I think it’s great that people get to enjoy different game modes.
I believe that they should however be equivalent in every respect - queing method aside -and placed at the same level in the game menus for both quickplay and competitive.
Completely true there….
The community in general from top to bottom had been crying about it.
The Dev update from Papa Jefe for 2-2-2 covers this.
Between public outcry for more controlled/balanced environment/games, and the Devs needing to solidify a long term path forward for the game, 2-2-2 made a lot of sense. And still does.
When 5v5 comes out, it’ll start off as 1-2-2, but I’d be more than willing to bet it rolls over to no role requirement.
This is simply because in a 6v6 scenario, the skill curve for an individual to have great impact while soloqueuing is disastrously high.
Reducing a hero from each team changes this drastically. And as Overwatch 2 evolves, I wouldn’t be surprised if tanks effectively get phased out all together (and turned into fat DPS).
We’ll see though….
Isn’t “Top 500” in Open Queue like Low Diamond?
1 Like
It was around 3700 SR in the first season that I reached top 500.
For Role Queue? Sure.
For FORCED 222 ? Nah. Not at all.
Only some part of the community did. I can guarantee you 100% that is not the case for many other players that left the game. Specially true flex players.
It only makes sense if it was ONLY available in LFG and the rest of the game was Open Queue. LFG allows you to control your group, and as for the enemy team, you should have ZERO control over it so yeah, it solves the issue.
The Facts are still there, I already mentioned them on this thread so I am not going to repeat myself : It solved less issues than it created.
Now they are holding onto RQ but taking out 1 less tank. I think its a good implementation and people are pre-complaining (shocker huh?) but theres no doubt that they know, deep inside, they sacrificed A LOT of the game when they implemented the forced 222.
2 Likes
Again…. Enough from top to bottom.
Blizzard borderline redesigned the game for it…. It was definitely not a simple implementation.
That’s cool….
Really though I’m not even arguing with you. I’m simply pointing out what was stated in the Dev update for 2-2-2.
No…. Blizzard kinda shot themselves in the foot with Overwatch (initially).
Their whole initial design was a hero shooter with various heroes and counter play strategy.
But with so many abilities in the game, correct balance has been an issue ever since. And balancing around unrestricted edges is very complicated.
So they saw an opportunity to narrow their scope and honestly for the better.
Literally since I first started coming to the forums, it’s always, nerd this, buff that, delete brig.
People hate multiple heroes and counter play (because they wanna play their beloved Genji into everything). So Blizz said tuck if, we’ll move towards soft counters and skill match-ups.
Now all heroes are viable 
NOmegalul…. About as useful of a feature as hero bans, except hero bans definitely went the way of the 🦤.
Enforced Role Queue makes it so both teams are required to have some “function” of structure.
I mean…. I’m not gonna go hunt for your facts.
There are plenty of people top to bottom that prefer 1 mode over the other and they’re available to play.
And “my” facts state that it solved significantly more problems than it created. 
Well yes…. 2-2-2 is heavily determined by tank performance. And people much more prefer a more…. Hero Shooter play style…. So that’s the direction they’re pushing in.
More flanky, lower time to kill, more dueling and quick engagements (Valorant 
).
Well it simplifies the game.
6v6 pretty much forces greater team synergy to be victorious.
5v5 allows more individual carry potential and less team reliance
(since people spend more time soloqueuing than grouping up).
Ehhh…. Meh….
They certainly redesigned for certain….
As to how much was sacrificed?? Guess we’d have to ask Papa Jefe….
not at all
as a point of clarification, there never was (and never is) any such requirement made. the choice to provide (or not provide) credentials was (and always will be)
just that - a choice, voluntary
that said, given that this claim was used to appear to speak from a position of authority on forum-related matters, it is entirely reasonable to ask on these forums that the claim be supported
see above. this was never required, and further, in regards to your claim that I have called you a liar, I have never made any such statement in any thread anywhere in the forums, including but not limited to this one
as no such statements have been made, there is no such activity to cease
I have made no personal threats upon you, or on any member of these forums
I ask that such accusations cease immediately
I do not understand how it is possible for person A to believe that he/she has been personally threatened by person B and yet then attempt to continue a conversation inviting further interaction from person B. One might then believe that the accusation of personal threat to be a sham
I have already addressed some of this
Some of this is loaded with presumptions/presuppositions and ergo is not something I’d choose to address
1 Like
not at all
the two arent the same at all, not even remotely
not at all
I have never made such a statement
if one wished to play the main 6v6 game modes for Overwatch as a whole - there was a substantial period of time where one had no other choice other than to play 222 with all of its severe problems
further - playing 6v6 role-less queue remains an arcade only option to this day, when it should be side by side with 222 qp on the main game selection menu as competitive is
the two are not remotely the same, not even comparable
the main problem is that the two modes are not equivalent, though they should be and very often are claimed to be
there remains a large number of differences between the modes aside from the only necessary differences, which is queuing
there is (and was) a large segment of the community that never wanted and never asked for 222 to be inflicted upon us
there was an outcry in the forums before 222 infested the game to not add 222, as it was well known that bottlenecks at dps - leading to excessive waits to play - would occur. That outcry continues today
Many of those who were originally in favor of 222 have come to the forums and to other internet discussion media to declare that now that they had experienced 222, they knew they were wrong to have supported it in the first place
Blizzard has spent substantial capital (time, money, and resources) to bandaid 222 with things like the fast pass. All of that draft capital could have otherwise been devoted to actual game enhancements, but instead, the many severe problems with 222 forced their hand
I know of many severe problems that 222 added to the game
I know of nothing I’d consider a problem that 222 actually solved
I see 222 as THE worst change ever made to the game, with no close second
2 Likes
To clarify, your request for evidence of my profession is a direct insinuation of your accusation of lies.
Requests for evidence of such a kind is a direct request for me to harm myself through giving personal information out through the internet.
You also did not address any of the questions i asked, which is another lie on your part.
Please stop requesting i perform actions that could lead to personal harm.
not at all
I have already addressed this - I have made no such statements - and will not be addressing it further
not at all
similar to the previous item: I have made no such statements, have already covered this item earlier, and won’t be addressing it any further
not at all
In order for someone to lie, someone has to make a statement.
said another way, a statement can be a lie or truthful, but in both cases, a statement of some kind is required
the absence of a statement is never a lie.
I have asked several times that the accusations cease, and I ask here and now once again that such accusations cease immediately
I have made no such requests and ergo have nothing to stop
Similar to the above, I ask that such accusations cease immediately
1 Like
Excellent, as such i expect no further requests for evidence of my profession and therefore for me to commit harmful acts to myself. That does not mean you cannot ask me further questions on my 20 year professional game design career.
Please show me that you did not lie about answering these questions:
- The devs have a clear vision. They dictate what will happen in the game driven by capitalistic pressures. If you, a single person, disagree with that vision and wish them to go against a huge mass of empirical data from various customers they use to make their decisions, why would they do what you want?
- Please show your evidence that a 5dps team is factually “not bad”? The ability to not always lose with 5dps does not make them “not bad”.
- Why do you think OWL dictates what the devs do?
It is a matter of candid honesty and therefore a kindness for me to point out your lies, therefore i see no reason to stop.
It is never a kindness to accuse someone of a bad thing like lying…it is at best rude, especially when done in a non-private setting like this one; and in this case, since no I told no lies, such a statement is deceitful and highly inappropriate
I ask one final time that the accusations of lying cease immediately
That said, given that the above statement once again includes the unsupported “20 years experience as a game designer” claim, it must be noted once again that no credentials nor any other explicit or implicit evidence of the claim have been presented despite many requests for it. As such, the claim remains unsupported, just as it has been for a very long time
1 Like
Of course it is. Candid honesty gives you insight into your negative behaviours and how they affect other people. It can help you learn how to be a better person. You lied, i pointed it out several times - if that upsets you then maybe its time for some personal growth and behavioural change.
Again, please stop implying that i should be giving you evidence of my profession and experience, given doing that would be a self-harmful act. As for implicit evidence, I refer you to the high levels of expertise i have on the many subjects pertaining to game design that we have discussed at length. I am more than willing to give you more - ask away!
And again, you failed to answer my questions so i must assume you accept that you lied:
- The devs have a clear vision. They dictate what will happen in the game driven by capitalistic pressures. If you, a single person, disagree with that vision and wish them to go against a huge mass of empirical data from various customers they use to make their decisions, why would they do what you want?
- Please show your evidence that a 5dps team is factually “not bad”? The ability to not always lose with 5dps does not make them “not bad”.
- Why do you think OWL dictates what the devs do?
Based on the consistency of people (on both sides), it’s pretty even from every forum post I’ve seen.
That’s cool…. Don’t recall arguing against that…. AT ALL in fact 
I imagine you consider yourself to know many things (correct or not).
Confirmation bias….
That’s cool….
Fortunately blizzard wasn’t asking Megadodo to determine the fate of Overwatch.
Uh…. Yeah…. It’s almost as if Jeff mentioned this in pretty much every dev update leading to 2-2-2’s introduction.
Very deductive reasoning though.
There is (and was) a large segment of the community that desired and requested (more like begged if we’re being real) for Blizzard to bless us with 2-2-2.
that segment of the community in effect asked Blizzard to break they promise they had made to all players - that they could select and switch to any available character at any time
Blizzard doing so amounted to breaking said promise after making said promise explicitly to millions upon millions of buyers
A lofty accusation for a decision that was ultimately implemented.
And again, open Queue is available to play so I’m genuinely curious why this is still such an issue….
Given life cycle of Overwatch 2, 1-2-2 will ultimately be phased out (I’d definitely be willing to wager on it).
not an accusation - as they own the intellectual property, it is their right to change their product; and there was no law broken
if the two game modes were the same aside from the necessary queuing differences, there would be far less to complain about
however, there are many differences aside from queuing method between the two alleged equivalents
1 Like
Then why are you over exaggerating like they committed an act of genocide?
Edit: as much as I’m ragging on you, I do appreciate your passion for your preferences .
For better or worse…. Customer satisfaction is difficult to truly determine in this situation, I think we can agree there 
Well again…. Blizzard had to choose a direction to move forward in….
Open Queues availability is kinda like your boss saying “at least you have a job,” rather than laying you off to save capital for other endeavors.
I get all that but how do we play the game when nobody wants to play tank or healer. How do we play when there is constantly more dps than any other role?
222 saved the game, thousands and thousands would have left and the game would really be dead right now.
1 Like
You mean…. You don’t like 5 DPS + Zen?
- Support
As a DPS main, I’m honestly not that upset about queue times. It’s very rare that I ever saw a queue time over 7 mins unless I duo queue DPS.
Without an alternate reality, it’s difficult to say whether the game would have thrived with only Open Queue.
Personally I know I would have moved on had that been the case.
1 Like