|
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 07 2015 01:12 Pwere wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2015 00:47 ref4 wrote:On November 07 2015 00:29 Pwere wrote:
If the Origins pack costs 60$ and comes with a bunch of skins and free shit for other games, you can bet there's a starter edition somewhere that costs 0-20$ and only comes with a bunch of/all heroes.
Everything Blizz has done with this game so far screams of eSports. You don't compete with CS:GO by charging 60$ for a game that also sells skins/emotes/whatever. not free if you paid $60 for them. It's like your "free" airplane meals (and "free" salted peanuts!) for a 12 hour trans-pacific flight that costs you $960.99 one way because you bought the ticket the last minute. at this point they're shit, not free shit. Seriously, why do you feel the need to post something like this? We all know free shit is not free. You paid for a ticket to attend an event, then you won free shit. You got 100 wins in HS, you got a free mount in HotS. It's not free, you played hours for it! At least try to address the main point of the post: Blizz needs to compete with CS:GO if they want eSports, and they can't do it if 60$ is the cheapest option (that somehow comes with free shit).
lol this guys is trying to justify calling something you expect and payed for as free shit. If you expect it and you pay for it, it's not free, it's paid for.
|
The comparison with CS:GO is just very stupid.
CS is and allways was very diffrent than "other" shooters and Blizzard is going for something diffrent than CS is. Overwatch is more like a "team" UT/Quake with classes. The only similarity to CS is that its team based.
Overwatch is way more in the spirit of TFC or even CTF in Quake/UT. Its a fast paced team shooter. Aside from the team aspect, CS is nothing alike.
CS also was never truely dead. People allways liked to play it and whiteout the split due to 1.6 vs source, it would have probably stayed on top (well, it was allways on top, just not on the big stages anymore) all the time. All CS:GO did was succsessfully modernising it, Source was kinda a failure because it made some mistakes and alienated many 1.6 players, CS:GO didn't and suddenly CS is big shit again.
Hell.. I bought CS:GO and probably played it only a few hours, but these hours are hours were i just want to play CS and i'm happy  .
|
On November 07 2015 01:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2015 01:30 ref4 wrote:On November 07 2015 01:25 Plansix wrote:On November 07 2015 01:21 ref4 wrote:On November 07 2015 01:12 Pwere wrote:On November 07 2015 00:47 ref4 wrote:On November 07 2015 00:29 Pwere wrote:
If the Origins pack costs 60$ and comes with a bunch of skins and free shit for other games, you can bet there's a starter edition somewhere that costs 0-20$ and only comes with a bunch of/all heroes.
Everything Blizz has done with this game so far screams of eSports. You don't compete with CS:GO by charging 60$ for a game that also sells skins/emotes/whatever. not free if you paid $60 for them. It's like your "free" airplane meals (and "free" salted peanuts!) for a 12 hour trans-pacific flight that costs you $960.99 one way because you bought the ticket the last minute. at this point they're shit, not free shit. Seriously, why do you feel the need to post something like this? We all know free shit is not free. You paid for a ticket to attend an event, then you won free shit. You got 100 wins in HS, you got a free mount in HotS. It's not free, you played hours for it! At least try to address the main point of the post: Blizz needs to compete with CS:GO if they want eSports, and they can't do it if 60$ is the cheapest option (that somehow comes with free shit). Why does Blizzard feel the need to push Overwatch to be a huge esport? WoW is doing just fine for such an old game without being an esport at all. HoTS is somewhat of a success financially without nobody watching it. Nobody watches Destiny, CoD, Assassin's Creed like people religiously follow LoL/DOTA/CSGO but they're pretty successful financially. I guess you can make a case for Hearthstone but then again they're competing with the non-existent digital version of Magic so they win automatically. (honestly why the hell is all of the Magic digital platforms so shit?) Destiny is normally in the top ten of Twitch every night... On November 07 2015 01:25 Gorsameth wrote:On November 07 2015 01:21 ref4 wrote:On November 07 2015 01:12 Pwere wrote:On November 07 2015 00:47 ref4 wrote:On November 07 2015 00:29 Pwere wrote:
If the Origins pack costs 60$ and comes with a bunch of skins and free shit for other games, you can bet there's a starter edition somewhere that costs 0-20$ and only comes with a bunch of/all heroes.
Everything Blizz has done with this game so far screams of eSports. You don't compete with CS:GO by charging 60$ for a game that also sells skins/emotes/whatever. not free if you paid $60 for them. It's like your "free" airplane meals (and "free" salted peanuts!) for a 12 hour trans-pacific flight that costs you $960.99 one way because you bought the ticket the last minute. at this point they're shit, not free shit. Seriously, why do you feel the need to post something like this? We all know free shit is not free. You paid for a ticket to attend an event, then you won free shit. You got 100 wins in HS, you got a free mount in HotS. It's not free, you played hours for it! At least try to address the main point of the post: Blizz needs to compete with CS:GO if they want eSports, and they can't do it if 60$ is the cheapest option (that somehow comes with free shit). Why does Blizzard feel the need to push Overwatch to be a huge esport? WoW is doing just fine for such an old game without being an esport at all. HoTS is somewhat of a success financially without nobody watching it. Nobody watches Destiny, CoD, Assassin's Creed like people religiously follow LoL/DOTA/CSGO but they're pretty successful financially. I guess you can make a case for Hearthstone but then again they're competing with the non-existent digital version of Magic so they win automatically. (honestly why the hell is all of the Magic digital platforms so shit?) Where has Blizzard pushed Overwatch as an esports? Players are trying to but I have yet to hear a word about it from Blizzard. They are not. They likely will let people know about some tournament they are going to run later when they talk about the game at Blizzcon and that is it. Like I said, I listed all the games that are making dough without being esport but I was replying to the person who said that Blizzard NEEDS to compete with CSGO. Yes, that is dumb. People who measure for success in Twitch viewer and online discussion are silly. Its like believing that facebook or youtube are an accurate measurement of anything. There are plenty of games that are wildly successful that don't have a robust online footprint.
I am sure Blizzard defines success in their own context though tbh. I am sure they wanna have esports for this game. It's just THE THING to do atm, everything has to be an esport.
Overwatch is no exception here, most likely.
|
On November 07 2015 01:25 Plansix wrote:
Destiny is normally in the top ten of Twitch every night...
and Winter is the highest rated SC2 streamer ... so um ya.
Bell Canada and Rogers Communications lie all the time about their viewership #s which is why ad agencies pay organizations like AAM and ABC to audit their #s. You begin to get an idea what their real #s are after you hand them an AAM report and when you are in the process of buying ad time from them.
i take Twitch's #s as seriously as Rogers and Bell #s.
|
On November 07 2015 02:25 Velr wrote:
CS also was never truely dead. People allways liked to play it and whiteout the split due to 1.6 vs source, it would have probably stayed on top (well, it was allways on top, just not on the big stages anymore) all the time. All CS:GO did was succsessfully modernising it, Source was kinda a failure because it made some mistakes and alienated many 1.6 players, CS:GO didn't and suddenly CS is big shit again.
I thought CS 1.6 players had just as many complaints about CS:GO as they did about source. Did they fix them all or did it get popular despite them?
|
On November 07 2015 01:36 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
Battleborn has the same formula as Destiny except it has scalable drop-in/drop-out co-op campaign stuff.
But Battleborn is soooooooooooo bad. 
No wonder they cancelled the release in February.
On November 07 2015 02:50 nighcol wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2015 02:25 Velr wrote:
CS also was never truely dead. People allways liked to play it and whiteout the split due to 1.6 vs source, it would have probably stayed on top (well, it was allways on top, just not on the big stages anymore) all the time. All CS:GO did was succsessfully modernising it, Source was kinda a failure because it made some mistakes and alienated many 1.6 players, CS:GO didn't and suddenly CS is big shit again.
I thought CS 1.6 players had just as many complaints about CS:GO as they did about source. Did they fix them all or did it get popular despite them?
CS:GO now is a huge improvement over the first release version.
Valve took a shitton of work into it to make it the best competitive shooter there is atm.
|
Canada8159 Posts
NEW HEROES:
D.VA
MEI
GENJI
NEW MAP:
HOLLYWOOD
|
A giant purple mech! amagad
|
I want into that beta so bad  ( new awesome heroes!
|
new characters seem a little uninteresting, at least for me. more in terms of characters then how they play
|
Im worried about his "all stuff sofar"...
|
Buy this game? are they still living in the 20th century ?
|
|
|
eu.battle.net
40$ standard
60$ origin edition
Blizzard is so out of touch it is not even funny.
|
|
|
Origins edition isn't worth anywhere near the extra $20, at least for me. Some crappy skins and other "goodies" which only apply in other blizzard games.
|
I'm worried most about how big an open door he left for payed DLC.
and yes 40 feels high. If it was guaranteed to include all maps/champions ever then maybe but now... argh
|
the korean character is soooo cute.
|
Very underwhelmed, 40 bucks for the game i experienced in beta? Yeah no
|
we'll see how much more content gets added to the beta up to the 6/2016 release date
would have preferred a lower price than $40 for the base game, but if enough content gets released, then it'll be an easy sell
as it is right now, not so much
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
