Overwatch is much, much too expensive.

[LudicrousSpeed]

Ruler said:

Azuren said:
Is it trolling to say I feel it might be a tad overrated?



Because I feel it's a tad overrated. The last time a game released with only multiplayer and no campaign, it was panned for doing so (even though it was promised within two months for free). I feel there might be a bit of Blizzard bias going on.

Don't get me wrong, the game looks fantastic, but it doesn't seem like it brings anything revolutionary to the table. It's just a fresher, Blizzard-ier Team Fortress with Pixar-y animation (which you don't really get to ever see any of your own animations due to the whole First Person thing). SFV was a solid fighter with great animation and pseudo-free DLC (you could earn it or buy it), but sorry- no story, so it's clearly a mediocore game.

I guess I just don't understand. Eh. On topic, yeah, $60 is too expensive. But so is $40 for an FPS Moba. I'd pay $15, tops.

yes there is bias for Blizzard espacially for these reviewers. No way in hell deserves overwatch a 90+ on metacritic. The user score is the more honest score the game should have gotten.

Street Fighter is an established franchise with expectations for what it needs to have. In no way similar to Overwatch at all. SFV launched very bare bones and was penalized for it. To be honest I am glad Overwatch is scoring well. Maybe reviewers have finally removed the sticks from their asses in regards to reviewing MP only games.

That said, LOL @ Blizzard bias and user scores being the more "honest" scores. And how much Overwatch have you played?

One thing people forget when complaining about content value for $60 and how bad microtransactions are is that all future DLC for the game is completely free. All new maps, modes, and characters will be free of charge. And you don't need to grind for it or buy it with real money. It's completely free.