• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Overwatch - Review Thread

Toxi

Banned
TF2 was part of the "greatest value purchase of all time" Orange Box, or only... $20 on its own? The value proposition was way different, and people adjusted their demands accordingly.
Ah, okay.

Though I honestly could have spent 60 dollars on Team Fortress 2 and still gotten my subjective money's worth.
 

hodgy100

Member
Not that it really matters in a FPS but Blizzard's character designs are horrible in pretty much all of their games, to me at least...

Going to give this a go when I get home

mei.png

How can you not just adore her? :(
 
What? I mean I can see the design/art style not being appealing to everyone, but there is a shitload of variety/personality to the various heroes.

Yes, who could forget generic cowboy with absolutely zero defining features. Oh and cyborg ninja #16825 complete with yellow glowy bits. Or that one shadowy dude who looks like he was designed by a 12 year old and has the most obvious name ever..

Just because something is colorful doesn't mean it has personality or charm.
 

Codiox

Member
Well, first of all why does a game need to have unlockables? That's a very recent introduction to gaming and people were very happy with online shooters for many years before that....

Yeah, many people also were happy with black/white TV screens...
I like unlocks for motivate me to play a game longer. And only some skins are not what will motivate me to play a game any longer.

On top of that, the game is ridiculously polished.

So today this is a feature that makes a game outstanding? That it works as intended? This shouldnt be something "nice to have". This should be a requirement.

What was the appeal of TF2 when it first released? That one didn't have any unlockables or weapon variety either and it had a lot less classes. Yet it still was one of the best multiplayer shooters of all time for mostly the same reasons.

This is something i cant answer because i never played TF2 or looked it up. It never interested me because it didnt looked appealing to me. Maybe for the same reasons.

I really don't understand why people are having such a hard time getting this game, especially those who have tried it. You might not like it, but the appeal is pretty apparent.

For me, its not, and therefore i want that somebody explain this to me.
 
W-what. I can easily look at a character's silhouette alone (which is how I figure out who I'm going for since I play as Mercy) and tell you who's who. In design alone it's more diverse than most shooters and most games because I can, at a glance, look at the character and tell you exactly what I can expect out of them. That comes from playing for... 3 hours maybe? I don't agree with the Pixar comparison but the game's designs are far from anonymous.

It's going to be tough to tell the difference between a McCree and that godawful Soldier 76 America skin at a distance.
 
Yeah, many people also were happy with black/white TV screens...
I like unlocks for motivate me to play a game longer. And only some skins are not what will motivate me to play a game any longer.



So today this is a feature that makes a game outstanding? That it works as intended? This shouldnt be something "nice to have". This should be a requirement.



This is something i cant answer because i never played TF2 or looked it up. It never interested me because it didnt looked appealing to me. Maybe for the same reasons.



For me, its not, and therefore i want that somebody explain this to me.

A game can work as intended and have sub-par UI, bad sound design or few languages. In Overwatch, even the menus look great, and there's audio for any language you can wish for. That's good polish, IMO. Things that are not essential, but nice to have. It's not just technical but artistic, too.
 
Ah, okay.

Though I honestly could have spent 60 dollars on Team Fortress 2 and still gotten my subjective money's worth.

You and me both. Honestly though, at launch I couldn't have been less interested. I would've paid the money for Portal and Episode 2 each, though.

For me, its not, and therefore i want that somebody explain this to me.

Are you at all getting what other people find appealing about it? I mean, obviously it's not for you, but for those of us who do enjoy it, its basis of appeal is just that it's deeply satisfying to play. it is inherently fun, absent of any unlockables or customization. Everything about it feels great.
 

Codiox

Member
That's the point... you're playing a character who specializes in certain weaponry/abilities. If you didn't like it, try another character...

"After the beta i thought "okay, i have seen all of the game now, why should i buy it?" . "

You can't even be bothered to remember the only character you played as Pharah, And that she can fly, and has a conc shot that knocks people around? But you only know she has an rpg... you really don't play games much huh so weird that you're trying so hard to understand this game specifically right now after you hated the beta.

yeah i remember her name and her abilites. thanks. i never said i hated the game, i just said i dont understand what makes this game awesome. thanks for the conversation.
 

Codiox

Member
You and me both. Honestly though, at launch I couldn't have been less interested. I would've paid the money for Portal and Episode 2 each, though.



Are you at all getting what other people find appealing about it? I mean, obviously it's not for you, but for those of us who do enjoy it, its basis of appeal is just that it's deeply satisfying to play. it is inherently fun, absent of any unlockables or customization. Everything about it feels great.

TBH this seems like the best answer i got until now. Thank you.

Maybe i should just try the game again to understand it. I thought the beta was enough to understand it, maybe i was wrong.
 

Xaero Gravity

NEXT LEVEL lame™
Not that it really matters in a FPS but Blizzard's character designs are horrible in pretty much all of their games, to me at least...

Going to give this a go when I get home
That's my biggest issue with the game. I'm not a fan of any of the characters from an aesthetic point of view.
 

Staf

Member
Haven't followed this game but it looks great. But can i play this game casually without being yelled at by someone 15-20 years younger than me?
 

Toxi

Banned
Not that it really matters in a FPS but Blizzard's character designs are horrible in pretty much all of their games, to me at least...

Going to give this a go when I get home
I think the final game has a good variety of character designs. When revealed I was not that impressed for reasons like the typical cartoon lack of visual diversity for female characters compared to male characters, but further reveals of D-VA, Zarya, and Mei helped make the female cast look more lively while Hanzo, Soldier 76, McCree, and Genji made the male side less crazy and more consistent in comparison.

Biggest problem with the character designs for me right now is that certain skins are too different from the distinct character silhouettes provided by the normal costumes. For example, Reaper's default costume has a long flowing trenchcoat while Soldier 76 has a more compact design. Their Origins skins reverse this so Soldier 76 has a long flowing coat while Reaper loses it. I feel like their backstory designs should have been designed to keep the character silhouette consistent.
 

hodgy100

Member
Yeah, many people also were happy with black/white TV screens...
I like unlocks for motivate me to play a game longer. And only some skins are not what will motivate me to play a game any longer.



So today this is a feature that makes a game outstanding? That it works as intended? This shouldnt be something "nice to have". This should be a requirement.



This is something i cant answer because i never played TF2 or looked it up. It never interested me because it didnt looked appealing to me. Maybe for the same reasons.



For me, its not, and therefore i want that somebody explain this to me.

Ok

some people like videogames where they give you lots of things to do and they have fun churning through all that content. some people like videogames that provide varied and interesting game mechanics for them to master. every character in overwatch is practically completely unique in the way they control and the way they are played. its not like Battlefield where each class is for the most part exactly the same with small variances.

and by polish people don't just mean bug free and functionally sound. They mean the quality of the art, the animation, all the attention to detail. The game feels like its been obsessed over by people that really care about what they are making and there are very few (if any) rough edges in the game.

if you didnt like the game in the beta, then dont buy the game. its ok to not enjoy a game :p
 

Toxi

Banned
Heard of him, never saw him until now.

The skin is still bad.

YLcyCX9.png


He looks more like McCree without a hat than he does Soldier 76.
Yeah, this is a major problem with character skins for me. They need to preserve the original silhouette of the character or else players will have more trouble recognizing certain characters at a glance.
 

Zemm

Member
Can someone enlighten me how Overwatch has a "depth issue"?

It doesn't. It's going to take a very long time before people master most of these classes individually. Then you have to master how they work with different team set-ups. Yeah this game had depth alright, anyone saying otherwise are clueless.
 

Hasney

Member
It doesn't. It's going to take a very long time before people master most of these classes individually. Then you have to master how they work with different team set-ups. Yeah this game had depth alright, anyone saying otherwise are clueless.

Yeah, vanilla TF2 didn't have much of a depth problem and this has even more.
 

Azoor

Member
Except you missed the part where each TF2 characters have a primary, secondary and a special melee weapon while Overwatch only has one weapon for each + a standard melee.

And then you have the fact that there are multiple options for each of these three weapon slots for each characters. The total permutations of weapons and equipments available in TF2 easily outnumbers Overwatch right now so your claim that isn't really based on anything solid.

Except the weapons change wasn't there when TF2 launched. Each class had specific weapons and that's it. I hope Blizzard do the same with Overwatch.
 
TBH this seems like the best answer i got until now. Thank you.

Maybe i should just try the game again to understand it. I thought the beta was enough to understand it, maybe i was wrong.

You want my honest advice? Don't worry about it that much. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it's going to click with you. It's ok to watch the hot new thing pass you by and not get caught up in the hype.

I picked it up just as much out of curiosity as I did out of genuine interest. I've always been open to the idea of playing something like this, but for various reasons they rarely take hold of me. It's a combination of factors that really have little to do with the games themselves. They involve the following:

1.) I'm not very good at shooters. Perhaps I just don't play them enough, but as of now this is true. So the idea of going online and being the team scrub that causes everyone else to lose and attracts grief isn't very appealing.

2.) I don't have set free time that I can dedicate to the game and find a good group of players to play with. Especially for something like an online game where pausing isn't an option, my time is basically limited to late at night after my kid goes to sleep.

3.) Because of 2, I've never really been one to like voice chat. Most of my time playing is when my wife and kid are asleep, so I try to make as little noise as possible when playing games at night.

I realize that these may have nothing to do with your complaints about your experience with the beta, but that's where I'm attacking this from. I really doubt that this game takes hold of me. However, I'm willing to give it a shot. And the reason why is just that I like the objective-based nature and variety of playstyles in the characters as a contrast to a pure deathmatch style of game that doesn't appeal to me much at all anymore. I get the feeling that while the core of the game remains the same, individual matches could be quite varied. And because of all of this, perhaps I won't feel like an asshole when I get paried up with a group and am the worst person out there.

We shall see. Just due to the nature of how I play games, I'm not expecting miracles. But this is the first team-based shooter that has really piqued my interest.
 
Heard of him, never saw him until now.

The skin is still bad.

YLcyCX9.png


He looks more like McCree without a hat than he does Soldier 76.

McCree's hat is probably his most defining feature, if I see the outline of a generic man character and it doesn't have a hat on, it's not McCree.

Folk wanting an explanation on why people like the game are bonkers. I don't like loads of games, I don't need someone to explain to me reasons why they like so that I can try and convince myself I also like it or double down on my hatred of it.
 

Zemm

Member
Except the weapons change wasn't there when TF2 launched. Each class had specific weapons and that's it. I hope Blizzard do the same with Overwatch.

I hope Blizzard never add multiple weapons for each character, that's what helped ruin TF2 for me. The bloat was insane. Not knowing what type of solider or demoman you were up against was also really dumb. Sometimes keeping it simple is the best way of keeping a game fun and competitive. Valve didn't get that memo and ruined TF2 with all their additions.
 
Not that it really matters in a FPS but Blizzard's character designs are horrible in pretty much all of their games, to me at least...

Going to give this a go when I get home

You are fucking crazy.
Its probably the biggest strentght this game has. Talking about Overwatch's character design, not blizzard in general.
 
McCree's hat is probably his most defining feature, if I see the outline of a generic man character and it doesn't have a hat on, it's not McCree.

Folk wanting an explanation on why people like the game are bonkers. I don't like loads of games, I don't need someone to explain to me reasons why they like so that I can try and convince myself I also like it or double down on my hatred of it.

I have played the game and mistaken a 76 with that skin with a McCree. It's an actual issue.

I can see that you may think it's hyperbolic, but having recognizable silhouettes is hugely important in a game where people can change characters all the time.
 
Honestly as unpopular as this opinion is, I agree with you.

It feels bland and lifeless and unoriginal like any other modern MP shooter, I want to like it and try and understand why it is getting so much praise but I have watched so many videos on it and I just don't get it, is it getting so much praise because it's blizzard? (My gut is telling me yes.)

Maybe I just have different tastes and it just isn't for me, that being said I enjoyed TF2 and I thought this would be just like that and I would enjoy it and it kind if is but then at the same time it's sort of more grindy and modern and that puts me off.

I dunno, I rarely play multiplayer games anymore anyway so maybe it's an age thing like you say, I am glad to see others getting such enjoyment from it though at the very least.

TBH this seems like the best answer i got until now. Thank you.

Maybe i should just try the game again to understand it. I thought the beta was enough to understand it, maybe i was wrong.

If you guys play on console, I would say give it a rent at Redbox or something if you are still interested in giving it another go. I feel like alot of the enjoyment I get out of this game is from playing with friends and gaffers. Solo queuing is kind of hit or miss. If the rest of your team doesn't care about team makeup or playing the objective, it can seriously put a damper on your experience. That being said, each character is designed with specific strengths and weaknesses. So if you find your are have trouble against a specific character with your current one, dont be afraid to switch it up. It is entirely possible that who you chose (maybe Pharah in this case) is weak vs the enemy (hanzo, widowmaker, etc.).

I see the depth in not just the moment to moment gameplay, but in team composition, and learning which to switch to another character when it isn't work.
 

Trionix11

Neo Member
Why do I feel like the fact that all future characters and maps being free is being ignored by the more negative reviews(which are still fairly good).

Complaining about microtransactions but ignoring the free characters and maps frustrates me.
 

Kyonashi

Member
Damn, no game on the Metacritic all-time top PC score has above 96, and that's what Overwatch is currently sitting at. Pretty impressive company.
 

nynt9

Member
All 3 of those points are basically my life, I play when my wife and kid sleep, don't use voice chat, I also suck at MP shooters and I don't have the time/energy to dedicate myself to an online game.

Well thankfully for you this game automatically tells you what a good team should look like, shows healers where damaged friendlies are. It also doesn't have grindy unlocks so someone who plays 10 hours a day won't have an extrinsic advantage over someone who plays an hour a day. And there are several characters who don't require precision aiming so you can play even if you suck at shooters.
 

Azoor

Member
I hope Blizzard never add multiple weapons for each character, that's what helped ruin TF2 for me. The bloat was insane. Not knowing what type of solider or demoman you were up against was also really dumb. Sometimes keeping it simple is the best way of keeping a game fun and competitive. Valve didn't get that memo and ruined TF2 with all their additions.

They could add things like skins and after effects and silly versions of existing weapons do they won't face the problem TF2 have.
 
Not surprised by these high scores. It's simultaneously one of the most accessible FPS games I've ever played while still being one of the most interesting. Add Blizzard's level of polish and you have something really special. Anyone on the fence because they feel intimidated by multiplayer shooters should give it a chance. I don't think I've ever played an FPS before that was this beginner friendly.

The accessibility is even nice for someone like me who has been playing online shooters for years. My aim was never the best and it's definitely gotten worse over the years, so the fact that there are all these characters more focused on things like spacing and movement means I can still play effectively even with my lackluster aiming.
 
I'm surprised that the game is reviewing so highly. This is the first multplayer FPS I've played since Team Fortress 2 and absolutely love it. However, the game is still an 8 or 8.5 out of the gate to me because it feels a bit light on the content, in terms of maps.

Give it another 4 or 5 maps at minimum, maybe another game mode, and there should be enough variety to solve problems in the short term. This is what gave Team Fortress 2 a good life before Valve ruined the game with hats, and what stopped Splatoon from being a dead new IP for Nintendo.
 

Won

Member
Why do I feel like the fact that all future characters and maps being free is being ignored by the more negative reviews(which are still fairly good).

Complaining about microtransactions but ignoring the free characters and maps frustrates me.

Because they are reviews. We don't know what we are actually gonna get and how it shapes the game. You can't review that, no matter how devoted you are to Blizzard.

You can review it again after things have been added. Some have done that with TF2.
 

nOoblet16

Member
Except the weapons change wasn't there when TF2 launched. Each class had specific weapons and that's it. I hope Blizzard do the same with Overwatch.
Ofcourse but still each class had 3 different engagement options, so you're selling it short by saying TF2 does a little less than half the classes of Overwatch so it's less complicated purely on that basis while ignoring the different playstyle and counters each of those abilities, equipments and weapons provided. 1 character in TF2 is a more complex than 1 in Overwatch even without the additions. It's the entire reason Overwatch has more characters in total.

And I can guarantee you that you won't have alternate weapons for existing characters and I doubt Blizzard will add as many as 30 more characters via updates.
 

hodgy100

Member
Ofcourse but still each class had 3 different engagement options, so you're selling it short by saying TF2 does a little less than half the classes of Overwatch so it's less complicated.

And I can guarantee you that you won't have alternate weapons for existing characters and I doubt Blizzard will add as many as 30 more characters via updates.

Id argue you dont want THAT many minor variances. you need to be able to easily go "ok this hero is there and this is how I deal with this hero"

adding multiple very different weapons to each hero complicates that:

"ok this hero is here but what weapon do they have, how do i deal with this hero?"
 

nynt9

Member
Ofcourse but still each class had 3 different engagement options, so you're selling it short by saying TF2 does a little less than half the classes of Overwatch so it's less complicated purely on that basis while ignoring the different playstyle and counters each of those abilities, equipments and weapons provided. 1 character in TF2 is a more complex than 1 in Overwatch even without the additions. It's the entire reason Overwatch has more characters in total.

And I can guarantee you that you won't have alternate weapons for existing characters and I doubt Blizzard will add as many as 30 more characters via updates.

Some heroes have multiple weapons, some have alt fire, they all have at least 2 abilities and an ultimate, some have mobility skills, they all have varying health, many abilities have at least two types of use to them (reaper's shadow form is useful both as a speed boost and invulnerability).

Boiling it down to just the weapons is ridiculously reductive.
 

Azoor

Member
Ofcourse but still each class had 3 different engagement options, so you're selling it short by saying TF2 does a little less than half the classes of Overwatch so it's less complicated purely on that basis while ignoring the different playstyle and counters each of those abilities, equipments and weapons provided. 1 character in TF2 is a more complex than 1 in Overwatch even without the additions. It's the entire reason Overwatch has more characters in total.

And I can guarantee you that you won't have alternate weapons for existing characters and I doubt Blizzard will add as many as 30 more characters via updates.

Please go back and read my original comment. I never said Overwatch has more depth.
 
Top Bottom