesn't mean they won't show off like: 'look how seriously we take the community' to be in a better light. That's not wrong, and very logically from their perspective. But still, its a two sided blade.PC-EU @lientier0 -
lientier✭✭✭✭SantieClaws wrote: »At the end of the day yes, even if perhaps there are no obvious or immediately measurable effects, is it not better that they do this than not do this?
And if they just wanted the good publicity well then there are many other ways of doing that in which do not involve having many kittens scampering around the office and knocking all of your things off the table yes.
Yours with paws
Santie Claws
I agree with this completely. Though they still do all the other things aswell.. like trying to stack publicity-buffs PC-EU @lientier0 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭@GreenTea ! Hi! Welcome to my world!
SantieClaws wrote: »And if they just wanted the good publicity well then there are many other ways of doing that in which do not involve having many kittens scampering around the office and knocking all of your things off the table yes.
Wait. You were not there! How did you know about that? 0 -
Checkmath✭✭✭✭✭
✭@Iluvrien and everyone else caring about, if they listened to the feedback.
Yes they did. The people, who were invited last week already play-tested a polished version of what the class reps could test. Various skills already saw changes in those three weeks in between based on the feedback of class reps and their discussions with the devs. Also the feedback of the playtesters from last week will be considered and will result in changes towards an even better Elsweyr chapter coming for the pts cycle.
Also there is another class rep meeting coming soon, which again will be themed around the current wrathstone situation and the coming elsweyr chapter.
So as you can see, based on the feedback of the reps and the streamers/influencers changes are made for a better, more polished version of the chapter, which will be testable for many people during the pts duration.6 -
SantieClaws✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭lordrichter wrote: »@GreenTea ! Hi! Welcome to my world!SantieClaws wrote: »And if they just wanted the good publicity well then there are many other ways of doing that in which do not involve having many kittens scampering around the office and knocking all of your things off the table yes.
Wait. You were not there! How did you know about that?
This one has a few Skeevatons in the air conditioning system yes …
Yours with paws
Santie ClawsShunrr's Skooma Oasis - The Movie. A housing video like no other ...
Find it here - https://youtube.com/user/wenxue2222
Clan Claws - now recruiting khajiit and like minded others for parties, fishing and other khajiit stuff. Contact this one for an invite.
PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!
https://www.imperialtradingcompany.eu/3 -
Aliyavana✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭SantieClaws wrote: »lordrichter wrote: »@GreenTea ! Hi! Welcome to my world!SantieClaws wrote: »And if they just wanted the good publicity well then there are many other ways of doing that in which do not involve having many kittens scampering around the office and knocking all of your things off the table yes.
Wait. You were not there! How did you know about that?
This one has a few Skeevatons in the air conditioning system yes …
Yours with paws
Santie Claws
it is the alfiq khajiit you have to watch out for0 -
Lord_Eomer✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭So after NDA lifted on 25 March, will players or class Rep provide preview details of Elsweyr ?0
