I think Team Fortress 2 straddles the line between a traditional First-Person Shooter (FPS) and the League-of-Legends-style Multiplayer Online Battle Arena (MOBA) genre (which came to prominence later), while Overwatch goes deep into MOBA territory to its own detriment.
Every character in Overwatch is meant to be highly distinct, with their own weapons, special abilities and a strong "ultimate" ability which must be charged before use. This leads to visual clutter, lack of baseline expectations, and poor dramatic tension.
I enjoyed playing Overwatch, but found Overwatch League (the professional broadcast series of Overwatch matches) to be borderline un-watchable. The special abilities on every character evidently need to feel "epic" which requires lots of special effects. Combined with many characters in a single fight, this leads to a lot of visual clutter. In contrast, Team Fortress 2 mostly has bullet attacks that produce little visual clutter. The only strong form of visual clutter is a flamethrower which is used as a disorienting short-range ambush weapon. Watching TF2 Highlander (a 9 versus 9 competitive format) I have a much clearer idea what is happening than Overwatch's 6 versus 6 team format. While the plentiful visual effects work reasonably well in MOBAs (which have an isometric or overhead camera), they combine poorly with the chaotic world of First-Person Shooters.
The special abilities and unique heroes of Overwatch also make it difficult to form a reliable expectation of what any given character can do. Team Fortress 2 has a clear baseline for health, speed, attack and support ability, roughly at the Pyro class. Deficits in one area generally coincide with strengths in another. While Overwatch has a roughly standard health level for small, light classes everything else varies wildly. In particular, tank classes (with high health and defensive abilities) enjoyed reasonable speed, attack and support abilities leading to the infamous "Goats comp" of all tank and support classes. This composition took over competitive play and caused Overwatch developers to update the game to artificially force teams to pick damage-dealing heroes. While Team Fortress 2 competitive leagues limit the number of players who can play the healing or area damage classes, all 9 classes have consistently seen play. The issue here is not merely balance, but rather that TF2 characters conform to a rough baseline. 4 of 9 classes in TF2 have access to the exact same shotgun, and a 5th has a similar weapon. Almost all strong weapons are tuned to output damage roughly in line with this shotgun. Overwatch has no such commonalities or baseline. It feels like TF2 took a generic character and generated 9 interesting permutations, while Overwatch created about 30 interesting characters from scratch. The result is more variety, but also less coherence.
Team Fortress 2 only has an ultimate ability on one class in the base game; the healing class can grant a few seconds of invincibility. While some ultimate-type abilities have been introduced over the years, these generally are less impactful than the Medic ultimate and require much greater tradeoffs. The flow of every match of TF2 is shaped by Medic ultimate abilities while other ultimate-type abilities are rarely so impactful. This creates excellent dramatic tension, as the whole team coordinates around a single moment where the peak of their team's capacity to win is unleashed. In Overwatch every character has their own ultimate ability and many of the "mere" special abilities are also quite impactful. Thus every fight presents a random selection of powerful abilities rather than clearly defined moments of higher and lesser tension.
The State does not exist, it is just another religion. Sadly its worshippers are very real and should be avoided if at all possible.
I think Hayek's Road to Serfdom explains this well
Wasn't there some Bitcoin mixer dev who got convicted?
I'm searching for it but the only one I'm finding is Fog and he seemed to actually run the service, not just contribute code
It looks like he's arguing with them before & after getting stabbed
This is a bad idea
Moreover he should avoid someone with a knife unless he's armed with a greater weapon
Did you notice the 18% gratuity already included?
I agree with that
However, I think in practice it would more closely resemble the ancien regime, with punishments like death and exile much more common. I think the "outlaw" system of the American West worked very well, with criminals denied the protection of the law (and thus subject to death or other injury). I also think in a sytem of private law there would be armed self-defense, and thus another avenue by which the death of criminals would become much more common.
Murphy seems to think that a private law system would become nearly pacifist, but I strongly disagree. The ability to be soft requires very strong security which in turn requires that somewhere along the line there is iron determination. We are seeing exactly that tension unravel in modern Europe and the Anglophone countries.
There is no scenario where nobody innocent ever dies. It's just not on the table.
I am strongly in disagreement.
I think lifelong incarceration is inhumane and burdens victims & law-abiding people (eg via taxation).
I'm willing to bite the bullet on some nonzero error rate, and I would encourage you to realize that your alternative (eg life incarceration) will also have a non-zero error rate.
It is sometimes argued that lifelong incarceration is cheaper than the death penalty, on account of the automatic appeals associated with the death penalty. Either these appeals do not tend to bring about justice, and they could be removed without an issue, or they do bring about justice and foregoing them for life incarceration would entail a higher error rate in life incarceration than in execution.
Californians voted almost 60-40 to restrict benefits to illegal imigrants
A Jewish judge decided the citizens of California had no right to do anything that might diminish the flow of illegals
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_California_Proposition_187
Maybe he was a sharp guy prior to his disease
But check out this interview (eg at 1m45s)
Was Stephen Hawking a genius, or a retard in a chair which other physicists used as a convenient mouthpiece?
I am skeptical that incompetence promoting peasant revolt is the fuel for revolutions
It seems to me that usually revolutions are led by members of the oligarchic class forming a counter-elite
English, French, Russian revolutions all follow this pattern
Even something like the defeat of the Kapp Putsch (by general strike) was effectively led by the pre-existing privileged class
"gold without the weight"
aka nothing at all