Anime Overwatch

[pakoito]

... comparing Disney/Pixar shit... to Guilty Gear... get... the fuck... out

You said you don't like 3D cartoons, I'm giving you *the best* 3D cartoons there are today regardless of style, the one's that are getting praises all around the board for doing it right; and now you come back with Pixar? Make up your mind bro, which one you want and which one you hate.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Not sure i personally care for that animu art style, but i think this is really besides the point. It is not the idea of having cartoony graphics per-se that bothers me. There's just something suspicious about making a Pixar/Disney style intro for this game. This is a type of animation which is very formulaic and derivative which simply has the stench of something that was created by some kind of committee. The cartoon industry itself appears to be very lucrative in America and i've seen quite a lot of those films while hanging around my sister's family (she has five kids!), and they are all made out of the same template. Some of them (but not all) are also quite openly subversive with lots of SJW shit in them, but in the main they all appear to have been made specifically to make money and have little artistic value to them. It just feels insipid to me. Like Blizzard deliberately went out of their way to conform to some type of industry standard rather then do their own thing.

 

[J1M]

Not sure i personally care for that animu art style, but i think this is really besides the point. It is not the idea of having cartoony graphics per-se that bothers me. There's just something suspicious about making a Pixar/Disney style intro for this game. This is a type of animation which is very formulaic and derivative which simply has the stench of something that was created by some kind of committee. The cartoon industry itself appears to be very lucrative in America and i've seen quite a lot of those films while hanging around my sister's family (she has five kids!), and they are all made out of the same template. Some of them (but not all) are also quite openly subversive with lots of SJW shit in them, but in the main they all appear to have been made specifically to make money and have little artistic value to them. It just feels insipid to me. Like Blizzard deliberately went out of their way to conform to some type of industry standard rather then do their own thing.

They all-but-announced that they have a TV show lined up for cross-promotion. The animation style is purposefully cheaper to animate than anything seen in the Diablo 2 or Warcraft 3 cinematics. Hence, why it looks like Pixar/Dreamworks shovelware.

 

[TedNugent]

This is an opportunistic game made off the scraps of a discarded MMO for that P2W cha-ching to fund other games. I wouldn't put it as a first class Blizzard member, same as I wouldn't with Hearthstone or their other shitty MOBA.

You say that as though Diablo 3 and WoW weren't complete shit

So now it's Diablo 3, WoW, Hearthstone, and that shitty MOBA to offset Starcraft 2. Yeah, decline.

Diablo III is far from flawless, but it's pretty decent now.
"Decline" is a relative term, when it comes to shitting gold, Blizzard are still as good as ever, if not even better than before.
Who else could ask a couple of interns to make a by the numbers card trading game with unity in a couple of months and not only get away with it but also make millions with it?

Diablo 3 is easily the best grindgrindgrind speed runner I've ever played

It is like a meticulously crafted skinner box

You sometimes have to admire the craftsmanship that goes into making a turd look beautiful without altering its actual substance.

 

[pakoito]

This is an opportunistic game made off the scraps of a discarded MMO for that P2W cha-ching to fund other games. I wouldn't put it as a first class Blizzard member, same as I wouldn't with Hearthstone or their other shitty MOBA.

You say that as though Diablo 3 and WoW weren't complete shit

So now it's Diablo 3, WoW, Hearthstone, and that shitty MOBA to offset Starcraft 2. Yeah, decline.

Diablo III is far from flawless, but it's pretty decent now.
"Decline" is a relative term, when it comes to shitting gold, Blizzard are still as good as ever, if not even better than before.
Who else could ask a couple of interns to make a by the numbers card trading game with unity in a couple of months and not only get away with it but also make millions with it?

Diablo 3 is easily the best grindgrindgrind speed runner I've ever played

It is like a meticulously crafted skinner box

You sometimes have to admire the craftsmanship that goes into making a turd look beautiful without altering its actual substance.

I believe Diablo 3 is a first class citizen for the reasons you state below.

I wouldn't say it's shit, just not adhering to gaming values of somebody born before 2000.

 

[omega21]

I got a bit miffed thinking of how all the assets and lore ingame were the dregs of a near-future MMO, then I remembered it was Blizzard and who gives a shit if they destroy their own ideas for a cashgrab.

 

[Metro]

Given the direction WoW is headed in (garrison, selfies, twitter integration) that MMO (Titan) would have been awful.

 

[Turisas]

The ability to go into options screen is now an unfair advantage.

 

[omega21]

Given the direction WoW is headed in (garrison, selfies, twitter integration) that MMO (Titan) would have been awful.

What is garrison? I hear that WoW has changed a lot from its glory days, though I never played it.


Also re: FOV, doesn't that make the situation worse when the real pros modify the gamefiles to change their FOV and the normal plebs won't be able to?

 

[buzz]

I feel a lot of people in here are a bit revisionistic about their Blizzard memories. For me, this company since the mid 90s has constantly been opportunistic, jumping at every chance of taking other well-received niche games, dumbing them down and adding spectacle and tighter design (which is debatable in the first place).

I mean, first of all, their Warcraft was already a Dune 2 clone that ripped off Warhammer really hard. Same with Starcraft and Warhammer 40k. Even in that situation, praising them for releasing RTSes is kinda bullshit, since we're talking about "strategy" games with absolutely minimal amount of strategic and tactical depth or complexity. Technically speaking, RTSes (especially the kind Blizzard and Westwood made) were the "popamole" of strategy games. We're talking about a time when games like UFO Enemy Unknown, Jagged Alliance, Master of Orion, Master of Magic, Lords of the Realm, Sim City, Civ and so on were made. Strategy games by that point were tackling fortress/castle construction, proper tactics where positioning and unit formation mattered, complex economical micromanagement, dabbling into diplomacy and so on. Compared to Warcraft's "let's see who can click faster and get the best units to the enemy's undefended camp quicker", it was something. Shit, even in the RTS environment there were games that tried to do something more like Total Annihilation or Stronghold or Rise of Nations, but these games and their ambitions were lost in time in exchange for the titillating aspects of the Blizzard games.

Same with Diablo, a dumbed-down roguelike for the masses. The devs that made it (it wasn't built by Blizzard in-house by the way) wanted to make it turn-based, but Blizzard insisted on it being real time.
Same with World of Warcraft and Everquest ...

The Lost Vikings, now that was some really great stuff

So really, what are we talking about? Their recent output falls more or less in the same line with the first things they did. Of course, those games were much more interesting and actually brought new things to the table as well (or were polished and enjoyable enough to not count), but overall Blizzard is still just as opportunistic as they were back then. They had the savviness and the marketing power to dominate whatever new fad was rolling at the moment in PC gaming.


As about Overwatch, I think it looks kinda neat . I especially like the vertical design of the levels and the ability to travel all over the place by flying/jumping/parkouring. Also, the art design reminds me more of animu than Pixar but that's just me. If the microtransaction stuff is not too bullshit, I might actually play it. Worst case, it would be just as much of a clusterfuck as TF2 is right now, and that's still a very fun game.

 

[Lyric Suite]

The Lost Vikings, now that was some really great stuff

What was so great about it? Ho, i know, innovashaun trolololo.

What a fucking stupid argument. It doesn't matter that the modus operandi of the company hasn't really changed in a general sense, because it is the quality of their games that is under scrutiny here, and it is obvious to all of us that Blizzard now isn't the same entity as Blizzard then. Their "opportunistic" tendencies are besides the point, because Starcraft was still a great game where as Starcraft 2 is not. The difference is that old Blizzard knew what the fuck it was doing in those days, where as now it is just a clueless commercial monster with a shit load of money and no understanding whatsoever of what made their own franchises popular in the first place.

Shit, even in the RTS environment there were games that tried to do something more like Total Annihilation or Stronghold or Rise of Nations, but these games and their ambitions were lost in time in exchange for the titillating aspects of the Blizzard games.

Muh historical revisionism. People remember Starcraft nowadays because of its success as an e-sport game, not because it was shinier than the competition.

 

[buzz]

But quality is relative.

Spoiler

I mean, it's a matter of taste. Some people may like Starcraft 1 more than the sequel, and the other way around. If someone enjoys Diablo more than Nethack, I just respect their opinion.

Spoiler

Also, originality is very important because it's what sets apart typical dreck from the truly good products. This is why Planescape Torment is the best game ever made.

Spoiler

You have terrible tastes LS and you're a preachy faggot. No one gave a shit about "e-sports" at that point, Starcraft was a best seller pretty much in the year it was made and the e-sports shit started a few years later, where games like FIFA and Halo were played alongside Starcraft. The popularity of these games were what included them in the e-sport circulation, not the other way around. And The Lost Vikings was good because it was a well-designed puzzle platformer, stop about whatever is setting you off.

 

[Lyric Suite]

But quality is relative.

 

[Turisas]

Blackhawk (or Blackthorne for you weird kwa's) was p. sweet, too. Casually walking past chained prisoners and then shooting them without even looking back was very r00fles!

 

[Marobug]

The ability to go into options screen is now an unfair advantage.

He has got a point actually, if you crank your FOV up you can see more vertically and horizontally making it easier to spot enemies and react faster.
Having the gameplay boil down to how well you can tolerate fisheye effect isn't cool or fair imo.

 

[Turisas]

It would be fine if the default FOV they selected wasn't shit:

At first glance, their FoV doesn't seem so bad. Horizontal FoV of 92, Vertical FoV of 60? Seems alright! However, note that they specifically mention a 16:9 aspect ratio. This is mathematically equivalent to a TF2 FoV of 75.18.

In other words, Overwatch's FoV is locked to TF2's default FoV, which is known to be quite low. Here are a couple comparison screenshots taken from another post:

16:9 Aspect Ratio TF2, 106 horizontal FOV, 73.7 Vertical FOV (most common TF2 FOV setting, fov_desired 90): http://i.imgur.com/sLBklcv.jpg

16:9 Aspect Ratio TF2, 92 horizontal FOV, 60~ vertical FOV (overwatch FOV settings, fov_desired 76): http://i.imgur.com/ZfqJr6F.jpg

 

[Lyric Suite]

It would have been fine if they didn't say "people who aren't aware there is a slider" (or if they didn't use the phrase "haves and haves not", when by haves they mean people with knowledge of a god damn setting slider for the game).

Those wouldn't be the type of people who could play this game competitively in the first place. Or at all actually. And they want to compete with Valve? With this kind of mentality? Do they even understand what type of people play shit like TF2 or Dota2?

 

[BlackAdderBG]

I feel a lot of people in here are a bit revisionistic about their Blizzard memories. For me, this company since the mid 90s has constantly been opportunistic, jumping at every chance of taking other well-received niche games, dumbing them down and adding spectacle and tighter design (which is debatable in the first place).

I mean, first of all, their Warcraft was already a Dune 2 clone that ripped off Warhammer really hard. Same with Starcraft and Warhammer 40k. Even in that situation, praising them for releasing RTSes is kinda bullshit, since we're talking about "strategy" games with absolutely minimal amount of strategic and tactical depth or complexity. Technically speaking, RTSes (especially the kind Blizzard and Westwood made) were the "popamole" of strategy games. We're talking about a time when games like UFO Enemy Unknown, Jagged Alliance, Master of Orion, Master of Magic, Lords of the Realm, Sim City, Civ and so on were made. Strategy games by that point were tackling fortress/castle construction, proper tactics where positioning and unit formation mattered, complex economical micromanagement, dabbling into diplomacy and so on. Compared to Warcraft's "let's see who can click faster and get the best units to the enemy's undefended camp quicker", it was something. Shit, even in the RTS environment there were games that tried to do something more like Total Annihilation or Stronghold or Rise of Nations, but these games and their ambitions were lost in time in exchange for the titillating aspects of the Blizzard games.

Same with Diablo, a dumbed-down roguelike for the masses. The devs that made it (it wasn't built by Blizzard in-house by the way) wanted to make it turn-based, but Blizzard insisted on it being real time.
Same with World of Warcraft and Everquest ...

Where you get that knowledge from,IGN? There is two games that made LAN and multiplayer popular-Doom and Warcraft II.RTS games are not popamoles for TB ones,you are stupid.Diablo created it own sub-genre and the game have nothing in common with roguelikes,you can save and load when you want,and there is no continuity if you die or starting a new game.

 

[TedNugent]

The ability to go into options screen is now an unfair advantage.

What a bunch of fucking clowns. First they take away LAN play in Starcraft 2, now they take away an FOV slider. Seriously, fuck Blizzard.

I already had to deal with this clown business in Red Orchestra 2. Here you have a bunch of imbeciles who think that giving you the choice to pick whatever FOV helps you play the best and avoid motion sickness is a troublesome conundrum that will leave you reeling. They actually want to select your FOV for you because you are too goddamn stupid to be able to figure out how a slide bar works. As though somebody that stupid's highest concern is an FOV slider on the competitive scale. Here's a thought, you aren't going to win any MLG awards if you can't figure out how an FOV slider works. I wonder how anybody that dumb would even figure out how to enter their credit card information on the Battlenet store to buy the goddamn thing.

Pretty much tells you a lot about their target audience.

 

[Jaesun]

I'm actually surprised they did not abandon this yet.

This will probably sell billions....

 

[Metro]

Why would they abandon it? It's the result of something they already abandoned.

 

[Kattze]

This was apparently supposed to be a mini game inside of their Titan MMO.

But anyhow, early previews currently have the game in a raggedy state. It's not just that it is in internal alpha, there is much less jumping/teleporting around than previously thought. The Scout class in TF2 is said to be suroprior in terms of mobility to anything OW has to offer with regards to flipping around. And flying is extremely limited; the SOldier in TF2 has a superior 'flying' ability due to rocket jumping. The 'flyer' in Overwatch, Pharah can only move up or down using her Jetpack and even that is limited.

Ofcourse all this can and should change, but the worrying part is Blizzard saying having some characters have too much mobility will be detrimental to the game overall.

 

[pakoito]

Them cha-chings more important than fun.

 

[Metro]

Considering HoTS is a casualized version of DOTA2 I would expect Overwatch to be a casualized version of TF2.

 

[Daemongar]

This was apparently supposed to be a mini game inside of their Titan MMO.

But anyhow, early previews currently have the game in a raggedy state. It's not just that it is in internal alpha, there is much less jumping/teleporting around than previously thought. The Scout class in TF2 is said to be suroprior in terms of mobility to anything OW has to offer with regards to flipping around. And flying is extremely limited; the SOldier in TF2 has a superior 'flying' ability due to rocket jumping. The 'flyer' in Overwatch, Pharah can only move up or down using her Jetpack and even that is limited.

Long time TF player, and I've just started playing a bit of Planetside 2. In Planetside, most abilities start as crap, then migrate upwards as you play more, upgrade skills and weapons, and elevate your ability. Is OW going to be the TF route of fixed skills with some variance based on found/bought weapons, or is it going to be more MMFPS with skill trees, purchasable upgrades and all that?

I think Planetside (and Tribes) handled flight pretty well. Odd that they wouldn't give a more rounded out flight, considering they have a sniper that can climb walls. Soldiers will need that maneuverability.

Unfortunately, they don't have a spy/espionage class...