Ricerocket
Member
And you're telling me RJing is hard? I've been doing those since Quake and classic TF with conc grenades from one base to the other.
-
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
- Thread starter orthodoxy1095
- Start date
And you're telling me RJing is hard? I've been doing those since Quake and classic TF with conc grenades from one base to the other.
veloxStrix
Banned
Mm, and about three months ago half of each team consisted of Zenyatta.
There are insane teleport paths on maps for Tracer that allow people to get behind the other team in interesting ways. Getting the timing just right on D.Va's ultimate can lead to some insane plays. Mei's Ice Wall can jam players into the ceiling and kill them, block paths off, or allow teammates to get to ledges. I saw someone run around through Temple of Anubis's last checkpoint as Lucio -except he was jumping pillar to pillar to constantly buff his teammates but stay hidden from anyone. Junkrat can use his mines to launch himself out of Ults. There is plenty of depth to Overwatch. I'm not going to say whether it has more or less than TF2, but I stand by my idea that time will tell is really the only argument people should be making.
A Serious Man
Member
This is basically my biggest complaint, a lot of the classes are just a tad too shallow. The game is super fun but I have concerns about how long it will hold my interest.
SmartWaffles
Member
A more fair comparison is how people played TF2 on the first day of release.
(Not exactly the most fair obviously due to Overwatch borrowing lots of design philosophies.)
(Not exactly the most fair obviously due to Overwatch borrowing lots of design philosophies.)
ryanthelion123
Neo Member
I Imagine as heroes get added the depth required to play them will increase. I also wonder if they will add new mechanics to current roster of heroes.
Glad to see this game is getting good review; I would give it a 9.5/10. Only disappointment for me is game modes.
strikeselect
You like me, you really really like me!
I find the map design is a bit overrated as well. If these maps were designed with movement in mind, why can't I stand on the rooftops of many buildings in the game? It just goes into this weird "sliding off" state. Bugs the hell out of me.
Gaming Truth
Member
Finally a metacritic user saying the truth:
Wow, this is legitimately terrible. Opens with possibly valid points like poor level design and no free-for-all content in an otherwise team v. team game, says Blizzard is instead wasting time with making their game look pretty and other time-wasting stuff. Opens up the suggestion box with wanting 21:9 support.
Geez, I want those 30 seconds back
Those upgrades were added long after Team Fortress 2 was released. There was a time when every class just had one weapon per slot with no variants.
I definitely wish there was an actual rocket jump class in Overwatch. It's just tons of fun once you get good at it.
The other fun part about playing TF2 Soldier is juggling. Nothing like bouncing a foe into an air shot.
I'm that person. I look at this and see as well as feel nothing. However, i'm completely okay that these types of games aren't for me.
A Serious Man
Member
It doesn't look likely but I do hope they release different builds/configurations for the current hero roster. Developing a new hero from the ground up every time you want to introduce a new variant just seems inefficient, and this is Blizzard we're talking about. I've lived through enough WoW content droughts to be worried about the frequency of updates for this game. TF2 had the benefit of the community creating an avalanche of content for it and filling in Valve's gaps.
truestatic
Member
"Force" one of them to let you play theirs to try it out.
I'm a primarily story-driven leaner as well, or at least a primarily single-player leaning player. This appeals to me in a huge way, but it is absolutely not for everyone, so you're right to be trepidatious.
Pharah does have rocket and concussion boosting/jumping, actually. If you think there's no learning curve, why isn't everyone a pro? I would argue a hero like Pharah actually has a LOT to learn just due to how crazy her mobility is, the game is an onion, the surface layers of complexity are unintimidating, but that doesn't mean you can't dig deeper and keep finding more. Go look up some pro players, the shit they do with heroes you think you 'get' is fucking CRAZY.
Not necessarily. The best Pharah players use both their conc gren and their jetpack to fly across levels much more quickly.
As the game progresses we're going to see players getting much better. Some people have been playing for 6 months, but now the player pool is significantly larger, and with that will come more innovation and slick mechanical tricks that people will figure out.
Edit: yep @ Yanger
The last game I bought simply because of hype was Vanilla-Destiny. Got burned preeeeetty hard by it, so I'm extra-critical. I will wait for the minimum, a month, before I decide on getting this to see the potential drought-effect. So far I feel nothing, but it feels good to see that people enjoy it!
Edit: did not mean to quote myself!
Ricerocket
Member
Oh wow, I had no idea you can conc yourself. Just learned something new that can boost my mobility.
The game is very well designed. The only problem I have with it is the people that play it, occasionally. You really need people to switch sometimes if they're not on the right character. Some people seem to insist on 'maining' a particular one when that's not how the game works. The game is 6v6, so it's very noticeable.
Lobbies also die really quickly, due to Blizzard not letting you open loot crates between rounds. Really bad decision IMO. Randoms don't get as much teamwork flowing as a result.
Lobbies also die really quickly, due to Blizzard not letting you open loot crates between rounds. Really bad decision IMO. Randoms don't get as much teamwork flowing as a result.
Randomizer
Member
Way too soon for these reviews. This type of game needs a substantial amount of time put in before a more complete opinion can be formed. Seriously a day or two and you are happy to give it a 5/5 rating? Really?
Maybe the game is just that fantastic, I don't know haven't played it. But I can't help believe some reviewers buy into hype and are very flippant and shallow, moving from one 'AAA' game to the next.
Also Splatoon and SFV were ripped apart for their lack content at launch. Yet this game seems to be getting a free pass. Seems a tad hypocritical if you ask me.
Maybe the game is just that fantastic, I don't know haven't played it. But I can't help believe some reviewers buy into hype and are very flippant and shallow, moving from one 'AAA' game to the next.
Also Splatoon and SFV were ripped apart for their lack content at launch. Yet this game seems to be getting a free pass. Seems a tad hypocritical if you ask me.
truestatic
Member
Game is essentially unchanged since the open beta. A week then and a couple days now to ascertain that it's just as great as it was is enough time to formulate an opinion.
They had access a long time ago, no content was hidden until release. Most of the outlets waited to see if the server would work fine or not, and they did.
Most of these reviewers have had access to the game for months. At the very very least they had the entire open beta, and they only needed to see 'yep, launch worked, servers work' to stamp a review.
partyphone
Banned
the cgmagazine review is super poorly written so it may have been rushed out. i'm not familiar with the writer though maybe he just barfs or whatever. most of the other reviews are boiler plate but I don't expect much from big sites.
In defense of those people, not everyone finds it fun to play as multiple characters. I played almost exclusively as Soldier 76 during the beta, and I don't see that changing when I eventually get the full game. If I had to play a support or tank character just to fill a role, I'd probably hate this game.
Oh thanks, that's awesome to know. I'll keep that in mind as I learn how to play her.
Subpar Spatula
Banned
Personally, I'm not a fan of "spend money to get random item box" even if it's cosmetic because it fuels an environment of gambling and wasting money. It's on the edge for me because, after working for game publishers that specialized in micro-transaction games, it becomes obvious the only reason it's random is because all the good stuff is behind a ridiculous percentage so the whales can feed easier.
RichiRamjag
Member
I kind of agree. I picked up this game because I got one of those Taco Bell codes cheap. I kind of regret spending the cash. I love online multiplayer, but this just doesn't do much for me emotionally in regards to enjoyment. I've been forcing myself to play most of the day and it can be great at times, draining at others. These scores seem a bit out there from what I saw in regards to content. Fun is subjective, so I can't fault them if they really dug it, but the whole experience has been pretty bittersweet in my case. I'm going to keep giving it a go though and hopefully, it'll grow on me a bit more.
Randomizer
Member
Ahh my bad I assumed it was one of those 'game is only available to journalists at launch' deals. If that's the case I will have to maybe check this out but I will wait for more reviews.
Counterpoint: you never HAVE to, but at some point you might branch out just to see, and you never know who you might like. I don't expect everyone to love every hero, but I bet most people are more likely to have a comfort hero, eventually force themselves to try someone else, and learn to enjoy them too. repeat x19 more times. I had probably 3 people I felt VERY comfortable with the first few days in closed beta, but by the end of the first beta period in december or november or whenever I was competent on every hero, and more importantly had found enough about them to ENJOY playing all of them. Some more, some less, but everyone enough to look at a situation and say "Yeah, I really think X would be the best hero right now" and jump into them and feel like I was playing the game well for making that decision.
You never know who you'll like until you really dig into them.
But you don't have to spend anything, and not in the F2P (You COULD grind 20 hours for 2 dollars worth of shit) kind of way, but in the normal ass game unlock kind of way (1.5 hours at the highest levels of xp requirement to get 4 things).
Trust me, I know I'm not going to change. Very first thing I did was spend 30 minutes to an hour messing around with each character, and Soldier was the only one that stood out that I also consistently did well with. Same goes for fighting games, racing games, other shooters, pretty much anything where there are multiple options present; once I find that one character/car/gun/whatever that I really like, it's pretty much over.
And I REALLY don't like playing support characters
Ghost is Bad
Banned
guys, its way more economically efficient to just grind out levels lol. it takes like an hour to get a box at the xp cap
Subpar Spatula
Banned
You missed my point.
spootime
Member
There's obviously still a large amount of variance between players because of the decisions they make and the way they position themselves. Teamwork and strategy will be the most important factor with most players I imagine.
I don't really think this is a controversial opinion or something, I've heard seagull and many other pros say that they think the amount of individual skill required to play this game at a pro level is way lower than tf2
truestatic
Member
This is at least somewhat addressed through the currency. If there's a specific skin or two you dearly want, you can buy them with a not totally inordinate amount of time played, assuming you're playing to play, and not playing to grind for the skin. And anything that's NOT a legendary skin is much cheaper, and so can be obtained relatively easily.
If you're playing this game to collect legendary skins, it's a shitty proposition. If legendary skins are a fun byproduct of playing the game, it's totally reasonable, and keeps spreads the worthwhile rewards out a bit so there are still things you'll want more than a month after launch.
brickarts295
Member
Hot damn a 98!? I know there's only 5 reviews but that's a nice number to have during the first week of sales. I wish I got into it during the beta, didn't have too much fun, also COD friends -_-
Unsurprisingly I was doing amazing with the Agent character because you know, he's the one that's closer to military shooter character XD
Unsurprisingly I was doing amazing with the Agent character because you know, he's the one that's closer to military shooter character XD
These scores are people's opinions about the game which means you're basically telling people "no there's no way you like the game that much!" I hope this illustrates just how idiotic that sentiment is.
1. irony of telling people what they shouldn't like.
2. 10/10 does not mean perfect or flawless game on a review scale. It means an amazing/must buy where it's flaws are hardly worth mentioning/ don't affect your enjoyment of the game.
3. (Not necessarily directed at you) why do people treat review scores as if it's a math test result?? A movie that gets 5 stars isn't considered the "perfect movie" and yet there are still people that basically come out and say "nah you can't use the full scale unless it literally has no flaws".
I mean at that point what's the point of having x/x scales? Nothing is ever truly perfect.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Why? What in the reviews gives you any rationale for that idea?
Popular games aren't necessarily better games. They just have wide appeal. A lot of people buy the new COD every year, but only a fraction of those people would say that each year's COD is their GOTY.
Anyways, I don't need to argue about GTA5 vs. Overwatch. They're both good in lots of ways.
I'd like one example of an instance where a high profile publisher straight-up bribed reviewers for a specific score. People always say this shit and it just doesn't happen. And frankly, after close to 10 million people playing the beta, they don't need perfect review scores.
Splatoon got docked by Gamespot for "SP campaign losing steam".
We shall see what they say about Overwatch.
NullPointer
Member
I agree wholeheartedly.
But 65 million is far beyond popular. Its mythic, and there's a ton of double dipping there, along with half a billion in profits from those shitacular GTAO microtransactions alone.
A metric fuckton of people found what they were looking for in GTA V and a crazy amount of them are still finding it. In terms of delivering what it was going for - I'd say it's done it in every way you could appreciate it. Popular acclaim, critical acclaim, beyond bonkers sales, and a continually huge playerbase. Yeah, it nailed it.
The number staggers me, but yeah, moving on ... ;p
Of course. That has to be the only explanation. Can't be that the game is good or anything.
SmartWaffles
Member
Funny that no one shittalks about Splatoon's lack of content at launch now, it was a $60 title too. Why? Because it is exactly what Overwatch is doing right now: all content updates are free. And if I remember correct, Splatoon's multiplayer content is even less at launch, with 5 maps and 2 modes.
Splatoon sold great and was loved, but for the sake of pointing it out: Splatoon launched with SIGNIFICANTLY less maps as well. I don't expect Overwatch would get a 'pass' if it had like 3 or 4 maps.
It has a singleplayer campaign though.
SmartWaffles
Member
Also Splatoon has a single player portion, but for the absolute meat of the package that is multiplayer, Splatoon gets a "pass" with even less content. So the bash on Overwatch is funny.
It is the prime example of pure gameplay goodness with goodwill free update triumphs over initial backlash, Overwatch will be the same.