I don't understand why you think they should have picked a different name.
An overwatch [0] is someone who has a better vantage point and can make tactical recommendations because of that privileged position. The point of the tool described in the paper is that it can see everything you do and everywhere you go within the code, so it can make better code edit recommendations. It's an apt name and makes perfect sense.
The fact that a video game shares the name is completely unimportant. This is an academic paper, which means people are generally not going to be using the tool itself ever (and it's not meant to be used like that). The only people who are going to be searching for it are people who've read the paper. A common purpose of papers like this is to provide a proof-of-concept so that a more fully featured version of the tool can be incorporated into proprietary software. As a consequence, the authors do not need to worry about what might be called the "marketability" of the tool, especially not in terms of name selection.
Cripes. We need a rule that if you're creating a new project, and the search results for whatever you want to name it have more then $NUMBER of results, you don't use that name.
Dealing with niche topics/tools that have the same name as a not-niche tool (particularly when they share a general domain) is a horrid pain in the ass.
