Overwatch: Thread of the Game

[gomipile]

I put it to you that the existence of an extrinsic ranking system is a big part of what makes playing a slog. It's not the only thing, Blizzard's insistence on hinging the gameplay on dogsbody support roles and profligate barriers also causes the gameplay to bog down into inconsequential poke stalemates, only to get broken by whoever earns their ultimate first.

I don't see how support in Overwatch is boring or menial in nature, overall. Thus, I don't understand how "dogsbody " could be an accurate descriptor for the support roles.

By "profligate barriers" I assume you mean something like "proliferation of barriers?" I don't know how a barrier could be profligate within the context of Overwatch.

I've played a ton of PVP shooters, from the earliest days of Doom and Quake, through Unreal, Soldier of Fortune 2, Call of Duty, the list goes on and on. But none of these games felt as futile and frustrating to play as Overwatch, in spite of the fact that earlier games had no kind of ranking system, which should arguably result in more mismatched lobbies and curbstompings. And I've definitely had some of those. And yet, I've consistently enjoyed far more Team Deathmatch in Modern Warfare 2 than I've ever enjoyed any Overwatch quick play, and mostly because of two things: 1) The progression model in MW2 is driven by cumulative personal accomplishments, rather than a zero-sum ranking scheme. 2) The core gameplay in Overwatch is simply less fun, by virtue of the effect of numerous hard counter matchups. Pharah versus Reaper? Just waddle back to the spawn room, Edgelord. Tracer versus Brig? Go back in time to the selection screen. Any tank versus Sombra? Well, you wanted to absorb damage, didn't you?

Then why are you here talking about Overwatch instead of talking about one of the games you actually enjoy playing?

I think Overwatch was in pretty decent shape at, and shortly after launch, actually, and the existence of huge but tough tanks didn't break the game. I blame the game's breakdown on the proliferation of easy, powerful barriers, and untouchable or unkillable healers.

When I play a support, I certainly don't feel like my character is untouchable or unkillable. Nowhere near, in fact. I don't see this sentiment as being within orders of magnitude of being able to be backed up by evidence from in-game experience.

The closest might be current and past Brigitte, but while she is and has been relatively durable in certain situations, she's never been anything like untouchable or unkillable. And the upcoming 2/2/2 balance changes bring her durability in line with the rest of the supports, anyway.

After that got boring as hell, the reworked Mercy to neuter Rez, and Dive achieved apotheosis, until Blizzard added enough untouchable healers to castrate Dive, and now we've got a kind of rock/paper/scissors of spam comp, Dive, and GOATS (though I stopped paying close attention to the OW meta when Baptiste doubled down on the 'way too many barriers' problem).

What does Baptiste have to do with 'way too many barriers?' He doesn't have any ability relating to barriers or which produces a barrier.

[blumeee]

I read this story in Apknite's group on Facebook. If I were in this, what could I do? And how do you guys think about this situation?

"For the past three days, I've been harassed by two players in OverWatch competitive. There are two players who have been matched with me in almost EVERY SINGLE GAME for the past three days totalling 27 games.

They spawn camp only me and target only me. They emote to other players and then wait at spawn just for me. I tend to play Mercy and Sym and they either do Mei, Sombra, Roadhog, or Genji. I have since avoided them as teammates but before when they were put on my team they would wall me into rooms as often as possible. They also spam chat repeatedly. They are obviously smurfing so when they are on the enemy team, no one can kill them to get them away from me.

Yesterday I have matched with them again and they kept throwing every other game until eventually players started leaving. We got up to a total of 16 rounds that lasted 1.5 hours all together until I finally left as well.

I've reported both players countless times and have encouraged teammates to do the same but they are still on and still getting matched with me. I don't know what to do.

This is of course, in addition to messages saying they know where I live, are going to find me, telling me to kill myself etc.

I feel like I cant play my favorite game anymore and Blizzard hasn't taken action. What can I do?"

[Rynjin]

Sounds not just fake, but extra fake.

[Kitten Champion]

Sounds not just fake, but extra fake.

I'm going to assume - perhaps uncharitably but I think reasonably - that blumeee's a bot attempting to spread that particular Facebook community around (which appears to be a mobile game-related thingy) for SEO reasons using Overwatch-related discussions.

[The_Jackal]

I don't see how support in Overwatch is boring or menial in nature, overall. Thus, I don't understand how "dogsbody " could be an accurate descriptor for the support roles.

Then explain the dearth of people willing to flex, please.

By "profligate barriers" I assume you mean something like "proliferation of barriers?" I don't know how a barrier could be profligate within the context of Overwatch.

Profligate means excessive or extravagant. It will concede it may not have been the ideal word to use. Nevertheless, you did get what I mean.

Then why are you here talking about Overwatch instead of talking about one of the games you actually enjoy playing?

Because Overwatch used to be a game I enjoy, until they ruined it with changes and Hero additions. Also, the successors to the classic FPS games I was referring to aren't in much better shape, having also succumbed to bad design creep.

When I play a support, I certainly don't feel like my character is untouchable or unkillable. Nowhere near, in fact. I don't see this sentiment as being within orders of magnitude of being able to be backed up by evidence from in-game experience.

The closest might be current and past Brigitte, but while she is and has been relatively durable in certain situations, she's never been anything like untouchable or unkillable. And the upcoming 2/2/2 balance changes bring her durability in line with the rest of the supports, anyway.

She and Moira are far, far tougher and/or more elusive than any DPS. That's not to say she doesn't have counters, Junk can dumpster her at will, but the rock/paper/scissors Hero design with little scope for skill-based counter-play limits the satisfaction of the play experience. Which touches at the core of my gripe with where the game has gone. Rather than address imbalances in Hero design, the devs have taken the cop-out approach of designing a counter-pick, which doesn't really fix the problems, it just creates a new problem, while leaving the original stilted compositions and matchups unaddressed.

What does Baptiste have to do with 'way too many barriers?' He doesn't have any ability relating to barriers or which produces a barrier.

Immortality Field says hi. It's just more absurd damage negation, in a game which features far too much damage negation.

[gomipile]

Then explain the dearth of people willing to flex, please.

I don't see the chain of reasoning here. There could be many reasons. Also, I don't see any reason to grant you the truth of the assumptions made in your question.

Profligate means excessive or extravagant. It will concede it may not have been the ideal word to use. Nevertheless, you did get what I mean.

I've only ever seen profligate used to describe people, not situations.

Because Overwatch used to be a game I enjoy, until they ruined it with changes and Hero additions. Also, the successors to the classic FPS games I was referring to aren't in much better shape, having also succumbed to bad design creep.

Then go play one of the older games you like? I still play on vanilla original Quake servers from time to time. Nexuiz still has a decent following, and it's basically a clone of Quake 3. The current version of Unreal Tournament is free, and it still follows the tried and true formula as well.

She and Moira are far, far tougher and/or more elusive than any DPS.

Any DPS? Are you sure about that? That's an awfully absolute statement.

Personally, I have found Tracer and Mei much more difficult to kill quickly than Moira or Brigitte. And a mobility-focused Junkrat can be harder to pin down than either of them, too. That plyaystyle for Junkrat is slightly rare at my low rank, though.

Immortality Field says hi. It's just more absurd damage negation, in a game which features far too much damage negation.

It's not a barrier, though. I remember you implying that he had a barrier. If you didn't then I admit my error in thinking you did.

[The_Jackal]

I don't see the chain of reasoning here. There could be many reasons. Also, I don't see any reason to grant you the truth of the assumptions made in your question.

Being deliberately obtuse won't fix the harsh disparity between the people who want to play off-meta and/or non-support roles, and the now-mandated 2/2/2 team layout.

Then go play one of the older games you like? I still play on vanilla original Quake servers from time to time. Nexuiz still has a decent following, and it's basically a clone of Quake 3. The current version of Unreal Tournament is free, and it still follows the tried and true formula as well.

"Go play something else" is not really relevant to this thread, or my point.

Any DPS? Are you sure about that? That's an awfully absolute statement.

Yes, I'm sure. The closest to Moira's power-suite on the DPS side arguably be Sombra or Reaper, and both compare unfavorably in terms of actual effectivness, as a casual look at their pick rates and win rates will show.

Personally, I have found Tracer and Mei much more difficult to kill quickly than Moira or Brigitte. And a mobility-focused Junkrat can be harder to pin down than either of them, too. That plyaystyle for Junkrat is slightly rare at my low rank, though.

Again, not really pertinent to my point. Tracer or Mei can't heal others, and therefore can't effectively keep teammates from being picked. Sombra can also be really elusive, but there's a difference between a DPS who needs to move away from the action and stop exerting pressure on your team, and a healer which can absorb a tremendous amount of punishment while still passively healing their team, or one that can dump tons of fire-and-forget, auto-hit healing while also skipping straight out of trouble in the event they're focused.

It's not a barrier, though. I remember you implying that he had a barrier. If you didn't then I admit my error in thinking you did.

I'm not here to have taxonomic discussion about game terminology. The point is it's more damage negation in game which is choked with damage negation.

[Velaryon]

I don't see how support in Overwatch is boring or menial in nature, overall. Thus, I don't understand how "dogsbody " could be an accurate descriptor for the support roles.

You're wasting your time in this argument. The_Jackal has made it clear he views aiming as the only actual skill in Overwatch. He has said more than once in the past that he believes anything and everything else about the game can be learned in an hour (or was it half an hour? I forget). He's not going to be convinced by anything you say.

[The_Jackal]

You're wasting your time in this argument. The_Jackal has made it clear he views aiming as the only actual skill in Overwatch. He has said more than once in the past that he believes anything and everything else about the game can be learned in an hour (or was it half an hour? I forget). He's not going to be convinced by anything you say.

This is true. But since when has convincing your interlocutor been the objective of arguing over the internet? We can all just dig our relative ideological foxhole and emit virtual spittle until the last trumpet.

In point of fact, there are other skills. Learning to manage your resources, like Tracer's blink or Making use of Hamtaro's movement abilities. But the amount of time to master these abilities, much like the "skill" of positioning, are much, much easier to learn. Whereas you can spend hundreds of hours practicing aim on Heroes like Widowmaker and McCree, and still have room to improve. It is that much harder than literally everything else in the game.

Why is this important? Because I think it's critically important that a game reward mastery. More difficult mechanics should be more powerful than simple, easy to execute mechanics, because competitive games are supremely reductive. If two Heroes have comparable when played at their peak potential, then the one that's easier to play is, in practice, indisputably the one you should play. The more difficult Hero is, in essence, a handicap for the player who attempts to use it.

But that's not how the designers approach the problem. They balance the game assuming that the top 1 percentile of Widowmaker players are matched up against the top 1 percentile of Junkrat players, and try to put those matchups on an even footing. And, of course, the result is that for someone of average skill, the spud-friendly Heroes are king. Swapping to one of these Heroes makes climbing rank very, very easy.

Even Team 4's own developers have said, as recently as May of this year that:

I’d say at this point its pretty clear Brigitte’s initial balance was pretty far off the mark. She has been nerfed multiple times since then and she is still very strong.

This is a character whose kit is incredibly simple, has virtually no mechanical complexity or difficulty, and relies on a composition strategy which an 8 year old could bring off competently. Still very strong.

Well, I have a problem with that, which is why I criticize the game, and I think the concept that games reward challenge is very, very important to making games that are actually good. If you're content to play the FPS equivalent of Mario-Kart, that's great, and you're entitled to your opinion. That doesn't mean I stop being entitled to mine.

[gomipile]

In point of fact, there are other skills. Learning to manage your resources, like Tracer's blink or Making use of Hamtaro's movement abilities. But the amount of time to master these abilities, much like the "skill" of positioning, are much, much easier to learn. Whereas you can spend hundreds of hours practicing aim on Heroes like Widowmaker and McCree, and still have room to improve. It is that much harder than literally everything else in the game.

Why is this important? Because I think it's critically important that a game reward mastery. More difficult mechanics should be more powerful than simple, easy to execute mechanics, because competitive games are supremely reductive. If two Heroes have comparable when played at their peak potential, then the one that's easier to play is, in practice, indisputably the one you should play. The more difficult Hero is, in essence, a handicap for the player who attempts to use it.

So, conversely, do you think that sound be adding characters which are artificially more difficult but more rewarding to the game?

Say, a precision, no spread hitscan that can only do damage on headshots.

Or a hitscan who has to hit a smaller target than everyone else does. That is, the outside X percent of every hitbox doesn't count for this hero.

They could do similar damage to Widowmaker, but with no charge time and a larger magazine.

I could go more ridiculous, but I'm not sure if I should reductio ad absurdum too quickly.

[The_Jackal]

So, conversely, do you think that sound be adding characters which are artificially more difficult but more rewarding to the game?

No, I do not. I think they should scale Hero power commensurate with their difficulty so that it's an even matchup for the median player, no the very best players.

Say, a precision, no spread hitscan that can only do damage on headshots.

Or a hitscan who has to hit a smaller target than everyone else does. That is, the outside X percent of every hitbox doesn't count for this hero.

They could do similar damage to Widowmaker, but with no charge time and a larger magazine.

I could go more ridiculous, but I'm not sure if I should reductio ad absurdum too quickly.

Too late.

[Psyren]

*blows layer of dust off thread*

Am I under the cutoff? I wanted to see if anyone has tried Overwatch on Switch yet. I was going to get it in order to get back into things, but then I started hearing really concerning things about the port's quality, or lack thereof.

[Rynjin]

It's the same game, right? What's to talk about?

[Psyren]

It's the same game, right? What's to talk about?

Same game, but different control feel, different processing power, potentially different playerbase even - likee do people use voice more or less, are certain heroes like Widow and McCree used more or less often in people's opinions etc. If nobody here plays it on Switch to answer these questions, fine, but I figured there'd be no harm in asking.

[chainer1216]

The switch has no inbuilt ability to voice chat, instead needing a app for your phone, so dont count on there being any form of communication.

Ive also heard thats theres some performance issues.

And finally dont expect much support from nintendos end, Blizzard seems to have upset them. Blizz pulled out of a large release event last minute thanks to the Blitzchung backlash and nintendo basically pulled all marketing for the game on their end and is even offering refunds for digital purchases of the game, which theyve never done before.

[The_Jackal]

Same game, but different control feel, different processing power, potentially different playerbase even - likee do people use voice more or less, are certain heroes like Widow and McCree used more or less often in people's opinions etc. If nobody here plays it on Switch to answer these questions, fine, but I figured there'd be no harm in asking.

You're playing a FPS game with a handheld controller, tiny screen, with a 1.0 GHz CPU. You might as well be playing with a stone circle or perhaps an astrolabe.

[Psyren]

You're playing a FPS game with a handheld controller, tiny screen, with a 1.0 GHz CPU. You might as well be playing with a stone circle or perhaps an astrolabe.

I think the 1GHz is the GPU, the CPU is actually quad core 2GHz each (docked at least, which would also give me a big screen.) The articles I've read seem to indicate the launch performance issues are due to optimization and are thus fixable through updates.

[The_Jackal]

I think the 1GHz is the GPU, the CPU is actually quad core 2GHz each (docked at least, which would also give me a big screen.) The articles I've read seem to indicate the launch performance issues are due to optimization and are thus fixable through updates.

I was reading from the specs listed here. Sorry if they're incorrect. Nevertheless, this is going to be very far from a normal FPS experience, even for a console.

[Psyren]

I was reading from the specs listed here. Sorry if they're incorrect. Nevertheless, this is going to be very far from a normal FPS experience, even for a console.

I went off this page. I think the specs change based on whether you're docked or not.

I do get your point, it's no PS4 Pro/XB1X , but I'm also not going to buy one of those just to play Overwatch either and the Switch has more exclusives that I actually like. So I'll probably wait for a bit more optimization then. I was still curious whether anyone here had tried this version firsthand though.

[Psyren]

So, uh... Blizzcon? What do folks think of Overwatch 2?

If Blizzard is good at anything, it's a co-op mode I can play for months if not years, and there will be story missions too.

You also get to keep all your unlocks and play alongside OW2 players even if you stick with OW1, but only in the PvP modes and seasonal events as per the current game.

The new art style looks... more anime?

[Rynjin]

Nothing that looks like it would draw me back, certainly not for a full game pricetag, sadly.

Now the stuff about Diablo IV on the other hand looked great; too bad it's not going to be here until like 2021 at the earliest, most likely.

[heronbpv]

@OW2:
It looked like a glorified (and full priced, as stated) expansion pack. And if it's not going to divide the player base, by having the multiplayer side be "cross-play" (as if the games were different, right?), what's the point?
If somebody with more information could elaborate, that would be appreciated. I don't play much, but I like the game.

[Psyren]

@OW2:
It looked like a glorified (and full priced, as stated) expansion pack. And if it's not going to divide the player base, by having the multiplayer side be "cross-play" (as if the games were different, right?), what's the point?
If somebody with more information could elaborate, that would be appreciated. I don't play much, but I like the game.

A fleshed out co-op PvE mode would absolutely bring me and my friends back; we lost a bunch of hours to the likes of Destiny and even Anthem, so the desire for an online shooter against interesting AI opponents is definitely there.

Also, considering that the original game was only $40 and we haven't heard anything yet on price, I think it's a bit premature to go after OW2 on that score.

[Winthur]

original game was only $40.

weeps in Eastern European monopoly money

[Kitten Champion]

A fleshed out co-op PvE mode would absolutely bring me and my friends back; we lost a bunch of hours to the likes of Destiny and even Anthem, so the desire for an online shooter against interesting AI opponents is definitely there.

Also, considering that the original game was only $40 and we haven't heard anything yet on price, I think it's a bit premature to go after OW2 on that score.

I paid full price for Reaper of Souls, which was a genuine XP-pack, because it added that much relatively speaking.

[Rynjin]

I paid full price for Reaper of Souls, which was a genuine XP-pack, because it added that much relatively speaking.

But you only ever NEEDED to pay $20-$40 (I don't recall the exact price but I know it was under $40) for the content in Reaper of Souls; $60 was the Collector's Edition or whatever price with all the wings and pets and such.

A fleshed out co-op PvE mode would absolutely bring me and my friends back; we lost a bunch of hours to the likes of Destiny and even Anthem, so the desire for an online shooter against interesting AI opponents is definitely there.

Also, considering that the original game was only $40 and we haven't heard anything yet on price, I think it's a bit premature to go after OW2 on that score.

Blizzard doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from me any more; I'm not dropping them but neither am I ever going to assume the best motives or most customer friendly scenarios.

Also it will almost certainly be $60 on consoles if nowhere else.

[heronbpv]

weeps in Eastern European monopoly money

South america monopoly money joins the sufferinggame

I paid full price for Reaper of Souls, which was a genuine XP-pack, because it added that much relatively speaking.

And so did I. But that was worth it, and also was the same game, not a "new" one of sorts.

A fleshed out co-op PvE mode would absolutely bring me and my friends back; we lost a bunch of hours to the likes of Destiny and even Anthem, so the desire for an online shooter against interesting AI opponents is definitely there.

Also, considering that the original game was only $40 and we haven't heard anything yet on price, I think it's a bit premature to go after OW2 on that score.

Sure enough, I don't know exactly the scope of said PVE, and if it's in the same level and amount as Reaper of Souls (as commented above), then maybe it's acceptable (RoS was 120 bucks in my local currency, if I remember correctly; standard for modern games). But, even that as an expansion, and that's my point: if we're only getting a bunch of pve maps, and nothing more, then why not simply sell it as an expac, for that price range? Because I don't see how some PVE maps make it worth the full price of 249,99 of my local currency. Which is sad cause a PVE single player mode would be cool for me as well, but not for that price.

[The_Jackal]

I'm doing a "wait and see". Certainly co-op Overwatch PVE content is what I've been asking for, but I'm afraid Blizz is going to have to prove this is a non-trivial amount of content before I'll commit to buying anything.

[Avilan the Grey]

Right now I am just really annoyed that every single one of the new character designs look worse than the originals. More detailed? Yes. But also less unique and less fun.

[Avilan the Grey]

I guess I just became a "smurf" sorta.
I got a copy of the game paid for me by someone for my birthday, and instead of trying to sort things out with returns etc I actually created a new account for it.

Now, my last season was a long time ago* and well... my SR was <1000 (yes, you may now laugh to death). So I don't feel like I am abusing the system. Starting completely over kind of feels nice, and also enjoying the new features at team select etc.

*Last time I played the game AT ALL was before the last two characters were introduced.