New Overwatch Theatrical Trailer

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

New Overwatch Theatrical Trailer

Blizzard has released a new cinematic trailer for its upcoming shooter: Overwatch.

So Blizzard has made quite a name for itself for making kick-ass cinematics, and it looks like its upcoming shooter Overwatch will be no different. The company has just released a "theatrical" trailer for the game, which will make its debut in select theaters nationwide. You can check it out to the right.

The trailer show's some of the game's heroes being... well, heroic. Protecting the weak, helping the needy, and just doing good. It offers a bit of a glimpse into what the Overwatch organization of the game's namesake actually is, although it doesn't really explain why all of these defenders of the peace have been thrust into control-point battles against each other...

Overwatch, being a multiplayer-only shooter, will have to rely on such kind of cinematics, as well as in-game cues to tell its story. It'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

The game is set for release in Spring, 2016, for the PC, PS4 and Xbox One.

Permalink

Steven Bogos:

Overwatch, being a multiplayer-only shooter, will have to rely on such kind of cinematics, as well as in-game cues to tell its story. It'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Don't forget about the announced graphic novel that'll act as the back story to the game's setting.

WhiteTigerShiro:
Don't forget about the announced graphic novel that'll act as the back story to the game's setting.

Is there anything they're doing that isn't being taken from Valve's playbook?

Zontar:

WhiteTigerShiro:
Don't forget about the announced graphic novel that'll act as the back story to the game's setting.

Is there anything they're doing that isn't being taken from Valve's playbook?

Ah yes, because Valve totally came up with the idea of doing tie-in media to their properties. Nevermind that Blizzard's use of EU material goes back to the 1990s.

Anyway, I liked this trailer. Cheesy, but it's the right kind of cheese given the subject matter, and actually goes into worldbuilding (e.g. showing the omnic-human tensions in King's Row, which was established in prior lore, and showing the successful Gibraltar launch). If I had to nitpick though, what's up with Pharah's scene? Where in late 21st century Earth is trench warfare being conducted? It can't be the Omnic Crisis being depicted (wrong timeframe), and they don't look Arabic (so unlikely to be the Egyptian Army that she was part of), so...yeah.

But like I said, nice trailer.

Hawki:

Ah yes, because Valve totally came up with the idea of doing tie-in media to their properties. Nevermind that Blizzard's use of EU material goes back to the 1990s.

I was more talking about the FPS game with cartoonish graphics as its stylistic aesthetic choice, using a series of videos that are posted online to advertise the game's characters and story despite the game itself not having one, and using visual novels to give the lore of the setting to people since the game has none.

Using tie in material is one thing, but Blizzard is straight up copying what Valve did for TF2. Which isn't a surprise since Blizzard never had an original idea in their life.

just wish they'd make a movie with overwatch, not that I think the warcraft movie will be bad, just more interested in seeing these characters on screen after watching the cinematics.

Zontar:

Hawki:

Ah yes, because Valve totally came up with the idea of doing tie-in media to their properties. Nevermind that Blizzard's use of EU material goes back to the 1990s.

I was more talking about the FPS game with cartoonish graphics as its stylistic aesthetic choice, using a series of videos that are posted online to advertise the game's characters and story despite the game itself not having one, and using visual novels to give the lore of the setting to people since the game has none.

Using tie in material is one thing, but Blizzard is straight up copying what Valve did for TF2. Which isn't a surprise since Blizzard never had an original idea in their life.

None of which is exclusive to either game. Strife, League of Legends, Smite, Dawngate, and Infinite Crisis all use(d) the same tactic, despite the lack of story within the game itself. Even when a story does exist within the main game, the same tactic can be used (e.g. WildStar - cartoony aesthetics, use of graphic novels and videos for world, characters, etc.) There's also the fact that not a single TF2 video has ever engaged in worldbuilding or utilized sequential narrative in relation to each other, whereas both Overwatch cinematics so far have (the original cinematic utilizes characterization, worldbuilding, and 3 act structure, whereas the one in this thread builds off narrative threads and gives closure to them (e.g. Gibraltar).

And bear in mind this is Valve, the masters of appropriating mods as their own, with TF2 being the prime example. Half-Life is the exception rather than the rule here.

Obviously there are similarities between the two, but Valve hardly has a monopoly on the above concepts. Same reason why Battleborn and Paladins shouldn't be called Overwatch copies even if Overwatch beat them to the limelight.

I admit the trailer was kinda neat but I can't help to wonder with the whole "We are Overwatch" and yet they have assassin like Reaper and Widow Maker and the outlaw like Roadhog among their ranks at the end.

gmaverick019:
just wish they'd make a movie with overwatch, not that I think the warcraft movie will be bad, just more interested in seeing these characters on screen after watching the cinematics.

This is exactly what I keep thinking whenever I see their cinematics "just make a full movie like this already!". It will be interesting to see what becomes of the Warcraft movie, but I still feel that full CGI is the way to go for them.
Especially so after seeing this as the style is very Pixarish, and they seem to be doing rather well with that.

Well, Overwatch series/movie is probably going to happen, now that Acti/blizz has their own film studio since this year.

Cheesy as fuck, but kinda neat nonetheless.

Blizzard trailers always make me wish they'd just pack in the videogame gig and make CGI movies instead.

Seems weird...

Why would you go with a story that completely contradicts the gameplay you're providing?

If all these guys and gals are part of this big superhero organisation then why is the game them fighting against each other?

Wouldn't a story about the whole thing being some sort of future sport or something like that where it actually makes sense for the lot of them to be fighting each other?

I realize some of the characters are supposed to be from actual evil organisations but for the most part this seems to be Overwacht vs Overwatch.

Scarim Coral:
I admit the trailer was kinda neat but I can't help to wonder with the whole "We are Overwatch" and yet they have assassin like Reaper and Widow Maker and the outlaw like Roadhog among their ranks at the end.

A lot of these characters, like Reaper and Widow Maker, have never actually been associated with Overwatch as a group. These guys are just mercenaries, or from other organisations, and I guess that they just added them in to make sure that it isn't Overwatch vs Overwatch 100% of the time.

Fun fact: Only 9 out of the 21 characters in Overwatch were actually part of the Overwatch group.

Hawki:
Snip

You do realize all your examples are also examples of companies using the TF2 model, right?

And there has been world building in the videos, in both the 'Meet' videos and other TF2 promotional works on YouTube we get a picture of relationship between the mercenaries and the company they work for. Granted this is much more explicitly done in the graphic novels, but at the end of the day having a multiplayer only game that has its story and lore given through YouTube videos and graphic novels is something Valve did first. The reason others are doing it is because it has proven successful enough to emulate, so it's no surprise that Blizzard, who have ripping off emulating the ideas of others as their entire business model would do the same.

Zontar:

Is there anything they're doing that isn't being taken from Valve's playbook?

You mean the playbook filled with stuff they either bought off someone else and gave a new lick of paint paid homage to (like, say, TF2 itself) and/or ripped-off emulated like DOTA2?

Aeshi:

You mean the playbook filled with stuff they either bought off someone else and gave a new lick of paint paid homage to (like, say, TF2 itself) and/or ripped-off emulated like DOTA2?

TF2 was built from the ground up, hell it was completely changed twice from what it was originally supposed to be. Sure the original started off as a mod like Counter Strike, but that mod was a realistic shooter and not a stylised one.

As for DOTA2, who are they emulating? The DOTA mod was the first MOBA. Is it a ripoff emulation because it was a mod for Warcraft?

Zontar:

As for DOTA2, who are they emulating? The DOTA mod was the first MOBA. Is it a ripoff emulation because it was a mod for Warcraft?

If you have a better term for taking all the WC3 assets the DOTA used, changing them all juuuuuust enough that they can't be sued and screaming "Original Character Models, do not steal!" I'd like to hear it.

Aeshi:

If you have a better term for taking all the WC3 assets the DOTA used, changing them all juuuuuust enough that they can't be sued and screaming "Original Character Models, do not steal!" I'd like to hear it.

Given how WC3 (along with literally every other Blizzard game ever made) took both its character models and the entire story of their games and changed them just enough that they actually lowered the bar for how little needs to be changed to not be sued, and the fact DOTA 2's characters look about as similar to WC3's then WC3's look to generic DnD ones, the comparison seems to fall flat, especially when one remembers the fact that Blizzard's original ideas bin is about as deep as a dried up kiddie pool.

The entirety of everything they've ever produced vs the visuals for a single game are not exactly what one could call "comparable".

Laggyteabag:

Scarim Coral:
I admit the trailer was kinda neat but I can't help to wonder with the whole "We are Overwatch" and yet they have assassin like Reaper and Widow Maker and the outlaw like Roadhog among their ranks at the end.

A lot of these characters, like Reaper and Widow Maker, have never actually been associated with Overwatch as a group. These guys are just mercenaries, or from other organisations, and I guess that they just added them in to make sure that it isn't Overwatch vs Overwatch 100% of the time.

Fun fact: Only 9 out of the 21 characters in Overwatch were actually part of the Overwatch group.

Thats not actually true at all.

With very little exception (Roadhog and Junkrat being the two I remember off the top of my head) most characters were in Overwatch when it existed. Reaper used to be the leader of Overwatch actually.

What the game is based off of is long after Overwatch is done for as an organization, which is established in the first cinematic they made for it.

Laggyteabag:

Scarim Coral:
I admit the trailer was kinda neat but I can't help to wonder with the whole "We are Overwatch" and yet they have assassin like Reaper and Widow Maker and the outlaw like Roadhog among their ranks at the end.

A lot of these characters, like Reaper and Widow Maker, have never actually been associated with Overwatch as a group. These guys are just mercenaries, or from other organisations, and I guess that they just added them in to make sure that it isn't Overwatch vs Overwatch 100% of the time.

Fun fact: Only 9 out of the 21 characters in Overwatch were actually part of the Overwatch group.

Actually, both Reaper and Widowmaker are former Overwatch members. That said, they both have no reason to be there, as Widowmaker was brainwashed by Talon, and Reaper (a.k.a. Gabriel Reyes) is nursing a grudge against Overwatch/Morrison.

Zontar:

Hawki:
Snip

You do realize all your examples are also examples of companies using the TF2 model, right?

And there has been world building in the videos, in both the 'Meet' videos and other TF2 promotional works on YouTube we get a picture of relationship between the mercenaries and the company they work for. Granted this is much more explicitly done in the graphic novels, but at the end of the day having a multiplayer only game that has its story and lore given through YouTube videos and graphic novels is something Valve did first. The reason others are doing it is because it has proven successful enough to emulate, so it's no surprise that Blizzard, who have ripping off emulating the ideas of others as their entire business model would do the same.

I realize that similarities can be drawn, yes, which was part of my point - the only point of exclusive connection between the two was that they're both a FPS. And even then, Valve's use of EU for its games is predated by various companies, Blizzard included. I can just as easily claim that Valve is "ripping them off" under that. Bear in mind this is Valve, the masters of "take a mod, make it our own," whereas Blizzard is more "take a concept, let's polish and alter it." The differences between DotA and HotS are examples - one, a facelifted mod with barely, if any alterations. The other, the use of entirely new gameplay mechanics.

And I challenge you to name one TF2 video that has actual worldbuilding - a picture of relationships comes under characterization, not worldbuilding. And having watched every "meet the x" video, plus the sandwich and bread video, I can't say I learnt anything about the setting bar there being a red team and blue team (who are fighting for some reason), that red team is accountable to an administrator, and...that's it. The 'worldbuilding' there is so paltry it might as not even exist. Overwatch managed to get more worldbuilding in one cinematic than every "meet the x" video combined. Heck, even Soldier: 76's video actually used worldbuilding in addition to fleshing out Morrison's backstory.

Zontar:

Aeshi:

If you have a better term for taking all the WC3 assets the DOTA used, changing them all juuuuuust enough that they can't be sued and screaming "Original Character Models, do not steal!" I'd like to hear it.

Given how WC3 (along with literally every other Blizzard game ever made) took both its character models and the entire story of their games and changed them just enough that they actually lowered the bar for how little needs to be changed to not be sued, and the fact DOTA 2's characters look about as similar to WC3's then WC3's look to generic DnD ones, the comparison seems to fall flat, especially when one remembers the fact that Blizzard's original ideas bin is about as deep as a dried up kiddie pool.

The entirety of everything they've ever produced vs the visuals for a single game are not exactly what one could call "comparable".

Name one character in WC3 (or any Blizzard game) that literally re-uses a character model from another game.

Plus the difference being that while every Blizz universe has taken inspiration (keyword, inspiration) from another source, each universe has developed over time and become more its own thing. Another difference being that, staying in the realm of WC3, I could list the major characters of the game, and statistically speaking, it's likely that most will have even heard of some of them, and be able to list personality traits. Make a list of DotA heroes on the other hand, and I strongly suspect that anyone who doesn't play DotA will have a hard time naming them, let alone telling us anything about their backstory out of hand.

Face it, DotA, in terms of worldbuilding/asset use is Valve lowering the bar even further. Copy-paste characters from characters (DotA 1) who were copy-pasted from other charcters (WC), put them in a game, call it their own, and then copyright the term "DotA" for good measure. Oh, and then change the names around a bit lest there be a mixup when Blizzard starts using its own characters in HotS. Not that I feel Valve was obligated to, but let's face it - I can tell you much more about "Sylvanas Windrunner" than "Windrunner" out of hand (think her name's Lyralei? Either way, I can't recall any of her backstory.)

Zontar:

Given how WC3 (along with literally every other Blizzard game ever made) took both its character models and the entire story of their games and changed them just enough that they actually lowered the bar for how little needs to be changed to not be sued, and the fact DOTA 2's characters look about as similar to WC3's then WC3's look to generic DnD ones, the comparison seems to fall flat, especially when one remembers the fact that Blizzard's original ideas bin is about as deep as a dried up kiddie pool.

You know what? Challenge accepted!

And this is just the species stuff. I didn't even bother doing more character specific stuff, like comparing DOTA2's Alchemist-who-is-a-little-goblin-fellow-riding-a-giant-brute to Warcraft's Alchemist-who-is-a-little-goblin-fellow-riding-a-giant-brute for instance. I'll keep going tomorrow if you want.

I still have no idea why people are fighting in Overwatch. Makes it kind of hard to enjoy the cinematics they release when I don't know the basics of the conflict.

Xeorm:
I still have no idea why people are fighting in Overwatch. Makes it kind of hard to enjoy the cinematics they release when I don't know the basics of the conflict.

Most of them are mercenaries now, like Reaper and Widowmaker. Some of them are still trying to fight the good fight, like Tracer and Winston. Others are trying to get to the bottom of what/who killed Overwatch in the first place (Soldier 76).

If you watched any of the Overwatch videos you'd know a good bit of this. There's a ton of world building goin on in them.

shintakie10:
Most of them are mercenaries now, like Reaper and Widowmaker. Some of them are still trying to fight the good fight, like Tracer and Winston. Others are trying to get to the bottom of what/who killed Overwatch in the first place (Soldier 76).

If you watched any of the Overwatch videos you'd know a good bit of this. There's a ton of world building goin on in them.

So far, I've watched a few. Most notably, nowhere is there anything saying "This is why we fight" in this video here. Especially not what has them fight in some big brawl as they do ingame.

Xeorm:

shintakie10:
Most of them are mercenaries now, like Reaper and Widowmaker. Some of them are still trying to fight the good fight, like Tracer and Winston. Others are trying to get to the bottom of what/who killed Overwatch in the first place (Soldier 76).

If you watched any of the Overwatch videos you'd know a good bit of this. There's a ton of world building goin on in them.

So far, I've watched a few. Most notably, nowhere is there anything saying "This is why we fight" in this video here. Especially not what has them fight in some big brawl as they do ingame.

They're mercenaries or fighting against mercenaries, or if they're Junkrat they're just causing mayhem. Its not going to be perfect due to the way that the mechanics of the game work, but if you're askin for somethin that specific you're not goin to get an answer.

The way you're phrasin the question you want to know why you're in a team with X characters fighting Y characters while also wanting to know why X character would also be fighting their doppelganger on the other team, or multiple doppelgangers on the other team.

It'd be like asking about the story of ToR based off the pvp matches. That very specific thing isn't meant to make sense, it just exists inside the overall story.

shintakie10:
They're mercenaries or fighting against mercenaries, or if they're Junkrat they're just causing mayhem. Its not going to be perfect due to the way that the mechanics of the game work, but if you're askin for somethin that specific you're not goin to get an answer.

The way you're phrasin the question you want to know why you're in a team with X characters fighting Y characters while also wanting to know why X character would also be fighting their doppelganger on the other team, or multiple doppelgangers on the other team.

It'd be like asking about the story of ToR based off the pvp matches. That very specific thing isn't meant to make sense, it just exists inside the overall story.

Oh, ok. That makes sense. I'm used to games spinning stories about what the characters do while you're playing, not about what the characters do when you're not playing. My mistake.

All this lore wasted on an FPS, if only Blizzard hadn't sold out to activision we might have gotten a ground breaking new mmo instead of 2 minute cutscenes. I don't want to go read wiki's to find out why my characters are fighting, I want it in the game I am playing. But we can't have lore in game in fps's :/

Zontar:

WhiteTigerShiro:
Don't forget about the announced graphic novel that'll act as the back story to the game's setting.

Is there anything they're doing that isn't being taken from Valve's playbook?

I guess I didn't know that Valve created graphic novels.

Red Panda:
All this lore wasted on an FPS, if only Blizzard hadn't sold out to activision we might have gotten a ground breaking new mmo instead of 2 minute cutscenes.

MMO's fucking suck though. Better to use these on a genre that's worth a damn.

shintakie10:

Xeorm:
I still have no idea why people are fighting in Overwatch. Makes it kind of hard to enjoy the cinematics they release when I don't know the basics of the conflict.

Most of them are mercenaries now, like Reaper and Widowmaker. Some of them are still trying to fight the good fight, like Tracer and Winston. Others are trying to get to the bottom of what/who killed Overwatch in the first place (Soldier 76).

If you watched any of the Overwatch videos you'd know a good bit of this. There's a ton of world building goin on in them.

Annnnnnnd it all means fuck all in the game itself considering you'll have teams of enemies fighting alongside each other. Or, for that matter, faithful comrades pitted against each other. Or, for that other matter, a person pitted against their "evil clone."

.......or there could just be a team comprised of six of the same character. :P

Such is the way of MOBA's, though: when the game starts the story doesn't mean anything at all. A shooter MOBA will be no different.

OT:

I got a kick out of this comment from the youtube page for this video:

We are blizzard fans. We are patient. We are non-streamers. We are Onlywatch.

:P

Strange to see all this storytelling in a game without a storymode. Shame.

Xeorm:
I still have no idea why people are fighting in Overwatch. Makes it kind of hard to enjoy the cinematics they release when I don't know the basics of the conflict.

Probably just "training" between global conflicts and whatnot. Pretty simple excuse companies make in this kind of scenario.

Or, as was stated here, perhaps the video was from their glory days and now things have changed.

Ah I miss the days when Blizzard used to be "darker"

Diablo 1 Intro cinematic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w44SmMFy5Dc

Starcraft 1 Amerigo Cinematic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqqEh-rWy_s

Diablo 2 intro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRXP5td0ZrA

Warcraft 3 Arthas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr7A19TPN_k

Now everything has to look either cartoony and pixar looking and colorful.

Samtemdo8:
Ah I miss the days when Blizzard used to be "darker"

Diablo 1 Intro cinematic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w44SmMFy5Dc

Starcraft 1 Amerigo Cinematic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqqEh-rWy_s

Diablo 2 intro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRXP5td0ZrA

Warcraft 3 Arthas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr7A19TPN_k

Now everything has to look either cartoony and pixar looking and colorful.

Really? Because you seem to mean that you miss the days when Blizzard made nothing but Diablo, Starcraft, and Warcraft. For the record, here's some cinematics from those series:


An entirely new property unrelated to the above three came out and has a different, more cartoony style to it, but that doesn't somehow remove the existence of everything else they've made recently.

LifeCharacter:

Samtemdo8:
Ah I miss the days when Blizzard used to be "darker"

Diablo 1 Intro cinematic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w44SmMFy5Dc

Starcraft 1 Amerigo Cinematic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqqEh-rWy_s

Diablo 2 intro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRXP5td0ZrA

Warcraft 3 Arthas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr7A19TPN_k

Now everything has to look either cartoony and pixar looking and colorful.

Really? Because you seem to mean that you miss the days when Blizzard made nothing but Diablo, Starcraft, and Warcraft. For the record, here's some cinematics from those series:


An entirely new property unrelated to the above three came out and has a different, more cartoony style to it, but that doesn't somehow remove the existence of everything else they've made recently.

Does not help when Blizzard demeans the iconography of the old games. (Looks at Candy costume Muradin Bronzbeard in Heroes of the Storm) This Overwatch game just does not feel like a Blizzard game to me.

Now:

1. World of Warcraft is the one thing I like best about their current cinematics. I did not mind Mist of Pandaria because it was not all "Kung Fu Panda" silly.

2. Starcraft 2 is reletively consistant with the old games in terms of looks. The only thing I did not like is how they changed the look of the Zerg. I feel they made them a bit cartoony and way to spiky.

3. You know unlike alot of people I really did not mind Diablo 3 from a Story Perspective and gameplay. I had fun with the campaign and was engaged with the plot. I just thought Diablo himself looked silly.

Samtemdo8:
Does not help when Blizzard demeans the iconography of the old games. (Looks at Candy costume Muradin Bronzbeard in Heroes of the Storm) This Overwatch game just does not feel like a Blizzard game to me.

Alternate costumes aren't exactly an unknown thing for MOBAs and Blizzard has never had an all serious all the time attitude towards their works, especially Warcraft. I'd consider the costume to be in the same category as those quotes units give when you click on them too many times.

And Overwatch doesn't feel like a Blizzard game because it has a different art style and is in a genre they haven't done yet. Nothing wrong with trying something new, after all.

1. World of Warcraft is the one thing I like best about their current cinematics. I did not mind Mist of Pandaria because it was not all "Kung Fu Panda" silly.

2. Starcraft 2 is reletively consistant with the old games in terms of looks. The only thing I did not like is how they changed the look of the Zerg. I feel they made them a bit cartoony and way to spiky.

3. You know unlike alot of people I really did not mind Diablo 3 from a Story Perspective and gameplay. I had fun with the campaign and was engaged with the plot. I just thought Diablo himself looked silly.

Okay, so you understand that you're complaint about how Blizzard used to be "darker" and now everything had to be cartoony, Pixar-looking, and colorful isn't a reasonable one if it's limited to just those particular design choices, yes? I mean, it's fine to think that Overwatch doesn't really fit with the rest of Blizzard's stuff because, again, this is something completely new for them, but that's pretty much just limited to this one game.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here