[QUOTE=BananaMed;51742562]I like how you suddenly threw in there games that are totally different from TF2 or Overwatch.
I don't even know what your point about TF2 is.
It's obvious Team Fortress has choke points.
The difference is it has a lot of alternate routes to capture points that are open to every character.
I have almost never found myself without any option to progress further into the map, there was always a corridor or a tunnel I could proceed into to avoid most of the combat.
Another big deal about Team Fortress is not having any obvious impenetrable points near control points, which you cannot take unless you have a significantly better team. Even if the odds are stacked against you heavily in TF2, an individual with sufficient skill can turn the tide of the game, like a good spy killing an enginner and sapping all his stuff, or a a soldier that knows how to use corners to take out a sentry nest. How a spy can trick an enemy medic to pop his uber, I can go on, and on.
You just don't see things comparable to this in overwatch.[/QUOTE]
Except Dustbowl.
Oh yeah and Overwatch is a different type of game from TF2, just like all the rest I listed. Overwatch is the most similar but it's still inherently different from a design perspective.
[QUOTE=GentlemanLexi;51742368]did you forget the heavy existed[/QUOTE]
Soldier can down Heavy in 3 shots.
Pharah will take about 6 direct hits to down roadhog, assuming he's just standing there doing nothing.
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51742414]That does make TF2 a better game though?
Choke points make the game really frustrating, and the most importantly unfair.
Even first stage of Gold Rush in TF2 which is pretty infamous for the the last part of stage 1 is much more open than a lot of maps on OW.
Compare it to for example to King's Row where it's one small room with the last CP just outside the spawn room, same with Hanamura.[/QUOTE]
There is nothing wrong with choke points. However Overwatch's choke points are obnoxious.
Theres just a different design philosophy behind TF2 and Overwatch's maps
This is my favorite tf2 map:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/brfr1IA.png[/img]
3 Routes with very different locations. Any mode in tf2 does this.
Even 2cp Dustbowl. Theres a long tunnel that goes right to last for offense that defense has to check
Theres multiple lanes and a ditch that you can run
The most important part of this example is, any class in tf2 can take any of these routes at any time.
As opposed to Overwatch, which does this:
[t]http://i.imgur.com/OgWK3Zq.jpg[/t]
These are your only two options, and they lead to the same general, only 3 or 4 feet to the left.
And only select classes can even use the tiny ass window, which is why Reinhardt is so mandatory. You're all going to have go through that door at some point.
And this isn't cherry picking. This exact same choke is located on:
Volskya Industries First
Eichenwalde First
Watchpoint: Gibraltar Second
Hollywood first. (albeit the other "route" is usable by all classes)
I am probably forgetting some in its entirety.
The only map I haven't seen this choke used on is the Koth maps.
[QUOTE=Destroyox;51742597][b]Except Dustbowl.[/b]
Oh yeah and Overwatch is a different type of game from TF2, just like all the rest I listed. Overwatch is the most similar but it's still inherently different from a design perspective.[/QUOTE]
Your point being?
Other than that, It's a hero based first person shooter, with distinct weapons and stats.
It even has the same game modes. The only, and biggest difference between the two is the fact that OW has hero abilities that are not passive and (for now) has weapons you HAVE to use when playing a character.
The comparison is fair, and should be expected. There is a reason why it is so oftenly compared to Team Fortress.
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51742686]Your point being?
Other than that, It's a hero based first person shooter, with distinct weapons and stats.
It even has the same game modes. The only, and biggest difference between the two is the fact that OW has hero abilities that are not passive and (for now) has weapons you HAVE to use when playing a character.
The comparison is fair, and should be expected. There is a reason why it is so oftenly compared to Team Fortress.[/QUOTE]
the similarities start getting stretched pretty far when you start comparing them the way you are though.
They weren't designed with the same end goals in mind.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51742639]wall-o-text[/QUOTE]
I agree with you completely, I explained my opinion a bit further in my next post, WHY is in my opinion Team Fortress better in that regard.
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51742686]Your point being?
Other than that, It's a hero based first person shooter, with distinct weapons and stats.
It even has the same game modes. The only, and biggest difference between the two is the fact that OW has hero abilities that are not passive and (for now) has weapons you HAVE to use when playing a character.
The comparison is fair, and should be expected. There is a reason why it is so oftenly compared to Team Fortress.[/QUOTE]
Call of Duty and Halo are both arena shooters. They both have hitscan guns, grenades, jumping, camping, the same game modes, and melee. Only difference is CoD has its power weapons unlock with killstreaks.
See how disingenuous that kind of comparison is? Games can be similar in a lot of ways but have different gameplay as a whole. You can Compare OW and TF2 but you can't say 1 is objectively better than the other due to preferences.
So I watched the video and identify with a lot of what he said being why I personally couldn't find the game as fun in the long term as I wanted it to be. Namely the breakdown of resources vs cooldowns and just how many ultimate abilities can be boiled down to "hit Q to do big damage when lots of enemies gathered together". I was thinking the whole time that a lot of what he says explained why one of the few characters I enjoy playing is Soldier 76 and lo and behold it's his favorite character.
[QUOTE=Destroyox;51742730]Call of Duty and Halo are both arena shooters. They both have hitscan guns, grenades, jumping, camping, the same game modes, and melee. Only difference is CoD has its power weapons unlock with killstreaks.
See how disingenuous that kind of comparison is? Games can be similar in a lot of ways but have different gameplay as a whole. You can Compare OW and TF2 but you can't say 1 is objectively better than the other due to preferences.[/QUOTE]
Let's start with the Arena Shooter term. It's pretty unclear how you interpret Arena Shooters, however I have never seen in my life someone say that CoD or Halo are arena shooters. I would consider Quake and Unreal (Tournament) to be Arena Shooters, amongst others.
I'd also go as far as saying that granades are not a thing in arena shooters except for granade launchers, melee is non-existant except for something like the saw in Quake.
How is it disengenious to campare them if, except fot one of the games having active abilities, has almost everything in common? The game has almost everything TF2 has going for it, except for the abilities, why is it suddenly incomarable. Even the game modes are almost 1:1 the same.
TF2:
Team Deathmatch
Payload
CTF
Arena
CP
Domination
Overwatch:
Payload
CTF
Domination
Arena(3vs3)
The one gametype where people switch hero after death
CP
Why is it that one aspect of the game suddenly makes the game incomparable?
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51742864]Why is it that one aspect of the game suddenly makes the game incomparable?[/QUOTE]
It's not just one aspect though. It is multiple. Not just cooldowns, not just map design, not just heroes who have 1 skillset that can't be changed. It's all these minor differences as a whole that Overwatch different from TF2. You seem to be a fan of oldschool arena shooters especially since you say Quake and Unreal (Tournament) are the only Arena Shooters and Halo/CoD aren't. Don't really see what's different at the absolute most basic terms, they have very similar modes and it's about people shooting eachother inside of a small unchanging arena.
See I'm not trying to "insult" Quake or UT but given your choice of labeling, Quake and UT are as comparable to Halo and CoD as OW and TF2!
Also the creator of the video sure is a swell guy.
[T]http://i.imgur.com/jxMCZwf.jpg[/T]
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51742864]Let's start with the Arena Shooter term. It's pretty unclear how you interpret Arena Shooters, however I have never seen in my life someone say that CoD or Halo are arena shooters. I would consider Quake and Unreal (Tournament) to be Arena Shooters, amongst others.
I'd also go as far as saying that granades are not a thing in arena shooters except for granade launchers, melee is non-existant except for something like the saw in Quake.
How is it disengenious to campare them if, except fot one of the games having active abilities, has almost everything in common? The game has almost everything TF2 has going for it, except for the abilities, why is it suddenly incomarable. Even the game modes are almost 1:1 the same.
TF2:
Team Deathmatch
Payload
CTF
Arena
CP
Domination
Overwatch:
Payload
CTF
Domination
Arena(3vs3)
The one gametype where people switch hero after death
CP
Why is it that one aspect of the game suddenly makes the game incomparable?[/QUOTE]
So, as far as I can tell based on your arguments, evolution of the genre is bad, and what was once the "pinnacle" is still the "pinnacle"
Overwatch and TF2 are completely different games, period. The core gameplay is just completely different. If you can't see that, you're lacking experience with one of the games. They don't play anything alike.
[QUOTE=Destroyox;51742933]It's not just one aspect though. It is multiple. Not just cooldowns, not just map design, not just heroes who have 1 skillset that can't be changed. [b]It's all these minor differences as a whole that Overwatch different from TF2.[/b]
[/QUOTE]
Care to provide some of those "minor" differences you are talking about?
Also, why do you keep rating my posts xDumb when I'm honestly trying to have a conversation you?
So far it's YOU who seems to be insulted because I am criticizing Overwatch.
And you seem to get it wrong, Halo and CoD are comparable, just like UT to Quake, and OW to TF2, but not interchangeably between eachother.
[editline]29th January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51742950]So, as far as I can tell based on your arguments, evolution of the genre is bad, and what was once the "pinnacle" is still the "pinnacle"[/QUOTE]
OR maybe I think that those two games are similar, and deserve to be compared upon similar criteria?
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51743000]Care to provide some of those "minor" differences you are talking about?
Also, why do you keep rating my posts xDumb when I'm honestly trying to have a conversation you?
So far it's YOU who seems to be insulted because I am criticizing Overwatch.
And you seem to get it wrong, Halo and CoD are comparable, just like UT to Quake, and OW to TF2, but not interchangeably between eachother.
[editline]29th January 2017[/editline]
OR maybe I think that those two games are similar, and deserve to be compared upon similar criteria?[/QUOTE]
Halo and CoD have rather little to do with each other, either. UT and Quake are by far the most similar games here.
[QUOTE=elowin;51743020]Halo and CoD have rather little to do with each other, either. UT and Quake are by far the most similar games here.[/QUOTE]
Those games are very much comparable, and you can set a very defined set of common characteristics.
Why is it suddently that games have to be almost identical to compare them to eachother?
Do Disiciples not deserve being compared to Heroes series? Should Age of Wonders III not be compared to Endless Legend? Are Forza games not comparable to Need For Speed?
How do you decide when it is appropriate to consider games similar?
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51743000]Care to provide some of those "minor" differences you are talking about?[/QUOTE]
I did in the post you quoted
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51743000]
Also, why do you keep rating my posts xDumb when I'm honestly trying to have a conversation you?[/QUOTE]
Clicking the box button gives me euphoria. Also you keep getting caught in the cycle of labeling when that's not what I want to talk about.
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51743000]So far it's YOU who seems to be insulted because I am criticizing Overwatch.[/QUOTE]
Nah, I think Overwatch is a fun shooter but it's absolute dogshit if you want to play it in a competitive pro manner.
[editline]28th January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51743058]How do you decide when it is appropriate to consider games similar?[/QUOTE]
Overwatch and TF2 are similar. Hell Overwatch devs basically admitted this. It's just they aren't the same type of game, many differences.
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51743000]Care to provide some of those "minor" differences you are talking about?
Also, why do you keep rating my posts xDumb when I'm honestly trying to have a conversation you?
So far it's YOU who seems to be insulted because I am criticizing Overwatch.
And you seem to get it wrong, Halo and CoD are comparable, just like UT to Quake, and OW to TF2, but not interchangeably between eachother.
[editline]29th January 2017[/editline]
OR maybe I think that those two games are similar, and deserve to be compared upon similar criteria?[/QUOTE]
They aren't that similar though, their end goals differ massively.
Sure, they exist in the shooter genre, and thus can be compared to one another. But that's a fairly surface level examination of the games.
I ultimately don't think they're that close in genre, and goals that they can be compared. The goal of a shooter like Overwatch is a fast paced, team oriented, character driven shooter. TF2, if you were to write a "Log line" for it, would fall under the exact same set of terms. But they differ massively even under that due to their end goals differing. Overwatch doesn't want ammo to be a part of the game, it doesn't want ammo packs or ammo concerns at large to be an issue. Through it's use of cooldowns over ammo, it ultimately makes a design decision that separates them quite a bit further. Yes, you can compare them, but they're not aiming for the same thing. Putting that into words is a bit tricky, but there's little shared by the design of the 9 classes of TF2, and their ultimate goals for how they effect gameplay, and the roster of heros OW is running with.
I enjoyed overwatch for what it was, and I never really liked TF2 to be honest, it wasn't a fun game to get into late, and it felt like it's gameplay lacked a hook for me. OW had a good hook for me, but I'm over it now.
I just don't see the two as ultimately similar, comparable but not similar.
I'm glad to see innovation, and new things being tried in games like OW and the like. The shooters of old, the UT's, Quakes, Tribes, they're coming back in many ways, but they're coming back different because evolution in the genre has happened, and quite frankly, fuck yeah, because much of what those old shooters focus on feels dated now.
[QUOTE=Destroyox;51743068]I did in the post you quoted
[/quote]
I do not consider active, cooldown based abilities, and map design "minor".
[quote]
Overwatch and TF2 are similar. Hell Overwatch devs basically admitted this. It's just they aren't the same type of game. Many differences.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51743077]They aren't that similar though, their end goals differ massively.
Sure, they exist in the shooter genre, and thus can be compared to one another. But that's a fairly surface level examination of the games.
[/quote]
I am having massively conflicting messages here.
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51743128]I do not consider active, cooldown based abilities, and map design "minor".
I am having massively conflicting messages here.[/QUOTE]
I'm consistent with my message. Also me and HumanAbyss aren't collaborating or anything. There's tons of minor (in comparison to like Quake and ARMA levels of difference) differences between the 2 games.
[QUOTE=BananaMed;51743128]I do not consider active, cooldown based abilities, and map design "minor".
I am having massively conflicting messages here.[/QUOTE]
Similar and comparable are not synonyms
[editline]28th January 2017[/editline]
Games can be comparable, and not be similar
[QUOTE=Oizen;51740822]He's probably aware that Tf2's matchmaking is utter garbage.
I have 3500 hours in tf2 and I fucking suck at it, if I go to a DM/MGE server I get destroyed.
But anyone with a brain can pubstomp in tf2.
Meanwhile Overwatch has such an insanely low skill ceiling that someone who just installed the game 3 days could easily be playing at Master/Grand Master level.[/QUOTE]
He even says in the video straight out that TF2 has horrible matchmaking.
[QUOTE=RoboChimp;51739882]I prefer TF2, I need cloaking + backstab and uber charge to guarantee a win. Overwatch gives me a migraine because you move so slowly and there's too much colour going on, it feels like you have no control.
I'll stick to TF2 thanks.[/QUOTE]
You phrased this terribly but at the same time you're right.
[QUOTE=Rusty100;51738456]tf2 is such a better game it's ridiculous. you can actually outskill somebody 1 on 1, instead of the clusterfuck going on in overwatch that is the least personal pvp i've played to date. everyone's focusing on too much at any given time that you'll constantly be killing people who didn't even know you where there or vice versa[/QUOTE]
You don't know much about Overwatch if you don't think you can outskill people in it.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51743581]Similar and comparable are not synonyms
[editline]28th January 2017[/editline]
Games can be comparable, and not be similar[/QUOTE]
Now you are just arguing semantics.
Bottom line is,the games are comprable and because of that you WILL see people comparing them.
They always had and will be.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51742639]-chokepoint post-[/QUOTE]
Mei, from my experience, specializes in dealing with this kind of situation with the Ice Wall than Reinhardt. Depends where you place it thou.
[QUOTE=TreasoN.avi;51744225]You don't know much about Overwatch if you don't think you can outskill people in it.[/QUOTE]
You can outskill in Overwatch, but it isn't as "impressive" as it would be in TF2. A Medic(weakest offense capabilities) winning against a Scout(strongest 1v1 kit) is a more impressive feat than baiting out an ability, as encounters with certain heroes will most of the time be pretty much the same.
For example, a Roadhog will most likely instigate the fight with a hook combo. If you don't die to it, you'll be locked in a skirmish with him while you're low on health and he's able to replenish 300 points of his own if things go awry. Chances are that his hook is going to be off cooldown during your scuffle and now you're dead.
I don't care who you are, but regardless of the hero you're playing as, your tactics will be very transparent as your kit doesn't allow for other types of playstyles except for the one the designers tailored for your character. Sure, you can use your skill to make better use of your abilities like seeing through a player trying to bait your ability, or juking them out with a counter bait.
The encounters really just are about who uses their abilities successfully first, aside from a very few match-ups. The only thing Overwatch indeed does better is that you'll know exactly what a hero can do because of the abscense of unlockables and loadouts.
[QUOTE=Fancy Godgineer;51745289]You can outskill in Overwatch, but it isn't as "impressive" as it would be in TF2. A Medic(weakest offense capabilities) winning against a Scout(strongest 1v1 kit) is a more impressive feat than baiting out an ability, as encounters with certain heroes will most of the time be pretty much the same.[/QUOTE]
What are you talking about? Killing a Winston as a Mercy for example is just as satisfying.
[QUOTE=NoOneKnowsMe;51745593]What are you talking about, killing a Winston as a Mercy for example is just as satisfying.[/QUOTE]
Killing a full hp Roadhog as Lucio without pushing him off the edge is even better. :v:
[QUOTE=TreasoN.avi;51744225]You don't know much about Overwatch if you don't think you can outskill people in it.[/QUOTE]
If outskill simply meant out aim, then yes thats true.
Anything else. No not really.
Most out skilling I see is someone pressing Q to guarantee they win a fight.
I honestly don't understand how this is an esport sometimes.
I prefer TF2's system for rocket jumping where you have to use a button combination (along with using your mouse) instead of pressing one button like in Overwatch
Also, because rocket jumping doesn't really have a cooldown other than losing ammo you can rocket jump to mid really quickly, which is called a rollout and you can look it up for more information (soldiers and demomen do rollouts in competitive)
I also like that you can have 2 of the same class on a team having different roles and loadouts (for example the roamer soldier usually has the gunboats which minimizes damage from rocket jumping, and the pocket soldier has a shotgun instead of gunboats)
It provides more variety to a character, because you can take on different roles in the team while still having the core concepts of the class at play.
I think that TF2 is a better competitive game, and Overwatch is a good casual game.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51745654]If outskill simply meant out aim, then yes thats true.
Anything else. No not really.
Most out skilling I see is someone pressing Q to guarantee they win a fight.
I honestly don't understand how this is an esport sometimes.[/QUOTE]
But there's a layer of strategy in deciding to use your Q, it's a resource. Spending it on a 1v1 is probably a waste.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.