Other: Sometimes yes

Other: when it fits with their existing plans, when they think a PR disaster might be in the offing, or when being handed a new way to monetise the game by a player.

They listen yes. The real question is more, did they care or not ? And then, it depends on multiple factor.

If we ask something that concern the actual year content or major QOL issues or money grabbing, and that's not too crazy or too hard to do, MAYBE they'll do something.

But once it concern previous years, the chances drop drastically. Like when they added an active icon to the Harrowstorms, I still can't believe that they "forget" to add one for dolmens and geysers at the same time ...

Or those stupid rice bags in South Elsweyr, I'm pretty sure that this kind of things take 10 minutes to change but no, they're like "lol it's 2 years old ! Meh don't care !"

Yes, ZOS listens to their playerbase.

Just don't confuse listening with doing exactly what the playerbase wants.

Sort of but they listen to the Shareholders the most. It's a business so they need a new influx of players constantly since it's FTP. They should have stayed with the Subscription based model.

ZOS listens to the PVP playerbase more than anything else. Constant nerfs and "balancing" is done mostly for the 1% of the playerbase. I know, I will get attacked by the PVP crowd over these statements but look at all of the changes in the game for the past 7 years and see what was done for PVP VS what was done for PVE. Completely one sided.

The PVE players are leaving in droves as well as the PVP players. The game can not be "balanced" for PVP. It simply is not possible. You cannot balance two very different aspects of the game on the same server. ZOS "adjusts" the game "balance" with nuclear hand grenades over and over. The old players have had enough and are leaving or have canceled their subscriptions and only do the most basic in the game like logging in and out waiting and hoping for the day ZOS stops all this nonsense balancing.

The PVP crowd constantly complains about everything not being balanced. It goes in cycles from one class to another until those classes are destroyed with nerfs. Then they move on to another class and figure out how to make those classes strong and the cycle continues. More complaints and eventually those classes are gutted.

Remember Wrobel? LOL. I do. Maybe he had it right.

Where is the option "Yes, if you main magsorc" or " No, if you play DK"?

*Continues waiting patiently in Bosmer*

I feel like this is a little too much a set of extremes. I'm not one to even judge, honestly. I don't know these people well enough to say they ALWAYS listen or NEVER listen, and I think most players, even the oldest ones, also don't really know... they're just going to comment based on their opinions being responded to or not. In some cases people (and we know how people can be) will have suggested something once a long time ago, and if it never happened, will have a horrible opinion of the dev from then on, or vice versa. Others will say they don't because 'that's what everyone says, so it must be true', despite not having any way to have spoken to 'everyone'.

I've seen this in other games as well; people who play the game anywhere from consistently to obsessively, but HATE it with all their being and never have anything good to say about it. ...Why? Why linger in a game you hate, talking crap about it? Just close your account, delete your characters, go play one of a million other games you could enjoy so much more, and enjoy yourself. And if you like things about the game, why not focus at least a little on those, instead of whatever hangup you have unless its majorly game breaking or puts you in the first category... which brings me back to my question of why?

I do NOT think this is a perfect game, but it IS a very good one. I enjoy playing it, and it's engaging and interesting. If we look at dev and producer behavior in the last ten years, I have NEVER seen a company that complete adheres purely to the demands of their playerbase, so asking 'always' or 'never' is pretty unfair. And if you speak to anyone in the game about 'why is it so hard to get this?' or 'why does so much involve the cash shop?' the usual, and instant response is a dismissive 'Well, do you think they can keep this going without money?!' (At least it is for me.) If everyone knows this, then how and why are so many people complaining about the monetization of the game? I mean do we accept it as the norm, or do we resist it enough to affect a change?

I'm rambling a bit, but basically I think this kind of question needs a much broader range to be answered in any fairness to either the devs or their producers. All or nothing seems way too narrow of a gauge.

Yes. Whether they agree with what the players say is another matter entirely. And even if they do agree, the problem might be a lot harder to fix than the players imagine,

If the options were simply yes and no, I could easily vote yes, but they do not (and can not) listen "all the time" as their audience are often asking for different, contradictory things.

They most definitely listen to a lot of feedback, especially when presented with respect, but there is no way they can please everyone all the time. That would be impossible.

People are still confusing listening with getting the answer you want. Players wanted housing we got housing. Players wanted flying mounts we didn't get flying mounts. In both cases ZoS heard the player base requests. The answers were different.

Yeah of course they do.

Remember when everyone was asking for companions.
Like the forums was completely flooded with request for companions.
Companions, companions, companions, everyone was screaming for companions.

And ZoS delivered………………….yay.