i miss crazy experimental stuff. i'm pretty sure most of the problems with ow2 is they let everyone go (whether people that quit or firing or whatever) and its string maintenance.
So…. stomps. Stomps can happen in all games, and they happen in Overwatch. When a stomp happens, it's easy to blame the matchmaker: the match felt unfair, so it must be because the other team was much better or worse than your own. That might not always be the case, though. We’ve been collecting data and lopsided matches tend to happen at the same rate, regardless of match quality. Even in matches where the skill difference between players is less than one division. Have you ever played a match in Control and gotten clobbered on the first point, only to turn it around on the second and then win the match? During that first point, it's easy to think the match was made incorrectly. The point of this example is that we think there are mechanics in Overwatch that contribute to matches turning out this way. For instance, the way ult charge is generated in the game is a snowball mechanic, and it can be very hard to stop that momentum. When a team wins a fight, they typically generate more ult, but they also get to dictate positioning for the next fight, they get to stick together without the same chance of getting staggered as the loser. In the earlier example of Control, the reset between rounds negates many of these mechanics and puts each team on an even playing field for the next round. We are continually working on our matchmaker, but the biggest gains for perceived competitiveness in Overwatch lies in looking at our core mechanics and game modes and making adjustments here. More to come on this topic.
I've always felt that the stompiness people perceive in OW2 came from the switch to 5v5. It's a format that results in more definitive outcomes to team fights, often stemming from a singular mistake by one player. IMO open queue needs to become 6v6 for players who prefer that format. I'm glad they're finally talking about ult charge snowballing at least, that's something they should have revisited a while ago after the game became stompier.
This would be horrible for the health of the game. It would split the playerbase even further and make queue times/balanced matches even worse than they already are, and also the devs would have to choose between a) do they ignore 6v6 hero balance in which case that mode is never going to feel good and they're opening themselves up to constant complaints from that group, or b) do they balance both modes (which would have to be balanced significantly differently with a second tank in the mix) and now their team is being spread even thinner than it already is.
Like, this idea sounds great at first blush - gives everyone what they want! - but the way it would play out in reality would make basically nobody happy.
At best they could maybe make it an arcade mode along with mystery heroes and total mayhem, and let people just go in and fuck around with no expectation of a serious or balanced experience.
You know there's already open queue in both QP and Comp right? They put barely any effort into it as it is, and it hasn't hurt role queue. If it draws players over with 6v6, that's only because they like it better.
Open queue as it exists funnels people into the main QP/comp environments. It says "I don't care what role I play, just fill me into a game as necessary" and you get tossed into a game. It doesn't hurt role queue, because everyone involved is getting funneled into the same game type. Open queue players are playing with role queue players, they're filling in the gaps.
If I'm reading your suggestion right, you're saying that Open Queue would funnel folks into a totally separate game mode (6v6 instead of the standard 5v5). You want to create two separate groups that want to play two separate styles that are fundamentally incompatible (6v6 and 5v5). I just don't see how that jives with the current layout.
Edit: for your last point "If it draws players over with 6v6, that's only because they like it better." I don't disagree with this at all. I like 6v6 better! But they have to commit to one or the other - trying to cater to both groups will make everything worse. There is no way to split the difference on this.
Is there a reason JQ’s carnage isn’t countered by Rein’s charge like similar attacks (a DVA flight detonate, ball’s grappling claw swing, hell it at least neutrals a Doomfist punch)?
My annoyance that literally everything counters Rein’s charge aside, it seems like there was a choice made to overpower the hero’s players had to pay for.
Edit: see also the non-existent counter to Ramattra’s punch
Is there a reason JQ’s carnage isn’t countered by Rein’s charge like similar attacks (a DVA flight detonate, ball’s grappling claw swing, hell it at least neutrals a Doomfist punch)?
My annoyance that literally everything counters Rein’s charge aside, it seems like there was a choice made to overpower the hero’s players had to pay for.
Edit: see also the non-existent counter to Ramattra’s punch
Consistency is super important to Blizzard. This is why D.Va and Junkrat's ults deal no damage to them, but Tracer and Pharah's do. Consistency.
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
Junk's did on release, it got removed at one point as a way to buff him I think?
Yea, it's technically part of the "Total Mayhem" passive along with the bomb drop on death. It was added maybe halfway through OW1's lifecycle.
D.Va's bomb originally would wipe a baby D.Va as well but that was dropped around the same time I think? Once the initial period where the ult regularly resulted in teamwipes anyways.
I know I talked shit about Paladins, and it absolutely deserves it lately, but its anniversary event just started, with some really nice stuff for new players (free mini battle pass, boosted rewards, easier unlocks for characters, a few free unlocks for whoever you want, one limited skin from an old battlepass, etc). So a good time to poke at it if you're curious.
Ooof of a stream, it's not their fault but the two developers for the first part, the PVE stuff, are very skittish and aren't used to talking "live," and everything they showed looked placeholder and just like it did years ago at blizzon, like there is no polish even on things that have been there for 4 years. Concept art at this point is not something you lead with. In order to make the PVE replayable, they're putting heroes you can pick in the mode on a daily rotation along with archive like modifiers to the levels. Again, what the fuck have you been doing all this time? Hero Mastery is so basic and already in other games (SF6 has it as player combo challenges) that they had to delay it is even more of a black eye.
The second part with Aaron and Daniel is even more of a disconnect. They're bringing back a player progression system like you had in OW1 (the different color/size borders) but it's broken into different categories, but it's basically the same as OW1 but more badges, and you get a more detailed namecard as you get more levels for a character.
Flashpoint is just glorified 2CP mixed with KOTH, you go to the first point, once it's capped by a team, you have 5 other points open up, first team to three. The kids have already started calling it 3CP with a big map, some people were saying it's Hardpoint from CoD. One thing they keep talking about is the size and really, they didn't learn anything from Push feedback if this is what they're thinking.
It's really starting to feel like the developers are flailing, and it has nothing to do with the execs now, they are just oblivious to how the game is actually played and how people play it and what made people want to play it. People don't want Overwatch to evolve like Aaron says in his part, they just want more of what made it good, because that is what hooks people to Overwatch, not the game trying to do something else. If I want something else I will play that game. More payload maps, more hybrid, but instead you made deathmatch maps for a scarce amount of players. And Horizon. And Paris. Because let's rap, dude, pull up a chair backwards, everytime they've evolved the game they made it worse.
In other news, Chengdu Hunters are gone, and Scott Mercer left Blizzard, he was principal designer for OW.
I was listening to podcast on my drive home today and OW2 came up. They mentioned that they liked OW2 when it came out but got dry on it after the first few months because there felt like there wasn’t any progression. They weren’t even talking about PvE, just the multiplayer.
That’s really one of the things the loot boxes offered. A way to grind and get something for that time spent. The battle pass offers that in a more linear way, but 1) you have to pay for it and 2) it isn’t as lasting since it switches out at set intervals. Plus the shop has killed that “I have to earn this skin” feeling to a large degree (again the battle pass just doesn’t feel the same and I can’t explain why).
I think someone wrote it here, about why BPs suck. A BP is selling you a commitment of your own time. You pay $15 or whatever to guarantee that you will play the game for 200 hours in the next 9 weeks, and your reward is whatever Blizz decides to put in the BP.
In the old system, no matter what you did, you earned loot boxes - the opening of which always came with the thrill of anticipation, and would provide a currency that you could spend on the items you found meaningful.
Just another reason why OW2 sucks and is a lesser product than OW1.
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
they are just oblivious to how the game is actually played and how people play it and what made people want to play it. People don't want Overwatch to evolve like Aaron says in his part, they just want more of what made it good ... everytime they've evolved the game they made it worse.
This. I remember Kaplan once said that a big part of OW design was giving every character OP tools to have big, awesome "hero moments," and the solution to characters that were OP in some ways were characters that were OP in other ways. OW2 design seems to want to smooth everything out into a mushy, beige paste.
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
+1
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
I feel like OW2 it's being made for the folks who complain about everything but you have to be careful about that cause you get some loud minority type of stuff.
That said game retention naturally decreases as a game's life goes on so I can see the logic around focusing on the complaints of your most hardcore. That said making something more competitive doesn't necessarily make it more fun.
Larger map size is just absolutely not what I want from overwatch. One of the major strengths of the game was always its focused, curated maps that flowed nicely. I especially don't know why that would change now, with OW2's lower team size and higher focus on teamfights.
I think someone wrote it here, about why BPs suck. A BP is selling you a commitment of your own time. You pay $15 or whatever to guarantee that you will play the game for 200 hours in the next 9 weeks, and your reward is whatever Blizz decides to put in the BP.
In the old system, no matter what you did, you earned loot boxes - the opening of which always came with the thrill of anticipation, and would provide a currency that you could spend on the items you found meaningful.
Just another reason why OW2 sucks and is a lesser product than OW1.
Marvel Snap came out at around the same time, and while their monetization is quickly becoming more dire, they at least knew how to build a better season pass than blizzard apparently does. The random item drops within Snap's pass at least come with the promise of you getting something that isn't what literally everyone else is getting.
BloodySloth on
+1
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
Funny enough like if Blizzard just kept in the lootbox system and you know...added a BP option for people who wanted guaranteed drops.
That would have been a better system. But gotta be as antagonistic to the customer as possible I guess.
Larger map size is just absolutely not what I want from overwatch. One of the major strengths of the game was always its focused, curated maps that flowed nicely. I especially don't know why that would change now, with OW2's lower team size and higher focus on teamfights.
It’s definitely an interesting choice given map size has been one of the chief complaints about Push.
I don’t know why it has to be so hard. Scrap loot boxes. Give a set amount of currency for leveling up. Make it a fairly decent amount. Let the player buy things they want instead of randomly tossing shit at them they might not care about.
If you need monetization of some sort then just release a new content pack every season and allow players to purchase everything in it instead of grinding currency. Don’t sell me a fucking grind, I don’t have time for that shit!
I know the idea behind the battlepass is that it keeps people playing or whatever but maybe just make the game fun to play and release new content for it periodically to keep the player base invested instead of making them pay for a third job.
Saw a Tracer on console the other day with the tier 80 mythic. I see shop-only skins on heroes constantly.
People are paying. OW2 is not about the game experience, or balance, or "matches" (I just noticed yesterday QP still says "jump into matches against other players of your skill" wtf) - it's about raking in cash.
That's it. It's so sad.
Ed: Maybe a strong base game that was inviting to newcomers and more able to retain them through actually-matched matches wouldn't make as much money, but I have to believe that retaining a larger user base would be profitable, in the end?
Chance on
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
Oh yeah, sadly there is a science behind whales and FOMO. So I'm sure there are folks shelling out cash.
Personally I find preying on folks addictions to be repugnant but you'll always get folks to defend it cause "You don't have to do it"
Agreed. The amount of folks I see carrying water for Blizzard - often on this, but mostly other forums - is astounding. "All these other games do it!" "It's not illegal!"
S'like
"He was such a sweet guy when we first met but now Brad (Overwatch) beats me every night."
"Well it's perfectly legal for him to do that, though."
"It really fucking hurts."
"Look Jim (Apex), Bob (Valorant) and Dicky (Fortnite) all beat their husbands too - it's normal!"
It's not good, it's not cool, it's bad. "Then why don't you leave him?"
Chance on
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
0
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
blog update about competitive matchmaking and team queue. Reading between the lines they're saying you need to play more to have a better matchmaking experience, no duh, and there are more GM's than ever, meaning players are improving, although as mentioned here I think it's more the matchmaking and ranking is so broken it shoots people up into GM who have no data.
The team queue will be a 5 person premade team (any ranks) playing role queue. Why they're doing this as opposed to focusing more on solo queue (which is the majority of players playing the game), I don't know. They do say they've thought about this but implemented team queue in order to not affect wait times. I'm glad you're spending detail on painting that guest bathroom but the rest of the house needs the shoddy electrical, A/C, and plumbing looked at first, fam.
The reason they don't want to do solo queue is because there's no reason for solo players to ever play the regular queue. What happens to 2/3/4 person teams?
I think that what they've said is probably true - many/most of what players perceive as stomps are actually balanced matches, as far as an MMR system can realistically determine. OW2 has a game design problem that often exacerbates small skill discrepancies, and makes losses feel frustrating. No matchmaker can fix that, they need to change the game.
+1
BRIAN BLESSEDMaybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHHRegistered Userregular
I once spent 40 bucks on event loot boxes, two thirds the cost of the full game at launch, and didn't even get the Legendaries I actually wanted from the event because the number of duplicates I was getting were so high but wasn't enough for me to buy it outright.
After that year I felt complete apathy for any box I opened. I eventually stopped opening them entirely
I never bought anything from the Overwatch 2 store, but I would rather spend 40 dollars on an overpriced piece of shit skin that I actually want over spending 40 dollars on gambling to maybe get the skin I want
I refuse to sit here and pretend the loot boxes were somehow better than the battle pass. Sorry, but I think people who think the loot boxes were actually good are off their rockers.
I absolutely will not fucking go back to that shit
0
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
They are both predatory revenue strategies.
+2
KwoaruConfident SmirkFlawless Golden PecsRegistered Userregular
I was hoping they'd switch to loot boxes that could get from playing but you couldn't buy with cash, because I loved the thrill of opening a loot box, but also just a normal ass store where you could buy skins for one to five american dollars each (or that amount converted into BlizzBucks)
I was hoping they'd switch to loot boxes that could get from playing but you couldn't buy with cash, because I loved the thrill of opening a loot box, but also just a normal ass store where you could buy skins for one to five american dollars each (or that amount converted into BlizzBucks)
This, a grind or buy option basically.
wrt loot boxes being predatory, they definitely are, but in late OW1 they didn’t seem nearly as bad because after you owned most items, they just became ~50-100 credits which you could save up until the next event, and then just buy most/all the new skins.
By the end of OW1 I was sitting on about 150,000 in OW Funbux and could always buy whatever I wanted in a seasonal event. It was nice. Then OW2 happened, Blizzard waved their magic wand and abracadabra - it was all turned to nothing!
You really dazzle in a very specific way these days, Blizzard!
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
OW1 loot boxes were intended to be predatory, but they made a mistake - they didn't account for what would happen a few years down the line when players had built up a mountain of credits from getting nothing but duplicates in the boxes. The result was a monetization strategy that became less and less successful over time. It was only a matter of time before they corrected it. IMO battle passes are less predatory than loot boxes were in those early years.
I spent $100 on loot boxes the summer of 2016 - before you could buy skins with accumulated credits - solely to get Tracer's Union Jack skin. And then, I never used it like ever.
Gotta' catch 'em all.
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
Posts
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
Open queue as it exists funnels people into the main QP/comp environments. It says "I don't care what role I play, just fill me into a game as necessary" and you get tossed into a game. It doesn't hurt role queue, because everyone involved is getting funneled into the same game type. Open queue players are playing with role queue players, they're filling in the gaps.
If I'm reading your suggestion right, you're saying that Open Queue would funnel folks into a totally separate game mode (6v6 instead of the standard 5v5). You want to create two separate groups that want to play two separate styles that are fundamentally incompatible (6v6 and 5v5). I just don't see how that jives with the current layout.
Edit: for your last point "If it draws players over with 6v6, that's only because they like it better." I don't disagree with this at all. I like 6v6 better! But they have to commit to one or the other - trying to cater to both groups will make everything worse. There is no way to split the difference on this.
You're totally right. I don't think that changes my fundamental position, but when I'm wrong I'm wrong
Folks don't want the mode back just for the luls. Some people just like that competitive format more.
And I mean the OW team is having a hard enough time balancing one mode. So asking them to do two would probably be too much.
My annoyance that literally everything counters Rein’s charge aside, it seems like there was a choice made to overpower the hero’s players had to pay for.
Edit: see also the non-existent counter to Ramattra’s punch
Consistency is super important to Blizzard. This is why D.Va and Junkrat's ults deal no damage to them, but Tracer and Pharah's do. Consistency.
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
Consistency is important. This is why Pharah, Bastion and Soldier grenades and rockets do self-harm and Junkrat's bombs do not.
It's important that a Pharah or Soldier be conscious of their positioning in this very specific way, and that a Junkrat should not. Consistency.
Yea, it's technically part of the "Total Mayhem" passive along with the bomb drop on death. It was added maybe halfway through OW1's lifecycle.
D.Va's bomb originally would wipe a baby D.Va as well but that was dropped around the same time I think? Once the initial period where the ult regularly resulted in teamwipes anyways.
But it was the worst ultimate in the game because of this so they quickly changed it.
Ooof of a stream, it's not their fault but the two developers for the first part, the PVE stuff, are very skittish and aren't used to talking "live," and everything they showed looked placeholder and just like it did years ago at blizzon, like there is no polish even on things that have been there for 4 years. Concept art at this point is not something you lead with. In order to make the PVE replayable, they're putting heroes you can pick in the mode on a daily rotation along with archive like modifiers to the levels. Again, what the fuck have you been doing all this time? Hero Mastery is so basic and already in other games (SF6 has it as player combo challenges) that they had to delay it is even more of a black eye.
The second part with Aaron and Daniel is even more of a disconnect. They're bringing back a player progression system like you had in OW1 (the different color/size borders) but it's broken into different categories, but it's basically the same as OW1 but more badges, and you get a more detailed namecard as you get more levels for a character.
Flashpoint is just glorified 2CP mixed with KOTH, you go to the first point, once it's capped by a team, you have 5 other points open up, first team to three. The kids have already started calling it 3CP with a big map, some people were saying it's Hardpoint from CoD. One thing they keep talking about is the size and really, they didn't learn anything from Push feedback if this is what they're thinking.
It's really starting to feel like the developers are flailing, and it has nothing to do with the execs now, they are just oblivious to how the game is actually played and how people play it and what made people want to play it. People don't want Overwatch to evolve like Aaron says in his part, they just want more of what made it good, because that is what hooks people to Overwatch, not the game trying to do something else. If I want something else I will play that game. More payload maps, more hybrid, but instead you made deathmatch maps for a scarce amount of players. And Horizon. And Paris. Because let's rap, dude, pull up a chair backwards, everytime they've evolved the game they made it worse.
In other news, Chengdu Hunters are gone, and Scott Mercer left Blizzard, he was principal designer for OW.
That’s really one of the things the loot boxes offered. A way to grind and get something for that time spent. The battle pass offers that in a more linear way, but 1) you have to pay for it and 2) it isn’t as lasting since it switches out at set intervals. Plus the shop has killed that “I have to earn this skin” feeling to a large degree (again the battle pass just doesn’t feel the same and I can’t explain why).
In the old system, no matter what you did, you earned loot boxes - the opening of which always came with the thrill of anticipation, and would provide a currency that you could spend on the items you found meaningful.
Just another reason why OW2 sucks and is a lesser product than OW1.
This. I remember Kaplan once said that a big part of OW design was giving every character OP tools to have big, awesome "hero moments," and the solution to characters that were OP in some ways were characters that were OP in other ways. OW2 design seems to want to smooth everything out into a mushy, beige paste.
That said game retention naturally decreases as a game's life goes on so I can see the logic around focusing on the complaints of your most hardcore. That said making something more competitive doesn't necessarily make it more fun.
Marvel Snap came out at around the same time, and while their monetization is quickly becoming more dire, they at least knew how to build a better season pass than blizzard apparently does. The random item drops within Snap's pass at least come with the promise of you getting something that isn't what literally everyone else is getting.
That would have been a better system. But gotta be as antagonistic to the customer as possible I guess.
It’s definitely an interesting choice given map size has been one of the chief complaints about Push.
If you need monetization of some sort then just release a new content pack every season and allow players to purchase everything in it instead of grinding currency. Don’t sell me a fucking grind, I don’t have time for that shit!
I know the idea behind the battlepass is that it keeps people playing or whatever but maybe just make the game fun to play and release new content for it periodically to keep the player base invested instead of making them pay for a third job.
People are paying. OW2 is not about the game experience, or balance, or "matches" (I just noticed yesterday QP still says "jump into matches against other players of your skill" wtf) - it's about raking in cash.
That's it. It's so sad.
Ed: Maybe a strong base game that was inviting to newcomers and more able to retain them through actually-matched matches wouldn't make as much money, but I have to believe that retaining a larger user base would be profitable, in the end?
Personally I find preying on folks addictions to be repugnant but you'll always get folks to defend it cause "You don't have to do it"
S'like
"He was such a sweet guy when we first met but now Brad (Overwatch) beats me every night."
"Well it's perfectly legal for him to do that, though."
"It really fucking hurts."
"Look Jim (Apex), Bob (Valorant) and Dicky (Fortnite) all beat their husbands too - it's normal!"
It's not good, it's not cool, it's bad. "Then why don't you leave him?"
The team queue will be a 5 person premade team (any ranks) playing role queue. Why they're doing this as opposed to focusing more on solo queue (which is the majority of players playing the game), I don't know. They do say they've thought about this but implemented team queue in order to not affect wait times. I'm glad you're spending detail on painting that guest bathroom but the rest of the house needs the shoddy electrical, A/C, and plumbing looked at first, fam.
I think that what they've said is probably true - many/most of what players perceive as stomps are actually balanced matches, as far as an MMR system can realistically determine. OW2 has a game design problem that often exacerbates small skill discrepancies, and makes losses feel frustrating. No matchmaker can fix that, they need to change the game.
After that year I felt complete apathy for any box I opened. I eventually stopped opening them entirely
I never bought anything from the Overwatch 2 store, but I would rather spend 40 dollars on an overpriced piece of shit skin that I actually want over spending 40 dollars on gambling to maybe get the skin I want
I refuse to sit here and pretend the loot boxes were somehow better than the battle pass. Sorry, but I think people who think the loot boxes were actually good are off their rockers.
I absolutely will not fucking go back to that shit
This, a grind or buy option basically.
wrt loot boxes being predatory, they definitely are, but in late OW1 they didn’t seem nearly as bad because after you owned most items, they just became ~50-100 credits which you could save up until the next event, and then just buy most/all the new skins.
You really dazzle in a very specific way these days, Blizzard!
Gotta' catch 'em all.