So how have you liked Overwatch Open Beta so far? Rate it 0-10 (only those who played it)

  • 125 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for zergforlife
Zergforlife

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll So how have you liked Overwatch Open Beta so far? Rate it 0-10 (only those who played it) (112 votes)

10/10 8%
9/10 23%
8/10 34%
7/10 32%

I am LOVING it. The PC version at least is very fun. Tons of different classes and map styles. My favorites are the tanks, they feel very new and different compared to TF2 heavy.

Yes this is a lot like TF2, but an evolution. It took 10 years but we finally have a successor to TF2. Surely better than yearly military rehashes, a once every decade evolution.

I've played several days for many hours, I give it a 9/10. Any console gamers can tell me how it was on PS4/XB1? I heard not as good due to it being mostly designed around superior mouse (sorry had to make it relevant to this board). Thoughts?

Also if you do like it, what is your favorite character? Mine is Reinhardt.

 • 
Avatar image for mems_1224
mems_1224

56919

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By mems_1224
Member since 2004 • 56919 Posts

8/8

Plays great but the game seems thin on content

D.Va/Lucio 4 life

Avatar image for quadknight
QuadKnight

12916

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By QuadKnight
Member since 2015 • 12916 Posts

9/10, it was pretty amazing.

I played it on PS4 and had a blast with it.

Avatar image for LostProphetFLCL
LostProphetFLCL

18526

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By LostProphetFLCL
Member since 2006 • 18526 Posts

10/10. Playing it on PS4 and I LOVE it so far. Game is just a total blast.

Avatar image for Vaasman
Vaasman

15874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#4 Vaasman
Member since 2008 • 15874 Posts

Eh, I've played for a few hours and to me it's like a 7 maybe. There's a lot of charm in the character design and the core gameplay is really tight. But the game just feels so typical, the same way Heroes of the Storm feels. The team size cap is way too small for a class-based shooter, and the fact that the game modes are so basic is fucking lame. Would it have killed them to figure out a deathmatch or capture the flag? Or maybe a new mode unique to this game? Or maybe a true and awesome assault mode, like what UT2004 did. I mean for as bad as this game wants to be the next big arena shooter, they didn't do anything at all to improve that design.

So yea, it's fun, but forgettable. If it wasn't by Blizzard I wouldn't have even cared to play it.

Avatar image for Ant_17
Ant_17

13634

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#5 Ant_17
Member since 2005 • 13634 Posts

It's good, maybe 8/10.

Avatar image for m3dude1
m3dude1

2334

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 m3dude1
Member since 2007 • 2334 Posts

4/10. game is bland and boring imo. the shooting mechanics just suck.

Avatar image for zergforlife
Zergforlife

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Zergforlife
Member since 2016 • 467 Posts

@m3dude1 said:

4/10. game is bland and boring imo. the shooting mechanics just suck.

wow really? It is head over heals shooting compared to slow console shooters.

Avatar image for SexyJazzCat
SexyJazzCat

2796

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 SexyJazzCat
Member since 2013 • 2796 Posts

Solid 8/10. You certainly need to get used to each character.

Avatar image for Alucard_Prime
Alucard_Prime

10107

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#9 Alucard_Prime
Member since 2008 • 10107 Posts

I liked it just played 1-2 matches though....apparently the beta is basically the full game!....so gonna play it a bit more

Avatar image for zergforlife
Zergforlife

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 Zergforlife
Member since 2016 • 467 Posts

@SexyJazzCat said:

Solid 8/10. You certainly need to get used to each character.

Or at least 1 of each archetype. Being very seasoned at a tank or healer can turn a battle.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64054

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#11 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64054 Posts

7/10

It's good, a lot of fun. I question some of the skill ceiling (the hit boxes are pretty fucking generous), and in a TF2 comparison the game has a lot more holes in comparison, but it's a lot of fun. A lot of my reactions to it are what I had about Titanfall. The thing that is supposed to make this game different, doesn't do enough to make me think it'll be something special, but it's actually fun and feels like breath of fresh air at the same time. It'll end up having more legs because of Blizzard, but point is it's shaping up to be good.

Don't think it'll stack up favorably to other mp shooters from this gen like Rainbow Six Siege (which is fucking rad) or replace my love for Rocket League, but lots of games this gen won't be as good as Rocket League.

Avatar image for KungfuKitten
KungfuKitten

27389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#12  Edited By KungfuKitten
Member since 2006 • 27389 Posts

I don't feel I played it enough to rate it 10/10 but it's extremely good. Movement feels great, art design is great, sound design is great, the amount of content is Ok for a $40 game and it looks like they'll expand on it. It has pretty good ways to mitigate toxicity. The gameplay is pretty deep in that you will feel like you learned something in almost every match in the first 20 hours. It's fast paced but you do get the time to switch to a new character. Movement matters. Characters are extremely varied. I love it. On PC that is. Never touched the console version.

Downsides are the lack of mod support, there only being 2 builder characters so it will keep telling you you have no builders in a defense team, and some minor balancing stuff. I also heard some complaints about how it ran. It runs smoothly for me though.

Avatar image for freedomfreak
freedomfreak

52548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 freedomfreak
Member since 2004 • 52548 Posts

Had a good time with it. Had the most fun with Tracer and Zarya.

Avatar image for ShepardCommandr
ShepardCommandr

4939

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#14  Edited By ShepardCommandr
Member since 2013 • 4939 Posts

i am not a huge mp guy but i enjoyed what i played.I mostly stuck with support classes.

i wouldn't pay $40 for it though there's way too little content to justify a purchase.It has less content than evolve and Battlefront but no season pass bs thankfully

Avatar image for skelly34
Skelly34

2353

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 Skelly34
Member since 2015 • 2353 Posts

The SFM smut is literally the best thing about this shit game.

Avatar image for kittennose
KittenNose

2470

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#16 KittenNose
Member since 2014 • 2470 Posts

I don't like giving number scores, but I adore the heck out of the game. Mercy is everything I could have ever asked for from a healer, and If I somehow get tired of her the other healbot can freaking run on walls and hand out AoE speed boosts. It is a support's dream. I put like sixty hours into TF2 medic and a similar number into engie, there is no way I am going to put less into Mercy and Tracer.

Holy crap Tracer. I am not even good at FPSes and I can be a very effective Tracer even when they try to hard counter. So nice to see dedicated harass in an objective based shooter. So many of the characters have a very high skill cap, but the game is designed to be very noob friendly at the same time. Love the mechanics in this game in general. So well designed, with so much verity.

And you know they are going to add like 50 more classes.

Avatar image for zergforlife
Zergforlife

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By Zergforlife
Member since 2016 • 467 Posts

@skelly34 said:

The SFM smut is literally the best thing about this shit game.

What didn't you like about it?

@ShepardCommandr said:

i am not a huge mp guy but i enjoyed what i played.I mostly stuck with support classes.

i wouldn't pay $40 for it though there's way too little content to justify a purchase.It has less content than evolve and Battlefront but no season pass bs thankfully

Yeah but unlike those it will last WAAAAY longer (Blizz title, don't expect the population to tank for at least 4 years), be updated more (free), and be more competitive. Well the PC version at least.

Avatar image for shadowchronicle
Shadowchronicle

26969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#18 Shadowchronicle
Member since 2008 • 26969 Posts

Played in the lobby and it was fun. Decided to buy it early for the 24th this month because of the beta.

Avatar image for gago-gago
gago-gago

12138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19  Edited By gago-gago
Member since 2009 • 12138 Posts

I'm a level 25 now and still want to play over and over again. Even when it gets frustrating when team mates are playing it like its a death match, I finish up the rounds then find another team and feel better. I enjoy it more when playing with my bro and friends because talking to each other helps out. I could see why there isn't a death match mode because it's pretty team based. I hope there will be more modes, something like a horde mode could be fun. My bro already got it preordered and ready to game share so other people's review and score don't matter to us anymore. The game is fun, game of the month for me because I feel that the fun gameplay gives you more replay value than any game out in May.

Avatar image for datruth
DaTruth

19

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20  Edited By DaTruth
Member since 2016 • 19 Posts

A solid 8. I'll wait to see if any of my friends buy it before picking it up myself.

Avatar image for m3dude1
m3dude1

2334

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21  Edited By m3dude1
Member since 2007 • 2334 Posts

@zergforlife said:
@m3dude1 said:

4/10. game is bland and boring imo. the shooting mechanics just suck.

wow really? It is head over heals shooting compared to slow console shooters.

im not even sure what you mean, but it feels like shit compared to shooters like quake and unreal tournament. just slow and clumsy

Avatar image for KungfuKitten
KungfuKitten

27389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By KungfuKitten
Member since 2006 • 27389 Posts

I wonder whether COD fans would like this game. But I guess they would only try the console version.

My favorite so far is Mei but I have played mostly as Mercy because I'm naturally good with that kind of character. Played Medic for 100+ hours in TF2. Still haven't tried Genji, Reaper and Bastion tho.

Avatar image for KungfuKitten
KungfuKitten

27389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#23  Edited By KungfuKitten
Member since 2006 • 27389 Posts

@m3dude1 said:
@zergforlife said:
@m3dude1 said:

4/10. game is bland and boring imo. the shooting mechanics just suck.

wow really? It is head over heals shooting compared to slow console shooters.

im not even sure what you mean, but it feels like shit compared to shooters like quake and unreal tournament. just slow and clumsy

Have you played Tribes:Ascend? I think you would LOVE that game. But it might be a little late now to get into it. Not sure if it's still alive. If you're only into twitch shooters then I can see why Overwatch wouldn't be your thing.

Avatar image for Ballroompirate
Ballroompirate

26695

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#24 Ballroompirate
Member since 2005 • 26695 Posts

8.5

Avatar image for m3dude1
m3dude1

2334

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25  Edited By m3dude1
Member since 2007 • 2334 Posts

@KungfuKitten said:
@m3dude1 said:
@zergforlife said:
@m3dude1 said:

4/10. game is bland and boring imo. the shooting mechanics just suck.

wow really? It is head over heals shooting compared to slow console shooters.

im not even sure what you mean, but it feels like shit compared to shooters like quake and unreal tournament. just slow and clumsy

Have you played Tribes:Ascend? I think you would LOVE that game. But it might be a little late now to get into it. Not sure if it's still alive. If you're only into twitch shooters then I can see why Overwatch wouldn't be your thing.

i played the old school tribes back in the day, it was great. i dont only like twitch shooters. battlefield and cod are both fun and do well in their respective field. this game just feels bleh.

Avatar image for princessgomez92
PrincessGomez92

5747

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 201

User Lists: 5

#26 PrincessGomez92
Member since 2013 • 5747 Posts

9/10. Widowmaker is boss.

Avatar image for deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd
deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd

12449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd
Member since 2012 • 12449 Posts

8/10 now, fantastic gameplay ... 9/10 whe ncompetitive is in ... and more features. (private servers etc)... which are coming *eventually*.

Game of the year as far as I'm concerned.

Avatar image for deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd
deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd

12449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd
Member since 2012 • 12449 Posts

@Vaasman said:

Eh, I've played for a few hours and to me it's like a 7 maybe. There's a lot of charm in the character design and the core gameplay is really tight. But the game just feels so typical, the same way Heroes of the Storm feels. The team size cap is way too small for a class-based shooter, and the fact that the game modes are so basic is fucking lame. Would it have killed them to figure out a deathmatch or capture the flag? Or maybe a new mode unique to this game? Or maybe a true and awesome assault mode, like what UT2004 did. I mean for as bad as this game wants to be the next big arena shooter, they didn't do anything at all to improve that design.

So yea, it's fun, but forgettable. If it wasn't by Blizzard I wouldn't have even cared to play it.

They already explained why the modes are simplified, because the focus is on hero variety (much in the same sense that MOBA's only have 1 map and mode... well that most people care to play anyway). I disagree with the "6 va 6 is too small for team based shooter" that is illogical in every sense .... the level of effect of each character is too high for a cluster **** of 12 vs 12 for any ranked/normal balanced game mode ... maybe in custom game it will make an appearance.

Deathmatch NO .... deatchmatch/team death match is the same old boring s*t ..... this is not CoD, or UT.... UT's assault mode works because everyone is the same... so numbers can scale easily.

I dont disagree that more game modes would make it feel more complete on the surface... but in reality, it makes little difference. What I am missing is CTF/Attack and defend TUG O WAR style gameplay like in TF2 ... but again that would go against the quick-balanced-focus on the heroes thing they are going for.

I thought like you at first, but then I realised "I have TF2 for those things... this is unique in its own right".

Avatar image for Cloud_imperium
Cloud_imperium

15146

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 103

User Lists: 8

#29 Cloud_imperium
Member since 2013 • 15146 Posts

9/10 so far. Fantastic game. Feels very unique compared to other competitive FPS games.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a8875b6c648f
deactivated-5a8875b6c648f

954

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#30 deactivated-5a8875b6c648f
Member since 2015 • 954 Posts

9/10. One of the best FPS games I've ever played.

Avatar image for zergforlife
Zergforlife

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By Zergforlife
Member since 2016 • 467 Posts

@m3dude1 said:
@KungfuKitten said:
@m3dude1 said:
@zergforlife said:

wow really? It is head over heals shooting compared to slow console shooters.

im not even sure what you mean, but it feels like shit compared to shooters like quake and unreal tournament. just slow and clumsy

Have you played Tribes:Ascend? I think you would LOVE that game. But it might be a little late now to get into it. Not sure if it's still alive. If you're only into twitch shooters then I can see why Overwatch wouldn't be your thing.

i played the old school tribes back in the day, it was great. i dont only like twitch shooters. battlefield and cod are both fun and do well in their respective field. this game just feels bleh.

This is great for its respective field, it is a better version of TF2 and owns Battleborn.

I see it lasting much longer and having many more players than yearly CoD/BF games (PC version that is, console shooters are lol).

Avatar image for ReadingRainbow4
ReadingRainbow4

18733

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#32  Edited By ReadingRainbow4
Member since 2012 • 18733 Posts

It's a shooter that caters to casuals, you don't even need to aim in most cases just fire in the general direction of the enemy and you're sure to get a few kills. That said the porn isn't bad so at least something good came from it.

Avatar image for zergforlife
Zergforlife

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33  Edited By Zergforlife
Member since 2016 • 467 Posts

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

It's a shooter that caters to casuals, you don't even need to aim in most cases just fire in the general direction of the enemy and you're sure to get a few kills. That said the porn isn't bad so at least something good came from it.

It's casual friendly while also have incredibly high skill caps for those that play competitively. Just like Blizzard's other titles. The tournaments or ranked matches are going to be insane.

P.S. Ranked matches are disabled for Open Beta. in these there will be no "fire in general direction" will get you rekt.

Avatar image for jcrame10
jcrame10

6302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#34 jcrame10
Member since 2014 • 6302 Posts

It's good I just wonder how much more content and game modes there is to justify 60 dollars. Seems more fitting to be a 40 dollar title. I would probably get it day one either way if Uncharted 4 wasn't coming out next week

Avatar image for DragonfireXZ95
DragonfireXZ95

26712

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35  Edited By DragonfireXZ95
Member since 2005 • 26712 Posts

Probably an 8. It was a fun game, but I do feel as though it would get boring after a while. It was fun while I was playing it, however.

@jcrame10: It is 40 dollars. The special edition is 60.

Avatar image for vespuche
vespuche

1078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 vespuche
Member since 2007 • 1078 Posts

So far I like Widowmaker the most.

I also like to play support. Lucio and Mercy are fun.

Avatar image for elpresador-911
Elpresador-911

1096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#37 Elpresador-911
Member since 2013 • 1096 Posts

Uncharted 4 better

Avatar image for zergforlife
Zergforlife

467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38  Edited By Zergforlife
Member since 2016 • 467 Posts

@elpresador-911 said:

Uncharted 4 better

Too different to compare,

A competitive shooter that will have a large population and updates for several years, and probably have a great e-sports scene.

A short cinematic action game that can be played over a single weekend and never touched again, that probably won't have anyone playing the MP in a few months.

Avatar image for GhoX
GhoX

6267

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#39  Edited By GhoX
Member since 2006 • 6267 Posts

8/10 by myself

9/10 with friends

10/10 with friends who are also good

Avatar image for princeofshapeir
princeofshapeir

16652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#40 princeofshapeir
Member since 2006 • 16652 Posts

@jg4xchamp said:

7/10

It's good, a lot of fun. I question some of the skill ceiling (the hit boxes are pretty fucking generous), and in a TF2 comparison the game has a lot more holes in comparison, but it's a lot of fun. A lot of my reactions to it are what I had about Titanfall. The thing that is supposed to make this game different, doesn't do enough to make me think it'll be something special, but it's actually fun and feels like breath of fresh air at the same time. It'll end up having more legs because of Blizzard, but point is it's shaping up to be good.

pretty much how i feel. i can't justify spending $40 on this with the limited content and lack of dedicated servers and mods. most matches felt like they were pretty much just rush to the choke point and nuke the enemy team, which creates very short and unsatisfying games. not to mention the apex of depth in this game seems to be whether or not you can use your abilities at the right time as opposed to mastering advanced techniques and mechanics like in TF2.

overwatch is fun when i'm bored and want something to hold my attention for 30 minutes at a time but i will never see myself sinking hundreds of hours into it like i have with TF2

Avatar image for shadowchronicle
Shadowchronicle

26969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#41 Shadowchronicle
Member since 2008 • 26969 Posts

@jcrame10 said:

It's good I just wonder how much more content and game modes there is to justify 60 dollars. Seems more fitting to be a 40 dollar title. I would probably get it day one either way if Uncharted 4 wasn't coming out next week

That's because it is a $40 title.

  • Overwatch - $39.99
  • Overwatch Origins Edition - $59.99
  • Overwatch Collector's Edition - ??? according to the site probably because you can't pre-order

Avatar image for vespuche
vespuche

1078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 vespuche
Member since 2007 • 1078 Posts

I may have to pop on the Origins Edition. Just for the Tracer hero in Heroes of the Storm.

Avatar image for nutcrackr
nutcrackr

13032

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 1

#43 nutcrackr
Member since 2004 • 13032 Posts

Fun, not sure there is a lot of depth in each character but overall it was enjoyable. Needs more maps and more game modes.

Avatar image for Vaasman
Vaasman

15874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#44  Edited By Vaasman
Member since 2008 • 15874 Posts

@MBirdy88 said:
@Vaasman said:

Eh, I've played for a few hours and to me it's like a 7 maybe. There's a lot of charm in the character design and the core gameplay is really tight. But the game just feels so typical, the same way Heroes of the Storm feels. The team size cap is way too small for a class-based shooter, and the fact that the game modes are so basic is fucking lame. Would it have killed them to figure out a deathmatch or capture the flag? Or maybe a new mode unique to this game? Or maybe a true and awesome assault mode, like what UT2004 did. I mean for as bad as this game wants to be the next big arena shooter, they didn't do anything at all to improve that design.

So yea, it's fun, but forgettable. If it wasn't by Blizzard I wouldn't have even cared to play it.

They already explained why the modes are simplified, because the focus is on hero variety (much in the same sense that MOBA's only have 1 map and mode... well that most people care to play anyway). I disagree with the "6 va 6 is too small for team based shooter" that is illogical in every sense .... the level of effect of each character is too high for a cluster **** of 12 vs 12 for any ranked/normal balanced game mode ... maybe in custom game it will make an appearance.

Deathmatch NO .... deatchmatch/team death match is the same old boring s*t ..... this is not CoD, or UT.... UT's assault mode works because everyone is the same... so numbers can scale easily.

I dont disagree that more game modes would make it feel more complete on the surface... but in reality, it makes little difference. What I am missing is CTF/Attack and defend TUG O WAR style gameplay like in TF2 ... but again that would go against the quick-balanced-focus on the heroes thing they are going for.

I thought like you at first, but then I realised "I have TF2 for those things... this is unique in its own right".

This game has a dearth of content for a 40 dollar upfront cost, and whether you think those modes are good or not they would at least add some semblance of flavor and variety to some really boring modes. In fact maybe if they wanted to stand out they should have come up with a new or interesting mode. Even Heroes manages to have more variety with it's map objectives, and that game is free to play.

I mean lets be honest, this is clearly not a moba blend. There is no leveling, there are no lanes, there are no mobs, there are no bases. No in or out of game progression other than aesthetics. And the only environmental consideration is bottomless pits to wall off the map.

It's just TF2 style class shooter with a long cooldown, douchey ability for each class. So sue me if I hold it to that standard.

And your argument against bigger teams is nonsensical. If they properly scaled up the maps, 12v12 would be just fine. 6v6 and small, samey maps has no chance of holding my interest, not with so many other shooters on the market.

Avatar image for Shottayouth13-
Shottayouth13-

7018

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 Shottayouth13-
Member since 2009 • 7018 Posts

Played for about 30 minutes. I'm liking it so far. But no way is it worth $60.

Avatar image for ninjaxams
ninjaxams

7500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#46 ninjaxams
Member since 2004 • 7500 Posts

its pretty decent. i really enjoy how each character has a personality, especially bastion.

Avatar image for kittennose
KittenNose

2470

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#47  Edited By KittenNose
Member since 2014 • 2470 Posts

@Vaasman said:

This game has a dearth of content for a 40 dollar upfront cost, and whether you think those modes are good or not they would at least add some semblance of flavor and variety to some really boring modes. In fact maybe if they wanted to stand out they should have come up with a new or interesting mode. Even Heroes manages to have more variety with it's map objectives, and that game is free to play.

I mean lets be honest, this is clearly not a moba blend. There is no leveling, there are no lanes, there are no mobs, there are no bases. No in or out of game progression other than aesthetics. And the only environmental consideration is bottomless pits to wall off the map.

It's just TF2 style class shooter with a long cooldown, douchey ability for each class. So sue me if I hold it to that standard.

And your argument against bigger teams is nonsensical. If they properly scaled up the maps, 12v12 would be just fine. 6v6 and small, samey maps has no chance of holding my interest, not with so many other shooters on the market.


The game ships with more maps then Battlefield 4 came with. It ships with four game modes for those maps, and twenty-ish different classes who traverse these maps and assault objectives in extremely different ways. It also has interesting and fun off the wall game modes with crazy rules that change weekly to spice things up.

It has way more classes then TF2, and those classes are way more interesting then their TF2 counter parts (Mercy is like the medic, only she can glide, zoom to allies, rez her entire team, and doesn't need to equip special gear to boost ally damage) and it has a weapon verity that few shooters with competitive multiplayer can even dream of matching. I would try to compare it with the likes of Evolve but Evolve isn't as good as TF2.

On top of that, it is a Blizzard game. They are going to keep supporting it, and adding content. There is a very strong chance it will be free content as well. Unlike EA or 2k, they will not send it out to die like Titanfall, Evolve, or Hardline while hyping season passes and paid shortcuts, then enforcing a no refund policy. Overwatch blows the three games listed out of the water already, so saying it lacks content for a $60 game is a bit silly.

Saying it lacks content for a $40 title? Nonsensical would be a good word for this claim, so I will steal it. I am pretty sure we both know it is going to score better then Hardline and Evolve. Class shooters are not for everyone, but disliking a well fleshed out Class based shooter doesn't mean it has a dearth of content. It just means you favor Cod.

Avatar image for Vaasman
Vaasman

15874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#48  Edited By Vaasman
Member since 2008 • 15874 Posts

@kittennose said:
@Vaasman said:

This game has a dearth of content for a 40 dollar upfront cost, and whether you think those modes are good or not they would at least add some semblance of flavor and variety to some really boring modes. In fact maybe if they wanted to stand out they should have come up with a new or interesting mode. Even Heroes manages to have more variety with it's map objectives, and that game is free to play.

I mean lets be honest, this is clearly not a moba blend. There is no leveling, there are no lanes, there are no mobs, there are no bases. No in or out of game progression other than aesthetics. And the only environmental consideration is bottomless pits to wall off the map.

It's just TF2 style class shooter with a long cooldown, douchey ability for each class. So sue me if I hold it to that standard.

And your argument against bigger teams is nonsensical. If they properly scaled up the maps, 12v12 would be just fine. 6v6 and small, samey maps has no chance of holding my interest, not with so many other shooters on the market.

The game ships with more maps then Battlefield 4 came with. It ships with four game modes for those maps, and twenty-ish different classes who traverse these maps and assault objectives in extremely different ways. It also has interesting and fun off the wall game modes with crazy rules that change weekly to spice things up.

It has way more classes then TF2, and those classes are way more interesting then their TF2 counter parts (Mercy is like the medic, only she can glide, zoom to allies, rez her entire team, and doesn't need to equip special gear to boost ally damage) and it has a weapon verity that few shooters with competitive multiplayer can even dream of matching. I would try to compare it with the likes of Evolve but Evolve isn't as good as TF2.

On top of that, it is a Blizzard game. They are going to keep supporting it, and adding content. There is a very strong chance it will be free content as well. Unlike EA or 2k, they will not send it out to die like Titanfall, Evolve, or Hardline while hyping season passes and paid shortcuts, then enforcing a no refund policy. Overwatch blows the three games listed out of the water already, so saying it lacks content for a $60 game is a bit silly.

Saying it lacks content for a $40 title? Nonsensical would be a good word for this claim, so I will steal it. I am pretty sure we both know it is going to score better then Hardline and Evolve. Class shooters are not for everyone, but disliking a well fleshed out Class based shooter doesn't mean it has a dearth of content. It just means you favor Cod.

Except I hate CoD, and never once brought up Evolve or Hardline or Titanfall which are all also lousy in content. But your comparison to the content in Battlefield 4 is completely absurd when that game has a single player campaign, a bad one mind you, but also the maps are 20 times larger, and they don't all feel like the exact same thing with a coat of paint and some mixed and matched hallways, and they have destructibility and changing environments. Seriously, BF4 had 10 maps at launch but even the crappy ones were far more interesting than any Overwatch map. Plus the classes in TF2 and BF are bases, with the way the games are now you can mix and match all sorts of customization options to suit your style of play. On top of that the BF franchise has tighter gunplay with better hitboxes, as well as the combined arms aspect that allows it to stand out even when it's being iterated on year after year.

I'm sorry if my opinion makes you guys butthurt. I'm not even saying I don't like the game. It's fun enough that I've played maybe 8-9 hours of beta. I just don't think it currently has enough to carry it to me paying a 40 dollar price tag, and I'm certainly not the only one who's at least somewhat bothered by the content list, just look at the rest of the thread. Maybe some day down the line once their level of future support becomes clear, but at launch it's a no-go.

Avatar image for Sollet
Sollet

8287

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#49  Edited By Sollet
Member since 2003 • 8287 Posts

8/10.

It was fun, however the lack of game modes and maps is bothering me.

Avatar image for kittennose
KittenNose

2470

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#50 KittenNose
Member since 2014 • 2470 Posts

@Vaasman said:

Except I hate CoD, and never once brought up Evolve or Hardline or Titanfall which are all also lousy in content. But your comparison to the content in Battlefield 4 is completely absurd when that game has a single player campaign, a bad one mind you, but also the maps are 20 times larger, and they don't all feel like the exact same thing with a coat of paint and some mixed and matched hallways, and they have destructibility and changing environments. Seriously, BF4 had 10 maps at launch but even the crappy ones were far more interesting than any Overwatch map. Plus the classes in TF2 and BF are bases, with the way the games are now you can mix and match all sorts of customization options to suit your style of play. On top of that the BF franchise has tighter gunplay with better hitboxes, as well as the combined arms aspect that allows it to stand out even when it's being iterated on year after year.

I'm sorry if my opinion makes you guys butthurt. I'm not even saying I don't like the game. It's fun enough that I've played maybe 8-9 hours of beta. I just don't think it currently has enough to carry it to me paying a 40 dollar price tag. Maybe some day down the line but certainly not at launch.

Your comment doesn't make me butthurt, I just think your "dearth of content for a $40 title" is super silly, particularly when it is sucking you in hard enough to put that much time in before it is even released. If you stopped now (which is unlikely) you would be at about four bucks an hour. That is a better content to value ratio then a lot of $60 dollar games, and you haven't even paid for it. Nonsensical is a really good word for your position.

Bringing up Battlefield's campaign is also pretty lame. It is bad, and doesn't add $5 worth of content to the game. It is an afterthought to mark off a check box and nothing else, most fans skip it. Claiming Battlefield or TF2 gives you more options to suit your style of play is really reaching. In Overwatch you can choose between flying, wall crawling, wall running with super speed, a couple of different types of teleportation, leaping... and some others I can quite remember, and that is just movement abilities.

Mostly it sounds like you might be a little embarrassed you are putting so much time into such a game about having lots of silly fun! Don't be! Being able to reverse time is way more interesting then unlocking three shot burst.