|
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. |
More game modes wouldn't even be that big of a deal if the current one would be any good. But it isn't.
So when every other beta-tester I heard (not even exaggerating) speaks highly of the game, don't you think you should reconsider how you express your own opinions as being universially true?
Generally it seems you have these unique opinions when it comes to game-design. Ravager is the general favourite new unit in LOTV --> You make a big campaign where you probably wrote at least 10 post talking about how much you hate it.
Medivcacs you also hate despite them being an extremely vital part in bio-play in Sc2 which is most people's favourite composition.
And Liberators, that alot of people also seem to be like --> You hate them too and not just from a balance perspective.
Having opinions is fine, but isn't it time for you to reevaluate whether your opinions do not represent the majority?
There is no buildup, there is no climax, there is no narrative to any match. I think that is a huge problem. (not only for esports, but also for normal solo queue games)
Well I am tempted to agree with you, but I simply trust feedback from beta-testers more. Perhaps it is not neccasary for most players (but only an issue when it comes to esport... and you).
Anyway, I can identify somewhat with you as you do make some - on the surface - valid arguments and its a pain to attempt to make logical arguments against "blind fanboys". I was on that side 8-12 months ago when I was trying to explain to people in the Heroes of the Storm-thread that the design of the heroes was flawed as it left no room for outplays. The typical response was like "Just wait till games get released and pro's does sick stuff..." or something on the lines of "this is a teamgame, don't want carries here".
But at least I also had clear data to support my behind: All of the most played champs in LOL are the big playmakers, and when those heroes are simply removed in HOTS, it's not a succesful formula. Overwatch, however, does have playmakers and the question is whether the "storytelling" is 100% essential for the playing-experience, which doesn't seem to be the case based on player feedback.
And Heroes of the Storm was never as hyped nor prasied as OW. Noone was ever "wow" about HOTS, it was more of a "I guess this game is pretty fun'ish"-thing.
It's funny that you all neglect the twitch numbers when it is clear that it's a good indication a lot of the times.
Yes and honestly it is impressive that they held up that well. I don't know what you expected: That people would continue to watch a game they cannot play for weeks?
Twitch numbers are gonna rebound big at release. The game, however, might be more of a streamer-thing if they don't make the storytelling apparent for esport-viewers.
|
On November 19 2015 11:03 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +More game modes wouldn't even be that big of a deal if the current one would be any good. But it isn't. So when every other beta-tester I heard (not even exaggerating) speaks highly of the game, don't you think you should reconsider how you express your own opinions as being universially true? Generally it seems you have these unique opinions when it comes to game-design. Ravager is the general favourite new unit in LOTV --> You make a big campaign where you probably wrote at least 10 post talking about how much you hate it. Medivcacs you also hate despite them being an extremely vital part in bio-play in Sc2 which is most people's favourite composition. And Liberators, that alot of people also seem to be like --> You hate them too and not just from a balance perspective. Having opinions is fine, but isn't it time for you to reevaluate whether your opinions do not represent the majority?
Every other beta tester huh? That surely isn't exaggerated 
See i mostly play pvp games because of the competition. I am surely no high level player because i don't play that much, but i still value getting better at the game and noticing how the overall quality of gameplay increases while improving.
Maybe that is part of the problem right now. The current game mode falls flat here, especially because you only play one side of the map. I said this before, but forcing the players to play both sides (attackers and defenders) would already be enough to make it a lot more enjoyable.
If you just wanna hop in, play some 2-10 minute games without having any feeling for progress, skill level (at least when you aren't top tier) or even basic teamplay, then sure i guess you can have fun with it.
But longterm? I just don't see it, even in normal lol games you have some form of competetive value, in the current overwatch soloqueue this is non existent.
about the sc2 part:
+ Show Spoiler +Where do you even take it from that the ravager is the favorite new unit? How do you take this as a fact? It's pretty baseless imo. And even if that was the truth, why does it matter if most people enjoy playing with it? That doesn't make it a good rts unit (for sc2), that just makes it a fun unit to play with. I don't think that is the same, even though you could argue that being fun should be the only purpose, but that is another topic. At the end of the day the ravager promotes spamming its ability like we would play lol. It forces movement micro from the enemy, which is the only positive thing here i guess. Another problem i had with it was the complete lack of uniqueness considering that it is a roach morph, like i said before every other zerg morph is highly different from the unit it morphs from. This isn't the case here and thus i think it shows a lack of creativity. I dislike the medivac because it imo creates a lot of problems. That doesn't mean that i dislike the current bio gameplay. I think bio is the most exciting unit composition too, i adore great multitasking with it, etc. I just think that you could have the same exciting gameplay without the medivac and the game would probably be better if done right. Liberators being liked is also a statement i didn't really see a whole lot? I am sure terrans like it though
I also dislike adding "imo" everywhere, i think it should be clear that all i write is mostly my own opinion. Especially when the topic is something which you can hardly measure atm.
Anyway, I can identify somewhat with you as you do make some - on the surface - valid arguments and its a pain to attempt to make logical arguments against "blind fanboys". I was on that side 8-12 months ago when I was trying to explain to people in the Heroes of the Storm-thread that the design of the heroes was flawed as it left no room for outplays. The typical response was like "Just wait till games get released and pro's does sick stuff..." or something on the lines of "this is a teamgame, don't want carries here".
But at least I also had clear data to support my behind: All of the most played champs in LOL are the big playmakers, and when those heroes are simply removed in HOTS, it's not a succesful formula. Overwatch, however, does have playmakers and the question is whether the "storytelling" is 100% essential for the playing-experience, which doesn't seem to be the case based on player feedback.
And Heroes of the Storm was never as hyped nor prasied as OW. Noone was ever "wow" about HOTS, it was more of a "I guess this game is pretty fun'ish"-thing.
See while i agree that heroes failed because you as a single person cannot really make plays, i think the current experience in overwatch isn't all that different. Yes there are characters which have high skill ceilings, no doubt about that. But at the end of the day you still don't feel a lot of impact, you don't really know how well you did in comparison to the other players, you don't really know how important that killing spree you got at one point was. Why? Because the game doesn't really give you a lot of feedback one way or another. There are basically no real stats other than at the end of the game for things you cannot really compare with each other either.
Compare that to mobas where you have full knowledge of how well every single player is doing, when you are dead you can even watch some plays on the map. Same is true for csgo, there are these awesome clutch situations and everybody can see it. It creates aswesome moment naturally. In overwatch there really is only spawn, kill, die, respawn; rinse and repeat till you either win or lose. You don't really know which plays were important, there is no real impact.
Maybe the average player doesn't care, but all these things exist in other popular games, it doesn't exist RIGHT NOW in overwatch.
Yes and honestly it is impressive that they held up that well. I don't know what you expected: That people would continue to watch a game they cannot play for weeks?
Twitch numbers are gonna rebound big at release. The game, however, might be more of a streamer-thing if they don't make the storytelling apparent for esport-viewers.
I obviously didn't expect that overwatch will be the top game or anything close to that, but yes i expected more viewers partly because i thought big variety streamers would actually care more about the game and play it from time to time.
That doesn't seem to be the case though.
So yes i expected more than 6k viewers for a little while. But yeah maybe it is just not very interesting to watch for the same reasons i tried to explain above. There also might be some truth to it, maybe..
|
On November 19 2015 09:33 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2015 07:54 Plansix wrote:
Apparently its already dead game because of twitch numbers or something. Its almost like the game is just fun. It's nice that you know the ded game meme, but i didn't even say it is dead or anything. It's just below the level it should be at this point, for multiple reasons. Will it be a total failure? No probably not. But they clearly want this to be the next big thing, that doesn't really work out for them atm. It's funny that you all neglect the twitch numbers when it is clear that it's a good indication a lot of the times.
Average viewers for any game is always a smaller number than the total players. There's probably less than 10 thousand beta keys total right now.
Shockingly, a beta is actually just a beta, even if they tend to bleed into "early preview and marketing". Some people care about watching the early development and all the changes made, but most don't give a damn until they can actually play the game themselves.
|
On November 19 2015 12:19 The_Red_Viper wrote:
...because you only play one side of the map. I said this before, but forcing the players to play both sides (attackers and defenders) would already be enough to make it a lot more enjoyable.
Hm, that really makes me question everything you said so far, because you DO switch sides on every map!
|
Canada8159 Posts
I wish they added a map voting system instead of randomizing the next map
|
They should put some polls every now and then, and every one voting too negatively and/or not contributing should have their beta key given to others 
|
Sweden5554 Posts
Don't think that's a great way to improve your product, AboutSV. The best approach is to listen, also the revoking should only be done on a case of not actually playing the game and or not communicating about an issue preventing them playing the game or a reason why they don't play it.
|
Of course, I was very light about it on purpose!
Also, if you only have people saying 'yeah! This is great, everything is perfect', you won't improve much :p
|
Sweden5554 Posts
I don't think that's entirely bad either, the only ones who are bad are the ones who don't communicate and don't play the game. if a person likes your game and plays it it will give them metrics, and help test their systems.
|
On November 19 2015 18:02 iXphobos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2015 12:19 The_Red_Viper wrote:
...because you only play one side of the map. I said this before, but forcing the players to play both sides (attackers and defenders) would already be enough to make it a lot more enjoyable.
Hm, that really makes me question everything you said so far, because you DO switch sides on every map!
No i mean switch sides in a single match, before it actually ends. Not like right now where you have two seperate games
|
On November 19 2015 12:19 The_Red_Viper wrote:Every other beta tester huh? That surely isn't exaggerated See i mostly play pvp games because of the competition. I am surely no high level player because i don't play that much, but i still value getting better at the game and noticing how the overall quality of gameplay increases while improving. Maybe that is part of the problem right now. The current game mode falls flat here, especially because you only play one side of the map. I said this before, but forcing the players to play both sides (attackers and defenders) would already be enough to make it a lot more enjoyable. If you just wanna hop in, play some 2-10 minute games without having any feeling for progress, skill level (at least when you aren't top tier) or even basic teamplay, then sure i guess you can have fun with it. But longterm? I just don't see it, even in normal lol games you have some form of competetive value, in the current overwatch soloqueue this is non existent.
So pubs will play like pubs will play in a fps game, people without too much investment in the game will just shoot things up, hey at least it's not 10vs10 like csgo but actual 6v6 game, that's like so bad. Want to play both sides and see some teamwork? Go play competitive.
See while i agree that heroes failed because you as a single person cannot really make plays, i think the current experience in overwatch isn't all that different. Yes there are characters which have high skill ceilings, no doubt about that. But at the end of the day you still don't feel a lot of impact, you don't really know how well you did in comparison to the other players, you don't really know how important that killing spree you got at one point was. Why? Because the game doesn't really give you a lot of feedback one way or another. There are basically no real stats other than at the end of the game for things you cannot really compare with each other either.
Compare that to mobas where you have full knowledge of how well every single player is doing, when you are dead you can even watch some plays on the map. Same is true for csgo, there are these awesome clutch situations and everybody can see it. It creates aswesome moment naturally. In overwatch there really is only spawn, kill, die, respawn; rinse and repeat till you either win or lose. You don't really know which plays were important, there is no real impact.
Maybe the average player doesn't care, but all these things exist in other popular games, it doesn't exist RIGHT NOW in overwatch.
I'm sorry but if you don't know yourself how important a kill streak was, can't see how you're doing compared to others, don't know what play was important then you simply don't understand the game enough. Experienced/pro/long time players will know easily while playing how they are doing, know if they made important multi kill etc. Your avg viewer might not know all the things without some kind of data(or caster) to tell but if you don't know yourself as a player how the game is going then the problem is with you not the game.
I obviously didn't expect that overwatch will be the top game or anything close to that, but yes i expected more viewers partly because i thought big variety streamers would actually care more about the game and play it from time to time.
That doesn't seem to be the case though.
So yes i expected more than 6k viewers for a little while. But yeah maybe it is just not very interesting to watch for the same reasons i tried to explain above. There also might be some truth to it, maybe..
Twitch viewers numbers are not representative of game's success, especially not one's that just entered beta. To claim otherwise is just silly. The game's potential feels 100 times better than that of Shootmania's which I played it with other pros/comp players in the alpha/beta a lot.
|
On November 19 2015 20:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2015 18:02 iXphobos wrote:On November 19 2015 12:19 The_Red_Viper wrote:
...because you only play one side of the map. I said this before, but forcing the players to play both sides (attackers and defenders) would already be enough to make it a lot more enjoyable.
Hm, that really makes me question everything you said so far, because you DO switch sides on every map! No i mean switch sides in a single match, before it actually ends. Not like right now where you have two seperate games
That would significantly increase the game time and each game would either be a tie or a 2:0 win. I don't see any benefit in this.
Why don't you just imagine yourself the two seperate games on each map belong together?
|
Wow, people here are actually suggesting taking away beta keys? Like WTF?? You didn't get in, suck it up.
|
On November 19 2015 21:29 iXphobos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2015 20:43 The_Red_Viper wrote:On November 19 2015 18:02 iXphobos wrote:On November 19 2015 12:19 The_Red_Viper wrote:
...because you only play one side of the map. I said this before, but forcing the players to play both sides (attackers and defenders) would already be enough to make it a lot more enjoyable.
Hm, that really makes me question everything you said so far, because you DO switch sides on every map! No i mean switch sides in a single match, before it actually ends. Not like right now where you have two seperate games That would significantly increase the game time and each game would either be a tie or a 2:0 win. I don't see any benefit in this. Why don't you just imagine yourself the two seperate games on each map belong together?
People have suggested a "timed" mode where both teams compete to complete the objective faster over two rounds. But if the beta's goal is map testing, a quick rotation is what Blizzard is looking for.
|
On November 19 2015 19:22 Jer99 wrote:
I wish they added a map voting system instead of randomizing the next map
Doubt it. They don't even let you pick the map you want to play in Heroes.
Issues with game modes is that it's a regression compared to TF2. Heroes are a progression (Tracer being like Scout with blink and other abilities) but it's two game modes that are an exact copy from a game that had more on release and over a dozen now.
If the argument is "They'll add more" that's one thing but people will get bored of 2 (they're even quite similar) modes as it stands.
|
Ok enough with controversial opinions... Let's talk some balance and general hero design. (from a solo queue experience, pro play might be totally different)
I feel like genji is totally op right now, one of the most mobile champs in the game, his "e" is really strong as well (he reflects shots with it) and his ulti , wow.
A good merci also feels too strong, her ultimate just changes the pace of the game.
In general i dislike the turret champs quite a lot, they don't belong in this game imo. Way too easy to use and on low level not even that easy to deal with if placed in a smart way.
|
I don't think there's any value in balancing the game outside of a competitive 6v6 perspective. Solo players are always going to think some hero is OP based on the rock paper scissors balancing of classes when their preferred class gets trounced by certain other ones.
|
Can't say much on balance until my teammates keep picking 5 offensive heroes with no support or tank. 
|
On November 20 2015 07:24 hariooo wrote:
I don't think there's any value in balancing the game outside of a competitive 6v6 perspective. Solo players are always going to think some hero is OP based on the rock paper scissors balancing of classes when their preferred class gets trounced by certain other ones.
While i think this true in general i still feel like genji is ridiculous atm^^
He is fun to play though (because of his strength..)
And opinion about the turret heroes? Do we really need them in this game?
|
On November 20 2015 07:41 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2015 07:24 hariooo wrote:
I don't think there's any value in balancing the game outside of a competitive 6v6 perspective. Solo players are always going to think some hero is OP based on the rock paper scissors balancing of classes when their preferred class gets trounced by certain other ones. While i think this true in general i still feel like genji is ridiculous atm^^ He is fun to play though (because of his strength..) And opinion about the turret heroes? Do we really need them in this game?
Bastion is totally fine imho. If you know how to play him, he can be very effective. On the other hand he's easily countered by several heroes.
Torbjörn needs a buff. His turrent is only useful at Lvl 3 and it takes way to long to get there. Also his gun isn't as good as it should be.
I personally like the idea of some stationary heroes (or builders as Blizz calls them). Adds some flavor to the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
