|
Please be advised:
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 09 2014 22:40 y0su wrote:
I feel like this is the story/world from titan put into game play ideas they had from sc: ghost.
could be fun, but I'm quite curious about a new blizzard IP that doesn't have an apparent focus on character development (I don't really have a better way to describe what I mean - "where's the story"). I guess a lot of "popular" games these days don't really focus on that (cs:go, mobas etc) and HS/heros borrow from previous IP so that feels different.
"These days". As if Street Fighter, Unreal Tournament, olders CS', etc. had glorious storylines. These kinds of games never had any purpose in its story besides finding a crappy reason to put all the fighters in an arena and letting them fight. If anything newer games tried to push more story into them.
|
On November 09 2014 22:43 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2014 22:28 NicksonReyes wrote:
Reaper is literally Malthael with guns. Guess you never saw the movie Equilibrium. His inspiration is much older then Malthael.
God bless Gun-Fu.
|
On November 09 2014 22:47 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2014 22:40 y0su wrote:
I feel like this is the story/world from titan put into game play ideas they had from sc: ghost.
could be fun, but I'm quite curious about a new blizzard IP that doesn't have an apparent focus on character development (I don't really have a better way to describe what I mean - "where's the story"). I guess a lot of "popular" games these days don't really focus on that (cs:go, mobas etc) and HS/heros borrow from previous IP so that feels different. "These days". As if Street Fighter, Unreal Tournament, olders CS', etc. had glorious storylines. These kinds of games never had any purpose in its story besides finding a crappy reason to put all the fighters in an arena and letting them fight. If anything newer games tried to push more story into them.
SF (and most fighters) do contain a story (mode) and characters/development... More so than the back story giving to LoL champions for instance.
However, the main point was not that such games exist (now or in the past), but that it seems strange to have Blizzard doing it. The lore in the WC, SC and Diablo universes is quite deep (even if the storytelling gets cliche).
|
On November 10 2014 00:06 y0su wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2014 22:47 SKC wrote:On November 09 2014 22:40 y0su wrote:
I feel like this is the story/world from titan put into game play ideas they had from sc: ghost.
could be fun, but I'm quite curious about a new blizzard IP that doesn't have an apparent focus on character development (I don't really have a better way to describe what I mean - "where's the story"). I guess a lot of "popular" games these days don't really focus on that (cs:go, mobas etc) and HS/heros borrow from previous IP so that feels different. "These days". As if Street Fighter, Unreal Tournament, olders CS', etc. had glorious storylines. These kinds of games never had any purpose in its story besides finding a crappy reason to put all the fighters in an arena and letting them fight. If anything newer games tried to push more story into them. SF (and most fighters) do contain a story (mode) and characters/development... More so than the back story giving to LoL champions for instance. However, the main point was not that such games exist (now or in the past), but that it seems strange to have Blizzard doing it. The lore in the WC, SC and Diablo universes is quite deep (even if the storytelling gets cliche).
If Overwatch is indeed a remnant of Titan then it was originally developed as a MMO FPS which would have given it a lot of room for storytelling. Since the game just didn't end up being as fun/interesting as Blizzard had hoped they reshaped it into something they do consider to be worth making but as you say it probably comes at the cost of their ability to tell the story.
|
On November 10 2014 00:06 y0su wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2014 22:47 SKC wrote:On November 09 2014 22:40 y0su wrote:
I feel like this is the story/world from titan put into game play ideas they had from sc: ghost.
could be fun, but I'm quite curious about a new blizzard IP that doesn't have an apparent focus on character development (I don't really have a better way to describe what I mean - "where's the story"). I guess a lot of "popular" games these days don't really focus on that (cs:go, mobas etc) and HS/heros borrow from previous IP so that feels different. "These days". As if Street Fighter, Unreal Tournament, olders CS', etc. had glorious storylines. These kinds of games never had any purpose in its story besides finding a crappy reason to put all the fighters in an arena and letting them fight. If anything newer games tried to push more story into them. SF (and most fighters) do contain a story (mode) and characters/development... More so than the back story giving to LoL champions for instance. However, the main point was not that such games exist (now or in the past), but that it seems strange to have Blizzard doing it. The lore in the WC, SC and Diablo universes is quite deep (even if the storytelling gets cliche).
Not at first. The original Street Fighter was basically an international tournament, and hardly anything more than that. Later on they started adding a lot more backstory for people who cared, but most people still didn't.
It's the statement that "these days popular games don't need to focus on storylines" that is simply wrong. Some games never needed to focus on storylines, and if anything they have gotten more complicated with time. If we are talking Blizzard, Rock'n'roll racing never really had a fleshed out backstory or character development. Certainly far less than more recent titles like the newer F-Zeros.
And still, noone knows how much story Blizzard will try to put into the game, even if in the end it doesn't really matter.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
Blizzard might not be that good at having good stories anymore but they are very good at world building, granted its an FPS this time and not an MMO/RPG so without a campaign they can do a lot less effective world building. I think they are trying to go with a bit of a comedy angle tho akin to a lively superheroes world so its something they are not neccesarily used to. We will see whether it works out.
As for the gender distribution, seems fine to me I don't really mind either way, the reason people complain about LoL btw is not the amount but how the females(and their skins) are represented and how they are sexualized/objectified(which tends to sell better among the LoL demographic).
|
This looks amazing... very excited for when it comes out. I played TF2 for hundreds of hours so I have a really good feeling about this. It seems like a great spiritual successor and I hope it builds on what is already good in current games that may be similar. The dwarf building the turret with his wrench does make me laugh though because I enjoyed engineer a lot. Interesting new turn for Blizz in general - they have forayed into another major genre. Exciting new endeavor overall.
|
Well, I'm diggin' it. Seems like it has heaps of potential and looks like a lot of fun for sure! Can't wait.
|
Really excited for this game. I'm all for the moba scene dying down and cycling back to FPS/MMOs or anything else for that matter. Played 2000 hours of dota and now heroes, and this is looking like something fresh.... even though it does look like a few games, the gameplay looks promising in terms of us getting taken cared of in the "fun + competitive" side of things. Other games are competitive but not fun, or the other way around, but Blizzard has a good eye on things like this (even tho SC2 isn't the best representation of that...)
A bit annoyed at the sexist calls from a few people. This game has way more female characters than other games if not most games. The character design of these females are misunderstood as "revealing sex objects" and in actuality it's more of "what looks bad ass," with emphasis on "ass." You have a lineup of sexy female characters and not as sexy characters... which I don't find what the big deal is... unless everyone's perception of the ideal female are covered up tomboys (which I highly doubt even within the female gaming community).
|
On November 10 2014 01:52 Lokian wrote:
Really excited for this game. I'm all for the moba scene dying down and cycling back to FPS/MMOs or anything else for that matter. Played 2000 hours of dota and now heroes, and this is looking like something fresh.... even though it does look like a few games, the gameplay looks promising in terms of us getting taken cared of in the "fun + competitive" side of things. Other games are competitive but not fun, or the other way around, but Blizzard has a good eye on things like this (even tho SC2 isn't the best representation of that...)
A bit annoyed at the sexist calls from a few people. This game has way more female characters than other games if not most games. The character design of these females are misunderstood as "revealing sex objects" and in actuality it's more of "what looks bad ass," with emphasis on "ass." You have a lineup of sexy female characters and not as sexy characters... which I don't find what the big deal is... unless everyone's perception of the ideal female are covered up tomboys (which I highly doubt even within the female gaming community).
I think everyone is fine with sexy female characters like on the ones in Overwatch. People just dont want Ivy from Soul Calibers. That goes form sexy to straight up pandering.
|
I don't get why people rationalize a game announcement like this with the statement that "Blizzard has always made casual games." Because that's just false.
Warcraft 1 and 2 were not casual games. War2, probably the beginning of the Blizzard golden age, was simply polished and well-designed. Everything about it, start to finish, was more appealing than the competition. Furthermore, they were perfecting a genre that was not at all played out. They made a serious contribution to RTS with War2 which they continued with Starcraft.
Starcraft was not, in any shape or form, casual. It was just a perfectly made RTS. When something is perfectly made, it appeals to a broader audience. They were advancing the genre further.
Diablo wasn't even made by Blizzard but it fit into their design ethos well enough for them to acquire the company pre-release. Again, not a casual game. Very dark atmosphere, it was decently difficult, it didn't have a cute storyline to draw casuals in. Diablo 2 just took that game and expanded the loot and character building aspects to heavy degrees. Similar to their RTS titles, they were blazing a trail in the genre (loot action RPG). These were games that no one had ever played before.
Same with War3. Again, they brought something unique to the table while making sure the game was polished. It was a little simpler than Starcraft and I personally was disappointed with it upon its release but it was a new type of RTS that people hadn't seen before.
WoW vanilla. Here's where it starts to get a little more open for interpretation. Some people will say that just took Everquest and casualized. Other people say they just refined the formula so it made more sense. In any case, the success of WoW contributed to the overall transformation of Blizzard into something that behaves more like a big corporation.
After vanilla WoW, and maybe TBC, Blizzard's strategy very clearly changed. They no longer took nascent genres and made the definitive version. Rather, they started taking mature genres and trying to just release "same game you've played but by Blizzard!" Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, all the WoW expansions, Hearthstone. None of these did anything to advance their genres, none of them introduced anything new gameplay-wise. They all, however, were more simplified than past versions.
Overwatch is now just "Team Fortress 2.. but by Blizzard!" That's not to say it won't be enjoyable... but defending Blizzard as the same company they've always been is just plain delusional. Especially when the focus of their press release is how they want to bring FPS to as broad an audience as possible (a genre that is ALREADY accepted by a hugely wide audience). That sounds like a business plan, not a design goal.
|
On November 10 2014 02:52 Yacobs wrote:
I don't get why people rationalize a game announcement like this with the statement that "Blizzard has always made casual games." Because that's just false.
Warcraft 1 and 2 were not casual games. War2, probably the beginning of the Blizzard golden age, was simply polished and well-designed. Everything about it, start to finish, was more appealing than the competition. Furthermore, they were perfecting a genre that was not at all played out. They made a serious contribution to RTS with War2 which they continued with Starcraft.
Starcraft was not, in any shape or form, casual. It was just a perfectly made RTS. When something is perfectly made, it appeals to a broader audience. They were advancing the genre further.
Diablo wasn't even made by Blizzard but it fit into their design ethos well enough for them to acquire the company pre-release. Again, not a casual game. Very dark atmosphere, it was decently difficult, it didn't have a cute storyline to draw casuals in. Diablo 2 just took that game and expanded the loot and character building aspects to heavy degrees. Similar to their RTS titles, they were blazing a trail in the genre (loot action RPG). These were games that no one had ever played before.
Same with War3. Again, they brought something unique to the table while making sure the game was polished. It was a little simpler than Starcraft and I personally was disappointed with it upon its release but it was a new type of RTS that people hadn't seen before.
WoW vanilla. Here's where it starts to get a little more open for interpretation. Some people will say that just took Everquest and casualized. Other people say they just refined the formula so it made more sense. In any case, the success of WoW contributed to the overall transformation of Blizzard into something that behaves more like a big corporation.
After vanilla WoW, and maybe TBC, Blizzard's strategy very clearly changed. They no longer took nascent genres and made the definitive version. Rather, they started taking mature genres and trying to just release "same game you've played but by Blizzard!" Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, all the WoW expansions, Hearthstone. None of these did anything to advance their genres, none of them introduced anything new gameplay-wise. They all, however, were more simplified than past versions.
Overwatch is now just "Team Fortress 2.. but by Blizzard!" That's not to say it won't be enjoyable... but defending Blizzard as the same company they've always been is just plain delusional. Especially when the focus of their press release is how they want to bring FPS to as broad an audience as possible (a genre that is ALREADY accepted by a hugely wide audience). That sounds like a business plan, not a design goal.
Blizzard has always aimed for a broad audience since the beginning. They keep their system requirements always very low. I couldn't play most games because we never had a good PC but Blizzard games always worked.
They always just wanted to make fun games. None of their earlier games were designed as 'hardcore'. Diablo 2 is super easy on normal. Starcraft and War3 just had very good campaigns but they were not hardcore....I don't see why they can't copy, polish and improve the team-FPS genre like you say they did with other genres.
|
On November 10 2014 02:00 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2014 01:52 Lokian wrote:
Really excited for this game. I'm all for the moba scene dying down and cycling back to FPS/MMOs or anything else for that matter. Played 2000 hours of dota and now heroes, and this is looking like something fresh.... even though it does look like a few games, the gameplay looks promising in terms of us getting taken cared of in the "fun + competitive" side of things. Other games are competitive but not fun, or the other way around, but Blizzard has a good eye on things like this (even tho SC2 isn't the best representation of that...)
A bit annoyed at the sexist calls from a few people. This game has way more female characters than other games if not most games. The character design of these females are misunderstood as "revealing sex objects" and in actuality it's more of "what looks bad ass," with emphasis on "ass." You have a lineup of sexy female characters and not as sexy characters... which I don't find what the big deal is... unless everyone's perception of the ideal female are covered up tomboys (which I highly doubt even within the female gaming community). I think everyone is fine with sexy female characters like on the ones in Overwatch. People just dont want Ivy from Soul Calibers. That goes form sexy to straight up pandering.
And I don't see any problem with that. Video games like Metzen said in the previous quote are are for everyone.
It shouldn't be molded only for overweight and complexed women. In this case give some clothes to Illidan, Orcs and "debuff" all Blizzard characters muscles.
We live in a very annoying era and freedom of speech is slowly fading away..Just a kind reminder that women used to loathe on video games and its players ("lol nerd") and now we have to keep them in mind when making a fantasy world..
Japan is the last free bastion of video games.
|
On November 10 2014 03:11 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
They always just wanted to make fun games. None of their earlier games were designed as 'hardcore'. Diablo 2 is super easy on normal. Starcraft and War3 just had very good campaigns but they were not hardcore....I don't see why they can't copy, polish and improve the team-FPS genre like you say they did with other genres.
You responded to my post without actually addressing any of my points and disputing points that I never made.
|
On November 10 2014 03:14 YuiHirasawa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2014 02:00 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2014 01:52 Lokian wrote:
Really excited for this game. I'm all for the moba scene dying down and cycling back to FPS/MMOs or anything else for that matter. Played 2000 hours of dota and now heroes, and this is looking like something fresh.... even though it does look like a few games, the gameplay looks promising in terms of us getting taken cared of in the "fun + competitive" side of things. Other games are competitive but not fun, or the other way around, but Blizzard has a good eye on things like this (even tho SC2 isn't the best representation of that...)
A bit annoyed at the sexist calls from a few people. This game has way more female characters than other games if not most games. The character design of these females are misunderstood as "revealing sex objects" and in actuality it's more of "what looks bad ass," with emphasis on "ass." You have a lineup of sexy female characters and not as sexy characters... which I don't find what the big deal is... unless everyone's perception of the ideal female are covered up tomboys (which I highly doubt even within the female gaming community). I think everyone is fine with sexy female characters like on the ones in Overwatch. People just dont want Ivy from Soul Calibers. That goes form sexy to straight up pandering. And I don't see any problem with that. Video games like Metzen said in the previous quoteare are for everyone. It shouldn't be molded only for overweight and complexed women. In this case give some clothes to Illidan, Orcs and "debuff" all Blizzard characters muscles. We live in a very annoying era and freedom of speech is slowly fading away..Just a kind reminder that women used to loathe on video games and its players ("lol nerd") and now we have to keep them in mind when making a fantasy world.. Japan is the last free bastion of video games.
I think I am going to quote George RR Martin when someone asked how he writes his women characters. In response he said: "We, I've always seen women as people." Heaven forbid that Blizzard put some through into their female characters and ask "would a girl/woman want to play this character".
|
On November 10 2014 03:19 Yacobs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2014 03:11 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
They always just wanted to make fun games. None of their earlier games were designed as 'hardcore'. Diablo 2 is super easy on normal. Starcraft and War3 just had very good campaigns but they were not hardcore....I don't see why they can't copy, polish and improve the team-FPS genre like you say they did with other genres. You responded to my post without actually addressing any of my points and disputing points that I never made.
You say their new business model is to bring things to a broad audience so i reasoned they've always been doing that.
|
On November 10 2014 03:33 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2014 03:19 Yacobs wrote:On November 10 2014 03:11 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
They always just wanted to make fun games. None of their earlier games were designed as 'hardcore'. Diablo 2 is super easy on normal. Starcraft and War3 just had very good campaigns but they were not hardcore....I don't see why they can't copy, polish and improve the team-FPS genre like you say they did with other genres. You responded to my post without actually addressing any of my points and disputing points that I never made. You say their new business model is to bring things to a broad audience so i reasoned they've always been doing that.
People often forget the Blizzard released D2 with a max resolution of 800x600 so everyone could play it on the PC they had. Blizzard has always been interested largest number of people with their games. I would argue that anyone who claims otherwise is having a case of selective memory.
|
I don't think anyone said the characters are oversexualized. It was just the comment from Blizzard that Overwatch represents a change in their characters design and that looking back they saw issue with characters from Warcraft, for example. It's weird, since characters in this franchise look more like the usual sexy female in tight clothing than the other games they have made, and it's not like their previous franchises had issues with over sexualization.
Looking at the first 15 characters in the screenshot, I would say they moved the opposite way, if anywhere. But it's not like it is an issue as it is, you will have to wait for the sexy nurse skinpacks to see if they will go that route.
|
Tracer sold me on this. The cavalry is here! Such a cute character^^
|
This game really looks like what Firefall PvP should have been IMO. It's actually really, really close aesthetically too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
