Microtransactions in OW1 really weren't a problem

General Discussion
1

Break it down into a simple formula:

Before:

  • Buy game once (price varies but caps at around $50 at launch)
  • Earn Lootbox every level
  • infinite levels
  • infinite source of Lootboxes
  • infinite chance to get the skin/in game currency to purchase skin

Now:

  • Get original game taken away that you paid for (only if you’ve been around since OW1)
  • Play Game
  • Do Challenges
  • Earn skin in 5-10 business years

OR

  • Purchase a single Skin from Shop EVERY time (Up to $20 every time)
  • Purchase Battlepass EVERY season (somewhere between $7-$10 idk can’t remember since I bought season 1 battlepass and thats it)

And now

  • Purchase slither of watered down PvE experience ($15 everytime they decide to release 3 missions)

To this day the issue with Lootboxes in OW1 always baffled me, they were free and you could earn them indefinitely. Arguably the only audience who hated it were people who spent money on them, which is on them in the first place. (you know, since they were free).

14 Likes
2

No one except the “law” said it was bad.

2 Likes
3

You left out

  • infinite chance that blizzard will stop updating the game for free
4

With how many lootboxes were thrown at the players for casually playing without paying and the fact that it was only ever cosmetics in them which were either here all year round or came back twice a year at predictable times, I really had zero issues with lootboxes in OW1.

6 Likes
5

I think if they just gave more coins it would be fine, but loot boxes shouldnt come back. Just make it easier to get coins.

However your post doesnt talk about microtranactiosn, if its just micro transactions then OW1 was worse because you had to gamble what you paid for, where OW2 you get what you paid for.

OW1 had worse micro transactions, but had ways to avoid buying, while OW2 has better micro transactions, but has worse ways to avoid buying.

2 Likes
6

Not even a hot take. That’s just the common consensus.

2 Likes
7

They should have stopped updating it and explicitly said so. They should have made a complete game from the beginning, released it and never updated it again. Then use the money from that game to make a new game in the future. All content, cosmetic or otherwise should have come with the game without any microtransactions.

8

Except for fact that games have only done that for 40 years now…

And it wasn’t for free cause people did buy lootboxes

None of current monetization is out of necessity

The only reason OW stopped getting stuff (not entirely true cause we still got cosmetics during events and it still received patches regularly) is because they withheld all the juicy bits for OW2

9

you see, if you spent money on lootboxes then thats kind of on you. Since you could earn them for free. I can’t go into a casino and start making money from just being in the casino.

Whereas with OW1 Lootboxes you could earn them from just gaining XP. Thats why I think the term ‘gambling’ in OW1 lootboxes was a bad label. It was the players choice to either play the game and earn them for free (which you could easily earn multiple every day) or purchase them.

1 Like
10

Did you even read my post?

OW1 had worse MICROTRANSACTIOSN, but had ways to avoid spending money.

OW2 has better MICROSTRANSACTIONS but has terrible ways to avoid spending money.

You didnt need to spend money in OW1 to get loot boxes, but if you did pay its worse then its in OW2.

OW2 has better shops becuase its not gambeling, but has terrible ways to get stuff without buying.

4 Likes
11

I mean the way I see it, spending no money for infinite rolls and cosmetics is always better than spending money for guaranteed cosmetics. I mean over time you’d get coins to buy a cosmetic for free anyway.

So I think OW2’s microtransactions are worse in every single way.

2 Likes
12

OW1 had a better system at getting cosmetics, i agree with you 100% there.

However Microtransactions are when you spend money, so if you want to buy a skin in OW1 you had to gamble for it, where in OW2 you dont have to gamble.

Any shop were you dont have to gamble will always be better.

OW2 has better microtransactions, but that doesnt mean OW2 is better at getting you cosmetics.

OW1 will be better becuase there are more free ways to get stuff then in overwatch 2, but that isnt microtransactions becuase you arnt spending money.

If you are spending money on microtransactions OW2 will be better because of the lack of gambleing.

You title is taking about microtransaction but your talking about stuff other then microtransactions.

4 Likes
13

Pong was constantly updating for free?

Not out of “necessity,” they could update the game for free for years if they wanted to. But, people don’t work for free.

1 Like
14

Pong wasn’t even a game in need of updating…what kind of example was that

And nobody worked for free cause the game earned money out of the gate and throughout via the lootboxes (not to mention merchandise and league)….

Nor am I implying they have to continue doing so forever and ever….expansions have been a thing forever…people pay for those as well

1 Like
15

If you have to use hyperbole to make your point, your point isnt as good as you think.

16

Games have not been constantly updating for 40 years, lol.

And no, pong would’ve been awesome if it was live service.

Yeah. That was back when the popular business model was release a game, then release a sequel. No updates, ever.

…and?

OW1 devs would’ve never continued working for “free,” and I use that term lightly, because maybe they made a small amount from lootboxes and people buying multiple accounts (since they encouraged it).

3 Likes
17

That’s an actual fact, so it’s not really a hot take.

1 Like
18

ngl was expecting a negative reaction thats why I said ‘hot take’

1 Like
19

Only the biggest whales and simps would say otherwise. Content drought had nothing to do with a solid system that kept you coming back and earning skins for free, it was non invasive.

2 Likes
20

Except they did….until they withheld the bulk of the games content for the future money sink…not because it was necessary to change the model….but because others had shown that you simply can…

I don’t blame blizz for the change itself…this didn’t start with them

And because they chose to do that they destroyed their own player base in the process…they sabotaged their own game out of greed

but I do blame them for what they’ve put out and how they’ve done…because what it’s actually done to the game is dog crap…as is usually the case when people go this route