Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 08:50:52 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  Gaming  |  Topic: Overwatch 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 27 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Overwatch  (Read 235199 times)
Surlyboi
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10962

eat a bag of dicks


Reply #385 on: May 26, 2016, 02:43:44 PM

A lot of people are playing this because it's not an exaggeration to say that this is the best shooter to come out in nearly a decade. Yeah it's fashionable to hate on Blizzard. Yeah, it's a TF2 clone. But it's really really good.

No, a lot of people are playing it because it's Blizzard and they've bought into the "Blizzard maeks god gaems" collective bullshit. It could be a garbage shooter and the masses would still play it because of the name.

Tuned in, immediately get to watch cringey Ubisoft talking head offering her deepest sympathies to the families impacted by the Orlando shooting while flanked by a man in a giraffe suit and some sort of "horrifically garish neon costumes through the ages" exhibit or something.  We need to stop this fucking planet right now and sort some shit out. -Kail
Sophismata
Terracotta Army
Posts: 543


Reply #386 on: May 26, 2016, 04:20:14 PM

A lot of people are playing this because it's not an exaggeration to say that this is the best shooter to come out in nearly a decade. Yeah it's fashionable to hate on Blizzard. Yeah, it's a TF2 clone. But it's really really good.

No, a lot of people are playing it because it's Blizzard and they've bought into the "Blizzard maeks god gaems" collective bullshit. It could be a garbage shooter and the masses would still play it because of the name.
It's not garbage but the shooting is subpar. Visual style is top notch, though, and the map design is really strong given how much vertical movement some characters have.

"You finally did it, you magnificent bastards. You went so nerd that even I don't know WTF you're talking about anymore. I salute you." - WindupAtheist
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #387 on: May 26, 2016, 05:29:11 PM

It works, it's super fast both in loading and in play (I'm done with a match in the same time fucking Division finishes loading), it doesn't separate the super elite from the plebes on any level other than skill, it's gorgeous, it's easy to learn, and it doesn't have chisel-jaw-meets-emo bullshit storylines about one dimensional shit nobody cares about.

On that, it's attractive to the mobile gamer edge.

But, it's also been marketed to hell and gone as the next spectator-pushed eventually-sponsored eSport.

So basically: great product from a strong development team that focused on what's important for the marketers to market.

SOP for any business.

Funny though how after all these year, just doing this continues to put Blizzard on a pedestal so many other games need to excuse.
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #388 on: May 27, 2016, 06:51:31 AM

We are back to the problem of Blizzard visual style. I really don't see how Overwatch is gorgeous at all. Pretty to look at, easy on the eyes, very well made? Sure. Gorgeous? Not even close. It's 2016. Games look waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than that.

Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #389 on: May 27, 2016, 06:55:43 AM

The only problem I have with the visuals in this game is that I feel some of the skins substantially change the silhouette of the characters. For example, the Reaper mariachi skin makes him look like Mcree from afar.

Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27449

Badge Whore


Reply #390 on: May 27, 2016, 07:00:25 AM

We are back to the problem of Blizzard visual style. I really don't see how Overwatch is gorgeous at all. Pretty to look at, easy on the eyes, very well made? Sure. Gorgeous? Not even close. It's 2016. Games look waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than that.

Super and Hyper-realisim is fantastic for those with systems who can run them. It's not any more or less gorgeous than stylized art, it's just more polys. 

You're also just peen-waving about your reality-capture ability rather than creativity in many cases.

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
Samprimary
Contributor
Posts: 4229


Reply #391 on: May 27, 2016, 07:02:03 AM

We are back to the problem of Blizzard visual style. I really don't see how Overwatch is gorgeous at all. Pretty to look at, easy on the eyes, very well made? Sure. Gorgeous? Not even close. It's 2016. Games look waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than that.

Overwatch went 100% the exceptional visual clarity route, and the gameplay is stronger for it. It's like a playable comic book, without any of that raytracing shit.
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #392 on: May 27, 2016, 07:05:16 AM

All true! It's just not gorgeous.

Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27449

Badge Whore


Reply #393 on: May 27, 2016, 08:28:46 AM


The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #394 on: May 27, 2016, 11:35:03 AM

A lot of people are playing this because it's not an exaggeration to say that this is the best shooter to come out in nearly a decade. Yeah it's fashionable to hate on Blizzard. Yeah, it's a TF2 clone. But it's really really good.

No, a lot of people are playing it because it's Blizzard and they've bought into the "Blizzard maeks god gaems" collective bullshit. It could be a garbage shooter and the masses would still play it because of the name.

I used to think otherwise, but it's true now more than ever. This was a failed project they rebranded and slapped a tag on, well after they tried to make a new innovative game, and it still came out exactly like something else that had already existed for 5 years.

But it's like Apple, people buy it regardless of the competition because of the name brand.

CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #395 on: May 27, 2016, 11:50:34 AM

I encourage you to go back and read Nija's post from the previous page.
Fabricated
Moderator
Posts: 8978

~Living the Dream~


WWW
Reply #396 on: May 27, 2016, 12:30:32 PM

I'm enjoying this a fair amount but this comes off to me as the Hearthstone of team-based shooters. Like, if someone tells you they're a pro Overwatch player your response should be to laugh hysterically.

"The world is populated in the main by people who should not exist." - George Bernard Shaw
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472


Reply #397 on: May 27, 2016, 12:49:23 PM

I'm enjoying this a fair amount but this comes off to me as the Hearthstone of team-based shooters. Like, if someone tells you they're a pro Overwatch player your response should be to laugh hysterically.
or instead of laughing, you say, "Yeah man, me too."

Then you go on feeling good with yourself because it is the only game you feel like a pro in because of age.

"See?  All of you are unique.  And special.  Like fucking snowflakes."  -- Signe
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #398 on: May 27, 2016, 01:08:00 PM

I encourage you to go back and read Nija's post from the previous page.

I'm not sure how anything he said plays against what I said. The fact is this was a failed project that they retooled, it's not at all innovative, and it plays like a game from 5 years ago. Whether or not you find that fun isn't really the point I'm making. The point is that on it's own merits without the Blizzard tag, this game would never draw the following it has. It's not being analyzed by the public on it's gaming merit.

Similar to Hearthstone.

CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
Kail
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2858


Reply #399 on: May 27, 2016, 03:28:12 PM

I'm not sure how anything he said plays against what I said. The fact is this was a failed project that they retooled, it's not at all innovative, and it plays like a game from 5 years ago. Whether or not you find that fun isn't really the point I'm making. The point is that on it's own merits without the Blizzard tag, this game would never draw the following it has. It's not being analyzed by the public on it's gaming merit.

Similar to Hearthstone.

Except that comes off as bagging on the game because it's popular.  The game does have some similarities with TF2 but calling it "not at all innovative", in a genre which has been glutted with yearly sequels and rehashes for years now, comes off as reaching really hard to find something bad to say about the game.  If there's some amazing AAA dev who's consistently pushing out groundbreaking FPS then I'd love to hear about it, otherwise I suppose Blizzard will have to be content with being a complete trash company whose only consolation is that every other company in the world is somehow even worse.

It's not banking on the Blizzard name (if you can even do that anymore, it's not like copies of World of Warcraft: Legion are flying off the shelves), we all had the option to play the game before we bought it.  We all knew what the game was.  And honestly, this argument was old years ago when MMO devs were whining that nobody played their crappy cash grab bandwagon titles because we all just had some kind of Pavlovian response to the Blizzard logo, and not because their games were boring crap, no sirree.
rk47
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6236

The Patron Saint of Radicalthons


Reply #400 on: May 27, 2016, 03:30:03 PM


Colonel Sanders is back in my wallet
Tairnyn
Terracotta Army
Posts: 431


Reply #401 on: May 27, 2016, 03:38:20 PM

My hypothesis is that the Blizzard name gives a sense of permanence, a level of investment power that provides certainty of infrastructure and future updates. The glut of indie games and rapid fire franchises (e.g. CoD) may also help, as younger gamers learn hard lessons from Kickstarters and their niche favorites facing dwindling player counts and the shutting down of multiplayer servers. WoW, Diablo, Starcraft.. they may have lost their luster with most, but they are still there and still pushing content, available to play.
Fabricated
Moderator
Posts: 8978

~Living the Dream~


WWW
Reply #402 on: May 27, 2016, 04:27:32 PM

The promise of continued support or at least a long-lived playerbase is a good motivator to buy a multiplayer game.

I paid money for titanfall, which is a damn good game IMO but holy fuck was it hobbled by being Origin only.

"The world is populated in the main by people who should not exist." - George Bernard Shaw
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #403 on: May 27, 2016, 10:49:14 PM

Blizzard is very good at taking existing game ideas and polishing off the bad bits.

I've always thought of video game design as two things - adding good stuff and removing bad stuff. Blizzard is super good at removing bad stuff, like a game design rock tumbler. Anything that feels off or janky they fix. In douchey video game lingo, their games are low friction.

The problem I have with Blizzard games is that they often don't put in good stuff that's very interesting, and the genres they play in are genres that don't particularly appeal to me. I could go for a really polished 3D Action Adventure game, but a really polished team-based FPS just doesn't interest me.

That said, there's plenty of room for a company that takes existing game ideas and makes a best possible version of it without adding much.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Ginaz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3534


Reply #404 on: May 27, 2016, 11:00:09 PM

The promise of continued support or at least a long-lived playerbase is a good motivator to buy a multiplayer game.

I paid money for titanfall, which is a damn good game IMO but holy fuck was it hobbled by being Origin only.

I've read a lot of people commenting this exact same sentiment.  They know with Blizzard, the game will be around for a long while and fully supported and updated.  Evolve?  Battlefront?  Titanfall?  All practically dead and as others have said, TF2 just isn't what it use to be.  They also don't have to go out and buy the latest edition of Call of Duty every year if they want a multiplayer shooter with an active player base.
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #405 on: May 27, 2016, 11:19:29 PM

Evolve was killed stone dead on release with its DLC crap.

Hic sunt dracones.
Job601
Terracotta Army
Posts: 192


Reply #406 on: May 28, 2016, 01:04:04 PM

I encourage you to go back and read Nija's post from the previous page.

I'm not sure how anything he said plays against what I said. The fact is this was a failed project that they retooled, it's not at all innovative, and it plays like a game from 5 years ago. Whether or not you find that fun isn't really the point I'm making. The point is that on it's own merits without the Blizzard tag, this game would never draw the following it has. It's not being analyzed by the public on it's gaming merit.

Similar to Hearthstone.

This opinion would be convincing if Hearthstone and Overwatch weren't the most fun games games I've played since they were released.  They might not be the "best" by some abstract standard, but they're definitely the most fun.  That is their gaming merit! Compare this to Magic, which has a great literate culture but is more fun to read about than play.  A lot of people agree with me, and they're not all bandwagoning.  f13 in general is still bitter that they were so, so wrong about the quality of Hearthstone.
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #407 on: May 28, 2016, 05:37:18 PM

Hearthstone is a very pragmatically designed game.

On paper, just looking at the rules and such, I think it's pretty clearly inferior to Magic by a wide margin. However Magic is simply unplayable online. Even in an offline tournament setting playing Magic is very tedious.

Even though Magic is a "serious" game with deep rules and systems it works far better for casual play. Once you start getting technical about passing priority and such it becomes a mess.

Hearthstone is very playable online. And that's the main goal of the game, so by that metric clearly a success.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #408 on: May 28, 2016, 06:36:58 PM

No one here questions the polish or quality of Blizzard games. No one here expects them to fail in either.

Regardless, Hearthstone is the shitty pop star of ccgs. There's nothing wrong with enjoying shitty pop. This isn't about being bitter, it's literally half an ecosystem. They finish out all the systems that make a ccg and keep it as tight as it is and I'll be impressed.

Until then, it's just another highly polished Blizzard game that comes with everything that's promised in such a product - which unfortunately, isn't enough for me when it comes to CCGs.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #409 on: May 28, 2016, 06:54:42 PM

Yeah, Hearthstone does what it does very well. However, the fact that it isn't a TCG makes the game take a very big hit for me.
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #410 on: May 28, 2016, 10:37:24 PM

The promise of continued support or at least a long-lived playerbase is a good motivator to buy a multiplayer game.

I'd agree to a point. One of the big draws of Games workshop was that if you bought their stuff and went to a convention there would be people playing their stuff. If you bought their competitors there might not be anyone playing that game. So, therefore, GW stuff became the default whether the games were crap or not, and there has already been acres of internet ink spilled on that subject.

The problem is, of course, that means that it's a self fulfilling circular prophecy when it comes to these giant companies. Blizzard games are always successful becasue they are blizzard and blizzard games are always successful. It does not mean that they are actually good as such. In fact they can just have their games working to a certain low level and watch the money get thrown at them, becasue everyone comes to Blizzard. Its the difference between serving dinner and adding seasoning.

TO me, this game looks like the same art style hat Blizzard has on every one of their games, so its all bling and no flash. Again there's nothing wrong with every one of their games having the same comfortable style. But it also means that there is no way in if you happen not to like that style very much, and sadly I don't. I don't actually dislike it, but it does not appeal much to me.

Overwatch looks like a competent game. It will have a vibrant community of players becasue its blizzard. But I've watched people play it, and it does not appeal to me. It just seems like a 6/10 to me. Nothing wrong with it but no sparkle to entice me. If it's your slice of carrot cake that's great.

Hic sunt dracones.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #411 on: May 29, 2016, 01:12:54 AM

Blizzard games are basically all 6/10. But in the broken down list of stats it goes like this:
Graphics: 7.5 - always
Sound: 10
Gameplay: always passable
Innovation: 0
Blizzardness: 20
Complete  Systems: 5

Blizzardness is the gaming equivalent of umami.
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472


Reply #412 on: May 29, 2016, 11:59:54 AM

Blizzardness is the gaming equivalent of umami.

That is the perfect comparison. Never been able to quite put my finger on it that accurately before.

"See?  All of you are unique.  And special.  Like fucking snowflakes."  -- Signe
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #413 on: May 29, 2016, 05:31:51 PM

I had to look it up. Cant disagree.

Hic sunt dracones.
Surlyboi
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10962

eat a bag of dicks


Reply #414 on: May 29, 2016, 06:59:00 PM

Blizzard games are basically all 6/10. But in the broken down list of stats it goes like this:
Graphics: 7.5 - always
Sound: 10
Gameplay: always passable
Innovation: 0
Blizzardness: 20
Complete  Systems: 5

Blizzardness is the gaming equivalent of umami.

Fucking accurate.

Blizzard is the Taylor Swift of the gaming industry.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2016, 07:25:40 PM by Surlyboi »

Tuned in, immediately get to watch cringey Ubisoft talking head offering her deepest sympathies to the families impacted by the Orlando shooting while flanked by a man in a giraffe suit and some sort of "horrifically garish neon costumes through the ages" exhibit or something.  We need to stop this fucking planet right now and sort some shit out. -Kail
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #415 on: May 29, 2016, 07:12:02 PM

Except for HOTS, which is missing the Blizzardness and thus just a pretty average game.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Hoax
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8110

l33t kiddie


Reply #416 on: May 29, 2016, 10:46:26 PM

Except for HOTS, which is missing the Blizzardness and thus just a pretty average game.

And D3 (at release?). I know it got "more fun" later but imo it was at least very similar to HOTS. Not good enough to distract you from the fact it had no soul or no real meat only synthetic umami-taste.

And Hearthstone... that's a Blizzard Zynga/FB/Mobile game not Blizzard MTG. People need to stop insulting MTG by even making that comparison.

A nation consists of its laws. A nation does not consist of its situation at a given time. If an individual's morals are situational, then that individual is without morals. If a nation's laws are situational, that nation has no laws, and soon isn't a nation.
-William Gibson
Nija
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2136


Reply #417 on: May 29, 2016, 11:29:43 PM

I don't know. I don't play just any Blizzard game and haven't ever been that way. I reluctantly played WoW. I skipped the first expansion, played the second for 3 weeks, and have never returned. I played D3 at release and quit until the expansion, and played that couch co-op on PS4.

This is my first Blizzard game in QUITE AWHILE and it's strictly a gameplay thing for me. I didn't play a single second during alpha, beta, any of that - until OPEN beta.

I really like to think I don't have blinders on for this one. Maybe I do. I'm not sure yet.
Sophismata
Terracotta Army
Posts: 543


Reply #418 on: May 30, 2016, 12:46:16 AM

I don't know. I don't play just any Blizzard game and haven't ever been that way. I reluctantly played WoW. I skipped the first expansion, played the second for 3 weeks, and have never returned. I played D3 at release and quit until the expansion, and played that couch co-op on PS4.

This is my first Blizzard game in QUITE AWHILE and it's strictly a gameplay thing for me. I didn't play a single second during alpha, beta, any of that - until OPEN beta.

I really like to think I don't have blinders on for this one. Maybe I do. I'm not sure yet.
It's not bad. It's just not great — which is really frustrating since a few of me mates are playing it now as the TF2 replacement. I wouldn't feel bad for enjoying it, though. I'd love to find it more engaging, I might go back and try again if they do another open event, to see if the shooting has picked up.

"You finally did it, you magnificent bastards. You went so nerd that even I don't know WTF you're talking about anymore. I salute you." - WindupAtheist
Setanta
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1512


Reply #419 on: May 30, 2016, 03:13:32 AM

It's not bad. It's just not great

Ironically, that's how I saw TF2. QWTF was fantastic, TFC was good but it was nowhere near as good as the original and TF2 was a refined, cartoon variant that didn't really do anything new, in fact there was a great gnashing of teeth when some of the QWTF systems didn't make it into the cut (grenades anyone?).

The innovative successor to QWTF was Tribes, not TF2.

T2, TFC, TF2, T:V none of these innovated but they were decent games that engaged the audience and somewhere in that mix lives Overwatch.




"No man is an island. But if you strap a bunch of dead guys together it makes a damn fine raft."
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 27 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  Gaming  |  Topic: Overwatch  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC