As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[Overwatch] Overwatch 2 is Live!

1103104106108109

Posts

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    Like look at this shit starting at 5:30

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=teBn6TghA_s

    Are you telling me that Blizzard is such a small indie company they can’t program their game to detect that this is cheating?

    I get it though, you need those Mercy feet skins released

  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    they didn't mention it in the patch notes because transparency is bad, but Brazil and Antarctic maps were removed because there's a bug in them to tank FPS with some Genji spawn hack.

  • LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    It’s obvious they don’t believe in their game anymore and have put the Overwatch brand in the juicer to squeeze what they can out of it before it’s completely dead

    It’s frustrating because I feel like the community still wants to enjoy the game. Dial back the monetization a smidge (even if only temperarily), fix matchmaker, and just lay low for a few months and the game would be back on track but instead they want to double and triple down on monetization until anyone who cares finally loses interest.

  • BionicPenguinBionicPenguin Registered User regular
    I'm generally pretty positive about the change to Overwatch 2. I like 5v5 and I think the general balance has been good aside from some outliers. However, I hate the the monetization. I think the battlepass is a straight up downgrade from loot boxes, which is a hell of a thing to say because fuck loot boxes, too. I think there's room for battlepasses to be...satisfactory. They need to not expire (I think Halo does this) and you need to be able to earn the currency to buy a battlepass by completing the previous battlepass (my understanding is many games do this).

    As for the PvE, I understand this is a product that needs to make money, but they just had a pretty big PR hit and I think even a single free PvE map would go a long way to making people feel a little better about the loss of the campaign and whatnot.

  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    LostNinja wrote: »
    Chance wrote: »
    Lucascraft wrote: »
    No, the battlepass is not fair. Not to the consumer. You are paying them for the privilege of grinding a bunch of meaningless challenges, which are designed to keep people engaged and playing for as absolutely long as possible, while simultaneously drip feeding rewards rather than just selling you the rewards outright. And it isn't even all the rewards. It's just some of the rewards.

    And the best stuff's exclusive to the store! For a limited time only!

    Well yeah, gotta cash in on the FOMO!

    I don't mind the Paladins' battle pass system. Its cosmetics are always top shelf, and between regular log-in rewards and the battlepass itself, you make a profit on the paid currency. I got the premium pass like four years ago, and even taking a couple years off, I have enough paid currency for like three now. Plus, unlike OW's, it's ridiculously easy to finish. I know it's FOMO, but you can knock off what you need to in 2-3 bot games every day that'd take all of 15 minutes. I did that for a couple months while exercising (stationary bike), barely touching the actual game and it was pretty relaxing and rewarding all things considered while still maintaining attachment to the game, rather than stressing over having to reach obnoxious and difficult goals. Now, its monetization outside the battle passes? That's even grosser and amazingly even worse than OW2's.

    ztrEPtD.gif
  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    LostNinja wrote: »
    It’s obvious they don’t believe in their game anymore and have put the Overwatch brand in the juicer to squeeze what they can out of it before it’s completely dead

    It’s frustrating because I feel like the community still wants to enjoy the game. Dial back the monetization a smidge (even if only temperarily), fix matchmaker, and just lay low for a few months and the game would be back on track but instead they want to double and triple down on monetization until anyone who cares finally loses interest.

    ...and if the quality of the game - the quality of matches, the fun factor it offered - were demonstrably the priority? It would have retained more players, and I would've spent $200+ on skins and battle passes so far in 2023.

    As it is? Fuck no. No way.

    Chance on
    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    I kind of don't know what to say here because I just don't share you guys' perspective on this at all. I'm not particularly angry at Blizzard and I think when you look at it objectively, things are not as dire as the community believes them to be in the heat of the moment. I don't understand why people get so mad in response to standard industry practices like battle passes and selling DLC. It's not the cheapest monetization plan out there, but it's not any more exploitative than their competitors.

    I expect OW2's development to continue as it has been these past months into the indefinite future, with PvE never becoming bigger than this, and I'm satisfied with that because I've always been in it for the PvP. OW2's development was a clusterfuck, but it seems to me that they're in the process of correcting course. I'll play a new game if anybody ever releases a class shooter that I like better, but that still hasn't happened yet.

  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    The reason I will never think Battle Passes are completely "fair" is because they are time-limited.

    You aren't really paying for the stuff. You're paying for the chance to get stuff.

    And most people will say "Well you get a lot of stuff for doing something you were gonna do anyway."

    But players grinding out a game over a set period also helps the developer cause it keeps their games populated. So it's basically player retention through FOMO.

    Also if the servers ever shut down all that shit is poof anyway.

    Dragkonias on
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    I think at its core the problem with OW is you can't go from having a game with one of the more generous business models to a game with one of the stingiest. People are gonna feel a way.

    I would actually be interested to see what OWs average numbers are nowadays but I doubt they'll ever show them.

    Only thing there really is are the Twitch Viewer numbers to measure general interest and from what I've seen outside of the FtP boost at the start OW2's average numbers are even lower than OW1's were in its final year.

    Dragkonias on
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    I also would like to see real numbers on players and revenue, but yeah that ain't happening. Twitch stats are a poor metric because it depends entirely on whether the big personalities are playing the game or not. The feelings of one dude can swing tens of thousands of viewers. It's clear that community sentiment is at an all time low, but nobody ever really knows how that corresponds to active players. In their earnings call in Feb they were telling investors the game performed well, which probably doesn't contain any outright lies at least.

  • Houk the NamebringerHouk the Namebringer Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    Zek wrote: »
    I kind of don't know what to say here because I just don't share you guys' perspective on this at all. I'm not particularly angry at Blizzard and I think when you look at it objectively, things are not as dire as the community believes them to be in the heat of the moment. I don't understand why people get so mad in response to standard industry practices like battle passes and selling DLC. It's not the cheapest monetization plan out there, but it's not any more exploitative than their competitors.

    I expect OW2's development to continue as it has been these past months into the indefinite future, with PvE never becoming bigger than this, and I'm satisfied with that because I've always been in it for the PvP. OW2's development was a clusterfuck, but it seems to me that they're in the process of correcting course. I'll play a new game if anybody ever releases a class shooter that I like better, but that still hasn't happened yet.

    A lot of standard industry practices suck and it should be pretty easy to see why others might be mad at these particular ones, even if you don't feel the same way. Other games/companies might have worse versions of those things, but I don't play those games and this isn't a thread about those games, so it's only natural we would talk about this particular game's version in this thread.

    I also don't really think you can talk about looking at things "objectively" when the things we're talking about are all about how the game feels player to player. There are things you can talk about objectively, but those are specifically the things you mentioned like earnings, player count, etc. that we're not gonna get visibility on, and don't really matter to the core issues folks are having.

    Again, I'm not nearly so down on the game as a lot of people are either, but if you genuinely can't understand why folks are feeling the way they do, I don't think you can claim objectivity any more than anyone else.

  • LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    I'm generally pretty positive about the change to Overwatch 2. I like 5v5 and I think the general balance has been good aside from some outliers. However, I hate the the monetization. I think the battlepass is a straight up downgrade from loot boxes, which is a hell of a thing to say because fuck loot boxes, too. I think there's room for battlepasses to be...satisfactory. They need to not expire (I think Halo does this) and you need to be able to earn the currency to buy a battlepass by completing the previous battlepass (my understanding is many games do this).

    As for the PvE, I understand this is a product that needs to make money, but they just had a pretty big PR hit and I think even a single free PvE map would go a long way to making people feel a little better about the loss of the campaign and whatnot.

    I’ll never forgive OW2 for making me miss loot boxes, but there was something to the excitement of seeing if you’d get the skin you are wanting. I realize this is why they are really really bad, but considering the current alternative feels like maybe just a few steps better than a gocha that isn’t saying much.


    Edit: I want to say since I’ve noticed how negative my last few posts were, that at its core I enjoy the game I’ve Overwatch. I played OW1 from launch until it was auto uninstalled at OW2’s launch and put more hours into that game than any other by a large margin with probably only Skyrim and KoTOR coming close. I want to love OW2 but it is very disappointing when the company running it has placed exponentially more focus on the monetization than the gameplay experience rather than a fair balance on both.

    LostNinja on
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    When I say being objective what I mean is making an honest effort to understand the perspective and motives of the devs. In my opinion, accusing a game dev studio of not caring about their game is crazy. Nobody is in this industry for an easy paycheck, except maybe Bobby and friends.

    There was an interview earlier where they explained in fairly frank terms why they monetized the game the way they did - they want to keep receiving funding to work on the game indefinitely, and to do that it must be sufficiently profitable. I work in software and I believe that this really is what motivates the rank and file. They would love nothing more than to be given a blank check to make it all free forever. Yes of course Acti-Blizz's upper leadership only cares about maximizing profit. This too is something I consider completely ordinary in this industry.

    As a thought exercise, let's pretend that OW2 did not announce hero missions at Blizzcon, and they didn't release the game until S6, with everything we have now being otherwise the same. I think this game would have been very positively received, with the main frustration just being that it took so long.

  • LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    Zek wrote: »
    I don't understand why people get so mad in response to standard industry practices like battle passes and selling DLC. It's not the cheapest monetization plan out there, but it's not any more exploitative than their competitors.

    Just because something is a "standard industry practice" doesn't make it right. Or ethical. Or moral. Or good for the consumer.

    The games industry has become a fairly shitty hobby within the last 10-12 years, ruled by overlords who don't give a crap about the hobby, or about fun, or about artistic expression, or integrity, or vision, or quality.


    To keep this on-topic without going way down the rabbit hole of the sins of the games industry... Selling a product is one thing. And that's what DLC is. The game company says "We have created X and we are selling it for $Y." The greed of pricing is a different topic that I won't delve into right now. DLC in the classic sense, aka expansion packs, mission packs, story addons, and the like are a quantifiable good that they are selling.

    Even something like cosmetic skins fall under this. Games have been selling skins packs for a long time now. So when Blizz creates a premium cosmetic and lists it on their in-game store and says "We're selling Super Slut Mercy for $45." It's a product listed and a price given. Whether or not that's an ethical price is a different discussion for another day. Today I'm talking about Battlepasses.

    So a battlepass is fuzzy. It's not as defined. And that's why that particular industry practice is so shitty. Because the product is not so clearly definable. What even is a battlepass? What are they selling you? What they are selling you, as it turns out, is your own time. They are selling you a time commitment. If you want to opt-in to the battlepass, you are agreeing to a 200 hour time commitment. Or whatever it is. This is just a made up number for the sake of illustration, please don't get hung up on the numbers. The point is that they are not selling you a product. They're selling you your own time. By buying the battlepass, you are saying "I am committing to playing Overwatch 2 for 200 hours within the next 9 weeks."


    Lucascraft on
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    Yeah I get it, but there's a big difference between just being a +1 in a bad trend (like they were with loot boxes) and the level of vitriol that they're receiving over this. OW1's loot boxes became crazy generous after a few years of accumulating credits and skins - that was an accident. They kind of sucked ass in the early years when you might just never get the skin you want during an event without forking over a ton of money.

    IMO, OW2's battle pass is a little better than average. They make hitting level 80 really easy if you're doing your dailies like half the time, and the dailies take typically 3 flex games as the fastest route. I do think that they should let you keep working on the passes you bought even after the season is over. It's absolutely artificial scarcity to get more people playing, as they all are.

    Zek on
  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    Not to get too deep in the weeds but every time I see someone say "these other popular games also (insert shitty thing)", I always hear something along the lines of "look, Donnie and Bobby both hit their family - you can't expect Mark to not slap you around once in a while."

    It's okay to hope for better. In fact, holding tight to the very notion that things can be better is the first step.

    And ironically, the mad vision to percieve the world not as it is, but as it could be was the core philosophy of a game called Overwatch that launched back in 2016.

    I miss it.

    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    Zek wrote: »
    Yeah I get it, but there's a big difference between just being a +1 in a bad trend (like they were with loot boxes) and the level of vitriol that they're receiving over this.

    Are you open to the notion that it might be more than one solitary thing that has eroded player trust in Blizzard and Overwatch? Over years? Cause it's a lotta' little, nasty cuts and a couple horrifying, deep gouges for good measure.

    And now I'm going to post That Thing About The Trust Thermocline. Please, enter this dude's Ted Talk.
    I've copied out (most of) the rest of the twitted thread below:





    So: what's a thermocline?

    Well large bodies of water are made of layers of differing temperatures. Like a layer cake. The top bit is where all the the waves happen and has a gradually decreasing temperature. Then SUDDENLY there's a point where it gets super-cold.

    That suddenly is important. There's reasons for it (Science!) but it's just a good metaphor. Indeed you may also be interested in the "Thermocline of Truth" which a project management term for how things on a RAG board all suddenly go from amber to red.

    But I digress.

    The Trust Thermocline is something that, over (many) years of digital, I have seen both digital and regular content publishers hit time and time again. Despite warnings (at least when I've worked there). And it has a similar effect. You have lots of users then suddenly... nope.

    And this does effect print publications as much as trendy digital media companies. They'll be flying along making loads of money, with lots of users/readers, rolling out new products that get bought. Or events. Or Sub-brands.

    And then SUDDENLY those people just abandon them.

    Often it's not even to "new" competitor products, but stuff they thought were already not a threat. Nor is there lots of obvious dissatisfaction reported from sales and marketing (other than general grumbling). Nor is it a general drift away, it's just a sudden big slide.

    So why does this happen? As I explain to these people and places, it's because they breached the Trust Thermocline.

    I ask them if they'd been increasing prices. Changed service offerings. Modified the product.

    The answer is normally: "yes, but not much. And everyone still paid"

    Then I ask if they did that the year before. Did they increase prices last year? Change the offering? Modify the product?

    Again: "yes, but not much."

    The answer is normally: "yes, but not much. And everyone still paid."

    "And the year before?"

    "Yes but not much. And everyone still paid."

    Well, you get the idea.

    And here is where the Trust Thermocline kicks in. Because too many people see service use as always following an arc. They think that as long as usage is ticking up, they can do what they like to cost and product.

    And (critically) that they can just react when the curve flattens

    But with a lot of CONTENT products (inc social media) that's not actually how it works. Because it doesn't account for sunk-cost lock-in.

    Users and readers will stick to what they know, and use, well beyond the point where they START to lose trust in it. And you won't see that.

    But they'll only MOVE when they hit the Trust Thermocline. The point where their lack of trust in the product to meet their needs, and the emotional investment they'd made in it, have finally been outweighed by the physical and emotional effort required to abandon it.

    At this point, I normally get asked something like:

    "So if we undo the last few changes and drop the price, we get them back?"

    And then I have to break the news that nope: that's not how it works.

    Because you're past the Thermocline now. You can't make them trust you again.

    Virtually the only way to avoid catastrophic drop-off from breaching the Trust Thermocline is NOT TO BREACH IT.

    I can count on one hand the times I've witnessed a company come back from it. And even they never reached previous heights.

    ...

    So what's the lesson for businesses here?

    - Watch for grumbling and LISTEN to it.
    - Don't assume that because people have swallowed a price or service change that'll swallow another one.
    - Treat user trust as a finite asset. Because it is.

    ...

    ADDENDUM:

    Been reminded of the time I was brought in to talk about this to a gaming company who I can't name.

    The marketing manager got SUPER angry and was like:

    "rubbish! we did lootboxing like this five years in a row and people kept paying!"

    I'm:

    "Mate. That's my point."

    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • PailryderPailryder Registered User regular
    1,000,000 people buying a one dollar skin gets you 1,000,000 dollars
    66,666 people buying a 15 dollar skin gets you (close enough) 1,000,000 dollars
    those are not the same though. if you make that skin affordable to more people by charging only a dollar, even though you get the same amount of money, you generate more good will. This is especially true if you have premier skins vs other skins where you might sell something cool for a dollar but something cool with a little extra for 15. My point is not to try and decide how much a company charges or values their time making skins, but that blizzard has decided on a pricing strategy that frankly is not engendering good will and they COULD with little change. They don't have to go broke but they can look at it from a different angle.

  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    SF6 is offering the classic character skins for a buck real money, but you can also unlock them playing the world tour mode (their version of PVE). That's immediate goodwill to me.

  • LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    I've heard nothing but good things about SF6. I wish I was good at fighting games so I could enjoy it.

  • TalithTalith 変態という名の紳士 Miami, FLRegistered User regular
    You don't have to be good at fighting games to enjoy it as long as match making or difficulty setting options are good enough :D

    7244qyoka3pp.gif
  • LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    Zek wrote: »
    When I say being objective what I mean is making an honest effort to understand the perspective and motives of the devs. In my opinion, accusing a game dev studio of not caring about their game is crazy. Nobody is in this industry for an easy paycheck, except maybe Bobby and friends.

    There was an interview earlier where they explained in fairly frank terms why they monetized the game the way they did - they want to keep receiving funding to work on the game indefinitely, and to do that it must be sufficiently profitable. I work in software and I believe that this really is what motivates the rank and file. They would love nothing more than to be given a blank check to make it all free forever. Yes of course Acti-Blizz's upper leadership only cares about maximizing profit. This too is something I consider completely ordinary in this industry.

    As a thought exercise, let's pretend that OW2 did not announce hero missions at Blizzcon, and they didn't release the game until S6, with everything we have now being otherwise the same. I think this game would have been very positively received, with the main frustration just being that it took so long.

    Yes, it’s fair to say that if the game hadn’t done several of the things it’s done to erode the good will and excitement players had for the game it would have more good will…until players start realizing the same monetization and matchmaking issues that have also led us to where we are now.

  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    I want to love SF but in the years between 2 and 4 I got super into Virtua Fighter - which, to me, is far simpler than what 2D fighters became with all their crazy gauges between SF2 and 4.

    I wish I could play Guilty Gear or even SF but I can't - they're all too complicated. I have a friend ( @chamberlain ) who's like the Fighting Game Guy in our group - he can play those games - and it was a day of great pride when I consistently beat him in the latest Virtua Fighter for a few hours.

    But we digress.

    The Battle Pass IS annoying and was a ding to trust in the same way loot boxes were for OW1 - and if OW2 were as great a game as OW1 was at launch, I would have paid cash money for every one, and every shop skin I took a fancy to. I have zero problem with actively supporting games I love, via cash money, or betting on games I think I'll enjoy via preorder.

    Heck, I bought the Watchpoint Pack weeks prior to launch! Or was it months?

    I dunno, but it was the last dime I ever spent on Overwatch. Haven't felt even an inkling of desire to reward it with money. Have felt so strongly burned by it, in fact, I won't even get Diablo - and I quite enjoyed the beta.

    Chance on
    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    LostNinja wrote: »
    Zek wrote: »
    When I say being objective what I mean is making an honest effort to understand the perspective and motives of the devs. In my opinion, accusing a game dev studio of not caring about their game is crazy. Nobody is in this industry for an easy paycheck, except maybe Bobby and friends.

    There was an interview earlier where they explained in fairly frank terms why they monetized the game the way they did - they want to keep receiving funding to work on the game indefinitely, and to do that it must be sufficiently profitable. I work in software and I believe that this really is what motivates the rank and file. They would love nothing more than to be given a blank check to make it all free forever. Yes of course Acti-Blizz's upper leadership only cares about maximizing profit. This too is something I consider completely ordinary in this industry.

    As a thought exercise, let's pretend that OW2 did not announce hero missions at Blizzcon, and they didn't release the game until S6, with everything we have now being otherwise the same. I think this game would have been very positively received, with the main frustration just being that it took so long.

    Yes, it’s fair to say that if the game hadn’t done several of the things it’s done to erode the good will and excitement players had for the game it would have more good will…until players start realizing the same monetization and matchmaking issues that have also led us to where we are now.

    Given how the OW2 rollout went, we'd still be about a week from the game being playable at all.

    ztrEPtD.gif
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    Yeah like Chance is saying it isn't one thing.

    I can name multiple issues over the years.

    I'm gonna be honest I had very little interest in PvE but when it was canceled or repurposed or whatever that pissed me off. Cause like it was the proverbial straw that broke the camels back.

    It made you question what all the disappointments, all the delays, all the radio silence was for.

    Like I don't really get angry at games, I see no reason to cause I can just play other games, so for me it is usually just a point where I decide I'm done and silently exit stage right.

    And speaking as someone who had almost 1500 hours in OW1 to go to just having no interest just cause I'm so down about everything OW related is rough.

    Dragkonias on
  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    Yea.

    I would not be so angry about it if I didn't love it so much >.<

    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    I have a load of interest in the characters, the lore, the backstory, the worldbuilding, the relationships, and the history of this world.

    What I'd like is not Overwatch 2 at all. What I want is Mass Effect, set in the Overwatch universe. I want a deep and rich singleplayer experience to really dig in and explore all of those things I listed above. Competitive shooters definitely have their place and I occasionally like to dip my toe in and do a bit of it myself. But more than that I enjoy exploring stories and worlds. And you can't get those things from a FPS. Not in the same way. (Yes, I know there's a lot of passive background worldbuilding in Overwatch. But that's different and that's not what I'm talking about).

    Anyway, I'd be on board for a full singleplayer campaign, but my interest level in these multiplayer horde mode events is very low.

  • Houk the NamebringerHouk the Namebringer Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited June 2023
    Zek wrote: »
    As a thought exercise, let's pretend that OW2 did not announce hero missions at Blizzcon, and they didn't release the game until S6, with everything we have now being otherwise the same. I think this game would have been very positively received, with the main frustration just being that it took so long.

    I'm not sure what the value is of a thought exercise that changes every single parameter of the actual experience we've had so far

    Houk the Namebringer on
  • BRIAN BLESSEDBRIAN BLESSED Maybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHH Registered User regular
    Zek wrote: »
    I kind of don't know what to say here because I just don't share you guys' perspective on this at all. I'm not particularly angry at Blizzard and I think when you look at it objectively, things are not as dire as the community believes them to be in the heat of the moment. I don't understand why people get so mad in response to standard industry practices like battle passes and selling DLC. It's not the cheapest monetization plan out there, but it's not any more exploitative than their competitors.

    I expect OW2's development to continue as it has been these past months into the indefinite future, with PvE never becoming bigger than this, and I'm satisfied with that because I've always been in it for the PvP. OW2's development was a clusterfuck, but it seems to me that they're in the process of correcting course. I'll play a new game if anybody ever releases a class shooter that I like better, but that still hasn't happened yet.

    I say this as someone who has literally uninstalled Overwatch for the first time since 2018 a few days after the news came out that they were discarding the $60 Hero Mode story missions, and didn't actually buy any of the battle passes... From what I can tell the $15 pricing for what they were offering seemed like a decent price point and the battle pass was astoundingly easy to ignore, barring the heroes that were still way far out on the season grind to unlock (which is definitely pants but I didn't really buy into any of the new roster anyway besides Sojourn and Kiriko), so very little of the news that has riled up the entire userbase since then has made me frothing mad like it seems to have everyone else.
    I stopped taking the game all that seriously back when Doomfist completely ruined my Support experience in Competitive mode so nothing about the gameplay balance since has bothered me all that much since I play most of the casual Quick Play All-heroes mode anyway. I think role queue was game balance cowardice but 5v5 and the embeefening of the solo tank made it a thousand times more fun to actually queue up for tank, so personally I considered it swings and roundabouts.

    I find it difficult to care all too much about the minutiae that everyone else considers death by a thousand cuts, because I learned my lesson long before any of that happened - that caring that much is a fools' errand and stepping away from Serious Mode was the best awakening I'd ever had in a videogame. The game by its very nature will never support the same kind of competitive balance it did in its first years, because in the pursuit of content (in the form of new heroes etc.), it would always loosen and collapse. And going into Overwatch 2 not having spent any actual additional money on anything, the only thing I've really wasted is time, which I was already doing anyway and will always be an improvement on having been fooled into wasting money on loot boxes that bought me nothing but duplicates. At least the $15 story missions and battle pass are a set product of known, defined quantity and quality.

  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    With the new patch:

    -matchmaking is still bad, 10 games, 8 stomps 1 balanced and 1 ok until a 2-stack left and ruined it. Gotta implement legit leaver penalties, if it took 6 years to finally rework Gibraltar maybe they'll finally get to this.
    -Pharah will dominate now that Widow is nerfed, and she not only has Mercy to pocket but Wifeleaver is Pockets R' Us and that heal on grab is like a mini cleanse. Despite the Mei and McCree buffs you can roughshod with Sombra/Pharah as DPS.
    -Tanks still have way too much HP, Roadhog just won't die now and supports negate too much damage. With the Widow nerf you have very little options to scare supports and backline enemies.

  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    Y'all know me. I hate everything and would slap Blizzard in the mouth if I could.

    ...and I like those Gibraltar changes.

    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    TexiKen wrote: »
    -Tanks still have way too much HP, Roadhog just won't die now and supports negate too much damage. With the Widow nerf you have very little options to scare supports and backline enemies.

    For me tanks don't have too much HP - they deal too much damage. Queen's self-sustain is a bit much - every ability she has short of her primary fire heals her - but any tank can get vaporized by a coordinated team.

    The fact that a Rein can double-firestrike any 200HP hero and pin for elims is just a bit much. And I've said before - Earthshatter, Annihilation and Rampage are obscenely overpowered.

    Shatter should do less damage (30 max) and the close range damage should be removed. Annihilation's speed boost should be removed. Rampage is the nearest to being balanced of the three, and its area of effect should be reduced by like 30%.

    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    I didn’t get to play Gibraltar defense during my quick play matches yesterday but I was hella confused when we got to that point on offense since I had seen there was a change but hadn’t looked too much into it. I went in to pin the defense in and the door I was expecting wasn’t there.

    Guess that means it’s working as intended :D

  • TexiKenTexiKen Dammit! That fish really got me!Registered User regular
    Chance wrote: »
    TexiKen wrote: »
    -Tanks still have way too much HP, Roadhog just won't die now and supports negate too much damage. With the Widow nerf you have very little options to scare supports and backline enemies.

    For me tanks don't have too much HP - they deal too much damage. Queen's self-sustain is a bit much - every ability she has short of her primary fire heals her - but any tank can get vaporized by a coordinated team.

    The fact that a Rein can double-firestrike any 200HP hero and pin for elims is just a bit much. And I've said before - Earthshatter, Annihilation and Rampage are obscenely overpowered.

    Shatter should do less damage (30 max) and the close range damage should be removed. Annihilation's speed boost should be removed. Rampage is the nearest to being balanced of the three, and its area of effect should be reduced by like 30%.

    Tanks can either be HP vats or do more damage, they can't do both. More and more it feels like DPS doesn't matter, because supports are basically DPS now with healing abilities, and tanks are SuperDPS with their own self heal/heal boost abilities.

  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    I love all the options for getting to high ground when you're attacking after the first checkpoint. Getting up there was always a circuitous hassle.

    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    TexiKen wrote: »
    Chance wrote: »
    TexiKen wrote: »
    -Tanks still have way too much HP, Roadhog just won't die now and supports negate too much damage. With the Widow nerf you have very little options to scare supports and backline enemies.

    For me tanks don't have too much HP - they deal too much damage. Queen's self-sustain is a bit much - every ability she has short of her primary fire heals her - but any tank can get vaporized by a coordinated team.

    The fact that a Rein can double-firestrike any 200HP hero and pin for elims is just a bit much. And I've said before - Earthshatter, Annihilation and Rampage are obscenely overpowered.

    Shatter should do less damage (30 max) and the close range damage should be removed. Annihilation's speed boost should be removed. Rampage is the nearest to being balanced of the three, and its area of effect should be reduced by like 30%.

    Tanks can either be HP vats or do more damage, they can't do both. More and more it feels like DPS doesn't matter, because supports are basically DPS now with healing abilities, and tanks are SuperDPS with their own self heal/heal boost abilities.

    DPS are the forgotten children of OW2. Supports have excellent DPS and mobility and self-sustain (and a new passive that gives them even greater self-sustain). Tanks have self-sustain and mitigation and often mobility.

    DPS are squishy as fuck and tend to require real mastery to get any value out of. They really rely on supports not DPSing lol.

    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • NobodyNobody Registered User regular
    I wouldn’t say they all get forgotten, Cassidy’s magical homing missile that makes everybody miss flashbang comes to mind.

  • ChanceChance Registered User regular
    Nobody wrote: »
    I wouldn’t say they all get forgotten, Cassidy’s magical homing missile that makes everybody miss flashbang comes to mind.

    I'm just sayin' half the tanks are OPaF, the support passive plus all their get-out-of-jail cards shatters the classic support need for a team that protects them to get their value and DPS? DPS go pew pew and that's it.

    And yeah Cass Magnetic 2.0 is bonkers and I'll be shocked if it's not nerfed to shit.

    'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
  • NobodyNobody Registered User regular
    From watching Flats I think tank players (at least at higher levels) are also frustrated because they keep getting forced into rock/paper/scissors where both tanks are constantly swapping based on hard counters.

    I think Blizzard’s plan is for the DPS combo to be Cass and Mei/Sombra. Can’t escape if you’re mag-hindered/frozen/hacked.

  • LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    Nobody wrote: »
    From watching Flats I think tank players (at least at higher levels) are also frustrated because they keep getting forced into rock/paper/scissors where both tanks are constantly swapping based on hard counters.

    I think Blizzard’s plan is for the DPS combo to be Cass and Mei/Sombra. Can’t escape if you’re mag-hindered/frozen/hacked.

    That would just be an awful play experience. Better than Sym/Sombra, but still awful.

    Regarding tanks being frustrated by getting countered, isn’t that kind of the point? The whole game is based on picks and counter picks.

Sign In or Register to comment.