IMO Battlebone looks like

Overwatch just by what I see on Twitch!

Anyone else think so?

no, not really
the art style and gameplay is very different in my opinion

2 Likes

Again, it is down to your opinion.

…only in the context of other, non-stylized, non-fantasy multiplayer games. If someone looks at these through the lens of, say, Counter Strike and Call of Duty, I could see how these might look the same.

They’re pretty difficult outside of the use of first-person aiming and happening to both have distinct vibrant characters.

In gameplay or visual terms? I’ve watched plenty of beta footage of Overwatch and it seems far more similar to games like TF2 than Battleborn; it’s got mainly attack/defend objective modes (points and carts, exactly like TF2 actually) whereas Battleborn so far seems to have lane-ish symmetrical modes. Characters also take way longer to kill in Battleborn, which gives time for offense-defence play in one life.

Visually I suppose you could draw similarities in colors for example, though Battleborn seems to lean more towards fantasy than Overwatch.

Absolutely not.

It would be like saying Age of Conan is similar to World of Warcraft because they are both MMOGs. There is some overlap in game play, but they are different games.

And, I’ll say this again - what’s the point? Even if they were exactly the same kind of game in terms of play they would be different games, and if you can’t understand that I have trouble understanding why you ever care about playing another game in the same genre of any game you’ve played. Because, other than genre, they are all the same, right? Of course not. Wolfenstein is not Doom is not Duke Nukem. And most decidedly any game made by Blizzard won’t be like any game made by Gearbox regardless of the genre or any game elements that inspired them.

3 Likes

I was invited to the Beta for Overwatch, and I can definitely agree with this comment here. There will be three PvP styles (the lane-“Moba-ish”-style, capture/defend a point, invade/destroy enemy base) for Battleborn, but this comment is consistent with what Overwatch is from my experience.

If you think that Marquis or Phoebe or Wrath (or whomever) could get you waiting to respawn super fast, you have seen nothing in Overwatch. Even the character style is quite different. Overwatch seems to be something that will cater more towards the CoD/TF2 crowds (some of my friends being in those crowds as well have told me they probably won’t go for Overwatch because they already have that in their chosen franchise.)

My observations/thoughts on Overwatch so far after reflecting on it and the comparisons of it to Battleborn (given my experience and referencing PvP, of course):

  • There is a tutorial for Overwatch (OW) offered when you first start the game-- but it only indicates how to use your mouse to “look,” how to use WASD keys to move, how to use buttons to use skills, and how to capture/defend an area. The non-capture/attack where you have to “escort” a cart/item which progresses only when accompanied by a nearby player wasn’t explained, and though it’s not tough for someone familiar with these kinds of games to figure that part out, I saw a lot of people just focusing on deathmatch versus actually going for the objective as a group.

  • So, in OW you choose a character based on attack/defend/tank/support. These are clearly labeled and separated at character select.
    – There is no analog to the Battleborn (BB) helix in OW-- there are no levels, and your Ultimate skill in OW is charged by doing damage to the enemy team. This could be a good thing if you prefer it or a hinderance as you can’t really customize your play at all without fully switching to another style with another character.

  • In OW, majority of characters are majority ranged-play, truly glass-cannons.
    In OW, if not playing a tank character, expect to die quickly if you’re targeted without cover to jump to. Expect to bunny hop and strafe a good deal-- and move more or less constantly. You must both a decent bit aware of your surroundings while also focusing on your objective; given the maps provide so many vantage points to keep track of, it’s great that the respawn is short. :stuck_out_tongue:
    – If playing a tank character, expect to still die fairly quickly-- there is no character I have seen in BB that has died as quickly as a tank in OW (without a dedicated healer on them in the Miko healing-beam style).

  • Enjoy the idea playing Marquis or Benedict and being able to withstand a shot or two while getting to cover to warp back to base or grab a heal? You will die in OW in one or less than one clip from another character that’s not support. There’s not a long spawn timer in OW, though, but you have much more potential to die without being certain as to why.
    – However, in OW, you luckily get a “Kill Cam” after you die to show you your killer’s perspective. Always great to be able to watch a replay, especially when you might be frustrated by that quick death you experienced and are surely wanting to savor that moment. :stuck_out_tongue:

  • The maps in OW, compared to the one example we see of BB, are much more complex. This is again more towards the shooter franchises I mentioned earlier-- you’re going to be fighting both the other team and the map here. There are no spots which are truly much safer than any other as almost always you have a way to flank or just pop up behind them. If your character can’t do that, you also have a few characters that can warp in some form or fashion to (with a little skill involved) get behind your attackers.

  • In OW, you can change your character at any point in the match as long as you are in a spawn area. This can become complicated as a balanced team can go awry with changes, but you can also switch up to cater to the situation, so this is more a “What’s your preference?” moment. It’s not my style, but I can absolutely see how people would enjoy that in a game of deathmatch/attack-defend the area or item.

  • In OW, it seems you can have two of the same character on your team simultaneously without exploit or glitch.

  • In OW, at the end of each match you are given a “Play of the Game” video based off the best player performance (which you cannot skip), so there’s some ego-stroking if you have some great kill-streaks of one-shotting other characters-- but it’s quite likely you might just see the footage of another player gunning you down or an assault character with unbelievable aim headshotting your team to bits. I’ve seen an 18-player kill streak achieved in a game which lasted around 11min. That’s some Overwatch holy-grail as far as I’ve seen in Beta.
    – After this, in OW, you can vote for the MVP of the match. You can also “rate” your teammates and enemy team (I assume this affects the likelihood of getting matched with/against them in future matches). These are both optional for you, but you can’t “skip” them. You can just abstain as they are completed and you wait for others to finish.
    — After all this-- the video, the vote, the rating (optional)-- then you start into the prep for the next match. Given the rating process didn’t affect anything and no one in your previous group left the game, you stay with those players. I won’t lie, though-- the process takes long enough that if I wanted to get a different group, I’ve alt-F4’d the game to get out and back in faster than having to wait through all that.

  • Unfortunately, in OW, there actually are objectives such as capturing a point or escorting a payload to a checkpoint. I say unfortunately because this keeps all matches as being one team attacking and one defending (unlike BB as far as we’ve seen), and the maps are, as stated before, very unforgiving. The punishment of non-communication is much more severe in OW as people getting distracted towards killing other players and not taking your objective leads to frustrating yet relatively quick defeat. The first two matches I was in lasted less than 10 minutes-- most of my matches have been 10min or less.

  • Random, but I have gotten used to the idea of alternating Attack and Defend each match in other games so that your group isn’t constantly doing one or the other, but in OW my group has had long strings of only being Attack Team (less often only being Defend Team) for multiple consecutive matches.

None of this is positive or negative-- it’s definitely all relative to the style of play you enjoy.

A few random points:

  • While you see some vibrant styling in the male characters of Overwatch (cowboy/ninja/soldier/knight-tank) where their gear clearly indicates their style or role without having to see their weapon (which you can almost guess 100% accurately by their costume), most (though not all) of the female options are donning spandex catsuits (now with sensible-height Battle Heels and Battle Thigh-Highs™!) and, without being able to see their chosen weapons (sniper rifle, mech, etc), you’d have a tough time accurately guessing what they all do or what their weapon might be. I may not be a fan of a poofy dress surrounded by swords, but I can’t deny that the garb of Phoebe both adds to her character and doesn’t make her into just eye-candy-with-swords. (And I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be any characters in skin-tight gear, just that it’s such a tired trope at this point that it seems like a cheap style for 5 of the 8 female characters, especially considering that’s only 8 females in the roster of 21.)

  • Sound in BB vs OW. In BB, all the sound I’ve heard so far in character voice acting and music has been pretty enriching to learn about the character’s personality and possibly lore-- and it’s all really distinctive. I honestly am already tired of OW voices, especially for the females, but all because they just seem to go on “This person represents England. Let’s have her speak in a heavy accent but say nothing of substance.” I haven’t really gotten anything from the quotes so far-- it’s all seems very trope-heavy.

  • Given the HP versus the listed damage of Ultimate skills in BB, you won’t find it feasible to one-shot someone with your Ultimate if they are at full-health and shield (if they have a shield)-- but the damage should take quite a chunk out of them. In OW, damage-oriented Ultimate skills are insta-death for those caught by it.

  • While in BB, there were a lot of people not talking-- but as soon as someone started talking, whether it was me or another player, people seemed to jump in and communicate more. By the end of the my limited BB experience, I hardly had a match where there was silence for the entirety of it. Things are in a place in BB where a lot of it might change, but I have to say that the people I now associate with the game are a big reason I am looking forward to purchasing BB. In OW, I have yet to have a match where someone has spoken (and there is integrated voice chat in OW as in BB). To be fair though, the quick deaths and constant, frantic pace/mobility in OW make it so that calling for help or calling out player locations seems a bit pointless-- by the time you call for help, you are dead, and when you call out an enemy location, they’d already far from the point which they were at when you saw them.

  • From my limited experience/knowledge of the two, even as a character shown to not have a shield, I felt like BB would allow me to make an impact in assisting my teammates. If need be, I could throw myself into a close-call situation to melee a character and try to get them off a teammate, or I could jump into the fray to lay down AoE and bolt to safety. In OW, so far, I feel very limited in my ability to assist. Noticing that a teammate is taking fire means they will likely be long dead before I can physically get to them, and if I am playing a character with mobility to close the gap quickly, I have a high chance of a quick death myself.

Ultimately, other than the first-person perspective and the fact that there is PvP and guns involved, I don’t see too many glaring similarities between the two games. I think that Overwatch will appeal to the current FPS crowds playing games like CoD and TF2, and for that I believe it may suffer much more than Battleborn in being not free-to-play. Whereas Battleborn seems to be going much more towards being able to bring friends or having a match long enough to make some new ones for a good team that you can take through PvE as well, Overwatch looks like it would benefit from a constant influx of players as those who do not take to the frenetic style of play that it requires may become quickly frustrated. I’m stubborn enough to throw myself into the grinder, but not everyone will be happy with paying for a full-price title and finding that their attempts to learn how to play are met with a constant string of quick deaths which are then replayed for them to enjoy a second time… followed by an end sequence of unskippable video/vote/rate/see your stats which forces you to linger before getting into another match to try to learn what you couldn’t stay alive long enough to try in the previous match.

As one tweet said it best in response to someone who was excited about getting into the beta to see if they will “keep or refund” their collector’s edition they’d already purchased:

“it’s just a team game you gotta get good at. you won’t know until 40+ hours”

^^ If that’s the case, do you want to spend 40 hours to find out if it was worth it?

Also, if you feel like seeing some representation of that community and some supremely salty entertainment, go check out the responses of people to the tweet about the Weekend Beta invites having all been sent. Lots of “I signed up and preordered on Day One not knowing anything or having played, and now I’ve not been invited to any level of Beta? Refund requested.”

Edited to clarify so that no one interprets certain points as being about Battleborn gameplay. Sorry for the long-winded post, but I was actually pretty surprised to see how different both the games were-- and how Battleborn is probably going to be much more “my style,” even though Overwatch looks to be a good game for those who prefer its style.

2 Likes