Overwatch 2 Reveal Event and Junker Queen Origin Story

[Darththeo]

Diablo Immortal isn't a precedent until another game follows in its foot steps. If your fears are realized and OW2 has mobile game level of monetization then DI will have been the precedent. Until then it is just an exception. There is no way to know if it is the norm yet. If how a game is monetized determines if it is predatory then the DI version of the Battle Pass is not predatory. It functions just like a normal battle pass which you've indicated can be "fair". The DI battle pass also isn't catering to whales because it doesn't encourage them to spend a lot of money on the game more then a normal battle pass. So if all battle passes are not predatory then the DI one can't be. This is why I've told you that you are moving the goal posts. Moving the goal posts to DI over all model being over the top instead of focusing just on the battle pass. You are trying to argue the over all model while talking only about the battle pass. It is why you are wrong.

It is fear mongering because there is no reason to be anymore cautious then normal. If DI didn't release yet I can bet you would still be arguing about how terrible the OW2 system could be, right? You just wouldn't have anything to use as a launching point for your fear mongering.

Yes, it is. You don't need something to follow to treat something as a precedent that not what the word means. The fact they did it sets the precedent they could do it again, even if no following game does. All a precedent means is an event or action that happened is considered for a future or current action. Diablo Immortal is by definition a precedent.

Yeah, Diablo isn't a fair pass, it is clear you aren't even reading my arguments at this point. A normal battle pass isn't fair. I literally said battle passes tend to be predatory. If you don't have the decency to read my argument, why do you bother replying? Most battle passes have inherent predatory behavior in them. A fair pass is one where a free player is treated the same as a paying player (ie capping both or not capping either) AND either everyone grinds or difference between grinding and paying is not huge. Or, if they want to cap free players and not paying, that battle passes aren't removed and you just constantly move to the next pass whenever you finished the one you were on.

[KainneAbsolute]

My guess is Blizzard will price:

- Battlepass
- Skins
- PVE campaign (like the last approach of SC2: you can play the multiplayer and custom maps, but you need to buy the campaign).

[Kallisto]

- PVE campaign (like the last approach of SC2: you can play the multiplayer and custom maps, but you need to buy the campaign).

TBH this was how the game was advertised from the reveal event so it will not be a surprise if it does happens.

[rhorle]

Yes, it is. You don't need something to follow to treat something as a precedent that not what the word means. The fact they did it sets the precedent they could do it again, even if no following game does. All a precedent means is an event or action that happened is considered for a future or current action. Diablo Immortal is by definition a precedent.

It is a mobile game as well. It can easily be the exception and not something they carry over to non-mobile titles. Just like the creation of Hearthstone, their last mobile game, did not have its monetization model become the standard. The Diablo model doesn't appear to be carrying over to Arclight Rumble so it isn't even the standard for Blizzard mobile games.

Diablo Immortal is a fair pass. If it is not then you are saying it is impossible for a battle pass to be fair. Because the Diablo Immortal battle pass functions just like a standard battle pass. It has a free and premium version. You can buy ranks. You can buy a bundle back to get ranks and items. It is also weird that the only non-predatory model is one where you can get everything for free. It sounds like this has nothing to do with predatory natures but envy/jealousy and people being able to get something you might want but don't want to buy.

[mg0]

Yes, it is. You don't need something to follow to treat something as a precedent that not what the word means. The fact they did it sets the precedent they could do it again, even if no following game does. All a precedent means is an event or action that happened is considered for a future or current action. Diablo Immortal is by definition a precedent.

Yeah, Diablo isn't a fair pass, it is clear you aren't even reading my arguments at this point. A normal battle pass isn't fair. I literally said battle passes tend to be predatory. If you don't have the decency to read my argument, why do you bother replying? Most battle passes have inherent predatory behavior in them. A fair pass is one where a free player is treated the same as a paying player (ie capping both or not capping either) AND either everyone grinds or difference between grinding and paying is not huge. Or, if they want to cap free players and not paying, that battle passes aren't removed and you just constantly move to the next pass whenever you finished the one you were on.

you know the battle pass and store idea is nothing new Halo Infinite, Apex Legends, Destiny 2,LOL, and r6 all have 1 so acting like blizzard is going to make this a new trend is laughable all they are doing in overwatch 2 has already been done before they are just late to the trend also it's now going to be f2p so its par for the course to sell more cosmetics at most it would turn into LOL that you have to unlock the new heroes but you can still get them as a f2p even mobile games like DI are nothing new Nintendo and sega have made some it just seems like because blizzard is doing it's new to you and has never existed before

[Buffbringer]

Not defending Blizzard, or any company really...

But people REALLY don't know other companies and mobile games if they think Blizzard and D:I are filled with predatory monetization models. Not saying i like said models or that blizz is going the right direction, but boy....

Hint: check EA for a company, and check Hero Wars for mobile gaming. You'll see that blizz and d:i are kids compared to them.

[Darththeo]

It is a mobile game as well. It can easily be the exception and not something they carry over to non-mobile titles. Just like the creation of Hearthstone, their last mobile game, did not have its monetization model become the standard. The Diablo model doesn't appear to be carrying over to Arclight Rumble so it isn't even the standard for Blizzard mobile games.

Diablo Immortal is a fair pass. If it is not then you are saying it is impossible for a battle pass to be fair. Because the Diablo Immortal battle pass functions just like a standard battle pass. It has a free and premium version. You can buy ranks. You can buy a bundle back to get ranks and items. It is also weird that the only non-predatory model is one where you can get everything for free. It sounds like this has nothing to do with predatory natures but envy/jealousy and people being able to get something you might want but don't want to buy.

Again, I am not arguing it will, but the fact they did it once is reason to have concern. You are pretending that being concerned is fear mongering.

No, it is possible that Diablo is an unfair pass and a fair pass is possible. You literally explain how it is unfair.
Who completes the pass faster? A paying player or a free player? And how much faster is one method over the other?
Are 100% of the rewards cosmetic without any benefit in game to the player?

If a paying player can finish a pass significantly faster than a non paying player AND if said pass has items that benefit the player in game, the pass is unfair. It doesn't matter if the free player "can grind out the stuff later" because it is always more efficient just to pay.

You can have a pass system where you are capped how many ranks you can go up each week. Say week 1, you can only hit rank 10 regardless of whether or not you pay. Or the paid for ranks is only to catch up to whatever the current cap is.

- - - Updated - - -

you know the battle pass and store idea is nothing new Halo Infinite, Apex Legends, Destiny 2,LOL, and r6 all have 1 so acting like blizzard is going to make this a new trend is laughable all they are doing in overwatch 2 has already been done before they are just late to the trend also it's now going to be f2p so its par for the course to sell more cosmetics at most it would turn into LOL that you have to unlock the new heroes but you can still get them as a f2p even mobile games like DI are nothing new Nintendo and sega have made some it just seems like because blizzard is doing it's new to you and has never existed before

And I never claimed it is new or that is making it the trend in gaming. That's literally not remotely close to my argument.

- - - Updated - - -

Not defending Blizzard, or any company really...

But people REALLY don't know other companies and mobile games if they think Blizzard and D:I are filled with predatory monetization models. Not saying i like said models or that blizz is going the right direction, but boy....

Hint: check EA for a company, and check Hero Wars for mobile gaming. You'll see that blizz and d:i are kids compared to them.

Just because someone else is worst and more predatory doesn't mean what Blizzard is doing is good or not predatory.

There are crappier systems out there than DI. Stepping in a pile of dog crap is better than stepping in a pile of cow crap. It doesn't mean I have to accept stepping in dog crap or consider it good. It is still crap.

[Buffbringer]

- - - Updated - - -



Just because someone else is worst and more predatory doesn't mean what Blizzard is doing is good or not predatory.

There are crappier systems out there than DI. Stepping in a pile of dog crap is better than stepping in a pile of cow crap. It doesn't mean I have to accept stepping in dog crap or consider it good. It is still crap.

Hence why i said i don't particularly like the model or that Blizzard is going the right direction.

I'm saying that claiming it's the worst company out there and the worst monetization schemers ever is just not FACTUALLY true. (Not considering the work environment aspect, of course)

Plain and simple, that's all i'm saying. Not trying to defend anything here, just saying facts.

[Syphke]

Not running hot for this. I only login every 2/3 days to play Mayhem for some hours

[Darththeo]

Hence why i said i don't particularly like the model or that Blizzard is going the right direction.

I'm saying that claiming it's the worst company out there and the worst monetization schemers ever is just not FACTUALLY true. (Not considering the work environment aspect, of course)

Plain and simple, that's all i'm saying. Not trying to defend anything here, just saying facts.

It is more annoying for me that people will excuse predatory behavior solely because other companies are worse.

DI is reason to be concern that we may get over monetized games in the future from blizzard. And I hope Blizzard and gaming in general moves away from over monetization.

[Buffbringer]

It is more annoying for me that people will excuse predatory behavior solely because other companies are worse.

DI is reason to be concern that we may get over monetized games in the future from blizzard. And I hope Blizzard and gaming in general moves away from over monetization.

Yeah i feel you. Honest opinion? I think Blizzard will go forward with monetization systems, step by step, testing the waters. I read some news that DI already sold 24M worth of MTX. So, despite being the lowest score on metacritic, it's a financial success, and we all knew it would be.

We can only hope that's more netease than Blizzard, and that they use acceptable systems on their games going forward.

[Daish]

"everyone is welcome" unless you have the wrong opinion

[Sorrowseer]

Cringe, manufactured characters that try hard, are hard to accept.

[Shigma]

So it turns out, despite the hate it got, Diablo Immoral was indeed an economic success so they are pushing it a bit further to other games. What a surprise.

"But its mobile it's fine in mobile hur dur". Well, this is what you get when you support predatory companies, you let them know they can and should do it (And being honest, if i were Blizzard i'll do the same, even if dirty, billions are billions. Who cares).

[Kallisto]

So it turns out, despite the hate it got, Diablo Immoral was indeed an economic success so they are pushing it a bit further to other games. What a surprise.

"But its mobile it's fine in mobile hur dur". Well, this is what you get when you support predatory companies, you let them know they can and should do it (And being honest, if i were Blizzard i'll do the same, even if dirty, billions are billions. Who cares).

Let's be honest anyone in the position of blizzard in the capitalist system we're in would do the same.

Businesses are like wild animals, well carnivores. Complaining at a company for finding ways to get more monetisation is basically complaining to a lioness that just successfully got their kill. Neither are going to take note because they just got successful at their reason for being.

No private business is going to say no to money. Expecting otherwise is just dumb. Not buying said game because if it isn't going to work either.

The only place to win is in the ballot box and vote for people that will reign in on business. The Dutch and Belgians made the first step.

Expecting the capitalist system to win out for it is just a fools errand as the system of capitalism that allows for it is immoral in of itself.

[Warning]

This trailer is so damn long and tries so hard to make someone seem cool and appealing who really isn't, that it ends up being counter productive. I also don't understand why they would go for a character with Junk in her name or even the theme in general when they already have Junkrat. Overwatch was fun for a bit and I liked playing Genji, Widow, Mei and Soldier for a bit but the game doesn't really have much long term appeal.

[Shigma]

Let's be honest anyone in the position of blizzard in the capitalist system we're in would do the same.

Businesses are like wild animals, well carnivores. Complaining at a company for finding ways to get more monetisation is basically complaining to a lioness that just successfully got their kill. Neither are going to take note because they just got successful at their reason for being.

No private business is going to say no to money. Expecting otherwise is just dumb. Not buying said game because if it isn't going to work either.

The only place to win is in the ballot box and vote for people that will reign in on business. The Dutch and Belgians made the first step.

Expecting the capitalist system to win out for it is just a fools errand as the system of capitalism that allows for it is immoral in of itself.

That's why i said i'd do the same. But as long as there are still other options where i don't feel i'm being treated as a purse that expects to be raped several times a week, i'd stick to those.

I enjoyed OW1's run for sure, but i don't like whats coming. It's fine, not the end of the world or anything drastic, as i said i understand their move (DI made 20+ millions already, apparently), i just don't want to support nor do i enjoy games like these, not just because i don't want to be expected to drop money every now and then that quickly enough piles up and ends costing way more than buying a "full" game, but the systems employed are usually grindy and anti-fun. if you don't pay, that is).

Plenty of options still (Which is another of the pillars of capitalism, luckily, competition).

[The King in Yellow]

Well, Overwatch 2 looks more and more uninteresting to me with the day. Alas, it's had a good run.

[Darkeon]

Expectations and hype set to minimum, because whats getting released is the game that I grew bored of with after 3 matches on the last beta.

While I was looking forward for the PvE side of the game I'd say that, by the time it gets released, my interest is probably non-existant and might actually skip it entirely.

Blizzard just can't do -one- thing right.

[Cosmic Janitor]

This trailer is so damn long and tries so hard to make someone seem cool and appealing who really isn't, that it ends up being counter productive. I also don't understand why they would go for a character with Junk in her name or even the theme in general when they already have Junkrat. Overwatch was fun for a bit and I liked playing Genji, Widow, Mei and Soldier for a bit but the game doesn't really have much long term appeal.

Some people say that they just really wanted a character that fits the Tank Girl / Jinx niche, though imho they failed hard here if that was the goal. Because to me they just made another butch barbarian supersoldier. Thematically she feels a bit redundant like Brigitte.