Whatever it ends up being, I’m not interested. Never cared for competitive gaming. Sad that Valve has decided to use part of their enormous talent pool for, well, this while almost any genre would’ve been better.
Also, this is already a highly saturated niche. I don’t doubt Valve’s technical prowess and knowhow to develop a game that can surpass all the other ones in quality, but a gilded turd is still a turd under that gold leaf, even if it’s technically the best turd in the world.
That’s unfortunate that it’s not a genre you personally are interested in, but it is a popular genre and Valve is a business. Just because it’s not to your tastes doesn’t mean it’s a waste of their talent.
Oh absolutely. I’m not conceited enough to imagine Valve is developing games for me or that I’m entitled to anything. Just venting my personal disappointment with their choice. I still consider them the cream of the crop in game and hardware development.
I’m just curious why Valve looked at the oversaturated hero shooter market (seriously, we’ve had failures 8 years ago now) and said “Oh yeah, let’s devote our resources there”
edit: Like, I seriously can’t understand it. Not even Blizzard is coming out unscathed from Overwatch 2.
Not really my responsibility to make an argument for you. Of all the reasons Overwatch 2 might not have performed well, it being a Hero Shooter doesn’t have any strong evidence and you didn’t provide anything showing that was the reason.
One could argue Overwatch 2 being a Hero Shooter is why it didn’t perform worse than it already has, given its problems.
Blizzard is bad at balancing the game - could be true of any game, doesn’t have to be a shooter
Blizzard cancels promised mode - Blizzard being bad at design and following through on promises.
See 1.
Forcing a game to become the sequel, not making meaningful changes other than monetization
See 1
Blizzard made a bad game
None of these are a result of Overwatch 2 being a shooter, and all of them are a result of Blizzard being shit at making quality games, caring about players, and following through on promises. So thank you, you have done a fantastic job demonstrating that Overwatch 2 being a shooter is not the reason it didn’t perform well.
Competitive online games have been Valve‘s focus for well over a decade so it‘s in line with their portfolio. If anything, Alyx was an outlier they only did because they have a headset to sell it with. I think they know what they‘re doing. Sucks for you to not be their target audience though because they are pretty good at making games.
Seeing the Steam store lately I’m honestly surprised there isn’t a porn shooter. Imagine if someone went all in making an OW ripoff, but committed to making adult skins. Think about how much money that could make.
Hang on, that is a single player game? I now auto-discard AAA games up front because most of them are online multiplayer affairs with fancy in-game items to purchase and silly anti-cheat gimmicks that give Linux users a hard time.
Yep. You can play alone, couch co-op with controllers, or with friends online if that’s what you’re into. I’ve logged a couple of hundred hours alone and another hundred or so couch co-op.
I played through the whole game with my gf and didn’t see nor read anything that would indicate that.
Regardless of if you play, solo or with up to 4 people there are 4 characters in your party. Your main character can be one of the predefined ones or not. You will probably have/want a mix of both.
First play through will take more than 100h and you will still have plenty to see for subsequent playtroughs. It’s literally impossible to see all of it first time regardless of how you play.
Just get it, it’s not just a GOTY, it’s one of the best games in a long while.
No. My girlfriend and I are 140 hours in and still not finished, and I’m amazed at how smooth the coop works with the story. You can each be different places doing different things, or you can travel together, you can each have your own relationships with npcs. A lot of conversations with npcs will repeat depending on who’s talking, but important story ones won’t. As long as you mostly stick together and make choices together, you’ll have every option a single player game does.
Have you played A Plague Tale (innocence, then requiem)? It’s one of the best story driven games I’ve ever played. It’s entirely linear, so plot urgency doesn’t feel artificial like it does in open world games.
Same. Something I can play, save anywhere to deal with life, and pick back up when time allows. I was one of those weirdos who really enjoyed Doom 3 when it came out (with the ducttape mod; that was one mechanic I didn't like) and grew up on old Commodore, Amiga, and PC single-player games and NES/SNES/Genisis RPGs. I want that again.
Like idk, when overwatch came out, it was an absolute blast. I wasn't looking forward to it at all, i didn't care for it a bit until i played it. It just got run into the ground slowly. Also they made team fortress 2 way WAY before, and yeah that's what they excites them.
Valve’s game development division feels more like a weird cult than a proper game company. I don’t think they get “excited” for the things that most people get excited for. (Remember when they were excited for a virtual card game where you have to pay for every card?) The Valve of the 2000s is long gone IMO
I, for once am excited. I didn't buy Overwatch since I was deeply disappointed in Blizzard, after D3. Then the whole pandering to CCP and Blitzchung fiasco happened and that cemented my decision.
I didn't play Valor ant since I don't enjoy having a Chinese kernel level spyware on my PC.
So this may be something that can satisfy my itch.
Because many of us remember before that, when Valve revolutionized the single player first person genre again and again with the Portal and mainline Half-Life games.
Any other dev would have capitalized on the massive interest in a sequel or at least sold off the property so someone else could have continued those franchises.
eurogamer.net
Aktywne