Support NeoGAF

[Draugoth]

---

Game Title: Overwatch 2

Platforms:

• PC (Oct 4, 2022)
• Xbox Series X/S (Oct 4, 2022)
• PlayStation 5 (Oct 4, 2022)
• Xbox One (Oct 4, 2022)
• PlayStation 4 (Oct 4, 2022)
• Nintendo Switch (Oct 4, 2022)

Trailers:

• Overwatch 2 | Game Overview (Reveal Event Clip)
• Overwatch Animated Short | “The Wastelander” [4K]
• Overwatch 2: Reveal Event | June 16

Developer: Blizzard Entertainment

Review Aggregator:

OpenCritic - 81 average - 82% recommended - 27 reviews

Metacritic - 81 average - 21 reviews

Critic Reviews

Attack of the Fanboy - Noah Nelson - 4 / 5

Overwatch 2 is a great game, but it is held back by its own identity crisis, lack of content, and questionable choices. Despite its blemishes, Overwatch 2 is a must-try experience, especially if you are playing with a dedicated squad of friends.

CGMagazine - Alex Handziuk - 8.5 / 10

Overwatch 2 is a worthy successor to the original Overwatch that doesn’t so much reinvent the wheel as it does improve upon it. While it does have its issues, the core gameplay and improved UI make for a fun and fully realized sequel.

Forbes - Kris Holt - 9 / 10

At launch, Overwatch 2 is a launchpad for something much, much grander. It’s rough around the edges, but the controlled chaos of the actual gameplay is right up my alley. Given the live service nature of the game, it’s something I’ll likely re-review every so often. Still, Overwatch 2 is in pretty great shape overall.

Game Informer - Brian Shea - 9 / 10

Overwatch 2 doesn’t flip the formula the way you might expect a long-awaited, numbered sequel would. But through various clever tweaks, it’s a well-rounded evolution of the experience into which I’ve poured more than a thousand hours since 2016. I may never recreate the magic of those first few years in Overwatch, but Overwatch 2 is a big step towards restoring the faith in the franchise and has me thinking it’s time to pour a few more hundred hours into my favorite team-based shooter.

GameSpot - Jessica Howard - 8 / 10

Overwatch 2 improves upon the core gameplay and characters fans love, but loses some of its predecessor's spirit in the process.

Gamepur - John Hansen - 10 / 10

When I am playing Overwatch 2, I am having the time of my life. When I’m not playing, I am wishing I was playing Overwatch 2.

GamesRadar+ - Alyssa Mercante - Unscored

Overwatch 2 shines and pops with updated graphics and gorgeous new maps, but its deviation from the source material is impossible to ignore.

GamingTrend - Ben Lombardo - 90 / 100

Overwatch 2 is so damn good. 5v5 has breathed life into the game, Junkerqueen, Sojourn, and Kiriko are a breath of fresh air, and the game's new high pace suits its competitive nature perfectly. The new maps are insanely fun to play, albeit with some needing tweaking, and the new Push gamemode only enhances Overwatch 2's core experience. The only downside comes from its cosmetic-locked, 9-week battle pass system, which will be costly to continually purchase.

God is a Geek - Adam Cook - 9.5 / 10

Overwatch 2 plays brilliantly. It's a wonderful shooter full of depth, with unique heroes to master, maps to learn, and hours of your life to lose all over again.

Guardian - Keith Stuart - 4 / 5

It's not really a sequel, but Overwatch's enthusiastic rejection of self-serious military shooters still draws you in.

Hobby Consolas - David Rodriguez - Spanish - 85 / 100

Overwatch 2's enhancements feel great and perfect gameplay in many ways. The free to play format will keep you afloat and will reveal to many a fantastic hero shooter with an impressive charisma, but it is not a sequel. What we saw here should have come sooner and may well be insufficient for some fans.

IGN - Simon Cardy - 8 / 10

Overwatch 2’s switch to a 5v5 format breathes new life into what was once the sharpest shooter around. It just hasn’t quite recaptured all of that glory – yet.

Metro GameCentral - Cheri Faulkner - 9 / 10

A breath of fresh air for the Overwatch franchise, with the new game modes, characters, and mechanics all working together superbly well, for a genuinely exciting sequel.

PCGamesN - Lauren Bergin - 6 / 10

While Overwatch 2 adds a host of heroes and features to Blizzard's iconic FPS game, its PvP feels more like a simple content update than a full blown sequel.

Polygon - Michael McWhertor - Unscored

Enjoying Overwatch 2 is an exercise in cautious optimism — not just in the future direction of its ever-changing lore and world, but in the idea that years of new content will ultimately deliver on the promise of a full sequel.

PowerUp! - Leo Stevenson - Unscored

Not everyone is going to be a fan of the changes and I'm certain many fans will be incensed with the way Blizzard has monetised Overwatch 2 but I'm also certain those some fans will be booting up the game on day one and playing until their eyeballs bleed.
Overwatch is back and it's better than ever.

Press Start - Harry Kalogirou - 6.5 / 10

While Overwatch 2 is still a good time, and an improvement over the original, it feels like less of a sequel and more of an update. There's some solid changes to the foundations of Overwatch, but a noticeable lack of new content, archaic game modes, and balancing issues leave something to be desired.

Prima Games - Matt Vatankhah - 8 / 10

Within Overwatch 2 lies the framework of what made its predecessor so special – a game bursting at the seams with personality, eclecticism, and undeniable charm that its competition can’t seem to match. A game that, after some thoughtful changes by Blizzard, could shape up to continue its monumental legacy for many, many years to come.

Rock, Paper, Shotgun - Ollie Toms - Unscored

A host of important changes will shake up the meta as Blizzard's hero shooter goes free to play, but it all reeks of desperation to stay relevant, and it might not be enough for many players.

Saudi Gamer - Arabic - 7 / 10

Overwatch 2 offers a fun experience and notable improvements to everything from the past, but the Battle Pass can be a hindrance to anyone who wants to enjoy it.

Shacknews - TJ Denzer - 8 / 10

Ultimately, Overwatch 2 feels less like a sequel and more like a refresh, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The new Heroes are neat, as are the refreshed looks of previous Heroes. The new Push mode and other new maps are fun as well. That said, the game pretty much plays the same. If you loved Overwatch, there’s really no reason why you won’t enjoy continuing this journey. If you weren’t a fan, this isn’t going to change your mind. That said, if the first batch of heroes, modes, and maps were any indication, it at least looks like Overwatch 2’s new free-to-play seasonal content rotation is going to keep things interesting for a long time to come.

Spaziogames - Valentino Cinefra - Italian - Unscored

Overwatch 2 is not a revolution of any kind, because it revolves around that identity that shook the market in 2016. However, the new composition of the teams must be assimilated, it is promising and rewards good players at the expense (perhaps) of novices.

Tom's Guide - Malcolm McMillan - 4 / 5

Overwatch 2 still has the same enjoyable gameplay loop and incredible character design from Blizzard’s original hero shooter. But this free-to-play update is iterative, rather than groundbreaking.

Twinfinite - Zhiqing Wan - 4 / 5

It’s difficult to look back on a game like Overwatch and wonder what it could’ve been if it had been delayed, and released as a complete, full-priced package with none of the extras: no feel-bad Battle Passes, with the story mode and Hero Missions available to all from the get-go. It’s not all doom and gloom of course; I’ve been in denial about the change in direction for PvP, but tens of hours of playtime have convinced me that the new 5v5 format will lead to more exciting experiences going forward. For my fellow lore and character enthusiasts, well, there’s always next year.

We Got This Covered - Cheyenne Clark - 3.5 / 5

Overwatch 2 replaces its predecessor with a similar, yet different experience, but its future feels uncertain as the franchise moves toward a more aggressive monetization structure with little to distinguish itself from every other live-service game.

Windows Central - Brendan Lowry - 4.5 / 5

Overwatch 2 represents the arrival of the foundational changes Blizzard's hero shooter needed in order to return to its former glory. While it's not perfect — few things ever are — the changes that the game makes to Overwatch's gameplay structure, progression systems, content release schedule, and presentation are absolutely stellar.

gameranx - Unscored

Video Review - Quote not available

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

OverWatch 1.5 or even 1.25

 

[anthony2690]

I love the little I've played, one morning.

Sadly though, most nights when I try to play I'm in a queue and then unable to play.

 

[The_Mike]

I'm not interested in the game, but that right there is review bombing.

Wonder if they can get MC to remove them, or if it's only some devs with more power that has these priviliges

 

[Castro27]

I don't agree with the review bombing but I also think reviewers are overstating what the game really is: an incremental upgrade to make up for the years of lack of content for OW1. Until PvE mode releases it just feels like its the same as it ever was, with some very predatory game pass system.

 

[BLAUcopter]

Not sure who they're trying to fool but this definitely should've just been an expansion.

 

[AV]

I'm not interested in the game, but that right there is review bombing.

Wonder if they can get MC to remove them, or if it's only some devs with more power that has these priviliges

This is some dystopian shit. People queueing for literally hours on end to play an FPS game in 2022 only to lose connection and get stuck back in the queue. That's a 1/10 video game, it doesn't work.

"That opinion is not allowed, citizen. 10s only."

 

[Majima Everywhere System]

I'm gonna check it out. Hope you aren't in my matches, you tryhards.

 

[MaKTaiL]

OverWatch 1.5 or even 1.25

Basically Overwatch 1.3 User Review Score.

 

[Ghost of Caelid]

Games mad fun, I never played the first overwatch so I have no real comparison to it, but I'm enjoying what I'm playing alot.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

It's been out for 2 days and is still unplayable. That 1.3 user score is real fitting.

 

[Captain Toad]

OverWatch 1.5 or even 1.25

According to Metacritic user score, 1.3.

 

[The_Mike]

This is some dystopian shit. People queueing for literally hours on end to play an FPS game in 2022 only to lose connection and get stuck back in the queue. That's a 1/10 video game, it doesn't work.

"That opinion is not allowed, citizen. 10s only."

Its embarrassing the game has these online problems with acti blizz behind it, but it's not surprising.

When the servers are more stabilised, the 1 review bombing will still be there despite it being fixed.

It is review bombing no matter how you twist it.

A game that would be an 8 or a 9 shouldn't be 1 simply because there online connection problems on the first few days.

 

[KiteGr]

All early reviews will be high.
I'm waiting for users.

 

[AV]

Its embarrassing the game has these online problems with acti blizz behind it, but it's not surprising.

When the servers are more stabilised, the 1 review bombing will still be there despite it being fixed.

It is review bombing no matter how you twist it.

A game that would be an 8 or a 9 shouldn't be 1 simply because there online connection problems on the first few days.

Review bombing is such a worthless term. 1/10 because the game literally isn't playable is bad, but

"9/10 not bad hopefully it's fixed" is fine? Positive review bombing, not a problem.

The solution is not to censor everyone who isn't happy that they released a broken game. The solution is to not release a broken or incomplete game. No Man's Sky is a significantly better game than it was at launch, but the ~60 critic rating remains as a stark reminder. That's not user review bombing.

Beyond that, OW2's problems stretch beyond it being unplayable and people should be allowed to voice their concerns without fear that their "incorrect opinion" will be removed. Simping for Blizzard in that way is a strange choice my man.

 

[STARSBarry]

For anyone wanting more reviews for Overwatch 2 please read this

Overwatch Reviews

Overwatch is a highly stylized team-based shooter set on earth in the near future. Every match is an intense multiplayer showdown pitting a diverse cast of soldiers, mercenaries, scientists, adventurers, and oddities against each other in an epic, globe-spanning conflict.

www.metacritic.com

Just deduct 1/6th from the score like blizzard did to the team size and it's exactly the same.

 

[nightmare-slain]

It's been out for 2 days and is still unplayable. That 1.3 user score is real fitting.

i'm having no problems getting into games. i only started playing it today.

i'm on PC and in the "PC pool" so don't know about consoles or cross play.

 

[Doom85]

Review bombing is such a worthless term. 1/10 because the game literally isn't playable is bad, but

"9/10 not bad hopefully it's fixed" is fine? Positive review bombing, not a problem.

The solution is not to censor everyone who isn't happy that they released a broken game. The solution is to not release a broken or incomplete game. No Man's Sky is a significantly better game than it was at launch, but the ~60 critic rating remains as a stark reminder. That's not user review bombing.

Beyond that, OW2's problems stretch beyond it being unplayable and people should be allowed to voice their concerns without fear that their "incorrect opinion" will be removed. Simping for Blizzard in that way is a strange choice my man.

If the game’s issues are fixed within a week, which is most likely the case, then yes a game that will likely last for years being judged for A WEEK of its existence is completely stupid. Especially as if they didn’t even make into the game, then guess what, THEY DIDN‘T PLAY THE GAME. And they didn’t buy it either as it’s FTP so they can’t even claim to have “wasted money”.

No Man‘s Sky did not turn around its issues in a week or anything close to it. Same with Cyberpunk 2077 and plenty of other examples. Because those games had massive issues with content and bugs respectively in the actual gameplay. Overwatch 2’s actual gameplay does not have these issues.

And what are these problems exactly besides the queue times and prior unlocks not transferring over which are both being worked on? The phone issue has already been announced to be fixed. People whining about the tiers of the battle pass have apparently not seen one in their entire lives (it should take roughly a hour per day to reach all 70 tiers. For a counter example, unless you’re god tier at the game, Dead by Daylight’s pass takes much more than that to complete one of its passes). The only real issue to me is the costume prices, but that’s only an issue for us hardcore players who could unlock all event costumes and such for free by a certain point after accumulating so many coins in-game, whereas the casuals would be buying loot boxes anyway, so really now the casuals probably save money as they can just buy which costume they want.

When one does get into the game, I want to hear a legitimate argument on how the ACTUAL GAME is a 1/10. Please, do tell how the gameplay deserves to be compared to Superman 64 or the like.

 

[ns6]

There's absolutely zero justification for any outlet to actually attach a score considering none of these reviewers played in the live launch environment. When the gist of every review is "hey this'll be good/great eventually," you have an impressions article, not a review.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

i'm having no problems getting into games. i only started playing it today.

i'm on PC and in the "PC pool" so don't know about consoles or cross play.

I don't know how many servers they have for pc, but it seems like they only got 5 for console. The queue times have been crazy. Wait 15 minutes just to hit an server error.


Funny enough I just got in a game while writing this post.

 

[DenchDeckard]

I'll install it on the weekend and give it a go if I can get in a game.

 

[AV]

If the game’s issues are fixed within a week, which is most likely the case, then yes a game that will likely last for years being judged for A WEEK of its existence is completely stupid. Especially as if they didn’t even make into the game, then guess what, THEY DIDN‘T PLAY THE GAME. And they didn’t buy it either as it’s FTP so they can’t even claim to have “wasted money”.

No Man‘s Sky did not turn around its issues in a week or anything close to it. Same with Cyberpunk 2077 and plenty of other examples. Because those games had massive issues with content and bugs respectively in the actual gameplay. Overwatch 2’s actual gameplay does not have these issues.

When one does get into the game, I want to hear a legitimate argument on how the ACTUAL GAME is a 1/10. Please, do tell how the gameplay deserves to be compared to Superman 64 or the like.

So should Blizzard be allowed to prevent user scores on third-party websites completely unaffiliated with them until they deem it okay to do so? Does that power lie with Metacritic, should Metacritic make sure to disable user reviews on every single game until they deem it "accurately reviewable"? Is that their job? What's your proposed system here? Should we just remove user scores entirely?

Metacritic user "scores" are fundamentally busted regardless of review bombing. It took me one minute to find a user who's given four PS4 games a 10/10 and four Switch games a 4/10. Won't take me long to find the inverse. That's what MC user scores are for. You said it yourself, I'm sure you'd love to hear the argument for Zelda BOTW and Mario Odyssey being 4/10 games, but the fact is there is no argument. These people are not reviewing the games, 9 times out of 10 it's an outlet for bias.

You can either have a problem with all user scores or have a problem with none of them, you don't get to pick. Giving a temporarily but fundamentally broken game a 1/10 is the exact same shit as giving it a 10/10 because you thought it was "okay, but people should stop whinging about tech issues". You can remove the scores from the site altogether but people will still flood it with comments about how it's busted and bad, you can remove those comments but... what then? People will look elsewhere for the exact same thing. The number is just a number. People buy IMDB ratings through bots all the time. It's meaningless. Ten people playing a game and giving it a 10/10 doesn't magically make it a better game than something 1000 people played but only 900 have a 10/10 to. None of this is objective.

 

[Thief1987]

Only 299 user "reviews". It's not a review bombing. If you want to see review bombing look at something like TLOU2.

 

[SuperBabyMethod]

Really fun so far and love the polish and presentation of the overall game barring the long queue times, which of course will be fixed.

Game is more frenetic and fast paced, especially with lesser shields and CC.

 

[Fake]

Only 299 user "reviews". It's not a review bombing. If you want to see review bombing look at something like TLOU2.

Or both are get hated by consumer. Just saying.

 

[Shubh_C63]

You can hate the launch or the business practice, but if underneath it all its still a fun game then reviews stand corrected.

Though I doubt any of them was able to play the game at launch.

 

[Warnen]

Might try when pve hits

 

[Saber]

When one does get into the game, I want to hear a legitimate argument on how the ACTUAL GAME is a 1/10. Please, do tell how the gameplay deserves to be compared to Superman 64 or the like.

The game is aways online, the online aspect IS part of gameplay because you can't play the game if you can't connect, so the criticism is totally valid.
Imagine people couldn't even play Super-man...oh no they can because its a singleplayer game.
Why people still need to explain that is beyond me.

 

[dorkimoe]

Still havent been able to even get into the menu of the game

 

[jaysius]

I couldn't read the reviews, I was in a queue and then when it got to 0 it reset and I went back into the queue at 30000.

 

[jaysius]

IF they're going to continue the DDOS lie then god damn, they need to fire all their security people and hire people that understand servers in 2022.

It's a bad lie, it makes them look bad security wise.

It'd be better if they were honest, they're not going to adjust anything for week 1(maybe 2) demand.

This game will be deader than 1 was faster. I'd give this game about 3 months of solid numbers before it drops into oblivion.

 

[Stuart360]

I dont have a problem with people expressing their fustration by review bombing, especially when its a technical problem preventing people from enjoying the game. The problem is though that the same people never ammend their review when the said problem gets fixed.

Its a tricky situation actually.

 

[March Climber]

Metacritic should make it mandatory for anyone posting a 1 or 10 review to type a paragraph indicating why your score is that low or high. It's rubbish that both anti-fans and fans do this and it makes user score way less credible than the verified ones.

 

[Doom85]

So should Blizzard be allowed to prevent user scores on third-party websites completely unaffiliated with them until they deem it okay to do so? Does that power lie with Metacritic, should Metacritic make sure to disable user reviews on every single game until they deem it "accurately reviewable"? Is that their job? What's your proposed system here? Should we just remove user scores entirely?

Metacritic user "scores" are fundamentally busted regardless of review bombing. It took me one minute to find a user who's given four PS4 games a 10/10 and four Switch games a 4/10. Won't take me long to find the inverse. That's what MC user scores are for. You said it yourself, I'm sure you'd love to hear the argument for Zelda BOTW and Mario Odyssey being 4/10 games, but the fact is there is no argument. These people are not reviewing the games, 9 times out of 10 it's an outlet for bias.

You can either have a problem with all user scores or have a problem with none of them, you don't get to pick. Giving a temporarily but fundamentally broken game a 1/10 is the exact same shit as giving it a 10/10 because you thought it was "okay, but people should stop whinging about tech issues". You can remove the scores from the site altogether but people will still flood it with comments about how it's busted and bad, you can remove those comments but... what then? People will look elsewhere for the exact same thing. The number is just a number. People buy IMDB ratings through bots all the time. It's meaningless. Ten people playing a game and giving it a 10/10 doesn't magically make it a better game than something 1000 people played but only 900 have a 10/10 to. None of this is objective.

Remind me where I said in my prior post that positive review bombing was a good thing? Because I’m pretty sure I didn’t. Nor did I say people shouldn’t be allowed to voice an opinion. It’s just, if they didn’t actually play the game, then their opinion isn‘t honest in my book

The game is aways online, the online aspect IS part of gameplay because you can't play the game if you can't connect, so the criticism is totally valid.
Imagine people couldn't even play Super-man...oh no they can because its a singleplayer game.
Why people still need to explain that is beyond me.

BRUH, the online element makes no difference. If they couldn’t start the game, then they can’t start it, whether it’s offline or online. But Overwatch 2 is a $0 game that you might not be able to start (and plenty of people have started it, and VERY SOON everyone will be able to start it). Superman 64 is a game that will cost you money to buy and then it’s a piece of shit when you PLAY IT.

Overwatch 2 is like a club that costs nothing to get in and is generally considered solid but due to some oversight they’re at max capacity and the bouncer has to tell some people they can’t come in but they should have the issue resolved soon. Superman 64 is like a club that has a permanent policy where they let anyone in for a fee and as soon as you walk in all the staff begin beating the living daylights out of you.

I would seriously hope you can tell the difference between two such clubs and not honestly think they deserve the same grade. Like, come on.

 

[Saber]

BRUH, the online element makes no difference.

Hahahaha this is dumbest thing I ever read. Coporate boot licking at the finest.
If the online aspect of an online games makes no difference in the gameplay, when theres countless videos of people disconnecting middle game, you have some serious issues.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

That user score is what happens when you offer an online game but nobody can login. Terrible service.

 

[jaysius]

Hahahaha this is dumbest thing I ever read. Coporate boot licking at the finest.
If the online aspect of an online games makes no difference in the gameplay, when theres countless videos of people disconnecting middle game, you have some serious issues.

I was at the end of a robot push match and the game DISCONNECTED, it was seconds from over with the Overtime timer about to finish. Then got reconnected with the exact same teams, my team and opposing team.

The errored game wasn't counted for anyone either win or lose...

This makes no sense for any of the matchmaking, there's something wrong with the entire thing.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Dat user score tho...

 

[AV]

Remind me where I said in my prior post that positive review bombing was a good thing? Because I’m pretty sure I didn’t.

Weird how you in three paragraphs your didn't mention them once though, even though it's the exact same problem on the other end of the spectrum. "Fake" reviews of a game with the sole intention of downplaying the critics.

As for you constant insistence about it being a free game, they've taken OW1 offline. People that already paid money for that game can no longer access it at all and many of those same people cannot currently access OW2 either. They've also had all previously unlocked heroes re-locked. You have absolutely no idea if the queue situation will be fixed in another day, a week, or a month, if you were clued into Blizzard you'd know they've currently also got a massive-scale server issue with Classic WoW right now.

MC user reviews are one of the best outlets for consumers to let others know that something is terribly wrong with a product at launch. This is not something that happens with 50% of all video games, this is Fallout 76, No Man's Sky, Cyberpunk 2077, Diablo Immortal, Overwatch 2. Trainwrecks. Complaining about users "not giving fair reviews" is weirdly defensive on behalf of people releasing bad products.

 

[Stuart360]

That user score is what happens when you offer an online game but nobody can login. Terrible service.

Same thing happened with that WOW re-release, and Diablo 2 remaster. Blizzard dont seem to be good at this stuff lol.

 

[sigmaZ]

Feels good to play, but I'm starting to notice some unbalances like with Zarya, but I'm sure they'll adjust things in the future.
I just wish they would've added and focused on more new modes of play. I really like push though.

 

[jaysius]

Feels good to play, but I'm starting to notice some unbalances like with Zarya, but I'm sure they'll adjust things in the future.
I just wish they would've added and focused on more new modes of play. I really like push though.

Too many morons are trying to play the new healer Kikiro as a DPS when she's not meant to be, she's a HEALER you HEAL OTHER PLAYERS WITH HER.

There are too many healer characters now that don't actually heal as a primary, or people don't see it that way.

There are many matches where you're just fucked if you have 2 healer characters that people are playing like an assault character and doing a shit job at it.

At least with 2 tanks they could soak some of the damage so a retarded healer or two could be balanced, now with only one tank, there's some really shitty matchups because of these retarded healer.

IF you are a HEALER then HEAL, your character isn't MADE to primarily ATTACK.

 

[Madjako]

Please Blizzard give me the option to lanch OW1 or OW2.
I'll still be able to play OW1 and not this sh...it OW2 !!!

 

[YukiOnna]

Played almost up to 10 hours and it's good to be back. Definitely love most of the changes to it and Kiriko is an excellent hero.
5v5 was the right move, I hated the near MOBA it became near the end of my time in the prequel. It made Overwatch League so boring to watch, too.

Although, some hero ability changes are weird even if it's to move away from stuns.

 

[Fuz]

lol that user score.

 

[Jennings]

I hope the PvE release has its own entry and doesn't piggy-back off these scores.

 

[Fuz]

I'm not interested in the game, but that right there is review bombing.

And fully deserved.

 

[Cert.in.Death]

The game is great.

The product is incomplete.

 

[MastAndo]

I would say that user rating is warranted for now, given the launch. It's pretty fun waiting in a queue for a half-hour, only to be booted back into the queue for something like, oh getting an achievement. It's a known issue on XSS/XSX apparently, and of course only happens to me while I'm in the middle of the best games of my life (hence why I'm getting an achievement, I suppose). Real nice.

On the brighter side, I'm now 50,000 on the merge queue, up from 150000 last night. So yeah, things are looking up.

 

[Fbh]

The concept of "review" bombing is weird to me.
It's user reviews, users are allowed to like/dislike a product for whatever reason they want. Want to give it a 1/10 because you don't like the cover art? that's fine.