Dev/Blizz/Act silencing Overwatch Players after Summer Games Cont.

[Kaleredar]

correct me if i'm wrong but in their summer games dev preview they said that Summer game much like holiday event in wow you can get themed cosmetics from the time this is happening and not to worry if you don't get what you want because this will be seasonal i.e come back in future. This is like holiday in WoW you can get things during that time only and if you don't you wait a year.

so non seasonal stuff is unaffected and every loot box has at least one item that is seasonal. I've gotten spays, player icons and epic skin for turrent man.
What exactly is the lie?

I think they're trying to be all lawyer-y about how Blizzard once said you could buy "any" cosmetic item for in-game currency (though you could never buy icons ) and they're claiming false advertising and coercion because you can't buy the summer games skins/emotes/yadda yadda because the thing used to say you could buy anything.

And to that I say:

[Mormolyce]

The lie was mostly from this quote on the Blizzard site.

While I understand that people are upset about the fact you can't buy the new skins with credits, trying to catch Blizzard out like this reminds me of a kid saying to their parents "but but but you said...".

[Very Tired]

Uh huh.

Yeah I'm going to defer to the far less loaded:



So people are upset they can't spend fake money on cosmetic items that have no impact on gameplay?

Yeah I don't really care. There are any number of skins available in-game. They aren't even encouraging you to spend real money, really, seeing as you can't buy the specific skin regardless.

There's no reason to be snippy.

[Nadiru]

If they're gonna tie in the sexy skins with events, they're leaving money on the table. Events end, but the desire to see Tracer in booty shorts only...grows.

[Very Tired]

While I understand that people are upset about the fact you can't buy the new skins with credits, trying to catch Blizzard out like this reminds me of a kid saying to their parents "but but but you said...".

Honestly I couldn't care less about the whole thing. I'm not one of the people who were foolish enough to actually be lootboxes with money to the point I'm overladed with credits.

But this incident only highlights why some companies prefer to have much less interaction with the player base. I think Jeff's response which basically equated to 'we aren't going to change it' only made things worse.

But hey, kudos to acknowledging why they would be upset instead of calling them all self entitled babies. The internet needs more of this.

[Nadiru]

While I understand that people are upset about the fact you can't buy the new skins with credits, trying to catch Blizzard out like this reminds me of a kid saying to their parents "but but but you said...".

Yeah, sure, Blizzard is a company and they can do what they want with their product. That doesn't make it not a dick move, and frankly I find the "menu" argument unappealing. The circumstances are wholly different and the menu is arbitrary.

[Hobotripin]

Yeah, sure, Blizzard is a company and they can do what they want with their product. That doesn't make it not a dick move, and frankly I find the "menu" argument unappealing. The circumstances are wholly different and the menu is arbitrary.

The problem I have is those against it fail to see that others like it and refuse to give compromises that keep the rare/special idea of these events.

[Charge me Doctor]

The lie was mostly from this quote on the Blizzard site.

Well if you use context (as in words "loot boxes" in the same sentence and a sentence before) you should understand that you can buy any shit that comes of loot boxes (read; "loot boxes", not "summer loot boxes". I'm not very happy with their dumb idea of allowing players to loot summer skins only at summer, and not buy them, because out of 30 boxes i haven't got Tracer or Zarya skin). They later removed that statement by the way, iirc.

[Nadiru]

The problem I have is those against it fail to see that others like it and refuse to give compromises that keep the rare/special idea of these events.

I mean, it's objectively suboptimal from a business standpoint to lose sales for gamer cred. Any increase in sales during events is severely outweighed by lack of sales for the rest of the lifespan of the game.

[Hobotripin]

I mean, it's objectively suboptimal from a business standpoint to lose sales for gamer cred. Any increase in sales during events is severely outweighed by lack of sales for the rest of the lifespan of the game.

Yeah, I mean I really have no issue with a small amount of skins not being purchasable with credits. Also, this thread title is severely misleading.

[Wondercrab]

I don't know why a lot of people are focusing so much on the technicalities of what Blizzard said/didn't say, rather than discussing the money-hungry, psychologically manipulative way they chose to distribute these skins. It feels as though the devs are all too aware of the "it's just cosmetic/you can earn it all in game" mindset, and are hiding behind that simplistic reduction of the business model to try and push it to its absolute limit. We as consumers have gotten very used to defending these kinds of microtransactions, since they're generally one of the least offensive ways for a company to bring in extra revenue post-launch, but devs (and sleazy businesspeople) have gotten wise to this as well. There are still good ways and bad ways to do purely cosmetic microtransactions, and the Overwatch summer games model is absolutely one of the worst, most exploitative ways of handling them.

It makes me terribly sad, because Overwatch had such a bright start. I didn't love the loot box system on launch, but I didn't detest it either. The fact that it only took them a couple of months to start doing money-grubbing stuff like this, however, followed by Jeff Kaplan's cringe-inducingly slimy, corporate response, has completely destroyed any of my respect for the way Blizzard are handling the business side of Overwatch.

[Charge me Doctor]

I don't even get the point of your whinery

Boo boo I can't have everything I want !! me angry è_é

Such crybabies, wow

Every time people mention the "it's just cosmetics" thing - remember, it's a game which is played by millions, some people will want to have everything. Not because they are entitled, but because they are gamers. It's the same with people who want to get all 5 stars on a level before moving on to the next level.

A quote from a russian movie explains my feelings towards this very well:
Вот, например, запретили бы тебе есть вилкой. Причем в формулировке «никогда». «Никогда больше не будешь есть вилкой!» Да, казалось бы, и черт бы с ней, можно ложкой, палочками, руками... Но тебе сказали — нельзя, и сразу захотелось именно вилкой. И, главное, вот она — вилка, лежит. Много вилок. Открыл ящик — полно.
Rough translation:
"For example, you was told that you can't eat with a fork. Literally can not use a fork, ever. Well, who cares, you can eat with your hand, or with a spoon, with chopsticks... but you was told that you can't eat with a fork and now you want to eat with a fork. And most important that there it is, a fork. A lot of the, just open a drawer and there they are".

My point is, that even if you don't want this thing (cosmetic item) that much, and developer says that you can't have that, you want it much more, you want it right now, because, there it is, visible to you, right in front of your eyes, like it always was, but now you can't have that all of the sudden.

[Kaleredar]

There's no reason to be snippy.

It sounds like this entire controversy stems from people being snippy.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't know why a lot of people are focusing so much on the technicalities of what Blizzard said/didn't say, rather than discussing the money-hungry, psychologically manipulative way they chose to distribute these skins. It feels as though the devs are all too aware of the "it's just cosmetic/you can earn it all in game" mindset, and are hiding behind that simplistic reduction of the business model to try and push it to its absolute limit. We as consumers have gotten very used to defending these kinds of microtransactions, since they're generally one of the least offensive ways for a company to bring in extra revenue post-launch, but devs (and sleazy businesspeople) have gotten wise to this as well. There are still good ways and bad ways to do purely cosmetic microtransactions, and the Overwatch summer games model is absolutely one of the worst, most exploitative ways of handling them.

It makes me terribly sad, because Overwatch had such a bright start. I didn't love the loot box system on launch, but I didn't detest it either. The fact that it only took them a couple of months to start doing money-grubbing stuff like this, however, followed by Jeff Kaplan's cringe-inducingly slimy, corporate response, has completely destroyed any of my respect for the way Blizzard are handling the business side of Overwatch.

This sentiment is a complete joke.

You can get loot boxes in game. How? By PLAYING THE DAMN GAME.

You know what happens when the summer event goes away and you can longer get the skins? You go back to getting the OTHER skins and cosmetics that people were 100% okay with having.

It's that notion of "put a ball in a toddlers crib and they don't want it, but try and take it away and suddenly they do." No one was complaining about a lack of cosmetics. But suddenly, because this small subset of cosmetics was ADDED, on top of the cosmetics we already have, has an element of RNG to acquire, suddenly Blizzard is "money grubbing and shady?"

That doesn't even remotely comport. Not only can you NOT directly buy them with cash anyway, but you can earn what you could buy with money by just playing the game and get them for free. Which has the exact same statistical chance to contain one of these cosmetics as if you had bought a loot box.

Your opinion sounds even more whiny considering that Blizzard has directly stated this event will return every summer, giving you further chances to get that genji skin that everyone wants.



Sometimes, you don't always get all the shit you want. Tough luck.

I think the rolling stones wrote a discourse on this.

[Wondercrab]

You can get loot boxes in game. How? By PLAYING THE DAMN GAME.

You know what happens when the summer event goes away and you can longer get the skins? You go back to getting the OTHER skins and cosmetics that people were 100% okay with having.

It's that notion of "put a ball in a toddlers crib and they don't want it, but try and take it away and suddenly they do." No one was complaining about a lack of cosmetics. But suddenly, because this small subset of cosmetics was ADDED, on top of the cosmetics we already have, has an element of RNG to acquire, suddenly Blizzard is "money grubbing and shady?"

That doesn't even remotely comport. Not only can you NOT directly buy them with cash anyway, but you can earn what you could buy with money by just playing the game and get them for free. Which has the exact same statistical chance to contain one of these cosmetics as if you had bought a loot box.

Again, this is precisely the reductionist viewpoint I was talking about that treats all "cosmetic, earnable in game" systems as equal, without addressing the nuance of how such a system can be done badly. When there is no way of mitigating RNG, forcing said microtransactions to be a pure gamble, when the speed of earning them in game is enormously slow, and when a sense of artificial exclusivity is added to them via time-limited availability, then you are left with a system that applies all the right psychological pressures to encourage people to spend more money than they might've wanted to. I mean, it ultimately comes down to the fact that getting a specific skin in the Overwatch summer games might cost an individual $5, or $500, with all the associated gambling psychology of sunk costs etc. coming into play to push them toward that higher figure. Heck, you don't even have to take my word for it, there were plenty of people on the forums posting about how they felt bad after sinking a bunch of money into Summer Games boxes and not getting the thing they were really after.

If your game is creating situations in which people spend (sometimes a lot of) money and get nothing they consider valuable in return, and then feel really bad about it afterwards, then it is clear that there's something about your business model that puts profit first and the experience of the consumer second.

This is seriously the kind of monetisation that I expect various laws to catch up with in the near future, much like how European law mandated that deceptively "free" mobile games had to disclaim their in-app purchases up front. Currently, business models like the summer loot box system are creating virtual slot machines that are innocuously marketed to players of all ages and backgrounds without any kind of legislation. I believe there are currently far worse examples of this happening within the industry, but Overwatch is contributing to the problem now, and sooner or later something's going to give.

[Endus]

When there is no way of mitigating RNG, forcing said microtransactions to be a pure gamble, when the speed of earning them in game is enormously slow, and when a sense of artificial exclusivity is added to them via time-limited availability, then you are left with a system that applies all the right psychological pressures to encourage people to spend more money than they might've wanted to.

If you're seriously going to make the argument that Overwatch's revenue model is "bad" because it makes you want to spend more money, then I'm not sure you understand what the point of a revenue model is.

Nothing you said there is the least bit objectionable. There's nothing wrong with random item boxes, let alone with them being the only paid option. There's nothing wrong with time-limited availability.

And frankly, the speed of earning them is not enormously slow. I usually earn a new box every time I play a session, because I sit down and play more than one game. On a victory, I get about 4500 xp, say, and on a loss, 2500xp (erring low on purpose). The average then, for a 50/50 win rate over the long term, is 3500xp/game. At 22000 xp/level, that's a box every 6 games or so. That's not "enormously slow", in my book. I'm not grinding for days to reach that distant barrier. It sometimes makes me say "eh, one more game, and I can get a box before I quit", and that's about it.

[Doylez]

And frankly, the speed of earning them is not enormously slow. At 22000 xp/level, that's a box every 6 games or so. That's not "enormously slow", in my book.

Getting an item you actually want is enormously slow. I couldn't care less about sprays or player icons so a lot of times when I open a loot box there's nothing in it but trash.

[Endus]

Getting an item you actually want is enormously slow. I couldn't care less about sprays or player icons so a lot of times when I open a loot box there's nothing in it but trash.

I've already bought most of the things I actually want, and I'm holding onto gold at this point waiting on future releases. When Ana launched, I had enough gold saved to buy the stuff I wanted for her right away.

Not really seeing it.

[Mercane]

This has to be one of the most childish and asinine 'fuck you blizz' things to get angry about.

They're cosmetics. Big deal.

[AeneasBK]

To be fair; when I skim-read the stuff about the summer games the impression I received was

A) You can only receive Summer Loot Boxes from playing games, you couldn't buy them.
B) Summer Games Loot Boxes would contain only Summer Games loot.
C) For the duration of the event you could use credits to buy any of the Summer Games loot you wanted/were missing.
D) Everything returns to normal on the 22md August.

So while I was obviously completely out; I don't know that Blizzard were as emphatically clear (espcially on point C) as they maybe could have been. If people spent real money on boxes for the sole purpose of purchasing specific Summer Games cosmetics, then while its easy to say "Yah-boo sucks to be you"; I'd still feel a little sorry for them losing out from the misunderstanding.

[Wondercrab]

If you're seriously going to make the argument that Overwatch's revenue model is "bad" because it makes you want to spend more money, then I'm not sure you understand what the point of a revenue model is.

Nothing you said there is the least bit objectionable. There's nothing wrong with random item boxes, let alone with them being the only paid option. There's nothing wrong with time-limited availability.

I was not saying the model was bad because it made you want to spend money. Again, nuance. It's bad because it encourages players to spend money without necessarily rewarding them. Heck, I do want to spend money on a ton of the skins in Overwatch. They're awesome, and the game is good enough that I'd feel comfortable rewarding the devs with a few extra dollars for some cool skins. What I will not do, however, is keep feeding coins into a slot machine until it eventually spits out a reward at some indeterminable point in the future.

I'm curious as to your reasoning for why none of these things are objectionable, though. The rationale of "it's just cosmetic/it can be earned in game/Blizzard are a business" is not a catch-all for them to do whatever they want within those boundaries and have it all be hunky-dory. They could still be making enormous amounts of money from cosmetic microtransactions without using every trick in the book to coax players into gambling for them. They could still offer cool, rare, time-limited rewards without attaching a huge question mark price tag on the end. At the very least they could have avoided giving such a disingenuous, corporate response to the player feedback that arose from this issue.

Of all the AAA companies out there, Blizzard has always come across (at least to me) as one that's willing to learn from its mistakes, and even prioritise the consumer experience over cynical money-first business models. I think part of why this issue upsets so many people is that it pushes Blizzard ever closer to occupying the same space as the Ubisofts and EAs of the gaming world, cashing in a lot of the passionate consumer goodwill they've accumulated over the years in favour of a quick buck. Blizzard have in the past proven themselves capable of being better than this, and it's sad to see them pursuing business models that are ill-content with making most of the money when they could be having all of it, regardless of how it impacts the player experience.