Are the characters of Overwatch let down by their own game?

[thejboy88]

First of all, let me just clarify that I am in no way saying that Overwatch is a bad or unlikeable game. However, I do feel that it is something of a disappointment when it comes to one crucial aspect; the characters. Everyone involved here, from Tracer to Hanzo and everyone in-between, feels like they could have so much done with them, yet Blizzard barely does anything with them in the actual game outside of combat.

For instance, take the hugely-impressive animated shorts that have been produced by Blizzard to promote the game. There, we gets tons of interesting information about not only the characters, but also the world they inhabit. We get stuff like engaging character interactions, backstories, even the wider politics and their personal allegiances. But the game itself? Maybe, if we're lucky, we get a few lines of dialogue during the fights that might clue us into this stuff, and perhaps a few details in the various maps, but that's it.

But overall, the game just doesn't seem anywhere near as interested in showcasing these great characters as perhaps it should be. In fact, I'd even go so far as to say that the very type of game Overwatch is, that of a team-vs-team online shooter, will forever hinder the kinds of stuff that can be done with what is, unquestionably, the very thing that makes the game as popular as it is; the cast.

 

[Saelune]

Its almost as if the characters/plot and the game have NOTHING TO DO WITH EACHOTHER!

It would be like if Heroes of the Storm was the original game for the characters in it, and it just hinted at the plots for all these other games, but they dont exist.

 

[American Tanker]

Yeah, OP, I agree that they should have done Overwatch as a third-person action game with intertwined stories seen from all of the different characters. That would allow all of the characters to shine, and also let their distinctive appearances be on full display.

It could have been so much more... But instead, it might as well be Team Fortress.

 

[Hades]

Yes, I do think its a bit shame that so much of the story of Overwatch takes places so far away from the game. It makes it much harder to see more of these highly likable characters.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Great Charcaters?

They are no different from your typical fighting game roster

 

[Sniper Team 4]

If the Overwatch characters were in any other type of game, odds are I would pick it up. Because you're right: those animated films that they put out, as well as the comics, and even just the background lore all make them sound super interesting. But as it stands, a team-based shooter can't have a story with any real meat on it, and so they are squandered.

 

[Zhukov]

Not really?

They're pretty simple characters. Each basically has a distinctive visual design and a couple of personality traits. I'd say that's about right for a multiplayer game.

I mean, I'm sure you could make something more of them in story-driven game, but that's not really Blizzard's thing. They can't do story and character worth a damn. Simple characters in a gameplay-driven game are a good match for them.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Definitely. Having visually-appealing chars in a first person game is like having a pitch black art exhibit. You can't really appreciate it. FPSs also have the issue of looking very shaky and have a lot of jarred movement which curtails attempts at being cool. While in an action game for example you have transitional animations when turning around and buildup of momentum and cool angles and such, none of these elements exist in Overwatch due to genre limitations.


I think this game would have been much better as a DMC/Bayonetta style game. Hell, even as a shooter, they could have gone the Vanquish route.

 

[Hawki]

You can say the same for any multiplayer-only game that has an abundance of lore.

It's part of why I can't get into Paladins that much, because there's no info about the world or characters, even if the gameplay itself is servicable. I don't play Overwatch, even if I enjoy the setting, but something like HotS or LoL has the benefit of lore adding to the gameplay indirectly, since lore/story/characterization is always a net positive. Heck, even Quake Champions seems to be taking this to heart.

Personally, I find that multiplayer-only games that don't even make the effort of trying to make the setting/characters interesting less to my interest.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

Neat, but ultimately vapid characters that don't really have a purpose being in a multiplayer shooter game and would be better served by an engrossing campaign or even an animated film?

Yes. That's Overwatch. GotY!

Also, SFM. They're good for that too, apparently.

 

[sanquin]

Weren't the assets and characters from Overwatch supposed to first appear in a new mmorpg blizz was making? Would explain why they have so much lore behind them.

 

[Zontar]

Also, SFM. They're good for that too, apparently.

Is there anything that isn't porn that has come of that? Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[Zontar]

Weren't the assets and characters from Overwatch supposed to first appear in a new mmorpg blizz was making? Would explain why they have so much lore behind them.

Nope. The superhero based MMO was completely scraped and Overwatch was what they moved on to after scraping it. While it's probably why the lore is basically that of a comic book featuring superheroes and supervillains, outside of that there's no real carryover between the two unless they've lied about scraping everything relating to the MMO they where making.

Plus the presence of a lot of lore for an online mulitplayer only game that doesn't need it isn't exactly new. TF2 has been doing it since launch, and like with that game Overwatch is doing it almost entirely as marketing.