• Blizzard CEO on loot boxes: 'I don’t think Overwatch belongs in that controversy'
    116 replies, posted
Only reason why I hate loot boxes in overwatch is because that's what 90% of the updates are for. I don't hate how they have the loot boxes, but I do hate how they treat the game because of them.
I wouldn't have an issue with OW's lootboxes IF all the content in the game was available in them. But they aren't. Events lock skins behind a time window, and if you miss out, you're out. If you want a particular skin during an event, be prepared to dish out the dosh. Other than that, they're alright, since it's only cosmetics If anything other than cosmetics is in lootboxes, then it's bullshit. Lootboxes are just a different form of a slot machine, and putting things in the RNG payout that change how the game plays for that particular player is fucked up. Star Cards in Battlefront is one of the worst offenders to date, even with the post-beta changes
[QUOTE=Nukefuzz;52868943]If they didn't give you duplicates, I would agree.[/QUOTE] Not to support lootboxes but Overwatch doesn't give duplicates anymore until you get all of a specific rarity. If I have every single common only then would I get duplicates, same with rares and so on.
I'm pretty sure (but not certain) I checked once and Overwatch at least at first actually updated faster with new in-house content than TF2 did. TF2 [I]felt[/I] a lot faster on new content because they had the added bonus of fan content, which Blizzard has avoided. I think their doing that is a legitimate critique, but I also don't think Blizzard is nearly as painfully slow as people have been implying, especially since they like to play up the "Blizzard Polish" and probably don't like to rush anything. I dunno. On the one hand, I think it's valid that people feel the event exclusive skins are preying on those that are obsessive compulsive or have problems with gambling, but I also think that Overwatch is doing crates in one of the more innocuous ways in the industry. As other people have said, everything outside of skins is completely free and will remain free. As someone who actually has reasonably bad OCD I've personally never had a problem with basically ignoring skins unless there's one that looks pretty cool, where I'll spend some in-game coins on it if I have them. If I don't and I'm not even close, oh well. I think there may be a point in that skinnerboxing and false value in games has gotten absolutely insane, though. Like one said above, the fact that Jim Sterling called loot crates the 'only reward' in Overwatch is nuts. Like, people care more about knives and fancy outfits than they do the game they're trying to play. I figure loot boxes are means to an end. They're there because they're wildly profitable while still being convenient for those that don't want to pay for hundreds of dollars for a lasting subscription or have the playerbase split up with paid expansions. The whole "well they made lots of money off of the game, so they can just keep supporting it for awhile!" thing just comes off as naive and unrealistic- no [I]corporation[/I] is going to continue supporting a game that isn't raking in more money just because they have money to burn, that's just not how things work. That isn't a problem with a single company, that's a problem with the industry. Rambling aside, this is my takeaway- it's fair that people think the event lootboxes are veering into exploitation of gamblers, and it would be nice if the ESRB would actually do their job if people are this concerned about it largely because I'm seeing people say the government should get involved and I think introducing videogames into the modern political arena is a [I]kinda dicey[/I] idea, personally. But the idea that people would seriously rather have expansions and subscriptions to this system boggles my mind. I find it legitimately difficult to understand why people care [I]so much[/I] about utterly meaningless, pointless cosmetics that they would rather pay 5-10 bucks a month or pay 20-30 extra bucks every year or so after the initial 40 to keep [I]actually playing the game.[/I] I think for a multiplayer game like Overwatch this system works [I]fine.[/I]
If not being able to get a skin in Overwatch destroys your enjoyment of the game to the point that you stop playing then maybe you didn't like it in the first place.
[QUOTE=thepwnwar;52870429]Not to support lootboxes but Overwatch doesn't give duplicates anymore until you get all of a specific rarity. If I have every single common only then would I get duplicates, same with rares and so on.[/QUOTE] Yeah, now. But that also means the chances you get coins so you can actually buy the skins you do want are lower.
[QUOTE=FlakTheMighty;52870625]Yeah, now. But that also means the chances you get coins so you can actually buy the skins you do want are lower.[/QUOTE] Is it possible for them to win? "God, I hate dupes." They remove dupes. "Now I can't get coins from dupes!" [QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52870651]Yeah, and it won't see any improvements because 90 percent of updates are based around microtransactions. When the only selling point to wring players back in is cosmetics, then yeah it's a mediocre game. So many players have gotten bored of the game, for good reason. Shit updates.[/QUOTE] It feels to me like I see balance patches every other week. Cosmetics come around for event updates and some updates are even focused on new cosmetics, but I can't say it really feels like "90%" of the updates are based around cosmetics and microtransactions. Overwatch is still a pretty massively popular game. I don't play it that often, but I think that's less because of micro-transactions or no updates and more because it's a hard game to play casually. You can't unwind with some mindless play in a pub like in TF2, because the game is a comp game by nature with a low player count and firmly defined hero roles that are crucial for a team to win. You kind of have to commit to playing for keeps if you want to play Overwatch regularly, even in QP- and there isn't a constant flow of player-created maps and content to fill the gap between updates, either. I think that's more of a genuine criticism than "lootboxes are ruining the gameplay, somehow"
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52870750]All seasonal events are based around microtransactions. Its shit for the future. Lootboxes have retarded the games potential, and my mates and I don't play it anymore because of that.[/QUOTE] True that repeating past events while adding more hats is kind of lame but they still add arcade modes, heroes, and maps often enough while doing new cinematics, comics, and trying to make their e-sports league a real thing in-between. I thought Uprising was [I]really damn cool[/I] and if we got a unique story mission like that every year, I'd totally be down for that. But personally Overwatch isn't really a game I try play all the time, it's sort of an every-once-in-awhile thing, at the moment. I'll say this though, it's fair to be frustrated and ask why you straight-up can't access event arcade modes at other times of year. I think they aren't really intended to be standalone gamemodes and they wouldn't have a lot of longevity if you tried to play them regularly, but I can see why one might find it a little screwy that they add new gameplay content and you can only play it once a year.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52870834]That's not for Blizzard to decide.[/QUOTE] What isn't, the arcade modes being locked or the success of their e-sports league?
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52871195]If gamemodes would get dull for players after a while. They really restrict the gameplay freedom of players when it comes to events, as if its an MMO or something. If they had PvE content outside events, it wouldn't be thag bad though.[/QUOTE] I mean, they're pretty limited and choreographed. I guess they intended to use them this year for events and people definitely would've been tired of them by the time this year came around. I don't think that's without fault, but I can see their reasoning. Some kind of generic survival mode might be cool at some point, I guess. I'd personally like to see an Overwatch singleplayer/co-op campaign expansion, I'd probably pay for that.
My mates and I played HotS for the DVa and Genji skins a while back, and since then we've entirely stopped playing Overwatch and just play Heroes. It's incredible how Blizzard's MOBA cash-in somehow wound up with the most dedicated and passionate team and the best balancing choices any Blizzard game's ever seen. I'm not comparing the development of a hero in an FPS to one in a MOBA, but in the time between Doomfist and Moira, the HotS team has made 7 heroes, a bunch of skins, a few new maps, and a heap of balancing changes that didn't completely break their game (cough mercy cough).
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52871488]I wouldn't, they've made plenty from gambling addictions to provide that for free.[/QUOTE] That's silly. I've already said why I personally think the "they've made enough money so microtransactions of any kind are wrong" point doesn't really work, I think that'd go double for something like making a full-sized cinematic story mode. That'd be mad expensive and I'd be surprised if they could somehow justify it internally with cosmetics sales considering they'd probably be irrelevant to such an expansion.
lootboxes are lootboxes, they're all the same, no matter how they are implemented and blizzard is no angel in this subject it's an inexcusable, disgraceful market practice and it has to stop
As long as the boxes only contain fashion I think they are fine.
60$ AAA multiplayer only game with lootboxes from one of the biggest companies in the world that's already rehashing events for the game one year on, people get mad at Valve over TF2 but atleast they made the game F2P soon after the Mann co store was added and ramped up the quality of updates significantly with a lot less employees than Blizzard.
From "be happy that Ana came for free" to making actual lore related content in limited events and an anniversary made only to get more lootbox money which makes sense, right? :v: I can't get over Uprising is a limited event and their Anniversary is just a middle finger to everyone
I dislike people who defend the lootboxes as a way for Blizzard to deliver free post-launch content and have servers running. The game made 1 BILLION dollars in the first year of release. Isn't that amount enough to deliver some free content of the release and pay servers? Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 don't have lootboxes, only 1-2 DLCs and can deliver free content and have their servers running.
if you think that it "only being cosmetic" somehow makes a difference, then I want to know what sort of games you play where "how things look" has no effect on your experience this whole perspective on something bad being OK because it's purely visual is only [I]​e[/I][I]ver[/I] trotted out in defence of loot boxes and microtransactions, and somehow never makes it's way into the greater discourse on games - I wonder why? :thinking: :thinking: :thinking:
The OW lootboxes are one of the worst examples in the industry for me, because the damage they've done to the game is more subtle than some other titles, but still blatant when you actually begin to look at it. Since Lootboxes work so well financially, and constitute virtually the only way to unlock content in the game, Blizzard has committed themselves to releasing more and more content locked away behind lootboxes thus leaving the rest of the game in disrepair. The amount of brand new maps and characters added to the game is laughable in comparison to the amount of cosmetic shit designed solely to be locked behind lootboxes. It creates this nasty as fuck environment where people are stuck playing the same dozen maps in a loop (most of which are awful by design, incredibly similar to each other, and have yet to be altered or balanced in any way shape or form bar anemic pointless changes) ad nauseum only to get lootboxes and the lootboxes themselves are rarely carrying anything good since they're purposefully filled with garbage. Then there's the time-gated content which is the same shit but even more cancerous. What little gameplay content blizzard makes is divided between permanent and seasonal content the latter of which is often more fun on paper, but made worse by the amount of people playing them solely to maximize lootbox gains during what little time the seasonal boxes are available. You could argue it's the community's fault for being so focused on cosmetics but Blizzard's the one handling content distribution in their own game, they're the ones who generated this toxic shitheap of a community where people are permanently salty because the only reason they have to play is locked behind RNG dogshit, and the only reason all the cosmetic stuff is locked behind RNG is because it statistically makes people come back more out of frustration. Overwatch has been out for more than a year and it's pitiful how little content it offers and how awful the balancing has been since release. Blizzard doesn't care about making a game, they care about making a platform with which they can sell microtransactions and make money off of esports.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;52869705]I guess they just need to go back to making each update paid dlc or introduced a WoW subscription fee. Maybe then people will be happy.[/QUOTE] I hate arguments like this. I really, really do. Every single time in a debate someone disagrees with one end of the spectrum, there's always someone like you that decides to completely flip it to the complete other side.
Not even lootboxes are inherently bad. Planetside 2 has lootboxes, but aside from the ones containing implants, you know exactly what you're going to get. Want some of that cool cosmetic gear? Here, buy this crate and get exactly what it is you're after. No duplicates, no chance of only getting half of them. You buy this crate, you get all the cosmetics for all classes. A lootbox doesn't have to contain random stuff. It's just that most developers (or rather the publishers, as I suspect) have unfortunately decided that they'd rather have lootboxes with random loot, forcing you to pay more and more money to get what you want. It's extremely predatory, and I'm fucking appalled this isn't considered gambling.
Man, if Overwatch lootboxes are gambling, I would hate to hear what you guys have to say about TCGs. With how easy it is to earn the lootboxes, I forget that you can even buy them, honestly.
Trading cards are gambling too, but the difference is there's a physical item and you can sell/trade what you don't want. You're stuck with whatever you get in Overwatch. Virtual trading cards are just bullshit.
[QUOTE=Simplemac3;52870722]Is it possible for them to win? "God, I hate dupes." They remove dupes. "Now I can't get coins from dupes!" [/QUOTE] Gosh, it's almost as if the system itself has fundamental flaws :thinking:
They could give coins with [I]every[/I] lootbox, just light Destiny does with Bright dust, anywhere from 200 to like 1,000 dust with every engram, Overwatch could give you from 100 to 500 coins and that'd make people happy.
[QUOTE=ThatSprite;52872363]I hate arguments like this. I really, really do. Every single time in a debate someone disagrees with one end of the spectrum, there's always someone like you that decides to completely flip it to the complete other side.[/QUOTE] I mean right after that post someone unironically said "actually that WOULD be better" so [editline]9th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;52872335]if you think that it "only being cosmetic" somehow makes a difference, then I want to know what sort of games you play where "how things look" has no effect on your experience this whole perspective on something bad being OK because it's purely visual is only [I]​e[/I][I]ver[/I] trotted out in defence of loot boxes and microtransactions, and somehow never makes it's way into the greater discourse on games - I wonder why? :thinking: :thinking: :thinking:[/QUOTE] I actually don't know what point you're trying to make. Yes, if a developer wants to keep making money after a game's release with microtransactions, it's a good thing that it's only cosmetic fluff. If you're so bothered by being incentivised to pay for fashion that the game is made significantly worse for you there's a decent chance you didn't like the game that much in the first place. I care about aesthetic in games and it doesn't bug me at [I]all[/I] that skins are sometimes hard to get because Overwatch's defaults look good. I'd say they usually look better than the alts. [editline]9th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Gray Altoid;52872644]Gosh, it's almost as if the system itself has fundamental flaws :thinking:[/QUOTE] People were complaining since release that they got duplicates with meagre cash payouts instead of having increased chances for good items as their inventory filled up. Swinging around and saying "actually I liked that thing I was complaining about" isn't a zinger, is all I'm saying.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52872338]Overwatch has been out for more than a year and it's pitiful how little content it offers and how awful the balancing has been since release. Blizzard doesn't care about making a game, they care about making a platform with which they can sell microtransactions and make money off of esports.[/QUOTE] You did the thing where you say cosmetics are the only reason people have to play again. Shit, I've played some seriously bad F2P titles. I loved Planetside 2 which had you grind for like, a straight day of play for a single weapon, or you could buy it for 20 bucks- you know, a thing that matters to the game. I kept playing it both because I'm a sucker for skinnerboxing as I'm a bit OCD and I unironically loved the gameplay. Overwatch is doing almost nothing compared to that. Not even going to get into the "They aren't doing anything but lootboxes!" Thing, because I just don't agree. Map quality is another matter. Let me ask this. What alternatives do people propose to this system? Letting the player directly pay a prenium for cosmetics they want? I feel people would be even more furious as events roll around and people feel compelled to spend absurd amounts of money for all of them. No microtransactions whatsoever, even cosmetic? Almost every other big publisher on the market Valve included is doing this. I don't think that's believable without ESRB taking some big steps.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52873688]Pay 60 Get the full, entire game and everything that it entails Thats it[/QUOTE] Literally nobody does this anymore with multiplayer titles and they haven't for around a decade. Closest thing is probably Titanfall 2 which is a great game that only has dumb prenium titan skins you can pay for and also has middling at best player numbers, which I partially suspect is because there's no skinnerboxing in it. If you're furious at Blizzard for doing this you should be livid at every reasonably large developer in the industry. Valve, who was famous for providing free updates with TF2 eventually decided they couldn't keep developing TF2 when everyone had already bought it and their profit had significantly dropped off without another source of income.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52873768]I am, I'm pissed at everyone. Thats why posts have been so aggressive. People have ruined my favorite hobby and I am livid.[/QUOTE] I just find it pretty easy to ignore cosmetic lootboxes in MP games, at least when you can earn the stuff other ways. Sorry you feel differently. I will say that anyone who's paid for microtransactions has themselves to blame for how bad they've gotten. I paid for a Counter-Strike operation map pass once and grew to regret it when you couldn't play those maps again afterwards- haven't done anythung else.
[QUOTE=Simplemac3;52873888]I just find it pretty easy to ignore cosmetic lootboxes in MP games, at least when you can earn the stuff other ways. Sorry you feel differently. I will say that anyone who's paid for microtransactions has themselves to blame for how bad they've gotten. I paid for a Counter-Strike operation map pass once and grew to regret it when you couldn't play those maps again afterwards- haven't done anythung else.[/QUOTE] Even cosmetic lootboxes play on a lot of people's weakness of jealousy, where they wan't the item too because they like how it looks. Cosmetics are literally in game advertisements to get players to spend more money. So when you take that concept and put it into a randomized system, you have now created something that is called gambling. Spending money in the hopes of getting the thing you want, until you get it. If you ever get it that is..
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.