Blogs
on April 18, 2026
And that brings us back to the question of __ whether Overwatch 2 needs to exist, or if it's just one giant Activision-endorsed cash grab. While the story mode is enticing, these missions could have easily been added into the base game as DLC. Many players would have gladly paid $20 or $30 to play through a cinematic adventure with Tracer and company, but instead, we're getting a new game that will likely be priced at the same level as other triple-A releases. This means if you want to see the journey of Overwatch's revival you're going to have to pony up $60, and that doesn't feel justifia
Although Overwatch hasn't introduced as much lore and story as players would have hoped, there's still a somewhat clear direction towards which Overwatch 2 seems to be headed. The team is becoming more active again, following Winston's recall during the events of the first Overwa
When Overwatch 2 was revealed in 2019, I assumed that it had to be nearly finished. Obviously Blizzard was announcing it because it was going to be releasing sometime in 2020. Otherwise, it could risk losing a lot of its popularity. Devoting resources to working on a sequel rather than adding content to the current game could cause players to drop off as the updates became less frequent. So it had to be just about ready to come
Part of me is curious to see where new modes and additions will appear when the first big seasonal update rolls around, or if Blizzard has something more experimental planned for a hero shooter that is relatively by-the-numbers right now. But when it comes to the user interface experience, overwatch2base.com I gotta give this thing top marks.
COD is one of the few game series left that get away with an annual release schedule. Every fall like clockwork a new COD comes out and sells like hotcakes. Activision likely loves the profits it makes from this FPS franchise, and it wouldn't be shocking if it thinks they can do the same thing with Overwat
What Overwatch really needed was the same thing that every live-service game needs: content. While development of Overwatch 2 caused a lengthy drought in the original, Overwatch wasn’t exactly on par with the rest of the live service game market either. A new hero every few months and a rehashed holiday event just weren’t cutting it. There’s a lot of people moaning about the new seasonal model in Overwatch 2, but if they were being honest, most of them would admit Overwatch wasn’t holding their attention. The luster fell off Overwatch after a couple of years, and the quarterly cadence of a new hero or map was not going to keep Overwatch al
This is what Overwatch 2 sounds like, a slight iteration that adds improvements and features while not altering the core gameplay. Releasing a sequel that's mostly the same game but with a new coat of paint is frowned upon by most gamers who aren't into sports. This kind of behavior from Blizzard would be surprising except for one thing: they're owned by Activision, the publishers of the Call Of Duty franch
The grim reality is that the entire reason Overwatch 2 exists is to change the way Blizzard makes money. All of the meta changes, like the battle pass, Coin system, and locking new players out of content until they grind enough, are designed to increase revenue and engagement metrics. I don’t think we should ignore that or give Blizzard a pass, and if that’s enough to get you to give up on Overwatch 2 I don’t blame you. As someone who still loves the game, I’m willing to accept fewer free rewards if it means more frequent updates and better events. It’s simply too soon to write it off for me. I need to see how the devs respond to feedback and how much the game changes over the next year. None of this is ideal, but in the long run, it could end up being exactly what Overwatch nee
I haven’t played enough of the game to judge its new direction and updated mechanics, thus placing a score on the experience doesn’t only feel unfair, but unprofessional. But what I can do is admire the sexy menus and slick user interface, since I don’t need any friends to lose myself in the cauldron of stats, modes, and heroes that make up the logistical majority of Blizzard’s hero shooter sequel. A real review is coming, but for now this will have to do.
After all, Activision has a reputation as the company that likes to drive its games into the ground with constant releases. It released so many Guitar Hero games that it practically salted the Earth when it comes to the rhythm genre. It's also easy to remember that Bungie was originally said to have a ten-year plan for Destiny until Destiny 2 went into production. Considering their public break-up with Activision earlier this year, it's plausible that Activision had a hand in pushing the former Halo developer into coming up with a sequel to drive fans over to the next g
I can tell you firsthand why this is a huge blunder from Blizzard. I used to play a lot of Overwatch. It became a nightly ritual to log on, meet up with the large group of friends who gathered online to play, and run through multiple rounds of competitive matches. One of the reasons why we all kept playing was because the game felt like it was always changing. We'd get a new character like Sombra or Orisa. Or a new map would be added to the rotation. Or we'd get a big seasonal event that would add in a new game mode and a bunch of unlockable skins. It felt like a game that kept giving and giving more so than any other game I'd played at the t