Sets the bar huh? cough TF2 cough
[editline]edit[/editline]
Or at the very least it [I]used[/I] to be like that in regards to TF2, though I hear a large update is in the works, so it might very well be again.
119 updates and the maps are still shit
It's setting a bar alright, but not a high one.
About every popular multiplayer game in the last 5 years has events and content added post release but good on blizzard
Half of those were Roadhog nerfs btw
[QUOTE=gk99;52468885]119 updates and the maps are still shit[/QUOTE]
hey this is antimuffin's shtick
[QUOTE=Swiket;52468912]hey this is antimuffin's shtick[/QUOTE]
Then he's got a good one. Unless their mapping tools are somehow worse than Hammer Editor then adding new pathways should be [i]fucking easy[/i] and yet they still haven't made any.
What about any remotely successful MOBA? League, Dota, etc? I know Overwatch isn't one, but its current development and intended lifecycle and cosmetic system are more or less identical, so it should be compared against those kinds of games.
Overwatch's post-launch support has been awful overall. 119 patches within 1 year is actually quite bad considering they needed 100+ patches and updates and changes to the game. Proves it's incredibly inconsistent.
[QUOTE=redBadger;52468967]Overwatch's post-launch support has been awful overall. 119 patches within 1 year is actually quite bad considering they needed 100+ patches and updates and changes to the game. Proves it's incredibly inconsistent.[/QUOTE]
This seems kinda contradictory, first you say support is awful, but then you say they've patched it too much?
In a competitive game like OW with an evolving meta, new characters and maps constant streams of updates are totally par for the course and its objectively wrong to consider that a weakness. No game is every perfectly balanced, especially one as malleable as OW (and other games in this area).
"The game is bad because it needed more than X patches in a year" is a really strange way to look at modern game development and competitive games.
Honestly, the game has changed far too much. I was a Roadhog main and I usually played once a month, but even then characters we're being modified so constantly and randomly that is was impossible to keep up. Changing things like damage values is drastically different from how much Blizzard has modified the core proponents of multiple characters. It makes me feel like all the time I spend learning things is wasted, and it also means that bad patches happen often enough to really interfere with my enjoyment.
Why should we applaud blizzard for doing their fucking job?
[QUOTE=DinoJesus;52469030]Why should we applaud blizzard for doing their fucking job?[/QUOTE]
Because it's Blizzard, [I]they do nothing wrong[/I]
Sets the bar? I dunno... Postal 2 got another update 12 YEARS after it's original launch along with new content.
THIS is setting the bar: [url]http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-07-11-half-life-has-a-new-patch-19-years-after-release[/url]
I don't know, for a game that makes mad cash, it shouldn't come as a surprise.
Then again it's just an article to fill the Overwatch quota, so
What the fuck is the point of this article. This is completely fucking normal for Blizzard, look at WoW for instance. :v:
Are they all content updates or does that also count every tiny hotfix and emergency nerf/buff? Because in that case Paladins already has over 125 patches, almost half of them being content updates. ([url]https://paladins.gamepedia.com/Patch_notes[/url]) And then you have other games like TF2 being supported for almost a decade.
And I know someone already said this but: What is there to celebrate about a game requiring so many hotfixes to run (and still having lots of unaddressed issues from over a year ago)?
[QUOTE=Malvodion;52469293]Are they all content updates or does that also count every tiny hotfix and emergency nerf/buff? Because in that case Paladins already has over 125 patches, almost half of them being content updates. ([URL]https://paladins.gamepedia.com/Patch_notes[/URL]) And then you have other games like TF2 being supported for almost a decade.
And I know someone already said this but: What is there to celebrate about a game requiring so many hotfixes to run (and still having lots of unaddressed issues from over a year ago)?[/QUOTE]
To be fair, that's 125 patches since Mid Nov 2015 compared to 119 patches over 1 year.
But, [I]once again[/I], number of patches means nothing if the content in the patches is mediocre/fixes nothing. Paladins has had better content/balance updates than OW has, IMO.
119 updates but they keep trickling in new maps, modes, and characters instead of adding all 3 in one patch. That's what's killed my interest in the game really.
[QUOTE=DrogenViech;52469179]THIS is setting the bar: [url]http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-07-11-half-life-has-a-new-patch-19-years-after-release[/url][/QUOTE]
Sorry, but iD Software set the bar as high as it gets, Doom is getting community fed updates for just about everything from entire new games to simple fixes, every day.
[editline]14th July 2017[/editline]
Release HL1 source or bust
119 patches and somehow the balance is more fucked than at release.
:goodjob:
With a massive dearth of game modes and content and a nigh fucked balance model, Overwatch sets the bar for how NOT to support a game aftermarket, eclipsed only by the utter clusterfuck that is Mass Effect: Andromeda.
[QUOTE=Damjen;52469707]119 patches and somehow the balance is more fucked than at release.
:goodjob:[/QUOTE]
Ah yes, remember release, where 2xWinston, 2xTracer, and 2xLucio was common? Where McCree could delete every hero in seconds? Where Torbjörn was even worse, Symmetra was a joke and Zenyatta a 150hp waste?
The balance isn't perfect right now, but it definitely is better.
[QUOTE=NoOneKnowsMe;52470758]Ah yes, remember release, where 2xWinston, 2xTracer, and 2xLucio was common? Where McCree could delete every hero in seconds? Where Torbjörn was even worse, Symmetra was a joke and Zenyatta a 150hp waste?
The balance isn't perfect right now, but it definitely is better.[/QUOTE]
I want to agree, but at the same time it seems Blizzard's balancing isn't very thought out that well and feels kinda patchwork-y. To me Blizzard is focused on fixing short-term problems like player complaints instead of fixing what's wrong with the game as a whole. The original playstyle of every hero is changing because of their balancing.
Do they decide who to nerf/buff solely because of pickrate or something? Almost every single balance update seems to have massive, unintentional consequences for the meta.
And here is me thinking payday 2 had the most updates for a game.
Whoever changed the title, you're the best.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
