Cuz PvP is where diversity and skillful play can be seen. PvE has a mastery of it's own but at the end of the day being good at PvE means being a human Macro

Jeremy wrote: »

Kadoin wrote: »

Jeremy wrote: »

mairwen85 wrote: »

Pvp and pve are completely different in many ways, each with their own set of disciplines and concerns, yet because of the overlap of zos implementation between pvp and pve, everything should be balanced for pvp first. It would get rid of a lot of the complaints if all testing for new items, sets, skills, etc was done on the pvp battlefield prior to introduction to pve. If its balanced for pvp, it will just work as designed for pve. I don't understand why they choose to do it this way where so much balancing and adjustment has to be done retrospectively. So much wasted time and effort and never a working solution for either game mode.

I would wait hours for a battleground on the PTS and Cyrodil was almost always empty. So that might have something to do with their lack of testing in PvP.

It might would help if they offered players in-game rewards to test PvP out on the PTS, something to encourage more people to do it. That or they should just hire more people so they can do the testing themselves.

Well, you don't exactly get anything for reporting a bug, not even thanks most of the time, and they ignore a majority of input, so what do you expect people to eventually do when they start to believe they aren't being heard and don't matter?

They will simply stop testing.

Bandwidth and time are both not free for the end-user. What then, do players really gain from testing on the PTS when the game still goes to live with the same exact bugs they have reported on PTS, or abysmal balance and performance?

I think that's definitely part of the problem. It's why I suggested in that post they should reward players for testing things out on the PTS - especially on the PvP end where it's obvious they could use some additional help.

[snip]

No amount of rewards, in-game or otherwise, will fix the fundamental problem with the PTS: that most of the player feedback is summarily ignored by the devs.
In fact, the great majority of the time, the reported issues aren't even acknowledged.

I will not bother wasting my time testing new updates on the PTS, when I know fully well that any feedback I can provide will end up in /dev/null.

As far as I'm concerned, PTS is only useful for testing builds without having to buy/farm the required sets on Live - especially testing to figure out if a build works as expected, or to check if X will proc Y, that kind of stuff.

[Edited to remove Baiting]

Are we playing the same game?