OW2 killed OW1 by taking away a lot of stuff that was better in OW1. OW2 does have some good but if they did not get rid of OW1. I would be on OW1 instead of OW2
10 Likes
" Microsoft is attempting to persuade regulators around the world to clear its $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard — the biggest deal of its kind the gaming industry has ever seen. "
maybe blizzard is in the business of making pure profit. selling skins, with no reinvestment in updates to PVE. so they can impress bill gates wallet.
Edit: actually I wonder if making OV2 require phone numbers and user data to play was a means of garnering Microsoft’s interest, because they can buy all that user data that wouldn’t have existed during OV1. The timelines sync up, from the offer to changes in game.
1 Like
yeah they clearly got rid of it for that reason, they knew people were enjoying OW1, it’s weird to make a sequel and kill the original. why didn’t they run two comp modes, still have OW1 6v6 as an option atleast. even if it was just a special game mode that comes back annually for a short 3 month season.
3 Likes
The purpose was to change their monetization model into an arguably greedier, more anti-consumer model with their greedy, overpriced skins. Blizzard figured they could justify Overwatch 2 and their new monetization model because they think their players are stupid and gullible. Considering people buy the skins from the shop, despite the ridiculous prices that should be reserved for actual content and not just cosmetic skins - which should only ever be $1-$5, $10 for a bundle - I’d say the community, or at least the whales, has proven them right.
1 Like
So far, it’s to sell overpriced skins and make CEO’s more yacht money… the game itself doesn’t even really matter anymore.
2 Likes
real reason?
To have a new SKU and justification for going free to play,
that was the quickest way to get bunch of new players at once, and make money for investors
2 Likes
Actually reading the thread, someone is actually defending OW2 being released in it’s state calling it early access, how delusional can you get?
5 Likes
The only games that should be “early access” nowadays are small indie games where they need user data and feedback so they can fix stuff and improve it as they finish development, like a community-involved effort
Not sure that should be limited to indie devs. I think what larian was doing with baldur’s gate 3 is fine. I would also say original sin 2, but I think that is what bumped them up to AAA to begin with.
Hopefully the first 2-3 months of this cash grab can cover server hosting fees for the forseable future, i.e. 2-3 years.
You could move most employees over to “unannounced survival game” and leave behind a skeleton crew who makes sure the servers are up and basic upkeep is achieved. Maybe a minimal overhead for some CoNtEnT and an AI-generated cosmetic or two, but otherwise no more development.
They made their cash in the first 2-3 months. Now it’s on autopilot. Classic pump n’ dump.
4 Likes
An expansion pack. Oh no not the complete quality ones you’d find during the pre Activision days, but the many Sims expansion packs from EA designed to scam you. New hero? Pay for the battle pass to unlock now. New skins? Pay $20 for each of them. Content that should have been there at launch such as the PVE? Please wait and pay later. In fact this game might be even worse than them and no amount of “but it’s free to play!” excuses can make up for it.
5v5 should have been the “option.” Have the mode prove itself to the players before they force it as the main mode, imo.
4 Likes
That would of been cool
Pretty simple, a “sequel” was a good excuse to over haul a lot of the game. Mainly adding in MTX, battle pass and other functions. If they tried to do that to an existing game there would be far more blow back than a “new game” including it in.
1 Like
The purpose was to try to get Bobby Kotick to allow them to have a budget, after they blew through all the pre-launch content they built.
And Bobby won’t give a budget to something unless it looks like a CoD style sequel.
It’s not just the comp mode of 6v6, I think it sucks with a battle pass now instead of lootboxs. OW is becoming like every other FPS game
The F2p argument can be a solid justification for adding paid season passes…
Doesn’t hold water as an argument in favor of them selling 2016 holiday skins for $20 a pop, and completely removing the ‘grind’ to earn them for free, which was kind of the point of the events to begin with.
2 Likes
I don’t blame people for the confusion. We’re currently hosting competative play at all levels, hosting sales, doing crossover events, running seasons with a battle pass, all for for an “early access” game.
At this point, game developers have overused / abused that term so much that it no longer has any real consistent meaning.
The issue I take with your argument is what the OP brought up–we actively lost a lot of content for OW2. We lost:
Workshop modes
Group finder
Loot Box system
On Fire system
Player cards at the end of matches
Visible SR for ranking up
Free event skins based on wins
Etc.
I’m actually not a “6v6 was better!” diehard like a lot of people, but I genuinely miss systems like group finder, player cards, on fire, and lootboxes. They all made my gaming experience more enjoyable. Even without monetization complaints, they did remove a LOT of other random content during the shift. And they’ve said they’re adding in more features, but it’s weird to me that they ended up removing so many features for something that was advertised as an upgrade.
1 Like
It could, if they didn’t already sell OW2 to every single fan of OW1 and a huge onboarding after advertising it publicly. Making it free to play without giving any compensation of game items to those who paid just shows they couldn’t care less about community unless it impacts them financially. Reputation means nothing, if they can just sell 100 skin packs for the same cost than making 10000 users happier and all owning them and transacting because they are 10x cheaper.
I do. For anyone who’s been following the game you have to be intentionally and by effect dishonestly trying to view what we have now as a complete product.
Everyone that has been paying attention/following the game knows deep down that what we have now is nowhere close to complete.
We’re still missing PvE, have only gotten 4 new heroes compared to the “40+ roster” that was teased years ago, still don’t have features shown in the trailer, still don’t even have the on fire system back yet, still missing several maps, still missing workshop as you mentioned, still missing several other QOL features, and at no point have the devs said we’ve left early access.
For people who haven’t been paying attention or following the game, sure, maybe there’s confusion. But for the trolls who have been on these forums for years & know better? Yea… They’re just trolls & liars.