I love Overwatch, and its super fun. I personally really enjoyed the closed and open betas, but like closed better - if only because of the higher amounts of player experience (not seeing multiple hanzos and bastions every game).
Playing with the closed beta players the games were less one sided overall and with the mostly open beta friends it was mainly just killing bastions over and over as widowmaker.
This being said I look forward to the full release and six months down that road when a meta begins to develop in pub play and people gain additional experience with all the heroes. I also am really looking forward to all the content I am planning for TL and hoping to create a strong group of people to help bring that content and grow the TL community for OW!
What we your thoughts on the open beta fellow TLers? Any of you sold on the game or decided it wasn't for you? Did any of you find some great groups to play with?
Let's discuss the end of the beta in this thread
Also if you have any ideas for TL's coverage of Overwatch, or want to contribute just send me a PM and I'll start to build a team for coverage
Had loads of fun even without anyone to play with, i was just solo queing, had around 25-30hours gametime so i got to try a decent amount of content.
What suprised me about OW is the fact that almost all classes are really enjoyable for me, normally i only play hitscan weapon classes as i enjoy trying to improve my aim etc but here i found myself enjoying completely different styles like mei or winston and even support classes.
I'm really really strapped for cash atm but i wanna buy it, just not sure if it will be on release.
As for the balance complaints i actually feel it's not as unbalanced as some people may say although i don't really want to judge the game untill i actually play more and at a higher level but for me it really did seem fine for what i played.
Overall it is a really fun game and exceeded my expectations.
Overwatch to me is exactly what I expect out of Blizzard and hits the couple key points I always associate with their games:
1) Gameplay is rock solid and fun. Always most important factor. Game feels great to play and is super fun. Movement, gunplay, different hero types, it all just fits so well together.
2) It looks great! I love the art style and I love how clear and easy it is to view the gameplay. You don't have to squint to find that sniper on a dead dark map or fiddle with your monitor gamma settings to see stuff clearly, there's no haze or fog effects to obscure vision needlessly.
3) Polished. Open beta, and it's more polished than several AAA launch titles. Yea I know, this is the game, it basicly is a launch title, but that's the thing. Blizzard doesn't put halfmade shit out to the public.
I played more hours than I really should have during the open beta, got to level 43 and had an absolute blast. Most of it I played in a group of 2 to 4 with my friends and the experience was great all around. Really easy game to lose track of time in. During the weekend I think we clocked like 12 hour nonstop session a time or two and didn't even notice it. Mark of an amazing game for sure.
40 euros, assuming there's no DLC/map pack/hero pack bs coming up, is a steal for a game of this quality. You don't even need to be a crack twitch shooter guy, there's several heroes that totally do not rely on pure aim to do well in and it's great that Blizzard managed to make a functional role to 21 different heroes in the game.
Game is amazing and I hope it does well and gets a proper comp scene going. I've seen some amazingly skilled players during the beta, they need an environment to show those skills.
21 thumbs up for Overwatch, Blizzard have definately made a great FPS game.
I last played in a weekend beta test that took place last fall. I was immediately stricken by the high skill cap of a lot of the heroes (which was a welcome deviation from most FPS games being released) and saw a lot of potential in the game itself. That said, I wasn't sure how much I liked the game. After having more of an opportunity to spend time with the game and understand it during the open beta test, I can safely say that I'm fairly smitten by Overwatch. This is a great game. The gameplay is solid. Blizzard has clearly put a ton of polish into Overwatch. The visuals and sound effects are both outstanding. The game also runs very well (I'm quite surprised, actually, given how problematic the SC2 engine has been).
What has impressed me the most is the variety in available styles of play. I don't pretend to really know or understand all of the heroes, but it is readily apparent that the heroes in this game are very well designed. Each has unique strengths and weaknesses, granting people ample opportunity to find a hero that really fits how they want to play. I gravitated towards Genji, whom I spent the vast majority of the open beta playing. I love his hyper-mobility, surprising versatility, and retardedly high skill ceiling. It was incredibly rewarding to go from being the worst of Genji scrubs (I was utterly incapable of using the Dragon Sword properly) when I first started playing him to being someone who was making a lot of game-carrying plays. Granted, there's still a lot of room for improvement, but I definitely like how far I have come in a relatively short period of time.
As a side note, the biggest problem with TL's Overwatch coverage is that there isn't a regular thread (or threads) for people to discuss the game. I understand the reasons for shutting down the general thread, but it needed to be replaced with stuff (like hero discussion threads) before it was shut down.
I get that no gen thread opinion xDaunt, but we will be creating stuff as we go.
This thread is one example. I encourage you to open a genji discussion thread if you wanna make a quality OP for it! But it all takes time and I really don't want to half ass the hero threads
I am only proficient in a couple heroes well enough to justify my creating of OPs for those myself so I'll work on them slowly over the coming weeks
Also to your point about Genji and in general playstyles, some heroes are very very flexible. There are at least three different genji playstyles i've seen used to great effect. There's the straight up team member genji who pushes payloads, pokes and goes in to execute with dash and hop back out. Theres the flanking genji who avoids his team completely and goes straight to the back to kill high priority targets. Then theres the annoying genjis who jump in and out simply to build ult charge and create chaos then do most of their game changing play with the dragon strike as opposed to their other abilities.
Poke would be a great example of a dragon strike player, Poro is a great flanker, and Seagull is an amazing teamplay genji :D
Very flexible high skill cap champ. Wish I could be better at him XD
Well, hard for me to write anything yet since I've installed and played only a little bit today and open beta ended, unfortunately, so I've made a pre-order.
Anyway, game looks kinda fun and cool but I'm just struggling with performance issues on my pretty old laptop, gonna figure out which setting gonna be the best to have at least 60fps+. Also it seemed I had slight lags in-game when I tried it out.
Anyway, can't wait for 24th May, so I can put my hands on OW and play some more games !
Edit: Seems like my GPU is kind of shitty for this game :\
Overwatch has the Blizzard sheen in full but it's unsatisfying solo (majority of the time for me) so it's a "wait and see". Perhaps if every character had one more of [weapon, movement mechanic, passive or active ability] it'd make character mastery and individual play more satisfying for me. Ideally this would further differentiate some of the roster from their team fortress archetypes, reinforce their strategic/tactical niche, and feed into the theme/lore. At the same time, matches are so short and simple in mechanics that I suspect the game would collapse under more character complexity.
For that matter, for such a relatively "themed" multiplayer shooter (compared to say tf2 or csgo), the game types are generic push the cart/KotH/rush with no connection to said theme. For the first new Blizzard IP since Starcraft, it's disappointingly timid (so far) in tying game modes/mechanics to the IP/theme. For example, >50% of the release roster seem to be "good guys", missing the opportunity to have game modes/maps balanced akin to the old school dota scourge/sentinel. Imo the fun and unique potential of the IP is weighed down by the emphasis on competitive play and balance.
Depending on the project, Blizzard are at times over-enamored with its design decisions or lacking nerve to release anything that hasn't been focus-tested and community-feedback'd to death. Imo Overwatch leans in the latter category from my impression of the barebones beta and thus is on hold for me. I'm sure Blizzard are working on building up Overwatch, but right now the game is the instant ramen version of the game I would pay money for.
i usually dont play shooters, so the game is a bit hard for me, especially on heroes like tracer or mcgree i cant hit shit, it was a bit frustrating, but that part i can manage.
The game itself is fun and reminds me a bit of the original deus ex multiplayer, it also was a shooter with many different abilities, i had fun with that one too.
What i dont like is that of course most people dont have any teamwork skills at all, so its best enjoyed with a fixed party, which i dont enjoy organizing. Also the matches are weirdly short and the combined downtime of deathtimers and play of the game and matchmaking and ready timers is very high when compared to playtime. I actually think its almost 50:50 downtime to playing the game.
Overall, I had a lot of fun with the Open Beta. I'm glad I preordered Overwatch, and I look forward to playing with the friends I made through TL and randomly.
The one rough part for me was playing Mercy in solo queue. I got decent amounts of heal and a couple solid rezzes I was proud of, but most of the time I was being focused by the enemy team, spamming group up to no avail, or watching in horror as my team continued to trickle in and die. Terrible win rate so far, granted I know at least some of it is my fault, but I felt pretty powerless to make a difference as Mercy while in solo queue. She seems like a hero that does great on a coordinated team especially with Lucio as a backup heals/shield/speed buff.
Contrast that with playing Lucio, where simply playing him on control point vs a team without one gives your team a huge advantage setting up on the point. Lucio is really fun and fairly easy to use but with quite the high skill cap given his wall riding. It just felt easier to make a difference with him.
I think a lot people who play support will gravitate towards Lucio especially given his advantages in control point.
I'm very curious to where the meta will go as there seems to be a lot of potential options. At least one support seems to be a must but other than that I ran into a lot of seemingly crazy things that work. 5 S76 + Lucio being the scariest crazy thing that worked really well. I think 2 tanks and/or 2 support will be common as those comps seem to work very well in my experience so far.
On May 11 2016 05:34 ZeromuS wrote: Also to your point about Genji and in general playstyles, some heroes are very very flexible. There are at least three different genji playstyles i've seen used to great effect. There's the straight up team member genji who pushes payloads, pokes and goes in to execute with dash and hop back out. Theres the flanking genji who avoids his team completely and goes straight to the back to kill high priority targets. Then theres the annoying genjis who jump in and out simply to build ult charge and create chaos then do most of their game changing play with the dragon strike as opposed to their other abilities.
Poke would be a great example of a dragon strike player, Poro is a great flanker, and Seagull is an amazing teamplay genji :D
I pulled up videos of Poke and Seagull. I think Poke is probably the better player (at least mechanically). The biggest thing that I noticed about what he does differently is his liberal use of Swift Strike to whittle down multiple targets. He gets a ton of multi kills from getting the CD reset from eliminations and then mowing through multiple enemy players with Swift Strike as soon as it comes back up. And of course, his movement around the map is really top notch, which I think is the defining characteristic of a good Genji player.
Love it. I was a big fan of TF2, and while Overwatch is very similar, it is also completely different. Game play is just as fun, but the tone is different.
Visuals/Sounds
The more serious gritty characters (a few of them are gritty) are very appealing to me. The voice acting is incredible on many of the guys. Reaper, Hanzo, Genji, D.va, Widowmaker, Junkrat, Bastion (digital sure), Roadhog, and many others just continually blow me away. The one drawback here is that all I hear is Raynor on McCree and it takes me out of the game b/c it doesn't fit... I really really want him to sound like Clint Eastwood instead of Raynor.
The visual art is great... Ultimates look slick as hell. Alternate intros as achievements is a real thing because they look SO good. As others have noted, it is easy to see things and no foggy junk to make it a pain. I like the more realistic style overall. Reinhardt is the only one with the hands bigger than a human torso that looks overly cartoony to me, but I guess he is to appeal to the WoW fans so....
Gameplay:
Yeah, I just played solo the whole time and while there were annoying matches and too easy matches, overall I can tell it is a solid game. It's going to be really fun.
Some things they changed up coming from TF2 perspective:
1. Static defenses are weaker in some ways. Certain characters besides invulnerable tanks can take out turrets. Good.
2. Unlimited Ammo is a thing, and it is convenient, I like it.. This works out well so far because grenade spam and the like for some reason isn't as powerful. The further divided classes (from TF2) and the rock, paper, scissors effect with the heroes seems to take care of this.
3. You can see most characters when they attack you from range, but not really Hanzo. He's interesting... a not long range sniper.
4. There is a class for every player out there. Some require great aiming. Some require great teamwork. Some are good for solo artists. I love it! Played every class and enjoyed something in each of them.
Most of the characters are so interesting. The offense characters feel so limited by comparison to the very unique and cool abilities of the tanks and supports and many of the defense characters. I played about 30 hours and couldn't get over how almost every team people ended up picking 4 offense as if they thought it was the only thing worth playing.
My favorite characters were Zarya and Mei and I felt I got pretty good with both of them in that time. The value add to the team is incredible vs. the offense characters who must rely on their teammates doing something good before they do something good. Give me a character that ENABLES power plays rather than a character who actually makes them just by seizing the opportunity any day.
On a side note, I think the truly brilliant thing about this game is that it's a twitch shooter... but not! If those are your skills, you can play certain characters to accentuate those skills. If you have other skills but not twitch shooter skills, well there's plenty of characters for you too. Any player can find a way to add great value to the team. I think this more than anything is what will make Overwatch a highly successful game.
This game is amazing. I don't particularly enjoy FPSes - didn't like tf2 - but I can easily see myself sinking 1000 hours into this when I'm burnt out from other games. I am counting on other game modes, but I'd be surprised if they were released within a year of launch. Blizzard is fucking slow. But so fucking good.
loved this game, thought i would like this but didnt know i would be addicted to this game !!! my favorite heroes: genji, junkrat, zenyatta and lucio they are so fun
Didn't expect much going into Overwatch, I think I was actually hesitant to click Install in the client. Yeah. Fucking love this game, I found myself playing it for 12 hours straight and not realizing that the day was already over. My 2 mains were Reaper and D.Va, and I always wanted to get in there and mix it up. I'd get a lot of PotG's as Reaper, which is exciting(insert sarcasm here if you want), but every now and then I'll play a game as D.Va and never die once, which is probably the most satisfying thing I pull off. I'll be looking to try other characters and broaden them horizons, but I've been having oh so much fun with those 2 that I haven't even thought of it.
My final game before the server shut down was the best one I ever played, easily. It was a King of the Hill on Lijiang Tower, and both teams were at 99%, it must have been in overtime for like 5 minutes. It was just a non-stop slugfest, I just couldn't hold back my smile, despite the tense game. Round 2 was also pretty close, but nothing like round 1, and even though we won rounds 1 and 2, it was only the cherry on the cake, what actually went down that game was so awesome, and the perfect game to go out on. Still mad I can't play more Overwatch of course, but I can't complain, all things considered.
The good: I play Widow, McCree and Tracer for the most part. Playing Tracer is a lot of fun and even though we've only had a few days I've made some very memorable plays with her. The game is very fast paced and dynamic, it feels extremely good when things work out. Love the art style, the gameplay is good, and I feel like I'm getting competent at the game. There are a lot of avenues for strategy which is cool.
The bad: I discussed my concerns in the QQ thread, saying I don't like certain characters which I find irritating (Bastion is not one of them). This is a personal thing, it's just how I feel.
i had fun. when i took the game seriously it was engrossing. when i wanted to just jerk-around and blow up shit it was fun watching the explosions.
a big key for the millions of semi-serious players is this... can i click "Quick Play" and get into a reasonably competitive and balanced game in less than 1 minute? if the answer is "yes" then this title hits a certain sweet spot that will catalyze the development of a very loyal fan base.
On May 11 2016 12:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i had fun. when i took the game seriously it was engrossing. when i wanted to just jerk-around and blow up shit it was fun watching the explosions.
a big key for the millions of semi-serious players is this... can i click "Quick Play" and get into a reasonably competitive and balanced game in less than 1 minute? if the answer is "yes" then this title hits a certain sweet spot that will catalyze the development of a very loyal fan base.
I think the answer is yes. I'm not super serious, but I felt I got pretty competent in these last couple days, and I try to play well of course. The games were engrossing for sure, but most importantly it didn't have that frustration factor for me, I always felt like there was another way to go. When I die to Bastion or Mei or whatever other frustrating thing, I always feel like I have power over making it not happen again. Whether it's perfectly balanced is unknown, but it certainly doesn't feel bad from where I'm sitting. I always feel like there's another notch I can carve into my gameplay, so I perform even better next time. It didn't just feel competitive and balanced, it also felt good, even in places you'd think would feel bad. This game hit a lot of sweet spots for me personally, and I can't wait to play it a ton more when it launches.
On May 11 2016 12:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i had fun. when i took the game seriously it was engrossing. when i wanted to just jerk-around and blow up shit it was fun watching the explosions.
a big key for the millions of semi-serious players is this... can i click "Quick Play" and get into a reasonably competitive and balanced game in less than 1 minute? if the answer is "yes" then this title hits a certain sweet spot that will catalyze the development of a very loyal fan base.
Relatively competitive and quick yes, balanced team wise, well once you get matched enough times, it will probably even out a bit. I had a lot of really terrible luck in solo queue where i'd get put into game 3 seconds from ending or with teams that were just terrible, assuming that gets fixed come release or shortly thereafter, then I think it can and will hit the sweet spot.
I guess I was kinda hyped for the game. It's a Blizzard title, it's got a nod to arena shooters of old and people who got in on the closed beta seemed to enjoy themselves.
And then it turns out Overwatch is crazy fun and I realize now I wasn't nearly as hyped as I should have been. Nice to have a new title exceed my expectations.
Gameplay is amazing and it's really intense when you have two somewhat balanced teams actually trying. When everyone picks snipers or Bastion and you're left having to decide whether to try to salvage the game as tank or support it's kinda meh though. Guess the "instalock"-mentality will fall off quickly in ranked games.
Getting to play something else than support or tank felt like Christmas. Not that I mind playing support or tank, and I could always trollpick D.Va and have a blast no matter what (at the level I was playing she was really effective anyway).
Well graphics and artstyle are as expected from a billion dollar company with years of experience in the gaming business. The characters look and feel nice, the voice acting is superb. The initial balance feels okay in general. There should have been even more variety like characters with some cloak or more ...
Technical issues: People with high ping should get DC'd or play against other people with high ping also hit boxes especially the head should be reworked. Also the update frequency from the server to the client should be increased.
I think this game could become repetitive very fast and maybe more game modes should be included. In addition It would be nice to see if you are playing against a team and don't geet matched against teams in Quickmatch (similar to HOTS).
any one care to post their quick match record? mine was 14-15. i felt like the players were around my skill level. so i'm a happy camper... i felt the "auto match" mechanic worked well for me.
It's a fun game, though it can get frustrating when the other team is coordinated with proper picks while my team has 2 widowmakers on a KOTH map or on offense the whole game. It's these types of teams that often fail to break open an entrenched position containing Bastion, turrets, Widowmaker and Mercy damage boosts. I like that even if the opposing team has a good aimer, they've gotta be willing to get in the thick of things (around checkpoints and carts) to win, otherwise the kill score they've amassed won't do their team much good. With this in mind I enjoyed playing Mcree the most because you're effective at close range but also with some good aim and luck you can kill traditional snipers at long range, which allows you to be effective around the cart when you have to, but you can also try to outflank the other team. Not to mention that pesky Tracers have to think twice about fucking with you and Genjis have to have good timing on their E to duel with you.
In conclusion, I was pleasantly surprised at how good of a game this is. I even watched some VODs from the Overkill.gg tournament and the games were very entertaining. It's not clear whether the lots-of-action factor can lure in spectators who don't play the game, because you still have to have an idea what each hero does in order to appreciate good plays and teamwork.
On May 11 2016 14:39 JimmyJRaynor wrote: any one care to post their quick match record? mine was 14-15. i felt like the players were around my skill level. so i'm a happy camper... i felt the "auto match" mechanic worked well for me.
72-46, although that was almost always with friends. If I had to play soloQ... well I wouldn't buy Overwatch in the first place I guess. Being forced to play tank/healer (= Lucio 99% of the time cause other healers are twice as hard to play in soloQ) cause the team is too busy instalocking snipers and Tracers gets boring reaaally fast.
Wanted to agree that the netcode needs help. I think it is set up at 20 tick, which is nowhere near acceptable for competitive twitchy play. I certainly started to notice that everything has a delay, so your critically timed special moves (McCree's roll, Reaper's invulnerability, Tracer's blink, etc.) have to be anticipatory instead of reactionary. This is a bad thing.
Oh, and so apparently hacks are a thing. I can't stand 'em. Blizzard should take all means to destroy these guys... but also they did a decent job of including classes that will help balance out cheaters.
1. Hanzo's vision. He can cast his vision arrow all the time, which is invaluable to his whole team. (I read on reddit just now that there are cheats to see where other players are... well if you have a Hanzo your whole team can see things by default).
2. Torbjörn's turret will auto-track and kill Tracers that are using an aim hack, so you can still deny them (I hope).
3. Let's say they have one or two widowmakers that have some aim bot. Go Reaper (maybe two players go Reaper and coordinate), teleport behind them, kill 'em. Make it your job to keep them off your team.
Still, I hope Blizzard bans the crap out of them. There is incentive if they cancel their account and make them rebuy and rebuy. Not many kids are going to be able to afford that.
Had an absolute blast playing, now I need to scrape up 40 bucks to play this sucker when it comes out. Only thing I'm disappointed is that I'm losing my legendary skins, but that's not even a real big complaint I had a blast switching around with different heroes and trying out different things. I even had a sudden falling in love with Widowmaker, who was by far my worst and least played hero, near the end of the beta where I absolutely shut down a team on Dorado. The game feels fresh and vibrant and fun and there's not really a whole lot more I can ask from a game. The diversity of the heroes lets me kinda just play depending on my mood and lets me change it up when I'm a little burned out from one hero. It's simple in nature but satisfying to execute good plays, and the UI is really nice.
It can be a little frustrating when the team composition doesn't work out well and the team is stubborn, but it adds challenge to play better and its bound to happen. On the flipside when you execute properly it feels amazing. And of course you can goof off and still have just as much fun (won a game on Dorado where I jokingly said everyone should go bastion and we did, other team wasn't happy ).
Good job blizzard i haven't had that much fun playing a video game in such a long time.
Win ratio went up a lot after playing support or tank classes
Nuts win rate.
Mine was just about 55% didnt get to see the numbers. I played with various groups though and came up against seagull's stack a couple times in closed, and I dont think I've ever beat him on a large coordinated team before XD
On May 11 2016 23:38 Reaps wrote: Is there anything you get for preordering the standard edition? I will most likely buy it on day 1 also
I believe Noire Widowmaker skin is preorder only for any edition?
On May 11 2016 23:10 KingofdaHipHop wrote: And of course you can goof off and still have just as much fun (won a game on Dorado where I jokingly said everyone should go bastion and we did, other team wasn't happy ).
Gotta tell my story now. So there was a random game where the first two guys picked Solider76, then a hesitation... I picked Soldier76 with a wry smile on my face (more of a joke, but then wondering what the rest of the guys would do). Another hesitation... chat started lighting up with something like "Should we?", "Yeah, why not", "DO IT!!!". Next thing you know, we were rolling them with pure 76ers. What a blast! Him being such a well rounded hero, I wondered for a minute if it was slightly broken. Out the gates you all sprint at the same speed. Constant chain heals, rockets, everybody stuck together and we had perfect midrange DPS to mow most things down, and good enough ranged DPS to take out snipers.
Next game we had to try again, and this time the other team had a better composition (and/or players) and we thought we were done for. In the end we squeaked out a win, but it was obviously not a broken composition... still hilarious fun though.
It was fun and felt really polished and "nice" to play BUT two things annoyed me:
Solo-Experience: As a Soloplayer you just have to pray your teammates want to win and not just fuck around/try out stuff (ranked will probably fix this a bit). If you get thrown into a bad matchup it feels like you spend more time between games than actually playing.
Maps (imho the true weakness). The mappool feels really small and one dimensional? It allways comes down to "everyone get here and FIGHT". Where are the maps with multiple objectives? Where are the gamemodes aside from defend/attack "Point/Thing XYZ". The maps in General also don't really feel fleshed out, they just tend to have 2-3 positions where defenders can truely defend and if the offensive can break such a Point they easily make it to the next "defendable" place (or 1-2 Retards die randomly at another Point on the map).
ATM for me, it is not worth it at full price, it just feels a little too one dimensional. It could become really great but they have to seriously work on maps/gamemodes or many People will get bored very fast.
Btw: I'm also not sure about the ultimates they came up with... Stuff like Widowmakers or Lucios are fine (and they are darn strong) but "Diediedie" or "ta ku giwqkeghahgelöakhgewlöhDRAAAGONNNS" or "Aimbot aquired" feel very "not fun" for everyone except the user.
Btw2: Icegirl, Bastion and Torbjorn should just be removed from the game.
Fair thoughts Velr. The maps are actually pretty varied, it just takes time to really experience the flanking routes and different map routes. There are a lot of places to make defense happen and yes there's always an objective but at the same time, the maps are pretty varied imo. The same complaint could be made about any other game when the meta is slowly being developed.
Did you try the brawl mode? Those are really fun game modes and i suggest you try those on release. Solo experience I agree on, you NEED to have at least one friend to play with but you can make friends very easily in game in my experience.
Mei, Bastion Torb hate is normal for new players. More than one week in and you'll change your mind. Trust. One week is just not enough time to really get to the depth in the game that unlocks a lot of the fun.
I would urge you to try the 40$ edition on bnet the game does get better (and will probably not go on sale for a long time sadly).
The Gamespot guys lauded Blizzard's bravery in not including any kind of "DeathMatch" game mode.
thoughts?
On May 11 2016 23:52 Velr wrote: Solo-Experience: As a Soloplayer you just have to pray your teammates want to win and not just fuck around/try out stuff (ranked will probably fix this a bit). If you get thrown into a bad matchup it feels like you spend more time between games than actually playing.
i feel the solo experience is the weakest point of Overwatch. as an experiment, i played 29 games solo in the open beta to see what it would be like in the wild jungle of total chaos.
and it was still pretty fun. it was not as fun as playing with real life friends or friends i've made playing Overwatch. if Blizzard manages to improve the solo experience somehow.. i'll be damn impressed.
as a solo experience i rate Overwatch a 7.5/10 game and with RL friends its over 8.5/10
I have no issues with Bastion/Torbjorn/Mei when it comes to balance or how to counter them, thats not my issue. Torbjorn and Bastion are just stupid concepts. I mean, i mainly played Junkratt, so these 2 nearly never were my big issues gamewise , i just hate what they are. All Mei does is make the opponent feel useless (the wall is cool tho).
As i said, the game feels very polished and good to Play, i just feel like it kinda lacks the "ooomph" that would make me buy it immediatly. I probably will sooner or later (because i get drunk/bored and get the urge to shoot at stuff ), but its not a "MUST HAVE" for me.
But to be fair, FPS/Shooters were never really my genre, aside from HL1DM (kinda decent/serious, loved it and still do ), some CS 1.6 (I was bad) and some Q3 (was "ok", at least i could handle nightmare bots/do well on random servers) when these games were hot shit i barely played any (aside from some very casual CS Source on servers for bads). SC/BW took too much time.
What i'd love to see for future maps would be some more in depth objective mode like someone else already pointed out.
Take RTCW:ET, this is a FPS that did objectives right. One map for example Goldrush you would have to capture the first point, then escort a tank to a bank, use the tank to blow open the bank door's, steal the gold inside, take the gold to a truck that is just outside, then escort the truck to the other end of the map. During all of that the other team is trying to stop you. It also left permanent changes to the map after each objective.
Something along those lines would be awesome to see in OW, it would also most likely mean longer games if they went more in depth with the objectives.
Main reason why i'm writing this is because someone asked Dustin Browder on twitter about something similar with the objectives and he said it was a cool idea. So maybe something for the future.
Yes, emulating ET as far as objectives go is a great idea. The games would definitely get longer, maybe ~25-30min+. But I don't think that would be bad, you can still keep the same format and have that one game type which has 2-3 big maps. Maybe tournaments could run 2-3 smaller maps+1 big one. While I still enjoy the short matches sometimes it's cool to play a long game where you struggle etc etc.
Aside from more complex objectives/game type, I'd like to see something added to the movement. Make it more interesting, as of now I don't think you can do much interesting stuff with it except with movement-based abilities ofc. But that could just be because I don't know the game enough.
I dunno, I really wanted to like Overwatch and have been hyped for it since it was announced, but actually playing just didn't feel satisfying. I think in part because it's a game that demands a ton of coordination which just wasn't there with the quick play. I never really felt at the end of a game like I'd actually contributed anything, in fact I had to wait until the stats screen just to have any idea of what my impact had been. Which is probably because I wasn't very good. And it just felt like I was basically spawning, running in, using abilities, eventually dying to one of the auto-kill abilities on the other team (Hanzo, McCree, S76), waiting 5 seconds, and repeating. The only exception was when I was playing Symmetra, whom I found to be a lot of fun and wound up picking most of my games. But I don't think I can justify getting the game just for her.
There were a couple of little things also. I'd like a minimap, for one. And the change in mouse sensitivity when you scope with Widow is really annoying.
Anyway, I don't want to rag on it too much since I can see other people really enjoyed it, and that's great. And I did have fun at times. But I think I'll be sticking to other games for now.
It's just a matter of finding the hero that suites you. I know my twitch aim isn't what it used to be, so I didn't play a single game as Widow, but I played a fair bit of soldier 76 because I can still track with my aim. Liked Mei and Mercy the most by far.
Btw, you can change the scope sens for Widow in the control options, there was a dropdown menu where you can select individual heroes from the list and change settings just for them. Some of the heroes had extra options like Widow has an option to pick how sensitivity changes when you scope.
On May 12 2016 03:00 daemir wrote: It's just a matter of finding the hero that suites you. I know my twitch aim isn't what it used to be, so I didn't play a single game as Widow, but I played a fair bit of soldier 76 because I can still track with my aim. Liked Mei and Mercy the most by far.
Btw, you can change the scope sens for Widow in the control options, there was a dropdown menu where you can select individual heroes from the list and change settings just for them. Some of the heroes had extra options like Widow has an option to pick how sensitivity changes when you scope.
Ah, I was looking for something like that but I guess I didn't look hard enough.
Ah, I was looking for something like that but I guess I didn't look hard enough.
I definitely feel like they should have that as part of the tutorial, or after your first game or two. It honestly took me 10 hours at first when I got into closed to truly explore these options and use them to my advantage.
I dunno, I really wanted to like Overwatch and have been hyped for it since it was announced, but actually playing just didn't feel satisfying. I think in part because it's a game that demands a ton of coordination which just wasn't there with the quick play. I never really felt at the end of a game like I'd actually contributed anything, in fact I had to wait until the stats screen just to have any idea of what my impact had been. Which is probably because I wasn't very good. And it just felt like I was basically spawning, running in, using abilities, eventually dying to one of the auto-kill abilities on the other team (Hanzo, McCree, S76), waiting 5 seconds, and repeating. The only exception was when I was playing Symmetra, whom I found to be a lot of fun and wound up picking most of my games. But I don't think I can justify getting the game just for her.
For what its worth, I definitely feel like this games true experience is with a smaller group, or a full group. The ability to talk about what you did, whats happening, and just be excited with your friends make this a lot more fun.
However I tend to solo play a lot, and in time the game definitely will be more rewarding for solo players. There was not any MM in the open beta, and most of the population only had that one week to figure out the game and heroes. Going into launch, after two or three weeks, people will have a much better grasp of the game. Jeff Kaplan actually talks about this in relation to Bastion/Torb. First month of a beta everyone screams to remove the heroes, but after just a month of playing the attacking side at higher skills begins to win 55% or more of the time.
So all in all, when the game comes out if you are going to play give it time! Like any game, it takes time develop map and game sense. There are a lot of elements of tempo, and map control in this game that take more time than people anticipate to fully realize/control them.
Symmetra is a blast! And you most definitely can pick her up on every defensive setup, or even on offense when you are escorting a pay-load. Her sentrys make standing near the pay-load a risk, and her teleporter can be used to get your teammates back on the pay-load after death that much faster.
Personally I love overwatch. The game has so much character, story, and depth. I feel like Blizzard did a pretty good job marrying the MobA world of heroes and the fast paced action of FPS's. This game has a lot of special elements that a lot of games do not use as well, like verticality. I also find the ability to switch heroes, while at first daunting and almost pointless, because incredibly important the better you get. I found myself regularly switching between Tracer, Widow, Zarya, and Mecry. Depending on what the team needed, or what I wanted to play. All in all, overwatch simply surprised me. I wasn't anticipating a game made to be "so much fun" to be this in-depth!
I like how much vertical aiming there is, most FPSs don't have this but that's mainly due to design I guess.
I'd still like faster movement on every character though, it feels too slow when you're moving around. Especially after respawns. I'd equate the movement to LoL where every character feels it has a static movement without any variance(aside from abilities ofc), compare it to dota where there's turn rates it already adds an interesting dynamic to how you move(albeit a small one).
Movement in these kinds of games always adds so much to the experience, think of quake, Jedi Academy, and GunZ. All of those games had so many cool things happen just because of how deep basic movement was.
I'm not the biggest into shooters usually but tried out the beta and found myself having a blast. Ended up preordering. I got not bad with mcree and still need to figure some other heros out.
Love D.Va. Her Voicelines are so super troll. I bought this game just for the Mercy Wings in Diablo out of a whim. And didn't really wanted to play it before release or at all, because multiplayer only fps. But got curious and watched some recommended streams and it was so much fun to watch. Then I opted into the closed beta and yeah playing is even better then watching. But I think I like playing it more, because I already understood alot of the game.
And it really helps that there are Tanks and Supports. I get to stressed out if I am the one who has to make something work. So I can always wind down playing pacifist Lucio or supports/tanks in general. (But seriously Blizzard give Lucio his combo back and nerf his Aura)
Maps are also so beautiful and full of interesting things.
Overall a Solid Game, a pitty there is no single player. Gorgeous dedication to details, Audio, Video, Gameplay, I just can't be happier about how it.
Without competitive mode there isn't much to say about balance or anything else. They said that Competitive will be revamped... let's wait and see.
What I would like to see: More Quick Play modes a-la-dota, All pick, all random, and so on, forcing players to have more options just for the fun. Replays Obs options to joing on-going matches and there are many other stuff that can help casters. Overview of the maps in JPG released so we can do strategy boards on it.
I played with a couple of my old friends who, it turns out, are very fucking good at this game. I had an absolute blast in a 4-6 stack. We ended up playing against Reaver and a couple of guys formerly on Envy and it was every bit as terrifying as you might imagine, despite the fact we managed to eke out a few wins. I cannot wait for launch as long as they're playing with me.
Solo queue was a bit more frustrating because it was really hard to play a support or a tank without dps just running amok and not coordinating with you. Stuff like LoSing your Lucio, or people walking through your Reinhart shield to shoot at stuff is fucking annoying.
Had a lot of fun with this game and looking forward to the 24th.
Two thing I want them to add:
- minimap with just team mates on it - just to help with the endless chain of going in one by one, would help pub games quite a bit to be more enjoyable and wouldn't harm competitive play
- little hud with a minimalistic info about team mates hp and ult % (see LoL)
The only thing I'm kinda concerned about is the possibilty of eSports in Overwatch in terms of watching. I would really like it to be big but the pace and current gamemodes could be hard to watch and quite chaotic. Maybe they can fix this with a better spectatormode and / or a different gamemode.
On May 12 2016 22:22 flyleaf wrote: Had a lot of fun with this game and looking forward to the 24th.
Two thing I want them to add:
- minimap with just team mates on it - just to help with the endless chain of going in one by one, would help pub games quite a bit to be more enjoyable and wouldn't harm competitive play
- little hud with a minimalistic info about team mates hp and ult % (see LoL)
The only thing I'm kinda concerned about is the possibilty of eSports in Overwatch in terms of watching. I would really like it to be big but the pace and current gamemodes could be hard to watch and quite chaotic. Maybe they can fix this with a better spectatormode and / or a different gamemode.
No thank you. It is wonderful that Blizzard had the insight not to include these features for the players. It greatly increases the need for map awareness in a way that hasn't been seen in games in some time.
They have arrows to indicate friendly players. A minimap won't magically solve going in 1-by-1. Its a player issue. The number of times I saw people waiting for respawns was almost non-existant in quick play. It only ever happened in competitive mode.
Also the number of times you spawn a few seconds after Lucio but he's already run away using his empowered speed boost ....
Yeah, it's easy enough to see where teammates are on the HUD just by looking at the arrows. I don't think that a minimap is really needed, and it certainly isn't going to fix the problem of chain-feeding newbs. I would like to see some 3D renderings of the maps that can be accessed for the purpose of better exploring the maps and learning them. Playing Genji, I learned most of the hidden pathways, nooks, and crannies on each map, but looking at some map guides, there were some important ones that I missed (like the backdoor route to Point A on Volskaya Industries).
I love the decisions by Blizzard to omit things that so many other FPS use. They could have included deathmatch, they could have added a minimap and a hud with so many statistics on it, but they left them out because they take away from the experience Blizzard was looking for. If you have a minimap, you have that thing where people just move around looking at the minimap, so they don't actually look at the map itself(and all its gorgeousness). If you have deathmatch, you encourage players to do dumb shit just to chase kills, and even in other modes, players would still have the habit of doing those things to get kills, and since that cuts into the idea of focusing on an objective, they left it out completely.
The simple bare-bones HUD they use is just perfect IMO. Look at Yoshi's Island, my favorite platformer, and probably the best platformer ever made. You have 0 HUD, there is nothing on-screen except you and the level, and so you get to take in the scenery better, focus more on the level and less on your stats, and you get more immersed as a result. Overwatch is doing the same thing, it removes elements that get in the way of the pure FPS experience.
The backdoor on Volskaya is pretty much required knowledge for Tracer players. It is really, really hard to get in without using the backdoor on that map with her. But you're right I doubt many players actually know about that route since I saw it very rarely used in my games. I also didn't see many people as Reaper/Tracer/Genji use the pathway on Nepal Village to get into their backlines via the rickety house. I'd use that all the time on Reaper once I see that the enemy team is poking at the main entrance.
In general people didn't use the sideways. So you just went on the highground as a defender an won. Unless your team mates tried to spawn camp heh. People will notice those things though and they will spread.
After your mmr goes up and you play more the "main entrances" on most maps flat out stop being used.
In higher mmr games you can actually spam the side room on first point nepal (cant remember what the name they gave it after it was randomised) with junkrat and kill all the squishies very very quickly if you get double lucio speed amped over there.
Its pretty cheesy but hilarious to get 3 kills before the point is even unlocked
I never thought I would have such an insane amount of fun playing, I was originally just gonna focus hard on two heroes, but after playing for a bit you realize how much certain ones can turn the team comp into an absolute monster and win you the game, then you start appreciating all the small interactions, strenghts, weaknesses, etc. You cannot solo carry the game nor should you be able to unless the other team is completely lacking a brain, yet difference in skill still makes a big difference in match outcomes and you can clearly outplay anyone if you are good enough, this simple fact makes the game so catching, because you can have fun in it, and you can also tryhard in it, best of both worlds.
I verbalized my discontent with the game about all that I disliked leading up to the point where I finally was able to play it(specially the tracer butt drama), and after going through the only test that matters, actually playing the game, the result is that I just bought a new gaming rig just for this game, here's to the upcoming hours upon hours that I will spend playing this game once it releases, hoping that many others will enjoy it as well.
The good thing about Overwatch is that at any point in time I knew was I was supposed to do. I knew where the objective was located and what the game mode expected of me.
Each hero just has a few keys, so one can quickly try them out without having to read a manual. Each hero I played (I only played a couple of them) felt different. Not just "more dps, but less health", each hero has its own gameplay mechanic. During the random team play I constantly thought about good possible hero combinations, while I was indulged in the map design.
In the end, Overwatch is a child dream come true: I cannot just watch a hero fight in an animatic, I can play a hero.
Blizzard's incredible artists managed to have each hero tell his story just by his/her appearance. You see any Overwatch hero and you can tell where he/she comes and what he/she is about.
An interesting look at Multiplayer only games by Force.
i think Blizz knows this and they'll introduce some PvE single player content for Overwatch in the coming years as part of their "Game As A Service" philosophy.
SC2 HotS had a bigger price tag barrier of entry than Overwatch and up until the moment LotV was released (and still probably) you would get matched up in less than a minute. Generally like 20 seconds. The author of the video talks about all the marketing of some of these big MP games but fails to realize that Blizzard games are almost self-selling. The company is known for quality and for game support. Was Titanfall supported years after it's release with new (free) content? Was it constantly patched? I honestly don't know but I'm going to wager a response of 'no.'
I think that a lot of the titles he identifies are kind of not good?
Evolve and Titanfall were just terrible. Battleborn did not get the biggest reception either.
I think overwatch has a lot going for it even at 40 dollars. I have faith on Blizzard's approach and the lore they can throw in. Also the game is just flatout fun.
Now Rainbow 6 siege is good, but its also not super accessible. Its a high price point, requires quite a bit of computing power to really run, and its slower pace and fairly tactical.
I think blizz has its polish, the lore and a solid accessible pure fun game. Who knows maybe I'm wrong, but I really don't agree with Force on this one - not for Overwatch.
It won't beat CS:GO in general I agree. But it is a great and new experience thats all its own different from all the other big shooters out there.
i think Blizz knows this and they'll introduce some PvE single player content for Overwatch in the coming years as part of their "Game As A Service" philosophy.
Eh, I think that he's making a mountain out of a mole hill, and, if anything, the tagline of "are Multiplayer only games doomed?" is highly misleading. The real point is that the space is highly competitive, so only truly superior products are going to survive long term. And this is how it should be, frankly.
But overwatch has a lot going in its favor. First of all it's a blizzard game which means lots of people are automatically going to check it out/buy it, because blizzard fanboys are numerous.
Second thing is that blizzard is known for supporting their games long after launch. I don't even need to cite older game because D3 is a really good example, even though I dislike the game even in its current state it was much much worse at release..and ever since then+expansion it has gotten much better(still dont like it personally, but can respect the blizzard for their commitment and improvements).
And then he says how very important it is that MP games that come out don't compete against the established market(dota/lol, csgo, etc). Overwatch isn't really competiting against any of these imo, it's a special niche. It plays more like arena shooters than cs/cod, but with the element of it being more team centric as well as the whole 'heroes' thing.
That said it really doesn't matter if the game isn't super big. Games don't need to be lol/dota/csgo level big to be considered successes, people are overconcerned with twitch viewership numbers, sales, etc. Small communities are fine as well, as long as matchmaking finds games at a reasonable speed it's all good.
On May 17 2016 06:35 Andre wrote: He does make great points.
But overwatch has a lot going in its favor. First of all it's a blizzard game which means lots of people are automatically going to check it out/buy it, because blizzard fanboys are numerous.
Second thing is that blizzard is known for supporting their games long after launch. I don't even need to cite older game because D3 is a really good example, even though I dislike the game even in its current state it was much much worse at release..and ever since then+expansion it has gotten much better(still dont like it personally, but can respect the blizzard for their commitment and improvements).
A good chunk of Overwatch's impending success is a function of the strength of Blizzard's brand. Blizzard has a large, loyal following (and with good reason). As such, Blizzard has lower entry barriers to the MP market.
And then he says how very important it is that MP games that come out don't compete against the established market(dota/lol, csgo, etc). Overwatch isn't really competiting against any of these imo, it's a special niche. It plays more like arena shooters than cs/cod, but with the element of it being more team centric as well as the whole 'heroes' thing.
Overwatch is competing in the FPS space. Its hook is a new/fresh take on the old team/class-based FPS genre. It's going to do well because 1) it is a very solid game in its own right, and 2) it has a legion of Blizzard fanboys to kick it off right.
That said it really doesn't matter if the game isn't super big. Games don't need to be lol/dota/csgo level big to be considered successes, people are overconcerned with twitch viewership numbers, sales, etc. Small communities are fine as well, as long as matchmaking finds games at a reasonable speed it's all good.
It depends upon how you want to define "success." Financial success certainly doesn't require LOL/DOTA numbers. However, low playerbase figures effectively mark the eventual demise of the game. The biggest problem is matchmaking, because it is harder to match up players of relatively equal skill. This, in turn, results in unfun games, which further depresses the playerbase.
On May 17 2016 06:35 Andre wrote: He does make great points.
But overwatch has a lot going in its favor. First of all it's a blizzard game which means lots of people are automatically going to check it out/buy it, because blizzard fanboys are numerous.
Second thing is that blizzard is known for supporting their games long after launch. I don't even need to cite older game because D3 is a really good example, even though I dislike the game even in its current state it was much much worse at release..and ever since then+expansion it has gotten much better(still dont like it personally, but can respect the blizzard for their commitment and improvements).
A good chunk of Overwatch's impending success is a function of the strength of Blizzard's brand. Blizzard has a large, loyal following (and with good reason). As such, Blizzard has lower entry barriers to the MP market.
And then he says how very important it is that MP games that come out don't compete against the established market(dota/lol, csgo, etc). Overwatch isn't really competiting against any of these imo, it's a special niche. It plays more like arena shooters than cs/cod, but with the element of it being more team centric as well as the whole 'heroes' thing.
Overwatch is competing in the FPS space. Its hook is a new/fresh take on the old team/class-based FPS genre. It's going to do well because 1) it is a very solid game in its own right, and 2) it has a legion of Blizzard fanboys to kick it off right.
That said it really doesn't matter if the game isn't super big. Games don't need to be lol/dota/csgo level big to be considered successes, people are overconcerned with twitch viewership numbers, sales, etc. Small communities are fine as well, as long as matchmaking finds games at a reasonable speed it's all good.
It depends upon how you want to define "success." Financial success certainly doesn't require LOL/DOTA numbers. However, low playerbase figures effectively mark the eventual demise of the game. The biggest problem is matchmaking, because it is harder to match up players of relatively equal skill. This, in turn, results in unfun games, which further depresses the playerbase.
I really think the numbers will be healthy for quite some time. The fact it literally requires a one time purchase but promises somewhat regular additions in terms of new characters/maps/cosmetics is a big boon to its eventual success. Whether people buy into that now or realise its actual strength a few months from now is going to be the big differentiator.
I think what this game has going for it what games like Hearthstone for example don't is the fact that you dont have this constant XX$ every so often to maintain it. It will cost more than CS:GO but its also easier to get into and feel like you are doing well in and wont cost a single penny to open boxes or get that skin you really like. So thats also a plus.
Lets see where it is 6 months from now but I have high hopes.
On May 17 2016 06:35 Andre wrote: He does make great points.
But overwatch has a lot going in its favor. First of all it's a blizzard game which means lots of people are automatically going to check it out/buy it, because blizzard fanboys are numerous.
Second thing is that blizzard is known for supporting their games long after launch. I don't even need to cite older game because D3 is a really good example, even though I dislike the game even in its current state it was much much worse at release..and ever since then+expansion it has gotten much better(still dont like it personally, but can respect the blizzard for their commitment and improvements).
A good chunk of Overwatch's impending success is a function of the strength of Blizzard's brand. Blizzard has a large, loyal following (and with good reason). As such, Blizzard has lower entry barriers to the MP market.
And then he says how very important it is that MP games that come out don't compete against the established market(dota/lol, csgo, etc). Overwatch isn't really competiting against any of these imo, it's a special niche. It plays more like arena shooters than cs/cod, but with the element of it being more team centric as well as the whole 'heroes' thing.
Overwatch is competing in the FPS space. Its hook is a new/fresh take on the old team/class-based FPS genre. It's going to do well because 1) it is a very solid game in its own right, and 2) it has a legion of Blizzard fanboys to kick it off right.
That said it really doesn't matter if the game isn't super big. Games don't need to be lol/dota/csgo level big to be considered successes, people are overconcerned with twitch viewership numbers, sales, etc. Small communities are fine as well, as long as matchmaking finds games at a reasonable speed it's all good.
It depends upon how you want to define "success." Financial success certainly doesn't require LOL/DOTA numbers. However, low playerbase figures effectively mark the eventual demise of the game. The biggest problem is matchmaking, because it is harder to match up players of relatively equal skill. This, in turn, results in unfun games, which further depresses the playerbase.
I really think the numbers will be healthy for quite some time. The fact it literally requires a one time purchase but promises somewhat regular additions in terms of new characters/maps/cosmetics is a big boon to its eventual success. Whether people buy into that now or realise its actual strength a few months from now is going to be the big differentiator.
I think what this game has going for it what games like Hearthstone for example don't is the fact that you dont have this constant XX$ every so often to maintain it. It will cost more than CS:GO but its also easier to get into and feel like you are doing well in and wont cost a single penny to open boxes or get that skin you really like. So thats also a plus.
Lets see where it is 6 months from now but I have high hopes.
I think Overwatch is going to be a big success, both short and long term. It has solid core gameplay and sports the kind of polish that we expect from Blizzard. Its aesthetic is ridiculously cool. Most importantly, it is an FPS that pretty much everyone can enjoy. It simultaneously caters to hardcore and casual players alike through the wide variety of available heroes. I think Overwatch is to FPS games as Hearthstone is to card games and WoW was to MMO's. It takes a popular genre and distills the core fun parts of that genre into a better product that has mass appeal.
Getting the skins you really like might actually take awhile
Loot boxes are still rng, and you'll essentially have to rely on currency drops to insure having skins you absolutely must have. Someone ran the numbers and it's quite believable that it will require ~5000 games average to unlock everything (with duplicates giving currenxy, etc).
Fortunately, I don't want everything, and skins are bonuses and an addition to the game, not the driving factor to grind games so I'm okay with that.
If you only want a few skins, that should be obtainable pretty quickly through currency drops (hopefully).
On May 17 2016 07:07 sushiko wrote: Getting the skins you really like might actually take awhile
Loot boxes are still rng, and you'll essentially have to rely on currency drops to insure having skins you absolutely must have. Someone ran the numbers and it's quite believable that it will require ~5000 games average to unlock everything (with duplicates giving currenxy, etc).
Fortunately, I don't want everything, and skins are bonuses and an addition to the game, not the driving factor to grind games so I'm okay with that.
If you only want a few skins, that should be obtainable pretty quickly through currency drops (hopefully).
I had everythig i wanted in closed beta at level 220 something.
Ittakes time but its far from the worst grind ive ever experienced in gaming.
On May 17 2016 05:00 ZeromuS wrote: Evolve and Titanfall were just terrible. Battleborn did not get the biggest reception either.
these games were never going to get Blizzard level support post launch. Gearbox offers decent support , but still not as good as Blizzard. imo, Overwatch is a better game than Evolve and Titanfall and will receive 25X better post launch support.
It will be interesting to see if Battleborn "succeeds". It will get some solid post sales support from Gearbox as Borderlands did. Battleborn is the most difficult to predict out of the 4 games discussed.
as Force aludes later on in his video, probably Overwatch will succeed.
i'm predicting 5 million units sold in week one of Overwatch.
I really think the numbers will be healthy for quite some time. The fact it literally requires a one time purchase but promises somewhat regular additions in terms of new characters/maps/cosmetics is a big boon to its eventual success. Whether people buy into that now or realise its actual strength a few months from now is going to be the big differentiator.
I think what this game has going for it what games like Hearthstone for example don't is the fact that you dont have this constant XX$ every so often to maintain it. It will cost more than CS:GO but its also easier to get into and feel like you are doing well in and wont cost a single penny to open boxes or get that skin you really like. So thats also a plus.
Lets see where it is 6 months from now but I have high hopes.
While I agree, personally I'm expecting them to release special edition loot crates every so often similar to how Dota 2 does cosmetics. Don't you think so?
It seems so easy to have a "Halloween 2016" Loot Crate, with a legendary skin for each (or most) heroes with some sort of Halloween costume, along with a bunch of epics/rares/commons to fill things out. Alternatively, they could just occasionally add new costumes to the existing loot crates, so there's always something else to lust after.
They can then sell loot crates for money as a microtransaction, and due to the fresh content, there's actually incentive for people to buy them. They'll sell some number of crates for $3, another option for $10, and a third option for $20 or $25, obviously with increasing crate per dollar value as you go up.
Why wouldn't Blizzard do this? Obviously they make a ton of money from microtransactions, while simultaneously ensuring future content work for their art teams. Second, people who spend extra money on cosmetics feel increasingly loyal to their game.
This also has a positive aspect for people who aren't interested in purchasing cosmetics. Namely, that Blizzard will be further incentivized to provide free and regular updates to game content, such as maps, heroes, balance, etc. Keeping the game popular and fresh will keep people interested in cosmetics.
So, personally I'm expecting this to happen, and not too far down the road. It doesn't contradict what you said about the game being 100% playable for a one-time purchase though. Just my 2 cents.
Games being single or multiplayer only is good. Just a couple of years ago every single god damn game had to have a multiplayer element tacked onto it. It was always complete garbage but multiplayer sells. So devs insisted on wasting resources to tack on some flaming shit multiplayer aspect. Resources that could have gone into something else in the single player campaign. Years before that people were tacking on a single player campaign that no one cares about onto a multiplayer game. Exactly zero people on earth cared about some sort of Battlefield story. Everyone buys that game to blow crap up and fly jets around on giant maps and snipe people a thousand miles away. Working on a single player campaign was again, a total waste. Put the resources into the game people care about or just sell your game as a single/multiplayer only experience for a reduced price.
All the games he lists are ghost towns because they were awful games. Developers managed to trick people into climbing onto the hype train and buying really awful games. But the devs already got their money, they don't give a single fuck about the game. All they want is you to buy the game then they laugh all the way to the bank. Once people realize they were duped and Evolve is actually a really terrible game, obviously no one is going to play it anymore and multiplayer is a ghost town.
There is zero problems with multiplayer only games. There's zero problems with singleplayer only games. The problem lies with shit games and people rewarding god awful developers with money they don't deserve. Thankfully there seems to be a bit of a ground swell on this front after being burned but I'm sure it won't last. If I want singleplayer I'll play Witcher. If I want multiplayer I'll play DotA. I don't play one expecting the other and gaming as a whole is much better for having the two categories separated for the most part.
I really think the numbers will be healthy for quite some time. The fact it literally requires a one time purchase but promises somewhat regular additions in terms of new characters/maps/cosmetics is a big boon to its eventual success. Whether people buy into that now or realise its actual strength a few months from now is going to be the big differentiator.
I think what this game has going for it what games like Hearthstone for example don't is the fact that you dont have this constant XX$ every so often to maintain it. It will cost more than CS:GO but its also easier to get into and feel like you are doing well in and wont cost a single penny to open boxes or get that skin you really like. So thats also a plus.
Lets see where it is 6 months from now but I have high hopes.
While I agree, personally I'm expecting them to release special edition loot crates every so often similar to how Dota 2 does cosmetics. Don't you think so?
It seems so easy to have a "Halloween 2016" Loot Crate, with a legendary skin for each (or most) heroes with some sort of Halloween costume, along with a bunch of epics/rares/commons to fill things out. Alternatively, they could just occasionally add new costumes to the existing loot crates, so there's always something else to lust after.
They can then sell loot crates for money as a microtransaction, and due to the fresh content, there's actually incentive for people to buy them. They'll sell some number of crates for $3, another option for $10, and a third option for $20 or $25, obviously with increasing crate per dollar value as you go up.
Why wouldn't Blizzard do this? Obviously they make a ton of money from microtransactions, while simultaneously ensuring future content work for their art teams. Second, people who spend extra money on cosmetics feel increasingly loyal to their game.
This also has a positive aspect for people who aren't interested in purchasing cosmetics. Namely, that Blizzard will be further incentivized to provide free and regular updates to game content, such as maps, heroes, balance, etc. Keeping the game popular and fresh will keep people interested in cosmetics.
So, personally I'm expecting this to happen, and not too far down the road. It doesn't contradict what you said about the game being 100% playable for a one-time purchase though. Just my 2 cents.
They've said all cosmetic content in the game post launch will be available for free, as will all maps and new heroes. Of course they'll sell boxes for real money. But its trivial to obtain them through playing and its always random chance what you get.
I doubt they would have any cosmetics available only by purchasing special lootboxes as that kind of goes against the whole approach for this game. However, a few years from now maybe, but not early on imo.
I really think the numbers will be healthy for quite some time. The fact it literally requires a one time purchase but promises somewhat regular additions in terms of new characters/maps/cosmetics is a big boon to its eventual success. Whether people buy into that now or realise its actual strength a few months from now is going to be the big differentiator.
I think what this game has going for it what games like Hearthstone for example don't is the fact that you dont have this constant XX$ every so often to maintain it. It will cost more than CS:GO but its also easier to get into and feel like you are doing well in and wont cost a single penny to open boxes or get that skin you really like. So thats also a plus.
Lets see where it is 6 months from now but I have high hopes.
While I agree, personally I'm expecting them to release special edition loot crates every so often similar to how Dota 2 does cosmetics. Don't you think so?
It seems so easy to have a "Halloween 2016" Loot Crate, with a legendary skin for each (or most) heroes with some sort of Halloween costume, along with a bunch of epics/rares/commons to fill things out. Alternatively, they could just occasionally add new costumes to the existing loot crates, so there's always something else to lust after.
They can then sell loot crates for money as a microtransaction, and due to the fresh content, there's actually incentive for people to buy them. They'll sell some number of crates for $3, another option for $10, and a third option for $20 or $25, obviously with increasing crate per dollar value as you go up.
Why wouldn't Blizzard do this? Obviously they make a ton of money from microtransactions, while simultaneously ensuring future content work for their art teams. Second, people who spend extra money on cosmetics feel increasingly loyal to their game.
This also has a positive aspect for people who aren't interested in purchasing cosmetics. Namely, that Blizzard will be further incentivized to provide free and regular updates to game content, such as maps, heroes, balance, etc. Keeping the game popular and fresh will keep people interested in cosmetics.
So, personally I'm expecting this to happen, and not too far down the road. It doesn't contradict what you said about the game being 100% playable for a one-time purchase though. Just my 2 cents.
They've said all cosmetic content in the game post launch will be available for free, as will all maps and new heroes. Of course they'll sell boxes for real money. But its trivial to obtain them through playing and its always random chance what you get.
I doubt they would have any cosmetics available only by purchasing special lootboxes as that kind of goes against the whole approach for this game. However, a few years from now maybe, but not early on imo.
I could see them doing limited time only achievements for special skins/sprays/loot boxes though. Similar to hots for their portraits during their major tourneys or lunar festival. Play x games to unlock type of deal.
I think that the game at release will still feel a bit lacking in content (we wont have ranked immediately) but I do have trust in Blizzard. Just have to look at Diablo III and how it was at release compared to now. People may have issues with Blizzard but they do try their best to take care of their customers. They will support the game, add content, and grow into something nice. I will enjoy it at release and watch to see how it develops further.
I think most heroes are too one dimensional and probably all heroes lack something, be it arsenal, utility or mobility, whatever. I feel like a prisoner in my own body playing these characters and it becomes repetitive bcuz the hereos arent really that deeply designed at all. Actually Overwatch brings almost NOTHING new to the table gameplay wise. Almost everything from movement, weapons and abilities and gameplay is known from before.
This game is good if you like to spam shit and enjoy the sensation of feeling like a good player because it's way too easy for any seasoned fps player. The game for me is just flat out boring because it's to simple and one dimensional and offers nothing new gameplay experience wise for me.
i think Blizz knows this and they'll introduce some PvE single player content for Overwatch in the coming years as part of their "Game As A Service" philosophy.
Eh, I think that he's making a mountain out of a mole hill, and, if anything, the tagline of "are Multiplayer only games doomed?" is highly misleading. The real point is that the space is highly competitive, so only truly superior products are going to survive long term. And this is how it should be, frankly.
i guess he needed a catchy title. creating a 5v5 balanced multiplayer experience with solid matchmaking is very difficult to pull off with a small player base.
already, Battleborn with 5,000 concurrent users is having issues creating 5v5 balanced multiplayer with low latency between all 10 players. if "multiplayer" meant 1v1 games then 5,000 concurrent players makes it a lot easier to create a balanced experience.
already in Battleborn you are either destroying your opponent or getting destroyed more than half the time. upon careful review: i think it might already be over for Battleborn's 5v5 multiplayer aspect.
On May 17 2016 18:23 BalanceEnforcer wrote: I think most heroes are too one dimensional and probably all heroes lack something, be it arsenal, utility or mobility, whatever. I feel like a prisoner in my own body playing these characters and it becomes repetitive bcuz the hereos arent really that deeply designed at all. Actually Overwatch brings almost NOTHING new to the table gameplay wise. Almost everything from movement, weapons and abilities and gameplay is known from before.
This game is good if you like to spam shit and enjoy the sensation of feeling like a good player because it's way too easy for any seasoned fps player. The game for me is just flat out boring because it's to simple and one dimensional and offers nothing new gameplay experience wise for me.
Well all heroes lack something by design. Thats the whole point of a team based class shooter.
I really don't think its as simple as you seem to be downplaying it to be
during the open beta i decided to try the game in the most boring ways possible because 6v6 with 3 to 5 friends is obviously great fun.
i played single player 6v6 where its 11 AI Bots and me. and the game was ok. me and my co-op pal played 2v2 where i had 1 AI ally and she had 1 AI ally. and we liked it. we had some good fun. i tried solo-ing in 6v6 ladder play and it was a decent level of fun.
i used Soldier76 for these "boring" game play modes. Soldier76 is the most boring and generic of all the heroes. and i still liked it.
even in the game's most boring configurations i still liked it and had fun. so its easily a $40 buy for me despite its "low content feel".
in the 6 years i've played SC2 Blizzard has managed to squeeze about $700 out of me. if they support Overwatch like they supported SC2 they'll probably get another $700 out of me.
On May 17 2016 23:37 noD wrote: A great game but OverPriced imo ....
At $60 its over priced for sure. At $40 though its pretty good. It might be a bit light on maps if anything, one or two more would be nice IMO. But as long as we get a few more in reasonable time and they don't nickle and dime people I'm fine with it.
On May 17 2016 23:37 noD wrote: A great game but OverPriced imo ....
At $60 its over priced for sure. At $40 though its pretty good. It might be a bit light on maps if anything, one or two more would be nice IMO. But as long as we get a few more in reasonable time and they don't nickle and dime people I'm fine with it.
If additional content down the line all comes free, then a one-time payment of $40 is extremely reasonable. With the amount of fun I had through the 10th, I was already willing to shell out the money.
Well all heroes lack something by design. Thats the whole point of a team based class shooter.
I really don't think its as simple as you seem to be downplaying it to be
I don't think you must define team based class shooter as such as heroes must lack something to make teamplay gameplay go through. Then it's just lack of good design overall. The richer and better design of heroes the better the teamplay experience will be. Im not saying all heroes should be able to do everything obviously but they shouldn't be simple as they are, they feel unfinished and sucky without the right hero synergy.
Teamplay is why i like this game, but then i get bored with playing the heroes.
I didn't play the beta, but I watched some streams and just found it kinda... boring. Idk if this is a common response to playing vs. watching or whether I was in the minority. Would've liked to try it out a bit but was too busy during the open beta.
I mean the game does literally NOTHING new. It innovates in no way shape or form. The netcode is brutal, they need to step that shit up. But it's fun. If you go in expecting greatness and a revolution in first person shooting you're wasting your money. If you go in thinking "TF2 was a good game" then you're getting what you expect TF3. Manage expectations.
There hasn't been an FPS that hasn't blown a bag of dicks in years, so if you want a decent game that scratches that itch try it out. If you want an insane, hyper skilled based, twitch shooting quake replacement this is not that game by a million miles.
On May 18 2016 09:31 darthfoley wrote: I didn't play the beta, but I watched some streams and just found it kinda... boring. Idk if this is a common response to playing vs. watching or whether I was in the minority. Would've liked to try it out a bit but was too busy during the open beta.
I felt similarly to you when I could Onlywatch, I couldn't quite see what was so great about it, bu I completely changed my tune once I logged some playtime, there's just something you miss when you're just watching someone else play. So, while it's possible it might not be your thing, there's a strong possibility you'll find it more appealing if you get the chance to play it. Granted, open beta was the best time to do this...
Yea don't expect to 1v6 rambo like you could in quake, unless you have your ult up on certain heroes. Though that korean widowmaker quick scoping everyone was probably the closest thing.
I played primarily solo and I still had a blast in the beta. To me, the amount I will play this game, for $40, only sc2 comes close to being that good of a deal. And I see myself playing more Overwatch in the long run. I love sc2, but I was able to just sit down and play Overwatch while with sc2, I'd be complete ass for the first how many games if I took a break.
Overwatch strikes a great balance between casual and skill. Clearly you can just be better at the game, have a better strategy and so on. But I'm also able to play solo and just have fun. You need to be open to playing all the roles. If so, you will have fun. I've never enjoyed a shooter this much.
I enjoyed it a great deal. Its akin to Heroes of the Storm where the solo experience is dreadful due to how important teamwork is. Get a stack of friends on mics.
All the ultimates are for the most part incredibly easy to notice, dodge, or counter. I was worried about that at first until getting more familiar with the game.
I am a simple man, I enjoyed shooting enemies in the head with widowmkaker, mccreed, hanzo, soldier, and tracer and hitting people the body with rockets. Feels better than TF2 by far. More twitchy aim because of the game including more precise aiming weapons, faster rockets, etc.
Looking forward to being able to play the competitive ranked mode as the average player is pretty easy to stomp despite the game giving so many tools to enable easy kills. I shut down plenty of teams completely as widowmaker, but it seems people weren't familiar enough with the game to know that you can swap to winston and harrass the hell out of a good widowmaker.
My favorite part of the game so far is being able to play with mixed skill groups of friends and do okay. In counterstrike if I play with people not up to my skill level its a horrible experience for everyone. If someone truly sucks at aiming we can have them play a non-dps character and do ok as a team. Far more important that you work together as a team than having another good aimer who wanders off on their own and keeps giving them a man advantage.
Second favorite part is the sheer variety and freshness all the characters and abilities adds to the objective based class shooter style game.
Biggest worry is probably the pub friendlyness of the game. TF2 works well as a big player count crazy spam fest. Overwatch is super focused on the 6v6 and doesn't seem like it would scale nor like it has plans to. Seems harmful in my eyes to the longevity of the casual player base.
On May 18 2016 09:31 darthfoley wrote: I didn't play the beta, but I watched some streams and just found it kinda... boring. Idk if this is a common response to playing vs. watching or whether I was in the minority. Would've liked to try it out a bit but was too busy during the open beta.
i don't like watching it. i like playing it. the game feels great. is it the greatest game ever? so far, nah. it might grow on me though... i'm keeping an open mind. that said, its definitely worth $40.
On May 19 2016 04:23 decemberscalm wrote: Great polish as usual from blizz.
I enjoyed it a great deal. Its akin to Heroes of the Storm where the solo experience is dreadful due to how important teamwork is. Get a stack of friends on mics.
All the ultimates are for the most part incredibly easy to notice, dodge, or counter. I was worried about that at first until getting more familiar with the game.
I am a simple man, I enjoyed shooting enemies in the head with widowmkaker, mccreed, hanzo, soldier, and tracer and hitting people the body with rockets. Feels better than TF2 by far. More twitchy aim because of the game including more precise aiming weapons, faster rockets, etc.
Looking forward to being able to play the competitive ranked mode as the average player is pretty easy to stomp despite the game giving so many tools to enable easy kills. I shut down plenty of teams completely as widowmaker, but it seems people weren't familiar enough with the game to know that you can swap to winston and harrass the hell out of a good widowmaker.
My favorite part of the game so far is being able to play with mixed skill groups of friends and do okay. In counterstrike if I play with people not up to my skill level its a horrible experience for everyone. If someone truly sucks at aiming we can have them play a non-dps character and do ok as a team. Far more important that you work together as a team than having another good aimer who wanders off on their own and keeps giving them a man advantage.
Second favorite part is the sheer variety and freshness all the characters and abilities adds to the objective based class shooter style game.
Biggest worry is probably the pub friendlyness of the game. TF2 works well as a big player count crazy spam fest. Overwatch is super focused on the 6v6 and doesn't seem like it would scale nor like it has plans to. Seems harmful in my eyes to the longevity of the casual player base.
I'm really not worried about the pub friendliness. Look at dota and league. They are far far worse for solo que and are objective based games. And those games will take you an hour. With Overwatch you will be done in ten minutes.