More “Meh” from Zwift in this “update”…four new routes added in Watopia, with some very short sections of new roads added to create some of the routes. For instance, there is now a mid-way “cut through” on the Jungle Loop to create the Serpentine 8. It is maybe a couple of KM long, at the most.
But of course after having just completed all of the routes in Zwift just last weekend, I now have 4 more to complete (well, only 2 now…did 2 of them this AM).
Zwift is really losing the plot, IMO…so many of the bigger issues continue to go unaddressed (cheating, the inability to switch routes w/o getting out of the game, etc.) but hey…eRacing!!
I guess we’ll be made to wait until next year for the Tokyo world… but yeah, I don’t get why they are not dealing with some of the minor stuff that annoys so many of us.
What is the plot for Zwfit?
I believe Zwift offers a lot for people. Group rides, workouts, races (as long as you’re not super bent out of shape assuming everyone who beats you is cheating), something different to look at when riding inside.
My zwift usage is pretty simple, either the wattopia hilly route (on a longer sweet spot day I can generally compete for a jersey) or up the alpe for certain sweet spot workouts. Between routes and worlds I don’t think they need to be adding new locations, what it seems like they need to do is keep refining the user experience, like racing, most glaringly. Since all my workouts are done with TR, I really don’t have a lot that I personally find missing on zwift, but I’m sure they continue to overlook common user complaints
- My cynical guess, they don’t care. You (I and so many of us) are already paying and committed in Z use. We are unlikely to bail and drop their revenue enough to make any dent.
All the interviews I have seen with Eric are focusing on those “new riders” they don’t have or lost in quick time from friction due to tech and setup issues. They seem to be aimed at becoming the cycling version of the big P and don’t care about fixing or improving the experience for us long-time riders.
I could be totally wrong, but it is more of the same from them and seems to be getting worse over time. That and their apparent focus on racing (despite all the glaring problems left unaddressed there) are killing any real development for the many thousands of us “real users” and it sucks the big one
I heard a gamer on one of the zwiftcasts (I think @GPLama was on it too) suggesting Zwift should just start on Zwift 2.0 than try and continually fix and debug what they have. Basically, park as is, and just start on a new build.
Sure, I’d be fine with that but I just don’t see it happening. It would seem like a massive dump of cash to “start over” and make something truly new.
Sounds like a hard sell to the new funding groups (not to mention the old ones) to say “yeah this works… but we wanna do the same thing all over again… just better”.
Despite similarities to the main gaming world, Z seems intent on ignoring any of the existing info that could be gathered from those parallel sources (my cynicism again).
Yeah, there has been speculation for awhile now that they can’t address some of the long-term gripes from users because they are boxed in by the framework of the original game design…and a complete UI overhaul carries a significant risk when you try and implement it.
the idea of a 2.0 version sounds logical to me, but I don’t know enough about software / game development to say whether it is realistic.
I definitely don’t - FIFA 98 was the last game I played (not counting zwift!)
No doubt…they view their user base as essentially a captive audience. They know they have us, we aren’t going anywhere, so why should they care about our complaints?
Hang on - Computrainer is on Line 1. They’d like a word.
So sad… that it’s more likely true than not
As mentioned on the latest Zwiftcast, Z just doesn’t have any real competition that could drive it to make real changes. Until that happens, I agree, we are captive if we want what Z essentially offers, because the options are few and lacking in many ways.
If Zwift isn’t doing a case study / analysis of how CT blew their market dominance, they are not paying attention to their business, plain and simple.
CT was literally the only game in town for interactive trainers for so long…but they refused to recognize the changing market conditions / trends (primarily ANT+) and relied on their reputation for being bullet-proof as their primary point of difference.
In the space of maybe 3 years, they went from being #1 in the market to bankruptcy. A staggering fall from the top.
I’m still kinda shocked that no one bought the rights to company, IP and relaunched the brand.
Me too, kinda. But I also think that what they had is likely too old-school (wheel-on) or otherwise known (general power measurement) and had little more than a bombproof design that is not what people want these days. Sadly, their success and reliability are sorely needed in this tech space today.
We’d all be better off if the industry was held to the quality that they delivered. But we seem to have tossed that out the window, along with their old approach (wired… until Wahoo delivers a “superior connection” method in the future… Oh man… the irony meter will bust on the marketing push when that happens ).
Not sure the two are comparable. It sounds like CT didn’t innovate and just rested on their laurels. Zwift is a very innovative company in my opinion. They may be focused on niche’s that I’m not particularly as interested in, but to say they aren’t paying attention to their business is a bit presumptive.
There may well be a zwift-killer that comes along, but I don’t think Zwift isn’t paying attention. And it’s very possible that the “would be” zwift-killer could have been the company to create the e-racing sports league first instead of them.
And the cynical viewpoint brought up here is likely not true. I doubt they actually view people as captive and thus to be ignored. Given their investment in events and accessibility of Eric, I would say they are probably more engaged than 99% of businesses. The result may be the same that they prioritize these other things higher, but that goes with any business, and we’ve seen it with trainerroad. You can’t do everything.
I am a fan of zwift and my expectations are low, so obviously others can make their own value decision. But you have seen some pretty decent new features from them in the past 12 months that shouldn’t be scoffed at. Pace Partners sound like the simplest thing, but every time I ride, there is a hoard of followers. France is one of the best world additions besides watopia to date. Steering might be a little limited, but I’m sure no small amount of work went into it from the design in game, to the hardware. I’m sure there are others. These route additions may seem small, but I’m sure folks will dutifully complete the routes, and probably appreciate the additional variation at some point during their membership.
Haha they will never be Peloton and have that type of fan base or listen to their customers. They only wish and hell Peloton just released pilates.
Not directed at you just responding to your comment. I like TR, Zwift and yes Peloton for different reasons.
Agreed, different markets, but I think Zwift aims to reach a level of “Zwift is the answer… and nothing else matters” solution at a wider scale than their current/small slice of “dedicated cyclists” and may be aiming to broaden to more fitness people that are using “cycling” instead of “spinning”. But I sure don’t know much more than some very uneducated guessing.
If Peloton ever opened up the model a little to get metrics to control smart trainers they would go to new heights. For $12.99 the digital app has a lot of value for what it has in stuff to do.
Try RGT Cycling.
You get to create your own route (the same scenery though), the physics/ride is more realistic, no zpower, and am told the racing is better (w/o less/the cheats). I like the feel much better and love riding on my routes along with TR (a few route with simulated constant slopes for those outdoor workouts). Oh, there is drafting and not that weird thing that Zwift has where you roughly put out the same power. It’s $5 cheaper also.
I don’t see that happening any time soon…they want to sell bikes, not an app right now. They don’t feel like they have come close to market saturation for bikes in the current climate, so no need to give people the option. You wanna do Peloton, you gotta buy the bike.
Now…is there a business model for someone to develop a platform for classes using smart trainers (i.e. a combo platter between TR group workouts & a spin class)? Maybe…but don’t look for Peloton to jump into that niche right now.
Yes I they won’t do it but was just saying “if” they did. I still use the digital app for yoga, meditation (favorite) and treadmill workouts even though I sold my bike a while back. Nothing wrong with the bike just like the trainer more.