In a previous comment, you argued this point (that damage over the course of a game doesn't matter), and, as an example, said that bastion has the highest damage per second is still bad. I was pointing out that a character's damage per second is completely different from their damage over the course of the game and that therefore this example does not make any sense. In the comment after that, after I point out that I'm using "damage over the course of the game" not "damage per second," you say,

His damage is fine. He just doesn't get to do it. Entirely different problems.

Once again, you are using "damage" in this sentence to mean "damage per second." You seem to agree with me that bastion does not do enough damage over the course of a game, because, as you say, "he just doesn't get to do it." Things like lack of mobility and lack of reliability both mean that, even if the character does an extremely high rate of damage per second, that character may do very little damage over the course of a game because his high dps will rarely connect on anyone. And so, yes, lack of mobility and lack of reliability can both make a character do not enough damage, using the definition of damage that I stated I was using, and this last comment shows you clearly understand the way I was using the word damage.

In this last comment you say, "Damage over the course of the game means very little. Damage over the course of the game only says you damaged something, not that you killed it." This is a reasonable argument, and I certainly agree to an extent. In previous comments I had simplified my argument into "damage done over the course of a game is the most important thing" because you couldn't seem to grasp the difference between total damage and damage per second, you were using them interchangeably throughout your comments despite them meaning completely different things.

So look, I personally think that "damage done over a game" is at best a rough indicator of how well you did. (Though I don't think it's "meaningless" as you say it is.) This is why when you said earlier that "A McCree that does 20% more damage isn't necessarily any better than the McCree that does less" I didn't (and don't) disagree. (Though 20% more damage is a lot more damage and that McCree probably still did more for his team, but you certainly can't be sure. Though of course you'd have to compare damage stats based on how long the game lasted and ignore (or weight differently) damage done to barriers. If the McCree did 20% more damage but their match lasted twice as long then they probably did considerably worse than the other McCree)