Overwatch

Zaphid

Zaphid

Trakanon Raider
5,862
294
Needless_sl said:
Their low tick rate makes a lot of weird ass deaths make sense now, my god why would they make it so low lol

Odd how there is 6 of these same god damn games coming out at once yet they didn't bother trying 9 years ago when TF2 came out?
Click to expand...
Well, MOBAs were done to death and F2P shooter is the industry's favorite way of reusing leftovers from failed projects. There have been a few games trying to cash in on TF2's success, but most of them failed horribly.

Battlefield Heroes ? Defiance ? Loadout ? Blacklight:Retribution ? Monday Night Combat ?

Some maybe even broke even, but none could be considered a lasting success. I'm more interested in what the next big thing is going to be. If anybody wanted a piece of Hearthstone's pie, they would release it already since it's not exactly hard to make.
 
Amzin

Amzin

Lord Nagafen Raider
2,917
361
Zaphid_sl said:
Well, MOBAs were done to death and F2P shooter is the industry's favorite way of reusing leftovers from failed projects. There have been a few games trying to cash in on TF2's success, but most of them failed horribly.

Battlefield Heroes ? Defiance ? Loadout ? Blacklight:Retribution ? Monday Night Combat ?

Some maybe even broke even, but none could be considered a lasting success. I'm more interested in what the next big thing is going to be. If anybody wanted a piece of Hearthstone's pie, they would release it already since it's not exactly hard to make.
Click to expand...
I had a lot of fun with Blacklight: Retribution but it certainly never made me feel like it was competing with TF2. Felt like a F2P CoD if anything, and when I was still in college, that was great :p I actually still have some great gameplay memories from it. I guess it stands to reason other people do for those other games too but don't think I ever touched any of them (except Loadout for 30 minutes)
 
Bondurant

Bondurant

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
3,837
4,786
LbQziJr.jpg
 
T

Tenks

Bronze Knight of the Realm
14,163
606
Just because they made the choice doesn't mean they can't reverse it. Blizzard has been exceptionally transparent and focused on community collaboration these days. If enough people say they want a higher tick rate (which prior to 4 days ago absolutely no one even knew what that was) Blizzard may bend and do that.
 
Mist

Mist

Eeyore Enthusiast
<Gold Donor>
30,404
22,181
Tickrate explains some of those sniper killcams I see when I'm playing Tracer.
 
Rafterman

Rafterman

Molten Core Raider
740
684
Tenks_sl said:
Just because they made the choice doesn't mean they can't reverse it. Blizzard has been exceptionally transparent and focused on community collaboration these days. If enough people say they want a higher tick rate (which prior to 4 days ago absolutely no one even knew what that was) Blizzard may bend and do that.
Click to expand...
Considering they state it was a choice for the "sake of fairness" I highly doubt it ever gets changed. It's the same lame ass excuse they used for not allowing 21:9 resolution as well.
 
Zaphid

Zaphid

Trakanon Raider
5,862
294
It's about as much of an artistic choice as 30 fps is more cinematic experience. Parts of Titan showing through maybe ?
 
T

Tenks

Bronze Knight of the Realm
14,163
606
Zaphid_sl said:
It's about as much of an artistic choice as 30 fps is more cinematic experience. Parts of Titan showing through maybe ?
Click to expand...
Its hard to say how deep down in their netcode the problem lies. It may be something as simple as they decided upon this number because they thought people would want a more generous aiming latency. Possibly they're getting playtesting feedback that is telling them this latency isn't optimal and all they need to do is tweak a few config parameters and they can bump it up.
 
rad

rad

Lord of Guk
1,137
2,492
Mist_sl said:
Tickrate explains some of those sniper killcams I see when I'm playing Tracer.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's sure interesting. I understood the RNG in Hearthstone in relation to the casual aspect. But to state from the beginning that OW was intended to be a competitive FPS it's quite odd they went this direction. I've never looked up the development team, any indication if they have experience in developing within this genre?
 
Himeo

Himeo

Vyemm Raider
3,263
2,802
Derpa_sl said:
So people who have been playing a while, what do you think of this guys post?

Heroes balance. - Overwatch Forums

So far I haven't found bastion to be an issue.
Click to expand...
Scrub hasn't played enough to get good. The game balance as far as the heroes go is pretty nice right now. Some maps are kind of shitty (for my preferred heroes and playstyles), but there are counters for everything in this game.

l2p

My biggest complaint, and the reason why I'm going to stop playing until launch, is that the time between matches is 10-15 seconds too long. Sounds like a first world problem, but it destroys the flow of the game especially after playing for a few hours during a long gaming session. They give you enough time to get bored enough to do something else, check email, browse the web, but not enough time to do those things before hero selection is over and the next game is starting.

Sure, Icouldleave the queue, do what I want to do, and requeue to play another game. But I don't want to wait 3 minutes for a new group to play with.

b951785dbb7563363df831b4350bcfd31c21e2f7_full.jpg
 
Malkav

Malkav

French Madman
2,686
1,583
Rafterman_sl said:
Considering they state it was a choice for the "sake of fairness" I highly doubt it ever gets changed. It's the same lame ass excuse they used for not allowing 21:9 resolution as well.
Click to expand...
Wait what, they do not allow 21:9 at all because of some bullshit? It's not just an oversight where support can be added later? This is bullshit.
 
Pyros

Pyros

<Silver Donator>
11,058
2,262
Himeo_sl said:
My biggest complaint, and the reason why I'm going to stop playing until launch, is that the time between matches is 10-15 seconds too long. Sounds like a first world problem, but it destroys the flow of the game especially after playing for a few hours during a long gaming session. They give you enough time to get bored enough to do something else, check email, browse the web, but not enough time to do those things before hero selection is over and the next game is starting.

Sure, Icouldleave the queue, do what I want to do, and requeue to play another game. But I don't want to wait 3 minutes for a new group to play with.
Click to expand...
Yeah they should speed it up. It shouldn't take 30seconds before the next game starts at the end. Just make it so it starts the next game without kicking you from the stats screen if you want to check your stats. Meanwhile it starts the ingame shit right away. 15-20secs to pick heroes would be enough too, that cuts 10-15secs. Sadly I don't think it's viable to reduce the 1min time for defenders to setup, as that time is sorely needed if you play Torbjorn or Symmetra to get in position and build your shit. You could cut like 15secs maybe and be fine, but it'd be annoying and basically reduce the amount of sentries Symmetra can setup.
 
Needless

Needless

Toe Sucker
9,169
3,268
This game constantly cracks me up.

Enemy team is pushing the last point of the russian map, we stack 3 winstons to counter their pushes... they counter our counter winstons with 4 Dvas and it just turns into a ridiculous ape leaping, mecha exploding shitfest for at least 3 minutes straight in overtime lmao



^ seems like the slow start is to allow people to connect to the game n shit since theres constant disconnections after a round
 
Pyros

Pyros

<Silver Donator>
11,058
2,262
Thing is the countdown doesn't start until people are connected to replace leavers. After you have 2 full teams, it then starts a 30secs counter to pick heroes, then 1minute to start the game. If you add the 30secs at the end of the game, that's 2mins plus whatever time you need to find the leavers' replacements, which can take 1-2minutes on its own(and you can't even afk for that part for some reason cause you get kicked for inactivity even though the game isn't actually started yet).

Which then potentially leads to a 2-3minute stomp on certain maps because your team is a bunch of monkeys who pick stupid fucking shit they suck at, like fucking Hanzo, every game there's a Hanzo, and the amount of good Hanzo in the beta you can count on one hand. Obviously you also always get a Widow, and most of them also suck. Or because your team picks semi cheesy stuff like double healer triple tank and then just bumrush the cap points, and the enemy team can't defend, because surprise they have hanzo and widowmaker again so they get rolled by the actual monkeys(or well apes I guess).
 
Rafterman

Rafterman

Molten Core Raider
740
684
Malkav_sl said:
Wait what, they do not allow 21:9 at all because of some bullshit? It's not just an oversight where support can be added later? This is bullshit.
Click to expand...
Yes, they disallow it because of some bullshit idea of fairness, just like they do in HotS. I guess Blizzard developers live in caves where things like 120/144hz monitors, mechanical keyboards, and high DPI mice don't exist.
 
Malkav

Malkav

French Madman
2,686
1,583
Rafterman_sl said:
Yes, they disallow it because of some bullshit idea of fairness, just like they do in HotS. I guess Blizzard developers live in caves where things like 120/144hz monitors, mechanical keyboards, and high DPI mice don't exist.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's it. The whole thing is stupid, because at this point, where do you draw the line with limitations and system specs?

Some people will always have an advantage over other because of hardware. And as you say, I think high refresh rates monitors have a bigger and more widespread impact than the handful of people having 21:9 monitors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.