if you say so 
So youâre saying Overwatch should not try to get the largest playerbase it can, intentionally cause people to quit, and not design the game around the playerbase it actually has.
Because they need some avant garde artsy points, instead of those silly green pieces of paper that buy stuff?
Feels like the time you told me they shouldnât design the Overwatch 2 TanksâŚexactly like the way they ended up designing them.
No, Iâm saying what I said. I understand Blizzard wants to make a ton of money, but I also think this will harm Overwatch in the long run by watering down its identity.
No? For Overwatch to be Overwatch, it needs to be made like Overwatch. Chasing money is only good for lining your pockets; itâll do nothing for creating a good gameplay experience.
Thatâs still true. They shouldnât do a lot of things that they are doing, and Iâm telling you that I understand why theyâre doing it while Iâm disagreeing. Turning every hero into âguy who shootsâ with very small differences has led us where we are now. The best at shooting will be the objective best heroes, while the worst at shooting will consistently be at the bottom.
At this point, Iâm just going to come out and say it: If you think the above is good for Overwatch, then I donât think you like Overwatch as much as I do. Youâd rather see it lose its identity and basically be a generic F2P money printer while Iâd rather play Overwatch.
1 Like
There isnât a way to make the game totally balanced, itâs more about making it as reasonably balanced as possible
The only truly bad characters were Symmetra and Bastion, with Reaper and Sombra following up that. Reaper still needs serious help as does Symmetra. Bastion and Sombra are much more playable with their changes while also retaining their general gameplay loops.
And just because characters have similar ability niches does not make them the same. Soldier is much better at close range but much worse at long range than the other two, Widow is the opposite, and Ashe is inbetween. Then Ashe and McCrack are still very different to each other in how youâd apply them. However, since none of them rely on gimmicks to function properly they are applicable to many more situations than characters like Sombra or Symmetra.
Even still, playing Soldier and playing McCrack are two very different gameplay experiences despite them being interchangeable in team compositions. They are unique.
Always so dramatic. They havenât done this at all.
1 Like
You wouldnât say any game with objectively bad characters is reasonably balanced, would you? Weâre at a point where it really is âplay this specific kind of character, or make your life difficultâ.
I agree, but I donât see how characters like Reinhardt will be playable at all when you consider that other tanks are just objectively better than him in OW2. People donât even want to hear about giving him things he needs, like a strong shield and instead they say âThe tank who was made to physically take damage should not be able to physically take damage and instead should rely on natural coverâ. Weâre unironically at that level of discourse here.
I agree, thereâs no way to make the game totally balanced, but what we have now is a joke.
I donât agree. You pick them to do the literal same thing; the only difference is the skills but that doesnât even matter when the most important thing for both of them is your raw aiming ability. More heroes are being turned into them like Bastion, and really I canât wrap my head around why.
Its fine if you think theyâre different enough to be called âuniqueâ, but when you can describe multiple heroes by saying the same things, I donât think theyâre that unique.
I played Rein a good bit in the beta and every other tank was not objectively better. Thatâs objectively wrong. In fact, Rein was the best pick against Junker Queen, made fighting her trivial!
And if you donât think the hitscans are unique from each other, then you are just a biased Rein player from the sounds of it. Not to put that as an insult though, just an observation that could be false. You donât seem to be viewing things from an unbiased standpoint.
The best example of this that I agree with is Brig, she feels like a heal-bot now. Before she had a unique identity as the healer that countered greedy divers/flankers, especially ones that ulted in your face with her stun. She also canceled their momentum for movement abilities, especially against Ball and Dva. Now she just does 45 more damage per bash and hopes to heal more.
2 Likes
This has been my #1 complaint Iâve been parroting since BETA 1 after playing Mei. I play Mei because she plays so uniquely. I play Bastion because he plays uniquely. I play Sym because she played uniquely. All the heroes I main are ones that give me experiences I canât get in other games.
OW2 has taken basically anything and everything that the heroes I love have that are unique and either stripped them or nerfed them into the floor. The very reason I play the game is being ripped out. I went from playing daily for 3 years to literally quitting 3 days into BETA 1 and moving to Apex for my hero shooter (literally hadnât played before that point outside a match or two). BETA 2 came and they did it to even more heroes.
At the end of the day, itâs Blizzards game and they can do what they want. They believe that nerfing the minority played heroes or dumbing them down will make the majority heroes come back in droves. What they donât realize is if you nerf enough minority played heroes, you end up with a very large number of players annoyed.
4 Likes
Now Mei I can see people truly being upset about since the freeze on her gun was her truly unique feature.
Symm and Bastion though, they arenât that different, Symm especially if youâre talking OW1 to OW2. Bastion still has the mobility for damage tradeoff, still focuses on holding down a location, and still blows people away with the ultimate. All they did was make the character more flexible.
The loss of the self heal for more damage suits the changes I think, but that ability is hardly why people played Bastion anyways, it just served to facilitate his gameplay loop.
So youâre saying the devs shouldnât make the game more agreeable to the playerbase the actually have, and instead focus on a much smaller niche novelty group of theoretical players that donât really exist in any way that would make queue times make sense.
And then refuse to actually acknowledge thereâs any downsides to what youâre saying?
Classy.
Iâm actually legit totally fine with Mei.
Well aside from wanting to be able to swap the primary/altfire buttons, without swapping the Icewall Deploy/Cancel buttons.
Maybe a bit less Ult charge cost, or more ammo regen on Iceblock.
But Mei is surprisingly good as âThe best OffTank in the Gameâ.
Yes but they are different axis. You donât need tradeoff one for the other.
You can have heroes with near identical kits with only numerical and have them wildly unbalanced.
And you can have extremely different kits but still be pretty balanced.
It isnât a simple tradeoff.
I found myself using Bastion as a utility pick.
Kinda like a âBudget Soldierâ that canât get oneshot by snipers, and has a Pharah Ult on cooldown.
If a Tank got out of position, I brutally murdered them.
Iâd argue you kinda do need a bit of a tradeoff for novelty, if you want a hero to be more of a generalist.
Sombra and Bastion, for instance, are much less unique, but I would argue way more fun.
That is NOT the same as balance though.
I donât think making the heroes generalists is a desirable goal.
I think making heroes less unique is bad, and if you do that it has to be for some seriously good reason.
Less unique is your negative side of the equation. So the other side has to be pretty damn compelling.
1 Like
I do. If you make a hero thatâs too niche.
They become incredibly hard to balance. Either they pubstomp the bottom 1/3rd of players, terrorize GM/OWL players, or get nerfed down to garbage tier for everybody but OWL or Bronze players.
That said, the purpose of balance to me is Unique+Worthwhile.
If they donât have both, then the uniqueness doesnât matter for +99.9% of players.
Even before we touch OW2, from the top of my head:
- Photon Shield/Barrier and Shield Generator from Symmetra
- Scatter Arrow from Hanzo
- Armor Packs and level 3 turret from Torbjorn
- Soul Orbs from Reaper
- (This one, I personally donât mind because it was traded by a different passive that do the same thing)
Didnât played the beta, not interested in the PvP. But as far as I heard, Mei, Sombra and Orisa lost some very important parts of their kits and the new things are just âmore damageâ in exchange.
1 Like
I see Symmetra, Sombra and Bastion all the time in QP. You see there are the scene where people are min/max the living life out of the game (competitive), then we have other game modes that are more lenient in hero selections (like QP and Arcade).
No hero is ânever usedâ in Overwatch, but some heroes are less useful in certain game modes depending on how serious you are about it. Youâll never achieve all heroes used in all modes all the time, that a utopia that will never exist, regardless of how much you change certain heroes. The only way to achieve that, is making all heroes within that range play the same, with exactly the same abilities. Meaning you boil Overwatch down to 1 tank, 1 DPS and 1 support.
No, Iâm saying what Iâm saying, and not that strange thing youâre trying to twist it into. First, recognize the fact that you have to mangle my words to have a point only validates my point, and then understand that, in my opinion at least, overwatch doesnât have this playerbase that you think they do.
Nearly every single change is met with intense negative feedback, no one is happy. The streamers, the forumers, the ex players: none of us are happy. This weird thing where you plug your ears and insist reality is actually this other way is not something I have to do. I can just look at Overwatch and judge it.
I already acknowledged the downsides of what Iâm saying. I both did it directly, and implied it. Time and time again, I mentioned that Blizzards actions are the money making actions; obviously, you have to be doing something correct to make money, I just think that this same thing will also harm Overwatch in the long run.
Why bother responding to me when you donât want to address the things I say? You always do this, and I can only assume its because you canât argue with my points. Instead of saying âSo youâre sayingâ, and the making stuff up, quote me and tell me why you disagree with me.