dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
1202

Adalicia
Om Nom Nom
join:2009-10-13
Lincoln, NE

1 recommendation

Adalicia to Krisnatharok

Member

to Krisnatharok

Re: New Blizzard Game: Overwatch

said by Krisnatharok:

It's just the Blizz fanbois yelling at people who are pointing out similarities to other F2P team shooters out there. Mocking someone for having an opinion doesn't really help things.

Come on now, I'm hardly a "fanboi" for Blizzard. I think they make relatively quality games with (generally speaking) not the greatest of stories but decent world building. I think mechanically they make good games. And of course I am a huge sucker for good art design. I enjoy seeing less often used techniques and styles, especially when everything needs to be perpetually pushing towards hyper realism in order for it to be taken seriously. And I wasn't trying to be a dick, more good natured ribbing. I said as much in the Wildstar thread when the topic of the art design came up. You've known me and interacted with me on these forums for years. Light hearted jabs does not mean I'm completely dismissing his opinion. I understand that some folks won't like the art style (it is a totally subjective thing), but I don't understand why that one thing seems to be a massive determining factor in if a game is enjoyable. Sound design, for example, is very important to a game (I use Transistor as a fine example of both excellent visual design and audio design) but very rarely do you seem people criticize a game for sound design so adamantly as you do a game using a visual ascetic that seems "cartoonish" or "kiddie," simply because they're aiming for a stylized design choice.

Think about the Legend Of Zelda: The Wind Waker. It was a great game, actually one of the best in the Zelda franchise, but people were shitting the bed over the design choice to use cell shading. And in retrospect that game on the Gamecube version still holds up very well, significantly more so than other games that went for a more realistic approach. And the game was still a great game.

How many people on this forum play League of Legends? I would argue that they have a very stylized and cartoon inspired look that has gradually changed over the years but by no means go towards the realm of hyper realism. And while some people might not like that design choice it doesn't stop them from playing and enjoying the game.

The point I am trying to make, and I tried much the same in the Wildstar thread, is that there is a very specific reason to have your art design revolve around such concepts. The biggest of which is, assuming you do it correctly, you create a timeless visual look. Team Fortress 2, while not my favorite game by a long shot, still looks quite good even eight years later because of the stylized nature of the art design.
said by Savious:

Im really torn. The game looks pretty childish. I gotta say. It really, uh, put me off at first.

The artisic feeling of the game reminded me of Wildstar, which I wasnt fond of. Its probably too late, but I would prefer a much more adult theme, or even teenager them.

said by Adalicia:

Or you could always play any one of the myriad of realistic and gritty shooters out there instead, cause, you know, there is a shit ton of them.

said by Krisnatharok:

You may not like it, and you may disagree with him, but mocking him doesn't change the fact that it is virtually the same art style as Wildstar, and similar to TF2, Firefall, and Loadout.

The success of the game is going to depend on how well they polish it, engaging and fun mechanics, and making the feedback loop accessible; because they aren't going to be treading new ground or art style.

But by all means, keep hating on the comments who are just pointing out the visually similar art styles.

Never once did I say that the art design wasn't similar to Wildstar, TF2, Firefall, or Loadout, though I would argue that of the aforementioned games the only game it is fairly similar to is in fact Wildstar. The other games use the same concepts but I wouldn't say they are the spitting mirror image of one another. And I think, past my snarky and in jest comments, I make a fair point. If someone does want something more realistic or adult there are myriad of choices out there. They make up the lion's share.

Just as he doesn't like the art style, I enjoy seeing something different, the generally less traveled path. I've said before some of my personal heroes are guys like Don Bluth, Tex Avery, and Chuck Jones. I can't help it. I will gladly have a discussion over these types of art decisions.

But ultimately the game should be looked at as a whole. Art design, sound design, story, they all play their part but if the game doesn't feel good, doesn't have those fun engrossing mechanics or (as you mentioned) a good positive feedback loop, it won't matter. I think Blizzard typically is a company that manges to combine all those aspects into a good product. While people like you and me have gotten older, stuff that was super appealing before becomes old, or we don't have the time to commit to those systems. I think going in this direction, something that looks like it should have a relatively high skill cap, interesting mechanics and abilities, and being more accessible and bite sized makes it look very promising. But who knows? I wasn't commenting on if the game would be good or not, in the end I was commenting on the art style. For his dislike I was simply countering. There wasn't any hard feelings. You can't convince everyone in the world to see your view point, but that has never stopped any of us from sharing our opinions and arguing with one another. Jabs, snarky comments, and in some cases blatant flaming and all.

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious to Adalicia

Premium Member

to Adalicia
said by Adalicia:

said by Savious:

Im really torn. The game looks pretty childish. I gotta say. It really, uh, put me off at first.

The artisic feeling of the game reminded me of Wildstar, which I wasnt fond of. Its probably too late, but I would prefer a much more adult theme, or even teenager them.

Not edgy enough, needs more browns, bloom, and dudes with scars and stubble. Maybe get John DiMaggio to do some voice work. Got it. Or you could always play any one of the myriad of realistic and gritty shooters out there instead, cause, you know, there is a shit ton of them.

I personally love the art design and the direction they took with the game. It is a text book example of how to make an endearing and almost timeless stylized look bursting at the seems with character. The game looks fantastic.

The guy with an anime avatar likes the look? No way! =p

Yea, there are a ton of other shooters out there that look more realistic and gritty, but those arent Blizzard games. They dont have the classes like this.

Honestly, I cant think of any FPS that such a myriad of classes like Overwatch appears to, outside of TF2.

If the game had a Titanfall, Battlefield or CoD look I would be frothing at the mouth right now.

Unfortunately, its pretty obvious that this is geared towards a younger generation of gamer.

Jobbie
Keep It Simple
Premium Member
join:2010-08-24
Mexico

Jobbie to Exodus

Premium Member

to Exodus
I like it. I will buy/play this for sure

TRU
join:2005-07-21
Michigan

TRU to Exodus

Member

to Exodus
Looks interesting. Can't wait to give it a try! And I will if it's F2P. If it's not then I probably wouldn't pay for it. Atleast not right away, maybe when it drops in price after a few months pass.

I won't hold my breath for that to happen though since Blizzard is, by far, the stingiest company when it comes to pricing their games and lowering said price over time. Hell, I think their still selling Diablo 3 for over $30 after all this time. The game has been out for a couple years yet they still price it like it just came out yesterday. Same with their other games.

Exodus
Your Daddy
Premium Member
join:2001-11-26
Earth

2 recommendations

Exodus

Premium Member

Sorry, I'm sick of freemium games. I want to pay for the game and get all the content.

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious to Adalicia

Premium Member

to Adalicia
I wanted to add that I'm not dismissing the game purely on its art style. I'm not dismissing it at all.

I'm just not starting the Savioud hype machine up like I have with, uh, other games.

Cat5
join:2013-04-26

Cat5 to Krisnatharok

Member

to Krisnatharok
said by Krisnatharok:

Apparently you completely missed the point of my rebuttal. If polish an low-end machines playing your game is what they are depending on for market share, there are other games there already.

Kind of like how Heroes of the Storm isn't really going to go anywhere.

Disagree.

Look at Hearthstone, in theory the game should not be anywhere near as succesfull as it is. For a start it's little more than a jumped up Facebook game playable on all manor of devices. Secondly, Magic: The Gathering has been doing digital card games well for years, yet Blizz came along with a bit of polish and trounced MTG, the Warcraft tie in probably helped too.

Likewise Heroes of the Storm is going to be huge as Blizz will make sure they tick all the right boxes, and again the Warcraft tie-in will help no end. It may not be quite as succesfull as League of Legends of DOTA2 to start with, but it will get players.

Exodus
Your Daddy
Premium Member
join:2001-11-26
Earth

1 recommendation

Exodus to Savious

Premium Member

to Savious
Good, maybe you'll play it for more than 3 days then.
said by Savious:

I'm just not starting the Savioud hype machine up like I have with, uh, other games.


ekster
Hi there
Premium Member
join:2010-07-16
Sainte-Anne-De-Bellevue, QC

1 recommendation

ekster

Premium Member

I give it a week, which will include a 10 page write up on starting the DSLR clan with mandatory appearance every 2 days and a plan to be professionally competing within 3 month after a hardcore training camp of 6 intensive weekends.

About the game, looks like a mash up between TF2 and some MOBA. The game can be fun I guess, if they do it completely free with skins only store like TF2/LOL.

If they try to sell like BF4, it will probably fail as I doubt that the majority of their target audience will be able to afford it. And if they go with freemium, it will probably be popular but I wouldn't touch it.

Goggalor
Psychonaut
Premium Member
join:2009-06-09
Your Mind!

Goggalor to Cat5

Premium Member

to Cat5
said by Cat5:

Look at Hearthstone, in theory the game should not be anywhere near as succesfull as it is. For a start it's little more than a jumped up Facebook game playable on all manor of devices. Secondly, Magic: The Gathering has been doing digital card games poorly for years, yet Blizz came along with a bit of polish and trounced MTG, the Warcraft tie in probably helped too.

Fixed that for you. It seems that with every new release of MTG that the interface just gets more finicky and just a general pain in the ass.

Exodus
Your Daddy
Premium Member
join:2001-11-26
Earth

Exodus

Premium Member

I would have loved to play MTG online, except that it's pretty expensive to get into and anything I found was a shit UI.

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious

Premium Member

I play Magic Online extensively. I have been since 2008.

First off, Hearthstone has not "blown MTG out of the water". I garuntee you the revenue that MTGO pulls in is 10 times that of Hearthstone. Im not talking about Duel's of the Planeswalker or whatever else, but the digital version of the exact card game.

Khans of Takir was just released, and they hold "Release Events" for a week after release. Since the reprinting of the Onslaught fetchlands, the set is very popular. The sealed queues for the release event are 16 players, and the cost of entry is about $25 per person. The queues were firing on average about once a minute during the first few days, then about every 5 minutes for the duraiton.

The UI in MTGO does leave a little to be desired; however, the latest release did make some improvements. Its certainly not in a good place, considering they are making money hand over fist on that program, but its manageable. Once you figure out the kinks and know the keyboard short cuts, its an excellent place to play competitive Magic. Any time I am getting ready for a big "paper" tournament (say the Grand Prix in Denver in January) I will play extensively online to test decks and get a feel for the meta game.

MTGO is the hivemind of Magic, anything that is going to happen in the paperworld will happen on MTGO first.

Exodus
Your Daddy
Premium Member
join:2001-11-26
Earth

Exodus

Premium Member

And the price of entry for new players?

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious to Cat5

Premium Member

to Cat5
said by Cat5:

said by Krisnatharok:

Apparently you completely missed the point of my rebuttal. If polish an low-end machines playing your game is what they are depending on for market share, there are other games there already.

Kind of like how Heroes of the Storm isn't really going to go anywhere.

Secondly, Magic: The Gathering has been doing digital card games well for years, yet Blizz came along with a bit of polish and trounced MTG, the Warcraft tie in probably helped too.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Trounced? I know I already replied to this, but I am just baffled. What is your basis forthis outlandish statement.

Exodus
Your Daddy
Premium Member
join:2001-11-26
Earth

Exodus to ekster

Premium Member

to ekster
said by ekster:

I give it a week, which will include a 10 page write up on starting the DSLR clan with mandatory appearance every 2 days and a plan to be professionally competing within 3 month after a hardcore training camp of 6 intensive weekends.

I've been "organizing" groups of online players for years and it comes down to the ability to create an environment that makes people want to cancel their lives to come back and do it again.... not the Savious-military approach of demands and expectations. Unfortunately, the caliber of games over the past few years have not been captivating enough to keep people going for months or years. Games launch, get played extensively for a few days, or even weeks, and then get discarded.

It used to be WoW that held everyone together. Lately, the only games that kept people going for a while was League of Legends, Diablo 3, and Battlefield 4. Even those games have died down in participation but still keep a solid core of people.

I don't really see any games that are going to bring us back to the WoW heyday where people will show up night after night, for months or even years... until probalby Star Citizen. Because the game is from Blizzard, I think this game will at least keep people rolling for a few months, but the quality of the game will decide if Blizzard can figure out how to inject its crack-addiction into this game and keep people staying beyond the honeymoon phase.

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious to Exodus

Premium Member

to Exodus
Depends on what you want to do. If you want to play Vintage (Black Lotus), then its about one Krisnatharok PC.

If you play Standard (current cards), you can build a competitive mono-red deck for $15. Enter the two man queues (two dollars an entry) and win 1 pack (four dollars in value). There is also eight man queues that you can win 5-3-2-2 packs for first, second, third and fourth palce respectively.

There are scheluded events with higher payouts (32 packs). These are just constructed events. You also have drafts (similar to the gauntlet of HS) sealed deck (open 6 packs, build a deck out of the cards you open), cube (a phantom draft, you dont get to keep the cards but they are cheap, and you get to play with some of the most powerful cards ever printed) and more. They even had a Vintage Masters draft recently that was a little more expensive than normal drafts, but you could open Black Lotus and friends.

Adalicia
Om Nom Nom
join:2009-10-13
Lincoln, NE

Adalicia to Savious

Member

to Savious
Well, supposedly over 20 million people have played it, there is a healthy tournament scene, lots of people streaming and doing YouTube videos for it, etc.

I think they're very different games and don't really directly compete with one another, but Hearthstone has been exceptionally successful for Blizzard.

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious to Exodus

Premium Member

to Exodus
said by Exodus:

said by ekster:

I give it a week, which will include a 10 page write up on starting the DSLR clan with mandatory appearance every 2 days and a plan to be professionally competing within 3 month after a hardcore training camp of 6 intensive weekends.

I've been "organizing" groups of online players for years and it comes down to the ability to create an environment that makes people want to cancel their lives to come back and do it again.... not the Savious-military approach of demands and expectations. Unfortunately, the caliber of games over the past few years have not been captivating enough to keep people going for months or years. Games launch, get played extensively for a few days, or even weeks, and then get discarded.

It used to be WoW that held everyone together. Lately, the only games that kept people going for a while was League of Legends, Diablo 3, and Battlefield 4. Even those games have died down in participation but still keep a solid core of people.

I don't really see any games that are going to bring us back to the WoW heyday where people will show up night after night, for months or even years... until probalby Star Citizen. Because the game is from Blizzard, I think this game will at least keep people rolling for a few months, but the quality of the game will decide if Blizzard can figure out how to inject its crack-addiction into this game and keep people staying beyond the honeymoon phase.

ATTENDANCE IS MANDATORY. But not really
Savious

Savious to Adalicia

Premium Member

to Adalicia
said by Adalicia:

Well, supposedly over 20 million people have played it, there is a healthy tournament scene, lots of people streaming and doing YouTube videos for it, etc.

I think they're very different games and don't really directly compete with one another, but Hearthstone has been exceptionally successful for Blizzard.

Over 20 million have played it. But have they paid for anything? Its a free to play game, tied in with the Bnet launcher. I played it, for about 4 days. Star Wars LCG has a health tournament scene, so does Pokemon. That doesn't mean they hold a candle to MTG.

Cat5
join:2013-04-26

Cat5 to Savious

Member

to Savious
said by Savious:

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Trounced? I know I already replied to this, but I am just baffled. What is your basis forthis outlandish statement.

I'm not going to be able to link as am at work and the sites are blocked but there is an article that Hearthstone has 20 million players released end of September time.

All reports on MTG show them losing players and revenue dropping 30-40%. the only player numbers I can find is from 2007 when it was 300k. I highly doubt they got 19.7m new players in 7 years when they also lost revenue.

Exodus
Your Daddy
Premium Member
join:2001-11-26
Earth

Exodus

Premium Member

Maybe MTGO should adopt more free to play options instead of forcing people to pay every time they take a shit.

Adalicia
Om Nom Nom
join:2009-10-13
Lincoln, NE

Adalicia to Savious

Member

to Savious
Dunno, that would be a question for Blizzard. I would assume that saying...what, 5-10% of the player base has paid for something in the game. Just say a $5 purchase. So $5-10 million?

I mean, I don't know, you can throw out numbers but without anything from Blizzard we can't say. I don't think saying 5% of the player base paying for something, some more, some less, is a stretch. I wouldn't be surprised if it was higher.

But like I said, I don't think they directly compete. Nor do they with PokeMon, YuGi-Oh, The Star Wars TCG, or what ever else you want to toss out. Hearthstone is super easy to learn, super easy to get into, and requires little to no effort on the part of the player to try. There is no barrier to entry. It is a simple and casual game. It is a CCG, yes, but that is about where I would say their similarities as games ends.

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious to Exodus

Premium Member

to Exodus
You can play for free all you want. The options I was discussing were just the competitive poriton.

cheesyyellow
join:2009-06-04
Poulsbo, WA

cheesyyellow to Exodus

Member

to Exodus
Funny how this turned from a game announcement thread, to a MTG vs. Hearthstone thread. With lot's of fluff in between.

Blizzard has never been innovative from a new ideas standpoint, but what they have done well is take proven formulas and make them better.

Blizzard didn't invent the RTS, but they created both the Warcraft and Starcraft franchises that are immensly popular because they appeal to a mass audience.

Blizzard didn't invent the action RPG, but they created the Diablo franchise that is immensly popular because it appeals to a mass audience.

Blizzard didn't invent the MMO, but they created the WoW franchise that is immensly popular because it appeals to a mass audience.

Blizzard didn't invent the CCG, but they created Hearthst...you know where I'm going with this.

Over the last 15 or so years Blizzard has taken game genres that appealed to a niche audience and simplified/improved them to make them appeal to a mass audience and they've been hugely successful at it. Now they're delving into the FPS market for the first time and I'm interested to see what they can do to improve upon it. Personally I'm not really holding my breath as most of the genres they jumped into were in their infancy when they got their hands in the pot. FPS's have been around a long time and I really don't see what there is to improve on other than small tweeks to what is already in place with other games such as Battlefield, CoD, and Planetside (mmo elements).

I'm not a big fan of the cartoony look of the game, but I said the same thing about WoW. 8 years and thousands of hours later I finally quit (yes, I recently reactivated to play with my kids, but that is a whole other subject).

I'll hold judgement until Beta.

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious

Premium Member

Command and Conquer for sure. I can't think of a previous ARPG though?

Adalicia
Om Nom Nom
join:2009-10-13
Lincoln, NE

Adalicia

Member

said by Savious:

Command and Conquer for sure.

Warcraft: Humans & Orcs came out before C&C by about a year. Westwood Studio beat Blizzard by about a year and a half with Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty. Though you could argue that there were even earlier games that were ALMOST what we consider an RTS to be today Dune II was really the first "modern" RTS and prototype for all those to come.

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious

Premium Member

Ah. I knew I was in the right neighborhood with CnC.

Krisnatharok
PC Builder, Gamer
Premium Member
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit

Krisnatharok to Adalicia

Premium Member

to Adalicia
Talking about earlier strategy games got me reminiscing: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St ··· Conquest

Anyone play that?

Savious
Premium Member
join:2012-03-05
Billings, MT

Savious

Premium Member

No, but I did read all about the history of ARPGs. Some of that shit goes back to the 80s. And here I thought the world started with Diablo.

Adalicia
Om Nom Nom
join:2009-10-13
Lincoln, NE

Adalicia

Member

Oh not at all. By definition, Action Role Playing Game, you can talk about like Hydlide (which is a terrible fucking game) and the original Legend of Zelda which are a decade or more older than Diablo, and technically speaking there were games that came before both of them.

I do think Diablo kind of set the new standard for a loot based hack and slash action RPGs though, and obviously there was a lot more in the way of customization in stuff like your character and stats.

Blizzard isn't really old enough to be the first company to do anything, but the things they do decide to do usually end up being quality products. They aren't for everyone but their body of work speaks for itself. How well they'll do with Overwatch is up in the air, but I don't think it is really a stretch to just assume it will be another solid product.