| Forum Index > General Games |
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. | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On April 20 2016 23:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote: according to Plansix i'm supposed to copy and paste them and not merely provide a link. why don't you two guys debate this in PM and keep me out of it. Uh, I wasn't attacking you or anything. No need to be so defensive. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17393 Posts
On April 20 2016 23:45 Seuss wrote: Uh, I wasn't attacking you or anything. No need to be so defensive. no defense here. i'd rather discuss Overwatch. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17393 Posts
http://www.overpwn.com/news/152-tracers-over-the-shoulder-pose-removal-drama-all level 1890  i bet you can level beyond that its just that your portrait frame won't change. i guess if a million guys hit 1890 they'll make more borders. | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17393 Posts
and then wipe it again when the full release starts? i hope Blizzard eventually offers this game to console players for $40 via direct download with no box. from a console perspective this really feels like a $40 game. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On April 21 2016 00:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote: are they going to wipe it all and start fresh when the open beta begins? and then wipe it again when the full release starts? i hope Blizzard eventually offers this game to console players for $40 via direct download with no box. from a console perspective this really feels like a $40 game. The console players really do get less for their money  | ||
|
Velzi
Finland659 Posts
On April 21 2016 02:01 Djzapz wrote: The console players really do get less for their money There is no game worth buying for console that gets ur money back in entertainment. (; | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
| ||
|
karazax
United States3737 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17393 Posts
On April 21 2016 05:00 deth2munkies wrote: It should be noted that console OW players get all the free updates that PC players are getting, and they get the Origins edition benefits as well, they just don't have the options of purchasing the bare bones game. I don't see how it has any less content or promise of content than something like Titanfall. true, however, i wouldn't be looking to match the new low content bar EA set with TItanfall though. i'm happy to spend $40 on the game. i hope they create some PvE DLC content similar to what Battleborn has so they can take more money off of me and my little gang of crappy players. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17393 Posts
http://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20743504195#post-5 its his reply to the topic "Ranked right now has massive problems" | ||
|
Velzi
Finland659 Posts
Personally I didnt find leavers / AFKers big issue in the stress test weekend, had like 2 games where someone left or afked (apart from the last 20s when u died and had no chance to get back to point in time). Only problem im seeing in the ranked seasons are for the "good" players who dont play that much, u use most of ur playing time grinding through ranks and when u finally reach ur level of gameplay, season is about to end. This shouldnt be that big of an issue when game actually launches but later on when people get tired with the game and actually play other games aswell and not only Overwatch, u use ur whole month stomping through ranks. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
One of the major reasons we decided to go with the sudden death tie break format instead of game length (aka "Stopwatch") was that to keep the objective for a map simple and clear: win the map. Use of a game length tie break and the various proposed variants on it add a second objective on top of that to break ties: win the map fast. Especially in the early days of Overwatch's competitive metagame, I'd rather not encourage players to change their team comps and playstyles around that second objective. To make a point, we could also use a different secondary criteria to break ties that would be just as technically fair as game length: total player deaths. That would be horrible, though. We don't want to incentivize players to NOT make aggressive plays because they're worrying about dying, nor do we want players chasing kills and ignoring the objective. Game length isn't as bad as THAT, but it could make some heroes more preferred than others, or in a worst case lead to "stall" comps used by defenders who know that they don't need to stop the attackers, just simply delay them. All that being said, we're actively looking to see if we can make improvements to our current format to address the feedback we've been getting. The dialogue has been great. See the objective "win the map" would be a good one if it was 50:50 balance of winning/losing the map. Which is why a second "objective" is needed. It makes no sense that it's a draw when one team simply does a lot better than the other (while both teams don't win the map) Let's say one team doesn't even get the payload because they don't conquer the first objective, the other team almost "wins the map". It is very clear which team did better in this case but right now it's a draw. That's completely ridiculous. Blizzard being stubborn is nothing new though, even when it is incredibly obvious that the current system is bad. | ||
|
Andre
Slovenia3523 Posts
Each 'stage' of the map having its own tactics made the game even more fun. Some people would focus heavily on defending a certain point and letting the enemy progress through other points, a great dynamic between time & overall strategy developed because of the stopwatch. Stopwatch seems the fairest, Idk why they wouldn't use it. | ||
|
Reaps
United Kingdom1280 Posts
On April 22 2016 01:58 Andre wrote: Only experience I have with stopwatch was from back in the day when I played RTCW: Enemy Territory(class-based team game) it was 6vs6 as well. There were definitely some matches where it got boring, but watching pros play was amazing. Those seconds ticking down and every moment counting was so hype. Worth saying the game was purely objectiive based, do A-B-C from start to finish(almost always it was in order -barring a few interesting strats). Each 'stage' of the map having its own tactics made the game even more fun. Some people would focus heavily on defending a certain point and letting the enemy progress through other points, a great dynamic between time & overall strategy developed because of the stopwatch. Stopwatch seems the fairest, Idk why they wouldn't use it. Just want to second this, as i have mentioned many times in this thread how much of a RTCW:ET fanboy i am xD One of the reason's were as you said, stopwatch seems the best mode for a shooter like this. It was crazy just how intense it was watching the pros play it. | ||
|
Andre
Slovenia3523 Posts
Braundorf had so many hype moments, due to stopwatch. DYNAMITE PLANTED!! | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
A noble effort, much more difficult than the alternative, and arguably futile. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17393 Posts
https://winoverwatch.tacobell.com/ | ||
|
JohnnyDavids13
4 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Rush vs PianO
Flash vs Speed
PiGosaur Cup
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
BeSt vs Leta
Queen vs Jaedong
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
RSL Revival
TriGGeR vs Cure
ByuN vs Rogue
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
