Support us on Patreon
PayPalWhile other developers like Larian are riding high with Baldur's Gate 3, it seems Blizzard are not doing so well with the recent Steam release of Overwatch 2 becoming the worst user-reviewed game of all time on Steam (via Steam 250). Overwatch 2 is playable on Linux and Steam Deck thanks to Proton.
This hasn't stopped it pulling in plenty of players though, with it hitting an all-time high of 75,608 playing just on Steam 3 days ago according to SteamDB. As I type this it still has 61,702 playing, so even though plenty of people are making themselves heard in Steam reviews - a lot of people are still playing it and likely enjoying their time with it. This puts it currently as the 15th most played game on Steam for peak player counts.
You don't have to look far into why the reaction has been so severe though. Steam gives players a real feeling of power thanks to the user review system, that certain other stores don't have, so it was expected this would happen due to the missteps Blizzard have made with Overwatch 2.
So what's happened?
Well it was supposed to be a sequel, but the reality is far different. Blizzard removed the original paid game, and turned the new version into a free to play version while continuing the live service model. Blizzard also cancelled the PvE content that was one of the bigger (biggest?) selling points of Overwatch 2. There is now a small amount of PvE available in the Invasion update - but you have to pay extra for it.
A lot of the negative reviews are Chinese players too, since Blizzard ended their agreement with NetEase which suspended their ability to play Overwatch and other titles officially. Now being on Steam though, Chinese players can make their voices heard (if they use a VPN to get onto normal Steam).
There's currently around 117,446 reviews on Steam with 106,596 being Negative.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
OW could've been online forever. Just release a map editor and server binaries. What a game it was when it came out...
But there would be no making money with that. So that would never happen.
0 Likes
Blizzard is the only large publisher I don't own a single game they've made.And even if you purchased any of their game you would not own it anyway, due to launcher system. Except maybe on gog, or bought their games on physical copy in the 90's/early 2000. and I'm not even sure about this point.
They own the game you purchase and all your progress and data, which is why I dislike blizzard so much, just as all other big publisher like EA, ubisoft. I uses steam because I'd say it's the less bad. But still I'll never get used to the fact that I need to logon to any sort of launcher to play my games. My computer is supposed to be the launcher, not some remote system checking me all the time.
0 Likes
Some of those players might just be looking at the menus and uninstalling.
A better metric might be if they actually play and if they come back once a week.
I used to play OW weekly but I have a hard time justifying wasting my time with OW1.2 even monthly.
Sometimes I just look at my old inventory then quit but that'll count as a concurrent player till I log off.
A better metric might be if they actually play and if they come back once a week.
I used to play OW weekly but I have a hard time justifying wasting my time with OW1.2 even monthly.
Sometimes I just look at my old inventory then quit but that'll count as a concurrent player till I log off.
0 Likes
would you recommend it for someone like me who has no nostalgia, and where it has no 'grip' on me?
Absolutely check it out. It's still the best hero shooter as far as I'm concerned. I also didn't play OW1 so I'm not sure how much better it was, but OW2 is great. It's true the monetization is pretty brutal (a little worse than Apex, if you have that as a comparison), but as long as you don't mind missing out on cool skins or most of the new PVE content, then you can spend nothing and have a great time. I'm not saying the review bombing isn't justified - people have a right to be mad - but at its core OW is a very well crafted gaming experience. You will have to face the fact that you're supporting Activision Blizzard though XD
0 Likes
Problem is, 95% of the user "reviews" of the game don't even touch upon how the actual game is as it stands today. They go fully meta and leave a thumb down.
That's user "reviews" in a nutshell. Whiner valley.
I don't f'ing CARE what was originally promised or how the first game was or whatever. I want a good game to play, and don't want idealism and fanatism dictating if I should like something or not.
Last edited by Beamboom on 16 August 2023 at 9:28 am UTC
That's user "reviews" in a nutshell. Whiner valley.
I don't f'ing CARE what was originally promised or how the first game was or whatever. I want a good game to play, and don't want idealism and fanatism dictating if I should like something or not.
Last edited by Beamboom on 16 August 2023 at 9:28 am UTC
0 Likes
Problem is, 95% of the user "reviews" of the game don't even touch upon how the actual game is as it stands today. They go fully meta and leave a thumb down.Well in this case, it's not like you have to spend money to find out.
That's user "reviews" in a nutshell. Whiner valley.
I don't f'ing CARE what was originally promised or how the first game was or whatever. I want a good game to play, and don't want idealism and fanatism dictating if I should like something or not.
1 Likes, Who?
Well in this case, it's not like you have to spend money to find out.
True. But my frustration level on the user "reviews" prevail in all its glory. ;)
1 Likes, Who?
Problem is, 95% of the user "reviews" of the game don't even touch upon how the actual game is as it stands today. They go fully meta and leave a thumb down.The reason is Blizzard's reaction to them over the years. Blizzard's BIG lie of PVE in OW2 and predatory business model and worse, gambling nature of its game has resulted in extreme hate and anger from player base towards it. This is why people say the negative review is deserved. It is simply a direct reaction to actions of blizzard over the years.
That's user "reviews" in a nutshell. Whiner valley.
I don't f'ing CARE what was originally promised or how the first game was or whatever. I want a good game to play, and don't want idealism and fanatism dictating if I should like something or not.
You say you don't want to be dictated to like a game, well Overwatch was FORCED into gaming world by heavy marketing and advertisement to a level people called it GoTY before even releasing. It was rightfully nick-named "Overhype".
About your last sentence, if you want a good game to play, Overwatch 2 is certainly entertaining as gambling is. It relies heavily on the addictive/gambling nature of MOBA games. So beware what you're walking into.
2 Likes, Who?
I didn't take the time earlier, but I just wasted some reading a bunch of those "overwhelmingly negative" reviews for this on Steam. It is overwhelmingly, review bombing. I actually am disappointed, I was expecting some of that, but I've yet to find one that I would mark as helpful. It's not my kind of game, so I won't be seeing for myself, didn't play the first one etc.I am completely on the same page as you. At the same time, I think it's pretty obvious (voice of professor Gilderoy Lockhart) gamers (consumers) want a public voice somewhere. Reviews of the game are not appropriate for business choices and generic customer experience, but where else is appropriate? I think it's fair the feedback to be conveniently accessible from store pages, too, a bit less prominent than the game reviews.
Most of it as about as constructive as drawing an ascii middle finger and far less thoughtful than that, even lol
Some of it just complaining about the change from paid to free-to-play model itself that they were all but forced into. (Fair enough, at least)
If you're going to post a bad review for a game (I have, when thoroughly disgusted with a game but I've also posted praising reviews), at least state what it is you don't like about it. Be snide and sarcastic if you want, even, but at least make a point.
P.S. Here's one that at least has some substance:
https://steamcommunity.com/id/orngecitrus/recommended/2357570/
1 Likes, Who?
It is simply a direct reaction to actions of blizzard over the years.
My point is that such response is content for a gaming article. Go blog about it. It has nothing to do in a game REVIEW. A game review is about the game, as it stands before us today. Not pre-hype, not capitalist motivations, not what the fans *expected* or *demanded*, not about the company behind it or how they fare with their fans.
Just a judgement of the game itself, behind the fluff.
That's what a game review should focus on. Can they also MENTION the surrounding chaos? Well, sure. But the rating should never be based on THAT.
So such user bombings of low ratings of the game is just... childish. Like the least effort possible to make a statement. And they ruin the user review feature while they are at it.
Last edited by Beamboom on 10 September 2023 at 11:08 am UTC
0 Likes
It is simply a direct reaction to actions of blizzard over the years.
My point is that such response is content for a gaming article. Go blog about it. It has nothing to do in a game REVIEW. A game review is about the game, as it stands before us today. Not pre-hype, not capitalist motivations, not what the fans *expected* or *demanded*, not about the company behind it or how they fare with their fans.
Just a judgement of the game itself, behind the fluff.
That's what a game review should focus on. Can they also MENTION the surrounding chaos? Well, sure. But the rating should never be based on THAT.
So such user bombings of low ratings of the game is just... childish. Like the least effort possible to make a statement. And they ruin the user review feature while they are at it.
Well, let me disagree: User reviews is where the company feels and maybe even reads when they've done something wrong. They don't give a flying one for what I blog. Giving a bad review for bad behaviour is making use of consumer power.
I agree that this might make the reviews less helpful for people only wanting to know how good a game is. But no matter if a game has been review bombed or not, I often look at the highest rated reviews to give an impression.
0 Likes
See more from me