nope! happy players dont always make it live longer
good balance doesnt mean happy players either bc ppl think theyre fav hero is UP even though it’s balanced and evenly matched in many cases.
plus balance is relative and people forget that.
Lex, Zhin and Skye are nasty OP, clearly you dont even play paladins lol
paladins is literally the most broken game in the world. trillion+ bugs which have been present since open beta LUL
And before you say anything I have over 1000 hours on paladins and been playing it since launch.
Not disagreeing, but its still better balanced than Overwatch lololol
2 Likes
im confused…youre the one that brought up summer games…so i countered that statemtent specifically…did you confuse me with someone else after that?..and i thought my OP was clear enough that all the events are treated the same now as before…theyve never really added anything new to any of them…
Since QP is a massive mixed bag and no one actually cares in there? For me at least. You can have a team of plat on one team, and a couple of masters and a silver on the other.
It is really terrying to run into a Master in QP. They are the silent type who join a server, stomp it and then leaves without saying a word.
Yet Melee still has a very much alive and competitive community.
balance is not relative. its only relative when it “seems balanced”.
Like junkrat for example. People say he’s balanced because he dies easily at ranged.
But ultimately speaking, he’s unbalanced due to his AOE and the fact that his aiming system is completely messed up. you cannot really aim with junkrat and he’s more or less designed to be a spam character which ultimately does not fit up with how blizzard recently designed symmetra. They took upon themselves a design philosophy of “the game is fast paced”.
Thus by blizzard’s perspective and how they balanced symmetra, he is unbalanced.
And in general, he’s unbalanced.
Balance is not relative.
Its more or less obtainable and discernible through numbers.
are you ignoring your own comments now?
You said “events are treated exactly the way they always have”
So I brought up a recent example while at the same time arguing against your points except the paywall myth.
because the controls were intuitive, had depth, and basically was hyper fast paced. The reason it stayed alive is because there has yet to be another smash or another game that lives up to those controls until VERY recently with games like Slap city, which I play btw.
Peck, a lot of game companies that EA swallowed has a bunch of occult followings that are still strong to this day and a bunch of indie devs can easily fill that void now. EA effectively freed up the market considerably by buying a bunch of these game companies and preventing them from making sequels but at the same time are denying the fans of what they want. And thus they stick to that old game.
have you seen a JR who aims? It’s amazing and it takes more skill to do than any other hero’s primary fire and even alt fire. go look up jr at 1000 hours
no it is relative bc nerfing or buffing one hero has a chain reaction of making others more or less viable. like changing hanzo zarya become so much better bc she works very well with him even tho she wasn’t changed directly she got played way more.
for example a rocket launcher in many games doesnt seem balanced bc of it’s power speed etc but when you factor in ammo count respawn time difficulty of acquiring etc it’s balanced.
another example having too many options of all equal strength is usually good but it can also create issues since where everything is just as good as everything else nothing seems good to use or powerful and becomes mundane.
an example of that is a RPG game where every skill is balanced. why ever used anything besides lvl1 spells if it’s just as good as everything else?
points at sky and after a while has basic knowledge on where to aim to hit specific area where people fluctuate through
“HOLY CRAP HE’S A GOD!!!”
its not relative.
It directly affects game play. and a game that doesnt have good gameplay is either frustrating, bad in general, or too easy.
You’re right about that.
But eventually David gonna run up on Goliath (…eventually). Usually when i play with/against these guys they are usually suffering from a strong case of superiority complex and are most of the time the first ones throw a fit or get into a fight.
In silver, i feel like the gameplay is much worse than QP. In my experience, there less coordination, less fundemental Overwatch, everyone trying to look for their own picks by themselves. One match, i had a guy just randomly Rein charge into a group of 6 like a bowling ball thinking he going to get a strike. Yesterday, i had a guy made fun of me because i had a silver border and was in silver and called me an racial term. Had him for two matches. Lol.
In qp, i feel like everyone is a bit more civil. Because it is a mixed bag, where more skilled players are invited, the teammates are more akin to play Overwatch the way it’s supposed to be played. Silver ranked dont have that kind of leadership or expertise (for lack of a better term) to hold the team together.
That’s just my view. My alt account is in the cusp of plat and gold. And the play there is slightly above qp quality matches/teamates
yes it is because AGAIN making one change even a teeny tiny seemingly minor one affects every other hero bc of the counters, synergies, maps, etc are all affected by the changed hero and then those that are changed by changing one also change others.
not to mention people perceive balance differently (look at any time a hero gets nerfed or changed or what have you) and some say it’s balanced and others say now it’s more broken. perception of balance is sometimes more important than the actual balance. if the most of the community think hero A is OP then they’ll try to use hero A and heroes they work well with. boom new meta even though they may be mediocre which the devs also have to consider
are you gonna finish that statement or leave it open ended? you never said what a game like any of those mean
btw even games that are too easy people enjoy animal crossing is crazy easy but fun.
so you agree that the changes to balance are real and thus makes it not relative based on whoever views it.
The “impact” of that change is relative.
But balance and the change to balance is not relative and has an effect on everything in the game.
well yeah because thats a completely casual genre where its only balance is money grinding, how long it takes u to get the kk rider songs and item collection being dependent on how you operate and also RNG.
and also RNG for everything else in the game.
did you see the last event??? that was a prime example of not caring whatsoever.
People suck. But that’s a truth in every aspect of existence, not just OW.
no they are relative read it again.
yes it is the impact IS the balance bc without impact there is no balance.
do you know what relative means? in relation to. proportion to.
that means balancing one thing relates to everything and looking at even one tiny thing wrong throws balance out the window completely.
you balance things by making relative changes. are most guns doing 30dps but one is doing 50dps? those are relative numbers like a literal balance scale one can create more weight than others.
so? you didnt say that before you just said “too easy”. dont be too easy = bad then go well yah thats different then too easy != bad
dark souls is crazy easy once you find a pattern. that’s all that game is is pattern recognition.
I think during launch, people were able to tolerate the little updates because it was still new. But since Overwatch made lots of money through lootboxes/etc., where is that money going towards? They could still do the same model but people can lose patience for the game.
It doesn’t affect casual players because they can pop in whenever or they don’t play as much.
2 Likes