• Blizzard makes a video poking fun at EA
    81 replies, posted
tbh thanks to valve's system I probably made more money than I spent obviously I could have made more by just working, but that was in my teenage years [sp]sharking items in tf2 was fun on it's own[/sp]
[QUOTE=Tuskin;52892583]I doubt the video was made for targeting EA specifically, but F2P games in general, these take months in advance to plan out to create. A marketing campaign doesn't just happen over night. It is just a happy coincidence.[/QUOTE] Actually Blizzard came to my school last week to recruit artists and they were showing off their facilities. They showed us a video of this room they have called the "Creativity Corner" where Blizzard employees just fuck around with shit like video making, puppet shows, etc... So it was probably from that.
[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;52892579]as far as I know overwatch was the first $60 game to push lootbox skins. i'd be interested if anybody could name another one before it.[/QUOTE] Halo 5 $60 - lootbox cosmetics - free content updates Came out almost an entire year before Overwatch. I feel like they were the first to use that oh-so trendy AAA trifecta but I could be wrong.
[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;52892579]as far as I know overwatch was the first $60 game to push lootbox skins. i'd be interested if anybody could name another one before it.[/QUOTE] Overwatch started as a $40 game and the loot boxs are skins ffs. Compared to most loot boxes they're not that bad. Yeah it can be annoying not getting the skins you during events but it no way effects the game. People have overblown overwatches loot boxes
Really Valve still embody the worst of lootboxes, which is that you can exchange the rewards for money. A lot of people want lootboxes regulated as "naughty" gambling like slot machines. I'm a bit skeptical on that since we don't really have the data to justify it for lootboxes in [I]general[/I], but situations like tf2 and CS:GO I think are the first places the government may want to look at as the exchangeable real monetary value of rewards looks p. dangerous.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52892900]Really Valve still embody the worst of lootboxes, which is that you can exchange the rewards for money. A lot of people want lootboxes regulated as "naughty" gambling like slot machines. I'm a bit skeptical on that since we don't really have the data to justify it for lootboxes in [I]general[/I], but situations like tf2 and CS:GO I think are the first places the government may want to look at as the exchangeable real monetary value of rewards looks p. dangerous.[/QUOTE] Weirdly enough, I'd actually say Valve's system is slightly better, only because if you want, you can fully bypass the gambling system and actually buy the skin you want through the marketplace. You don't really have that option with Overwatch. Everything is obtained in the lootboxes. You may argue that yes, you can buy skins with in game non paid for currency, but you also get that currency only through the lootboxes. This all gives people an incentive to go out and buy lootboxes, and keeps them in that sort of "gambling loop." While the real money aspect is pretty shady and should be better monitored, I'd rather pay $5 or $10 for a particular hat I want than $50 for a [B][I][U]chance[/U][/I][/B] at that same hat, with no guarantee that I'd be getting that hat. And I speak from first hand experience sadly enough. I bought one of those $50 packs of lootboxes just because I wanted to get a particular skin for Mei. I never got that skin. I'd much rather just buy it outright.
I don't really get the hate for Hearthstone. Yeah there's microtransactions, but card packs for physical card games work the same way and no one's mad at Wizards of the Coast.
[QUOTE=mark6789;52892874]Overwatch started as a $40 game and the loot boxs are skins ffs. Compared to most loot boxes they're not that bad. Yeah it can be annoying not getting the skins you during events but it no way effects the game. People have overblown overwatches loot boxes[/QUOTE] "It's just cosmetic," you say, until you look at Shadow of War, NBA 2K18, or Battlefront 2 Preorder exclusives, on-disk DLC, season passes, gameplay-affecting lootboxes in $60 games, multiple 'editions' with different prices -- every scummy thing that "triple A" studios ever did started out as something innocuous, and when a few people got up in arms about it they were always shouted down with "it's just a preorder bonus" or "it's just cosmetic" or "you don't [i]have[/i] to buy them." Then the publishers, seeing the money coming in, began to push it further and further, and now the [i]full[/i] game costs $100+ instead of $60 Don't think "it's just cosmetic," think "it's just cosmetic [u]for now[/u]" e: not to mention there's no reason to have lootboxes in a full-price game in the first place. Blizzard has sold somewhere to the tune of 30 million copies of Overwatch -- [i]it does not need lootboxes to sustain its business.[/i] They're a free-to-play mechanic, and even then they're ethically dubious. Restricting cosmetics to lootboxes (with the inability to trade or buy directly, the flashy 'opening' effects, and the $1.99 price tag or whatever) does not improve the game, it only serves to extract more money, via the seductive power of gambling, from people who already paid full price.
[QUOTE=Stiffy360;52892788]Not to mention, tf2 doesn't have two currencies. It doesn't have any currencies. You pay for a key, and it opens any crate. No buying 1600 credits only for lootboxes to cost 750 credits each. Not to mention a fair amount of stuff can be bought directly in the store, or through trading. It's still not good, but it's not horrible either.[/QUOTE] Keys are a currency. Opening one loot box costs one key. It's not a bullshit unfair currency but it's a currency. And if you factor in trading there absolutely are currencies there, they're just market-driven as opposed to being official and set in stone.
[QUOTE=laserpanda;52893015]I don't really get the hate for Hearthstone. Yeah there's microtransactions, but card packs for physical card games work the same way and no one's mad at Wizards of the Coast.[/QUOTE] Especially because you can "Earn" them for free, but I guess you also can't resell them later if you're no longer interested.
[QUOTE=Luni;52893016]"It's just cosmetic," you say, until you look at Shadow of War, NBA 2K18, or Battlefront 2 Preorder exclusives, on-disk DLC, season passes, gameplay-affecting lootboxes in $60 games, multiple 'editions' with different prices -- every scummy thing that "triple A" studios ever did started out as something innocuous, and when a few people got up in arms about it they were always shouted down with "it's just a preorder bonus" or "it's just cosmetic" or "you don't [i]have[/i] to buy them." Then the publishers, seeing the money coming in, began to push it further and further, and now the [i]full[/i] game costs $100+ instead of $60 Don't think "it's just cosmetic," think "it's just cosmetic [u]for now[/u]" e: not to mention there's no reason to have lootboxes in a full-price game in the first place. Blizzard has sold somewhere to the tune of 30 million copies of Overwatch -- [i]they do not need lootboxes to sustain their business.[/i] Restricting cosmetics to lootboxes (with the inability to trade or buy directly, the flashy 'opening' effects, and the $1.99 price tag or whatever) does not enhance the game, it doesn't improve anything, it only serves to extract more money via the unethical seduction of gambling from people who already paid for the game.[/QUOTE] "they do not need loot-boxes to sustain their business" is arguable, there's more to their business in the overwatch franchise such as overwatch contenders and overwatch league. these are million dollar investments.
Blaming Valve or Blizzard for this shitshow is like blaming the local pub owner for turning half the town alcoholic. Valve may have started it and Blizz popularised it but they didn't shove scummy as fuck P2w shit in their crates for full price games. Blame UBI/EA/the others for being greedy shits and the consumers for being complete twats for falling for it.
Nice try blizzard but World of Warcraft has existed for quite the years now don't try to hide it.
[QUOTE=mark6789;52892874]Overwatch started as a $40 game and the loot boxs are skins ffs. Compared to most loot boxes they're not that bad. Yeah it can be annoying not getting the skins you during events but it no way effects the game. People have overblown overwatches loot boxes[/QUOTE] Sure it doesn't affect the game but it's still an addiction aka gambling
[QUOTE=redBadger;52893194]Sure it doesn't affect the game but it's still an addiction aka gambling[/QUOTE] And really, in that regard is a lootbox system even needed in Overwatch? things would have been just fine if they had just made the skins separate purchases that you could save up for with in game credits or whatever, or buy with real world money if you want them right away, those sorts of systems work just fine from what I've seen in the past. [I](it's just those sorts of systems don't make as much money from the obsessive gambling crowd)[/I] Like out of everything people can say, a Lootbox system is the most predatory system available, that's the biggest problem people have with it, it being "just cosmetic" is just a small piece of the pie.
When it comes to who started it, i'd liken it to the birth of the modern car. The first modern era car was made by Karl Benz in in 1800's (there were 'cars' before and after it), but it was the Model T Ford which made the car popular. TF2 would be the Benz while Overwatch is the Ford. Eitherway, Blizzard you are just as guilty of this shit as well so piss off.
[QUOTE=Rahu X;52893010]Weirdly enough, I'd actually say Valve's system is slightly better, only because if you want, you can fully bypass the gambling system and actually buy the skin you want through the marketplace. You don't really have that option with Overwatch. Everything is obtained in the lootboxes. You may argue that yes, you can buy skins with in game non paid for currency, but you also get that currency only through the lootboxes. This all gives people an incentive to go out and buy lootboxes, and keeps them in that sort of "gambling loop." While the real money aspect is pretty shady and should be better monitored, I'd rather pay $5 or $10 for a particular hat I want than $50 for a [B][I][U]chance[/U][/I][/B] at that same hat, with no guarantee that I'd be getting that hat. And I speak from first hand experience sadly enough. I bought one of those $50 packs of lootboxes just because I wanted to get a particular skin for Mei. I never got that skin. I'd much rather just buy it outright.[/QUOTE] wtf Valve's model has a chance at dropping an item randomly, or dropping a box which can contain 1 item. To open the box you literally have to spend money, or you spend more real life money to get the exact thing you want. Valve's system is literally the reason why developers are going ham to let people pay real money for things in games, its no surprise it eventually escalated to how it is now. At least in overwatch literally everything is free and the duplicate rate is extremely low.
I don't know why people are defending TF2's crates so much because that pretty much marked the decline of the game for me when people were too obsessed with crates and Valve started to give a shit less. Blizzard's is not even that bad, I haven't bought a loot box in ages because they've lowered the rates of dupes and you get so much by purely playing. You don't need to pay a key to open it either so there's nothing stopping people from opening it. On the other hand, I have never opened a TF2 crate in my 1000+ hours because I don't want to pay $2 lol.
[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;52892579]as far as I know overwatch was the first $60 game to push lootbox skins. i'd be interested if anybody could name another one before it.[/QUOTE] Of which you don't need to spend a cent to open or buy.
[QUOTE=laserpanda;52893015]I don't really get the hate for Hearthstone. Yeah there's microtransactions, but card packs for physical card games work the same way and no one's mad at Wizards of the Coast.[/QUOTE] I am, fuck magic the gathering, it's a bottomless pit you throw money into. Blizzard likely could turn a strong profit monetizing golden cards, avatars, boards, arena access, etc. or/and by charging up-front for new expansion. It's actually why im quite interested in what Valve does with artifact and whether they ditch those systems. Kind of like how with mobas, they threw out unlocking characters. These are digital card games, and they don't have to be bound by the restrictions of physical cards.
[QUOTE=Rammaster;52893378]I don't know why people are defending TF2's crates so much because that pretty much marked the decline of the game for me when people were too obsessed with crates and Valve started to give a shit less. Blizzard's is not even that bad, I haven't bought a loot box in ages because they've lowered the rates of dupes and you get so much by purely playing. You don't need to pay a key to open it either so there's nothing stopping people from opening it. On the other hand, I have never opened a TF2 crate in my 1000+ hours because I don't want to pay $2 lol.[/QUOTE] Same applies to csgo, where you spend 2.50 dollars to get 0.01 cent in return 90% of the times.
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;52892566]That was Valve. Started with TF2 and CSGO[/QUOTE] Korean MMOs had loot boxes before hats even existed in tf2.
Imo saying OW loot boxes are OK because they are cosmetic only is really a poor excuse. Say what you want but cosmetics do affect game play and saying it doesn't is plain wrong.
[QUOTE=Dookas;52893539]I'm saying OW loot boxes are OK because they are cosmetic only is really a poor excuse. Say what you want but cosmetics do affect game play and saying it doesn't is plain wrong.[/QUOTE] Can you explain how skins effects gameplay? Since you make that bold claim without any reasoning
[QUOTE=redBadger;52893194]Sure it doesn't affect the game but it's still an addiction aka gambling[/QUOTE] I used to have low self control with my spending habits and spent about $200 on CSGO crate keys because hey, they're only $2.50 a pop and you get cool shit for it! That was my justification and I would argue I was for all intents and purposes "addicted" to buying and opening the crates. Lootboxes are deliberately slippery slope, cosmetics or no. At least with CSGO I was able to recoup most of that money by selling my skins, but making them someone else's problem is not necessarily a good thing.
[QUOTE=mark6789;52893551]Can you explain how skins effects gameplay? Since you make that bold claim without any reasoning[/QUOTE] They can if they make abilities, characters, etc. difficult to recognize. Pro league of legends for example bans some skins because they make abilities more difficult to see. Though I don't think this applies much to overwatch with it's thick red charcter outlines, not touching abilities that much, etc.
[QUOTE=Hatley;52892555]Blizzard caused loot boxes to explode in popularity. They don't have the right to act all high and mighty.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=IliekBoxes;52892566]That was Valve. Started with TF2 and CSGO[/QUOTE] I'm only regurgitating points from [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLDid1UNyg8][b]this video here[/b][/url], but, as the video puts it: [quote=Video][b][i]"Overwatch is to loot boxes as Resident Evil is to survival horror - they didn't invent the idea, but they sure as hell made it popular."[/i][/b][/quote] And, as Jim points out, if you look at [b][url=https://www.giantbomb.com/loot-boxes/3015-9059/games/]this incomplete list of games with lootboxes[/url][/b], you will see that in the period between TF2 adding lootboxes ([b][url=https://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Mann_Co._Supply_Crate#Update_history]September 30, 2010[/url][/b]) and Overwatch being released (May 23, 2016), there were 15 games released with lootboxes. Compared to the time since Overwatch's release (May 23, 2016) to now (November 15, 2017), there have been [b]24 games[/b] released with lootboxes. For those who don't want to do the math, the "games with lootboxes per year" went from 2.65 (15 games divided by 67.77 months, multiplied by 12) to [b]16.2[/b] (24 games divided by 17.77 months, multiplied by 12). That is over [b]6 times as many games with lootboxes per year[/b], since Overwatch's release. To say that Valve "started" lootboxes is a fair statement. To say that Valve made them popular is horseshit - [b]that[/b] title belongs to Overwatch. The numbers speak for themselves.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52893590]They can if they make abilities, characters, etc. difficult to recognize. Pro league of legends for example bans some skins because they make abilities more difficult to see. Though I don't think this applies much to overwatch with it's thick red charcter outlines, not touching abilities that much, etc.[/QUOTE] That’s reasonable, in heroes of the storm some skins can blend in the background. Still, I don’t think it’s a huge issue. Overwatch has those new country skins in esports so it’s easier to see.
[QUOTE=Dookas;52893539]I'm saying OW loot boxes are OK because they are cosmetic only is really a poor excuse. Say what you want but cosmetics do affect game play and saying it doesn't is plain wrong.[/QUOTE] i do agree to some extent. the whole "cosmetics don't affect gameplay" thing isn't as true as it used to be. nowadays tons of games have skins where it changes the silhouette and major color schemes of characters. in rainbow six siege you can buy a black uniform for every operator in the game, which, while minor, does provide an advantage in darker lighted areas in the map. or if you buy a absurdly colored skin, you'll actually put yourself at a disadvantage. games like league of legends has this problem too. legendary and ultimate skins change so much about a character from animations to particle effects, god only knows whats going on through a newbie's head when they see all of these conflicting elements. there's definitely more to cosmetics nowadays than purely "being cosmetic" because it affects how you view the game and how you think during a match also yea, being able to customize your character is just generally apart of the game. restricting cosmetics is restricting parts of the game
[QUOTE=mark6789;52893551]Can you explain how skins effects gameplay? Since you make that bold claim without any reasoning[/QUOTE] People tend to enjoy making a character their own and costume then to the full extent and people will base skill off of many initial factors one of which is what skin you have (or hat). In tf2 people with gibuses tend to be underestimated due to the stigma with that cosmetic .People with expensive hats or legendary skins tend to be favored in terms of a pick by a player over someone with say a gibus or no skin And unrelated to this argument but loot boxes imo are a bigger problem in OW because they are most of the content we recievd in the game, juse new lootboxes with flashy skins
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.