Absolutely no reason for a score that low unless the coffee was bad or the milk was spoiled. gitgud
-
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
Absolutely no reason for a score that low unless the coffee was bad or the milk was spoiled. gitgud
StrongBlackVine
Banned
That 98 seemed really high for what this game brings. I expect the the score to get lower as more reviews drop. High 80s final score.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
The game feels like an 8/10, or in some cases I dare say a 7.9/10, when your constantly in crappy teams and losing.
jim2point0
Banned
I will buy it when they support 3440x1440 
pokeystaples
Banned
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.
The Elite
BOSS
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.
Crunch Berries would have brought it up to a 6.
Oops All Berries would have been a 7.
Outright Villainy
Member
Nah. I'll probably be playing Soldier 76 when there's already 2 though
If I see 2 soldier 76s on a team ill change immediately to him and do everything in my power to convince everyone else to pick him too.
WE'RE ALL SOLDIERS NOW.
Interfectum
Member
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.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
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.
Coffee is the generic third-person cover shooter of breakfast beverages. It did the job, but I could have been a bit more creative.
Mister Megative
Banned
What was your breakfast review?
Get back to work, we've got more Overwatch to play tonight.
It is though. The game will undoubtly have quite a long life.
Mister Megative
Banned
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.
It's a good job 10/10 and 4/4 doesn't mean perfect then.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
I think we need to specify the PC version will have a long life. I'm still unsure about consoles.
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.
The Elite
BOSS
I was surprised by how little of my friends are actually playing. Judging by GAF I would expect about 20-30 people on at night like other big games.
agreed. The console versions are getting less than stellar reviews from users while the PC version is getting above average marks. What's the differences?
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.
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.
Mister Megative
Banned
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.
Dreams-Visions
Member
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.
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.
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 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?
Perhaps, sometimes you should break it dooowwwwn.
spootime
Member
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.
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.
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?
orthodoxy1095
Banned
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
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.
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.
Dreams-Visions
Member
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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...
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.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Did The Washington Post weigh in with their 4/10 yet?
Don't put yourself down so much, maybe you should at least try and stop being such a defeatist.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
In the offhand chance that Michael Thomsen reviews Overwatch and has a contrarian opinion on it, can we all please ignore and not lose our shit like in the UC4 thread?
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.
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?