There is a lot of discussion about the overestimation bias for Deep Q Learning and similar off-policy action value estimation algorithms like DDPG. This is why methods like Double DQN and TD3 were created.
But what I don't understand is, is it not true that every temporal difference estimation has an overestimation bias? If so, how come no one cares about it? In all literature I read, the overestimation bias is synonymous with Q learning methods. I can't see why this isn't a problem for all methods (other than methods that use Monte Carlo returns like REINFORCE).
For example, if we did Advantage Actor Critic (A2C) with a 1-step bootstrap, the policy update pushes the policy network toward the distribution that maximizes the estimated advantage:
$\DeclareMathOperator{\E}{\mathbb{E}}$ $\pi(s_t) \leftarrow \mathrm{one\_hot}\left (\mathrm{argmax}_a \; \E_{s_{t + 1}}\left[R_t + \gamma V(s_{t + 1}, \phi) - V(s_t, \phi) \right ] \right )$
If $V(s_{t + 1}, \phi)$ is noisy and for some $s_{t + 1}$ the value is significantly overestimated, then the actions leading to this state have an overestimated advantage value, and the policy is optimized toward the actions with overestimated advantage. This error propagates to the target value of the learned $V$ function as new trajectories are sampled using a biased policy that favors actions with artificially high advantage values, potentially destabilizing everything.
This problem seems exactly identical to the overestimation problem for Deep Q networks and DDPG... am I mistaken somewhere?