|
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 October 31 2015 05:16 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2015 05:06 -Archangel- wrote:On October 31 2015 02:49 Hider wrote:On October 31 2015 01:02 -Archangel- wrote:On October 31 2015 00:39 Hider wrote:On October 31 2015 00:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
So basically SC2 isn't fun to play? Sc2 feels like difficulty for the sake of difficulty. Lots of stuff you have to memorize, accurate timings you need to refine. Lots of stuff where you make clicks for teh sake of clicking (macro). Then once in a while you might get to actually control your units in an engagement, but the micro interactions - at least prior to LOTV - were generally not good. And then if you make one small mistake, you can easily just lose the game right afterwards. All true, that is why I found more fun RTS to play  As for Overwatch, the game looks as fun as older FPS I used to play when I was younger (quake, quake 2, TF1) so I am looking forward to playing it. Sorry but micro interactions in slow motion isn't fun either. Give me fast-paced RTS with a low learning curve and let me control large armies and I am sold. You already have that with sc2. Really? Sc2 has a low learning curve? And Sc2 isn't fast-paced. Units move fast, but you don't have any engagements for the most of the game. Fast-paced = Lots of engagements all the time and everywhere + fast-moving units. No developers has yet been able to develop such an RTS game (yet).
I think you're looking for Dawn of War (the first one - not the pseudo rts Dawn of War II). There's still a small playerbase esp. after they changed the multiplayer to steamworks.
|
On October 31 2015 04:28 Hider wrote:It probably won't be if its not F2P since an upfront-fee is a major barrier for people in the easy. If its F2P, I think it is a real possibility that it could overtake LOLs throne as the biggest game within a couple of years. But most likely, it will be $20 upfront + microtransactions in forms of skins/weapons. That's the safer solution and is almost guaranteed generate hundreds of millions of dollars. Show nested quote +That's not to say I don't think this game takes skill, I just think that because the of way the game is designed, it makes it so I could see people who might be put off by a hardcore FPS like CS could totally get into Overwatch. The thing about this game that stands out to me is how it appeals to so many different players. I was watching a stream of Summi1t, who said he didn't like Tracer cus it had too much movement speed (which wasn't for him). Then I watched another stream said he didn't like Hanzo cus too much aim, loved Trazer.. And you probably also hear some (girls typically) say they prefer support/tanks because they have shitty mechanics (that's my stereotype!). And as you say, you are going to attract alot more people than Counterstrike which is a lot of waiting --> 100-0 --> more waiting. Some of that is still in OW since you can play high precision + high damage dealer heroes. But you can also opt for heroes where you constantly battle. It's probably the FPS game that the most amount of people will find some type of pleasure in.
Yeah, it's in the same vein as Team Fortress where you would prefer to play heroes/class archetypes that fits your style of play or that appeals to you in general, whichever comes first. Overwatch isn't necessarily new in that regard, it's heavily inspired from that Team Fortress styled FPS genre and it's immediately apparent from the first or second game I played of it. The thing that really separates Overwatch from TF2 is that it's a little more frenetic and the action actually feels good.
It's not fair to actually even compare Overwatch to a Counterstrike because both games are just completely different but one is definitely being more suited to a casual audience than the other. There's not even a lot of modern PC shooters out there in the market, so it's easy from Blizzard's perspective to go through this route than something like a Call of Duty or CS.
I think Overwatch is very fun but the biggest skepticism I have of this game is just whether it's just me not getting too into it or if other people will feel the same. I played one long session of Overwatch and told myself that was cool but there's not that addictive quality to it yet that's making me want to go back for another.
|
Russian Federation421 Posts
|
On October 31 2015 05:16 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2015 05:06 -Archangel- wrote:On October 31 2015 02:49 Hider wrote:On October 31 2015 01:02 -Archangel- wrote:On October 31 2015 00:39 Hider wrote:On October 31 2015 00:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
So basically SC2 isn't fun to play? Sc2 feels like difficulty for the sake of difficulty. Lots of stuff you have to memorize, accurate timings you need to refine. Lots of stuff where you make clicks for teh sake of clicking (macro). Then once in a while you might get to actually control your units in an engagement, but the micro interactions - at least prior to LOTV - were generally not good. And then if you make one small mistake, you can easily just lose the game right afterwards. All true, that is why I found more fun RTS to play As for Overwatch, the game looks as fun as older FPS I used to play when I was younger (quake, quake 2, TF1) so I am looking forward to playing it. Sorry but micro interactions in slow motion isn't fun either. Give me fast-paced RTS with a low learning curve and let me control large armies and I am sold. You already have that with sc2. Really? Sc2 has a low learning curve? E: but i do agree with u SC2 not having low learning curve. And Sc2 isn't fast-paced. Units move fast, but you don't have any engagements for the most of the game. Fast-paced = Lots of engagements all the time and everywhere + fast-moving units. No developers has yet been able to develop such an RTS game (yet).
I dont know what lvl u are playing at SC2 but atleast for me SC2 is really fast-paced game with lots of things happening all around the map.
E: but i do agree with u SC2 not having low learning curve
|
was linked already  , for shame that you don't read everything !
|
On October 31 2015 05:16 Hider wrote:
And Sc2 isn't fast-paced. Units move fast, but you don't have any engagements for the most of the game.
Fast-paced = Lots of engagements all the time and everywhere + fast-moving units.
This is the description of fast-paced? I thought it means like 200/200 in ~12min as well as 2sec fights as well as ~50supply production per minute. units movement is completely irrelevant here.
I call your description like intense-paced, this is exactly what Sc2 need for years. Biggest step to do it to slow things I mentioned in fast-paced.
|
It's not fair to actually even compare Overwatch to a Counterstrike because both games are just completely different but one is definitely being more suited to a casual audience than the other.
I assume you mean CS:GO is more towards casual audience? I don't agree with that. I think CS:GO just adds a different type of satisfaction, but part of that satisfaction is also in Overwatch (depending on which hero you play).
And also a funny fact: Over 2% of the entire Danish population has played CS:GO within the last 2 weeks (similar value for Sweden). By making the very rough assumption that it's only 15-30 year old men who play CS:GO that represents 18% of that segment.
I don't think there is a single other game that has a broader playing base in the history of gaming than that (maybe South Korea BW/LOL).
Yeah, it's in the same vein as Team Fortress where you would prefer to play heroes/class archetypes that fits your style of play or that appeals to you in general, whichever comes first. Overwatch isn't necessarily new in that regard, it's heavily inspired from that Team Fortress styled FPS genre and it's immediately apparent from the first or second game I played of it. The thing that really separates Overwatch from TF2 is that it's a little more frenetic and the action actually feels good.
I think the hero classes look much more differnet than in TF2. Having ultimates and supermobility like abilities in OW makes it appealing to me.
|
Russian Federation421 Posts
On October 31 2015 05:55 FeyFey wrote:was linked already , for shame that you don't read everything !
Not enough PASSION. The girl is a Random bonjwa and people are discussing whether Sc2 is fast paced.
|
Well it definitely looks a lot like TF2 (which everyone has said) but that's really not a bad thing. TF2 is an amazing game. The distinctiveness of the classes in TF2 is better than any other class based shooter I've seen, so copying the template is a good strategy.
I could see myself putting serious hours into this game as long as there aren't new heroes that you have to pay or grind to unlock all the time.
|
I dont know what lvl u are playing at SC2 but atleast for me SC2 is really fast-paced game with lots of things happening all around the map.
It's all about what you think is a lot. I think a bit of harassment here and there is not alot. I want battles/small skirmishes to take up at least 70-80% of total gametime.
TvZ HOTS was somewhat close to that in 2013-2014, but now it's become so much more passive (at pro-level). And even then, the matchup lacked a ton of diversity.
And that's also where OW shines. You get tired of a hero... You just switch to another one!
The game is only get better over time as more and more heroes are added to the game.
I thought it means like 200/200 in ~12min as well as 2sec fights as well as ~50supply production per minute. units movement is completely irrelevant here.
No fast-paced implies constant army trading. Hence why TvZ 2013-2014 is the closest to that in the history of Sc2.
200/200 in 12 minutes typically only occurs with passive play (and the game also has too low of a supply cap/too high supply values).
2 second fight --> Into GG is a consequence of lack of positional advantages and amove engagements instead of movemement-based micro.
Positional advantages can - in some scenarios - make the game less fast-paced, but it depends on how its implemented. If it doesn't prevent engagements from taking happening in the first place, but rather makes it possible for a low army count to beat a higher army count, you'll increase the total amount of multitasking in the game + add more comeback opportunites.
For instance, TvZ in BW was actually quite fast-paced despite significant positional advantages.
I think you're looking for Dawn of War (the first one - not the pseudo rts Dawn of War II). There's still a small playerbase esp. after they changed the multiplayer to steamworks.
Hmm when I watch people play the game (from youtube), it kinda looks like they are just amoving their units around. For me the reason I want it to be fast-paced is so I can take part in a lot more engagements where I am heavily rewarded for (movement-based) micro.
|
On October 31 2015 05:27 shin ken wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2015 05:16 Hider wrote:On October 31 2015 05:06 -Archangel- wrote:On October 31 2015 02:49 Hider wrote:On October 31 2015 01:02 -Archangel- wrote:On October 31 2015 00:39 Hider wrote:On October 31 2015 00:17 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
So basically SC2 isn't fun to play? Sc2 feels like difficulty for the sake of difficulty. Lots of stuff you have to memorize, accurate timings you need to refine. Lots of stuff where you make clicks for teh sake of clicking (macro). Then once in a while you might get to actually control your units in an engagement, but the micro interactions - at least prior to LOTV - were generally not good. And then if you make one small mistake, you can easily just lose the game right afterwards. All true, that is why I found more fun RTS to play As for Overwatch, the game looks as fun as older FPS I used to play when I was younger (quake, quake 2, TF1) so I am looking forward to playing it. Sorry but micro interactions in slow motion isn't fun either. Give me fast-paced RTS with a low learning curve and let me control large armies and I am sold. You already have that with sc2. Really? Sc2 has a low learning curve? And Sc2 isn't fast-paced. Units move fast, but you don't have any engagements for the most of the game. Fast-paced = Lots of engagements all the time and everywhere + fast-moving units. No developers has yet been able to develop such an RTS game (yet). I think you're looking for Dawn of War (the first one - not the pseudo rts Dawn of War II). There's still a small playerbase esp. after they changed the multiplayer to steamworks.
I would say that yes, DoW is pretty fast paced and you battle all the time. Also it is fairly easy to learn.
|
I've been at looking 2gd playing this and it looks more interesting than I expected.
I'd probably only play tracer though, because her abilities looks like 10x more interesting than anything else.
I honestly expected a fps that was just even more casualized than hots is in the moba genre.
They have to remove some of the clutter though, it's just so much stupid shit showing up all over the screen in fights.
|
United States12248 Posts
I don't see any screen clutter honestly. The UI is pretty minimalist and you only see a gold glow when you're being healed (plus the name and health of your healer which may or may not be considered clutter), small blue arrows when you're being boosted, and the large words STUNNED or PINNED when you're unable to perform an action (so it's moot). Of course, you also get kill confirmation messages (maybe you'd prefer HLDM-style corner icons?) and most importantly, buff notifications, such as when Widowmaker uses ult to grant wall vision.
|
On October 31 2015 09:36 Excalibur_Z wrote:
I don't see any screen clutter honestly. The UI is pretty minimalist and you only see a gold glow when you're being healed (plus the name and health of your healer which may or may not be considered clutter), small blue arrows when you're being boosted, and the large words STUNNED or PINNED when you're unable to perform an action (so it's moot). Of course, you also get kill confirmation messages (maybe you'd prefer HLDM-style corner icons?) and most importantly, buff notifications, such as when Widowmaker uses ult to grant wall vision.
I definitely disagree with this a fair bit. There's been a lot of talk about it on the Overwatch subreddit, and it doesn't take long to see how insane the clutter can get.
|
This game looks so sick, wish I had it.
...
|
On October 31 2015 09:44 Aylear wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2015 09:36 Excalibur_Z wrote:
I don't see any screen clutter honestly. The UI is pretty minimalist and you only see a gold glow when you're being healed (plus the name and health of your healer which may or may not be considered clutter), small blue arrows when you're being boosted, and the large words STUNNED or PINNED when you're unable to perform an action (so it's moot). Of course, you also get kill confirmation messages (maybe you'd prefer HLDM-style corner icons?) and most importantly, buff notifications, such as when Widowmaker uses ult to grant wall vision. I definitely disagree with this a fair bit. There's been a lot of talk about it on the Overwatch subreddit, and it doesn't take long to see how insane the clutter can get.
Not going to happen most likely, which sucks, but I wish Blizz would let us make custom configs, would solve all these issues. I mean tjorborn's reload animation covers the whole screen, who seriously thinks that's a good idea. Hopefully we get at least some options to reduce those things.
|
On October 31 2015 19:35 DCRed wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2015 09:44 Aylear wrote:On October 31 2015 09:36 Excalibur_Z wrote:
I don't see any screen clutter honestly. The UI is pretty minimalist and you only see a gold glow when you're being healed (plus the name and health of your healer which may or may not be considered clutter), small blue arrows when you're being boosted, and the large words STUNNED or PINNED when you're unable to perform an action (so it's moot). Of course, you also get kill confirmation messages (maybe you'd prefer HLDM-style corner icons?) and most importantly, buff notifications, such as when Widowmaker uses ult to grant wall vision. I definitely disagree with this a fair bit. There's been a lot of talk about it on the Overwatch subreddit, and it doesn't take long to see how insane the clutter can get. Not going to happen most likely, which sucks, but I wish Blizz would let us make custom configs, would solve all these issues. I mean tjorborn's reload animation covers the whole screen, who seriously thinks that's a good idea. Hopefully we get at least some options to reduce those things.
unless the customization is available in-game, I doubt Blizzard is going to allow custom config files because casuals will complain
|
On October 31 2015 22:53 udgnim wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2015 19:35 DCRed wrote:On October 31 2015 09:44 Aylear wrote:On October 31 2015 09:36 Excalibur_Z wrote:
I don't see any screen clutter honestly. The UI is pretty minimalist and you only see a gold glow when you're being healed (plus the name and health of your healer which may or may not be considered clutter), small blue arrows when you're being boosted, and the large words STUNNED or PINNED when you're unable to perform an action (so it's moot). Of course, you also get kill confirmation messages (maybe you'd prefer HLDM-style corner icons?) and most importantly, buff notifications, such as when Widowmaker uses ult to grant wall vision. I definitely disagree with this a fair bit. There's been a lot of talk about it on the Overwatch subreddit, and it doesn't take long to see how insane the clutter can get. Not going to happen most likely, which sucks, but I wish Blizz would let us make custom configs, would solve all these issues. I mean tjorborn's reload animation covers the whole screen, who seriously thinks that's a good idea. Hopefully we get at least some options to reduce those things. unless the customization is available in-game, I doubt Blizzard is going to allow custom config files because casuals will complain
Or it will be like in cs:go when the tournament organiser goes through it to verify nothing connecting to a cheat is in it. Configs are both good and bad. I use it in Dota but would much rather have the options in game so everybody has the same chances, also easier to enable/disable that way.
The thing that seems to need changing the most is the sun, giving a real position advantage to one side on maps.
Been watching a_seagull for ~5h and have to say the game seems very interesting. Much more interesting than CS:GO is for me, mostly due to the fact that there are other things than nades and shooting (simplified).
Edit, how are they handling cheating? Most fps games tend to be bad at stopping it due to ping considerations.
|
On November 01 2015 01:19 Yurie wrote:
Edit, how are they handling cheating? Most fps games tend to be bad at stopping it due to ping considerations.
We don't know yet. Apparently there is not even a report player function as of today, and I can't imagine there's a lot of anti-cheat countermeasures in place for a beta where the point is to find things and break things.
|
On October 31 2015 07:45 Ingvar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2015 05:55 FeyFey wrote:was linked already , for shame that you don't read everything ! Not enough PASSION. The girl is a Random bonjwa and people are discussing whether Sc2 is fast paced.
haha one of the comments was like, why is her race a 4 on a dice xD. But I guess she will have psy blades, stim packs and creep for vision speed boost !
And shoots bunny scarabs that only go off 70% of the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CSj2uL6XAAA6OI1.png)
