If there’s one thing Blizz wanted in OW2, it was to desperately complicate the development by implementing this confusing as hell system you have dreamed up
Im not guaranteeing anything, But if you think OW2 will continue with how OW1 operates, then you are greatly mistaken.
The visual changes are more fundamental than that. They’re different assets, not different shader settings on the client. They have to build those assets for each version of the engine, so it makes no sense to have two versions active at once.
Keep in mind that we’ve seen many examples of the visual changes already. If you visit the New Look page and swipe from side-to-side, you’re not just seeing Lucio’s armor get shinier, you’re seeing a whole new character model with new textures and materials on it.
1 Like
Might be like a visual mod that other games have. Like GTA, Skyrim, Fallout, etc.
You actually sometimes have to buy visual mods in other games to make the games look better.
And they are using the same game engines.
And visual mods drastically change the look of the games from the vanilla experience.
Exactly.
Which is why its silly to think OW2 could have just been a simple patch implemented into OW1.
Well behind the scenes, it’s certainly more than a patch, basically replacing the whole client. I’m guessing their patch release system can handle distributing that as a patch to the Overwatch client, but they might end up releasing it as a separate client instead and disabling the original. Either way, the original client would no longer be functional, since it’s an online-only game.
Im not saying i have all the answers. Its all speculation and reading into the things they have said. We will have to see.
The point of this thread was to show that OW2 will most certainly implement a new business model.
And it would be highly silly to think that OW2 will operate just like OW1 in that you pay $40 and expect to get infinite free content , forever.
Netflix series. People LOVE netflix series.
?
Netflix is subscription based.
It’s about the hype. Money doesn’t have to directly go from the consumer to the product, there are roundabout ways.
Just… don’t make it suck… that will have the opposite effect.
Hero skins, weapon skins, weapon charms, etc. There’s plenty of stuff they could sell via microtransactions. If the game is f2p and more importantly fun then people will pay for stuff. I’m afraid of f2p for other sketchy reasons
1 Like
I was also under the impression that heroes would have interchangeable skills in pve, possibly even a level up system. They could do something with that.
Side note wish they would talk about that more because interchangeable skills is pretty cool
1 Like
One of my large fears is I think a lot of people like Overwatch for the collecting of skins. If skins became $10 each, people would care far less about the next D.va skin, you’d likely rarely see the new skins in the game.
We already all have a large selection of OW skins, which they probably can’t take away from us considering they’re taking OW1 away from us, so who would spend $50 on OW skins for a few characters?
I mean, i rather have everything for free for a 1 time fee.
But its highly unlikely to be relevant now-a-days with how the free2play games have sky rocketed to the top and show no signs of slowing down.
You adapt or stay behind.
Doesn’t matter if i don’t like it.
2 Likes
Micro transactions can lead to predatory practices. Like making the grind for skins very tedious or very rare loot box drop to urge people to open their wallets.
I am surprised that people are so accepting of this. I guess it became so normal to nickel and dime players that people expect it now.
1 Like
Annoying enough that blizz uses their ‘limited time skins’ and ‘watch 100 hours of an OW streamer you don’t care about’ to try and force people to consume OW content via FOMO.
1 Like
Sojourn free unlock!
3 Likes
I said in the previous post i dont like it. But im not blind to what having these systems brings.
It bring constant players as they dont have to invest much.
And it brings in constant revenue, that makes it easier to hire a large developer team to keep pumping out content.
Look at Fortnite, that game was dead, and all they did was make one gameplay change and they are back at the top. Selling tons of battle passes and such.
And even if people didnt play Fortnite, the hype got them to try it out and it was free to try. They didnt have to spend any money to try it.
2 Likes
Or manipulating matchmaking to get players to spend money. I know there’s little evidence of this being implemented yet but companies are clearly looking into it.
It happens to star wars battlefront. I think someone did the calculations and the odds of getting a rare character was the same as being hit by lightning twice.
They can create the problem to sell the solution.
1 Like
Of course they can act like snakes and do these type of things.
But they haven’t done this so far, so im giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Might be a less-evil way of doing microtransactions that are not like any of the current games.