Avatar

Moneo

Moneo@lemmy.world
Joined
0 posts • 182 comments
Direct message

I don’t want my depressive episodes to result in my cats being miserable

I would appreciate if you didn’t attack me personally.

Nah but for real I go through the same thing. I feel really guilty when I let their box get out of hand, they never seem bothered either which kind of makes it worse.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I don’t mean to be a dick but without giving actual reasons all you’re saying is “I preferred ow1”, which is kind of what my original comment was referring to. Tank synergies is definitely something that was lost with ow1, rein/zarya and dive comps were very fun and definitely something I miss. But it was also a major source of balance issues and player frustration.

Two tank team composition was a consistent balance issue and severely restricted the design of tank heroes. Sigma is a really fun and interesting hero, but when he was added overwatch entered a prolonged two shield meta which was incredibly boring. The devs added a cool hero, and he made the game worse. Not only did he make the game worse, but there was no obvious or easy solution, because sigma wasn’t the problem, two shields was the problem. In my opinion that exemplifies how bad of an issue the game was facing and justifies the changes made.

There’s nothing wrong with preferring ow1 but the person I responded to called it “a terrible game compared to the original” which is just blatantly incorrect in my opinion.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I agree. I was a die-hard ow1 fan and quit because of the absolute disgrace that was the transition from OW1 -> OW2. I have every reason to hate OW2 but I don’t because it’s a fine game and improves on OW1 in every way that is important to me (gameplay and balance).

permalink
report
parent
reply

In my opinion, anyone saying OW2 is worse than the original is saying this for personal reasons and not trying to be objective. OW2 is, in my experience, much more balanced than OW1. Many of the more frustrating aspects of the game have been fixed or removed, and most of the characters added since OW1 seem fun to play and not frustrating to play against.

There are very many valid criticisms one can make of Blizzard. The history of being a shitty workplace, the objectively awful decision to make OW2 a sequel, the treatment of Jeff Kaplan by execs, the monetization, and probably more. None of those criticisms (except monetization to a limited degree) have anything to do with whether or not OW2 is a bad game or not.

But I’m speculating since the person you responded to has not elaborated on any of their views.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Why? I played OW from beta, stopped playing after all the shitty workplace accusations came out, then played again for 10 or so hours last month.

I didn’t play much competitive (in my recent sessions) but the game seemed like it was in a pretty solid place. The only “major” issue I can think of is that the tank role is incredibly important, which creates a bit of a toxic environment where people are scared to play tank because they get flamed if the team gets rolled. But I think the downsides are worth the benefits, with tank being so important it’s become the core that the rest of the game balances around. Healers have more agency and dealing damage/contributing to elims is a vital part of the role. A lot of the frustrating/cheesy aspects of the game have been removed, scattershot, damage-doomfist, mercy 5-man-res, goats, double shield.

Again, I took a long break from the game, but before that I clocked a lot of hours in competitive. Personally the game feels about as balanced and enjoyable as it’s ever been.

Obviously the monetization is gross and that entire side of the game sucks now but that’s an entirely different conversation.

permalink
report
parent
reply

A blue map doesn’t feel very good when the results are continued genocide, republican border bills, and “the most lethal military in the world”.

I’m not saying don’t vote blue, but lets not pretend young voters have much to be excited about.

permalink
report
parent
reply

4 years ago the dems ran on not caging children at the border, now Kamala is running on how she’s going to sign a republican border bill and “secure our border”.

Is it really that hard to imagine why some voters might feel apathetic about voting for democrats?

permalink
report
parent
reply

“Democratic voters” are unreliable because Democrats do not deliver, simple as that. Public healthcare, cannabis legalization, not-funding-a-genocide. Kamala is promising none of these things. Kamala is promising that America will have the most lethal military in the world. Kamala is promising America will support Israel’s “right to defend itself”. Kamala is promising a “secure border”.

Barring Tim Walz and a few policies, Kamala is running a campaign that the republicans of the Bush era would support wholeheartedly. Democrats consistently run campaigns on the premise that they are better than republicans, then quietly shift their policies towards the right. 4 years ago the they ran on not caging children and ruthlessly deporting families, now they’re running on “strong border” rhetoric.

Stop blaming voters for the Democrats inability to run on and enact good policy.

permalink
report
parent
reply

The response Harris made to the protestors at the DNC is the best example I can think of. I’m probably exaggerating how much the Harris campaign is relying on this strategy because lemmy is inundated with “DO YOU WANT TRUMP TO WIN???” commenters,

permalink
report
parent
reply

Pretty sure that’s the point of the comic.

permalink
report
parent
reply