Overwatch 2 Reveal Event and Junker Queen Origin Story

[crusadernero]

Whole point of OW2 was pve, and its not even launching with the game lmao. Like someone else said, this is a patch not an entire new game that deserves the "2" title

Yeah, when OW2 was announced the whole PvE part was highlighted as the BIG thing. Then we dont even get a proper reveal of it now, when its supposed to come out in 2023.

Makes you wonder whats going on. Have they changed up what they want out of this game? With lots of skins, emblems, battlepass and whatnot each season.. Maybe they decided to double down on creating stuff for that, rework classes and make new map modes and put PvE on the sideline?

- - - Updated - - -

2 decades away you paid for the game and the game stayed the same forever but for bug fixing patches from time to time. Maybe you got an expansion or two (you had to pay for) and gg.

If you want games with never ending support and new features every now and then, the 2 decades ago business model is not sustainable anymore.

Thats a fair argument, but it doesnt apply to every game. Certain games and genres work just fine without constant content updates. But I get it - gaming companies want to earn money along the way, not just from box sales. Thats why im fine with battlepass, aslong as you can always complete each battlepass at your own pace.

- - - Updated - - -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loot_box#History

If you only recognize Fifa or Team Fortress 2 as the first for loot boxes then you ignore a large part of their history. Nothing announced for OW2 requires you to buy it and they still remain optional cosmetics. So your argument is moving the goal posts as well as not based on facts. Of course more content gives them more things to monetize. It also doesn't change that their model of selling skins/cosmetics is still the same between OW1 and OW2.

It is most certainly fear mongering because over monetization isn't going to happen because of Overwatch 2. They aren't taking things from the mobile market because everything they are doing has existed in PC games already. Of course the industry is making money any way they can. That is their goal. To make money. You are playing on the fear of the industry as a whole adopting the model because of one game. That is fear mongering. Lmao.

Tbh skins aint that much of a big deal. It gets annoying when certain wep models/skins is SO good and its hidden behind currency and/or a battlepass. Then again - if you play the game alot, you'll get the wep skin/model anyway.

In OW the skins doesnt matter at all. In fact, you dont even see your own character while playing except the weapon. Aslong as everyone is on the same playing field, I honestly dont care a whole lot about it. Its a skin, nothing power related. In this day and age, we should live with that.

[Mendzia]

You can play PvE with your friends

Wooowwww... really Blizzard?
I can play with my friends??
Thank you!

[crusadernero]

The sims with its multiple money grab expansions launched in 2000. Monetization of video games is nothing new.

I remember I got the first sims game when it launched. Some time later the first addition launched and already then I started to think "wonder how many there will be of these?", even though I was rather young to care/think about it. Cause I mean, its the sims... the addition possibilties are endless.

Years later and I have no idea how many sims additions there are, but there seems to be alot of them lol

[Mojo03]

It's all sounding pretty good to me to be honest as someone that casually plays and likes OW.

Disappointed for the lack of PVE details and that there isn't any at launch, but the fact it's all free is pretty great.

I'm assuming they're just going to piecemeal all the PVE stuff they made already between the 18 week hero/map season updates for a while (since new seasons are every 9) which is a smart way to make use of the PVE they already made and keep giving people stuff to do.

No doubt the mythic skins and new cosmetics will be overpriced as fuck, but as long as it doesn't affect the core gameplay and it's still possible to somehow get stuff without cash, I'm fine with it.

The skins are great, but I only really need 1 I like on each character and I mostly have that already, so it's w/e for me.

[Mic_128]

Years later and I have no idea how many sims additions there are, but there seems to be alot of them lol

I went and checked because I was curious too.

Eleven expansion packs, twelve "game packs", eighteen "stuff packs", and eleven "kits" have been released. Roughly, it's over 800 bucks for everything


As for OW, give us something concrete on how far off PvE is! That was the main reason for OW2 existing in the first damn place!

[kamuimac]

seems like Diablo Immortal battlepass was immense succes .

we can expect similiar battlepass in all blizzard games from now on including wow. which is a good thing imo finally will be something worth to spend gold on

imagine if with battlepass you would get like automaticaly full normal gear each season so you dont have to waste time on content that doesnt interest you :0

[crusadernero]

I went and checked because I was curious too.

Eleven expansion packs, twelve "game packs", eighteen "stuff packs", and eleven "kits" have been released. Roughly, it's over 800 bucks for everything


As for OW, give us something concrete on how far off PvE is! That was the main reason for OW2 existing in the first damn place!

Holy crap thats ALOT. They must have raked in the big bucks with that game hah. I only played the first sims, I got what I wanted from that game after that heh.

Since they didnt give us anything about PvE now except "coming in 2023", I really dont have high ups for it. Seems they decided to strip down on the PvE part and focus on other things. Dont expect much.

- - - Updated - - -

seems like Diablo Immortal battlepass was immense succes .

we can expect similiar battlepass in all blizzard games from now on including wow. which is a good thing imo finally will be something worth to spend gold on

imagine if with battlepass you would get like automaticaly full normal gear each season so you dont have to waste time on content that doesnt interest you :0

I mean, the renown system in SL is more or less a battlepass.. I fully expect a expanded feature of that in 10.0.

[Zarathos]

This has been normal for almost 2 decades boomers

39,99 for 9 weeks content? ok...if u say so

[Pheraz]

Question to American forum posters:

is this kind of reveal presentation a normal thing in america? For me it looks so weird and not fitting to make those devs make some fictive talk show talking about how they are so cool and made all this stuff. Maybe it is a thing in american media but for me as a not-american it is not very entertaining and I enjoy the usual trailer-style revelations much more.

[cface]

Who can trust this dogshit company with any new release? Only fags and female might wanna work for them, any kind of talent will simply steer away from this company, or use it for a short while before abandoning.
Also, what kind of players puts their effort into this companies game. Why even play HotS if you can play a stable game like Dota? They don't have any credibility left

[ellieg]

Honestly tho, battle pass cosmetics are dumb. Either the stuff is free and everyone has it so you don't stand out, or its paid for and you point and laugh at the children swiping their credit card. The only good cosmetics are the ones that are earned through some sort of challenge.

[Darththeo]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loot_box#History

If you only recognize Fifa or Team Fortress 2 as the first for loot boxes then you ignore a large part of their history. Nothing announced for OW2 requires you to buy it and they still remain optional cosmetics. So your argument is moving the goal posts as well as not based on facts. Of course more content gives them more things to monetize. It also doesn't change that their model of selling skins/cosmetics is still the same between OW1 and OW2.

It is most certainly fear mongering because over monetization isn't going to happen because of Overwatch 2. They aren't taking things from the mobile market because everything they are doing has existed in PC games already. Of course the industry is making money any way they can. That is their goal. To make money. You are playing on the fear of the industry as a whole adopting the model because of one game. That is fear mongering. Lmao.

Wow, you have totally misrepresented my point twice. Maplestory, PC game. ZT Online, PC Game. I never said Fifa or TF2 were the first loot boxes, I said PC games had loot boxes first.

And you don't know that over monetization isn't going to happen, therefore you can't call it fear mongering. Blizzard literally over monetized Diablo Immortal already. This isn't fear mongering, this is recognizing a company has already done it once. It would be fear mongering if Blizzard didn't already do it once, and had questionable monetization in their other games. To think it "can't" happen, is sheer foolishness at this point because Blizzard already showed they can and will do it if they think they can get away with it.

And yes, these things are existing in PC and console games, but they are a minority still.

[Unlimited Power]

Had heard the rumors that OW2 would launch without PvE. I've basically lost any interest in the PvP aspect of OW long ago, so not returning until PvE is implemented.

[Mic_128]

2 decades away you paid for the game and the game stayed the same forever but for bug fixing patches from time to time. Maybe you got an expansion or two (you had to pay for) and gg.

If you want games with never ending support and new features every now and then, the 2 decades ago business model is not sustainable anymore.

I would much rather buy a complete game. Remember games like Perfecct Dark? Had a bunch of cosmetics, unlocked more as you played, had cheat modes and things you could unlock and earn all part of the base game? These days those last three unlockable levels would have been DLC, as would half the multiplayer skins.

It's not a matter of it not 'being sustainable' but 'not as profitable of we can't keep squeezing cash from them'

[pacotaco]

"Full" games from my first console (snes) to today cost exactly the same, I could buy Super Mario World for (the equivalent of) 60€ and i can buy AAA games for 60€ nowadays; but money is worth less than half due to inflation and development teams have growth from 10-20 developers to hundreds. It's dellusional to think this can continue forever; as development teams are bigger everytime and inflation won't ever dissapear. In order to keep up with the increase in costs they have to be inventive on how to sell games and make you think you are not paying 2 or 3 times more.

The thing is that before, you bought a game, and that was the complete experience.
Now, in the AAA market (indies don't usually do it), you buy the game, and they keep adding things fo at least 3 years, and you end paying a LOT more of the equivalent (even taking inflation cost).

And most of the time, it's done in a dishonest way: "GotY", "Complete", "Super", "Ultra", "Collector's", "Gold", "Platimun". How many times are they gonna re-release the game with some minor tweaks/adds and charge like a complete new game?

I got so tired of that trend that now I only buy 1 or 2 games at release, and I wait at least 3 or 4 year until they stop re-re-releasing the game, so I can pay for a complete game and have the full experience, but I think I'm the minority.
The problem is that they already catch on that and now they took 2 approaches to that problem:
- Give the base game for free to hook the players and try to make them buy their thousand DLCs.
- Make "games as a service": always-on, full on microtransactions, full of psychological traps to make people spend money.
The way I see it, they treat their consumers more like potential junkies than gamers, to the point that even liberal countries are thinking about regulating that shit.

- - - Updated - - -

2 decades away you paid for the game and the game stayed the same forever but for bug fixing patches from time to time. Maybe you got an expansion or two (you had to pay for) and gg.

If you want games with never ending support and new features every now and then, the 2 decades ago business model is not sustainable anymore.

The thing is: do we need/want that ALL games are never-ending, as-a-service?
that's the problem there. That the industry want to push for it even when there's no need, only get even more revenue.

Hell, look at that FIFA thing (I don't recall the exact name) where every year it resets, and you need to spend crazy amounts of real money to re-buy charactes.
It's the same game all the time. They only change some stats on an excel, clear progress, et voila, new season.
It uses FOMO and sunken cost to trap players into waste money.

And I fear that this trend would make the market crash:
- They'll skim the people to the point that they'll become suspicious.
- Then they'll call it a day, and would cut out all fundings "because the market is not so green as it was"
- Without funding the market would crash.

And hear, I'm not doom saying, this same shit already happened 40 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983

- - - Updated - - -

It's like they began making ow2 and half way through they thought, oh shit we were supposed to add pve lol

The feeling is that they wanted to add it, but they still can't figure out what to do for it, and after so many years (they probably started working on it at least 6 years ago) someone in production said "Look, we can't waste more moeny on this. Let's try to market what we have and finish the product with the money we get from sales". Then they decided it was easier to make it F2P and fund it through microtransactions.
TLDR: it feels like salvaging a failed development.

- - - Updated - - -

Thats a fair argument, but it doesnt apply to every game. Certain games and genres work just fine without constant content updates. But I get it - gaming companies want to earn money along the way, not just from box sales. Thats why im fine with battlepass, aslong as you can always complete each battlepass at your own pace.

Exactly. I'm not against monetization per se. It's when it's done like if planned by sociopaths when I dislike it, and makes me fear (as a player and developer) that the overly greedy monetization sends it all to hell.

- - - Updated - - -

I remember I got the first sims game when it launched. Some time later the first addition launched and already then I started to think "wonder how many there will be of these?", even though I was rather young to care/think about it. Cause I mean, its the sims... the addition possibilties are endless.

Years later and I have no idea how many sims additions there are, but there seems to be alot of them lol

Acording to this wiki: https://sims.fandom.com/wiki/The_Sims
7 of them. And I guess at around 30$ each + tha base game that it was maybe 40$ or so. So around 250$ for the complete Sims if you bought all at release.

But the real problem for me is the 2nd instalment, were they activelly cut things from the previous game to sell them again in expansions.

For me the worst offender is Civilization. Each new game is reuced to the barebones functionality and they repeat the same cycle of re-releasing things in previous games.
Jumping from the complete Civ4 to release base Civ5 was heartbreaking to the point that a coworker that's really really into that type of games said "fuck this, let me know when they reach the point they left Civ4"

- - - Updated - - -

Question to American forum posters:

is this kind of reveal presentation a normal thing in america? For me it looks so weird and not fitting to make those devs make some fictive talk show talking about how they are so cool and made all this stuff. Maybe it is a thing in american media but for me as a not-american it is not very entertaining and I enjoy the usual trailer-style revelations much more.

I'm not american either, but this type of presentation is relatively new for Blizzard. I think it's their way to fight the "rockstar syndrome", by giving space to talk to several devs from different groups (design, coding, audio, graphics).
But I agree that it feels too fake, too weird the way it looks like if we're spying on a group of friends talking on a cafe.

- - - Updated - - -

I would much rather buy a complete game. Remember games like Perfecct Dark? Had a bunch of cosmetics, unlocked more as you played, had cheat modes and things you could unlock and earn all part of the base game? These days those last three unlockable levels would have been DLC, as would half the multiplayer skins.

It's not a matter of it not 'being sustainable' but 'not as profitable of we can't keep squeezing cash from them'

I remember the days fighting games came with all characters and costumes that you unlocked through playing, and sometimes they'll release a new version with extra characters.

Now we have shit like SF5, where you have to buy 2/3 of the characters and stages as DLCs (https://streetfighter.fandom.com/wik...r_V#Characters). And I didn't even dar to look at costumes.

[Cosmic Janitor]

For the people that expect this battle pass scam to work in WoW instead of a sub: Ain't gonna happen. Lazzyard looks to aim for 6-9 month long seasons in WoW, there is pretty much no way they would earn more with battle passes instead of a subscription with that business model. If anything it will be an additonal feature.

[McNeil]

Overwatch 2 must be one of the most mismanaged game of all time. Either this or WC3: Reforged

[Mic_128]

TLDR: it feels like salvaging a failed development.

Kind of fitting, since, that's how we got OW1.


I'm not expecting the same level of success this time.

[rhorle]

And you don't know that over monetization isn't going to happen, therefore you can't call it fear mongering.

Neither do you yet you keep pushing the fear of it happening. Not just in Blizzard games but in the industry as a whole. Textbook fear mongering lmao. Also if you think a thing like a battle pass is still the minority then you haven't played very many PC or Console games. Nothing Blizzard is doing with OW2 is a minority in the industry.

[Darththeo]

Neither do you yet you keep pushing the fear of it happening. Not just in Blizzard games but in the industry as a whole. Textbook fear mongering lmao. Also if you think a thing like a battle pass is still the minority then you haven't played very many PC or Console games. Nothing Blizzard is doing with OW2 is a minority in the industry.

Except I have proof Blizzard has done it in another game.
What you are doing is akin to saying "I know they dishonestly sold a game before, but surely they aren't going to do it again."

Excepting a snake oil salesman to be dishonest for money isn't fearmongering.

Most games don't have battle passes, they are by definition a minority feature. They are becoming more popular, that is true, but not every game or even most games have a battle pass system. And my issue is that tons of battle passes are predatory and designed to encourage players to open their wallets.