Overwatch now makes poor winners look like the juveniles they are
GG EZ gets automatically replaced with a variety of phrases designed to make others smile.
Playing competitive games can be hard enough without sore losers. However, sore winners can be even worse, rubbing your nose in the loss instead of being somewhat magnanimous. Blizzard feels your pain, and has tried to reverse the psychological torment in a behind-the-scenes fix in Overwatch.
After matches, some winners tend to gloat, typing GG EZ in match chat, which stands for Good Game, Easy win. Typing that to friends privately or even typing that to your team is no problem. But typing it so your opponents see it? Won't happen. Blizzard devs now replace that string of characters with a variety of phases designed to make the gloater look complimentary ... or worse.
Among the catchy little phrases added:
- I'm wrestling with some insecurity issues in my life, but thank you all for playing with me
- C'mon Mom! One more game before you tuck me in. Oops mistell.
- I could really use a hug right now
- I'm trying to be a nicer person. It's hard, but I'm trying, guys
- Mommy says people my age shouldn't suck their thumbs
- It's past my bedtime. Please don't tell my mommy
There are also ones turning the troll into a good winner, such as "Well played, I salute you" and "Gee whiz, that was fun. Good playing".
It will be interesting to see if these changes make it through into Blizzard's other competitive games as well.
-
John Keefer posted a new article, Overwatch now makes poor winners look like the juveniles they are
-
This is great https://gfycat.com/RigidMadeupFairybluebird
-
-
-
In every FPS you can talk to the other team. Why is it weird that you can? I hate this move towards "non toxicity" because it comes at the cost of socialization. Players need to put on their big boy pants when they play MP games. If a player is being "toxic," then mute or block the person or go play SP. It sucks that they've removed useful features because a few players are being "toxic."
I had a game the other day where a teammate and I worked together and had some awesome combos. I wanted to whisper to him after the game and say "hey man great job on those combos" but I couldn't because I wasn't friends with him. I couldn't be friends with him because I'm already full up on friends. So, I wanted to compliment a guy and couldn't because Blizzard was afraid of me being toxic when I was doing the opposite.
Another example is when I want to compliment someone on the opposing team. Oops, can't whisper to them either, babies are worried about "being toxic." So now we're all banned from talking to other people in a MULTIPLAYER GAME. This is ridiculous.
When is the Shack going to prevent new posts? That will stop the "toxicity" that we have. But it would also stop any good discussions as well. Yes, we're going to have "toxic" posts here and there but you simply deal with them on an as needed basis instead of banning everyone from communication.-
-
-
-
Bad analogy. You're equating guns on planes to global communication. aka: calling for a ban on both. That's wrong. No one is arguing for guns on planes. No one is saying let's let some guns on planes.
I'm saying let players talk to other players, don't lay a blanket ban. If one player does not want to receive messages, they can block them. Simple as that. But don't block me when I want to talk to others. Some of my favorite interactions have come from random chat. Look at the chatty. Should we block private messaging on here unless you explicitly add someone to an allowed list? No? Then why are we doing that in Overwatch? Because people are getting triggered by "toxic" players, boo hoo.-
-
-
-
Because flights have a system in place to block terrorists. The equivalent system in games is to block players. But they've decided to not only block terrorists, but everyone (aka - flying). If people have a problem with a shitty person (aka terrorist) and the block them, then your whole incidence per game goes to zero because these players are blocked. But for people like me, who enjoy interacting with everyone, I get to do that without being blocked as well.
-
-
-
-
-
Totally irrelevant. And false. I don't know who you are playing with but most matches I play in and just people playing. Sometimes you get people talking trash but people do that in real life competitive activities. Should we prevent people from talking during football or soccer games now too? Just in case someone wants to say something snarky? Or should we assume people have a backbone and can handle criticism? Or if they CAN'T or don't want to, they can opt out? Why are we defaulting everyone to opt out and not even allowing an opt in?
-
-
-
-
Agreed on the HoN comparison. That game had so much potential, but company mismanagement plus a shitty community ruined it's potential. That, and the fact that it launched at $30 where LoL had just launched for free.
However, I would prefer for there to be an easy way to mute the enemy team, like in Dota 2, then to block communication to the enemy team entirely. The way Overwatch is doing it works, too, and is hilarious, but people will just find ways around it.
-
-
I've almost never encountered positive cross team interactions. When the other team has something to say to me, it's generally toxic. So I have no problem losing that tiny fraction of positive interaction in exchange for never getting the negative.
Also for your talk about the whispers, I've gotten plenty of whispers from people after games complimenting me. I've also gotten people from the other team complimenting me in whispers. I've also had people from the other team whisper me to say I was terrible or whatever. None of these interactions were from people on my friends list. You might want to check your settings.
-
-
-
-
Anytime someone says "toxic" in a serious conversation, I know that they're part of the Politically Correct movement and are more than willing to ban all communication for the sake of their own feelings. A block or mute button does the same thing and doesn't prevent others from interacting as well.
Show me sometime who calls people toxic and I'll show you someone that requires other people to resolve their problems.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
When I moderated a BF4 server we had a swear filter that just bleeped things. People hated it and would try to work around it, but our policy was that most swearing done in the game was abusive language and if you were just frustrated then the bleeps conveyed it just as well.
Point being, I added new things to the list all the time. Not too hard. Blizzard can probably just look at things typed in games with reports and figure out most of the new trends. -
-
-
-
-
-
Yes I was surprised to see them do both at once. Incidentally I'm in favor of both changes - strict hitboxes are too unforgiving for projectile weapons, and his arrows were too slow for him to be a proper sniper. However if he's OP now I think they should nerf his close range damage. Ambushing him at point blank range and dying instantly to a desperate headshot or a ground-scatter arrow is very frustrating.
As far as his skill curve goes though, the playerbase always incredibly overestimated the impact of those hitboxes IMO. It's not like getting a close scrape with an arrow is pure luck (usually), you still have to be quite accurate to hit consistently. So the outcry over hitboxes to me seemed like people were more concerned about what was "right" rather than what was fun.
-