Agree…the thing I find hilarious is that some of the same people complaining about this wanted the comp requirement to be raised to level 50… 
You mean your failed arguments that everyone in this thread has picked apart?
You have this entire forum telling you that you’re wrong. This place never unanimously agreed about any single issue before this one. Maybe it’s time to look in the mirror.
7 Likes
They don’t do this at the expense of new players or casuals. On the contrary they invest massive sums into marketing. You think kda and all those cinematics are for people who would play anyway? Nah it’s to keep the game relevant amongst the casual crowd and potential new players.
3 Likes
Just be sure to @ me either way! If you’re bookmarking it then I won’t be. I have no doubt competitive will be just fine.
This reminds me of a Spongebob episode.
What do you mean? They have the exact same monetization model where you either play the game or pay money to unlock heroes.
Uh… I mean, definitely partially yea. Just like Overwatch’s cinematics are the most hype for already existing players, but are also to get new players interested in the game…
1 Like
Why would I answer a hypothetical about a scenario you’ve made up. There is no data to suggest that would happen. So stop being angry about things you’ve made up.
I’ll also note that it’s 3% on the conservative end being leveraged against likely the peak player count, which means I’m skewing highly in your favor. The percentage is likely much higher, closer to 10% or more.
So statistically speaking, the odds that one of the 3% gets placed with 4 members of the 97% are quite high.
MANY premium BP owners will suffer from matches with non BP owners.
Nintendo is highly transparent about sales figures, I can link them.
1 Like
This thread reminded me of these ads
It very much can. I’d wager the majority of players do not have every mini-event skin. Those aren’t hard to get, but from week to week, real-life things come up and pose barriers.
The biggest problem is OW2 is supposed to draw in new and lost players.
I’d imagine most people make their decision on whether they like a game after 2-4 hours of gameplay. I dropped Europa Universalis after 7. I regret spending that much time on it.
2 Likes
Maybe OW2 will revitalize my playing habits when it comes out, but I don’t play every day, I usually don’t play for much more than an hour, and I’m a DPS main so I have to deal with queue times and I really doubt I can make progress on my battle pass while waiting in queue.
I have things to do IRL! I have other games to play! My life does not revolve around Overwatch. Should that lock me out of comp, if I decide I want to try it again this season?
You said it, not me.
1 Like
Those games play differently, and thus the model does not translate smoothly. It hurts the game and goes against the core concept of what the game is. The same can’t be said about the other games unless you’re dishonest.
Nah, I’m gonna keep talking about it because it’s still completely relevant to the conversation.
Okay, okay, I’ll make an addendum. It’s not the people who are mad about it, it’s just the people who are mad enough about it to quit.
Putting it here just to point out that, yeah, you said it.
Okay, so because you clarified with “might” it suddenly absolves you? You still think less of people who are upset about this issue.
The primary mechanism by which fights are decided is not locked. Secondary abilities are via characters. Overwatch has a different ruleset.
And they don’t lock guns, the primamry mechanism of player differentiation, behind battlepasses. Weird.
Right, but the characters in Apex are secondary to the guns. How do you not get this?
Nowhere near as “huge” of a factor as Overwatch, though.
What did I add? You said that this controversy might drive off the worst parts of the community. i.e. the people mad enough to quit are the worst parts of the community. What did I add?
It’s not smart to do things that will piss off the core audience and not be attractive to new players. It’s smarter to make the game have broad appeal so that they can get more money, and locking heroes is not a good means to that end.
Or, hear me out, they allow people to have the same toolset to try and win games in all modes. It’s a game about character swapping and counters, where hero abilities are 100% unique to the hero you play, so while Apex might lock heroes behind a pass, they A: shouldn’t, B: have less impact than this decision.
I mean, the lack of content isn’t because of lack of funding, though. They started development on OW2 in 2018 and that’s a big part of what killed content creation. It’s been confirmed that the game was never intended to be a live service game, it seems it was in the last year, year and a half or so where they actually shifted their focus to that. So it’s not exactly a monetization issue that caused a lack of content. If that billion dollars in sales wasn’t enough to keep content floating then OW2 has literally no hope.
You skipped the question. Do heroes have to be on a BP for the game to be funded? Would a battlepass without a hero lock not fund the game?
JQ had one of the highest unmirrored win rates in the beta, if not the highest. Blizzard literally gave us the stats and you’re saying that your anecdotal experience is somehow better than that.
5 Likes
And every single one of those players was “sucking at a brand new hero”, playing against players playing their years old mains.
1 Like
I’m gonna leave this thread at this point. Poytheon and I are just getting into novel-length quote fights and I’m kinda tired of it, tbh.
We’re at a really stupid impasse.
2 Likes
These figures are not accurate. Also, how many have bought it now.
They won’t. The matches will be the same, except they might have 1 other hero available. A hero they’ve never played, so if anything they will be a hinderance and not a benefit.
Source?
Kinda sounds like a hypothetical you made up. My claims were sourced, or source offered, so…
Here I’ll even oblige that offer for free:
Overwatch Sales Ranking June:
https://venturebeat.com/games/june-2022-npd-overwatch-and-final-fantasy-vii-return-to-the-top-20/amp/
Battle League Sales:
https://www.vgchartz.com/article/454466/switch-ships-11108-million-units-as-of-june-2022-nintendo-switch-sports-sells-484-million/
Mario Kart 8 Sales:
https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2022/08/here-are-the-top-ten-best-selling-nintendo-switch-games-as-of-june-2022
50 Million Players 2021:
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/70576/overwatch-passes-50-million-player-milestone-across-all-platforms/index.html
I’m glad someone seen that this disagreement was going no where. That both sides were not going to change the others mind no matter how many numbers the other threw at the other side.
Junker Queen was ‘a hero we never played’ and maintained a dominant 56% unmirrored win rate in the beta, despite its short duration, going against heroes that are years old.
Source: Creativity is the essence of discovery: Overwatch 2 Beta Statistical Analysis - News - Overwatch
Historically new heroes are overly strong, especially in recent history. The very month after his release Sigma had 3 abilities nerfed, his barrier being nerfed in two different ways, and his primary fire damage receiving a huge nerf of 14% Echo, Ashe, Baptiste, and more suffered nerfs post release.
That commercial & the dog commercial with “In the arms of an Angel” in the background is OW2 LOL
Don’t you guys care about the dogs?! 
Difference being that those mini-events are limited time, the new characters aren’t. I don’t have every mini-event skin (only missing a couple) but I’m not going to just miss out on a hero because I couldn’t play for one particular week out of the year. It’s not really a great comparison.
I have no doubt that players will enjoy OW2 even if they don’t immediately have Kiriko unlocked as soon as they log in. If they didn’t buy the premium pass, they will likely want to work towards unlocking her & then enjoy getting a new hero. OW2 is poising to have far more longevity than OW1.
I also have things to do IRL, I work a full time job and play other games. But I will be playing a ton of OW2. If you really don’t have 12 hours to play in a month you should probably consider spending a measly $10 for a battle pass every 18 weeks, that’s the supposed timeframe between heroes. $10 every 4 or so months isn’t much
Do you know the difference between “at the expense of” and “not catering to”?
I repeat, the game does not do anything at the expense of new players or casuals, heck, they’re the ones who benefit from the game being F2P instead of having to pay full retail just to try the game (or barely play it)
Not having 80% of the legends, agents & champions in those games is just as impactful as Overwatch. They all provide different strategies and options for situations. Unless you assume that Kiriko will be an absolute must pick and having her is actually massively advantageous then those games are great comparisons. If you’re assuming that there’s no way I can refute your assumption.
Well unfortunately that will just tell me you’re not worth responding to.
Some of the people that are mad enough to quit will include players that are the worst of the community. Never said all those who quit or are upset are bad people. Do you finally understand?
Hopefully you can stick to the quote instead of making up your own things.
Still incorrect, and this will probably be the last time I correct you. Go ahead and be upset, I’ve only said several times now that people who are upset about all of this are not what I was referencing to as “the worst of the community” or that they’re “bad people” but uh… go ahead and keep repeating yourself that I was 
So you’re saying character choice in Apex/Valorant/League doesn’t play a crucial role in the outcome of matches? Seems like you’re trying to find any way to dodge the fact that the most successful games on the market are using the same monetization that OW2 is using and that if OW2 wants to be as successful it should do the same
Characters, which they do lock behind battlepasses, are entirely crucial to your capabilities as a player in those games.
Sure, when you’re across the map and you’re getting sniped characters don’t come as much into play, but in the nitty gritty of the game they are absolutely game changing, and they are locked behind battlepasses, and they are massively successful & will have content for years to come. For OW2 to be as successful as those games, they need to use the proven monetization standard or wither into obscurity like OW1 did.
I can only repeat so many times that the characters are absolutely crucial in players capabilities during a match, which are locked behind battlepasses.
True, Overwatch is fortunately not sharing weapon pools between characters, that’s why I enjoy it over those other games.
I’m really over having to repeat myself I’ll let you figure it out.
The core audience will appreciate that doing what they were already going to do anyways (play the game a lot) will unlock content quickly. Most of the people pissed off seem to be those who don’t play the game a lot.
We’ll agree to disagree as to what the best course is for the most money & best outcome for the longevity of the game.
Not a good recipe for the longevity of the game.
But it is. Do you think content would have stopped if Overwatch was raking in dough in 2019-2022 as it was in 2016-2018? Maybe you do, but I don’t. I had no reason to spend a dime on Overwatch once I bought it. I played it so much that I got pretty much every cosmetic rather quickly. That’s not a recipe for a game with longevity.
The game was never meant to be a live service game because it was a one time purchase with finite content… now we’re moving to a live service game with possibly “infinite” content. I’ll take the latter. I want OW content forever, not just 3 years and then another hiatus.
What do you considered “funded”?
I thought I addressed your question by saying that the most successful character based F2P games use the same monetization that OW2 is seemingly going to use… what we all want is for OW2 to be the most successful it can be right? I don’t want partially funded, I want fully funded so we don’t get another Overwatch hiatus for 3 years…
Most games were mirrored Junkerqueen matches. The reason her unmirrored winrate was so high was because Top tier players recognized her strength and abused her while the rest of the playerbase were playing the rest of the tank roster, that’s a good recipe for a high unmirrored winrate.
Yea, she was OP & high tier players abused her. However, most players were not that good with her. Her high unmirrored winrate is a result of her being OP & high tier players recognizing her strength abusing her against the rest of the tank roster. Fortunately for the playerbase they will not be going against high tier players… they’ll be versing against other players of their skill level.
Like I said I’m pretty tired of repeating myself, it wouldn’t be such lengthy responses if you’d just talk about what’s in this thread… but you’re adding several replies talking about other threads…
We both see it. I can only repeat myself so many times & ask that they not make off topic replies, that’s what making our replies so lengthy. It would be much shorter if we would actually just talk about what is in this thread…
Those sales figures are from a marketing company using estimates. Would take with a very large pinch of salt.
Also, purchasers of Watch Point Pack will be added to by a large number of people who will just buy the premium pass on day 1 for $10.
Like I said, you are angry about a scenario you’ve made up. If it happens and you’re angry, fair enough. But this is silly.
Anecdotal. Blizzard’s stats were on the entire beta player base. Masters and higher make up 4% of the player base per this post:
They cannot have this widespread of an effect on her win rate.
1 Like