@Swoopalz: I didn't say my opinion alone, I specifically said everybody whose opinion I care about (which by the way does not include gamespot, they just happen to align this time). Whether it is streamers, YouTubers, friends, or competitive players from other games I've enjoyed, practically everyone of those who actually played the game is super happy with Overwatch and considers it near flawless. Even people like me, who were convinced that it would be shit before they got to try it. If a game manages to please its intended audience to this extent, does it not deserve a good score just because it's not for everyone?
Sometimes critics and player opinion drifts apart quite a lot (e.g. Mad Max), but here it does not seem to be the case. I don't care about gamespot's credibility or even what score Overwatch is getting, I'm just giving you my perspective on this because I respectfully think that you are off the mark in this case. No need to be angry.
And yes, Battleborn is a very different beast. I'm sure you also have used the internet long enough to see the patterns of how the hivemind works. Battleborn is considered an underdog and isn't considered a potential threat to anything really. Nobody has a reason to go and shitpost in its review section (aside from those people who just enjoy being an ass). If you like Overwatch it's very easy to simply ignore Battleborn, it's a non-factor. If you like Battleborn (or TF2, or ...) it's impossible to ignore Overwatch since it's being shoved in your face wherever you look right now. It's no wonder that some people react to it irately.
@Swoopalz: Because it's not cool to hate on Witcher 3 and it's not stepping on the toes of any fanbases. You always have these rivalries among multiplayer scenes, especially if games roughly resemble each other. You just can't put any stock in those user averages, most of it is complete garbage.
Nobody should care anyway what the "internet hivemind" thinks. If you can't judge by yourself, then just listen to people you personally respect (e.g. friends). I know that Overwatch has a great reception among everybody whose opinion even slightly matters to me, so there's nothing fishy going on. It's just a good game.
@Karmazyn: How do you put a price on fun? I always find it odd to compare these things. But if you go by the amount of enjoyment you get out of it, then a competitive multiplayer game that you actually get hooked to will always beat everything else.
@Yams1980: You see your character quite a bit, often during the game, but mostly during pre-game selection or POTG intros. More importantly of course other people see it and also the skins come with custom weapon skins and sometimes custom effects which you do see.
@theothersider: The console price point is somewhat surprising, especially since you could argue that the PC version is likely to offer the best value due to the much more active competitive scene. I don't think I would buy it on console, unless I had no other option and plenty of disposable income.
@jontslayer: One I enjoyed playing, the other I didn't.
Tongue in cheek, but in the end that's what it comes down to. Aside from the pretty colours and fancy world, Overwatch is really well designed and what's most important is that each of the 21 heroes is satisfying to play by itself. In the end a shooter comes down to its mechanics, and nailing 21 different playstyles in a way that actually works together in a balanced 6on6 setup with consistent high quality maps is quite the feat. I would also argue that playing with a different hero is much more interesting in terms of variety than playing on a different map or a different game mode. In OW, the maps and gamemodes are purposefully put into the background, since the game is ultimately all about the gameplay of the heroes and their interactions.
Also, with its focus on 6on6 competition OW seems much more poised to actually become a successful esport, which TF2 never really managed to do. The competitive scene is already incredibly active and everyone involved seems to have an optimism about the game's future that I've rarely seen before. Competitive FPS used to be dominated by fast paced arena shooters, but ever since their demise there hasn't really been an alternative to CS any more. OW is the first game in ages I actually believe has what it takes to reach comparable heights.
@dexda:You can't please everyone, but the large number of people who are addicted to it are definitely not all paid by Blizzard...
I guess that's the thing though, practically everybody can enjoy a good story while competitive multiplayer games are not for everyone. As such it was good that it had the open beta, so most people had a chance to try it for themselves. Personally I had no intentions of buying it before I got to play it actually. I never expected to like it as much as I do and I'm not sure if watching videos and reviews of it alone would have convinced me either.
Maybe in the future there will be a free starter edition like Blizzard has for its other games.
@RSM-HQ: In the end, this is just petty fighting over trivialities.
When did we lose track of the one thing that really matters in games? It's whether you are having fun. If the reviewer doesn't have fun because online matches aren't fulfilling enough, and there is a lack of alternatives, then they will probably mention it. If they are having a whale of a time, then the game is doing its job and the reviewer is most likely going to glance over any omissions they are not missing anyway.
All reviews are subjective to some extend, and almost all multiplayer games have their fanbase for whom the game is the best thing since sliced bread and who will be upset if the game does not receive top scores. All we can take from a review is how much that particular reviewer (or group) enjoyed the game and why.
With a game like Overwatch, reviews arguably don't even matter and frankly I don't care one bit whether gamespot's reviews are balanced or not. I just found it really surprising how many of the comments seem to focus on trivial feature checklists rather than whether the game is fun to play.
We have not had a truly convincing multiplayer FPS in ages, and I would think that counts for a million times more than whether it has a tacked on story mode or not.
As for the SFV review, I got the impression that the reviewer had more an issue with getting into the game as a casual player without good SP training options. Overwatch does not have that problem, it's super easy and smooth to get into no matter what your skill level is. This matters a lot, because the longevity of the game directly depends on how accessible it is to new players.
You know which other games don't have a story mode? Quake 3, Counter-Strike, Team Fortress 2. You know which other games have been the defining multiplayer FPS of the last few decades? Yeah...
Of course you dock points for lack of single player if the multiplayer is only "decent", but every once in awhile a game comes along that breaks all the rules. Overwatch is almost guaranteed to keep you entertained for a very long time to come, and the value proposition is hard to beat.
On the other hand, as great as the new Doom may be, there is no way I'm going to spend 60 EUR for a fantastic SP campaign and a mediocre MP. I just can't afford that price for such a limited amount of entertainment.
Overwatch for 40 EUR though? An absolute steal.
I'm anything but a Blizzard fanboy, the last game by them which impressed me was Warcraft 3. When Overwatch was announced I was sure it would be casual nonsense. I tried the open beta out of curiosity more than anything, but like so many others I've been thoroughly impressed. You can tell that this wasn't designed by casuals but by real fans of the genre. Competitive FPS have been stagnant for a very long time, and apparently it needed Blizzard's fresh take on things to breath some new life into it. Even if it follows a well known formula (that has been waiting for a competent implementation for competitive play), shooters are ultimately all about the mechanics and Overwatch nails that.
The bottom line is, Overwatch does exactly what it needs to do and it does so perfectly. Everybody has to decide for themselves how much that is worth to them, for many of us it is priceless.
Zenity's comments