By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - I wish Overwatch had flopped sales-wise

Barozi said:
LuccaCardoso1 said:

Yes, Overwatch is a great game, but imo it made the FPS genre (not just the FPS genre, but it especially) much worse. Let me explain:

Overwatch has loot boxes that can be bought with real money. Overwatch sold a lot, and because it has a lot of fans that think it's a sacred game and refuse to consider the loot boxes a problem, publishers now think loot boxes are a-ok with consumers.

Overwatch has no campaign. Overwatch sold a lot, and because it had a lot of fans that think it's a sacred game and refuse to consider the lack of campaign a problem, publishers now think it's a-ok to don't include a campaign in a $60 game if it has a multiplayer mode. That's a more recent one, but with CoD BO4 not having a campaign, we can expect the number of FPSs with single-player content shrinking more and more from now on.

Overwatch also won tons of awards, including Game of the Year (!) on TGA 2016.

Overwatch basically made anti-consumer practices acceptable in the eyes of publishers.

it's like you never heard of Team Fortress 2 lol

TF2 is free lol



G O O D B O I

Around the Network
John2290 said:
spemanig said:
Not having a shitty, tacked on campaign isn't anti consumer - it's pro consumer. I say bring on more. Keep single player single player and multiplayer multiplayer.

And loot boxes predate overwatch, so overall the op is WRONG. And screw it - bring on the loot boxes too. I have lots of money, and no time. I don't care if it's anti consumer. It's pro ME, and inventory upgrade systems were always garbage anyway.

That's short sighted and I hope reactionary because it's certainly not based in clear thinking. What if your brother or mother got depressed and spent thousands on loot boxes or your kid/future kids maxed out a credit card on you in the middle of a recession. If your mind set truly is that I hope ot does happen so you gain some perspective. 

It's not short sighted at all. If you're an adult, it isn't up to the world to prevent you from being irresponsible. If you spend thousands on loot boxes, and you're unhappy with that decision, that's your fault. That's like blaming the alcohol or the bar for some depressed guy getting wasted every night. If your kids have any control over your funds, especially during a recession, you're being a shitty parent and you deserve it. There are password-protected fail safes that prevent that sort of thing from happening. Again, that's like blaming the internet because your child has a porn addiction.



Well, this is new.

Read.

??? The loot boxes are completely free and only cosmetics. There's no issue with them at all. And why does it need to have a campaign? This post makes no sense at all.



I bet the Wii U would sell more than 15M LTD by the end of 2015. He bet it would sell less. I lost.

Ka-pi96 said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

ME3 was single player. Not sure why anybody would have bothered with its multiplayer mode. Hiding lootboxes in a dark and hidden corner of the game (ME3's Multiplayer), is not the same thing as making them front and center in your game for everybody to see. 

Stop trying to make exceptions or claim things don't count. The OP's claim that Overwatch was the first successful game with loot boxes was categorically false, as was his claim that EA never put loot boxes into any non-sports or mobile games until after Overwatch.

People making false claims without doing any research is a bad thing, don't defend it.

Yeah OP had his facts wrong, but he still has a point. Overwatch wasn't the first game to have lootboxes, or the fist successful online-only game. But it still had a huge impact on the industry, due to a combination of timing, quality, and marketing.



LuccaCardoso1 said:
Barozi said:

it's like you never heard of Team Fortress 2 lol

TF2 is free lol

Pretty much confirms what I said.

It went F2P 4 years after launch. Who said Overwatch isn't going F2P in 2020?



Around the Network

I would agree, but players forced Bungie to add story and a fully fleshed out campaign to Destiny.



"Multi-player only" games are only a problem if you consider "Single-player only" games to be a problem.



When I was a kid, I didn't have access to my parents funds. That makes no sense to me and is a part of irresponsible parenting.
The OP is just looking to throw blame at overwatch, because it's popular, and will ignore anything that doesn't support his argument. We all know overwatch did nothing first, from leaving out single player, to having micro-transactions, or anything else.

It did not in any way pioneer a path for other companies to follow suite. Overwatch gives you the opportunity to get everything in the game, outside of 3, or 4 costumes completely free. Overwatch is profitable, and makes a lot of money, and with several evens happening throughout the year, along with the regular release of new characters and stages, it's clear that the money is going back into the game.

There's tons of games that don't give out DLC characters and stages for free.

Overwatch isn't even obligated to give it's extra content away for free. It could have all it's content behind paywalls, and charge a monthly subscription to play the game.

What has happened are big companies moving to the cell phone market because fewer and fewer companies want to spend big money on a project that could fail. Especially if it's a new concept. But, that's fine. Have fun with your endless sequels, and blame overwatch for a cell phone strategy that it, on its own, had nothing to do with. You'll still have to suffer the consequences regardless of taking blame at overwatch or not. It's just the biggest thing you have to point your fingers at. But because of the cell-phone structure of being cheaper to create, and filled with microtransactions, it would have crossed over anyway as a means to suppliment the growing costs of games.

Everyone's defending overwatch, though. Maybe there's a serious flaw in your thinking. You know what I did? I bought the singular pink mercy skin on the day of the release. I didn't care that it was 15 dollars. I've also bought lootboxes too if I don't get what I want near the end of the event. If it saves me time, and hassle, or having to wait an entire year to get, it's my money and I can decide if it's worth it.

If anyone has an issue with that, then you can wait until the government steps in, and tell these companies what they can and can't do, because obviously the true adult is not the individual, but the government.



It's a fad and like all fad's, it'll pass. Just focus on games you like and let it die naturally.



John2290 said:
spemanig said:

It's not short sighted at all. If you're an adult, it isn't up to the world to prevent you from being irresponsible. If you spend thousands on loot boxes, and you're unhappy with that decision, that's your fault. That's like blaming the alcohol or the bar for some depressed guy getting wasted every night. If your kids have any control over your funds, especially during a recession, you're being a shitty parent and you deserve it. There are password-protected fail safes that prevent that sort of thing from happening. Again, that's like blaming the internet because your child has a porn addiction.

Agreed somewhat but in a medium that mainly attracts kids and teens who haven't learned life lessens yet or had experience with money its sickening. Also, when you look into how they are evolving the gameplay to prey on basic human and animalistic tendencies right down to the chemical level of the brain and social hierarchy, targeted at kids and teens its more of a problem that you seem to imagine. 

Your comment screams of ignorance but perhaps you are guilty for engaging in what basically amounts to cheating, not only other players who have invested more time but also yourself for skipping core aspects of the gameplay loop and paying to do so.

People who buy loot boxes, have self control and can justify doing so afterward are scum in the same way an athlete takes drugs yet this is peoples pass time you're fucking with. Their hobby that they pay for. 

What you’re saying is literally ridiculous. The main demographic for console games, especially those with micro transactions, are adults between 25 and 35. Kids and teens aren’t being targeted. If a teenager with their own money is spending everything on micro transactions to the point of self destruction, again, that’s the parent’s fault for not sufficiently teaching them the value of money.

Games have ALWAYS used psychology to exploit players, from arcades to grinding in RPGs to micro transactions, it’s all the same. And guess what? Movies do it too. And television. And books, and music, and all forms of artistic expression. There is nothing more inherently exploitative here than what appears anywhere else.

There’s nothing ignorant about my remarks here. In fact, they are extremely self aware. I’m not cheating - I’m skipping an inherently flawed, unsatisfying gameplay loop. It sucks. It’s boring, tedious, repetitive, and holds absolutely no constructive value. If it did, no one would pay to skip it and there would be no business model. If you waste your time grinding for anything, you’re the pitiable one, not me. Frankly, loot boxes shouldn’t even be necessary because the whole design philosophy is flawed, but that philosophy predates this bandage by decades. It’s never going away because people like you have been trained to be addicted to it or be apathetic to it, so again bring on the micro transactions.

If you seriously think that people buying loot boxes for what is literally a recreational hobby is in any way comparable to professional doping, where the stakes are much higher and the consequences to all parties is far more severe, then you’re perspective is in need of some serious re-evaluation.



Well, this is new.

Read.