Overwatch Review: Great characters, built with teamwork in mind

[alabama man]

^ This.

This is one of the most enjoyable games I've played in a long time. It sure wasn't what I was expecting, and it's unique mechanics that differentiate it from your standard shooter really do pull you in hard.

My girlfriend, roommate, and one co-worker played yesterday for about 3 hours together - and I can honestly say I haven't had that much fun in any MP game in years.

Ofc the game can be worth the money for you when it provides you with plenty of fun. MP games are sometimes played for hundreds of hours if not thousands.

But really this is Blizzard here. They definitely could do way more. Starcraft 2 is a great example of a game with plenty of value. They are experts in game making and in no shortage of funds.

Overwatch isn't my thing so I wont enjoy it but looking at it from the value of the content its really underwhelming. They did the bare minimum and you know it. That they put micro transactions into this bare minimum 60$ game is an insult. If CoD would do this there would be all hell loose.

Also the graphics look like they're made for Intel HD in mind. To end on a positive note, yes the many hero characters are cool and all. Its just that I happened to play games like Timesplitters and looking at what games provide today for a premium price it really leaves me wondering where we are heading.

Cod had lootbox system and to top that they have dlc that splits player base. To get a full cod game you need to pay 100$ or more. Also why do you want everything to be grey and have quake grunts? You have loads of realistic looking shooters to choose from so why it bothers you if someone likes to spot the characters without hacking them bright green and disabling level textures? I think it looks great and having over 200fps constantly with these graphics is better priority than making it prettier for 10% of gamers.

 

[Burty117]

Have you read the stuff about "project titan" which was meant to be the next big Blizzard MMO like Destiny/Division, how it was cancelled and how some think that Overwatch is scraps of that project turned into a multiplayer shooter. Certainly explains the level of detail/story/animated shorts etc. that have been turned out for it so far.

Of course I have, Blizzard already admitted Tracer was basically ripped straight out of "Project Titan".

- Part One

- Part Two

- Part Three

Although it's an hour to watch all 3 parts it's well worth it, They hint at a few things that probably came from Project Titan. I'm still holding out for a single player story driven Overwatch one day though

 

[Evernessince]

That $60($40 on PC) gets you content updates for the life of the game, no paid DLC's. The hell is wrong with that?

1. You don't know what you are getting before hand. The content updates may very well be good or they could be bad. For all we know the content updates could be additions to the micro-transactions or one map every 3 months.

2. The content should be in the game at launch. Not months laters and you don't even know what you are getting. If you are going to treat the game like an online game it should be free and supported by Micro-transactions. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. Another game that follows the same payment model, Guild Wars 2, is an MMO where the server costs are way higher, the base game had way more content, and they've add a massive amount each month to the game. Overwatch looks bad whether you compare it to other AAA games or other Online MMOs with the same payment model. It doesn't even have 1/50 the content guild wars 2 has.

 

[Nero7]

Cod had lootbox system and to top that they have dlc that splits player base. To get a full cod game you need to pay 100$ or more. Also why do you want everything to be grey and have quake grunts? You have loads of realistic looking shooters to choose from so why it bothers you if someone likes to spot the characters without hacking them bright green and disabling level textures? I think it looks great and having over 200fps constantly with these graphics is better priority than making it prettier for 10% of gamers.

leave the straw man in the closet.
hey if you enjoy the game you bought I sure don't mind about that. Not that I would enjoy it, I got standards.

 

[YSignal]

1. You don't know what you are getting before hand. The content updates may very well be good or they could be bad. For all we know the content updates could be additions to the micro-transactions or one map every 3 months.

2. The content should be in the game at launch. Not months laters and you don't even know what you are getting. If you are going to treat the game like an online game it should be free and supported by Micro-transactions. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. Another game that follows the same payment model, Guild Wars 2, is an MMO where the server costs are way higher, the base game had way more content, and they've add a massive amount each month to the game. Overwatch looks bad whether you compare it to other AAA games or other Online MMOs with the same payment model. It doesn't even have 1/50 the content guild wars 2 has.

There is no paywall for anything in this game. Again buying loot boxes is COMPLETELY OPTIONAL. It's also not an MMO so stop comparing it others. LOL at haters.

 

[Evernessince]

There is no paywall for anything in this game. Again buying loot boxes is COMPLETELY OPTIONAL. It's also not an MMO so stop comparing it others. LOL at haters.

If it doesn't want to be compared to MMOs it shouldn't have the same model as some of them. It's fair game if they both use the game pay model.

Is everything completely optional or just about as much as buying gems in mobile games? You don't have to buy it but the game sure does encourage you to do so. Let's just put it like this, Blizzard ran some numbers and figured that people would be willing to pay for content that would normally be included free. Blizzard doesn't publicly disclose the loot box drop rate. Do you actually know how long it would take to unlock everything without paying? Considering that you can get the same stuff over and over and getting duplicates only gives you a tiny amount of coin, I'd say quite a while without paying.

Lol, yeah people who criticize a game are so stupid. We should all blindly accept poor business practices and half-assed games.

 

[Steve]

If it doesn't want to be compared to MMOs it shouldn't have the same model as some of them. It's fair game if they both use the game pay model.

Is everything completely optional or just about as much as buying gems in mobile games? You don't have to buy it but the game sure does encourage you to do so. Let's just put it like this, Blizzard ran some numbers and figured that people would be willing to pay for content that would normally be included free. Blizzard doesn't publicly disclose the loot box drop rate. Do you actually know how long it would take to unlock everything without paying? Considering that you can get the same stuff over and over and getting duplicates only gives you a tiny amount of coin, I'd say quite a while without paying.

Lol, yeah people who criticize a game are so stupid. We should all blindly accept poor business practices and half-assed games.

There is no way you have played this game based on your comments and you are also likely unfamiliar with Blizzard games full stop.

 

[Axiarus]

1. You don't know what you are getting before hand. The content updates may very well be good or they could be bad. For all we know the content updates could be additions to the micro-transactions or one map every 3 months.

2. The content should be in the game at launch. Not months laters and you don't even know what you are getting. If you are going to treat the game like an online game it should be free and supported by Micro-transactions. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. Another game that follows the same payment model, Guild Wars 2, is an MMO where the server costs are way higher, the base game had way more content, and they've add a massive amount each month to the game. Overwatch looks bad whether you compare it to other AAA games or other Online MMOs with the same payment model. It doesn't even have 1/50 the content guild wars 2 has.

It is Blizzard, they support their games. If this was another developer I would honestly be worried. Just look at Hearthstone, content updates on the reg. They have already stated that future content would be free as well. Guild Wars 2 also gets boring very quickly, has a terrible endgame, does not add massive amounts of content each month (one reason I quit after they stated content every 2 weeks and stopped that pretty quickly) and is a totally different type of game.

 

[Kibaruk]

There is no way you have played this game based on your comments and you are also likely unfamiliar with Blizzard games full stop.

First, it's not an MMORPG but it is an MMO. Massively multiplayer online game. It is online, it is massive (This is the only place where you are wrong though).

If it doesn't want to be compared to MMOs it shouldn't have the same model as some of them. It's fair game if they both use the game pay model.

Is everything completely optional or just about as much as buying gems in mobile games? You don't have to buy it but the game sure does encourage you to do so. Let's just put it like this, Blizzard ran some numbers and figured that people would be willing to pay for content that would normally be included free. Blizzard doesn't publicly disclose the loot box drop rate. Do you actually know how long it would take to unlock everything without paying? Considering that you can get the same stuff over and over and getting duplicates only gives you a tiny amount of coin, I'd say quite a while without paying.

Lol, yeah people who criticize a game are so stupid. We should all blindly accept poor business practices and half-assed games.

You don't have to microtransactions to win or keep on playing, period. You can get this boxed every time you level but most importantly, it's following the idea of popular mobas where you pay for visual or audio enhancement if you want to, not for powerful weapons or 1 shot kill stuff.

If you are one of those freaks that need to unlock everything, good for you and yes, you will probably have to spend money to get loads of loot boxes. If you just want to play you don't have to.

It is clear you don't know what you are talking about as usual, this is specially annoying when people who have no idea about something start throwing crap everywhere.

 

[gingerbill]

I'd grown bored of multiplayer FPS games having played them for a long long time , they were my favourite genre . I played the overwatch beta and was surprised that I loved it . It is simply a fun game that feels good to play and seems like it will last a long time because there are so many different characters to play that all play a bit differently.

Balance seems good for a launch game , there's a few obvious weak and strong characters ( **** you McCree )but nothing game ruining. I think game balance has always been Blizzards weakest trait but hoping they will be better on this game.

The game also has the blizzard trademarked levels of polish and lots of nice little touches. I been having fun for the first time in a long while on a multiplayer FPS. I also have to add how happy I was to just pay £30 for a game with no launch DLC or ridiculous micro transactions to unlock abilities or guns or gameplay stuff.

 

[Evernessince]

There is no way you have played this game based on your comments and you are also likely unfamiliar with Blizzard games full stop.

And you are straight up wrong, you know what they say about assumptions. Here's a link to my character of the same name of this account

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/search?q=evernessince

Care to enlighten me on what exactly would speak of my ignorance or are you just fabricating that too? What kind of article author attacks his readers with nothing to go on?

 

[Evernessince]

It is Blizzard, they support their games. If this was another developer I would honestly be worried. Just look at Hearthstone, content updates on the reg. They have already stated that future content would be free as well. Guild Wars 2 also gets boring very quickly, has a terrible endgame, does not add massive amounts of content each month (one reason I quit after they stated content every 2 weeks and stopped that pretty quickly) and is a totally different type of game.

Something I'm missing here? You had an issue with the lack of content but quit after they announced new stuff every two weeks.

The end game of guild wars 2 is what you make of it. You can go PvP, raiding, or WvWvW. The raids / dungeons are not the instant grat that Wow dungeons are. The WvWvW is the best mode in the game and this is the only MMO where you can do that sort of thing.

 

[CrisisDog]

It's okay.

I suck at online FPS, but the AI-Medium mode is keeping me entertained enough. But I'm getting slaughtered in outright PvP matches.

I will admit, the two or three game modes that are supplied (depending on how you want to classify their difference) does seem limited for a title that's been in the works for a year or more. Hopefully there will be more match types in the future.

Twelve maps is okay, but again, more in the future would be good.

I also heard there was a ranking system in beta, but it's gone in the final release. I think this would make it more enjoyable for the players lacking FPS skills like myself when going PvP. Again, will it come back with future DLC?

I'll recommend it for the moment, but here's also to hoping for some speedy DLC releases.

 

[Axiarus]

Something I'm missing here? You had an issue with the lack of content but quit after they announced new stuff every two weeks.

The end game of guild wars 2 is what you make of it. You can go PvP, raiding, or WvWvW. The raids / dungeons are not the instant grat that Wow dungeons are. The WvWvW is the best mode in the game and this is the only MMO where you can do that sort of thing.

I quit shortly after they stopped updating every two weeks. They did it for a while and then just stopped after they ran out of stuff to put out. I then came back after Heart of Thorns and played for a few months and got bored again. This was with an amazing and active guild as well. While the combat in GW2 is amazing, the structured PvP is an unbalanced snorefest. WoW raids are not instant grat, no idea where you get that from, LFR maybe? Mythic raids are harder than what GW2 has to offer. The only reason GW2 raiding is anywhere near difficult is because the majority of the player base is used to more casual gameplay. A group of competent people easily clears GW2 raids, saw it myself. WvW is almost all it has going for it, and that is just a zergfest. I just find it funny that ANet said they did not want to make a grindfest game...and that is exactly what GW2 is.

 

[Evernessince]

I quit shortly after they stopped updating every two weeks. They did it for a while and then just stopped after they ran out of stuff to put out. I then came back after Heart of Thorns and played for a few months and got bored again. This was with an amazing and active guild as well. While the combat in GW2 is amazing, the structured PvP is an unbalanced snorefest. WoW raids are not instant grat, no idea where you get that from, LFR maybe? Mythic raids are harder than what GW2 has to offer. The only reason GW2 raiding is anywhere near difficult is because the majority of the player base is used to more casual gameplay. A group of competent people easily clears GW2 raids, saw it myself. WvW is almost all it has going for it, and that is just a zergfest. I just find it funny that ANet said they did not want to make a grindfest game...and that is exactly what GW2 is.

By instant grat, I meant that someone in your part is guaranteed a good piece of gear. WvWvW changes based on what class you play really. Warriors are pretty much forced into a zerge. Rouges and Mesmers can go out and shank or take bases by themselves. A good commander will try and divide the enemy forces by sending multiple distraction forces around the field.