It’s a worthy discussion, but don’t make something that trivial so personal.
Leaving that aside, one of the big things that progression systems do is to add some level of long-term goals to the game. When it comes down it, Overwatch has no story, no goal, and nothing else really to add to the experience. If you want TF2-style matches and nothing else, then TF2 has gotcha covered. Even if you, personally, don’t like it, having that long-term element to grow into gives players something they can aspire to beyond getting the next kill. Sure, the moment-to-moment gameplay needs to be there. But it may not even enough to keep people interested if the game lacks anything else. They also tend to narrow the options for new players to several good but not exceptional choices that help them get into the game.
You’re certainly not obligated to like the, but these systems went into games like CoD and its clones for a reason, and that reason isn’t limited to just the blander modern military shooter games.
This isn’t what a skinner box is. A skinner box is, by definition, random. A progression system isn’t a skinner box because you know exactly how long until you can get what you want. TF2’s hats and Dota 2’s cosmetic items are skinner boxes. So is Overwatch’s loot crate system (though I don’t think those give repeats so it’s alleviated somewhat).
I don’t like progression systems in multiplayer FPS games (except maybe Planetside where it serves a purpose given how big the game is), but they’re not skinner boxes.
Edit: I heard Battleborn had a progression system where the more you play a certain character the more of their backstory you unlock. They could do that with little Overwatch cutscenes for each character and that would be cool. Though the obvious problem with that is people playing the hero they want the cutscene for rather than what the team needs.
I know you’re a passionate guy about gaming and games, but you are seriously coming off over the line here a little. Let’s dial back the outrage and anger and all that that you’re displaying a little in your posts. The Pit is the place to take issue with posts and posters that get a person worked up enough to start to come off sounding a little insulting.
In short, just ease up a small bit beyond this post, please. Just a note, that’s all… not a warning…
and if you wish to discuss this note, please do so in ATMB or PM.
Maybe there’s some technical misunderstanding that I have, but my layman’s understanding, but from wikipedia
It doesn’t say anything about randomness on the page, and in fact, suggests the opposite - that consistency leads to conditioning. Do an actual, get a reward.
My point is - games used to be designed based on the engagement of their gameplay. Primary concerns were providing a fun experience. But the trend in gaming is to get people hooked directly via little dopamine release conditioning the same way people often react to drugs or gambling. The sensation of progressive, of getting some reward, of constantly seeing your level go higher or getting some sort of minor unlock like a new sight for your gun or a new cosmetic trumps the actual quality of gameplay for a lot of people.
So you have a lot of games designed now where activating this little dopamine conditioned response is the primary goal, and creating an interesting game through the merits of gameplay is no longer the primary goal. This is most obvious in mobile gaming, which is a wasteland of F2P conditioning nonsense, but the trend has been making its way around the gaming world.
Yes, it works, it works in the same way that slot machines work, even though slot machines are the dumbest fucking thing you could possibly do with your time. You don’t go to slot machines for compelling gaming experiences, you do it because you get sucked into a conditioned cycle of little dopamine releases. That doesn’t mean that it’s a good thing.
It trades good gameplay for little addiction boxes, so those of us who don’t get some sort of life validation from seeing our XP go up and some new teal skin for my third holo sight get the shaft, since the cost of shifting game design in that direction is worse gameplay.
Consistent conditioning produces quicker results, but random sporadic conditioning produces longer-lasting results. Current practice is generally to start with consistent reinforcement, but to then start gradually tapering it off.
Though I’m not sure this is really relevant to gaming, which has no rewards beyond the game itself.
I would’ve sworn that TF2 did properly do this (i.e., second attacking team got the same amount of time it took the first attacking team to win, if they did win) but admittedly it’s been a while since I’ve played. But I completely agree that it’s silly design.
For me so far, Overwatch feels like a less-good version of TF2. Maybe it’s just because I played so much TF2 back in the day that Overwatch doesn’t have the same novelty, but I think it stems from some different design aspects. I liked that TF2 had both larger team sizes (10v10 or 12v12 was what I usually played) and a smaller amount of classes/characters. Because the characters were more tightly designed, it felt like there was more of a rock/paper/scissors design element, and tactics/strategy was just as important as being able to aim/shoot/etc. There’s a reason there was no “rifleman” class in TF2, because it’s difficult to balance such a character that’s useful in every situation. Overwatch throws that all out with including characters like Soldier 76 or McCree.
Maybe I just sorta suck at the game, but what made me like TF2 was I could still succeed and help the team… play spy and blow up that sentry nest, or play pyro and do a good job of banzai charging the enemy team and delaying their advance. When it’s only 6v6 you can’t really do that, you really need to stick with the team (especially if you’re running around on your own and come across someone like McCree, Mei or Reaper). This also means that when you’re doing your job but your teammates are morons, it’s more likely you’ll get completely rolled and feel powerless.
Lastly, the whole experience/loot box thing is stupid. If it was free to play, that’d be one thing, but if I’m gonna be charged $40 they could have all the sprays/voice lines/poses etc unlocked from the start. I agree with Johnny Bravo that having it at least be tied to the character you’re playing would be a nice start.
So I’ve decided that I like the game well enough to play with friends but that’s about it. I’m not willing to put the effort required to get good. My main obsession is still Heroes of the Storm. I’m already a try-hard, I don’t have the time for two games like that.
One more thing… this game really needs a good wiki/reference site. There’s a lot of interactions and details that can’t be figured out from the very short in-game descriptions of abilities and weapons. For example, I didn’t realize until reading it on other message boards that energy weapons go through Reinhardt’s shield, or that Junkrat’s tire can climb up walls. I still don’t know if Zarya’s primary fire has infinite range or not. Stuff like that. The Gamepedia one is alright but not quite as detailed as I’d like yet.
Not exactly. In both the early and late stages, randomness is important because it causes the subject to perform the action more than he or she would otherwise choose to. That is, at both points the subject might want the reward ten times, but because he or she cannot be sure of getting that reward for each action, the individual must act much more often than otherwise.
It is, because a number of games incorporate this kind of system in order to get players to act more often. I don’t think it’s actual relevant to the kind of system Senor Beef was discussing, but games like Diablo and Borderlands have used it, for example, to promote the loot grind. And of course, many other games such as MMO’s, or Team Fortress 2 also use randomized drops in a different context. In all these systems, players are rewarded for playing longer with better drops, but in a randomized context so they can never be sure of getting what they want - but on average the time to get something “good” increases later in the game.
This isn’t the only instance of trying to use Skinner boxes in games by any means, but it’s one of the most obvious. For many people, however, this kind of system is a complete bore.
MFPallytime, a youtube streamer (I watch a lot of his Heroes videos, released a video talking about his opinion on the game, what he likes, dislikes, etc. Plus, it shows him playing Tracer and he is much better than I’ll ever be.
I think I’ve finally figured out what isn’t working for me, mentally about this game.
They do all this very impressive character and world building, and then the game is basically “randomly chosen teams of five who shoot each other in an arena, for no reason” - it feels very out of line with all the worldbuilding polish they’re putting into it.
Yeah, it’d make more sense if there were a hero team and a villain team. There’s enough of both that you could still have nice diverse teams with each.
Yeah. Apparently they killed it because they just couldn’t make it fun. Which is FINE, but they don’t seem to be leveraging the assets they saved in a very effective way, I guess.
Though that article doesn’t even seem to indicate that the characters and worldbuilding are amoung the stuff salvaged from Titan, so… who knows.
This was a lot less of a problem before I took the time to watch the cinematic trailers. Now I can’t really imagine a Tracer and a Widowmaker on the same team. Or hell, Zenyatta and Widowmaker! Talk about dissonance. At least the gameplay is really good, but this game is sort of crying out for some kind of story to pull it all together.
I have like 3 people who’ve told me “I’ll get it if you get it” and then like another 7 who’ve said they’ll get it if everyone else is getting it, so I guess if I end up getting it, 10 other people will too. Blizzard should give me a free copy.
It’s fun, I like it, kinda on the fence about $40, but meh, Blizzard games won’t be on sale anytime soon so I may as well grab it now if I’m going to grab it. I guess I probably will.
I’m still on the fence. At the moment I want to see what their development cycle is going to be like. Somebody on Reddit just pointed out that Heroes of the Storm has kept to a new hero every 3-4 weeks for a full year. That’s done a lot to keep the game fresh.
Overwatch obviously can’t pump out characters at that rate, but hopefully they’ve got something in mind for keeping things from getting too static. Unless their target market is the same group of people who have been playing de_dust for the last 15 years, in which case I’m out of luck.