Anyone else think this game won't really take off in the MLG scene?

[Daedius]

League of Legends is pretty big as an e-sport, and Overwatch uses a similar style to that of Dota's abilties.

[Nyoken]

As powerful as any ulti might be, it takes a certain amount of skill knowing when to use them against really good players, cause you know if you don't time your shit right... you're gonna get shut down very quickly and get zero kills.

[NFA]

Waiting for that explanation/proof.

1. random ‎(comparative more random, superlative most random)

- Having unpredictable outcomes

A team can be winning for a whole game, then the enemy suddenly pulls off a ultimate combo and wins the game before the other side can respawn again. Do you still not understand? Because I'm not sure if I can make it any more clear for you.

[Jester Joe]

1. random ‎(comparative more random, superlative most random)

- Having unpredictable outcomes

A team can be winning for a whole game, then the enemy suddenly pulls off a ultimate combo and wins the game before the other side can respawn again. Do you still not understand? Because I'm not sure if I can make it any more clear for you.

Because that has never ever happened in a single game ever.

And that's not what randomness is still, in terms of a game. Would you say at the start of a game the winner is random, despite being unpredictable?

What you're proposing is basically saying "A game shouldn't have turnarounds, the winning team should win without losing".

[NFA]

Oh, so now you're going to walk it waaaaaaaaaaay back and pretend that by "random" you just meant "can't predict it".

Ok, buddy.

It's literally the definition of the word, are you legitimately dumb?

- - - Updated - - -

Because that has never ever happened in a single game ever.

And that's not what randomness is still, in terms of a game. Would you say at the start of a game the winner is random, despite being unpredictable?

What you're proposing is basically saying "A game shouldn't have turnarounds, the winning team should win without losing".

Are you serious? Kaplan even made a post about this saying how easy it was for a team to suddenly chain ultimates and win on the last point on certain maps despite the other side being "better". Due to map layout, respawn timers and so forth.

[Deleted]

Yeah, but attack/defense is always going to be lopsided one way or the other depending on the teams. (And at higher levels of play, attack is almost always super easy)

So having the entire match depend on attacking that one point seems a bit strange. It'd be like having overtime in a CS:GO game only consist of three rounds with one side only being T and one side only being CT. Of course one side or the other is going to be easier depending on the map/teams, which is why they alternate.

I feel your pain. They should make people play both attack and defense and then if both teams succeed in attacking, have them redo attack/defense again but with lower timers and whoever get's the furthest, the fastest, wins.

[Endus]

You're literally not making any point with what you're saying, whether or not its mathematically predictable is completely damn irrelevant to what I said earlier. Not a single player in the world will ever be able to predict each individual projectile and its movement anywhere on any map. And if you're still going to tell me they are then you might as well just drop it, or just go make a video showing us how you consistently hit every single arrow with your scatter shot since its so damn mathematically predictable.

You don't have to hit with every single projectile to use Scatter Shot.

Though I will say, more than a few times I've bounced a Scatter Shot off the ground to headshot an oncoming Reaper in one shot. So yeah; not impossible, by any means. Every time? Nah. My aim's not that good. But that's an issue with my performance, not that scatter shot is "random". My lack of control is not a failure of the game.

There is not one thing random in Overwatch, other than some factors of map selection.

[NFA]

So I guess what you're going to post next is "random" simply because I can't predict it.

In fact, THIS post is random because you didn't predict it.

Or maybe you've uprooted that goalpost and are furiously running a marathon with it because you've gone and goofed up.

Or maybe you're so extremely butthurt by realizing you had no point to begin with that you're desperately trying to make it sound like I said something I didn't?

"This is randomness"
"No its not randomness you don't know what the word means"
"Well here is the definition of the word which is exactly what I was talking about"
"no no no its not what it means you're wrong I'm right lalalalalala goalposts"

Jesus christ dude.

[Endus]

It's literally the definition of the word, are you legitimately dumb?

Yeah, no, it isn't. Particularly since Scatter Shot is predictable. You can't predict it on the fly. That's not the same thing.

Let's say we're playing a game where you have to guess the number I'm thinking of, between 1 and 100. I tell another buddy that I'm going to start at 3, and double every time you get it right. You not guessing my number does not mean it's not predictable, it means you can't predict it. My buddy who I told my algorithm to could predict my number every time. The issue is your lack of understanding, not that anything was actually random (it wasn't).

[NFA]

So wait, let me get this straight...

Both teams played the same game and one came out ahead by utilizing the tools given to them by the game and within the rules of the game, and your argument is, "Yeah, well, the losing team was better."

I mean, in a high variance game, yes that can happen. You CAN play better poker than your opponent but get outdrawn on, at least in a small sample size. But this isn't a game with that kind of variance, so you claim is nonsensical.

Except we're talking about whether the game can succeed in an MLG scene. And I don't think it can with how easy it is to wipe a team by getting a good ultimate chain and then claim the point before they can recover/respawn. League doesn't have that problem since if a team is winning the whole game they'll 9 times out of 10 survive a team wipe due to their gold and objective lead. No such thing in overwatch.

[Jester Joe]

Are you serious? Kaplan even made a post about this saying how easy it was for a team to suddenly chain ultimates and win on the last point on certain maps despite the other side being "better". Due to map layout, respawn timers and so forth.

Okay? Does that suddenly disprove that one clutch ultimate in Dota 2 can clean up the winning team and cause them to lose?

And before you say "Well that's not an FPS", the discussion isn't genre based, it's whether or not ultimates should be able to swing the balance of the game.

Kaplan stating that you can chain ultimates and win is, well, obvious. It's still not random, and it's STILL possible to outplay.

Basically, nothing you are saying disproves this game as being viable for "MLG".

[NFA]

Yeah, no, it isn't. Particularly since Scatter Shot is predictable. You can't predict it on the fly. That's not the same thing.

Let's say we're playing a game where you have to guess the number I'm thinking of, between 1 and 100. I tell another buddy that I'm going to start at 3, and double every time you get it right. You not guessing my number does not mean it's not predictable, it means you can't predict it. My buddy who I told my algorithm to could predict my number every time. The issue is your lack of understanding, not that anything was actually random (it wasn't).

Why are you still going on about scatter shot? And why are you denying the definition of the word? Go look it up in a dictionary, lol.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay? Does that suddenly disprove that one clutch ultimate in Dota 2 can clean up the winning team and cause them to lose?

And before you say "Well that's not an FPS", the discussion isn't genre based, it's whether or not ultimates should be able to swing the balance of the game.

Kaplan stating that you can chain ultimates and win is, well, obvious. It's still not random, and it's STILL possible to outplay.

Basically, nothing you are saying disproves this game as being viable for "MLG".

Refer to my earlier post comparing it to League, its too easy to chain them together and win against a superior team by getting better ultimates near the end of the game. I don't think that has any place in MLG tier play since it makes it rely less on consistent skill and more on just knowing when to have your team press Q at the same time. Which isn't really enjoyable to watch.

[Endus]

Are you serious? Kaplan even made a post about this saying how easy it was for a team to suddenly chain ultimates and win on the last point on certain maps despite the other side being "better". Due to map layout, respawn timers and so forth.

That wasn't even what he was saying. He was saying that a well-organized team can conduct a rush on both points so quickly that, if they get the first one, they can cap the second without giving the defense much time to challenge that first point's capture or regroup their defense on the second. That's an issue of timing, not that the game is "too easy" for attackers. They'll probably fix it by creating a closer A-point spawn for defenders, while that point's in their hands.

- - - Updated - - -

Why are you still going on about scatter shot? And why are you denying the definition of the word? Go look it up in a dictionary, lol.

Full Definition of random
1a : lacking a definite plan, purpose, or pattern
b : made, done, or chosen at random <read random passages from the book>

2a : relating to, having, or being elements or events with definite probability of occurrence <random processes>
b : being or relating to a set or to an element of a set each of whose elements has equal probability of occurrence <a random sample>; also : characterized by procedures designed to obtain such sets or elements <random sampling>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/random

Not so much. There's nothing random about Scatter Shot.

[NFA]

Meanwhile everyone STILL goes bonkers over the single Coldzera AWP round that by all accounts turned around a blowout in the Liquid/LG match, and no one whines that it was too easy to kill that many people and turn the game around.

No, they just say that it was a great play.

Yeah because it happened in a single match, its not a regular occurrence.

- - - Updated - - -

Not so much. There's nothing random about Scatter Shot.

And my initial post wasn't referring to scatter shot, you guys just decided to bring it up because you didn't understand why I used the word.

[Jester Joe]

Refer to my earlier post comparing it to League, its too easy to chain them together and win against a superior team by getting better ultimates near the end of the game. I don't think that has any place in MLG tier play since it makes it rely less on consistent skill and more on just knowing when to have your team press Q at the same time. Which isn't really enjoyable to watch.

It's too easy to in a public match setting. That is all they have to base it on right now, there is no competitive play, there hasn't been really big tournaments.

In an organized team, you're gonna have to try harder to pull off just dropping Qs on each other. And I highly doubt League never has any swings in team momentum, otherwise it would be extremely boring to watch a game that the losing team cannot come back from.

[Endus]

And my initial post wasn't referring to scatter shot, you guys just decided to bring it up because you didn't understand why I used the word.

This post?

Not a chance it will compete with the other big MLG games. It has way too much randomness factor and unpredictability. The reliance on ultimates to completely turn an otherwise uneven game is also bad for competitive play since it rewards bad players.

Again; there is nothing random about Overwatch, other than map selection. Weapons do set amounts of damage, everyone has set health levels, weapons follow predictable paths, etc. There is no RNG in the gameplay. You used the word incorrectly, and are refusing to admit it.

Particularly since "unpredictability" when applied to the outcome of a relatively equal matchup is a good thing for the competitive scene. If games were predictable, there'd be no point in watching them just to see the obvious occur. A good competitive game gives the losing team multiple opportunities to turn that loss around into a victory.

[NFA]

This post?

Again; there is nothing random about Overwatch, other than map selection. Weapons do set amounts of damage, everyone has set health levels, weapons follow predictable paths, etc. There is no RNG in the gameplay. You used the word incorrectly, and are refusing to admit it.

Do you really need me to link you the dictionary again?

Adjective

1. random ‎(comparative more random, superlative most random)

- Having unpredictable outcomes and, in the ideal case, all outcomes equally probable; resulting from such selection; lacking statistical correlation.  [quotations ▼]

So no, I used the word in exactly the manner I intended to. You're the incorrect one here.

[Endus]

Do you really need me to link you the dictionary again?

Adjective

1. random ‎(comparative more random, superlative most random)

- Having unpredictable outcomes and, in the ideal case, all outcomes equally probable; resulting from such selection; lacking statistical correlation.  [quotations ▼]

So no, I used the word in exactly the manner I intended to. You're the incorrect one here.

I don't mind your definition, either.

It still does not apply to Overwatch gameplay. The outcome of any particular shot is entirely predictable. The outcome of a game is unpredictable, but any competitive game needs that. Because otherwise, there's no point in watching; the obvious victor will win and there's no point. Competitive gaming is a fun experience because outcomes are unpredictable and down to player skill, moment by moment.

So you're wrong, either way, depending on if you were referring to gameplay elements (not random at all), or the outcomes of a given match (which should be unpredictable, or playing them is a waste of everyone's time).

[Deleted]

Do you really need me to link you the dictionary again?

Adjective

1. random ‎(comparative more random, superlative most random)

- Having unpredictable outcomes and, in the ideal case, all outcomes equally probable; resulting from such selection; lacking statistical correlation.  [quotations ▼]

So no, I used the word in exactly the manner I intended to. You're the incorrect one here.

Where is the randomness in Overwatch?

[NFA]

It's too easy to in a public match setting. That is all they have to base it on right now, there is no competitive play, there hasn't been really big tournaments.

In an organized team, you're gonna have to try harder to pull off just dropping Qs on each other. And I highly doubt League never has any swings in team momentum, otherwise it would be extremely boring to watch a game that the losing team cannot come back from.

League has swings but they're not as significant to the outcome of the whole game as a team wipe would be in overwatch. Said team wipes very easily caused by a chain of ultimates. Whereas in League you can not only survive that but you can much more easily see it coming which allows for much more counterplay than to just press your own Q and hope you don't die while stuck in Zarya's gravity well. Not to mention there's also items in League that allows you to build for countering certain characters and their abilities, something which Overwatch lacks.

Anyways, point is I don't think the game is good for MLG play. You obviously disagree. I really can't be bothered debating this anymore when people like Endus and Bovine would rather get that hung up on the use of a word they think was incorrect (when it wasn't) than the message I was trying to get across.