We will be closing this General thread in 24 hours. It will remain searchable.
After that we will require new threads to discuss topics.
Questions should go in the stickied Q&A thread, screenshots and PotG will go in the PotG sticky, QQ/Rage/Complaints should go in the QQ/Rage thread. If you want to talk about maps or strategies open a new thread.
Any comments or concerns will be logged please forward them to ZeromuS. This new forum is still fluid so we will try this out. General TL rules will still apply to new threads.
On November 08 2014 07:35 Steveling wrote: Have you guys read what reaper's ulti skill does? This can't be more casual, which in itself is not a bad thing, just saying.
Yeah i know right, a short ranged aoe dmg spell is literally casual. I am sure you won't find any of that in the hardcore games you play !
It's a fps game, you are supposed to aim at stuff. I have never seen something like this in any fps game ever, for obvious reasons.
It's far more than an the typical cross-hair-over-enemy-then-click-fast FPS game.
They appear to be expanding the FPS genre, vastly improving the gameplay, like they did with the MOBA genre.
here we go again
It's been mentioned that Overwatch has a form of auto-aim.
I did talk about this subject in the past:
Example 1: Adding auto-aim to CS:GO (removing complexity) Aiming is a huge part of CS:GO, it's one of the most important skills in the game. Does adding auto-aim dumb down the game, reduce skill or kill depth? No. The game will still require just as much skill as it does now. Instead of being about aiming, auto-aim would shift the game to be about positioning, strategy, flashing and firing with maximum lethality (minimizing recoil). The team with more skill in avoiding situations where they will be killed by the opponent's auto-aim by being at the right place at the right time would win. The skill of correct positioning would be absolutely critical. So playing CS:GO with auto-aim would require the same amount of skill it requires now, it just emphasizes different types of skills, like positioning.
No doubt, we will have losers (as in people who literally lose in a game of Overwatch) that get annihilated and utterly dominated by their auto-aiming opponents while hypocritically saying that the game is too easy.
Except Overwatch seems to be based more on heroes/abilities than actually aiming.
I'd greatly prefer it if this was actually a skill shooter but oh well, still looks fun and I'm very interested in trying it out. Here's hoping I get lucky with a beta key ONCE.
On November 08 2014 07:35 Steveling wrote: Have you guys read what reaper's ulti skill does? This can't be more casual, which in itself is not a bad thing, just saying.
Yeah i know right, a short ranged aoe dmg spell is literally casual. I am sure you won't find any of that in the hardcore games you play !
It's a fps game, you are supposed to aim at stuff. I have never seen something like this in any fps game ever, for obvious reasons.
It's far more than an the typical cross-hair-over-enemy-then-click-fast FPS game.
They appear to be expanding the FPS genre, vastly improving the gameplay, like they did with the MOBA genre.
here we go again
It's been mentioned that Overwatch has a form of auto-aim.
Example 1: Adding auto-aim to CS:GO (removing complexity) Aiming is a huge part of CS:GO, it's one of the most important skills in the game. Does adding auto-aim dumb down the game, reduce skill or kill depth? No. The game will still require just as much skill as it does now. Instead of being about aiming, auto-aim would shift the game to be about positioning, strategy, flashing and firing with maximum lethality (minimizing recoil). The team with more skill in avoiding situations where they will be killed by the opponent's auto-aim by being at the right place at the right time would win. The skill of correct positioning would be absolutely critical. So playing CS:GO with auto-aim would require the same amount of skill it requires now, it just emphasizes different types of skills, like positioning.
No doubt, we will have losers (as in people who literally lose in a game of Overwatch) that get annihilated and utterly dominated by their auto-aiming opponents while hypocritically saying that the game is too easy.
This is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. And this is even on a starcraft board where we have immediate disprove in form of BW-->SC2. In the beginning people argued that the "removal" of macro in SC2 would shift the game towards more attractive things. More micro, more drops etc. Did this ever happen? No. Players in SC2 just have less stuff to do, less apm needed. CS with auto aim would be indredible boring. Most weapons are insanely accurate with the first shot. With auto aim it would just come down to split seconds of reaction timing to hit the trigger. Just comes down to who shoots first wins. And nades would be completly useless with autoaim.
On November 08 2014 07:35 Steveling wrote: Have you guys read what reaper's ulti skill does? This can't be more casual, which in itself is not a bad thing, just saying.
Yeah i know right, a short ranged aoe dmg spell is literally casual. I am sure you won't find any of that in the hardcore games you play !
It's a fps game, you are supposed to aim at stuff. I have never seen something like this in any fps game ever, for obvious reasons.
It's far more than an the typical cross-hair-over-enemy-then-click-fast FPS game.
They appear to be expanding the FPS genre, vastly improving the gameplay, like they did with the MOBA genre.
here we go again
It's been mentioned that Overwatch has a form of auto-aim.
I did talk about this subject in the past:
Example 1: Adding auto-aim to CS:GO (removing complexity) Aiming is a huge part of CS:GO, it's one of the most important skills in the game. Does adding auto-aim dumb down the game, reduce skill or kill depth? No. The game will still require just as much skill as it does now. Instead of being about aiming, auto-aim would shift the game to be about positioning, strategy, flashing and firing with maximum lethality (minimizing recoil). The team with more skill in avoiding situations where they will be killed by the opponent's auto-aim by being at the right place at the right time would win. The skill of correct positioning would be absolutely critical. So playing CS:GO with auto-aim would require the same amount of skill it requires now, it just emphasizes different types of skills, like positioning.
No doubt, we will have losers (as in people who literally lose in a game of Overwatch) that get annihilated and utterly dominated by their auto-aiming opponents while hypocritically saying that the game is too easy.
This is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. And this is even on a starcraft board where we have immediate disprove in form of BW-->SC2. In the beginning people argued that the "removal" of macro in SC2 would shift the game towards more attractive things. More micro, more drops etc. Did this ever happen? No. Players in SC2 just have less stuff to do, less apm needed. CS with auto aim would be indredible boring. Most weapons are insanely accurate with the first shot. With auto aim it would just come down to split seconds of reaction timing to hit the trigger. Just comes down to who shoots first wins. And nades would be completly useless with autoaim.
I think that people should keep in mind that we don't know how all the game mechaniques like movement and spells will look like, we might get a gunz2 remake but then with a diffrent way on how they handle spells
even with auto aim games like gunz would be fcking skillfull, so why can't it be with overwatch?
On November 08 2014 07:35 Steveling wrote: Have you guys read what reaper's ulti skill does? This can't be more casual, which in itself is not a bad thing, just saying.
Yeah i know right, a short ranged aoe dmg spell is literally casual. I am sure you won't find any of that in the hardcore games you play !
It's a fps game, you are supposed to aim at stuff. I have never seen something like this in any fps game ever, for obvious reasons.
It's far more than an the typical cross-hair-over-enemy-then-click-fast FPS game.
They appear to be expanding the FPS genre, vastly improving the gameplay, like they did with the MOBA genre.
here we go again
It's been mentioned that Overwatch has a form of auto-aim.
I did talk about this subject in the past:
Example 1: Adding auto-aim to CS:GO (removing complexity) Aiming is a huge part of CS:GO, it's one of the most important skills in the game. Does adding auto-aim dumb down the game, reduce skill or kill depth? No. The game will still require just as much skill as it does now. Instead of being about aiming, auto-aim would shift the game to be about positioning, strategy, flashing and firing with maximum lethality (minimizing recoil). The team with more skill in avoiding situations where they will be killed by the opponent's auto-aim by being at the right place at the right time would win. The skill of correct positioning would be absolutely critical. So playing CS:GO with auto-aim would require the same amount of skill it requires now, it just emphasizes different types of skills, like positioning.
No doubt, we will have losers (as in people who literally lose in a game of Overwatch) that get annihilated and utterly dominated by their auto-aiming opponents while hypocritically saying that the game is too easy.
This is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. And this is even on a starcraft board where we have immediate disprove in form of BW-->SC2. In the beginning people argued that the "removal" of macro in SC2 would shift the game towards more attractive things. More micro, more drops etc. Did this ever happen? No. Players in SC2 just have less stuff to do, less apm needed. CS with auto aim would be indredible boring. Most weapons are insanely accurate with the first shot. With auto aim it would just come down to split seconds of reaction timing to hit the trigger. Just comes down to who shoots first wins. And nades would be completly useless with autoaim.
I think that people should keep in mind that we don't know how all the game mechaniques like movement and spells will look like, we might get a gunz2 remake but then with a diffrent way on how they handle spells
even with auto aim games like gunz would be fcking skillfull, so why can't it be with overwatch?
That's not what I said. It can be very skillfull with autoaim if the rest of the mechanics complement. I was just replying to the poster above quoting illogical arguments and sources.
On November 08 2014 07:35 Steveling wrote: Have you guys read what reaper's ulti skill does? This can't be more casual, which in itself is not a bad thing, just saying.
Yeah i know right, a short ranged aoe dmg spell is literally casual. I am sure you won't find any of that in the hardcore games you play !
It's a fps game, you are supposed to aim at stuff. I have never seen something like this in any fps game ever, for obvious reasons.
It's far more than an the typical cross-hair-over-enemy-then-click-fast FPS game.
They appear to be expanding the FPS genre, vastly improving the gameplay, like they did with the MOBA genre.
here we go again
It's been mentioned that Overwatch has a form of auto-aim.
I did talk about this subject in the past:
Example 1: Adding auto-aim to CS:GO (removing complexity) Aiming is a huge part of CS:GO, it's one of the most important skills in the game. Does adding auto-aim dumb down the game, reduce skill or kill depth? No. The game will still require just as much skill as it does now. Instead of being about aiming, auto-aim would shift the game to be about positioning, strategy, flashing and firing with maximum lethality (minimizing recoil). The team with more skill in avoiding situations where they will be killed by the opponent's auto-aim by being at the right place at the right time would win. The skill of correct positioning would be absolutely critical. So playing CS:GO with auto-aim would require the same amount of skill it requires now, it just emphasizes different types of skills, like positioning.
No doubt, we will have losers (as in people who literally lose in a game of Overwatch) that get annihilated and utterly dominated by their auto-aiming opponents while hypocritically saying that the game is too easy.
This is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. And this is even on a starcraft board where we have immediate disprove in form of BW-->SC2. In the beginning people argued that the "removal" of macro in SC2 would shift the game towards more attractive things. More micro, more drops etc. Did this ever happen? No. Players in SC2 just have less stuff to do, less apm needed. CS with auto aim would be indredible boring. Most weapons are insanely accurate with the first shot. With auto aim it would just come down to split seconds of reaction timing to hit the trigger. Just comes down to who shoots first wins. And nades would be completly useless with autoaim.
I think that people should keep in mind that we don't know how all the game mechaniques like movement and spells will look like, we might get a gunz2 remake but then with a diffrent way on how they handle spells
even with auto aim games like gunz would be fcking skillfull, so why can't it be with overwatch?
That's not what I said. It can be very skillfull with autoaim if the rest of the mechanics complement. I was just replying to the poster above quoting illogical arguments and sources.
It's basically a direkt copy of the Brawler Heavy Mech from HAWKEN complete with machine gun, turret mode and repair drone. Now if it additionally got a dumb-fire rocket, dodge and jumpjets it would make it perfect!
I thought the trailer made little sense, but the gameplay vids seemed interesting. If it really manages to allow you play different kind of game depending on your character while managing to not be clunky, it could actually be pretty good.
I just hope they make it one time purchase game, grinding stuff open in such game doesn't sound like too fun and I'm still haunted by what happened to my favorite server(s) soon after TF2 went F2P (spoiler: the already constantly full pretty high end pubs with few hundred regulars turned into cesspool). Then again, if it really is heavily focused on matchmaking and ranks it might filter the games well enough.
On November 08 2014 07:35 Steveling wrote: Have you guys read what reaper's ulti skill does? This can't be more casual, which in itself is not a bad thing, just saying.
Yeah i know right, a short ranged aoe dmg spell is literally casual. I am sure you won't find any of that in the hardcore games you play !
It's a fps game, you are supposed to aim at stuff. I have never seen something like this in any fps game ever, for obvious reasons.
It's far more than an the typical cross-hair-over-enemy-then-click-fast FPS game.
They appear to be expanding the FPS genre, vastly improving the gameplay, like they did with the MOBA genre.
here we go again
It's been mentioned that Overwatch has a form of auto-aim.
Example 1: Adding auto-aim to CS:GO (removing complexity) Aiming is a huge part of CS:GO, it's one of the most important skills in the game. Does adding auto-aim dumb down the game, reduce skill or kill depth? No. The game will still require just as much skill as it does now. Instead of being about aiming, auto-aim would shift the game to be about positioning, strategy, flashing and firing with maximum lethality (minimizing recoil). The team with more skill in avoiding situations where they will be killed by the opponent's auto-aim by being at the right place at the right time would win. The skill of correct positioning would be absolutely critical. So playing CS:GO with auto-aim would require the same amount of skill it requires now, it just emphasizes different types of skills, like positioning.
No doubt, we will have losers (as in people who literally lose in a game of Overwatch) that get annihilated and utterly dominated by their auto-aiming opponents while hypocritically saying that the game is too easy.
Hahaha, auto aim. Oh well, I'll show myself out, hf with this.
Blizzard already tried to make a Superhero player vs. player game once in the form of "Justice League Task Force" and it was godawful and known as one of the worst fighting games of all times.
It's hard to find a good balance between possibilities for people to do without making it too complex. I think CS and recently CS:GO has this and the reason why it's so popular. Aiming is the number one thing but you can compensate with good positioning, map awareness etc. Also there's a random element in the weapons that can lead to both frustration and funny shit.
Games like quake on the other hand has much more shit to do and learn, starting from the movement which is like art when done by people who know it inside and out. There's very little randomness to the weapons and you have pretty much yourself to blame. The skill gaps also makes it really hard to get into the game since people slightly better than you will make it seem like there's nothing you can do so it's important that you play with people around the same skill level as you. This is so horribly implemented in quake live it's unreal but it's not the games fault but rather the system around it and low number of players.
I'm interested in how Reborn and a few other games in development will do. To make a game complex and 'hard' but also fun and accessible for everyone is insanely hard and a noble effort but i'm not sure if it's the right way to go if you want your game to be successful. Although if you do manage to balance those things it's a jackpot for sure.
On November 08 2014 21:10 shin ken wrote: I'm a bit sceptical though.
Blizzard already tried to make a Superhero player vs. player game once in the form of "Justice League Task Force" and it was godawful and known as one of the worst fighting games of all times.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that in 19 years Blizz has managed to improve and learn a few things.
On November 08 2014 21:10 shin ken wrote: I'm a bit sceptical though.
Blizzard already tried to make a Superhero player vs. player game once in the form of "Justice League Task Force" and it was godawful and known as one of the worst fighting games of all times.
20 years ago. Blizzard North Co-developed the SNES version.
On November 08 2014 21:10 shin ken wrote: I'm a bit sceptical though.
Blizzard already tried to make a Superhero player vs. player game once in the form of "Justice League Task Force" and it was godawful and known as one of the worst fighting games of all times.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that in 19 years Blizz has managed to improve and learn a few things.
Blizzard should force all designers of Overwatch to play Justice League Task Force at least a couple of hours as a rude reminder how things can go wrong!
On November 08 2014 19:33 NihiLStarcraft wrote: I'd greatly prefer it if this was actually a skill shooter but oh well, still looks fun and I'm very interested in trying it out. Here's hoping I get lucky with a beta key ONCE.
I'd rather have a casual shooter, I'm getting tired of the whole "is this the next big esport" crap from blizzard.
Seems interesting, reminded me of team fortress, but i have a horrible feeling this is going to be pay2win. (New chararacter for only $10, super cool item that improves energy $15, etc).
EPT
It can be very skillfull with autoaim if the rest of the mechanics complement. I was just replying to the poster above quoting illogical arguments and sources.
