We also launched on Steam last week, and, although being review-bombed isn’t a fun experience, it’s been great to see lots of new players jump into Overwatch 2 for the first time. Our goal with Overwatch 2 has been to make the game more accessible than ever for more people than ever before.
Many of the reviews on Steam mention the cancellation of the much larger component of PvE that was announced in 2019 as one of their primary reasons for dissatisfaction with the game. I get that. That announcement was about an ambitious project that we ultimately couldn’t deliver.
If we can’t turn back the clock, then what can we do? We can keep adding to and improving Overwatch 2. That is how we move forward. This means more maps, heroes, game modes, missions, stories, events, cool cosmetics, and features - an ever-expanding, evolving, and improving game. This is the future of Overwatch. One where we will continually create and innovate on what is making the game great now for the players who are playing now.
Overwatch is such a unique game and world. When our heroes are all working together to complete an objective, there is really nothing else like it. Jump in–there’s more to come!
You must log in or register to comment.
They are adding more micro transactions, that’s going to fix everything! 🙄
We see the shit show that d4 is and that’s a fully paid $70 game. I’m not sure they have the skill to even do anything other than micro transactions and nerfs.
I hate the term review bombing. Because guess what. Any review not left under false premises is an entirely legitimate opinion on the media. If someone thinks a movie or game is bottom of the barrel trash because of some small aspect, they’re entirely within their right to have that opinion, and it’s no less legitimate than someone who likes it more.
Then I’d argue that reviews don’t give a complete picture, if that’s the case. Because it’s hard to argue that Overwatch is really the worst game on Steam.
I would argue that reviews have never been a good metric for comparing games to each other, especially when it comes to aggregate user reviews, primarily because reviews are heavily influenced by what the player base expects from a game.
While that’s true, what’s illegitimate is when the idiots set up bots to spam negative reviews, like what happened with Captain Marvel and Last Jedi. A person with a negative opinion is fine. A bot spamming the same negative reviews again and again in order to artificially bring down the score? Not fine.
I’m not saying that’s what happened here, but reviewing bombing generally consists of more than a group of angry people writing honest reviews.
A review bomb is a collective effort to lower the score of something, abusing systems meant to reflect an average opinion by gathering people who would not normally leave a review, often people who haven’t even played the game. It is intentionally creating sampling bias. “Review bomb” is a meaningful term being applied correctly here. I don’t like modern blizz, but Overwatch 2 is not the worst game on steam as its review average would indicate.
Companies who blame reviewers instead of their shitty product… Blizzard, reddit, etc.
The PR guys are just trying to change the discussion around the problem notice they don’t talk about the microtransactions issue and talk about how adding them is some great value. There is no honesty in that message just corpo ass covering.
Once the corpos open their mouths, the illusion that they care about player happiness very quickly disappears.
To them, we are just a resource to be exploited for money.
It’s funny that when there’s lots of positive reviews then it’s a success and everything is great but when there’s a lot of negative reviews then suddenly it’s “rEviEw bOmBiNg”.
deleted by creator
LOL what a load of bullshit. I enjoy OW2, but man… it’s been a total trainwreck.
Addressing it at all was a mistake. Because realistically they can only answer in one of two ways
“We hear you, but we’re gonna do nothing”
“We hear you, but we can’t do nothing”
Here they chose the latter, which means people will assume incompetence on their part. Like, look at that “turn back the clock” bit. Why can’t they? Why should the audience read that in any other way than “Oh, I guess, this Blizzard isn’t as ambitious or competent as the Blizzard of a couple years ago which would have delivered on it”.
They need some PR training. I seriously think one among whoever wrote, edited or greenlit this should have stopped and pondered what the goal of the text is.
Honestly thought their response was pretty decent. They said they understand about the PvE. Of course they didn’t mention any anger towards the CEO or mismanagement. They did say they’ll deliver, but who knows, it’s probably just empty words… again.
