U35 what is wrong?

Lags · January 7

Stamicka wrote: »

Lags wrote: »

Also, do you agree there is a population decline? And if so what do you think the reason for it is?

Let those who have no interest in how this update affected the game go back to talking about how there's no toilet furnishing items and how overland is too hard. They're not going to change their mind until a negative change impacts them.

ThoraxtheDark wrote: »

Nobody ever talks about the other glaring issues eso has .

You can probably find a thread that discusses just about any problem that you have with the game.

ThoraxtheDark wrote: »

Zos has a lot more issues than update 35. Please try to conceptualize more of a compelling argument than "update 35 bad ". There are plenty of good points listed above why it's just not true lol. If you want you are welcome to take a break from eso if too emotional

I think there's a lot of compelling arguments here that discuss how exactly update 35 negatively impacted people and what could be done better. I think that wanting to make the game more accessible is a good goal that update 35 didn't accomplish. There's huge knowledge gaps and a lack of important information within the game that contribute to the accessibility issue the most.

I personally think most people can learn the game enough to get into a vet trial with time. The game needs to give them the tools to improve and learn rather than trying to bring others down or nerfing the content itself.

Fair enough. [snip]

as to your other point about making the game more accessible, ya they could have done that but they went about it in the wrong way. Dumbing things down is the wrong way. Making an mmo more solo/casual based is the wrong way. better rewards and incentives helps with that issue. leading people down the right path. giving newer players more of a guiding hand and more information early on. Creators and end game players also help a lot with this, both with information and as example. So its very sad these are the people zos has been chasing away so much.

The game has always been extremely casual/solo friendly. You would be hard pressed to find an mmo that is more solo/casual friendly. Even new player friendly, even if zos doesnt help them in the right direction, reward them properly, or give them the information they should have access to, the game is still easy over all.

[Edit for bait]

Franchise408 · January 7

spartaxoxo wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

ZoS are the only ones that have accurate data.

Sony, Microsoft, and Steam also have accurate information about their install base.

Steam charts are hard data about Steam users.

Edit

SilverBride wrote: »

But it's not proof.

It is evidence. Things like Witness Testimony is admissible in a court of law. It's not "smoking gun" levels but that is not the only level of evidence needed for a reasonable conclusion based on evidence.

Quoting to agree.

It is not complete evidence, and does not give the whole picture. But it is evidence.

Franchise408 · January 7

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But it's not proof.

SilverBride wrote: »

ZoS are the only ones that have accurate data.

The burden of proof is actually on you...

Do you have any piece of data where there’s an upward or stable trend? Nothing supports that.

The burden of proof for what? I never made any claims that there was any kind of trend, one way or another.

All I did was disagree that there is a mountain of data to support that people are unsubbing and that the population is declining.

And that is all I'm going to say about it.

The Steam chart shows that there were 40% fewer people playing the recent New Life event versus 2023. People like to argue that the Steam chart isn't representative of the whole community for a lot of reasons. All of those reasons are wrong, and I won't spend time arguing statistics from first principles about it again. If someone thinks that the fact that they run the game without the launcher invalidates the statistical inference from data on 16,000 daily players, I can't help them. Those numbers are unequivocally representative of the game as a whole, and that is a literal mountain of data.

Steam #'s are absolutely irrelevant in terms of overall player count when in regards to a game like ESO that is not exclusively on Steam.

Steam #'s are relevant when showing percentages and trends. If a percentage of the Steam playerbase trends one way or another, it is likely to follow suit across all the other platforms as well that Steam is not tracking.

Franchise408 · January 7

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Oceanchanter wrote: »

Reason?
The MMO wasn't bringing enough money to sustain itself.
At some point it was leeching off it's sister MMO (from the same studio), and the studio was acquired by another company that decided to cut spending.
There wasn't any U35-esque update. It just died.

I have also played a game that ended up shutdown as we waved goodbye to the servers. You are right that this game is not dead and is not in maintenance mode. Games in that state don't get meaningful updates.

But just because the game isn't dead yet doesn't mean it isn't declining in population. Just as it's objectively not dead yet, there's also no good reason to believe that the game's population isn't declining.

Games don't die overnight. They die from things like ignoring players leaving in numbers. They die from bad updates or lack of content. They die from poor performance. Etc etc.

The truth is that long before a game dies, it has often been in bad shape for a long time.

I am not saying ESO is there yet. I think it can still correct course and it's overall still fun. But reducing content often, poor performance, and the lack of basic qol features are clearly not helping to retain players. And it seems like they aren't being replaced as often anymore when they leave, if things like the Steam Charts are anything to go by

Also agree with this. Both things can be true. The population can be in current decline, AND the game is nowhere near shutting down. The game is not empty, it's not losing money, it's not in maintenance mode. ESO is not dead or dying.

It can be declining, and the population can be shrinking, and that may be a temporary trend, or it may be a permanent trend, but I would argue against any claims of the game dying or being dead, while agreeing with claims of the population being presently in decline.

Franchise408 · January 7

Vonnegut2506 wrote: »

I was there for the end of Warhammer Online where people were still claiming the game was doing fine even after they announced they were pulling the plug.

I was there in SWG after the NGE and watched people claiming the NGE actually made the game better and people were just overreacting right up until they pulled the plug.

I am still in SWtOR watching people claiming the game isn't in maintenance mode even though it has been sold to a company that literally only does MMO maintenance mode games.

The amount of willful ignorance that MMO players can display doesn't even surprise me anymore.

On the flip side, I've been seeing chicken little's saying the sky is falling and ESO is dying for years. I came back full time in 2019, and have been hearing people claiming the game is dying since then. I see people claiming games like Diablo 4 dead just because PoE2 came out, or even a single player game like Starfield dead, despite being one of the most played games on Gamepass and having continuous updates and expansions. Hell, I still see people claiming that EQ is dead, despite having yearly expansions and opening new servers annually, including one of their most recent openings having the largest single server population of the game's existence. ***, I've even heard the claims of New World being dead and they just re-released on console, and from everything I've heard (maybe I'm wrong?) it's breathed new life into the game and it's in a decent state at the moment.

So yea, I would believe the evidence that the population is currently in decline, and the game isn't as popular as it was even just a few years ago, but I would definitely reject any claim that the game is dead or dying.

Vonnegut2506 · January 8

Franchise408 wrote: »

Vonnegut2506 wrote: »

I was there for the end of Warhammer Online where people were still claiming the game was doing fine even after they announced they were pulling the plug.

I was there in SWG after the NGE and watched people claiming the NGE actually made the game better and people were just overreacting right up until they pulled the plug.

I am still in SWtOR watching people claiming the game isn't in maintenance mode even though it has been sold to a company that literally only does MMO maintenance mode games.

The amount of willful ignorance that MMO players can display doesn't even surprise me anymore.

On the flip side, I've been seeing chicken little's saying the sky is falling and ESO is dying for years. I came back full time in 2019, and have been hearing people claiming the game is dying since then. I see people claiming games like Diablo 4 dead just because PoE2 came out, or even a single player game like Starfield dead, despite being one of the most played games on Gamepass and having continuous updates and expansions. Hell, I still see people claiming that EQ is dead, despite having yearly expansions and opening new servers annually, including one of their most recent openings having the largest single server population of the game's existence. ***, I've even heard the claims of New World being dead and they just re-released on console, and from everything I've heard (maybe I'm wrong?) it's breathed new life into the game and it's in a decent state at the moment.

So yea, I would believe the evidence that the population is currently in decline, and the game isn't as popular as it was even just a few years ago, but I would definitely reject any claim that the game is dead or dying.

If a population in a game that depends on population to keep going is in decline as most available data shows, isn't it by definition "dying"?

doesurmindglow · January 8

Most of what was controversial has been reversed mechanically (which is honestly all the evidence you need to know it was a bad idea to begin with), but the player count, guild organizations, and level of community trust in the development team has never really recovered.

Here's the Steam chart since Update 35, with "same time that year" player counts:

These data suggest something like a 40% dropoff in player count in the years since the update, which most of us have noticed in-game as well. There's a decent seasonal bump every June around chapters, but each one has been smaller than the year before.

doesurmindglow · January 8

I also like to look at the Google trends data, just as a benchmark against Steam figures, and it tends to show the same pattern:

The Steam data is representative of the playerbase as a whole.

doesurmindglow · January 8

Twitch viewership data for the category. This data is messier (due mostly to viewership promotion events) but the trends are still pretty visible:

doesurmindglow · January 8

Number of total parses on the Iron Atronach dummy submitted to esologs.com, by update:

Data source: https://www.esologs.com/zone/statistics/13?aggregate=amount

Turtle_Bot · January 8

SilverBride wrote: »

Lags wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Quoted post has been removed.

It's not toxic to disagree that something that happened 2 years ago is causing the population to decline today.

no its not, but thats not what i meant by that. Its a generalization of the type of players on here who constantly refuse to accept that anything is wrong and run defense for zos. And it actually is a little toxic to ask people for concrete statistics that you know do not exist, because you said it yourself. You know zos is the only ones who have the numbers, and you know all we can go on is stuff like steam charts, youtube, the forums, and our experience.

Players that are having a positive experience and were not negatively affected by changes are not being toxic by giving their own personal feedback.

It is also not toxic to ask for concrete numbers to back up a statement that there is "mountains" of evidence for something we haven't noticed at all.

Not having a bad experience does not make us or our feedback toxic.

It's fine for players to share their feedback that they have had a positive experience due to specific changes. That is not what is being pointed out as toxic. What is being pointed out as toxic however, is the way in which that feedback is being stated, where it is being stated in such a way as to be completely dismissive/antagonistic of the issues that other players ARE experiencing. This is what is meant by the claim of toxic.

Like others have stated, it's great that you, and others like you, weren't negatively impacted by the U35 changes (and other changes made around that time and since then due to that being the direction the game was moving in) and as always, feel free to share that, but, it also needs to be understood, that just because those changes didn't negatively affect some players, that doesn't mean that they were positive for everyone, and when commenting that some liked those changes, there needs to be care taken to not constantly dismiss/detract from the issues that others are putting forward by repeatedly claiming all is fine.

Lags · January 8

doesurmindglow wrote: »

Most of what was controversial has been reversed mechanically (which is honestly all the evidence you need to know it was a bad idea to begin with), but the player count, guild organizations, and level of community trust in the development team has never really recovered.

Here's the Steam chart since Update 35, with "same time that year" player counts:

These data suggest something like a 40% dropoff in player count in the years since the update, which most of us have noticed in-game as well. There's a decent seasonal bump every June around chapters, but each one has been smaller than the year before.

I would love to see an eso that hit those peak numbers again. not like 50k players over all, but the game back to where it was when they could hit 50k people on steam, and god knows how many else in the rest of the game. I know that was like western skyrim or one of the bigger chapter releases, but things were just so much better.

Even before one tamriel, i would go to mournhold and there would be hundreds of people talking and trading around the wayshrine. Or in one tamriel when the undaunted areas were full of people dueling and doing pledges, and the chat was full of people actually looking for groups. Or even after that, when craglorn was full of people everyday running stuff. The game felt so alive, now it just feels depressing. And the thing with big mmos like this is, the more they expand, the less alive the world feels. Naturally because people are spread out more since we keep getting more zones and instances, and im not saying thats a bad thing. But when you combine that with a game losing players like this, it feels even worse.

Lags · January 8

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Lags wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Quoted post has been removed.

It's not toxic to disagree that something that happened 2 years ago is causing the population to decline today.

no its not, but thats not what i meant by that. Its a generalization of the type of players on here who constantly refuse to accept that anything is wrong and run defense for zos. And it actually is a little toxic to ask people for concrete statistics that you know do not exist, because you said it yourself. You know zos is the only ones who have the numbers, and you know all we can go on is stuff like steam charts, youtube, the forums, and our experience.

Players that are having a positive experience and were not negatively affected by changes are not being toxic by giving their own personal feedback.

It is also not toxic to ask for concrete numbers to back up a statement that there is "mountains" of evidence for something we haven't noticed at all.

Not having a bad experience does not make us or our feedback toxic.

It's fine for players to share their feedback that they have had a positive experience due to specific changes. That is not what is being pointed out as toxic. What is being pointed out as toxic however, is the way in which that feedback is being stated, where it is being stated in such a way as to be completely dismissive/antagonistic of the issues that other players ARE experiencing. This is what is meant by the claim of toxic.

Like others have stated, it's great that you, and others like you, weren't negatively impacted by the U35 changes (and other changes made around that time and since then due to that being the direction the game was moving in) and as always, feel free to share that, but, it also needs to be understood, that just because those changes didn't negatively affect some players, that doesn't mean that they were positive for everyone, and when commenting that some liked those changes, there needs to be care taken to not constantly dismiss/detract from the issues that others are putting forward by repeatedly claiming all is fine.

its hopeless trying to explain it. ive tried but i dont see the point of it anymore. At least if there is nothing constructive being offered to the conversation. There is just no point when some people on the forums ignore 90% of your post, or 90% of the entire thread, and just pick small points to respond to. Only to say something that you have already explained, or responded to, or someone else explained, or responded to, but it was just ignored.

Its just talking in circles and in the end certain players are not impacted by these type of issues so they just dont care. Its not an issue because i dont see it, but i also dont care about it so im not looking for it. Or i dont do that, so im not impacted by it. it is what it is. My biggest thing is that the community growing and thriving is what is needed for the over all health of the game, for it to stick around, and for it to improve. And unfortunately its just not happening right now.

But im happy for these type of players. If they are enjoying things good for them. But if things keep going downhill eventually it will reach them. Or they will be the only ones left, i guess time will tell.

doesurmindglow · January 8

Lags wrote: »

I would love to see an eso that hit those peak numbers again. not like 50k players over all, but the game back to where it was when they could hit 50k people on steam, and god knows how many else in the rest of the game. I know that was like western skyrim or one of the bigger chapter releases, but things were just so much better.

Even before one tamriel, i would go to mournhold and there would be hundreds of people talking and trading around the wayshrine. Or in one tamriel when the undaunted areas were full of people dueling and doing pledges, and the chat was full of people actually looking for groups. Or even after that, when craglorn was full of people everyday running stuff. The game felt so alive, now it just feels depressing. And the thing with big mmos like this is, the more they expand, the less alive the world feels. Naturally because people are spread out more since we keep getting more zones and instances, and im not saying thats a bad thing. But when you combine that with a game losing players like this, it feels even worse.

Yeah and if it was just the Steam data by itself, maybe there'd be an argument we could ignore this decline, as it could indicate something weird like people moving away from Steam and onto the other launcher. Or something.

But taken together with all the other data available like Google search interest and ESO logs usage, both of which obviously include tons of players that access the game through other platforms, the trend becomes pretty hard to deny, and the strength of statistical inference likely from a sample of some 13,000ish remaining players on that platform becomes pretty overwhelming.

Truth be told, we all have our anecdotal experience, and a person that interacts less with other players in the game is likely to have a different anecdotal experience. Many ESO players keep to themselves, focus on single player content and questing, or on housing and furnishings, such that they may not notice the thinning out of the playerbase that's obvious to those of us who main PVP and other more social interactions like guild management. But many of those who do "main" the Massively Multiplayer aspects of the MMO instantly know this is true: it's much harder these days to find fights in PVP, to fill rosters for trials and raid groups, and to maintain guild membership and participation. That the available data also seems to support, rather than undermine, that anecdotal experience is really just laying the keystone into the arch of this increasingly solid argument.

Many of us do want the game to return to a more active playerbase. We've actually wanted this all along. But it's hard to get there if we can't even acknowledge in the first part that the playerbase is losing interest, let alone take seriously the reasons why they are doing so, which have also been talked about on here for years. We can't keep bleeding content creators and moving down the search and viewership rankings and expect the game to remain competitive with other titles in the space, of which there are increasingly many.

spartaxoxo · January 8

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

Like others have stated, it's great that you, and others like you, weren't negatively impacted by the U35 changes (and other changes made around that time and since then due to that being the direction the game was moving in) and as always, feel free to share that, but, it also needs to be understood, that just because those changes didn't negatively affect some players, that doesn't mean that they were positive for everyone, and when commenting that some liked those changes, there needs to be care taken to not constantly dismiss/detract from the issues that others are putting forward by repeatedly claiming all is fine.

I want to add for me, I actually don't care if someone thinks that I'm wrong about my POV and disagrees. Sometimes I am wrong and how I remembered or perceived something was off. But, they should at least explain why. To me there's a big difference between disagreeing with me and doing so because you want your POV known. And disagreeing with me just to dismiss my POV.

I'm not calling anyone out in particular here, just sharing the concept. But, for me, that's a big factor in when I consider someone to be dismissive/toxic versus simply coming at an issue from a different POV.

MorganaLaVey · January 8

Lags wrote: »

its hopeless trying to explain it. ive tried but i dont see the point of it anymore. At least if there is nothing constructive being offered to the conversation. There is just no point when some people on the forums ignore 90% of your post, or 90% of the entire thread, and just pick small points to respond to. Only to say something that you have already explained, or responded to, or someone else explained, or responded to, but it was just ignored.

Its just talking in circles and in the end certain players are not impacted by these type of issues so they just dont care.

Nah, id say they want to turn a "battle" of argument in to a battle of attrition. By repeating the same nonsese over and over again while avoiding a constructive discussion people get tired of arguing and stop. Now they can say whatever they want and noone will argue against it. So when now new players come in they see "U35 was great." and since no one disagrees, they believe it.

Elowen_Starveil · January 8

Franchise408 wrote: »

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But it's not proof.

SilverBride wrote: »

ZoS are the only ones that have accurate data.

The burden of proof is actually on you...

Do you have any piece of data where there’s an upward or stable trend? Nothing supports that.

The burden of proof for what? I never made any claims that there was any kind of trend, one way or another.

All I did was disagree that there is a mountain of data to support that people are unsubbing and that the population is declining.

And that is all I'm going to say about it.

The Steam chart shows that there were 40% fewer people playing the recent New Life event versus 2023. People like to argue that the Steam chart isn't representative of the whole community for a lot of reasons. All of those reasons are wrong, and I won't spend time arguing statistics from first principles about it again. If someone thinks that the fact that they run the game without the launcher invalidates the statistical inference from data on 16,000 daily players, I can't help them. Those numbers are unequivocally representative of the game as a whole, and that is a literal mountain of data.

Steam #'s are absolutely irrelevant in terms of overall player count when in regards to a game like ESO that is not exclusively on Steam.

Steam #'s are relevant when showing percentages and trends. If a percentage of the Steam playerbase trends one way or another, it is likely to follow suit across all the other platforms as well that Steam is not tracking.

Exactly. If Steam's numbers are 40% down, the other "communities" are also way down, regardless of absolute numbers.

JustLovely · January 8

Parasaurolophus wrote: »

I see a lot of complaints about this patch. What's wrong with it?

This question has been answered multiple times daily every day since U35 was released.

Read the forums. You're answer has been posted 1000 plus times by now.

Franchise408 · January 8

Vonnegut2506 wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

Vonnegut2506 wrote: »

I was there for the end of Warhammer Online where people were still claiming the game was doing fine even after they announced they were pulling the plug.

I was there in SWG after the NGE and watched people claiming the NGE actually made the game better and people were just overreacting right up until they pulled the plug.

I am still in SWtOR watching people claiming the game isn't in maintenance mode even though it has been sold to a company that literally only does MMO maintenance mode games.

The amount of willful ignorance that MMO players can display doesn't even surprise me anymore.

On the flip side, I've been seeing chicken little's saying the sky is falling and ESO is dying for years. I came back full time in 2019, and have been hearing people claiming the game is dying since then. I see people claiming games like Diablo 4 dead just because PoE2 came out, or even a single player game like Starfield dead, despite being one of the most played games on Gamepass and having continuous updates and expansions. Hell, I still see people claiming that EQ is dead, despite having yearly expansions and opening new servers annually, including one of their most recent openings having the largest single server population of the game's existence. ***, I've even heard the claims of New World being dead and they just re-released on console, and from everything I've heard (maybe I'm wrong?) it's breathed new life into the game and it's in a decent state at the moment.

So yea, I would believe the evidence that the population is currently in decline, and the game isn't as popular as it was even just a few years ago, but I would definitely reject any claim that the game is dead or dying.

If a population in a game that depends on population to keep going is in decline as most available data shows, isn't it by definition "dying"?

No, because a drop in population does not mean that it is going to be a perpetual drop, or a large enough drop to make the game unsustainable.

It's a 10 year old game with new alternatives coming out all the time. A drop of some level is to be expected.

Auldwulfe · January 8

Franchise408 wrote: »

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

SilverBride wrote: »

But it's not proof.

SilverBride wrote: »

ZoS are the only ones that have accurate data.

The burden of proof is actually on you...

Do you have any piece of data where there’s an upward or stable trend? Nothing supports that.

The burden of proof for what? I never made any claims that there was any kind of trend, one way or another.

All I did was disagree that there is a mountain of data to support that people are unsubbing and that the population is declining.

And that is all I'm going to say about it.

The Steam chart shows that there were 40% fewer people playing the recent New Life event versus 2023. People like to argue that the Steam chart isn't representative of the whole community for a lot of reasons. All of those reasons are wrong, and I won't spend time arguing statistics from first principles about it again. If someone thinks that the fact that they run the game without the launcher invalidates the statistical inference from data on 16,000 daily players, I can't help them. Those numbers are unequivocally representative of the game as a whole, and that is a literal mountain of data.

Steam #'s are absolutely irrelevant in terms of overall player count when in regards to a game like ESO that is not exclusively on Steam.

Steam #'s are relevant when showing percentages and trends. If a percentage of the Steam playerbase trends one way or another, it is likely to follow suit across all the other platforms as well that Steam is not tracking.

That means that any poll or statistic is completely invalid, as it does not count every single person in it.
Steam works like any survey or poll .... it does give a solid bit of data, but with a margin of error.

That said, I am going to go over what a mid player felt with U35 - as it was neither as terrible as some say, but was also not fun. It wasn't just the changes made, it was also what it triggered in the player base that made it bad.

I had been playing a year - my character, at the time, had been a stamina sorc - I had spent the money to get Imperial, and a race swap token to change, as a friend had suggested to me, and I had joined a guild that was willing to help me build up.

I did NOT, yet have much in the way of gear, but was working on it. I could parse about 43 to 45K, at the time, and was showing about 23 to 28K in trial logs, and was starting to learn.... and it hit.

And in the next trial, I was suddenly showing 11 to 13k damage -- but, my trial dummy parse was still 43K ---
Same was happening to a LOT of the members in my guild.... and we were failing at trials we had already beaten.....
It was then, that we found out about the buff to the trial dummy, and that it was giving false information, and yeah, it felt like a dishonest coverup of ZOS just dumping on the playerbase.

After a few weeks of flailing, I retired my main into living in the craft hall.... as that was now it's only purpose, and based on a suggestion from a guild mate, created a Nord DK Tank.... with cost reduction jewelry, and stomped my way to free stamina.
The only thing holding me in that game, at that point, was my friends, as my participation was "stand here, hit this button every so often, and watch that timer so that you can re-taunt things.......

Meanwhile, we went from a daily trial, to 3 times a week, to once a week, and then our guild leader quit .....
Mind you, when I joined, we had over 300 active players in that guild, and now, 2 months after U35, we had 80, of which, only half of us were even active --- after 2 days, the officer that became leader quit.... the next quit an hour after... and the last remaining officer, who had been handed leadership, couldn't get anyone else even willing to take it.... so the guild disbanded.

I spent time as a solo player.... wondering why I was still doing this.... but trying.
Then Oakensoul, and all the screaming, fighting, and gatekeeping that happened over that one.

At the time, I didn't even have a mythic.... hadn't thought about them, yet.... so it was just a lot more screaming.... and even more hostility, and more people quitting..... including other friends I had made.

And then Oakensoul got nerfed... which is fine, but I am still not sure they looked at it the right way...... because the real issue seemed to be the Empower (which they did finally fix), as people were using Queen's Elegance with Heavy Attacks and Lightning Staves and getting similar damage output to Oakensoul... as long as they had the crit and Brutality/Sorcery buff......

In addition Oakensoul failed to deliver those numbers with anything outside of lightning staves... there NEVER was a flame staff Oaken build, nor Ice, or any other weapon. only lightning, which would mean the flaw would have been in that interaction.... but that discussion was not being had. If you tried to have it, you got shouted down, called names, etc.

After things died down.... I went and got Oakensoul, primarily because I am over 50, have arthritis, and after U35, it felt like I was doing MORE watching timers than less.... because the DOT meta was in full force......

And I was vote kicked from a number of random dungeons with the "we don't need a crutch user"... or "we don't include Sgt. Broakensoul" and other gatekeeping arguments.

I finally found a guild that let me run again, just as I was going to quit... but it still remains.
U35 did damage -- not irreparable, and would NOT have been as destructive, but the reaction to it, the gatekeeping, and the general toxicity of a LOT of the playerbase, at that time, made it much more destructive than otherwise.

Auldwulfe

Franchise408 · January 8

Auldwulfe wrote: »

That means that any poll or statistic is completely invalid, as it does not count every single person in it.
Steam works like any survey or poll .... it does give a solid bit of data, but with a margin of error.

False.

Polls and statistics are entirely valid in the realm of percentages and trends. They are not relevant for overall #'s if they don't actually account for overall #'s. Something like a political poll gauges the overall sentiment towards a politician or policy based on percentages, but it is absolutely worthless in determining the overall sum of people who feel a certain way, because it only accounts for a small segment of the population.

Steam #'s are the same way. Steam #'s account for only a small segment of the playerbase. You can't look at Steam #'s and say "there are only XYZ amount of players". That total does not account for PC players not using Steam, X-Box players, Playstation players, etc, many of which may be larger overall bases than PC Steam.

You can look at Steam and see "there has been a 40% decrease in the playerbase" and use that to determine that there is likely an approximately 40% decline in playerbase across the board, as Steam players won't be more or less likely to leave the game than anyone else. The Steam percentages may not show the whole picture, as again it's not factoring in every single segment of the population, but when dealing with percentages you can look at trends which likely carry over.

spartaxoxo · January 8

Auldwulfe wrote: »

That means that any poll or statistic is completely invalid, as it does not count every single person in it.
Steam works like any survey or poll .... it does give a solid bit of data, but with a margin of error.

Steam Charts aren't a random sample. They are the numbers of a specific group of people. They can show trends that should be applicable to the general playerbase. But they aren't the same thing as a random sample.

So, if a new game releases on Steam but not on console, we can expect that it will likely pull significantly more players from Steam users than console users.

Or a game with most of its users on Steam (or all of them) may appear more popular than ESO based on the Steam Charts. But, that doesn't mean it actually has a larger playerbase as a whole. Most PC users of ESO aren't playing on Steam. And none of the console accounts are played through Steam.

spartaxoxo · January 8

Franchise408 wrote: »

You can look at Steam and see "there has been a 40% decrease in the playerbase" and use that to determine that there is likely an approximately 40% decline in playerbase across the board, as Steam players won't be more or less likely to leave the game than anyone else.

PC users are likely leaving in greater numbers than console users due to more competing MMOs available. Given such a large drop on Steam players, it is most likely that console is also declining. But, it's probably a smaller percentage than PC.

Auldwulfe · January 8

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You can look at Steam and see "there has been a 40% decrease in the playerbase" and use that to determine that there is likely an approximately 40% decline in playerbase across the board, as Steam players won't be more or less likely to leave the game than anyone else.

PC users are likely leaving in greater numbers than console users due to more competing MMOs available. Given such a large drop on Steam players, it is most likely that console is also declining. But, it's probably a smaller percentage than PC.

I have friends that play XBox ESO and they state there are times in Alinor where they don't see another person in the craft area for up to an hour........ I consider that anecdotal.....
And I know players that were on PCEU, that have come over and joined via Steam, because the player base is declining there.... so, as I said, since people voluntarily use Steam, or voluntarily log direct, or voluntarily use a console to play games... you can take it as an indication, like any survey or poll.... and just assume a margin of error......

Auldwulfe

sarahthes · January 8

Auldwulfe wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You can look at Steam and see "there has been a 40% decrease in the playerbase" and use that to determine that there is likely an approximately 40% decline in playerbase across the board, as Steam players won't be more or less likely to leave the game than anyone else.

PC users are likely leaving in greater numbers than console users due to more competing MMOs available. Given such a large drop on Steam players, it is most likely that console is also declining. But, it's probably a smaller percentage than PC.

I have friends that play XBox ESO and they state there are times in Alinor where they don't see another person in the craft area for up to an hour........ I consider that anecdotal.....
And I know players that were on PCEU, that have come over and joined via Steam, because the player base is declining there.... so, as I said, since people voluntarily use Steam, or voluntarily log direct, or voluntarily use a console to play games... you can take it as an indication, like any survey or poll.... and just assume a margin of error......

Auldwulfe

Numbers of players encountered in game in a zone isn't really indicative of population at all due to sharding/instancing.

Auldwulfe · January 8

sarahthes wrote: »

Auldwulfe wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You can look at Steam and see "there has been a 40% decrease in the playerbase" and use that to determine that there is likely an approximately 40% decline in playerbase across the board, as Steam players won't be more or less likely to leave the game than anyone else.

PC users are likely leaving in greater numbers than console users due to more competing MMOs available. Given such a large drop on Steam players, it is most likely that console is also declining. But, it's probably a smaller percentage than PC.

I have friends that play XBox ESO and they state there are times in Alinor where they don't see another person in the craft area for up to an hour........ I consider that anecdotal.....
And I know players that were on PCEU, that have come over and joined via Steam, because the player base is declining there.... so, as I said, since people voluntarily use Steam, or voluntarily log direct, or voluntarily use a console to play games... you can take it as an indication, like any survey or poll.... and just assume a margin of error......

Auldwulfe

Numbers of players encountered in game in a zone isn't really indicative of population at all due to sharding/instancing.

Which is why I consider it Anecdotal..... but also, after a while, it can be an indication......

Auldwulfe

Franchise408 · January 8

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Franchise408 wrote: »

You can look at Steam and see "there has been a 40% decrease in the playerbase" and use that to determine that there is likely an approximately 40% decline in playerbase across the board, as Steam players won't be more or less likely to leave the game than anyone else.

PC users are likely leaving in greater numbers than console users due to more competing MMOs available. Given such a large drop on Steam players, it is most likely that console is also declining. But, it's probably a smaller percentage than PC.

Very possible.

That's why I stated you could take that there is likely an approximately 40% decline across the board. It might not be exactly equal across the board, but there's probably going to be a somewhat similar dip on the other platforms as well. It could definitely very easily be more heavily weighted towards one or the other.

Elowen_Starveil · January 8

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Auldwulfe wrote: »

That means that any poll or statistic is completely invalid, as it does not count every single person in it.
Steam works like any survey or poll .... it does give a solid bit of data, but with a margin of error.

Steam Charts aren't a random sample. They are the numbers of a specific group of people. They can show trends that should be applicable to the general playerbase. But they aren't the same thing as a random sample.

So, if a new game releases on Steam but not on console, we can expect that it will likely pull significantly more players from Steam users than console users.

Or a game with most of its users on Steam (or all of them) may appear more popular than ESO based on the Steam Charts. But, that doesn't mean it actually has a larger playerbase as a whole. Most PC users of ESO aren't playing on Steam. And none of the console accounts are played through Steam.

You're obviously correct that Steam charts aren't made from random samples out of the entire ESO-playing population, but it doesn't matter. Normally, random sampling would get you data points all over the spectrum to calculate the mean and deviation. In this case, the chart represents the ENTIRE PC Steam-using population. You don't need sampling! You have all the data!

And, sure, the Steam chart it doesn't necessarily mathematically extrapolate to the whole population playing the game, but does anyone seriously expect me to believe that the PC Steam users play the game statistically any differently than other subgroups in terms of length or time of day? The only thing that chart is measuring is time in game, and it can't be that different between PC Steam and PC native. I just can't.

And what's with people saying that PC Steam users are a minority of the users of the game? Has anyone from ZOS ever confirmed that? Is there ANY data to show what percentage of players are on PC, Steam, native, Xbox, PS, NA, EU? Anything? Or is this just people trying to make the hard truth of the Steam chart go away by dismissing that subgroup as too small to matter?

Rkindaleft · January 9

dk_dunkirk wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Auldwulfe wrote: »

That means that any poll or statistic is completely invalid, as it does not count every single person in it.
Steam works like any survey or poll .... it does give a solid bit of data, but with a margin of error.

Steam Charts aren't a random sample. They are the numbers of a specific group of people. They can show trends that should be applicable to the general playerbase. But they aren't the same thing as a random sample.

So, if a new game releases on Steam but not on console, we can expect that it will likely pull significantly more players from Steam users than console users.

Or a game with most of its users on Steam (or all of them) may appear more popular than ESO based on the Steam Charts. But, that doesn't mean it actually has a larger playerbase as a whole. Most PC users of ESO aren't playing on Steam. And none of the console accounts are played through Steam.

And what's with people saying that PC Steam users are a minority of the users of the game? Has anyone from ZOS ever confirmed that? Is there ANY data to show what percentage of players are on PC, Steam, native, Xbox, PS, NA, EU? Anything? Or is this just people trying to make the hard truth of the Steam chart go away by dismissing that subgroup as too small to matter?

No, they just have to deny any sort of evidence that even remotely suggests interest in the game is declining because if they don't then they have to admit their favourite game may not be doing as healthy as they think it is. Then it all goes around in circles because "steam charts/google search trends/twitch viewing metrics isn't evidence of declining interest!!!!1!!11!"

Some people will just believe whatever they want to and then be coping every time there's anything to suggest otherwise.

SilverBride · January 9

The game is 10 years old. Of course population will decline. That doesn't mean the game is dying.