Tone-deaf AUA on Reddit

ESO_Nightingale · September 18

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Also wanted to follow up here. Thank you for the feedback on the AUA. We are taking this feedback to the team to see how we can improve these in the future. The goal with these is to provide a pipeline for communication. Especially with recent changes to leadership, we felt it was important to have an AUA that covered a wide mount of topics. But we are taking in the feedback to improve these in the future along with some of the commentary about the game to share with our team for continued improvements.

I appreciate these comments back to us on this post Kevin. A lot of people are upset right now and many are venting it in a non constructive way, so i hope it doesn't dissuade future communication. If we can keep the honesty moving forward and see some legitimate action. I feel it would get us all back on track.

efster · September 18

The whole "let's add new sets with every new xpac, trial, and dungeon" is just painful now, I'd bet most people are collecting them just to "fill out the sticker book" which does actually nothing besides allowing you to create gear from said set for minimal transmutes should it become viable in some hypothetical update, but this almost never actually happens. There's always the initial hopeful "oh, what if I could do THIS" with some of the new sets that come out but none of the actually difficult content in this game rewards or encourages experimentation with gear setups, especially not in PvE so the end result is just disappointment.

Just because there is a data point in a spreadsheet for some drunk dude from Omaha running around Cyro in Abyssal Brace, Ranger's Gait and Mighty Chudan doesn't actually mean these sets bring anything to the table. But no, "every set has its place". Trash is a place, I'm just saying.

Destai · September 18

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Also wanted to follow up here. Thank you for the feedback on the AUA. We are taking this feedback to the team to see how we can improve these in the future. The goal with these is to provide a pipeline for communication. Especially with recent changes to leadership, we felt it was important to have an AUA that covered a wide mount of topics. But we are taking in the feedback to improve these in the future along with some of the commentary about the game to share with our team for continued improvements.

They've all been a part of the studio and community for years, right? They should have some sense of the community's expectations when it comes to how things are communicated. Most of what was said felt like vague, safe, corporate responses - despite people asking for otherwise.

And you guys can say "things are in the works" all you want, but that's not being believed by a lot of folks. It's just frustrating to see that at this point. It seems like you guys prefer to deal with that frustration, rather than managing sentiment if/when plans change. Even though the community's largely united in saying, "tell us your plans earlier, we're ok if plans change"; it seems like you're unwilling to do that.

Also, there were a number of hardball questions that really needed to be answered but weren't. I asked quite a few myself - like what did you guys learn from U35. Of course, no answer. If you guys are gonna post in blogs about how you learn from your mistakes, then you need to be prepared to openly discuss them. You will gain credibility if you do.

But the biggest controversy here is combat and how it's handled. People are asking ZOS to stop having that spreadsheet dictate how every change is handled.

I walked away from the AUA thinking that SkinnyCheeks can better articulate more about the combat system than the studio running it. There's just not a lot of confidence in how combat is managed. It's absolutely clear ZOS needs combat feedback way earlier - like fresh off the design board.

Anyways, I'm hoping more AUA's can happen in the future and hope these lessons-learned are applied. Maybe the next AUA can be focused on combat. That's been asked for since you guys started your deep-dive series.

Eclipse318 · September 18

Sigh.

I've been playing since 2018. I have a Breton DK tank that I use 99% of the time as my main, and my two heavy armor sets have passives that do damage so I'm really happy with my build.

I don't want to have to haul out the armorer to screw with my build constantly.

I don't want to use subclassing to screw with all my builds that I've been working on for 7 years.

I don't want to learn scribing to screw with all my builds that I've been working on for 7 years.

I'm here to play a fun game, not take college courses and spend 60 hours watching YouTube videos just so I can "keep up" with the players using all these new and very complicated mechanisms to eviscerate everything by tapping a couple keys. I don't think that's a fun way to spend what little non-work time I have.

You know what would be a very simple way for us to customize our builds?
- More morphing options of existing skills and bigger skill trees within the skill system (which we've been asking for)
- No more "slottable" champion points as a chokepoint, just let us put points where we would like the most points. Done.

On balance: It always makes me a bit sad when I'm doing something like a dolmen and a green laser beam suddenly cuts everything in half and then runs off. Like... why was I even doing that when an Arcanist just did a drive-by and made me feel like an infant? And it's been like that for ages -- if ZOS actually cared about power balance, that'd be a place to start.

Unfortunately, now that we have all these ridiculous fiddly drill-down methods for tweaking everything (almost entirely for DPS) they won't or can't go back to something simple like a better skill morph tree for all roles and classes.

Honestly? It feels like so many corporate systems these days -- busywork for devs who keep inventing new complicated stuff nobody asked for so they have job security. *coughtalesoftributecough*

One final note: I don't use Reddit. I don't even have an account. I'm not going to swim around in sewage for the convenience of the spreadsheet team that barely listens to us anyway.

Sigh.

peacenote · September 18

Soarora wrote: »

Yeah… I keep thinking about that… like we already know ZOS spreadsheet balances even when we keep begging them not to but to see it so plainly is bizarre.

Before hybridization, there was a "standardization" initiative which changed a bunch of "over time" abilities so they would all align and be consistent. I was not a fan of the change, because abilities that weren't necessarily "DPS-rotation" abilities were steamrolled over in the quest for standardization, like rapids and HOTs. In almost all cases, for the builds I was running at the time, it resulted in a reduction of fun and an increase in annoyance.

But in addition to this, I remember this initiative so distinctly because it was the first time I remember thinking "they are doing this to try and automate testing, balancing, and adding new abilities." I was concerned about that direction because too much consistency is the enemy of fun.

And, here we are.

I think somebody at ZOS a long time ago figured it was better/more foolproof/more efficient/more affordable to balance on a spreadsheet with guidelines, chasing a world where a lot of this could be automated and dev cycles/times would be greatly reduced. And have doubled/tripled/quadruped down on the idea, looking to eliminate "just one more layer" until they reach that goal, instead of absorbing the feedback and reversing course, not really understanding that our feedback was really about this strategy, not just the issue of the day. Just my theory.

If things can be automated and no expertise is needed, it's not really special anymore, is it?

Pevey · September 18

Vulkunne wrote: »

Djiku wrote: »

The recent AUA on Reddit was just terrible. I can't put it any other way. How you can be so blind and defensive to reasonable feedback regarding consumables and sets is just baffling. I want to be constructive and leave it at that.
Just listen to Skinny Cheeks. He is making valid points and is a longtime standing community member and content creator, so he knows what the community is worried about.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=w0BbaObAw_k&t=401s

I am totally against making any adjustments to consumables. Wheeler is right to push back on this and to make a strong case for having this approached in a slower, more constructive manner. If the balance for classes is messed up already and we all know it to be true, then why rush making changes to consumables? It's a bad idea right now and Wheeler has the right of it on this one. The way players are dealing out damage in PvP, a health pot barely covers it. Just barely worth even having tbh. I can only imagine nerfring pots or food any further at this time. *Cringe*

I know there are many different influencers and people saying alot of different things right now but please remember, not all of us play this game to their expectations or their 'level' if you will. I urge restraint, continue moving forward slowly until everyone has their confidence back in what changes you're making, regardless of what anyone else is saying. Cause for some, their Guilds and Ball groups, do not represent anyone else but themselves and the things they want to serve them. Please please, don't forget about the rest of us because playing the game (if you can even call it that) with some of these jokers -for years- has proven they only care about themselves.

As far as ZOS is concerned, while I cannot and would never try to speak for them, I would think it's safe to say the ZOS we're dealing with now is not the same as before. I've gone thru similar 'events' that bring major changes within a company and um... things change. Never expect it to be exactly the same afterwards. Not necessarily for the worst but generally speaking new leadership brings new changes and this is the season for change. My recommendation is to dial back some of the grief and give them time to adjust. Remember, think about how the people who work for ZOS are feeling atm and realize that the communication and the way we thought about things from before is going to be basically starting over with potentially a different team, with different internal structure, with a newer approach. Be grateful they're only taking (1) patch cycle (so far) for catching up with things. Because realistically, it could (and probably should) take longer than that especially with the existing issues.

It's ok to have standards and try to understand things but I think we all need to consider adjusting our expectations. I'm sure ZOS will get back in the saddle when they are ready to move forward. But until then it might actually be better to leave the goal post where it is and give them time to adjust. And that could take a while, it's just how it is and none of us can change that. This horse has a new pair of shoes and a new rider. Slow down speedracers. Dodge City will still be there.

I think you misunderstand what people are asking for. You say not to nerf consumables, which puts you in agreement with what others have been voicing. People are just asking for them to combine the stamina and magicka buffs on consumables in the same way they have for skills. For instance, prophecy and savagery. This was left undone during hybridization. Wheeler is saying that would be impossible, because they would have to nerf consumables across the board. Because the spreadsheet commands it. That is the excuse for just leaving it as is.

Stamicka · September 18

peacenote wrote: »

Before hybridization, there was a "standardization" initiative which changed a bunch of "over time" abilities so they would all align and be consistent.

I think somebody at ZOS a long time ago figured it was better/more foolproof/more efficient/more affordable to balance on a spreadsheet with guidelines, chasing a world where a lot of this could be automated and dev cycles/times would be greatly reduced.

This is something I really started to notice when Gilliam came into the picture. Gilliam's design philosophy seems based around standardized values and rigid rules. We haven't heard from him for awhile and I'm not even sure if he's still with ZOS.

It seems like Brian Wheeler has a similar philosophy and is bound by "rules" that don't actually need to exist.

Hamfast · September 18

I would like to point out that Brian Wheeler was correct when he said all sets have a purpose... my Main agrees, and here is why...

A few of the overall sets are used to support different builds in a myriad of circumstances, and a few more are used for other things... but the use of the rest is that they are added to our sticker books in case they become the flavor of the month... and then deconstructed to give us the materials we use to craft useful sets and upgrade the sets that need it...

Even if the only use of some obscure set is to become the parts used to create other items, that is still a use... perhaps not what the purpose they were intended for, but still a purpose.

Yes, my Main is a Crafter.

onyxorb · September 18

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Wanted to clear this point up. We posted on the forum that we would be doing an AMA on Reddit, days before the AMA happened. Just to give a heads up that it was happening. So we did not attempt to hide the discussion. We wanted as many people to participate as possible.

The reason we chose to do the AMA on Reddit is because the formatting for threaded discussions is far easier to follow than in our forum threads. We have looked into how we could make the experience better on the forum, but Vanilla Forums (our provider) doesn't support threaded conversations.

Thanks for clearly explaining 'why' it was on a different site than the forums, that was helpful and makes sense.

I know I don't check forums every day , and don't check reddit at all, so I totally missed out on this.

Information seems to randomly be distributed between the forums, twitter, reddit, twitch, and the ESO website.
I'm not sure anyone has the time/energy to check all those sources all the time. Or if they even know about some of these sources.

It really feels that important things like the AMA, surveys and maintenance windows should be displayed in the In Game 'Announcements'.

Is there a reason why they can't use the in game Announcements for stuff other than events and Crown Store sales?

Again, they wouldn't need a full article 'in' the Announcements, but a quick blurb, and a link to find out more info would really be great to have in game so we don't have to keep missing out on things.

Morvan · September 18

Vulkunne wrote: »

Djiku wrote: »

The recent AUA on Reddit was just terrible. I can't put it any other way. How you can be so blind and defensive to reasonable feedback regarding consumables and sets is just baffling. I want to be constructive and leave it at that.
Just listen to Skinny Cheeks. He is making valid points and is a longtime standing community member and content creator, so he knows what the community is worried about.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=w0BbaObAw_k&t=401s

I am totally against making any adjustments to consumables. Wheeler is right to push back on this and to make a strong case for having this approached in a slower, more constructive manner. If the balance for classes is messed up already and we all know it to be true, then why rush making changes to consumables? It's a bad idea right now and Wheeler has the right of it on this one. The way players are dealing out damage in PvP, a health pot barely covers it. Just barely worth even having tbh. I can only imagine nerfring pots or food any further at this time. *Cringe*

I think you misunderstood the point, Skinny didn't directly ask to adjust consumables on his comment, Wheeler only assumed so since Skinnycheeks mentioned how hybridization wasn't really finished, as he fears the same will happen with subclassing.

When people say hybridization isn't finished, it's mainly due to how weapon/spell damage have pretty much no reason to be separated stats anymore, we've been expecting them to fuse those two and named buffs related into a single damage stat, hence why Wheeler assumed Skinny was talking about consumables, since they're related to this change, though the fact he only specified consumables makes me assume he doesn't really know the logic behind it.

Overall, this change wouldn't really nerf or buff consumables, we'd just fuse Prophecy and Savagery into one, and same for Major Brutality and Sorcery, since every source that provides those buffs will always provide BOTH as if they were one, except consumables for... some reason?

And also, we're not just asking for this right now, we know they have their hands full with subclassing (though they don't seem to know it sometimes), we've been asking for this since hybridization, it's been 3 years.

Pevey · September 18

Stamicka wrote: »

peacenote wrote: »

Before hybridization, there was a "standardization" initiative which changed a bunch of "over time" abilities so they would all align and be consistent.

I think somebody at ZOS a long time ago figured it was better/more foolproof/more efficient/more affordable to balance on a spreadsheet with guidelines, chasing a world where a lot of this could be automated and dev cycles/times would be greatly reduced.

This is something I really started to notice when Gilliam came into the picture. Gilliam's design philosophy seems based around standardized values and rigid rules. We haven't heard from him for awhile and I'm not even sure if he's still with ZOS.

It seems like Brian Wheeler has a similar philosophy and is bound by "rules" that don't actually need to exist.

There's no way for us to know the inner workings on the team and who is responsible for what. Like in any group of two or more people, I'm sure there are differences in opinion, small and large. I only ever mention Wheeler by name because he is in charge. I think if you are responsible for the overall vision, the buck stops with you. Not anyone else on your team. But this is also based on the assumption that the "leader" of the team actually had any say. I leave room for the possibility that Wheeler may personally disagree with the vision set by his own bosses and which he has no power to change. I also only mention Wheeler by name since several times over the years he has demonstrated that he has a limited understanding of the combat in ESO. Either ZOS leadership does not read ANY social media, or they believe players are making personal attacks (rather than pointing out the obvious conclusion based on the evidence), or they just don't care.

Vulkunne · September 18

Morvan wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

Djiku wrote: »

The recent AUA on Reddit was just terrible. I can't put it any other way. How you can be so blind and defensive to reasonable feedback regarding consumables and sets is just baffling. I want to be constructive and leave it at that.
Just listen to Skinny Cheeks. He is making valid points and is a longtime standing community member and content creator, so he knows what the community is worried about.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=w0BbaObAw_k&t=401s

I am totally against making any adjustments to consumables. Wheeler is right to push back on this and to make a strong case for having this approached in a slower, more constructive manner. If the balance for classes is messed up already and we all know it to be true, then why rush making changes to consumables? It's a bad idea right now and Wheeler has the right of it on this one. The way players are dealing out damage in PvP, a health pot barely covers it. Just barely worth even having tbh. I can only imagine nerfring pots or food any further at this time. *Cringe*

I think you misunderstood the point, Skinny didn't directly ask to adjust consumables on his comment, Wheeler only assumed so since Skinnycheeks mentioned how hybridization wasn't really finished, as he fears the same will happen with subclassing.

When people say hybridization isn't finished, it's mainly due to how weapon/spell damage have pretty much no reason to be separated stats anymore, we've been expecting them to fuse those two and named buffs related into a single damage stat, hence why Wheeler assumed Skinny was talking about consumables, since they're related to this change, though the fact he only specified consumables makes me assume he doesn't really know the logic behind it.

Overall, this change wouldn't really nerf or buff consumables, we'd just fuse Prophecy and Savagery into one, and same for Major Brutality and Sorcery, since every source that provides those buffs will always provide BOTH as if they were one, except consumables for... some reason?

And also, we're not just asking for this right now, we know they have their hands full with subclassing (though they don't seem to know it sometimes), we've been asking for this since hybridization, it's been 3 years.

Skinny's not the only one to discuss the consumables changes, as I've heard different ideas from other places. I think it's important for anyone who has stake in this game to provide their opinion, and I'll refer to what they said as my policy is to never speak for anyone else.

That said, I brought my own points into this ring based on my experiences with this game. I'll refer any interests back to my original post and no further explanation should be necessary for my part. I think we all contribute important points to this conversation and now is a perhaps a better time for ZOS to listen while they get things in order and plan on how to move forward.

Rkindaleft · September 18

Destai wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Also wanted to follow up here. Thank you for the feedback on the AUA. We are taking this feedback to the team to see how we can improve these in the future. The goal with these is to provide a pipeline for communication. Especially with recent changes to leadership, we felt it was important to have an AUA that covered a wide mount of topics. But we are taking in the feedback to improve these in the future along with some of the commentary about the game to share with our team for continued improvements.

And you guys can say "things are in the works" all you want, but that's not being believed by a lot of folks. It's just frustrating to see that at this point. It seems like you guys prefer to deal with that frustration, rather than managing sentiment if/when plans change. Even though the community's largely united in saying, "tell us your plans earlier, we're ok if plans change"; it seems like you're unwilling to do that.

Also, there were a number of hardball questions that really needed to be answered but weren't. I asked quite a few myself - like what did you guys learn from U35. Of course, no answer. If you guys are gonna post in blogs about how you learn from your mistakes, then you need to be prepared to openly discuss them. You will gain credibility if you do.

I want to highlight this because it merits repeating.

@ZOS_Kevin, I would like to reiterate the point that when the team says "we're working on improving communication", what the players are actually desperate for, is open dialogue with the player base and the dev team regarding updates and balance changes. We don't expect you to reveal everything or spoil future content, but one of the reasons players are so upset with the comments made in the AUA is because every time there's a problem with an update, concerns are met with silence, feedback is met with crickets and questions go unanswered. Then when you get comments like you did in the AUA, that show a fundamental misunderstanding of the combat landscape, it says to us, that it's almost like you didn't even bother to read any of it. It shows a blatant disregard for the wants and needs of the community.

This problem doesn't even just involve questions about combat, either. It took so many updates to even find a solution to something as small as the Grim Focus permaglow despite it being almost consistently on the front page of the forums for 3 years...

Ragnarok0130 · September 18

Destai wrote: »

Brian's responses were pretty discouraging; it feels pointless to provide them feedback. I

And this is precisely why PTS feedback fell through the floor after U35.

Ragnarok0130 · September 18

Nemesis7884 wrote: »

Spreadsheet balancing and standartization of everything might have made sense before subclassing....but now it makes 0 sense...they should rather form the skill lines around specific themes, strengths and weaknesses to make them more interesting....in a paper stone scissor style fashion

Subclassing itself is a misnomer. Real subclassing would have been a templar being able to further spec into a sub role such as a priest or paladin not stealing skill lines from another class - that is multi-classing. Also the devs told us that power creep wasn't concerning when we raised it as an issue during the U46 PTS cycle so why are they all of a sudden concerned about power creep with consumables? The dev's priorities are so misplaced that I cannot adequately describe them without my post being 75% [snip]s.

Ragnarok0130 · September 18

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Also wanted to follow up here. Thank you for the feedback on the AUA. We are taking this feedback to the team to see how we can improve these in the future. The goal with these is to provide a pipeline for communication. Especially with recent changes to leadership, we felt it was important to have an AUA that covered a wide mount of topics. But we are taking in the feedback to improve these in the future along with some of the commentary about the game to share with our team for continued improvements.

Kevin at this point all I can say is "that dog don't hunt". We've been repeatedly reassured that "improved communication" was the rule of the day since well before U35, but especially with U35 and U46 but the devs always fall back into lack of communication, blowing off community questions, and giving us scripted video Q&As that don't answer the questions that the community wants answered and then silence once again. This is not sustainable and nobody believes the improved communication line anymore. We love this game, we love the community, and we love you Kevin but the others are actively driving the community away from the game. This needs to be fixed, if not for a game sustainment angle, for a fiduciary responsibility to the Microsoft shareholders angle.

colossalvoids · 12:14AM

Ragnarok0130 wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Also wanted to follow up here. Thank you for the feedback on the AUA. We are taking this feedback to the team to see how we can improve these in the future. The goal with these is to provide a pipeline for communication. Especially with recent changes to leadership, we felt it was important to have an AUA that covered a wide mount of topics. But we are taking in the feedback to improve these in the future along with some of the commentary about the game to share with our team for continued improvements.

Kevin at this point all I can say is "that dog don't hunt". We've been repeatedly reassured that "improved communication" was the rule of the day since well before U35, but especially with U35 and U46 but the devs always fall back into lack of communication, blowing off community questions, and giving us scripted video Q&As that don't answer the questions that the community wants answered and then silence once again. This is not sustainable and nobody believes the improved communication line anymore. We love this game, we love the community, and we love you Kevin but the others are actively driving the community away from the game. This needs to be fixed, if not for a game sustainment angle, for a fiduciary responsibility to the Microsoft shareholders angle.

It's like 2018 all over again. And 2019, 2020, 2022 etc. with "we hear you, we'll do better, communication is coming, stay tuned!, twitter posts asking about "how communication can improve, we all ears". But how long can you be tuned in for the actions to take place, I don't know. It's a bit comical at this point but I genuinely hope someone out there in the team, some new people with a drive and passion like Kevin would be able to somehow shift us into the right direction. Can't see it now, but if this thread got monitored there's better be some actions and the sooner the better.

Just directly ask us directly what communication and how it should be structured, there's enough people who could guide the conversation left in the community despite most being long time gone (mostly because the crickets we're hearing, or rather not hearing even them). People were already trying for years to no avail here, in class rep, content creation etc. Just simply look other teams who do amazingly with community, how they do stuff, how to effectively communicate and own your mistakes, not just blindly celebrate everything with communication channels shut tight.

silky_soft · 12:37AM

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Also wanted to follow up here. Thank you for the feedback on the AUA. We are taking this feedback to the team to see how we can improve these in the future. The goal with these is to provide a pipeline for communication. Especially with recent changes to leadership, we felt it was important to have an AUA that covered a wide mount of topics. But we are taking in the feedback to improve these in the future along with some of the commentary about the game to share with our team for continued improvements.

It's great you're always here Kev. But after 6 weeks I think the new studio head needs to take front and center with his vision for the game. He's not an outsider, he's been with the game for a fair while, he would already have vision. It would be great if skinnycheeks is allowed to have a 1 on 1 with Jo about the current place of the game and the future direction. Given free reign to ask anything and not pre scripted Q&A.

YandereGirlfriend · 1:29AM

Nemesis7884 wrote: »

Spreadsheet balancing and standartization of everything might have made sense before subclassing....but now it makes 0 sense...they should rather form the skill lines around specific themes, strengths and weaknesses to make them more interesting....in a paper stone scissor style fashion

Spreadsheet balancing never made sense to begin with.

Trying to describe game balance with math rather than experience and qualitative observation is building a house upon sand.

Personofsecrets · 2:31AM

@ZOS_Kevin the design team gutted and killed draugers heritage and dreamer's mantle for no good reason. I had draugers heritage since 2015 and used to use it in battlegrounds until it was nerfed to the ground. Again, for what reason?

Personofsecrets · 2:38AM

The design team is supposedly worried about balance but continues to allow the most toxic gameplay that I've ever experienced in ESO to just persist.

Funny how straws can be grasped over sets that are junk, but there are still setups that can burn down my 38,000 armor build in seconds. And when it isn't that, it's non-stop templar healing ult or non-stop power overload.

Just think about that. Design just isn't capable of seeing the problems. They are here, they have been here, and nothing is doen. Therefore, they aren't issues to design. They are just off in their own little world. Yes, probably one of spreadsheets.