The DEVs don't seem to learn from their mistakes

General Discussion
1

This thread is going to be very critical towards the DEV team and I hope it’s going to constructive as well but be warned, I’m not pulling any punches because there are some things that they are doing wrong which they need to know.

A major theme is going to be the DEVs’ attempt at shifting blame towards the playerbase to hide their own mistakes.

Abandoning design philosphy
Recently Jeff posted this on the forums,

This is probably the first big mistake on their hand, they created a game that was very clearly intended to be played in a certain way and didn’t add anything that would steer players towards playing the game in that way. And even if we set aside Jeff’s extreme naivety to not see a very likely player behaviour comming what happened afterwards is arguably worse. When the inevitable player behaviour started, instead of trying to actually take pride in the game they had created, they started to cater to that behaviour which really should be seen as unwated and rewarded it.

This was the beginning of the toxicity in OW because of the devide in the playerbase that it created.

Would ya’ll stop being so toxic?
The infamous DEV update video where Jeff decided to tell us that they couldn’t focus on making new cool stuff for the game because we were all being too toxic.

What Papa Jeff fails to realize here is that a lot of the toxicity is caused by the poor choices of the DEV team, with the game’s original design philosphy, complete lack of systems that would encourage that specific style of gameplay and then abandoning it how else did you expect the community to react?

You created a divide where people have fundamentally different views of what the game is and how it’s meant to be played. On one side we have the players who actually wants to play the game based on its original design philosophy who you have basically villainized and those who actively does the thing you didn’t expect people to do.

Even the title of the video “Play nice, play fair” is interpreted differently by the different groups. To someone who wants to play it like it was meant to be played won’t think that someone who really only wants to play a single hero no matter what is playing nice nor will they think that it’s a fair way to treat 5 other people.
People who only want to play their favourite hero don’t understand why people are telling them not to play that hero and feel that they are being bullied (which rightfully some of them are) and can’t see what they are doing wrong.

Keep in mind that in the previous years, the DEVs have been very reluctant to even speak on this topic and we have also got a lot of conflicting and vague answers.
About 3 years in and now we are getting information like the quote from above.

Be careful of what you wish for
This is a big OOF. This truely just shows us that the DEVs have very little idea of what they are doing and/or that they simply don’t understand what the community wants (which Jeff actually openly said on a stream as well).

The better way of explaining what he really means when he says “be careful what you wish for” is “be careful what you wish for because we will do something that makes no sense and completely mess up the game as a result”.

How in the world does “we don’t want dive to be played 24/7 in pro/top ELO games” result in a character that was so disgustingly broken conceptually that it not only made Dive unplayable but also later more or less deleted the entire damage hero roster which is now the current problem that they are trying to deal with because everyone are spamming “residentsleeper” in the twitch chat during OWL and the live audience booing.

Poor balancing
First Mercy after her rework which took about 6 months+ to fix? Then Brigitte who has been out for nearly a year now, a hero they have continuesly given nerfs to and still continue to nerf indirectly as well. Brig launched March 20, 2018 and was a horribly OP monster, how long did it take before we saw the first balance change to her? May 3, 2018 was the first time the made balance changes to her and that change alone was just to reduce her ridiculous Shield Bash cone angle which used to be 90!

What have they really achieved with all these balance changes to her? A hero that still remains a very important hero in the current meta and is honestely not really good outside of that given team comp. It’s like they made a hero with a horrible design that they don’t actually know what to do with and somehow that’s our fault.

Reaper was buffed out of his mind, but most people at the high ELO and pro scene knew that Reaper was never going to be a 3-3 counter. The only times we have seen him work in OWL is during fights where the team was going to win regardless of whether they had a Reaper or not, he’s essentially a snowball hero, when you first get it rolling he just helps it keep going but he never starts rolling it himself.
So really unchanged when it comes to the highest level of play where the changes were intended to make a difference, but what happened in lower ranks? You made an unstopable W+M1 hero (kinda like Brig) who people in those ranks simply lack the gamesense and mechanical skills to stop.

This current patch on the PTR seems promising but I don’t even know if credit can be given to the DEV team for it, it honestely feels like they talked to people who have a better idea on how to balance it and tried to go with that.

TLDR
Take responsibility for your own mistakes and stop trying to shift blame on the playerbase. It’s your game and it’s your decisions that affect the game.

48 Likes
2

Of course not. How can they learn from mistakes when they are unable to admit them?

24 Likes
3

I could not have said that any better.

6 Likes
4

I agree with the premise, but I disagree with the latter half of the statement. The game is designed explicitly to encourage lots of switching throughout the match to counter your opponents. I think their mistake was failing to realize that their heroes were so unique and had such personality that people would have too much fun sticking to one hero.

Which TBH I can’t blame them. When I played TF2 (thousands of hours) I swapped between classes all the time. Sure I had my favorites, but I would gladly switch to a demo or a heavy or a medic when necessary. In OW I don’t get that same feeling. I actually fall in love with specific heroes to the point where I only want to play a few and the others feel boring to me.

12 Likes
5

Jeff should have just binned Overwatch like he did Titan. Maybe WoW would be less a cesspool if he went back there.

From the very start he has proven he knows nothing about this genre and what he is doing, ofcourse maining is going to be a thing in a game like this, its common sense, something he lacks.

Looking at the games state now it goes far beyond him not understanding this genre, the devs just don’t seem to have any idea how to balance and design basic kits for heroes, its a mess and this game will continue to get worse and worse.

2 Likes
6

The hypocrisy and inability to admit mistakes. “Reworks are an absolute LAST resort!” Symmetra gets no changes on the PTR for an entire year and is then reworked to the point people that mained her cant anymore

7 Likes
7

I think the problem here was those 'situational characters" were never good in any situation.

8

The community made major nerfs/buffs happen. They listen to everyone.

4 Likes
9

I used to play the old Torb on certain maps on defense and it worked well for me in Diamond because I was also good at using his gun. I’d never play him on attack under any situation because I knew what his niche was and how to get use out of it.

Even Symm had her place, given that it was mostly effective in ranks where people don’t have the gamesense and mechanical skill to punish it. And some people even found a way to go unpunished even in the highest ranks by exploiting the enemy teams ignorance.

This all really comes down to people being able to realize that a hero is niche and accepting it for being that and not expect to play it in every game and in any situation because they really like that character for whatever reason.

The problem I have with them not adding necessary things to make the multiplayer experience better is that they created a game that basically necessitates it due to how incredibly team reliant it is and how important building a synergizing team comp is.

Jeff has also gone on the record to say that they didn’t expect people to group up and play as closely together as we see in deathball comps, which again baffles me because of how they not only designed their heroes but also their maps.

For good or worse, there are certain types of heroes that needs to be present in every team comps to make them work.

A team without a main tank is going to struggle just like how a team without a main healer is going to struggle.

Honestely, things like Role Q should have been in the game at launch, it’s kinda ridiculous to expect people to play so many different heroes and maining certain roles does make more sense.
Up until now, the basic rule of thumb for a flex is to be able to play 1 main tank, 1 main support and 1 damage. Then you might have other heroes you can play as well but if you have those 3 you should be able to contribute to making a decent team comp with any team.

2 Likes
10

That is the main problem, the situation would have to be effective use of his turret in defense. His turret really didn’t bring much to the table unless the enemy team was really terrible ( refused to switch to counter turret )

Again this is a terrible argument.
Your hope of survival is the enemy ignoring you.
That isn’t a skill.

11

Not really, a turret provides a different angle of attack that doesn’t miss, if you play it well as a Torb you’ll put the enemy in a position where they either have to focus it down which creates an opening for your team to attack while they are distracted or they ignore it, letting you build your ult fast.

A niche implies also implies that they might not be good for every rank as well. If you can exploit that the enemy team can’t punish you while you have an easier time killing them by not having to aim for instance then you played smarter and could potentially climb, then you might hit a point where you can no longer use that strategy and will have to adapt to stay at your new rank and/or improve.

12

101 of balancing dont change a new addition too soon after release. data to get a good idea of how they interact and why people are picking something. If you change too soon you have more data of people picking the new thing bc it’s new not bc it’s good. for example orisa was picked like crazy at the start even though she wasnt very good. same with DF and sombra. not the best hero but ppl spammed picks anyways bc new.

they have admitted fault but not for everything bc sometimes it’s not their direct fault. One tricks for example. not condoning their actions just saying you cant control your players as much as you think no matter how things are ppl will still do what they want even if it’s a bad idea.

1 Like
13

That seems more like a player problem than a symm problem

14

At this point I wouldn’t even be surprised if they didn’t know their mistakes.

15

To be fair, Sym got a full rework twice and each of them completely changed her playstyle. The other reworked heroes were easier to adapt but Sym felt like a brand new hero after both of the reworks.

1 Like
16

What was the difference between 1.0 and 2.0? I know that they removed her E that gave 25 shields for shield gen and added photon barrier but was there anything else?

1 Like
17

Moveable barrier is a big jump from giving 25 shields to a teammate. Was used to countering Pharah ults and engaging in a group. Selecting between two ults as well. Sym was the first and the only hero with 2 ults at once. For other i think the primary range got a buff from 3 to 5 meters but thats not a playstyle changer.

18

The entire OP completely fails to realize that it is very common for game developers to intend a game to be played a particular way and for players to end up doing the unintended.

Now if the OP’s assertions were to be followed through on, the devs would have to come down hard and enforce “their vision”.

When game devs have done this in the past it hasn’t ended very well. They end up with the label of “tyranical”. Where how large segments of players’ decide to engage in the game is ignored, creating a hard line between players and players and devs.

Devs who ignore emergent play of their games are often more short sighted than devs who had an intent, saw what players were doing that was different, and decided to encourage the emergent behaviors.

3 Likes
19

It’s interesting since this touches on the developer balance of “making the game they want to make” on one end of the spectrum and “the game players want to play” on the other, and it’s a very difficult balance to make since ultimately it’s a business that needs to keep itself afloat.

It’s difficult for devs to make a game they envisioned while also being considerate to the playerbase that consumes their game, particularly as it’s inevitable that conflicting ideas or behaviours will prop up.

3 Likes
20

I wasn’t sure how to feel about your post at first glance, because I’m not a fan of confronting criticism and negativity, but, in fact, you’re totally right. Those words need to be said and acknowledged at some point.

I think I still understand the development team position tho. They have tried to listen to a community that (for the major part) don’t know what they want, and most importantly, don’t know how to actually achieve what they want

That doesn’t excuse anything of course, but I think they should stop listening to everyone (when they actually listen)
They probably should acknowledge everyone’s opinion, but arguments should be the main focus. It’s a very difficult path to follow tho, because you still have to make somewhat arbitrary decisions for Overwatch

Anyway, I like this post, I know the dev team is working hard to make Overwatch great, but there’s still work to do

1 Like