LuccaCardoso1 said:
Overwatch still sold 6.36 million on retail for consoles. You can switch "Overwatch" on the title for "Overwatch on consoles" or "Overwatch Game of the Year edition" if you want. My point still stands.
That's a great aspect about Overwatch. Doesn't make it ok to have paid loot boxes and no campaign though.
It's not anti-consumer to not have a campaign. It's anti-consumer to sell a multiplayer-only game for 60 dollars. By the way, do you really think Activision Blizzard, one the largest (if not the largest) publishers in the world doesn't have enough resources to make a campaign without worsening the multiplayer modes?
Still exploiting people's tendencies to get addicted to gambling. |
Why do multiplayer games have to cost less then 60 dollars? Is their some unwritten rule? If you think the game doesn't have enough content fair enough, but the mere fact that it is multiplayer only doesn't mean that it can't cost 60 dollars, 100 dollars or even thousand dollars. It's all about what is the value of the content.
Regarding loot boxes, again their is nothing wrong with having microtranascations, it doesn't exploit anything just like alcohol and tobacco stores do not exploit the tendencies of people. Human beings are responsible for their own actions. Also how do you expect the game to still get support today, instead of creating post launch DLC and splitting the player base, the game has microtranscations which do not effect the game at all. This is how the PC market operates, and it is great at doing so. Games get support for years even up to decades, and that is supported by optional microtransactions.
If Blizzard made a campaign for overwatch it would have had to to radically change the development cycle of the game, the amount of content at release, and so much more.
Again their is nothing wrong with a lack of a campaign or with loot boxes if the core game is of value and is good.
