• 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

And that's fine. It just means the game isn't for you. I tire of grinding to unlock stuff and would rather just play for fun. Especially with MP games since having to unlock characters, weapons, upgrades etc. just makes it an unbalanced mess and leaves those of us with less time to play always behind the people who play a ton. So the other players aren't only more skilled/experienced, but also have better gear and characters. That's not fun to me. But there's a huge market for those games, so I'm glad they're out there. Just like I'm glad their are games like Overwatch that are more focused on balance and just playing for fun.

The reason I bought this game is bolded. I don't need the carrot and stick of unlocks. I just don't have the time for that stuff anymore. While I might be behind the skill curve of those who play constantly, at least I'm not competing with ridiculous gear, weapons and perks.
 
Honestly I hate that in hospitals "On a scale of 1 to 10 how would you rate the pain?" Fucking painful or I wouldn't be in hospital lol.

I had a mild headache while I was in and the nurse asked me to rate my pain. I gave it a 1.5.

I put a fucking .5 in there.

I blame IGN.
 

Interfectum

Member
Which is why I think scores are redundant and it's much better to just read the opinion of the reviewer and look at the objective facts rather than scroll to the score and the summary.

I just think scores are pointless in reviews, I always have, come to think of it, I can't think of any gaming sites that don't use a scoring system?

Are there any?

Yeah there a few I think...

I don't read too much into review scores, I just see them more as a useful guide.

Like I don't think there is much of a difference between an 8/10 and a 10/10 game. I only raise eyebrows when a game starts dipping into a 5 or 6 that I read a review and see if there's some fatal flaw I should know about.
 
Overwatch may be a good game but no game should ever get a 10/10, perfect is not achievable, nothing is perfect also critics are biased towards certain companies and the scoring reflects that.
This is one of the dumbest posts in the thread. It's not even original though, it's the same ridiculous nonsense that people repeat in every review thread.

First: why have a 10/10 on a review scale if you're not going to use it?

Second: a 10/10 doesn't mean perfect, so your whole post is invalid anyways.
 

Fbh

Gold Member
Good to hear it's good. The beta was pretty fun.

It's not really my type of game though but I'll probably pick it up once it goes on sale. Blizzard generally has decent sales for Black Friday, right?
 

ryanthelion123

Neo Member
Man, I watched a Giant Bomb stream of them playing the game and all three who were playing were just not very good at the game at all. It makes me wonder how multiplayer only games' review scores are based on the skill of the actual reviewer. If you are only losing, you are no going to enjoy the game as much.
 

azyless

Member
How is this game for someone who hasn't played multiplayer shooters since Rainbow Six: Vegas and is basically terrible at them?

People have said this is quite accessible though? I suck at MP and was looking at buying it, I really don't want to get "rekt" lol.

I'm terrible at shooters and I've been having great fun with it. Some characters don't require much aiming/reflexes to be decent.
 

Alavard

Member
They shouldn't, because nothing is perfect, perfection is an impossibility from a logical stand point.

Ever see someone get a perfect score on an essay in school? This is the same. It's not saying the thing being judged is perfect, it's that it reaches the highest score on the requirements being judged.
 

atom519

Member
Nothing wrong with that at all, doing you is more important than appeasing randoms.

This is literally the exact opposite of how a game like Overwatch should be played, and it makes me sad to see similar posts from selfish players not willing to maximize their team comp.
 
Me and a few other GAFers had a hot streak last night. Went about 8-1. We were straight-up WRECKING shit. So much better than randoms who want to play it like CoD. I cannot overstate how much things change with a full team of six who get along, laugh and have solid comms.
 
This is literally the exact opposite of how a game like Overwatch should be played, and it makes me sad to see similar posts from selfish players not willing maximize their team comp.

Agreed. Worst kind of mentality. This is a game where proper team-comp is essential. Don't be so self-centered that you'd negatively impact everyone else's experience for your own satisfaction. If that's your style, Battlefront, CoD, Halo and other games that promote lone-wolf gameplay are available to you. This is a team game where objective control dictates wins and losses; not your KDA. Play the game the way it's meant to be played and don't fuck over the 5 randoms that have to suffer through your narcissism. If the team clearly needs a healer/tank, how about you stop sniping while your team is desperately trying to cap a point with 1 minute on the clock you orangutan.
 

commish

Jason Kidd murdered my dog in cold blood!
Thirdly, you may think a 10/10 does not mean perfect but to me, from a mathematical point of view, when you give something an absolute out of an absolute it is literally saying it the the best it can be, there is nothing can improve upon it at this point in time (or ever) it is rated as flawless or considered perfect because if that wasn't the idea then why give it a 10?

This post. I don't even. "From a mathematical point of view"... when we are talking about reviewing video games. Okay. "if we were talking about a different subject, then it would be true111!"

Anyway, this isn't the type of game that lends itself to reviews. In 6 months, we'll see how the competitive landscape of the game has changed. Either it will have caught on or died.
 

Siege.exe

Member
This is literally the exact opposite of how a game like Overwatch should be played, and it makes me sad to see similar posts from selfish players not willing to maximize their team comp.

Agreed. Worst kind of mentality. This is a game where proper team-comp is essential. Don't be so self-centered that you'd negatively impact everyone else's experience for your own satisfaction. If that's your style, Battlefront, CoD, Halo and other games that promote lone-wolf gameplay are available to you. This is a team game where objective control dictates wins and losses; not your KDA. Play the game the way it's meant to be played and don't fuck over the 5 randoms that have to suffer through your narcissism. If the team clearly needs a healer/tank, how about you stop sniping while your team is desperately trying to cap a point with 1 minute on the clock you orangutan.

Again, I play the objective. In every multiplayer game I play, I play the objective. Point needs to be held down? I hold it down. Payload needs to be escorted? I escort it. I get a lot of kills along the way because I keep people from contesting the objective. I see you getting hurt? I run over to you and drop Soldier's AoE healing thing if I can. During the beta, I was on the winning team far more often than not. Just because I'm not playing different characters in different situations doesn't mean I can't or don't contribute to the team, and I think it's really shitty of you guys to act as if I or anyone else needs to go play a different game just because we're not playing exactly the way you want us to play. If I don't want to be a tank, I'm not going to play a tank. Same goes for healers, snipers, builders, or even other offensive characters. I play Soldier, and I do it pretty damn well, and if you're going to jump down people's throats for not switching characters, I'd say you're being a pretty terrible teammate.
 

Kintaro

Worships the porcelain goddess
My point that a 10/10 represents what I consider to "flawless" or perfect because surely any flaws or imperfections should be accounted for when scoring something and that should be reflected in the score?

I don't like review scores much either.

However, what "you" consider doesn't much matter. What does that outlet mean when they say 10/10? Considering no game is perfect or flawless. It can mean "Top of its genre" or any number of things. Each scoring outlet is different and unless you work for them, what you consider doesn't really have much merit.

What does 10/10 mean to the outlet scoring it?
 

fuzzyset

Member
Again, I play the objective. In every multiplayer game I play, I play the objective. Point needs to be held down? I hold it down. Payload needs to be escorted? I escort it. I get a lot of kills along the way because I keep people from contesting the objective. I see you getting hurt? I run over to you and drop Soldier's AoE healing thing if I can. During the beta, I was on the winning team far more often than not. Just because I'm not playing different characters in different situations doesn't mean I can't or don't contribute to the team, and I think it's really shitty of you guys to act as if I or anyone else needs to go play a different game just because we're not playing exactly the way you want us to play. If I don't want to be a tank, I'm not going to play a tank. Same goes for healers, snipers, builders, or even other offensive characters. I play Soldier, and I do it pretty damn well, and if you're going to jump down people's throats for not switching characters, I'd say you're being a pretty terrible teammate.

Perhaps, sometimes you should break it dooowwwwn.
 

spootime

Member
Again, I play the objective. In every multiplayer game I play, I play the objective. Point needs to be held down? I hold it down. Payload needs to be escorted? I escort it. I get a lot of kills along the way because I keep people from contesting the objective. I see you getting hurt? I run over to you and drop Soldier's AoE healing thing if I can. During the beta, I was on the winning team far more often than not. Just because I'm not playing different characters in different situations doesn't mean I can't or don't contribute to the team, and I think it's really shitty of you guys to act as if I or anyone else needs to go play a different game just because we're not playing exactly the way you want us to play. If I don't want to be a tank, I'm not going to play a tank. Same goes for healers, snipers, builders, or even other offensive characters. I play Soldier, and I do it pretty damn well, and if you're going to jump down people's throats for not switching characters, I'd say you're being a pretty terrible teammate.

I have to agree with this. If someone wants to just play one character, its really not a big deal. Those kind of players probably aren't going to be ruining your competitive games, and even if they do play competitive, they are probably going to get filtered down to the lower end of the MMR pool anyway.
 

atom519

Member
If I don't want to be a tank, I'm not going to play a tank. Same goes for healers, snipers, builders, or even other offensive characters.

But what if your team needs a healer, or a tank? Better off losing as long as you get to play your favorite hero.... right?

This is going off topic from OP so I'll just stop now, but if you have this mentality you are a bad teammate plain and simple and the reason why this game can be frustrating for other players.
 

Siege.exe

Member
But what if your team needs a healer, or a tank? Better off losing as long as you get to play my favorite hero.... right?

This is going off topic from OP so I'll just stop now, but if you have this mentality you are a bad teammate plain and simple and the reason why this game can be frustrating for other players.

If you're asking if I'd rather enjoy the game I payed for than be beholden to a bunch of people I don't know, the answer is yes. If you're asking if I just want to run an gun and not play objective/help my team, the answer is no. The idea of me performing at my absolute best and making far more of an impact than I would playing as any other character making me a "bad teammate" is absurd, and I'd gladly want nothing to do with this game or its community if most people felt that way (which they fortunately do not, as it's just an extremely shitty way of interacting with people).

Since you appear to want to move on from this, I just want to ask one thing/present an example: I'm a prop. Been playing prop for over 5 years, and aside from the occasional placement at lock, that's the only the position I play. I'm a pretty damn good prop if I do say so myself; match up well against people much larger than me, fast for my size, scrum well, win the vast majority of rucks I enter, so on and so forth. If our winger goes down, should I be the one to move into that role? Would my team receive any benefit from me moving to a position that I not only do not know how to play, but am in fact not physically fit to play? Would I be more of a bad teammate for doing what I do best, or doing something that I have no business doing at all?
 
Ok, firstly thank you for insulting my intelligence because of my opinion on review scoring, shows your level of maturity.
Oh give me a break, I didn't insult your intelligence. You could very well be a smart individual. But your "opinion" on this subject isn't intelligent.

Secondly, I am not trying to insult the game so don't take it personally, I intend on picking it up so no need to get mad towards me.
I never said you were insulting the game. I'm not interested in your thoughts on the game, I'm interested in quashing this boneheaded, annoying horseshit about "perfect scores" that continues to pop up in every damn review thread.

Thirdly, you may think a 10/10 does not mean perfect but to me, from a mathematical point of view, when you give something an absolute out of an absolute it is literally saying it the the best it can be, there is nothing can improve upon it at this point in time (or ever) it is rated as flawless or considered perfect because if that wasn't the idea then why give it a 10?
What are you talking about? A "mathematical point of view"? What does that even mean? This isn't math class. We're talking about review scales. You don't get to decide what they mean.

IGN: 10=MASTERPIECE
Simply put: this is our highest recommendation. There’s no such thing as a truly perfect game, but those that earn a Masterpiece label from IGN come as close as we could reasonably hope for. These are classics in the making that we hope and expect will influence game design for years to come, as other developers learn from their shining examples.

Jimquisition: 10=Sterling
A 10 represents the finest of the fine, an exemplar of its genre, and the current game of its type to beat. While nothing in life is perfect, these games come as close to the ideal as one can get. Such a score is not given lightly, and is reserved for true pinnacles of the medium. A pinnacle can be relative – another game may eventually come that bests it, but for now, this is the kind of stuff the industry ought to strive for.

Destructoid: 10=Flawless Victory
10s aren't perfect, since nothing is, but they come as close as you could get in a given genre. The new game to beat in its sector, we're talking pure videogame ecstasy here.

Polygon: 10
A score of 10 is the highest recommendation we can give. 10s represent ambitious games that succeed in ways few games have, and that we expect will be part of the gaming conversation for some time. These are the "must-plays." However, this is not a "perfect" score. We've never played a perfect game. Except for The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past.

USgamer: 10 (5)=Phenomenal
It might have a few flaws, but everything comes together to deliver an incredible, compelling and enjoyable gaming experience that shouldn’t be missed.

Gaming Trend: 10 (100)=Phenomenal
Phenomenal – Mind-blowing. Redefines its genre.

Angry Joe: 10=Fantastic

GameSpot: 10=Essential
 

Orayn

Member
If you're asking if I'd rather enjoy the game I payed for than be beholden to a bunch of people I don't know, the answer is yes. If you're asking if I just want to run an gun and not play objective/help my team, the answer is no. The idea of me performing at my absolute best and making far more of an impact than I would playing as any other character making me a "bad teammate" is absurd, and I'd gladly want nothing to do with this game or its community if most people felt that way (which they fortunately do not, as it's just an extremely shitty way of interacting with people).

In a team based game where roles matter, completely refusing to ever change characters is the same thing as ignoring the objectives. It's also ruining your own fun by reducing your chances of actually winning matches.
 

Jito

Banned
If you're asking if I'd rather enjoy the game I payed for than be beholden to a bunch of people I don't know, the answer is yes. If you're asking if I just want to run an gun and not play objective/help my team, the answer is no. The idea of me performing at my absolute best and making far more of an impact than I would playing as any other character making me a "bad teammate" is absurd, and I'd gladly want nothing to do with this game or its community if most people felt that way (which they fortunately do not, as it's just an extremely shitty way of interacting with people).

Yeh we're the ones being shitty suggesting you play the game the way it was designed to be played, why else would all the characters work so well together and have appropriate counters for each, why else would it allow you to switch characters when every time you spawn? But just keep spinning that idea that we're the ones being shitty.
 

BiggNife

Member
10/10 has never meant perfect and that's just something that everyone assumes because everyone thinks review scores work the same as academic scores even though that has never ever been the case
 
Game Revolution - 4.5/5
Blizzard has always excelled at delivering enjoyable games with beautiful presentations, and Overwatch shows that it can extend this talent to genres that it’s never visited before. This might be its first shooter, but it has a remarkable fun factor that you would expect from only the most elite shooter-oriented developers.
 
It's all true. The game is the definition of excellence. You can see the love and care poured into each character, into the graphics, into the soundfx, into the map designs filled with dozens or rooms and multiple floors.

If there has been a more polished, more excellent game than this one that has come out in the last 5 years, I haven't played it.
 

Siege.exe

Member
In a team based game where roles matter, completely refusing to ever change characters is the same thing as ignoring the objectives. It's also ruining your own fun by reducing your chances of actually winning matches.

Roles do matter, yes. I just happen to play the role I play very well, well playing all of the other roles very poorly. I'm not ignoring any objectives by not changing, I'm optimizing the amount of contribution I make to the team. Despite winning more often than losing, I don't derive even a tiny portion of my fun from winning. I get it from playing the game, because the game is fun.

Yeh we're the ones being shitty suggesting you play the game the way it was designed to be played, why else would all the characters work so well together and have appropriate counters for each, why else would it allow you to switch characters when every time you spawn? But just keep spinning that idea that we're the ones being shitty.

The game you're describing doesn't sound very fun. It sounds like I have to do a bunch of things that I don't like to do, and am not good at doing. Overwatch, the game I play a ton during its open beta, was extremely fun, and I won plenty, despite doing the exact opposite of what I am apparently "required" to do. I do my job well, yet because I'm not constantly jumping between characters that I'm not good with and/or do not like, something that would pose an actual detriment to my team, I'm being shitty? And the people that are telling me that I need to go play another game, that I'm doing a disservice to my team despite helping them win most of the time, that I'm playing the game wrong and am a shitty teammate for the sole fact that I only play one character, aren't being shitty? That sounds really backwards to me, and I would never treat anyone I play games with in such a manner.
 

Orca

Member
But what if your team needs a healer, or a tank? Better off losing as long as you get to play your favorite hero.... right?

This is going off topic from OP so I'll just stop now, but if you have this mentality you are a bad teammate plain and simple and the reason why this game can be frustrating for other players.

In the rush to vilify people for playing the character they're good at, we sometimes forget there are other players on the team capable of switching characters. They must be bad teammates too.
 

Jito

Banned
The game you're describing doesn't sound very fun. It sounds like I have to do a bunch of things that I don't like to do, and am not good at doing. Overwatch, the game I play a ton during its open beta, was extremely fun, and I won plenty, despite doing the exact opposite of what I am apparently "required" to do. I do my job well, yet because I'm not constantly jumping between characters that I'm not good with and/or do not like, something that would pose an actual detriment to my team, I'm being shitty? And the people that are telling me that I need to go play another game, that I'm doing a disservice to my team despite helping them win most of the time, that I'm playing the game wrong and am a shitty teammate for the sole fact that I only play one character, aren't being shitty? That sounds really backwards to me, and I would never treat anyone I play games with in such a manner.

Yeh like I said, it's shitty to main a character in this game. There's no denying the game is clearly designed around switching characters to deal with the enemy team. You can keep trying to deny that the game is designed that way but it clearly is. You're right though that it's shitty people telling you to play something else.
 

Orcastar

Member
Oh give me a break, I didn't insult your intelligence. You could very well be a smart individual. But your "opinion" on this subject isn't intelligent.


I never said you were insulting the game. I'm not interested in your thoughts on the game, I'm interested in quashing this boneheaded, annoying horseshit about "perfect scores" that continues to pop up in every damn review thread.


What are you talking about? A "mathematical point of view"? What does that even mean? This isn't math class. We're talking about review scales. You don't get to decide what they mean.

IGN: 10=MASTERPIECE


Jimquisition: 10=Sterling


Destructoid: 10=Flawless Victory


Polygon: 10


USgamer: 10 (5)=Phenomenal


Gaming Trend: 10 (100)=Phenomenal


Angry Joe: 10=Fantastic

GameSpot: 10=Essential

I find it incredibly sad that all these reviews have to include a disclaimer saying that a score 10/10 does not mean that the game is perfect...
 

Siege.exe

Member
Yeh like I said, it's shitty to main a character in this game. There's no denying the game is clearly designed around switching characters to deal with the enemy team. You can keep trying to deny that the game is designed that way but it clearly is. You're right though that it's shitty people telling you to play something else.

I didn't say that the game isn't designed to be played that way, it clearly is. I'm saying that you do not have to play that way to make a meaningful contribution to your team, and as far as I concerned, I would be a much worse teammate if I did play the way the game was designed because I'd be running around doing a horrible job at what I'm supposed to be doing. I just don't get the argument that I HAVE to change characters/roles in order to be a good teammate, and that not doing so makes me a bad one, when that couldn't be further from what I experienced. If I suck at doing something, who exactly am I helping by doing it? I'd be wasting a spot on my team, wasting their time, and I wouldn't be having any fun. No one benefits from that situation, where as when I play with the one character I'm actually good with, my team usually wins, and I'm having fun. I don't see any scenario where the former can be perceived as preferable to the latter.
 

Jito

Banned
I didn't say that the game isn't designed to be played that way, it clearly is. I'm saying that you do not have to play that way to make a meaningful contribution to your team, and as far as I concerned, I would be a much worse teammate if I did play the way the game was designed because I'd be running around doing a horrible job at what I'm supposed to be doing. I just don't get the argument that I HAVE to change characters/roles in order to be a good teammate, and that not doing so makes me a bad one, when that couldn't be further from what I experienced. If I suck at doing something, who exactly am I helping by doing it? I'd be wasting a spot on my team, wasting their time, and I wouldn't be having any fun. No one benefits from that situation, where as when I play with the one character I'm actually good with, my team usually wins, and I'm having fun. I don't see any scenario where the former can be perceived as preferable to the latter.

Don't put yourself down so much, maybe you should at least try and stop being such a defeatist.
 

Siege.exe

Member
Don't put yourself down so much, maybe you should at least try and stop being such a defeatist.

How am I being a defeatist? I like Soldier. Soldier is extremely fun to play as. I'm good at playing Soldier. I tried the other characters plenty, I'm perfectly happy playing only as Soldier, and I win more when I only play as Soldier. Staying in my lane presents the highest net benefit to both me and the people on my team, I don't see why I should needlessly meddle with that.
 

Jito

Banned
How am I being a defeatist? I like Soldier. Soldier is extremely fun to play as. I'm good at playing Soldier. I tried the other characters plenty, I'm perfectly happy playing only as Soldier, and I win more when I only play as Soldier. Staying in my lane presents the highest net benefit to both me and the people on my team, I don't see why I should needlessly meddle with that.

That is begin defeatist though. The only way you'll ever get good with the other 20 characters is by playing with them.
 

Siege.exe

Member
That is begin defeatist though. The only way you'll ever get good with the other 20 characters is by playing with them.

I played with them though. I'm not going to waste my time, have less fun, and perform worse becoming okay with 20 characters when I can have a ton of fun and perform extremely well becoming great as 1. Maybe one of the future characters can grab me, but what obligation do I have to use multiple characters when everyone is better off with me just playing one?
 
Top Bottom