A Partial Analysis on why Overwatch was always a bad game.

[Echo]

The original Overwatch was already a bad game, and it never was a good game to begin with. The majority of people are just tired of Triple A devs being hacks, and Overwatch at least has style, which is enough for most bored gamers to enjoy.

Unfortunately for Blizzard, a bad game with a good paint job is still a bad game.

Let's talk core game design.
6v6 games with a roster of 20+ characters to choose from was stupid in MOBA gaming, and it's stupid here.
Team Size directly correlates to how important each team member is. If 1 player dies in a 2v2, that's half your team; in a 10v10, that's only a tenth. This importance puts extra pressure on players to perform optimally, which segways into the next part about team size:
Specialization Vs Generalization.
The ability to excel in many situations will always win out over specializing in a specific role, so long as the team sizes are small. When every player counts, you need to be able to quickly adapt to the situation, which is impossible if you've gimped yourself by picking a hyper-specific character.
(That's why everybody hates Hanzo, btw)
Meanwhile, larger team sizes afford enough of a buffer for players to specialize, which often makes teams even more effective when done properly.

Overwatch... completely and utterly fails to understand these concepts, and that incompetence bleeds into player frustration.
The fact that Overwatch had problems with [The Meta™] even before the reboot should've been a red flag. You could not play a casual game without forcing yourself to abide by what is optimal instead of fun, or you would be banned due to excessive reports.

This problem isn't even exclusive to Overwatch.
6v6 TF2 is straight up an inferior game for the exact same reasons, despite its classes being far more flexible. The only reason it's even remotely respected is because the base game is 12v12, so only competitive players have to deal with the flaws of 6v6.

One of the only games I've seen that get low team sizes right is CS:GO, and that's solely because nobody is tied to a specific class. Yes, the weapons can influence how you play the game, but you're not restricted to them in the slightest. It's just you, your team, and your enemy.
The other game I've seen pull this off well was the now defunct Magicka Wizard Wars. Every player had access to eight magical elements they could mix together for various effects and dueling with your magic was purely a test of skill, because you had access to the exact same tools as everyone else.

Everything regarding Blizzard's inability to "balance" the game, or their lies about PvE... it means nothing.
Overwatch itself was doomed to suck from the moment Blizzard chose 6v6, and they killed any hope for the game when they made it 5v5.
Overwatch SHOULD have been a massive 10v10 brawl at the smallest. It'd be a clusterf#ck, but it'd also force the Special Effects department to not just vomit neon colors everywhere and call it a job well done.

[WhiteRabbit]

Originally posted by Echo:

You could not play a casual game without forcing yourself to abide by what is optimal instead of fun, or you would be banned due to excessive reports.

I agree with many of your sentiments, but I don't know where people keep dragging this bs from...

In all my years of playing OW casually and competitively and liaising in various communities, I have never, ever, heard of anyone being banned because they were playing for 'fun' instead of 'optimal'.

[Echo]

Originally posted by WhiteRabbit:

Originally posted by Echo:

You could not play a casual game without forcing yourself to abide by what is optimal instead of fun, or you would be banned due to excessive reports.

I agree with many of your sentiments, but I don't know where people keep dragging this bs from...

In all my years of playing OW casually and competitively and liaising in various communities, I have never, ever, heard of anyone being banned because they were playing for 'fun' instead of 'optimal'.

I burned through three accounts in 2017 due to maining Symmetra and Torb.

I hope you understand my skepticism of your statement.

[Butcher]

Your attempt at reasoning is a mess. DotA2 is 5v5, but popular, what is the difference exactly.

[WhiteRabbit]

Originally posted by Echo:

Originally posted by WhiteRabbit:

I agree with many of your sentiments, but I don't know where people keep dragging this bs from...

In all my years of playing OW casually and competitively and liaising in various communities, I have never, ever, heard of anyone being banned because they were playing for 'fun' instead of 'optimal'.

I burned through three accounts in 2017 due to maining Symmetra and Torb.

I hope you understand my skepticism of your statement.

I'm equally sceptical...

You don't get banned three times without exploiting or sabotaging gameplay somehow...

[Dwarf_Bastard]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Your attempt at reasoning is a mess. DotA2 is 5v5, but popular, what is the difference exactly.

I'm sorry, but no matter what they say about DOTA2 and it's playerbase, DOTA2 is MUCH MORE complicated game with MORE mechanics, MORE characters, MORE variativity. Even if there's just a single map it in.

OW2 is stuck somewhere between "hey. we have capture the zone map" and "OW2 will have PVE".

I hate to say this, but even DOTA 2 is techically a better game (NOT the community) then OW2.

[Butcher]

Originally posted by VR_Donut:

Originally posted by Butcher:

Your attempt at reasoning is a mess. DotA2 is 5v5, but popular, what is the difference exactly.

I'm sorry, but no matter what they say about DOTA2 and it's playerbase, DOTA2 is MUCH MORE complicated game with MORE mechanics, MORE characters, MORE variativity. Even if there's just a single map it in.

OW2 is stuck somewhere between "hey. we have capture the zone map" and "OW2 will have PVE".

I hate to say this, but even DOTA 2 is techically a better game (NOT the community) then OW2.

The main argument is that OW characters are not flexible and even TF2 characters are not flexible enough for OP. DotA2 characters also suffer from their pre-defined archetypes. Crystal maiden will never be a tank, at best having enough HP to cast her ult. KotL will never be good autoattacker, he is mainly caster.

[Dwarf_Bastard]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Originally posted by VR_Donut:

I'm sorry, but no matter what they say about DOTA2 and it's playerbase, DOTA2 is MUCH MORE complicated game with MORE mechanics, MORE characters, MORE variativity. Even if there's just a single map it in.

OW2 is stuck somewhere between "hey. we have capture the zone map" and "OW2 will have PVE".

I hate to say this, but even DOTA 2 is techically a better game (NOT the community) then OW2.

The main argument is that OW characters are not flexible and even TF2 characters are not flexible enough for OP. DotA2 characters also suffer from their pre-defined archetypes. Crystal maiden will never be a tank, at best having enough HP to cast her ult. KotL will never be good autoattacker, he is mainly caster.

So, it's about Mercy not being enough Mercy dps?

[Echo]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Your attempt at reasoning is a mess. DotA2 is 5v5, but popular, what is the difference exactly.

Dota is also a pretty bad game, as well as the majority of MOBAS. They just attract a more competitive audience, so nobody really cares that they're actually pretty poorly designed games.

[Echo]

Originally posted by WhiteRabbit:

Originally posted by Echo:

I burned through three accounts in 2017 due to maining Symmetra and Torb.

I hope you understand my skepticism of your statement.

I'm equally sceptical...

You don't get banned three times without exploiting or sabotaging gameplay somehow...

I wasn't. I was just playing the game. I didn't have a mic, but I'd get a lot of ♥♥♥♥ from tryhards that'd get mad at me for "throwing" the game, whom then went and made false reports on me because they were scoring less than me.

It ain't my fault that Overwatch players are blind and will just walk into traps.

[Butcher]

Originally posted by VR_Donut:

Originally posted by Butcher:

The main argument is that OW characters are not flexible and even TF2 characters are not flexible enough for OP. DotA2 characters also suffer from their pre-defined archetypes. Crystal maiden will never be a tank, at best having enough HP to cast her ult. KotL will never be good autoattacker, he is mainly caster.

So, it's about Mercy not being enough Mercy dps?

You know, at least you can switch Mercy for a Bastion. Oh wait, they implemented limited role queue because stupid whiners couldn't deal with flexibility, so no trading support to a tank or DPS anymore.

[Echo]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Originally posted by VR_Donut:

I'm sorry, but no matter what they say about DOTA2 and it's playerbase, DOTA2 is MUCH MORE complicated game with MORE mechanics, MORE characters, MORE variativity. Even if there's just a single map it in.

OW2 is stuck somewhere between "hey. we have capture the zone map" and "OW2 will have PVE".

I hate to say this, but even DOTA 2 is techically a better game (NOT the community) then OW2.

The main argument is that OW characters are not flexible and even TF2 characters are not flexible enough for OP. DotA2 characters also suffer from their pre-defined archetypes. Crystal maiden will never be a tank, at best having enough HP to cast her ult. KotL will never be good autoattacker, he is mainly caster.

My argument is that Overwatch doesn't understand how to balance Team Size and Specialization.
Players will naturally gravitate towards what is more flexible when they don't have room to experiment, which makes the majority of the roster useless.
It's also why MOBA games are honestly pretty garbage, since they have the exact same problem.

TF2 struck gold with 12v12, since that guaranteed that players would have enough freedom to actually experiment and have fun, instead of being berated by their team for not obeying [The Meta™]

[Dwarf_Bastard]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Originally posted by VR_Donut:

So, it's about Mercy not being enough Mercy dps?

You know, at least you can switch Mercy for a Bastion. Oh wait, they implemented limited role queue because stupid whiners couldn't deal with flexibility, so no trading support to a tank or DPS anymore.

You can play a different mode if you want to have 5 tanks, or 4 dps 1 heal, or 2 dps 3 tanks etc. Are you saying this makes OW2 a flexible game?

Yes, There's a mod now where you can pick whatever you want. But... it's only related to the team IQ and troll balance, not the flexibility of characters...

[Butcher]

Originally posted by Echo:

Originally posted by Butcher:

The main argument is that OW characters are not flexible and even TF2 characters are not flexible enough for OP. DotA2 characters also suffer from their pre-defined archetypes. Crystal maiden will never be a tank, at best having enough HP to cast her ult. KotL will never be good autoattacker, he is mainly caster.

My argument is that Overwatch doesn't understand how to balance Team Size and Specialization.
Players will naturally gravitate towards what is more flexible when they don't have room to experiment, which makes the majority of the roster useless.
It's also why MOBA games are honestly pretty garbage, since they have the exact same problem.

TF2 struck gold with 12v12, since that guaranteed that players would have enough freedom to actually experiment and have fun, instead of being berated by their team for not obeying [The Meta™]

By "room to experiment" you mean dead weight? Like bards in Mordhau who never fight and only serve the role of midi player?

[Butcher]

Originally posted by VR_Donut:

Originally posted by Butcher:

You know, at least you can switch Mercy for a Bastion. Oh wait, they implemented limited role queue because stupid whiners couldn't deal with flexibility, so no trading support to a tank or DPS anymore.

You can play a different mode if you want to have 5 tanks, or 4 dps 1 heal, or 2 dps 3 tanks etc. Are you saying this makes OW2 a flexible game?

Yes, There's a mod now where you can pick whatever you want. But... it's only related to the team IQ and troll balance, not the flexibility of characters...

Flexibility of you, the player. Don't have heals? Switch to healer. Don't have shield? Get shield. Yeah, ability to get 5 tanks, 5 dps or 5 heal teams is what makes it flexible.

You think template "2.2.2" is in any way helping flexibility?

[Echo]

Originally posted by Butcher:

Originally posted by Echo:

My argument is that Overwatch doesn't understand how to balance Team Size and Specialization.
Players will naturally gravitate towards what is more flexible when they don't have room to experiment, which makes the majority of the roster useless.
It's also why MOBA games are honestly pretty garbage, since they have the exact same problem.

TF2 struck gold with 12v12, since that guaranteed that players would have enough freedom to actually experiment and have fun, instead of being berated by their team for not obeying [The Meta™]

By "room to experiment" you mean dead weight? Like bards in Mordhau who never fight and only serve the role of midi player?

I mean roles like entire classes.
In 6v6 TF2, you are effectively required to run two Scouts, two Soldiers, a Medic, and your choice of what I like to call "the flavor packet" because that one player is the only unique and exciting thing about the team.
If you deviate from [The Meta™], you will run into exactly the same problems as Overwatch.

12v12 TF2 actually allows for entire classes like Engineer and Pyro to shine, because they can actually do their jobs effectively without gimping their team.