From Paladins to Rivals: Why Hero Shooters Are So Stupidly Fun
I started with Paladins, not Overwatch. A love letter to hero shooters like Marvel Rivals and Overwatch, and why their living game of rock-paper-scissors, with tanks, DPS, supports, and ultimates, is so stupidly fun.
A captured spark. Unverified, unpolished, possibly wrong.
I didn’t start with Overwatch. I started with Paladins. Years before Marvel Rivals had everyone diving onto Spider-Man and Doctor Strange, I was grinding away in the game a lot of people slept on, and somewhere in there I caught a bug that never quite cleared: the hero shooter itch.
So what is a hero shooter? Take an ordinary shooter, where everyone sprints around with more or less the same guns, and detonate that idea. Hand every player a distinct character instead, with their own kit, their own attitude, their own job on the team. Those jobs sort into three buckets people call the holy trinity: tanks (big, beefy, soak the damage and carve out space), DPS (damage per second, the glass cannons who actually close the kills), and support (the healers and shielders keeping everyone upright). Overwatch made the shape famous, Paladins ran with it, Marvel Rivals bolted superheroes on top. Same skeleton, fresh paint.
Here’s the real reason it hooks. A hero shooter is secretly an enormous, living game of rock-paper-scissors. Every character bullies some heroes and folds against others, a relationship designers call a counter. Enemy team picks a flying dive comp? Swap to someone who shreds flyers. They stack a wall of shields? Bring the hero who ignores shields outright. So a match isn’t only about aiming well, though landing that “skill expression” feels incredible. It’s a puzzle you and four teammates solve in real time, against an answer that keeps moving because the other five people are solving it right back at you. That’s the same loop as reading an opponent and hunting the weak link in their setup, the whole attacker’s mindset. Then somebody fires their ultimate, the big saved-up super move, the team fight goes off like a grenade, and the puzzle resets from scratch.
And then there’s the other half: you get to be a different person every match. Some days I want to be the wall. Some days the medic who quietly carries the entire team and lets the loud ones take the credit. Some days I want to dive the backline and sow pure chaos. One game, three completely different moods, all wearing the same logo. That range is how “just one more” turns into three hours.
The kicker is that a hero shooter has no single way to win. The “best” character mutates week to week as players turn up new combos, a kind of shifting weather they call the meta. So you never actually master the game. You master a game that rewrites its own rules while you’re mid-match, which, now that I say it out loud, is the exact puzzle from the invisible scoreboard. Maybe that’s why I never put it down. A fight you can fully solve goes stale fast. This one just refuses to hold still.
Paths that lead here
No paths yet. This note is still off the beaten track.
Where this note points
- The attacker's mindset is systems thinking · Attackers don't break rules; they discover that the rules compose differently than the designers believed.
- The Invisible Scoreboard: How Do You Win at Being a Person? · Imagine an invisible scoreboard over your head: buy a friend a mango, +5; be cruel, −50. The catch is nobody handed you the rulebook. A tour of ethics: consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics, and moral luck.
More from these beds
- AI Slop and the Quiet Cost of Foraging · Maggie Appleton calls it jetspraying the web with AI slop. Here is why that cheap flood is so exhausting, told through Information Foraging Theory, and why your tiredness is a rational response, not a personal failing.
- The Dead Internet and Your Pattern-Hungry Brain · That creeping sense that the internet is mostly bots talking to bots has a name. Here is why the feeling is partly real, partly a trick your own mind plays, and what apophenia and the illusory truth effect are doing to you while you scroll.
- Explaining Without the Lecture · I got called a bad explainer, and I think I earned it. The fix isn't reading minds. It's the curse of knowledge, Grice's maxim of quantity, and treating an explanation like a game of catch instead of a monologue.
- Fuzzing is evolution with a weird fitness function · Bridging theoretical biology and systems security in a way that isn't just a superficial metaphor