The excuses for no pvp content are getting old

Lumsdenml · April 2023

FangOfTheTwoMoons wrote: »

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Urvoth wrote: »

3) Battlepass with reward track for skins, titles, etc.

Oh... oh please no... no no no no no.....

If handled correctly it wouldn't be bad. FF14 has something similar and its fine.

I'm not familiar with FF14's version, but I was thinking Fortnite and that is not what I want in my ESO PVP...

VaranisArano · April 2023

Serpari wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Serpari wrote: »

Backing up what licenturion said above, skill-based matchmaking in Cyrodiil would alleviate the slow but sure bleed of players it suffers from. Never been a fan of PVP, but I'd be willing to give Cyrodiil a try because there's a lot of story there I want to complete, as Oblivion was my favorite TES growing up. But I don't because I know I'd get destroyed as soon as I step into Bruma, and I doubt anyone's going to care if I go, "Oh, just here for quests and Skyshards."

There's no real way to do skill-based matchmaking in Cyrodiil. It's a vast, vast zone, and matchmaking would really go against the sprawling, multi-front Alliance war brawl that it's designed for.

I'll offer some suggestions because I used to be terrified of Cyrodiil:

You can go by yourself. A stealthy build or a tank build is probably the easiest for new players, IMO. You probably will die. Everyone dies in PVP, especially the PVPers. All you have to do is be willing to accept that it will take more tries to achieve your goals than it would in PVE, rez up and try again. Or try another day. Cyrodiil is better as a marathon than a sprint.

You can go as a group. When you're new to PVP, I think its a lot more fun and easier to feel effective when you're in a group. It'll probably be easier to get together a group of friends or guildmates during the Whitestrake's Mayhem events. One of my social guilds used to run IC groups during those events. It might be worth asking around if there are other fellow PVE players who're interested in exploring, questing, fighting, and probably dying in Cyrodiil together.

What would actually cure Cyrodiil from its slow bleed would be performance fixes that support the sprawling, multi-front Alliance War brawl its designed for.

Realized in my above quote I made it seem like I haven't been to Cyrodiil. I have, actually. And I've already done all these things. I don't mind dying, tbqh. It's rezzing so far from where I was at, losing progress, that frustrates me the most. Honestly, given the answers and attitudes here, I don't think Cyrodiil in its current state is for me. It's fine. There's other content. I do hope the devs listen to PVPs sooner rather than later, though. Four years is a long time.

That's fair. Rezzing up, losing progress, riding back and trying again is all part of Cyrodiil by design, i.e. if I die at Alessia front door, I have to ride back from Sej Outpost to rejoin the fight, which gives the defenders at Alessia time to regroup and push out.

So if you don't care for that, I can see where it's an uphill struggle in Cyrodiil.

licenturion · April 2023

VaranisArano wrote: »

That's fair. Rezzing up, losing progress, riding back and trying again is all part of Cyrodiil by design, i.e. if I die at Alessia front door, I have to ride back from Sej Outpost to rejoin the fight, which gives the defenders at Alessia time to regroup and push out.

So if you don't care for that, I can see where it's an uphill struggle in Cyrodiil.

I am already annoyed of the 15 seconds waiting in battlegrounds. 😆

I did however all the delves in Cyrodill and skyshards and never got bothered actually. I even capped two points on the way.

Only zone haven’t completed is IC. In fact I have zero percent there.

CameraBeardThePirate · April 2023

licenturion wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

That's fair. Rezzing up, losing progress, riding back and trying again is all part of Cyrodiil by design, i.e. if I die at Alessia front door, I have to ride back from Sej Outpost to rejoin the fight, which gives the defenders at Alessia time to regroup and push out.

So if you don't care for that, I can see where it's an uphill struggle in Cyrodiil.

I am already annoyed of the 15 seconds waiting in battlegrounds. 😆

I did however all the delves in Cyrodill and skyshards and never got bothered actually. I even capped two points on the way.

Only zone haven’t completed is IC. In fact I have zero percent there.

If you're on PC I highly recommend the AutoRelease addon for BGs. Makes it so that you never miss a respawn in BGs - you'll often pop up almost immediately after dying.

Photosniper89 · April 2023

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Olen_Mikko wrote: »

No big secret, but pvp is only a liability to Zos, they can't monetize it so why bother.

Zos would only be relieved if Cyro would be completely empty.

I disagree.... I know more than a few PVPers will roll a new character, don't want to take the time to lvl skills and will buy skill lines through the crown store to get to their end build faster.

Under appreciated post.

I, personally, have spent over $1,000 on this game and I'm almost 100% PvP. I'm not alone in this. The amount of time savers I spent money on... lol

SaffronCitrusflower · April 2023

Photosniper89 wrote: »

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Olen_Mikko wrote: »

No big secret, but pvp is only a liability to Zos, they can't monetize it so why bother.

Zos would only be relieved if Cyro would be completely empty.

I disagree.... I know more than a few PVPers will roll a new character, don't want to take the time to lvl skills and will buy skill lines through the crown store to get to their end build faster.

Under appreciated post.

I, personally, have spent over $1,000 on this game and I'm almost 100% PvP. I'm not alone in this. The amount of time savers I spent money on... lol

I think per capita PvP players spend significantly more on the game than any other subset of players. That's why it's mystifying to me how dismissive ZOS is when it comes to dealing with the PvP community. I've spent nearly 4x what you've spent on ESO over the years, mostly from 8 years of subbing....which I'm not willing to pay anymore after U35 for a number of reasons.

Jammy420 · April 2023

Elsonso wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Now however we have new servers, people are coming back to pvp, and development and support for pvp will most likely take off again, there would be no other reason to replace the server hardware.

The stated reason to replace the server hardware is that it is old and prone to failure. The hardware is 10 years old and may not even be supported by the people who made it. Poor performing code will run better on newer hardware, but that is just a brute force solution. The real fix is to make the software not poor performing.

Ah yes, because that totally worked when we had the performance patch which was supposed to do just that, and performance got significantly worse. It has always been bad server hardware.

Elsonso · April 2023

Jammy420 wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Now however we have new servers, people are coming back to pvp, and development and support for pvp will most likely take off again, there would be no other reason to replace the server hardware.

The stated reason to replace the server hardware is that it is old and prone to failure. The hardware is 10 years old and may not even be supported by the people who made it. Poor performing code will run better on newer hardware, but that is just a brute force solution. The real fix is to make the software not poor performing.

Ah yes, because that totally worked when we had the performance patch which was supposed to do just that, and performance got significantly worse. It has always been bad server hardware.

Yet, we are starting to hear how the initial performance boosts from the new hardware did not hold. When they replaced the hardware, all the data got put down conveniently, and as the server runs, entropy creeps in and performance drops. Server hardware is not the end-all of performance problems at the server level. Hardware can only take you so far, and in this case, apparently not far enough. The server software has to be written efficiently, as well.

What ZOS was doing about performance during the "year of performance" is a mystery to me. They improved some performance, but not the big ticket item that people wanted improved. They did things, investigated things, and then went off to think over the data for a year. When they returned from their introspection, they announced a path that would take years more to complete. I await the results of that work.

Holycannoli · April 2023

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

What a kind of new pvp content you want to see? New classes and new sets it is a new pvp content

New maps, new zones, new battlegrounds, new objectives, etc.

EmEm_Oh · April 2023

I've brought this up on several different posts:

1) New Siege Weapons (Lancers were great, add a Coldfire Lancer, Coldfire Oils, etc.)

2) Allow the D-Ring in Keeps to be sieged. Each pillar siegeable.

3) Increase the side towers of the keep by one level. Tower humpers will approve.

4) Remove the Saint Guardians or whatever they are. They make no sense and look stupid being put all over the place. NPCs agree with me on this one.

5) For the Faction Tri-Keeps, make them look different than the others (see #3). Increase the height of the inner keep area by one more level.

6) Allow broken bridges to finally be accessible.

7) Add another large bridge, and could be a clone of the Alessia bridge.

8) Have a random massive boss patrolling Cyro. This will encourage groups to form to kill it. Have special rewards that drop from it exclusively--such as a "better" chance to drop a Coldfire Lancer.

9) Resource towers, make them more robust (larger), and add another level.

SeaGtGruff · April 2023

EmEm_Oh wrote: »

4) Remove the Saint Guardians or whatever they are. They make no sense and look stupid being put all over the place. NPCs agree with me on this one.

Do you mean the Golden Saints who hang out at various spots around Cyrodiil? Aren't those the places where Volendrung can spawn? Isn't Cyrodiil being seiged by Molag Bal as well as by the three alliances? Why not ask for all of the dolmens to be removed as well? That is to say-- No. Just, no. The Daedra (Golden Saints, Flame Atronachs, Dremora Whatevers) can stay.

Jaraal · April 2023

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

EmEm_Oh wrote: »

4) Remove the Saint Guardians or whatever they are. They make no sense and look stupid being put all over the place. NPCs agree with me on this one.

Do you mean the Golden Saints who hang out at various spots around Cyrodiil? Aren't those the places where Volendrung can spawn? Isn't Cyrodiil being seiged by Molag Bal as well as by the three alliances? Why not ask for all of the dolmens to be removed as well? That is to say-- No. Just, no. The Daedra (Golden Saints, Flame Atronachs, Dremora Whatevers) can stay.

ZOS already killed all the deer, no need to remove even more flavor from the already relatively desolate zone.

(Maybe they can remove all the unwanted and out of place elk in the new "Telvanni Peninsula" zone and transplant them to the more climate friendly and thematically appropriate Cyrodiil as reparations! That would be nice. They look a lot more natural and cohesive alongside bears and wolves than they do with nix-oxen, guars, and floating jellyfish.)

Emmagoldman · April 2023

Somber97866 wrote: »

They just made you your own special pvp class in the arcanist and your gonna grip about no pvp content? Sheesh what do you pvp'ers want? Really !

They didnt just make the new class for pvpers and are we really calling a new class pvp content. We are setting the bar really really low as far as what is content and what is being asked for.

Just curious, as there have been 100s of posts over years on specifics to what people are asking for. Are you legitimately confused?

Lumsdenml · April 2023

Jammy420 wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Now however we have new servers, people are coming back to pvp, and development and support for pvp will most likely take off again, there would be no other reason to replace the server hardware.

The stated reason to replace the server hardware is that it is old and prone to failure. The hardware is 10 years old and may not even be supported by the people who made it. Poor performing code will run better on newer hardware, but that is just a brute force solution. The real fix is to make the software not poor performing.

Ah yes, because that totally worked when we had the performance patch which was supposed to do just that, and performance got significantly worse. It has always been bad server hardware.

I don't think that is the case. If that were true, we would not have seen a degrading of performance since the servers were replaced. We saw a huge performance increase when those new servers went live, but it has degraded since then. You can't blame that on hardware... that's a software issue.

Caribou77 · April 2023

For the past year or so, each update has introduced new, significant bugs that have made pvp performance worse (block bug; dead bumper skills, CC broken).

So, not trying to be negative, just realistic: I don’t see stable, non-laggy gameplay ever coming. If it were possible, it would have happened by now.

OtarTheMad · April 2023

I feel like ZOS does care about PvP regardless of what some say. I mean to be perfectly honest why the heck would they want to continue to get crapped on by PvPers on here, Twitter, livestreams etc? I doubt it’s a fetish. If I were them I would want to fix PvP for the simple fact that it would shut us the f up. LoL.

Isn’t the stuff they are updating about 10 years old? Especially with all the code in the game I am glad they are taking some time. They could update us more sure but I don’t want to pressure them into finishing, like take your time and get it friggin right.

I also like that they are cautious about new content. Rich said it on his stream once, before he stopped doing that, basically he said something like “we did add new content, Volendrung and siegeable milegates and bridges. Look at how that went. It just added issues.”

I don’t think Cyro will ever be lag free. Honestly look at the map, it is one GIANT open area. Ever play Open Cities mod for Skyrim? Taxing on the PC, well it’s not much better for Cyrodiil. It would probably be better if we had to load into some areas, like the keep areas that unlock the scrolls or something.

Some lag here and there okay… fine. As long as it doesn’t impact the fights too much I’m good.

mb10 · April 2023

They simply don’t know how to improve PVP from an innovative stand point and a technical one too.
It’s been years, it won’t change and it’s probably at the stage where it’s too late now too tbh.
Most PVPers have left

mb10 · April 2023

I always found it hilarious when PVEers got all happy at the idea of No PVP content. Unfortunately for them, other players don’t have simple mechanics you can learn like a dungeon boss.
Every fight is different and losing to another player probably hurts their ego.
However, PVP is the epitome of gaming combat. There’s nothing better than besting another person or group

Urvoth · April 2023

OtarTheMad wrote: »

I feel like ZOS does care about PvP regardless of what some say. I mean to be perfectly honest why the heck would they want to continue to get crapped on by PvPers on here, Twitter, livestreams etc? I doubt it’s a fetish. If I were them I would want to fix PvP for the simple fact that it would shut us the f up. LoL.

Isn’t the stuff they are updating about 10 years old? Especially with all the code in the game I am glad they are taking some time. They could update us more sure but I don’t want to pressure them into finishing, like take your time and get it friggin right.

I also like that they are cautious about new content. Rich said it on his stream once, before he stopped doing that, basically he said something like “we did add new content, Volendrung and siegeable milegates and bridges. Look at how that went. It just added issues.”

I don’t think Cyro will ever be lag free. Honestly look at the map, it is one GIANT open area. Ever play Open Cities mod for Skyrim? Taxing on the PC, well it’s not much better for Cyrodiil. It would probably be better if we had to load into some areas, like the keep areas that unlock the scrolls or something.

Some lag here and there okay… fine. As long as it doesn’t impact the fights too much I’m good.

The whole point of the post is that there’s so many options for pvp content they could add without affecting performance, though.

StaticWave · April 2023

The assumption that PvP makes no money is just ridiculous and disrespectful. Watch any PvP only game and you see just how much people care about cosmetics. After all, who wouldn't want their character to look good while fighting other people?

PvPers will spend the majority of their money on cosmetics such as new costumes, weapon outfits, and crown crate for those shiny new mounts. Not to mention ESO+, new chapters, and miscellaneous spending such as upgrades for new characters.

It's extremely disrespectful to completely ignore this portion of the player base just because they "don't bring in money". It's basically saying "thanks for spending thousands of dollars on us, but unfortunately we don't think your community brings in enough revenue so we won't focus on giving you new content"

Sylosi · April 2023

Lack of content isn't really the issue with the PvP in this game. For a themepark MMORPG it has actually got quite a lot of PvP content - Cyrodil, IC, duels, BGs with 5 modes and 8(?) maps.

The problem is none of that content is good, even by the low standards of MMORPG PvP. Which is the actual reason it is so unpopular, not performance issues as the self selecting sample still left playing the PvP in this game would have you believe.

For example it is not an accident that Cyrodil has always had less players and far less guilds / GvG than the only other "big" MMORPG with that type of PvP. The biggest problem is that large scale combat in this game is one dimensional and low skilled (even by the low standards of mass scale PvP).

As for BGs, they just aren't very good as small team instanced PvP. The main issue is they are 3 teams, which basically breaks the most fundamental rule of PvP design - risk vs reward, which means none of the BG game modes really work as PvP games. There is a reason sports, actual PvP games, etc are two teams.

But then even if BGs were 2 teams it is debatable if you could get a decent PvP mode given how extreme the cheese can get in this game with the utterly busted sets and how sustain is usually completely out of control in a combat system where limits of sustain are supposed to be the balance to having no cooldowns on skills. (which is why 1v1 is mind-numbingly dull in this game)

People literally laugh when I tell them about some of the stuff in this game, like how much passive damage you can proc off a single attack or how there is a 1 piece set that makes you permanently immune to soft CC and so on. The PvP is bad.

Tandor · April 2023

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Now however we have new servers, people are coming back to pvp, and development and support for pvp will most likely take off again, there would be no other reason to replace the server hardware.

The stated reason to replace the server hardware is that it is old and prone to failure. The hardware is 10 years old and may not even be supported by the people who made it. Poor performing code will run better on newer hardware, but that is just a brute force solution. The real fix is to make the software not poor performing.

Ah yes, because that totally worked when we had the performance patch which was supposed to do just that, and performance got significantly worse. It has always been bad server hardware.

I don't think that is the case. If that were true, we would not have seen a degrading of performance since the servers were replaced. We saw a huge performance increase when those new servers went live, but it has degraded since then. You can't blame that on hardware... that's a software issue.

I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that ZOS explained that the new hardware wasn't to fix performance issues but to future-proof the game so far as new content was concerned, and that the performance issues were being addressed by rewriting the server software code which is still ongoing through this year. Is that right?

React · April 2023

Tandor wrote: »

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Now however we have new servers, people are coming back to pvp, and development and support for pvp will most likely take off again, there would be no other reason to replace the server hardware.

The stated reason to replace the server hardware is that it is old and prone to failure. The hardware is 10 years old and may not even be supported by the people who made it. Poor performing code will run better on newer hardware, but that is just a brute force solution. The real fix is to make the software not poor performing.

Ah yes, because that totally worked when we had the performance patch which was supposed to do just that, and performance got significantly worse. It has always been bad server hardware.

I don't think that is the case. If that were true, we would not have seen a degrading of performance since the servers were replaced. We saw a huge performance increase when those new servers went live, but it has degraded since then. You can't blame that on hardware... that's a software issue.

I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that ZOS explained that the new hardware wasn't to fix performance issues but to future-proof the game so far as new content was concerned, and that the performance issues were being addressed by rewriting the server software code which is still ongoing through this year. Is that right?

The initial post we received about the code rewrite in January 2022 specified a completion date of "by the end of 2022". It wasn't until November, 10 months later, that they then told us "we'll be working to release it in parts beginning in Q2 2023". They also specified they'd be testing this "rewrite" on the PTS.

The PTS for the Q2 2023 is active now. There is no mention of the code rewrite anywhere in the notes, and two separate posts asking about it have been ignored.

I mean, is it still ongoing? How would we know? Is progress actually being made, or is this just a convenient scapegoat they're using to create the excuse of "we can't touch PVP with a 12 foot pole until this work is done, completion date is undetermined".

When Necrom launches, it will have been 4.5 years since PVP content was added to the game. I'm sorry, but I do not and never did consider volendrung or destructible milegates and bridges "PVP content". Volendrung only ever caused lag, and adds nothing new by way of PVP combat. Destructible milegates and bridges altered the surrounding terrain when they were added - removing tons of cool line of sights and unique terrain in favor of siegable structures that literally nobody cares about.

Photosniper89 · April 2023

React wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Now however we have new servers, people are coming back to pvp, and development and support for pvp will most likely take off again, there would be no other reason to replace the server hardware.

The stated reason to replace the server hardware is that it is old and prone to failure. The hardware is 10 years old and may not even be supported by the people who made it. Poor performing code will run better on newer hardware, but that is just a brute force solution. The real fix is to make the software not poor performing.

Ah yes, because that totally worked when we had the performance patch which was supposed to do just that, and performance got significantly worse. It has always been bad server hardware.

I don't think that is the case. If that were true, we would not have seen a degrading of performance since the servers were replaced. We saw a huge performance increase when those new servers went live, but it has degraded since then. You can't blame that on hardware... that's a software issue.

I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that ZOS explained that the new hardware wasn't to fix performance issues but to future-proof the game so far as new content was concerned, and that the performance issues were being addressed by rewriting the server software code which is still ongoing through this year. Is that right?

The initial post we received about the code rewrite in January 2022 specified a completion date of "by the end of 2022". It wasn't until November, 10 months later, that they then told us "we'll be working to release it in parts beginning in Q2 2023". They also specified they'd be testing this "rewrite" on the PTS.

The PTS for the Q2 2023 is active now. There is no mention of the code rewrite anywhere in the notes, and two separate posts asking about it have been ignored.

I mean, is it still ongoing? How would we know? Is progress actually being made, or is this just a convenient scapegoat they're using to create the excuse of "we can't touch PVP with a 12 foot pole until this work is done, completion date is undetermined".

When Necrom launches, it will have been 4.5 years since PVP content was added to the game. I'm sorry, but I do not and never did consider volendrung or destructible milegates and bridges "PVP content". Volendrung only ever caused lag, and adds nothing new by way of PVP combat. Destructible milegates and bridges altered the surrounding terrain when they were added - removing tons of cool line of sights and unique terrain in favor of siegable structures that literally nobody cares about.

This. So much this.

Where is any mention of the code rewrite, is that still even a thing?! @ZOS_GinaBruno you mentioned multiple times you were working on improving communication - can we get some communication on this?

Or even a "we hear you" somewhere in a PvP thread - anyone.

Aardappelboom · April 2023

Photosniper89 wrote: »

React wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

Lumsdenml wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Jammy420 wrote: »

Now however we have new servers, people are coming back to pvp, and development and support for pvp will most likely take off again, there would be no other reason to replace the server hardware.

The stated reason to replace the server hardware is that it is old and prone to failure. The hardware is 10 years old and may not even be supported by the people who made it. Poor performing code will run better on newer hardware, but that is just a brute force solution. The real fix is to make the software not poor performing.

Ah yes, because that totally worked when we had the performance patch which was supposed to do just that, and performance got significantly worse. It has always been bad server hardware.

I don't think that is the case. If that were true, we would not have seen a degrading of performance since the servers were replaced. We saw a huge performance increase when those new servers went live, but it has degraded since then. You can't blame that on hardware... that's a software issue.

I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that ZOS explained that the new hardware wasn't to fix performance issues but to future-proof the game so far as new content was concerned, and that the performance issues were being addressed by rewriting the server software code which is still ongoing through this year. Is that right?

The initial post we received about the code rewrite in January 2022 specified a completion date of "by the end of 2022". It wasn't until November, 10 months later, that they then told us "we'll be working to release it in parts beginning in Q2 2023". They also specified they'd be testing this "rewrite" on the PTS.

The PTS for the Q2 2023 is active now. There is no mention of the code rewrite anywhere in the notes, and two separate posts asking about it have been ignored.

I mean, is it still ongoing? How would we know? Is progress actually being made, or is this just a convenient scapegoat they're using to create the excuse of "we can't touch PVP with a 12 foot pole until this work is done, completion date is undetermined".

When Necrom launches, it will have been 4.5 years since PVP content was added to the game. I'm sorry, but I do not and never did consider volendrung or destructible milegates and bridges "PVP content". Volendrung only ever caused lag, and adds nothing new by way of PVP combat. Destructible milegates and bridges altered the surrounding terrain when they were added - removing tons of cool line of sights and unique terrain in favor of siegable structures that literally nobody cares about.

This. So much this.

Where is any mention of the code rewrite, is that still even a thing?! @ZOS_GinaBruno you mentioned multiple times you were working on improving communication - can we get some communication on this?

Or even a "we hear you" somewhere in a PvP thread - anyone.

There's been a ton of tagging devs about this when PTS went up, there hasn't been any updates, but I agree. Unless the new servers magically fix performance (which they said wouldn't) and we can start looking forward to PVP content, an update on the rewrite would be very welcome since they again mentioned in the AMA that nothing new will come unless peformance improves.

Photosniper89 · April 2023

Aardappelboom wrote: »

There's been a ton of tagging devs about this when PTS went up, there hasn't been any updates, but I agree. Unless the new servers magically fix performance (which they said wouldn't) and we can start looking forward to PVP content, an update on the rewrite would be very welcome since they again mentioned in the AMA that nothing new will come unless peformance improves.

The server upgrade "fixes" the lag for about a month or two max then it comes back in full force.

It's really weird to explain to those who haven't experience it but you can almost "feel" the server trying to process/queue the casts in real time. During peak fights it's as if you can feel the server going line by line doing checks against buffs/debuffs/skills, etc. I've never played a game where I could have this sense of "feel" - so to speak.

It's really hard to put that feeling into words but.... I think the only true fix is the rewrite. Something on the back end, as far as processing goes, has to change because no amount of hardware is going to fix this.

Lebkuchen · April 2023

It just doesn't make sense. Why would the performance get worse after a while? If it was the code, or the size of the game, it should be exactly the same for PC EU (with new hardware) and PC NA (with 1 year old hardware), right? Even Playstation EU was perfect on the day of the refresh (even on a PS4), and is getting worse now after the first maintenance. What is happening here?

Jaraal · April 2023

Lebkuchen wrote: »

It just doesn't make sense. Why would the performance get worse after a while? If it was the code, or the size of the game, it should be exactly the same for PC EU (with new hardware) and PC NA (with 1 year old hardware), right? Even Playstation EU was perfect on the day of the refresh (even on a PS4), and is getting worse now after the first maintenance. What is happening here?

Hard to say, without them actually coming out and telling us. People have theorized that perhaps they are allocating more resources on hardware launch, and then scaling that back over time. Or that possibly the data pipeline at the anti-DDoS servers that all incoming game data is routed through is opened up more, and then then tightened up as initial performance capabilities are verified. But that's pure speculation.

We do have access to a couple of facts gleaned through observation, though. During previous Whitestrakes/Midyear Mayhem events performance mysteriously improved dramatically, and then went back to pre-event levels of dysfunction upon completion of the event. And we also know that the longer the servers are up without maintenance, the worse performance gets, until they are eventually reset/rebooted. So, there are at least a couple of controllable variables.

Ultimately, it's up to the player to decide if game performance (or lack thereof) is something they wish to deal with as long as they play. Because it's certainly out of our hands. And as long as the game remains profitable and the servers online, there will always be players who think everything is good enough for them to continue playing.

Aardappelboom · April 2023

Jaraal wrote: »

Lebkuchen wrote: »

It just doesn't make sense. Why would the performance get worse after a while? If it was the code, or the size of the game, it should be exactly the same for PC EU (with new hardware) and PC NA (with 1 year old hardware), right? Even Playstation EU was perfect on the day of the refresh (even on a PS4), and is getting worse now after the first maintenance. What is happening here?

Hard to say, without them actually coming out and telling us. People have theorized that perhaps they are allocating more resources on hardware launch, and then scaling that back over time. Or that possibly the data pipeline at the anti-DDoS servers that all incoming game data is routed through is opened up more, and then then tightened up as initial performance capabilities are verified. But that's pure speculation.

We do have access to a couple of facts gleaned through observation, though. During previous Whitestrakes/Midyear Mayhem events performance mysteriously improved dramatically, and then went back to pre-event levels of dysfunction upon completion of the event. And we also know that the longer the servers are up without maintenance, the worse performance gets, until they are eventually reset/rebooted. So, there are at least a couple of controllable variables.

Ultimately, it's up to the player to decide if game performance (or lack thereof) is something they wish to deal with as long as they play. Because it's certainly out of our hands. And as long as the game remains profitable and the servers online, there will always be players who think everything is good enough for them to continue playing.

While I like Cyro, I'd actually rather have more modes akin to battlegrounds and IC, where close quarter, smaller skirmishes can take place. These smaller instanced pvp modes don't have bad performance, at least not in my experience.

Also an updated leaderboards system, something like they did for TOT would be a welcomed addition and that has nothing to do with performance.

I'd like some communication on this as well, so here's hoping.

xclassgaming · April 2023

PVP should be removed, Cyrodiil should be revamped to be purely PVE, same as the Imperial City.