I wonder if after all of this feedback the developers will do more than an acknowledgment or just string us along. I do wonder who is the one who fumbled the bag this badly, though. Was it the corporate section of the company or was it the developers?

We will see soon if they listened(or not), but thank you Vylaera for putting pretty much the consensus of thoughts into an eloquently worded post. You've done a great thing here.

ThirdEye_PULSE wrote: »

baltic1284 wrote: »

p4l4mu7 wrote: »

13k hours over 7 years and I will cancel my esoplus after all these years, not only because they are constantly adding these terrible major changes but also they have been really disrespectful and unprofessional towards playerbase.

Same why I stopped my ESO plus got tired of how i was being treated by Zenimax and the community overall. When Zenimax actually starts caring about the community overall and those that give this community over all a very bad reputation for bulling and such on the various subjects then I might start giving Zenimax money again till then my wallet is closed.

Yup. If the people concerned about patch notes post anywhere but main forums we are called whiners. Those are the same people we are trying to help by being vocal here. ZOS say they have a thankless job. We dont even get paid for the harassment, and ZOS also expects us to spend hours parsing to give them data otherwise our input isnt valued. Who really gets the short end of the stick here? We do it for the love of the game, and get crapped on by the same people were trying to help... over and over.

I actually feel really annoyed that this isn't said more.

@ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_GinaBruno I know this may seem like a moot point to make but could we get some communication from the team on the antagonistic acknowledgments from the developers? Like, it does seem relatively bad that forum moderators are able to tell us to not bait, be disrespectful, or such but then Rich (when he downplayed everyone in a tweet calling it knee jerk reactions) or Gilliam (saying that they don't consider anecdotal feedback, and where the tone of that specific post was passive aggressive in its own right) does the exact same thing with no consequences and indirectly causing a good chunk of the player base to devalue solid criticisms with "whining children". It inherently influences childish behavior on both the forums and off the forums(where the forums are acknowledged outside of said forum). In my professional opinion this is unprofessional behavior from people we are supposed to hand our trust to. Who we expect to create a non-toxic environment inherently doing just the opposite of creating a non toxic environment.

Could we get some sort of apology from the developers for being this way? It would help calm the relative frustration for many forum goers and give us a reason to treat them the same way. (I'm not saying that anyone should be disrespectful here, I just am asking why the developers aren't given the same consequences as their client base. Treat people the way you want to be treated, as they say.)

Who cares if you have an unpopular opinion? No one at Zenimax wakes up in the morning and says I'm gonna get player X. It isn't personal. If they are like any other dev shop they have a team of people that come up with these ideas.

The light attack weaving skews the dps outside the scope of the abilities. You can't balance it and it was never intended, if it was there would be a tutorial in the help section on how to do it. I really don't care one way or the other but from a progress perspective eliminating the light attack weaving opens up adjustments to all of the sets, skills, abilities, etc. Now for dps across all classes you have to do this one thing. /golfclap you can weave. The player churn is real and it sucks trying to get the next body up to speed on it. I remember this guild trying to teach a dude week 1 of his purchase on how to weave. He just said no thanks and quit the game. People just want to get an MMO Elder Scrolls experience. This team has done a great job with it. Did I want open world PvP? Yes. Did I want that bounty system, Yes. Did I want spell crafting? YES. But did I get any of those things? No, and I think they just fired the guys that wanted to put it in the game.

If you want an excuse to leave so be it. This is my 3rd or 5th time back. I still enjoy it, especially the PvP even though I've lost a few steps.

No one is out to get you. No one is working overtime to screw you over. They are trying to make it better. They have to try different things to see if they work because you players figure out the edge case advantages to break their game.

You're victims of your own success. You got gud and they can't make the game any harder.

I have to say I agree with the OP as well. Especially having to reallocate CP with some updates. That totally unmotivates me to even want to play. I mean, who wants to spend a hour+ (each char.) at times after a update getting several characters playable again?

Here is a idea ZoS. Don't reset our CP, just give us a free reallocation we can use anytime on our characters. That way we can just move a few points here and there as needed.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

[snip]

I appreciate the reply Kevin.

I think the "whiney children" comment was about some other posters who will whine that you are just complaining when you ask for some change to the game, no matter how well thought out the post/desire.

See a recent thread I made to compile how rewards were earned for recent events (someone provided a link, so the thread was not as useful, though now it can be found in a search). The first couple of replies complained that I was just whining about PvP deaths in the recent event, when that was not the case at all.

Ask for simplified survey collection, and many will say things like "it is meant to take time' or it is "easy to workaround". I find neither to be valid reasons, but I can accept disagreements, but many do push into the "quit whining" area.

Some of us would just like much better feedback and an interaction loop. Yes, the dev team will not make every change I would like, but making many of them (including better cross platform movement support) would greatly help with satisfaction.

I am not thrilled with the proposed combat changes, but it is unlikely to heavily impact me since I don't play much content that needs what is getting pushed down. ZOS would make me a much happier player if it did some of the Quality of Life changes I want, but I don't feel I have gotten any feedback on any suggestions I (or many others) have made in those areas. See my attempt to get such feedback in another QoL thread recently.

Add to that the point that we cannot discuss any moderation decisions (I got a couple of suspensions in the past that I never could even clarify exactly what part was wrong) and it gets frustrating.

I am not a special snowflake, so I am sure others have similar, if not identical, experiences.

I do at least appreciate your attempts to listen more, even though it is a tough road!

@Vylaera
OP, I typically see a wall of text and after reading a paragraph or two I skip the rest (perhaps my attention span is too short), but when I started reading yours I continued till it was done. I have been a long time Elder scrolls fan, I started in 2002 with Morrowind, then Oblivion and then everyone's favorite Skyrim. I was in the ESO Beta (when Beta testing actually meant something). I have taken a few breaks from ESO occasionally but always came back. You eloquently stated what I have been feeling for awhile and feel you summed it up perfectly:

Between sledgehammer changes, damage reductions without adjusting content, constant developer micromanagement of things that don't need to be micromanaged, arbitrary changes, and arbitrary design philosophies. It's a perfect storm all at once with U35 and I, and a lot of other people, are just exhausted with it.

Well done.

Dr_Con wrote: »

PVP with CP is obnoxious. There are standard non-cp modes to satisfy play styles, but people want to cheese as much as they don't want to be cheeesed. I don't agree with all the [Snip] in this post saying they're quitting ESO because of nerfs, because they have to spend gold every 3 months because they want to follow the meta, because they won't be able to do 120k dps and now only do 60k dps for trials, etc.

Those are not what you call them. Unless you call anyone not liking something that, in case you should note the quote from the Princess Bride: "I don't think that word means what you think it means!"

[Edited quote]

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Most of the time, these situations can be cleared up though general questions rather than acting on the assumption of ill intent.

@ZOS_Kevin The thing is, looking at U35 I can assume one of the two things: it is either ill intent or blatant incompetence. Even if we disregard ESO-specific moments, current situation is a disaster from management point of view: scope is too large, allocated resources are struggling (encounter team is blocked by combat team), there is not enough time to test and fix. Testing and fixing may require much more time when initial idea goes wrong, therefore you should allocate 6 months, not one and a half. Why 6 months? The product is huge, changing its core features will cause side effects, and these side effects should be accounted. Yes, you can try to rush it in 3 months, but not in one and a half, even people not from IT industry see it. Can you produce minimum viable product in 1,5 months? Of course, but ESO is a finished product, and not everyone is going to tolerate such regression. Customers want to see advertised features, not "hang on, we'll fix it eventually" cardboard sign.

I aprecciate your honest communication both as a customer and as IT specialist. Big bosses understand only business metrics, and I hope that you'll manage to explain them current risks.

[Snip]


please show me how to go from 10k to 120 k dps alone with weaving thanks
yes i now how to weave and cancel animation

i only want to now how to get 120 k dps

[Removed quote]

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

@Faltasë Thanks for your feedback here. We felt it was important to address the commentary around "anecdotal feedback" quote as this was specifically mentioned in official communication.

Faltasë wrote: »

I know this may seem like a moot point to make but could we get some communication from the team on the antagonistic acknowledgments from the developers? Like, it does seem relatively bad that forum moderators are able to tell us to not bait, be disrespectful... Gilliam (saying that they don't consider anecdotal feedback, and where the tone of that specific post was passive aggressive in its own right)

(Abbreviated to highlight core comment being referenced)

The comment was not meant to be antagonistic. It was meant to clarify what feedback would be helpful for the dev team and nothing more. So for example, feedback with player data from PTS or clearly explaining situations in which combat changes would positively or negatively impact play experience are what the team was looking for.

Other feedback like (and this is just a mock example), "These changes are garbage and do you even play the game?", are not what the dev team is looking for when asking for feedback. While that kind of feedback expresses player sentiment, it does not help the team in providing feedback they can work off of to address concerns. So the note on anecdotal feedback was more so to address comments like that. Not to antagonize anyone. However, given the feedback around the rhetoric, we will keep that in mind as a team going forward in communication.

Lastly, we want to touch on this line here:

Faltasë wrote: »

Like, it does seem relatively bad that forum moderators are able to tell us to not bait, be disrespectful...does the exact same thing with no consequences and indirectly causing a good chunk of the player base to devalue solid criticisms with "whining children".

(Abbreviated to complete core sentence without the quotes referenced.)

As Forum Manager, I feel obligated to answer this one specifically for moderation purposes. First, I want to make it clear that we do not perceive you as "whiny children".

Second, I understand the comment was perceived as being antagonistic, however trying to match the perceived antagonizing commentary with additional antagonizing commentary does not help general communication. I understand the community concern around the U35 combat changes but we will not tolerate baiting or bashing, especially to the dev team, as a player response to deal a consequence. Certainly not on the forum.

So where does this leave us? I encourage you to question or ask for clarification when you see something as antagonistic, much like @Faltasë has. This was a respectful way to question and ask for motivation around word usage and general commentary. So thank you for asking the question. Most of the time, these situations can be cleared up though general questions rather than acting on the assumption of ill intent. There are ways to be critical of choices without berating members of the team. That will also aid in avoiding getting actioned on the forum. The whole point is to create an open place where positive and negative sentiment can be shared and communication can be had. As noted earlier, we will be more vigilant with our rhetoric as well to help this point.

To close, sorry for the long answer, but hopefully this helps to provide some context regarding the "anecdotal feedback" quote. Thanks all for the continued feedback.

Appreciate the feedback, Kevin. Seeing actual candor is a pleasant surprise. My thoughts are as follows.

Part 1: Regarding your mock-up statement.
First - the comment you mocked up is still important feedback, and very likely how many people feel right now. What do you expect from players when we keep saying one thing and you guys keep doing the opposite? With this update it's not about numbers. It's about an overwhelmingly unwanted change being forced through a 5 week PTS cycle. I appreciate that Gilliam needs data to make better decisions, but the whole effort seems to be contrary to what the community is saying en masse - we don't want it.

Second - asking if a developer plays their game is an important question, too. Especially if their approach is based on data rather than how a change feels. If a developer comes out the gate with a baffling change, how are we not supposed to feel like there's a disconnect? How can we respectfully say someone (or their idea) is out of touch, especially when it needs to be said? Sometimes people get lost in their own ideas and they need to be shown that.

Third - Sweeping changes need more time so we can better test it against whatever the stated goal is - if it's stated at all. And if you guys can't articulate what your goals actually are beyond something vague like "increase accessibility", how are we supposed to feel like it's anything but your mock-up comment? You guys are making massive changes, we want to see them played by you before it impacts the game we all love. If it's so great, and absolutely must launch, then show us. Play test it. Do a vet trial with your changes in front of the community. We deserve that at the very least.

Part 2: ZOS's Rhetoric and Reception
I'm happy you guys are considering how your comments land. I just hope it goes beyond Gilliam, because I feel like it's deeper. While Gilliam's quote was a little off-mark, I don't think it's as bad as the antagonism I've seen from Rich. This whole PTS cycle started on a sour note - the tweet from Rich - sardonically asking us for trust only for us to be right and you guys having to backtrack on half the changes proposed. That tweet cemented that he views us as "whiny children". I know his directives impact how the forum is managed because he's said as much on his streams. So while you say we're not seen that way, the evidence is quite the opposite. To date, ZOS has done nothing that directly addressed the fallout from that tweet. You've stated yourself that responding in kind to antagonism doesn't help the conversation - so why is that coming from Rich at the start of this PTS? That did nothing but prime us to be upset by something like what Gilliam said.

I get that ZOS devs don't want to feel disrespected but ZOS can't lead with ambiguous announcements, sardonic tweets, "we see your feedback but we're moving ahead anyways", couple that with radio silence on major threads, and then edit our words and not expect people to not be absolutely fuming mad. You guys are creating that cycle. Looking for acknowledgement that you and ZOS CMs see this cycle.

ZOS needs to be more responsive and reflective in general. Case in point, this thread here. Players are asking Gina to follow up on a thread she's already commented on, and we're not getting any clarification on what seems to be a major gap. So even when we do follow your advice, the result is the same - crickets. Her as a community manager especially, should anticipate that a one-liner is going to generate more questions than answers. It's hard to not infer ill-intent or negligence. We'd all love to give ZOS the benefit of the doubt, but we can't anymore.

Part 3: Closing thoughts:
Can you elaborate on what ZOS is doing to make these forums more welcoming and meaningful for the people here? Why would I come here vs Reddit? I think the general expectation is that there's a chance for development interaction, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Hoping you can clear that up.

I hope you take the time to answer the hard questions I've asked here Kevin. I do appreciate some of the changes made in response to some PTS feedback. I just wish there were more dialogue other than damage control here.

Can I respectfully ask that my thread remain on topic? I think Kevin has addressed well enough the perhaps wrong use of what many people perceived as antagonistic dialogue in dev responses and posts.

Thanks, guys.

Jaraal wrote: »

Vylaera wrote: »

Can I respectfully ask that my thread remain on topic? I think Kevin has addressed well enough the perhaps wrong use of what many people perceived as antagonistic dialogue in dev responses and posts.

Thanks, guys.

Certainly, if you feel the “state of the game” is not related to management or player/developer relationships.

No I don't think that the unfortunate state of the game which I detailed pretty comprehensively in my post has much to do with a dev using language that players perceived as hostile. Otherwise I would have mentioned it.

baltic1284 wrote: »

Vylaera wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

Vylaera wrote: »

Can I respectfully ask that my thread remain on topic? I think Kevin has addressed well enough the perhaps wrong use of what many people perceived as antagonistic dialogue in dev responses and posts.

Thanks, guys.

Certainly, if you feel the “state of the game” is not related to management or player/developer relationships.

No I don't think that the unfortunate state of the game which I detailed pretty comprehensively in my post has much to do with a dev using language that players perceived as hostile. Otherwise I would have mentioned it.

In your post no you have a point there but so does those that post as the DEV team have used hostile wording against the community itself and so has Moderators on the forums no, I'm not trying to break rules, but it has happened a lot in the past. Does your post state that directly or indirectly no but it has happened, and most players are starting to get tired of it.
It is very sad when players have to put in there post I'm Not Trying to break the rules, but this is how i feel to generally feel safe on the Forums from what has happened. The company in General does have a very bad reputation of customer company relations, in that area in general does need to be addressed and fixed, moderation still needs work in fact a lot of work, from what i have seen on the forums over the years from when I was selected for testing, the moderation has gotten to the point of either speak good of the company you be picked on and bullied, ie the twitch issue they had as an example.
Relations all around has to be looked at and seriously changed to be more polite to those you are asking A to play the product and B give money to you. your post may have been why your frustrated with the company but so are the players posting in here on why they are and when a Admin steps in to explain and give excuses to defend those that have caused the problem that is also an issue that needs to be addressed. The community shouldn't have to be posting in fear of the company or of what those that have power will abuse and how they will, communication needs to be on the forums and only on the forums not on Reddit or any other platform as not all have access or use those platforms.

Gonna be totally honest when I say I did not read your whole post. Very hard to read, no offense. Here's a great resource for you.

But the gist of your post appears, to me, to say that people are frustrated with the nature of dev communication or the lack thereof. And that's totally fine. You can have a problem with that. My post isn't about this issue, which was my earlier point. There are other active posts dedicated specifically to this issue. Those posts would be a great place to submit your valued player feedback and allow my post to stay on topic.