Do you believe your feedback is registered FULLY?

Wuuffyy · October 2019

^^^Title. In regards to testing periods, 'PTS', especially. I am just curious if the playerbase or at the very least, the forumbase, believes that their feedback/suggestions (not straight unsupported nerf OR buff threads btw) AND other thoughts are being heard and, at least, seriously considered.

Points to think about:

Are they (developers and class reps) protecting your interest? (... playstyle -or are DEVs at least giving you similar alternatives to use-, RPs. etc.)?

Are your bug report threads and corresponding bugs being fixed in a timely manner (simple yes/no)?

Are major issues (lag, CP "issue", etc) being fixed or addressed in a timely manner IN YOUR OPINION?

Are your ideas for new and existing content being considered and being used proactively (well thought and sensible ideas only) OR in any way (IN YOUR OPINION)?

SIMPLE YES OR NO (COMMENTING APPRECIATED BUT NOT REQUIRED)

DISCLAIMER: I understand people want to say maybe but in this case if they aren't making it for you all the way, there aren't any half measures, so it's a NO (I am not trying to sway opinions OR stating my opinion in any way). I am also not asking about your enjoyment OR whether you currently like the game or not.

PURPOSE: I am curious, and others might be also. Maybe this might even help the DEVs understand how the community feels (either in support of or not) about changes (12 months recent especially).

VaranisArano · October 2019

I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want, and when we agree, it's definitely not as fast as I want it.

Crucial distinction.

Wuuffyy · October 2019

VaranisArano wrote: »

I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want.

Crucial distinction.

VOTE. Also not saying what you want. They cannot do that always. Just saying in regards to suggestions... are they being considered (when they are well stated, once again not unsupported rubble), IN YOUR OPINION.

redspecter23 · October 2019

Yes!

I believe they hear the feedback. What they do after that very often doesn't seem to have much to do with that feedback unless it's something they were going to do anyway.

x48rph · October 2019

No.

No. I think they do listen to some but it's very selective. Really feel they pay way to much attention to , and at times cater to what streamers and super elite players say and do then they do to the average joe, even though average joe represents the majority of the game population and is usually the one most hurt by the changes. Then of course there's the fact that a lot of good posts probably get lost in the mix since they can't possibly sit there and comb through every thread each day.

Tannus15 · October 2019

No.

There has been no recognition or acknowledgement of the sustain issues that are introduced with this patch. It's been raised by a lot of people with examples and data and not a single word has been said about it.

Banana · October 2019

Yes!

But the majority of the time they have already decided what they are going to do.

Ragnarock41 · October 2019

No.

I feel like they already have a plan set in motion and what us want matters very little.

ccfeeling · October 2019

No.

ZOS never respect their customers .

VaranisArano · October 2019

Wolf_Watching wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want.

Crucial distinction.

VOTE. Also not saying what you want. They cannot do that. Just saying in regards to suggestions. Are they being considered (when they are well stated, once again not unsupported rubble).

I dislike voting, in large part because I think it promotes ignoring the feedback offered by commenters in favor of just looking at their votes, and because these forum polls create an overreliance on a relatively tiny number of self-selected posters to make their point. Well-reasoned, well-supported feedback, forum polls are NOT.

But that's a tangent.

I qualify my "Yes, they listen" answer because there's an obvious retort "but then why don't they listen to our feedback?"

At the end of the day, this retort and most "do the devs really listen" questions really come down to a persistent mistaken belief that "if someone really considers my most excellent feedback, they'll realize I'm right and they'll do it my way.

IMO, that's a fallacy. The Devs are perfectly capable of understanding and taking good quality feedback into account fully, and then deciding to do what they want anyway.

So yes, I think that good quality feedback is fully registered by the Devs.

I just don't think that necessarily means that the Devs are going to change their minds or be convinced to change their course of action by said good quality feedback. They do what they want, often with the certainty that their course of action is better than any well-stated feedback to the contrary. (It gets really awkward when the Devs later realize they were wrong, as with the DOT buff/nerf whiplash we're getting, and the players who gave good feedback have a massive "We told you so!")

So yes, the Devs understand and register our good, quality feedback.
That doesn't mean:
A. They won't decide their way is better/more profitable.
B. They aren't mistaken about what they expect to happen.
C. They want to, but can't make it happen, right away.
All of those things can and have happened, even when the Devs are fully registering good, quality feedback.

SirAndy · October 2019

Wolf_Watching wrote: »

Do you believe your feedback is registered FULLY?

Wuuffyy · October 2019

I at least believe I understand the majority POV now. If any DEV sees this post DERAILING while I am not on the forums, feel free to DELETE this poll. Thank you so much to everyone who has voted insofar!

Have a nice NIGHT all!

BennyButton · October 2019

No.

The only acceptable and correct answer is a resounding no.

Wuuffyy · October 2019

VaranisArano wrote: »

Wolf_Watching wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want.

Crucial distinction.

VOTE. Also not saying what you want. They cannot do that. Just saying in regards to suggestions. Are they being considered (when they are well stated, once again not unsupported rubble).

I dislike voting, in large part because I think it promotes ignoring the feedback offered by commenters in favor of just looking at their votes, and because these forum polls create an overreliance on a relatively tiny number of self-selected posters to make their point. Well-reasoned, well-supported feedback, forum polls are NOT.

But that's a tangent.

I qualify my "Yes, they listen" answer because there's an obvious retort "but then why don't they listen to our feedback?"

At the end of the day, this retort and most "do the devs really listen" questions really come down to a persistent mistaken belief that "if someone really considers my most excellent feedback, they'll realize I'm right and they'll do it my way.

IMO, that's a fallacy. The Devs are perfectly capable of understanding and taking good quality feedback into account fully, and then deciding to do what they want anyway.

So yes, I think that good quality feedback is fully registered by the Devs.

I just don't think that necessarily means that the Devs are going to change their minds or be convinced to change their course of action by said good quality feedback. They do what they want, often with the certainty that their course of action is better than any well-stated feedback to the contrary. (It gets really awkward when the Devs later realize they were wrong, as with the DOT buff/nerf whiplash we're getting, and the players who gave good feedback have a massive "We told you so!")

So yes, the Devs understand and register our good, quality feedback.
That doesn't mean:
A. They won't decide their way is better/more profitable.
B. They aren't mistaken about what they expect to happen.
C. They want to, but can't make it happen, right away.
All of those things can and have happened, even when the Devs are fully registering good, quality feedback.

The poll isn't perfect. But neither is anyone I know so...

Wuuffyy · October 2019

BennyButton wrote: »

The only acceptable and correct answer is a resounding no.

Hit that vote button. Solidify your response if you want.

SFDB · October 2019

No.

"Do you believe your feedback is registered fully?"

Maybe you'd like to have some class identity stuff in your class identity patch? It'd be a lot easier to swallow a plate full of nerf if it was more than a dagger, Elder Scrolls: Angry Birds, and demonstrating your connection to mighty dragons by flinging your poo at them.

sproattt · October 2019

No.

They have no idea what's going on. Just saw on another thread that nightblades cloak be getting nerfed aka losing crit from stealth... Didn't see this in patch notes. Haven't saw cloak nerf posts in a while, so no.

There's more attention to the crown store than game performance. Once I saw skills being sold at 3k crowns (£16 GBP) per skill, per character I instantly knew that the game as a whole was done. There's no balance from PvP and pve either which in itself is destined for doom. Too many direct impactful nerfs too soon and no chance to come back now.

They still haven't addressed the state of Incap strike and how useless silence is, how useless mass hysteria is, how we lost defile from Incap/fracture from surprise attack/minor maim and slow on fear/heal over time from rally and how broken Undo has been for the last year or how broken potions are when you attempt to consume them.. 9 times outta 10 it doesn't go off although you hear the consumption of the potion....

I would rather play a battle royale of Peppa Pig than touch ESOs vision of what this games becoming. Its a disaster for Stamblade and as for Magblade ... There both going to be binned for Templars.

Nightblades have been dominant for years, however in 2 patches it's went from;

Sorc/Nb/dk/plar/warden to Plar/Dk. Haven't seen anyone using Warden or Sorc in PvP in a long time. Everyone's a temp and from what I imagine, the Devs love them.

idk · October 2019

Yes!

Wolf_Watching wrote: »

Are they (developers and class reps) protecting your interest? (... playstyle -or are DEVs at least giving you similar alternatives to use-, RPs. etc.)?

For starters the class reps are not there to "protect" our interests and that should be obvious since we all have different interest.

Taking things a step further, we cannot even agree to disagree in the forums. If the forums represented one entity it would be part schizophrenic, a dash of dissociative identity disorder probably a little bipolar disorder.

So Zos could take in all of our feedback, and pretty sure they do read most of it that actually offers actual constructive feedback while pretty much ignoring the rants and rages. However, it would probably be a bad idea to try to make changes to heed every bit of feedback.

Edit: Fact: we have seen strong evidence Zos listens to our feedback as we have seen they make changes that were a direct result of well thought out constructive feedback in multiple PTS cycles.

ChunkyCat · October 2019

Yes!

duh everyone pays attention to me

Major_Lag · October 2019

No.

This whole travelling circus of a design team reminds me of a similar situation I've been dealing with at work:

It took my boss about 2 years of being flooded with a combination of actual constructive feedback, as well as relentless complaints (both from the customers as well as from our own employees), before he would even CONSIDER fixing obvious and glaring deficiencies in one of our flagship products.

FWIW, my boss has been repeatedly advised by multiple experienced specialists, right from day one, that there are numerous problems with the design of said device and that it is not capable of functioning as intended in its current form.

Eventually he did begin to see reason and started listening to at least SOME of the feedback... but it's a classic case of "too little, too late": it has already cost him millions in lost sales, due to the big hit to the company reputation resulting from the whole mess.

Notice the similarities here?

Zypheran · October 2019

You seem to be asking several different questions that, imo, have a bit more complexity to their answer than suits the rigid yes/no constraints you are trying to insist upon.
My experience, if you want yes/no answer, you need to phrase the question in a simple binary way.
For example, you seem to be asking three questiins "do they listen", "do they respond" and "is their response timely". Answering all three is not as simple as yes/no

BattleAxe · October 2019

No.

x48rph wrote: »

No. I think they do listen to some but it's very selective. Really feel they pay way to much attention to , and at times cater to what streamers and super elite players say and do then they do to the average joe, even though average joe represents the majority of the game population and is usually the one most hurt by the changes. Then of course there's the fact that a lot of good posts probably get lost in the mix since they can't possibly sit there and comb through every thread each day.

This feels true more so when you think a majority of class reps are streamers and content creators

zyk · October 2019

Registered "Fully" ? No, of course not. There are millions of customers. It's not possible to carefully consider the feedback of thousands of players individually.

I think ZOS devs probably have a very good grasp of the preferences different types of players have, but they are in the very challenging position of having to appease a huge range of disparate players who play the game differently. A lot of problems in ESO stem from the fact it was designed for an audience significantly different from the one that now plays it.

Though I am a vocal critic of many changes, I don't think game devs should design their games according to popular opinion. As participants in the game, we all have very biased views and really can't see the forest from the trees.

jcm2606 · October 2019

No.

VaranisArano wrote: »

Wolf_Watching wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

I think the Devs listen to sensible, well-reasoned feedback. I just don't think they always do what I want.

Crucial distinction.

VOTE. Also not saying what you want. They cannot do that. Just saying in regards to suggestions. Are they being considered (when they are well stated, once again not unsupported rubble).

I dislike voting, in large part because I think it promotes ignoring the feedback offered by commenters in favor of just looking at their votes, and because these forum polls create an overreliance on a relatively tiny number of self-selected posters to make their point. Well-reasoned, well-supported feedback, forum polls are NOT.

But that's a tangent.

I qualify my "Yes, they listen" answer because there's an obvious retort "but then why don't they listen to our feedback?"

At the end of the day, this retort and most "do the devs really listen" questions really come down to a persistent mistaken belief that "if someone really considers my most excellent feedback, they'll realize I'm right and they'll do it my way.

IMO, that's a fallacy. The Devs are perfectly capable of understanding and taking good quality feedback into account fully, and then deciding to do what they want anyway.

So yes, I think that good quality feedback is fully registered by the Devs.

I just don't think that necessarily means that the Devs are going to change their minds or be convinced to change their course of action by said good quality feedback. They do what they want, often with the certainty that their course of action is better than any well-stated feedback to the contrary. (It gets really awkward when the Devs later realize they were wrong, as with the DOT buff/nerf whiplash we're getting, and the players who gave good feedback have a massive "We told you so!")

So yes, the Devs understand and register our good, quality feedback.
That doesn't mean:
A. They won't decide their way is better/more profitable.
B. They aren't mistaken about what they expect to happen.
C. They want to, but can't make it happen, right away.
All of those things can and have happened, even when the Devs are fully registering good, quality feedback.

That's fine and all if it's just one person's biased feedback, and if that were the case, I'd agree with everything you've said. But it isn't, most of the time it's the unanimous feedback of the entire community, including the class reps.

When you've only got a few people screaming at you completely mixed messages, it's fine to pass them off as just trying to buff their own builds and nerf builds they don't like.

But when you've got the entire community screaming at you, as it's been these past 2 whole PTS periods and through many, many periods in the past, you've done something wrong, and the community is not happy with it.

To add insult to injury, a lot of this feedback also comes with some pretty big predictions as to the impact of the changes if they were to hit live, most of which are in the exact opposite direction that the game should be heading in, and most of these predictions come true, to some extent. So, not only is your community unanimously telling you that your changes suck, they're also telling you exactly why they suck, and what will happen if they go through unchanged.

To add further insult to injury, most of the time, Zenimax themselves think they've missed the mark when they actually see the impact of their changes. Look at what happened in these past two PTS periods. Zenimax overbuffed DoT's, players told them that DoT's are too strong, Zenimax barely reigns them in if at all, DoT's go live and push the whole game into a DoT meta, Zenimax pulls an IRL surprised Pikachu face as they realise they *** up, immediately overnerfs them the next PTS. Had they just listened to what players were saying, DoT's would never have hit live the way they were, and they wouldn't be wasting two entire weeks this PTS attempting to pull DoT's back in line, but actually gutting them.

I believe that the average opinion of the community (at least, the portion of the community that actually knows what they're doing) is fairly similar to the opinion of Zenimax themselves. We all want the game to go generally in the same direction. The problem is, Zenimax has no idea how to get there, and won't let go of their ego to just listen to what the community is saying, even if the community and Zenimax agree 3 months down the road during the next PTS, only to repeat the cycle.

Sahidom · October 2019

This won't go over well but *** it, I'll say it anyways.

First, the Class Rep program is an organizational tool that represents a limited number of "actors" e.g. end-users. The entity does not have, and will not, share any stakeholder sway in the development of the game. The group is an informality where feedback is offered on discussion topics; BUT it's done as a public relations methodology. No one on the forums will be able to provide meaningful feedback without historical data to support their statements. Everything else is subjective and opinion based, including my own posts. I would like to know whether the Class Reps are given a thorough survey accompanied by a specific test case scenario; otherwise, their simply measuring "Perception" which is a subjective Quality Assurance attribute.

Second, often when bugs are reported, those defects are tracked in a defect matrix until resolved. So, NO but that's expected when you're dealing with 1000s of identified defects. Perhaps at the end of Q2 2020 of their master plan, many bugs will be resolved, or not if its origination resides in the core components of the software application without reworking the software.

Third, anyone who says Champion Points isn't a paint point in the power creep is delusional. I'd challenge anyone to disable or zero-out all your champion point tree allocations. You'll notice a significant game play difference. Champion points was replaced veteran ranks to be an account reward system for long-term players. It's no longer the case and its impacting the power scale of the game: How many current and previous skill change proposals have been instigated due to their over performance because of the champion point system? Ask yourself that question. The developers need a KISS solution to changing how champion points are used. Such, removing the different trees and create a node list based on the character's attributes e.g. resource pools, recoveries, spell/physical resist, spell/weapon damage, spell/weapon damage critical chance and damage nodes, spell/physical penetration, break-free/dodge/block/sprint/stealth cost nodes, and healing done. Simple and remove all +% modifiers. Yeah, added more than the question asked; but said it and moving on.

Lastly, players have no actual method other than the PTS update/patch notes to recognize whether or not their ideas are considered. It's a subjective response type question.

There's my feedback to this survey. Extract whatever to satisfy your metrics.

Nerftheforums · October 2019

No.

Cast times are still here...

GrimTheReaper45 · October 2019

No.

Not at all, not even slightly.

There are literally 1000s of examples this year alone that prove they dont listen, will push the patch out and maybe adjust it later. Only after their numbers point out a significant issue. There is 0 reason our testing matters at all

xeha_arwen11 · October 2019

No.

x48rph wrote: »

No. I think they do listen to some but it's very selective. Really feel they pay way to much attention to , and at times cater to what streamers and super elite players say and do then they do to the average joe, even though average joe represents the majority of the game population and is usually the one most hurt by the changes. Then of course there's the fact that a lot of good posts probably get lost in the mix since they can't possibly sit there and comb through every thread each day.

Yeah. I agree 100 percent with this post. Taking a look at the changes made over a long span of time, it seems that certain streamers and "elite" players are literally all that get any kind of voice. It makes absolutely no sense to cater to only a extremely tiny portion of the player base. Like 5 percent if I'm being awfully generous. Horrible damage and sustain nerfs have been very common because of catering to that tiny portion. 95 percent of players are not overpowered. 95 percent of players don't have infinite sustain. So now those 95 percent will be destroyed by all these nerfs, and a huge portion will leave for good.

Guilds trying to beat vet trials disband. Those people leave since their goal has become impossible with these nerfs.

Only people who play this game like a job as well as people who cheat will be able to easily deal with the changes.

More and more people leave and aren't equally replaced by others. The game suffers.

Derra · October 2019

I think it´s completely unreasonable to expect feedback to be considered/registered fully.

haelene · October 2019

No.

I think they are very selective about the feedback they take into consideration and have gotten very good at ignoring or silencing the stuff they don't want to hear even if it's honest, well thought out, non inflammatory and civil feedback.

If I'm being honest, I don't think they care*. I think they found out they can get away with ping pong nerfs/buffs and massive changes over short amounts of time and that in the end it's a positive thing for them. Sure the forum might rebel, but it's easy enough to silence discussion or ignore it and ultimately they get more "player engagement" because people are forced to refarm gear and relearn rotations every few months. It looks good to investors and appears healthy on paper - doesn't have to be fun or actually engaging for the players.

* When I say they don't care I mean the company overall - not individual employees. I'm sure that for some of them this game is their passion.

LiquidPony · October 2019

No.

Sahidom wrote: »

This won't go over well but *** it, I'll say it anyways.

First, the Class Rep program is an organizational tool that represents a limited number of "actors" e.g. end-users. The entity does not have, and will not, share any stakeholder sway in the development of the game. The group is an informality where feedback is offered on discussion topics; BUT it's done as a public relations methodology. No one on the forums will be able to provide meaningful feedback without historical data to support their statements. Everything else is subjective and opinion based, including my own posts. I would like to know whether the Class Reps are given a thorough survey accompanied by a specific test case scenario; otherwise, their simply measuring "Perception" which is a subjective Quality Assurance attribute.

Second, often when bugs are reported, those defects are tracked in a defect matrix until resolved. So, NO but that's expected when you're dealing with 1000s of identified defects. Perhaps at the end of Q2 2020 of their master plan, many bugs will be resolved, or not if its origination resides in the core components of the software application without reworking the software.

Third, anyone who says Champion Points isn't a paint point in the power creep is delusional. I'd challenge anyone to disable or zero-out all your champion point tree allocations. You'll notice a significant game play difference. Champion points was replaced veteran ranks to be an account reward system for long-term players. It's no longer the case and its impacting the power scale of the game: How many current and previous skill change proposals have been instigated due to their over performance because of the champion point system? Ask yourself that question. The developers need a KISS solution to changing how champion points are used. Such, removing the different trees and create a node list based on the character's attributes e.g. resource pools, recoveries, spell/physical resist, spell/weapon damage, spell/weapon damage critical chance and damage nodes, spell/physical penetration, break-free/dodge/block/sprint/stealth cost nodes, and healing done. Simple and remove all +% modifiers. Yeah, added more than the question asked; but said it and moving on.

Lastly, players have no actual method other than the PTS update/patch notes to recognize whether or not their ideas are considered. It's a subjective response to type question.

There's my feedback to this survey. Extract whatever to satisfy your metrics.

"Zeroing out" CP seems to me to be entirely missing the point. We didn't start with zero CP. Three and a half years ago, in Dark Brotherhood, we started with an initial CP cap of 501 (it was uncapped previously).

The question of CP and "power creep" is a question of the 309 additional CP added to the cap in the meantime. And of course the fact that we *used to* have massive built-in cost reduction via CP must be considered as well.

The Elder Scrolls Online

Do you believe your feedback is registered FULLY?

Do you believe your feedback is registered FULLY? 121 votes