Wolf_Watching wrote: »

For Player Transparency Only to Devs (at least PTS-goers). Please do not ‘agree, insight, or awesome’ the post, please. Feel free to support your opinions in the comments. Keep it respectful. The poll is anonymous. Please do not assume based off posts that a person(s) opinions align to one side or another.

Not really. This has contributed to my stepping back from PTS.

I was thinking of updating for PTS Week 3, but am on the fence after reading the patch notes. On the one hand, it is only a few hundred MB, but the time and effort to give feedback, and ultimately be ignored, doesn't make it feel worth my time. Best I could do is just subjectively say whether it is better or worse than PTS Week. That might not feel like a total waste of my time.

this is a poll

So this is going to be counter to how most folks feel, but yes, I do think my feedback is valued as a consumer. With some major caveats.

Caveats:
1. I am but one player. The ESO Devs design, write, and balance their vision for many, many players.
2. I have but one wallet. The Marketing and Accounting Department over at ZOS would like to convince many, many wallets to fork over their cash.
3. ZOS will not actually miss me if I leave so long as there are bright-eyed and shiny new players to replace me (and my wallet).

So my feedback is ultimately that of one eminently replaceable consumer. With those strict limits in mind, yes, I do think that my feedback on the forums and on their surveys is valued for what it is.

I'm fairly active on the forums, and so I've had the opportunity to watch the Devs take feedback from the forums and implement it in game on a number of occasions. It usually takes a lot longer than you'd think, see Alliance War tokens for an example. Or Tales of Tribute for that matter.

I've also see that the Devs have their own ideas about how ESO should grow, and watched them go their own way regardless of advice from the class representatives they picked. So there's a lot of feedback that just isn't going to be listened to (see Auction Houses or criticism of Account Wide Achievements) because it's simply counter to the Devs' vision.

This update is a great example of the Devs pursuing their own vision. They had some areas they were willing to compromise on with ground-based DOTs and HOTs. They adjusted those according to feedback. But it also seems clear they don't intend to compromise in areas like light and heavy attacks. And so you can give them all the feedback you want, but they're the Devs and if they don't want to change that part of the update, it's not getting changed.