Why Was Overwatch (PC/PS4/XbOne/Switch, 2016) So Good?

 In 2016, Blizzard Entertainment released their first FPS game, Overwatch. A game that, at one point, practically took the world by storm, winning its share of awards, including Game of the Year for 2016. The game received tons of praise for it’s variety of unique characters, colorful presentation, emphasis on team based gameplay, on top of just being unique in a sea of other FPS games releasing around the same time with the same “space shooter” aesthetic.

In 2022, however, the reputation of Overwatch among the gaming community has… changed. While the game still holds a good amount of popularity, opinions on it have become more divisive. Many people felt that the game went downhill as a result of various changes and balancing updates to the characters that, in many people’s view, led to the game feeling a bit too competitive or restrictive in one way or another.

And, over the years, this has made me want to look into something. I personally loved Overwatch when it came out in 2016. While I had played other multiplayer FPS games of that sort, none of them quite reeled me in as much as Overwatch did. It was, honestly, nothing like I played before - I loved the team based gameplay, I loved the cast of characters with their own unique abilities - and ultimately, it was just a game that grabbed me to an extent that no other FPS games did.

And honestly, to this day, it’s still a game I really enjoy. I don’t play it quite to the extent that I used to, but I still go back to it fairly frequently and I do enjoy my time with it. And, well, I wanted to look into that. What made Overwatch so appealing to me in the first place? Why do I still enjoy going back to it after so many claims of the game going downhill? Why did I enjoy it in the first place? And, well, why was Overwatch so good?

Before I continue with anything here, I do want to make clear that, with their recent share of controversies, that this review is not intended as an endorsement of Activision Blizzard. Between their many controversies, particularly the Blitzchung Hong Kong incident and especially their sexual harassment lawsuits that have been going on for the past year, I obviously do not believe that Activision Blizzard is an ethical company (although none of them really are) nor do I condone any of their actions. But while I can definitely respect the choice to boycott their games, ultimately this doesn’t necessarily change my opinion of Overwatch itself. Keep in mind that I’ve been planning to do a review like this one off and on for the past few years, and it just so happens that Activision Blizzard is kind of a crappy company with controversies coming out of their ass, so this is just sort of a result of unfortunate timing. Regardless though, this has been a subject I’ve wanted to talk about regardless, and especially with Overwatch 2 releasing at some point soon, I figure I may as well talk about why I enjoyed Overwatch so much in the first place.

PRESENTATION AND LORE

Let’s start off with a pretty simple one. I feel like when it comes to discussing the appeal of Overwatch early on, the presentation and its characters were a draw for many. Especially at the time, in a sea of the same space military shooters that were coming out, Overwatch simply just stood out on its more colorful tone on its own. The only other major FPS game I could think of with a similar vibe was Team Fortress 2, which had been released almost a decade prior, and even then, Overwatch still managed to retain more of it’s own unique Pixar-esque style - completely with a cast of characters with different designs and personalities that stood out from each other.

One criticism I have occasionally heard towards Overwatch is that the characters lack personality, and to an extent, I can understand this notion - I think the issue is ultimately more of a problem with how the lore has basically stagnated since the announcement of Overwatch 2 in 2019 - but at the very least, I feel like you gotta admit that the designers and animators did a really good job of utilizing their respective positions to really tell about each character and their personalities. I mean, just looking at the Overwatch poster I have hanging above my computer, I do get a good vibe of what each character is like just using the still images. 

Bastion is a robot, but in contrast with a lot of media involving robots portraying them to be evil or whatever, he seems… gentle, good-natured. Granted, that isn’t exactly the case in the actual game, but you get my point.

Animation is also a very key feature here. When you actually play these characters, you take note of the way they all have their own “idle” movements and ways of shooting their weapon, and I think New Frame Plus’ video titled ‘How Overwatch Conveys Character in First Person’ does a really good job of talking about that, probably better than I could do as someone who’s just kind of starting this whole video essay thing. It also ties in with aspects like the weapons they use, the more minor details on each character as well as their changeable skins, and even really just how their abilities are based around their character archetypes. But, that’s a topic for later. 

Either way, I will say this - Overwatch is sort of an inspiration to me as someone who has gone to college for animation and does help me think about how I design each of my characters, incorporating their personalities into their actual designs. I mean, the amount of work that goes into designing and animating each Overwatch character, it’s not really much of a wonder as to why it’s one of the most searched topics on… well…

Actually, random thing that’s semi-related to that subject, but can I just say that I’m glad they updated Tracer’s victory pose. Admittedly I wasn’t there for that whole shenanigans, but Tracer’s original pose just looks so… stilted and lifeless to me, whereas her updated one is so much more expressive and just tells me more about her character. Tracer is meant to be a pretty peppy, bubbly character that loves action, and you can’t tell me with a straight face that there’s more of that in her original pose than in her updated pose. Unless you’re just horny, but that’s a topic that’s too child unfriendly for this review.

Anyway, something I should also probably cover is the lore, as it still does relate to the characters and setting of Overwatch. The lore and story isn’t really *part* of the core game for the most part (although will be given more focus in Overwatch 2’s PvE modes), but occasionally animated shorts, comics and stories in addition to stuff like the “Archive” events come out to contextualize the history of the game and the backstories of the different characters.

The basic story goes like this - at some point in the not-so-distant future, the human population hits a peak in the evolution in technology, leading to the creation of the “Omnics”, who were used to achieve economic equality and began to be treated as regular people. However, at some point, facilities began to produce more lethal, hostile robots, leading to an Omnic Crisis, which resulted in the creation of ‘Overwatch’ by the United Nations, a task force with the assignment to respond to this threat and restore order.

But after quelling the crisis, division within Overwatch began to form, especially with the creation of a subgroup known as “Blackwatch” to fight terrorist organizations such as Talon. Rifts began between the leader of Overwatch, Jack Morrison, and Blackwatch, Gabriel Reyes, and various controversies began, accumulating into the destruction of Overwatch’s Headquarters, presumably killing both leaders among others. Ultimately, this resulted in the dissolution of Overwatch by the UN under the Petras Act, which also banned any activity in relation to the group.

Overwatch, as a game, takes place about six years after the dissolution, where the take over of corporations and outbreak of terrorist groups has resulted in a new era of disorder, leading to Winston, a former member, looking to reassemble the team in response. At some point, it also turns out that Jack Morrison (Soldier 76) and Gabriel Reyes (Reaper) were not actually killed in the explosion, with the former still looking for reasons as to Overwatch’s dissolution, and the latter joining Talon.

That’s the simplest I could make of it, and on top of that, there are also backstories for each of the characters and their response to the reassembling of Overwatch. The story doesn’t necessarily have an impact on the actual gameplay, especially since you can form teams with alleged enemies, but there are references made in-game through elements like the setpieces, voice lines and interactions.

The story on it’s own isn’t necessarily the most interesting thing out there - the concept does sort of just fall into the same category as a lot of superhero media - but I do appreciate how they go about giving each character their own story and their different perspectives on different events. The animated shorts in particular are really well done - the animation itself looks really good, Pixar-esque even, and it adds a lot to the general art style of the game. 

My favorite short is definitely ‘Rise and Shine’, which covers Mei’s backstory when she wakes up out of cryostasis following the reassembling of Overwatch, and I mean, is just really emotional, allowing you to really get invested in Mei’s story and what she had to go through. Not too far from that is ‘The Last Bastion’ which covers Bastion’s backstory… without even really using any words, being pretty much fully cinematic and really capturing Bastion’s connection to nature. But ultimately I do think all the animated shorts are really well done with their animation and character movement, and I definitely feel like there’s potential there for an Arcane-style TV series or movie based on the game.

I think ultimately my biggest problem though is that, while there is a lot of potential in the characters, worldbuilding, and history… it doesn’t feel like they offer enough of it. I can’t really deny that a lot of characters still feel underdeveloped, with some, particularly Zenyatta, not really having any lore to him even now. If this was still early on, then that’s understandable, but it feels like since 2019, we’ve gotten nothing on this front aside from a few side stories and three character reveals, and as such, the lore has sort of just remained stagnant. Hopefully, Overwatch 2 will deliver more with each of the characters’ backstories and the world of Overwatch in general, especially being intended as more story-heavy.

One thing I did want to address, though, was the notion that Overwatch’s lore and story are inconsistent - there are supposedly plotholes and retcons within the story especially as more details have been given. And… I don’t feel like this is necessarily the case, but it’s more of a lingering problem with what I said about Overwatch’s story being underdeveloped. 

The two most common inconsistencies I see brought up is one regarding D.Va’s status as a pro gamer prior to being recruited to MEKA, and the other regarding McCree/Cassidy’s age. The first one I remember coming about around early 2018 - D.Va was at least supposedly stated to be a pro StarCraft player, but it was later on stated by Michael Chu that D.Va wasn’t a pro StarCraft player before joining MEKA.

But you do have to pay attention to that wording - *before* joining MEKA. As further clarified, it is stated that D.Va is currently a pro StarCraft player, but it wasn’t the game she specialized in prior to her recruitment. I can’t deny that his statement is worded strangely, but it does make sense. Her actual bio doesn’t even mention StarCraft, and ultimately just that her video game skills led to her being able to pilot a mech well. So, in conclusion, D.Va currently is a pro-StarCraft player, but that wasn’t the game she specialized in at least until after her recruitment.

I also kind of blame this on miscommunication within Blizzard. After digging a bit deeper, it seems that the origin of this “inconsistency” stems from a StarCraft announcement involving her being added as an announcer that D.Va had made her start as a pro gamer in StarCraft 2. But you have to keep in mind that Blizzard is a big company, and that the StarCraft team is separate from Overwatch’s, and it’s very likely that the vision of Overwatch’s writers got misinterpreted at some point down the line.

Either way, I feel like this is such a minor detail and considering how vague it’s left as it is, it ultimately doesn’t really matter that much in the grand scheme of things. Which is where we get to the other “retcon” I mentioned - McCree/Cassidy’s age.

This one came about around the time of Ashe’s launch - allegedly, the two of them formed the ‘Deadlock Gang’ in 1976, but since Overwatch takes place mid 2070’s, this would make Cassidy about 100 years old, despite being 37 in official Overwatch lore. This also comes in addition to him being recruited into Blackwatch at 17, despite it being allegedly formed 8 years prior.

Except… this comes out of a fundamental misunderstanding of the lore. The part about Blackwatch being formed 8 years prior especially is explicitly not true - at no point is it ever stated that Blackwatch itself was formed 8 years before the current events, but rather around 20+ years up to that point. A Blackwatch *base* was said to be established 8 years prior, which is where 2018’s Retribution event comes to play, and that was implied to be one of the last Blackwatch missions before it, along with Overwatch, was dissolved altogether.

But let’s cover the other part about the forming of the Deadlock Gang. Yes, when looking at the game’s skins, it is implied that the ‘Deadlock Rebels’ was formed in 1976, 100 years before the current events of Overwatch… but that’s the thing, that’s the Deadlock Rebels. This is one where I can understand the misconception a bit more, but you do have to consider how “wild west” gangs in history functioned. Tl;dr, they weren’t big centralized organizations, but often there were different gangs, or series of gangs, that operated out of the same place with agreed upon rules regarding conflicts.

And this is sort of referenced in the official Overwatch lore. It’s never actually stated that the Deadlock Rebels were the same gang as the Deadlock… gang - the only place I could find stating that was the Fandom site, which isn’t a reliable source especially for gathering *official* Overwatch lore information. It’s very likely that Ashe and Cassidy were inspired by the Deadlock Rebels at some point, leading to the formation of the Deadlock Gang as another part in a series of gangs based in the Deadlock Gorge.

Now, there are other things I could cover, but I think ultimately, I just want to say this - I often state in my Sonic reviews that I’m not expecting Final Fantasy level writing from the games, and this is a similar case with Overwatch here. Regardless of what inconsistencies people bring up, even if they are true and can’t be refuted, I’m still ultimately playing Overwatch for the gameplay and characters themselves over anything else. The lore of it is just more of a fun side thing that I can get into to learn more about the characters I enjoy playing as then a core part of the game, even if Overwatch 2 will be based around that a bit more. I could spend all day defending the Overwatch lore, but ultimately, that’s not the main thing I’m playing Overwatch for.

So, with that said, let’s step a bit back into Overwatch’s presentation. I’ve already covered the characters, but there’s another component to Overwatch’s art style that I also really like when it comes to the maps and environments. In general I really do like when media, especially video games, portray different countries and parts of the world - with Sonic Unleashed being another example of this - and I think combined with the art style Overwatch does this really well. 

Once again, the variety of characters plays a part of this, coming from different heritages and showing representation of minorities, but I think the maps and environments are something I also don’t see get a lot of attention on this front. And, to me, the visual design of the maps is generally really good. Hanamura, for example, represents Japan, with an overall color scheme of bright pink, green and white-ish tones, providing a “spring” setting with the cherry blossom trees and Japanese-style buildings and temples. This contrasts with something like King’s Row, which not only has that UK style with double-decker buses and a modernized Big Ben in the background, but also has a more dark and grim color palette, which sort of represents the dark history within the Overwatch lore due to being a central of the Omnic conflict. There’s also Apotos- I mean, Ilios, representing Greece.

Even Paris, while not a very good map gameplay-wise, still has a lot of good setpieces and architecture to represent France. Including a piano on the defending team’s spawn point which people have modded to play MIDIs, which is pretty neat.

The soundtrack I… don’t really have much to say about. I’d describe it as much ambient, orchestral tracks and would say it’s good overall - my favorites being the Play of the Game theme and the theme for Watchpoint Gibraltar - but it’s not necessarily something I find myself going out of my way to listen to, or really say much else about other than… it works, and I like it well enough. Especially in the case of the animated shorts though, I will say it does really help sell the emotional aspect of them and really fits with most of what they’re going for.

But yeah, that’s my overall opinion on the presentation of Overwatch. In a nutshell, I think the game does a lot of things well - the overall Pixar style is nice, especially in the shorts, and I really feel like the character designs and animation all really help them stand out with their own personalities. The maps generally look really good, and the colorful, Pixar-esque style not only helped it stand out at release, but still looks really nice 6 years later. There’s just a lot that goes into Overwatch’s visual design, in both the characters, maps and environments, that I think the team has really done a good job with, especially as further characters and maps have been released, and will release as Overwatch 2 comes.

GAMEPLAY

Even if you haven’t necessarily played Overwatch, you probably have a decent idea of what the gameplay is like - at it’s core, Overwatch is a team-based hero shooter with a large cast of characters, each with their own unique abilities and strengths, split into three (formerly four) groups - Hero, Damage, and Support. Within the different game modes, players are split into two teams of six, each of them faced with an objective that they have to either capture or defend. 

In the main game, the modes are Assault (one team is on attack, trying to capture two points, the other is on defense, trying to stop the team from capturing the points), Escort (similar concept, except instead of capturing two points the ‘attack’ team is pushing a payload), Hybrid (attacking team has to capture a point, then push a payload) and Control (a King of the Hill-type mode) where both teams are trying to capture the same point). There are also other game modes available in the Arcade, and Overwatch 2 will be adding new “Push” mode.

So, we have a cartoon-y FPS game with a variety of characters with their own unique playstyles, in a team-based environment, with gameplay modes involving capturing objectives. Of course, that’s going to draw comparisons between it and another game. Let’s see… what’s it called? Oh yeah, Splatoon, right?

Nah, I’m talking about Team Fortress 2. Yeah, I feel like any conversation regarding Overwatch on the internet is likely going to involve someone bringing up Team Fortress 2, as even at launch, that was the biggest comparison, creating a sort of rivalry that at this point basically just feels like the newer game living rent free in players of the old game’s heads. 

I will admit that I’m not the biggest expert on Team Fortress 2 or anything. I’ve definitely played my share of it (74 hours on Steam), but it was never really my multiplayer game of choice or anything. But either way, while I do acknowledge that Overwatch and Team Fortress 2 do share a lot of similarities, I kind of feel like the comparisons and “rivalry” between them sort of negate the appeal of both games, what they do well, and how differently they actually play beneath the surface.

I’m just going to say it - Overwatch is *not* Team Fortress 2. Yes, both games do sound similar on paper, but when you actually play the games, they still feel significantly different to play. I think DougDoug’s video, y’know the one where he explains the rivalry with food, does a really good job describing the nuances of Overwatch vs Team Fortress 2 gameplay-wise and how different they feel to play.

The best way I would describe Team Fortress 2 is an arena shooter with team-based elements. Yes, teamplay is still a piece of the game (obviously considering it’s called, well, TEAM Fortress 2), but I wouldn’t say it’s *emphasized* in the same way it is in Overwatch. Some characters like Medic and Engineer are designed to help teammates and there are upgrades for the rest of the cast to benefit teammates around them, but you could still get away with being a lone wolf a lot easier than you can in Overwatch. If you do well, it does benefit your team, but if you aren’t doing well, it is still possible for the rest of your team, or hell, one powerful player to make it up.

In Overwatch’s case, team play is more “baked” into the experience. The limit of 6v6 (or 5v5 as of Overwatch 2) alone makes your actions and how well you play feel more impactful, but that’s also in addition to how each character is designed around playing off of or countering others, both on the enemy team and your own team. It is possible to be a lone wolf in Overwatch as well, but the game isn’t necessarily designed with that in mind. Each character has very distinct advantages and disadvantages, but playing well along with the rest of your team does mitigate those disadvantages, and results in each player benefitting another in some form. Reinhardt’s shield, for example, help protect the team, and a character like Lucio can help buff the team with two separate auras - one that heals, and another that increases speed. Yes, Team Fortress 2 does have some of this, but not to the extent that Overwatch has it, especially as the core moveset for each character is concerned.

DougDoug as I mentioned even describes this way - In TF2, team play is more incentivized to increase total damage output, whereas in Overwatch, it’s more about “building” up your team by playing well, timing your abilities and just how you coordinate. And whereas I see Team Fortress 2 as an arena shooter with team-based elements, I would say Overwatch is a multiplayer FPS title directly designed around teamplay with strong MOBA elements. TF2 prioritizes individual/mechanical skill, whereas Overwatch prioritizes strategy and coordination. And then there’s Paladins which is basically a first person MOBA but that’s a different conversation for a different time.

I’m admittedly not the best at explaining this, but if you’ve played both for a good amount of time, you will likely know what I am trying to say. There’s a different feeling to both games, and each has their own formula beyond just being “cartoony FPS games with objectives.”

Point is, both are solid games with their own unique appeal that neither of them can truly replicate, and neither games can really “replace” the other. Even the most competitive TF2 rounds I’ve played still didn’t really offer the same experience that Overwatch does. Does any of this make one game better or worse than the other? In my eyes, no - it just means that there’s room on the market for both titles without people being at each other’s throats over it. You two are both smart kids, and I think you can settle your differences.

And that gets to my next point. I have run into people who prefer how Team Fortress 2 plays since you don’t necessarily need to worry about playing too well. It definitely helps, but if you aren’t good at the game, usually it doesn’t negatively affect the teams’ chances as a whole. Again, it ultimately just comes down to how much damage output you can do as a team.

But I think the reason why I like how Overwatch plays in comparison to Team Fortress 2, as well as many other multiplayer FPS games, is, well, engagement. The way Overwatch emphasizes teamplay through coordination, timing of abilities, and strategy, helps me feel more engaged with what’s going on. I feel more encouraged to do well, and when I can help my team pull off a victory, it’s a very satisfying feeling that I don’t think any other games of this sort really give me. 

I’ll say this - when I do play Team Fortress 2, usually I find myself gravitating towards playing Medic over any other class, simply as a result of him being the character that benefits the other teammates the most. But again, Team Fortress 2 isn’t really designed around actively being around and keeping up with your team - it helps, but it’s not really emphasized.

Overwatch, in comparison, just had more of what I was looking for - where in comparison, each character is designed with being around and building up your team in mind. And when I do feel like my actions more directly make an impact, it helps keep me more focused and engaged with what is going on and what I could be doing better. It is more restrictive in a lot of ways, but it’s those restrictions that help the game stand out in how it executes team-based gameplay.

Of course, Overwatch isn’t the only game like this still - there’s still Paladins which also has, in some ways, an arguably bigger focus on team-based gameplay and is even more MOBA-like. But I think in addition, it’s how Overwatch balances team-based gameplay with elements like mobility, movement and gunplay. 

I would definitely consider Overwatch to be a fast-paced and intense game. Action is more ‘streamlined’ for lack of a better word compared to arena shooters like Team Fortress 2, and depending on how well your team can coordinate and time their abilities, the outlook of the game can easily flip.

That last part is another thing I want to touch upon - timing of abilities. In addition to their core shooting and movement options, every character in Overwatch comes with a unique set of abilities that can be activated with the push of a button, often related to their personalities. For example, Mei has an Ice Wall that can temporarily block the path against the enemy team and Cryostasis abilities that freeze her and make her invulnerable to attacks while healing her for a few seconds.

Many of these abilities greatly help the player in different ways when it comes to team battles, usually providing defense or better attack options. However, there are also cooldowns to work with, with varying length depending on the potential impact of the ability, meaning that these abilities can’t be spammed. Unless you’re playing Total Mayhem, where the cooldowns are either completely toned down or nonexistent and the game just devolves into utter chaos.

This aspect of the game is pretty important when looking into how Overwatch utilizes strategy and teamplay compared to other games - as an individual, you need to think about when is the current best time to use your ability to your advantage. I could just resurrect someone on the map as Mercy, but it would also be a bad idea to resurrect them in the middle of a bunch of Wrecking Ball mines, leading them to just die instantly anyway, wasting both more of their respawn time and leaving me with a 20 second cooldown.

(I… actually did that once and the guy I did it to kept roasting me for the entire rest of the game. oops.)

Ultimate abilities are another level of that. Usually these are the characters’ “best” and most powerful abilities - think of them as, say, the Smash Ball for Final Smashes in Super Smash Bros Brawl and onwards. A common criticism I see of Overwatch is that the game is “press ult button to win” and… I gotta be honest, I really feel like people exaggerate how easy that is.

Now, yes, some ultimates can be pretty powerful, but being powerful doesn’t necessarily always mean… effective. The time it takes to charge an ultimate is dependent on each character - some taking longer than others, but usually take a few minutes or so on it’s own with charge also added as you attack enemies. And on that note… you have to know when you can use your ultimate effectively. In many cases you only really get the chance to use your ultimate once or twice in a round, and like I said, being powerful doesn’t necessarily mean being effective.

Take D.Va’s ultimate for example - where she ejects out of her mech and that mech explodes after a few seconds, with the explosion taking up a decent range. But that few seconds is a lot of time for people on the enemy team to move behind another object on the map for cover, and on top of that, getting the right angle and position with it can be somewhat of a challenge on its own.

When used effectively, yes, it can wipe out potentially an entire team, but it isn’t as simple as simply pressing a button to make thing go boom. You have to decide when’s a good time to utilize it to trip up the enemy team, preferably a time where they’re crowded together in one spot with not much to avoid, when they least expect it, and to make sure you get your positioning just right. Even then, depending on what’s around, it may not necessarily wipe out the other team, and you may just have to accept it as more of a slight stall than a means to pick as many people off as possible.

Granted, I will say that some ultimates can more easily be used effectively than others (Widowmaker’s feels pretty useless while Soldier 76 is basically just auto-aim), but for the most part there are easy ways to counter other ultimates when you know what you’re doing. As such, to anyone who makes the claim that the game is “just ult to win”, with all due respect, I simply have to respond with…

skill issue lul!!!!!

(nah just kidding)

(or am I..?)

(idk i can’t even tell anymore)

Anyway, in the process of utilizing abilities and coordinating with your team, you can get some pretty intense team battles when every player is putting their front foot forward, and in those cases - when you get a victory, it’s a very satisfying feeling, and when you don’t, the experience within those team battles is still a great rush. That is, provided you’re not just getting steamrolled the entire time.

Admittedly the execution of Overwatch’s gameplay concepts isn’t perfect. When playing Overwatch casually, where the stakes aren’t as high, it is still pretty easy to just pick a hero and go with it, but when playing Competitive, you probably will begin to notice that with how this game is balanced, some players and team combinations are much better and more viable than others - and this is definitely where a lot of the current frustration with Overwatch comes in. That, and, well, the community being pretty toxic.

And while there had been complaints before, particularly in regards to the various Mercy changes and nerfs, and other characters like Doomfist and Moira, I feel like the complaints really started to build up with the introduction of Brigitte - a character designed around taking down DPS characters via crowd control and ultimately caused an entire new direction in the Overwatch meta due to her powerful abilities. In particular, she was a central piece of the ‘GOATS’ meta, which lasted for quite a while at least until Role Queue was added to the game. She would later receive nerfs to balance her out with the other characters, but her introduction is where I really feel like the reputation of Overwatch began to turn within the online gaming community.

Admittedly, I can’t really speak for the balancing, as the subject is something I don’t entirely understand, especially as someone who mostly plays Quick Play and Arcade modes and doesn’t touch Competitive because, I mean, I’d prefer to keep the little sanity I have, but it is pretty clear that Overwatch’s balancing could be better, and that the game does kind of lead itself into “metas” which limit your choice of viable characters when you really get into the nitty gritty of the game. 

However, when looking into the various balance changes, I do at least get the impression that the development team is at least trying to evolve away from this, especially with what I have played of the Overwatch 2 PvP beta, with them seeming to get away from shield metas on top of at least significantly dying down the amount of crowd control in the game. Still… it could be better.

Role Queue was one feature added in 2019 as a means to change up the meta, and this proved to be one of the more… controversial changes. Some people were happy with the addition - feeling that it opened up more opportunities for people to get the role they wanted without others beating them to team comp - while others were more critical, believing that it further limited their options and team compositions in game while also resulting in long ‘Damage’ queue wait times. 

This is one case where I… sort of see where both sides are coming from. It was really just kind of a band-aid on Blizzard’s problems with balancing the game, and it does make the game feel more limited in your options for team composition, and the game's distribution of characters in the Damage category versus others does contribute to longer queue times, but I can’t really deny that especially coming out of the GOATs meta that seemed to last forever (on top of those 5 DPS rounds early on), it did feel like a necessary change at the time and I did feel like games actually felt more… competitive, and in a good way, as in I felt like I matched more with close games than outright steamrolls. 

And thankfully we still have Quick Play Classic available if we desire (in the Arcade mode in the original game with it being added as a core QP mode in Overwatch 2), in addition to ‘Open Queue’ being added for Competitive players. Still, especially with Overwatch 2 being 5v5 with only one tank spot available, I do kind of hope that the development team gets away from the need for Role Queue at some point down the line.

So I’ve talked about the core gameplay concept and design behind Overwatch, and I have talked about the characters’ animations and design, but I haven’t touched upon how the characters play. As I stated before, each playable Overwatch character has it’s own set of unique abilities and can be categorized in three ways. Damage characters perform the most damage (obviously), Tanks have the highest amount of damage, and Support provides healing and/or other buffs to teammates.

I should also mention that “Damage” characters were originally split into “Attack” and “Defend” categories until about 2018, when both categories were merged, in addition to Symmetra being changed from Support to Damage.

It is kind of a minor thing, but I can understand the reason for merging those two categories - while some heroes are more attack-oriented and others more defend-oriented, I feel like the dichotomy between them sort of felt too narrow. Again, there are heroes like Torbjorn who I would consider more oriented around Defense (especially earlier on) and heroes like Soldier 76 which were more oriented around Attack, but then there were characters like Junkrat who I think could easily fit either way. 

I also still don’t really understand why Symmetra was a Support character when she couldn’t heal or anything. Yes, she had the ability to build teleporters and whatnot, but I feel like if they were to make Symmetra a support character, they should have also made Torbjorn a support character. 

Anyway, there are 32 playable heroes in Overwatch to choose from - originally launching with 21 with updates adding more up until the release of Echo in April 2020, with Sojourn and other characters planned to come out with the release of Overwatch 2. I’m not going to go over every single playable character in this game because, well, that would take too much time, but there are definitely some I want to talk about.

To start, there’s the ‘poster girl’ of Overwatch, Tracer - who you find not only on the game’s cover but also a lot of the promotional material for Overwatch. And she was one of the first characters I remember really liking to play as - her kit is relatively simple to understand especially in terms of gunplay, but I also remember really liking her abilities, particularly her ‘Blink’ which I felt really contributed to how her movement felt, with how it could be used to dodge enemy attacks at a good pace combined with the “Recall” ability allowing her to gain health by sort of going back in time (which references the lore a bit where she was equipped with a device to control time and keep herself in the present). Her ultimate also requires some good strategy and timing to use, with how weak it seems on the surface but depending on your timing can rack up some decent kills.

Though, I’d say one of the easier characters to start with in Overwatch in general is Soldier 76. If you have experience with any FPS game before - especially stuff like Call of Duty - Soldier 76 is generally pretty straightforward to understand. His gunplay mirrors a lot of those kinds of games with his weapon being an assault rifle, in addition to having a ‘Sprint’ ability, alternate fire with his Helix Rockets, and the ability to heal his team with a Biotic field. He’s never really been a character I’ve personally played often, but if you are looking to try Overwatch, he’s definitely one of the easier characters to understand just by using him in the Practice Range and Tutorial modes.

That said, my main DPS has always been Mei. Partially because I really like her personality and design, and also partially because, well, I’m an asshole. In the first few months especially I would consider her my main, period - there’s always been something fun about freezing other people and then right clicking to snipe them in the head, causing people on the other team to rage. I do a little trolling. I also sometimes like to place an Ice Wall in front of the other teams’ spawn point to waste a few seconds of their time.

However, over time, I kind of found myself gravitating towards D.Va as my main in Overwatch period, especially after Role Queue came out and the Damage queue took way too long. I’m not too sure why I started using her, but I guess at some point I tried her as a tank in a round and was like, “hey this is pretty fun actually” and went from there. I’m not quite sure what it is that made her so appealing to me (at least personality and design aside), but I guess I always found her to be the most fun ‘Attack’ tank and liked the way her mech factored into her abilities - particularly her Boosters, Defense Matrix and a bit later on her Micro Missile ability. On top of this, she sort of serves as two characters in one - if her mech goes down to 0 health, Hana ejects from it and now just has her light gun to rely on until you recharge the mech (which serves as her ult when ejected). Playing as a female young adult has never felt so intense.

Also when you call your mech after being ejected or using her actual ultimate you can sometimes have it crush other characters that are close to you. It doesn’t happen often, but oh boy is it satisfying when it does.

Orisa is another tank I enjoy playing from time to time. Whereas I consider D.Va more of an attack tank, Orisa is more of a defensive tank. At least, until Overwatch 2 fully comes out with her reworked abilities but that’s another topic for another time. Anyway, Orisa from what I remember was the first character introduced after I got into the game - the first free weekend began right after Sombra was introduced, and Orisa was of course the next character over. I remember really liking how she played, and over time she more or less became my secondary choice for tank. She doesn’t really have any movement options to her, but I do like her shield and her weapon makes me feel powerful.

Wrecking Ball or ‘Hammond’ is also an interesting character who does lie towards the top of the skill curve. When it comes to his design concept he’s definitely one of the most interesting - a pretty typical “hamster in a ball” trope, but with his kit designed around that concept. He isn’t a very strong character at his base, but if you do take the time to learn and utilize him, he can be a decent character to put up a fight against. I’d definitely consider him one of the more “high skill ceiling” kind of characters albeit with a high skill floor. Zarya is kind of a similar angle - being kind of a weak character at first, but if you can time her shields right you can definitely make her feel powerful, and she’s definitely one of the most fun to play as in Total Mayhem.

Support-wise, Mercy sort of serves as the ‘main’ healer of the game, albeit over time has sort of been the subject of most major balance changes. I do have to admit that she’s not my favorite to play as though - her kit doesn’t feel particularly unique and just sort of a simplified version of Medic from Team Fortress 2 more than anything else. When I do play as Mercy, it’s usually when I don’t feel like I’m doing a good job as any other support, but ultimately on her own I wouldn’t consider her the most interesting character to play as.

That said, I definitely love some of Overwatch’s other support characters. When it comes to this category, my main is Lucio - he doesn’t have the best ‘healing’ output, but his movement abilities are some of the best in the game, allowing you to ride on walls and perform some decent parkour when you know how to do so, which definitely gives the potential of finding ways to get to the objective quicker. Not only that, but he can also speed up the rest of the team, being able to switch between his healing aura. On top of that, when the Overwatch ‘Workshop’ was introduced, I remember seeing a lot of ‘Lucio Surf’ modes being made for the purpose of using Lucio’s wall-riding capabilities.

Ana is also a support I really like and another one of the first characters I really played much as. She definitely serves as a unique take on the ‘sniper’ role as - in which she isn’t great at doing damage still (if you’re looking for a ‘main’ sniper, you’ll probably want Widowmaker), but she can also use her weapon to heal her teammates in addition to throwing out healing grenades. Also worth mentioning she’s the first post-launch hero introduced.

Those are the characters I have the most to say about - there are still a lot more and the game does encourage you to try different ones out to see which one suits your playstyle most. But I think in addition to the different abilities and whatnot, another thing I really like is how each character has sort of their own place on the difficulty curve. 

One thing Overwatch does well in general in my opinion is it’s learning curve - compared to other games I’ve played I do feel like Overwatch is more simple and straightforward to understand, and this aspect is honestly one major reason why I got more into Overwatch than most other multiplayer FPS games, particularly TF2, which I’ve seen even many hardcore fans of agree has a steep learning curve that feels unwelcoming to newcomers. 

But not only does Overwatch give you a lot of opportunities to really learn the characters with tutorials, a practice range and vs AI matches, but the characters also give you variety in terms of difficulty to play as and learn. A character like Soldier 76 is more basic and straightforward, whereas a character like Wrecking Ball/Hammond is harder to learn and pretty weak if you don’t know how to play him well, but does provide some really good damage when you do take the time to learn him. And other characters just sort of fall in the middle from there to various degrees.

I will say another criticism I’ve heard about Overwatch is that it doesn’t have a high skill ceiling and… I do think there’s *some* truth to this, but I feel like Overwatch isn’t really a game designed primarily around mechanical skill, but like I went on about earlier - strategy and coordination. You have to remember that like I just said, each character does have varying degrees of difficulty and skill to overcome, and while it’s not something I actively follow or anything, what I have seen of Overwatch League does kind of display a lot of the higher end of Overwatch’s skill curve.

I’ll admit, its mechanical skill ceiling isn’t as high as Team Fortress 2’s, but again… both games have different approaches to team-based gameplay, and ultimately Overwatch’s skill ceiling and appeal doesn’t necessarily lie purely in individual, mechanical skill.

…and now we’re back at the beginning of this section.

I guess one more thing I could cover is the desire for hero customization - something like TF2’s loadout system or Paladins’ skill card system. And while I understand the desire for it… I don’t necessarily feel like it’s something Overwatch really *needs* per se. I mean, sure, being able to change out things about your favorite hero would definitely be a way to keep extra replayability to the game, and that will become an element in Overwatch 2’s PvE modes, but I feel like when it comes to PvP, part of Overwatch’s appeal was it’s more accessible learning curve and straightforwardness. Yeah, having the potential for more options would be nice, but I don’t necessarily think it’s enough to really make or break the game.

But that kind of leaves me with nothing much else to talk about, so… let’s get into my final thoughts.

FINAL THOUGHTS

So after all this, time to give a conclusive answer to the question I asked in the title. For me, I think Overwatch ultimately just has a very unique appeal that I still can’t find in most other FPS games. The way it blends FPS and MOBA elements to give a sort of ‘arcade-y’ experience, with it’s cast of playable characters with unique abilities, fun teamplay, fast pace, action and great amount of polish makes it a game that there’s just nothing quite like for me. And I think that’s that good blend of elements that made it such a success in the first place, and why it still holds a decent player base even after all this time and the whole situation with Blizzard.

But I do have to admit that… well, when I see people talk about their favorite games of all time, some will refer to games that, to them, came at the “perfect” time of their life. Maybe it was due to the amount of innovation and new technology at the time, or it was something that pulled them out of a rough patch, or both, or other reasons entirely.

And Overwatch… was kind of like that for me. I have to admit - when Overwatch was first launching I didn’t really care that much about it. I did hear about it a lot on various websites I went on, and I did think it looked fun, but initially I didn’t really think of it as something I would actively get into. And, as you can guess, that didn’t end up being the case.

I think a big part of it though was that at the time I first played it (and Paladins), I was… sort of in a rut. In addition to hearing about what was going on in the world around me, I had started dealing with anxiety issues over the past year and was starting to feel burned out from all my hobbies. And video games, unfortunately, weren’t an exception. 

At the time, my ‘main’ multiplayer/ongoing game was ROBLOX, which was also the game I had been playing through my childhood and early teen years, and I mention that because at the time, I was starting to kind of distance myself away from it. The game was going in a direction that I wasn’t very happy with, especially with the removal of various features, including ones that were the only reasons I was going back to the game for. But at the same time, I just couldn’t find an ongoing game that I felt motivated enough to keep going back to. 

I liked what I played of Team Fortress 2, but it wasn’t really a game I was dying to keep playing every day, especially as many of my friends were dropping it due to dissatisfaction with recent updates. Same more or less goes for CS:GO. Terraria was another game I really liked, but at the same time, after 100 hours or so I kind of just got burned out from the gameplay loop. Then I found Paladins, which honestly did hit many of the notes I was looking for… but still lacked *something*. And, frankly, that’s what led me to trying Overwatch - the mobility, the teamplay, the characters, presentation - it was more or less what I had been looking for in a multiplayer FPS title for the longest time.

To be clear, I’m not going to act like Overwatch is a perfect game. Hell, I wouldn’t even say it’s the *best* FPS ever, even if it is my favorite. A lot of the criticisms towards the game, especially in it’s current state, are definitely valid, and obviously ActiBlizz deserves all the flack that it gets.

But I’d be lying if I said I didn’t have fun with this game even now. And frankly, I still can’t say I’ve found a game that gives me quite the same experience as Overwatch. It’s not the only ongoing game I play - Animal Crossing: New Horizons also gets a lot of my attention - but if there’s any multiplayer FPS game that I’ve sunk a lot of time into, Overwatch is definitely that.

I have seen people call Overwatch a “dead” game, and that’s not really true - by all metrics it still has retained a fairly large playerbase and there’s still interest in the game among mainstream gaming culture - but I also can’t deny that it has declined at least somewhat. But at the end of the day, I do want this game to succeed, so seeing all the stuff about ActiBlizz among other things feels kind of… sad in a way. Maybe it is only a game and I’m just overreacting, but there is a good reason why Overwatch was such a success in the first place, and why there’s still fans and players of it now.