Do you care more about fantasy or mechanics?

General Discussion
I just want to see what the community cares about more: The fantasy and lore of the hero you're playing, or the mechanics and performance?

I know that this question is basically asking "are you a casual or serious player", but take, say, Abathur for example. He currently has the 3rd worst winrate of any hero, at only 43.8%. Blizzard decides to rework him, making him a more active support hero and makes it actually possible for him to engage in combat with other heroes when they aren't almost dead. This greatly increases both his pickrate AND winrate, but he no longer feels like the Evolution Master of the Swarm, standing in the background while his creations bring untold destruction upon his enemies.

How would you react? Would you be happy that he's in a better spot, and no longer has one of the worst win rates in the game? Or would you be mad that the fantasy of the character was utterly ruined? And if this happened to other characters?
Why not both?
Bad example. Abathur is in a great spot right now, he's just bogged down by awful players. And I really doubt anyone would want Abathur, unarguably the most unique character in this genre, to be streamlined.

A better example would be Garrosh. Gary has always been a point of contention - I personally love his kit, but many people say it doesn't suit him. Would I be mad if they gutted his kit and reworked him from the ground up, even if they gave it to another hero? Probably, yeah. I've grown attached to playing Garrosh with that kit. I don't want the hero I've grown attached to to be given a different playstyle (personality), or be transplanted to a new body (kit). The two are symbiotic and synonymous at this point.
09/02/2018 05:06 PMPosted by tkdboy
Abathur for example. He currently has the 3rd worst winrate of any hero, at only 43.8%. Blizzard decides to rework him, making him a more active support hero and makes it actually possible for him to engage in combat with other heroes when they aren't almost dead.


That's mostly because bads play him or bads don't know how to play with him.

A minor talent rework to change bad talents, sure, but Abathur is extremely powerful when played well and in the right situation.
I personally am going to tip in favour of mechanics.

For example, i love illidans playstyle and the hero i find most fun to play. Playing a hyper mobile (yet skillful) character feels so good to me despite being full aware that from a lore perspective illidan could be so much more.
Would have preferred both. However, in recent years, developers are paying less attention to history and the idea of ​​heroes.

You know whats funny? They bring in heroes of Overwatch almost literally, even add the "unfair" mobility of Hanzo against the feedback and all the hatred for Genji, because it was in Overwatch and they wanted to reflect Hanzo abilities in the game.

However, while "Whitemane - arise my champion", despite her whole story are around the ability to resurrect the dead, has not received any ability to refer us to this. According to the developers, such mechanics did not find a place in the game realities. I mean adding hypermobility, when everyone says that hypermobility is a problem - this is normal for them. And to make at least some reference to the possibility of resurrection for Whitemane, even if it's at least a resurrection of minions, for God's sake - "no place in the game mechanic" "Auriel have a res. already" etc. etc.

HotS really stands out from other MOBA's with loved and long known characters, I would prefer a more careful attitude to the nature and history of the character, this must be reflected in the mechanics of the character, at least slighty.

BTW why downwote TS? Its a good theme to discuss
Its a bit tricky

While we all know that overwaatch lore is deep and the characters are so unique and non stereotypical, they were revealed on 1994, november 23 i think?

I dont mind ow mechanics, but i hate the characters as if i feel it is fair to grant their abilities to heroes from wow sc dibbles and present them to the community.

I feel game pace is slow in general.
If you focus on fantasy, you're likely to end up with an addition that feels like the character they're supposed to be... but you can also end up with something like Tracer, who feels like who she's supposed to be but at the cost of being a balancing nightmare that's always either a god or worthless with no real inbetween.

If you focus on mechanics, you're likely to end up with an addition that plays well... but you can also end up with Tassadar, whose kit doesn't fit his background and lives or dies by enabling others. Namely Tracer, who Blizzard mentioned by name when discussing a potential Tassadar rework.

Really, they should strive for both - it's important to get a character to feel like themselves, but not at the cost of game balance, and mechanics are important, but should not come at the cost of a character feeling wrong (again, see Tassadar).
09/02/2018 09:08 PMPosted by FeralChaos
Really, they should strive for both - it's important to get a character to feel like themselves, but not at the cost of game balance, and mechanics are important, but should not come at the cost of a character feeling wrong (again, see Tassadar)

Pretty much.

You can't have only one for a good hero design.
09/02/2018 05:30 PMPosted by MurlocAggroB
A better example would be Garrosh. Gary has always been a point of contention - I personally love his kit, but many people say it doesn't suit him. Would I be mad if they gutted his kit and reworked him from the ground up, even if they gave it to another hero? Probably, yeah. I've grown attached to playing Garrosh with that kit

See, this is the reason why I'm generally in favour of new hero releases over "new hero" reworks. I know it'd be revisiting an old concept(at least lore wise to some degree), but I hope blizz doesn't save different versions of heroes for when they need to scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Actually, if they put Mei in this game I'd enjoy playing her no matter what the mechanics, as long as it fits a similar fantasy as Overwatch.
I want to offer some developer insight on this for people unaware of this concept.

What this post is referring to is to developer concepts known as Top-down design and Bottom-up design

Top-down design refers to having having the fantasy elements figured out and then designing the game play around those elements.

Bottom-up design refers to having the design concept figured out and then designing the fantasy elements around the design.

IMHO the best Heroes in HotS to date have all been Top-down design. For me, the main attraction of HotS is the fantasy properties they bring to the game. It's my way to get my fix of Blizzard properties without going head on into WoWcrack or Diablocrack. I don't have to spend hours upon hours upon hours grinding out gear to feel relevant. If it wasn't for these properties Blizzard commands, I truly and honestly wouldn't give HotS another look. The two biggest issues a MOBA has to get right out of the gate are Match Quality and Game Engine. These are still two areas Blizzard continues to struggle with 4 years after the launch of Alpha.

It's extremely obvious which heroes Blizzard has designed with a Bottom-up Design approach. Those heroes didn't have a strong release and continue to not be very popular heroes; this doesn't mean they aren't effective, however. Cassia, for instance, is very obviously a Bottom-up design. It was obvious Blizzard wanted a hero that dealt largely with blinds. The "beach ball" ult she has also really doesn't fit the fantasy of an Amazon at all. Much of her kit is gleamed off of Pantheon from LoL with only hints of her Diablo 2 design.
09/03/2018 06:48 AMPosted by Lighthammer
Top-down design refers to having having the fantasy elements figured out and then designing the game play around those elements.

Bottom-up design refers to having the design concept figured out and then designing the fantasy elements around the design.

The problem is that they sometimes go for bottom-bottom design, where they start with a design concept, and then never work the fantasy in at all.

Honestly I'd rather have extremely thematic heroes that require the players to find how they are useful, rather than well rounded but generic, Q is a straight skill shot maybe with a delay and a slow, type of heroes.

I want more heroes like Abathur, and Cho'Gall, the kind that we haven't seen in any other game. At this point they're too afraid of disrupting the meta to do anything cool...
You can have both, it just requires competent team of devs.
I prefer mechanics over fantasy. "Fantasy" is subjective and gets all over the place and people whine over what they think is, or isn't their particular 'fantasy', esp at the expense of mechanics.

"zomg how dare [boss] lose 1v1 to murky, this is so bs and against my fantasy"
"lol javazon #notmyzon"
"waah, its just a bunch of sjw pandering from [sequel game] and not the true hardcore origin"

If the hero is 'fun' and 'balanced', then the realization of their being will trump over the qualms of what is projected to be, or not be, particular to a fantasy. The basis of the game may reveal in realizing some fantasy, but otherwise it needs to be its own experience and be wholly enjoyable in relation to itself, and not just whimsically fancy for a brief kickback.

The qualities don't necessarily need to be at odds with each other, but one is something people will proclaim themselves to be 'experts' on and complain regardless, the other will keep people coming back to play more.

Take the bit regarding whiteman, esp in relation to auriel. outside of a few seconds on the Wrath short, there is no 'fantasy' for their to be auriel in the game. So the mechanics have to sell the story and make her exist.

If characters don't have solid kits, themes, visual clarity to convey what they do, and feel good doing it, the 'fantasy' isn't going to matter — people filled maps full of 'fantasy' to be realized in warcraft 3 customs. What lingered from that time and transcended a map mod into being their own things (not just dota, mind) were the mechanical aspects. Fantasy is ads, its surface identification, its sugar-coating, it luls people in, but there's gotta be more substance to keep people coming back for more and keeping them engaged.
I care a lot about fantasy. That's why I don't play Raynor, Tychus, Nova, Lucio, Zarya etc. Humans with guns.. Too lame for me
In order for one to feel legit and enjoyable it must include the other or the character wouldn't make sense.

I'm sure there are ways to make Kael'thas a swordsman in a cape but why?
Both, but if I have to choose I would choose mechanics. This is a PvP game after all. If this were a PvE game I would say the opposite.
09/02/2018 06:41 PMPosted by Wraithdagger
09/02/2018 05:06 PMPosted by tkdboy
Abathur for example. He currently has the 3rd worst winrate of any hero, at only 43.8%. Blizzard decides to rework him, making him a more active support hero and makes it actually possible for him to engage in combat with other heroes when they aren't almost dead.


That's mostly because bads play him or bads don't know how to play with him.

A minor talent rework to change bad talents, sure, but Abathur is extremely powerful when played well and in the right situation.


Just gonna stress this. Stop using win rates when taking about if a hero is good or not. Especially if you are using a site like hotslogs.
Fantasy matters much more. Mechanical gameplay balance can usually be achieved with simple XML buffs or nerfs after the fantasy "feel" has been achieved, but trying to take a generic "mechanically balanced" hero and giving them a fantasy would require them to be rebuilt from the ground up.
09/02/2018 07:40 PMPosted by Artorias
They bring in heroes of Overwatch almost literally, even add the "unfair" mobility of Hanzo against the feedback and all the hatred for Genji, because it was in Overwatch and they wanted to reflect Hanzo abilities in the game.


"He has it in Overwatch, so he's gotta have it in this game."
-Dev team

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum