Okay, you opened my eyes a little bit. I need to rethink my point of view on Overwatch 2.
1 Like
Low and behold that a company that spent months, if not years, developing a game asks for money for their efforts, disgusting (This is all sarcasm here)
Blizzard has the right to do what they want, it is their game.
New maps
New heroes
New PVE missions
New mode
New Graphics
New Sound Engine
All sort of other things
2 Likes
Free for PvP player only.
New engine and HUD update.
Story for OverWatch.
Missions for heroes.
New PvP mode.
Low effort cash grab lmao.
I hope that wasn’t sarcasm =P I love a good, civil conversation with fellow gamers! Yes, it COULD have been an expansion and been cheaper than it probably is gonna be, BUT again, simply being a fan of OW and its characters, I know I will play OW2 for hundreds of hours if not more, and $60 will suddenly seem like…not that big a deal…especially with OW1 not being abandoned 
Ya know, maybe calling it OW1 and 2 wasn’t the BEST idea…maybe OW and OW: Omnic Crisis or something…just to set them apart a bit more…would have been better. Anyway, I am rambling. Nothing to really do but be patient and see how OW2 evolves in its development!
2 Likes
You people are hilarious thinking your suppose to get things for free… let me ask you this then what to you constitutes a new game? If adding a story and other game modes don’t count well I gotta tell you better start hitting up that free area of steam or Xbox and PlayStation gold deals.
I actually really impressed on story mode. I love everything they showed on Blizzcon this year. Except this 2 near Overwatch logo.
1 Like
It was sarcasm
I think that OW2 is awesome and the time that blizzard put in showed
I dont mind that its a seperate game, just the whole $60 is bs, noone knows how much it will be. Its probably closer to $30 considering OW1 is currently $20 at the core game.
Actually they technically did have to. First of all they promised all pvp content would always remain free so by not doing so they would have lied and looked really bad and people would’ve been pissed.
Secondly it would make no sense and destroy their game to make people pay for pvp because that splits the playerbase and you can’t have a game like this where only a % of players have access to certain heroes and maps it would kill the whole thing.
I can get your point, but first, consider 3 things:
-
The engine had an overhaul. It needs a lot of work to make it compatible with some of the new features, even if it runs in the same core.
-
It will be released after 4+ years. A lot of time has passed since release, and the game had definitely had it’s time worth.
-
Skins carry on. Nothing that you spent all this long, time or money, will be wasted. One of their most consumer friendly moves so far.
Considering these points, a price tag for an expansion with decent PvE content, 3 maps and at least 2 heroes sounds fair.
I critisise Blizzard a lot for it’s pricing policies, but this time, they got it right.
Disagree with the wrong moves, applaud the right ones. So far, it seems like they’re finally listening.
The best thing to do is to accept this kind of moves, and try to set this kind of behaviour towards us customers as the standard.
2 Likes
How dare these entitled Gen Z Millennials have STANDARDS and expect a good game for their money? Unbelievable.
4 Likes
I am glad you know it’s price now already. When did it get released ?
They are just calling it a new game, in reality is DLC.
The only thing that you buy in that “new game” (if you want) is the PVE, the rest of the development will be on the same client of the OW 1.
They’re rebuilding the entire game in a new engine. They’re also adding an entirely new PvE component that looks to be much more than just a few story missions. That alone is worth another purchase.
On top of that, we get to keep the multiplayer mode, which has the strongest core gameplay of any competitive game I’ve ever played. It’s important that that stays intact. I’m really happy about how they decided to integrate it, actually. It’s a win-win for everyone who actually likes the game for what it is and/or also wants PvE content.
Do you know why it’s a separate game? So that you have the choice to play it. If you don’t want to play it, you don’t have to. I’m personally interested in lore and would love to play a DLC, but if you don’t want to you don’t have to. So do us a favour and leave.
1 Like
Those are just for the Hero Missions, which are basically just for levelling up. The Story Missions are on maps specifically designed for the mission (Rio is the one they have for the demo) and the missions appear to be quite long.
first of all it was $40
second nobody said you won’t get maps heroes or ptrs and updates for ow1, the only right thing you said is that there won’t be a new archives event
If game was announced as a completely separate thing: “Oh, that looks cool. I’ll buy it.”
Game is announced with compatibility and cross play with OW1 so nobody is left behind: “How DARE they! 
”
2 Likes
Where is everyone getting this $60 price tag from? This game is barely beta in my opinion currently, so basing a price off an unrefined, unfinished game is ?? and not to mention, it’s a slight expansion??
Literally every single game does this too. I don’t know why people are getting so upset. Don’t want PVE? Don’t buy OW2.
You get all the same thing in OW1 as OW2 except PVE as far as it’s been stated.
These people think when they pay $60 for Witcher 3, its because they built it from the ground up when its just an updated and reskinned with new missions version of Witcher 2.
Witcher 3 is basically an expac for Witcher 2.
The thing is making a new game from the ground up is expensive as frick.
They have to use the engine for a few games plus sell rites to other games to use the engine to pay for the development.
OW was made out of a ton of work that went into Titan, and they are probably just seeing green on how much money they threw into that.
yeah because games like Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon and Far Cry 5 New Dawn or Far Cry 4 Primal were all horrible horrible games…wait