Activision Blizzard adds 312 new skins to Overwatch to pay for e-Sports by milking customers using Micro-transactions

[hobobobo]

I always enjoy seeing the words "shop" in a game ive payed money for. Reminds me that i own a not copy, but a license, and this is not a game but a service. This is straight up bullshit, 5 bucks for a recolour (league used to do that and it was glorious).  The cute thing is - you are supposed to be suppoting the team you like when in reality all you support is BA and their voyage into risky buisness of inflating an esports scene.

 

If BA was true to their stated goal - they would make sales go to the teams and take the cut for the tourneys after that. This way ba just uses the stupidity and loyalty of fans towards their game to push a new, easy revenue stream.

 

 

I mean, praising the abuser and asking for more just coz he got a pretty smile seems to be the way to live. Just fucken look at BA last shareholders letter. Overwatch is beyond profitable and more then capable of financing its own esport scene, without resorting to selling you 20 minutes of design interns time (it doesnt even take that long to recolour a skin) for $5.

[AlTech]

1 hour ago, Bouzoo said:

Cosmetics, I don't see a problem with that. I think loot boxes are what you actually mean here?

Both of them (lootboxes and cosmetic MTX in paid for games) are predatory.

[EunSoo]

7 minutes ago, Energycore said:

I know what you mean. It's not hard to track convos where you're quoted but the rest is kind of a blur lol

yeah, i want to join this conversation because I know overwatch pretty well but its hard to figure out what's been said in which conversation between two people.

 

5 minutes ago, Energycore said:

In that case I suck and disregard that bit.

 

So wait, then can you buy anything in Overwatch that you want OR buy a loot box with stuff you can directly buy?

I'm going to try to explain the whole lootbox and in-game currency (may be more than you are interested or relevent to know, but important to know if you want to talk about it) in one post to clarify a couple misinformations I saw:

 

Each time you level up (depending on how much to play, but you can totally do it a couple of times a day) you get a loot box. Loot boxes can also be obtained by paying real world money. When you open a loot box, you get 4 random items ranging from in-game currancy to emotes to skins. Using the in-game currency, you can then buy individual emotes and skins but it can take a while to save up for a good skin. I have never bought a lootbox and have played about 120hr and have received about every skin that I wanted for each hero.

 

There is also another completely seperate in-game currency that you can ONLY get by playing the competitive gamemode and placing well in it. With it, you can buy a golden gun (basically a prestige item to show that you're good or have experience in the game) that makes the gun of your chosen hero look all shiny and cool. Again, you can NOT buy this with real world currency, you have to play competitive a lot to get it.

 

And then this week, Blizzard (not Activision-Blizzard) added a third currency that lets you buy the skins that you will see your overwatch league teams play with. Basically, its a custom skin themed after the team you choose and for the one hero you choose. Afaik, you can only buy these with real currency, but Blizzard "gifted" 1 free skin purchase to each player.

 

I saw some people think that they were giving players something each day for logging in. THEY ARE NOT. You do NOT get anything free for just logging in. That's misinformation.

[Misanthrope]

18 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

There is a massive difference between what EA was doing with Battlefront, and what Blizzard does with Overwatch.

If you can't see the difference then I don't know what to tell you.

 

Wait, do I understand you correctly.

You think Blizzard is doing a good thing and handling things well, but you don't want them to do that because you think it will encourage other companies to do it, but worse?

That makes no sense. By that logic we can't do anything, ever. Tesla shouldn't make electric cars because it will encourage Volkswagen to make one, and it might not be as good!

 

There are only two people in this thread that seems to care which company is behind the game. You and AluminiumTech.

Everyone else is giving examples and explanations for why this particular implementation of microtransactions is OK while others aren't.

 

I doubt it. There are massive, fundamental differences between how EA and Ubisoft usually handles microtransactions compared to how Blizzard does it.

You need to focus less on what logo is on the box of the game, and more on what reasons people are actually giving.

 

 

 

Ehm, you can buy specific skins in Overwatch. I know the OP is painful to read but it is right there in it.

You also get a free skin (which you can choose freely) every day you login.

1) I don't think you understand me correctly (assuming, in probably too much charitability from my part, that you weren't just trying to misrepresent me) I think that Blizzard is not doing a good thing but a "bad" one in an anti-consumer move by charging again for a game they already charged for and I am saying that a company that's justified by many of their core audience as doing "a good thing" or "reasonable" will lead to other companies copying their model. 

 

2) "There are only 2 people" followed by "others aren't" well which others are those? And how many? They might not care to have to deal with this kinds of replies like yours. And my contention remains that even those who think it's "ok" think so mostly because it's Overwatch, a Blizzard game, not because the core practice in and of itself they'd consider acceptable but the opposite, Blizzard and this game they consider an exception.

 

I am saying that in principle, I do not accept exceptions, even in games I happen to really enjoy myself i.e. I didn't think Bethesda was justified in trying to get such a large chunk of money from modders of Skyrim, something they're still doing today.

 

3) I'd like to hear the massive, fundamental differences please. In detail because I do not believe the differences would be "fundamental" to the business model here so I'd like to read this.

[AlTech]

2 minutes ago, Arokhantos said:

Whats wrong with supporting esports ?

The way in which it is implemented is not ideal.

 

I might just be naive here but if I were to buy a cosmetic item in that fashion (again I don't play overwatch), I would like to be able to choose where my money goes. E.g. using a slider to determine how much the publisher gets and how much the e-Sports teams get. With a 50% minimum for the publisher ofc.

[mondestine]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

How is it important? It's a first person shooter. You don't even see your own character except when you die.

And no, it does not affect how the game is played at all.

 

You're grasping at straws.

This is purely anecdotal evidence from my perspective, but I played Overwatch from the beta to about six months ago till I moved on from it (prob at least 500-600 hours overall between PC and PS4). Almost every single person I regularly played Overwatch with (whether online friends I made through the game, or actual close friends) was basically obsessed with the skins in Overwatch, even with it being a FPS game. For a ton of players, those skins are a big f*cking deal - especially if there is that "one" special skin that gets released during a seasonal event you just have to get.
When the first summer games event happened you couldn't buy individual seasonal skins yet, and there were at least three of four people I knew that were obsessed with unlocking the McCree American flag outfit in particular.
 So yeah, those Overwatch are super important to a lot of people - it absolutely affects the game and overall experience.


P.S: This thought just came to me while typing out everything, but can you imagine how much hate Nintendo would get if they had decided to microtranscation/ lootbox all of the skins in Mario Odyssey? That wouldn't go well for the big N, to put it mildly.
 

[WereCat]

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Admitedly this is more aimed towards Destiny. But looking good with a good skin is highly desirable in online games.

 

And online games try to exploit this.

But you can get most skins for free by just playing the damn game. You get free loot box for every lvl + for completing the weekly stuff + events and you get 5 items from each loot box. You dont have to spend a dime on any skins at all.

I really dislike microtransactions as well but Overwatch is one of the least intrusive games with the microtransactions as you can earn everything by just playing.

Gameplay is not affected at all anyway...

[Bouzoo]

9 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Both of them (lootboxes and cosmetic MTX in paid for games) are predatory.

I don't see why paid cosmetic items are predatory. Many people play games but don't have time to unlock stuff they want like they could n the olden days. You know what you're getting. Difference between a cosmetic microtransaction and a cosmetic DLC (like Tomb Raider or Mass Effect) is only in the way it's implemented. It's literally the same thing, and we've had those for ages. 

[AlTech]

Just now, WereCat said:

But you can get most skins for free by just playing the damn game. You get free loot box for every lvl + for completing the weekly stuff + events and you get 5 items from each loot box. You dont have to spend a dime on any skins at all.

I really dislike microtransactions as well but Overwatch is one of the least intrusive games with the microtransactions as you can earn everything by just playing.

Sounds like you're describing a F2P game to me. A game that I would play if Activision Blizzard were smart enough to put it on Steam and not their proprietary garbage launcher and if it was F2P.

 

Just now, WereCat said:

Gameplay is not affected at all anyway...

Game Enjoyment is.

[Techstorm970]

OMG!!!  Cosmetic microtransactions!  We should burn the place to the ground!  /s

 

I could care less what outfit my hero is wearing while I'm playing Overwatch.

[ItsMitch]

Just now, AluminiumTech said:

Game Enjoyment

Care to explain how someone else purchasing a skin in let's say Overwatch with their own money is affecting their gameplay enjoyment? 

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, Bouzoo said:

I don't see why paid cosmetic items are predatory. Many people play games but don't have time to unlock stuff they want like they could n the olden days. You know what you're getting. Difference between a cosmetic microtransaction and a cosmetic DLC (like Tomb Raider or Mass Effect) is only in the way it's implemented. It's literally the same thing, and we've had those for ages. 

I generally don't support most DLC practices. I support a few good ones such as Witcher 3 but most are garbage.

 

There's nothing wrong with Blizzard's system except the price of the game. One man once said, "there's no such thing as a bad product, just a bad price" and I feel charging money for Overwatch in it's current state is greedy and disgusting.

[WereCat]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

Sounds like you're describing a F2P game to me. A game that I would play if Activision Blizzard were smart enough to put it on Steam and not their proprietary garbage launcher and if it was F2P.

Well, whatever. You can still play Paladins I guess.

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, SC2Mitch said:

Care to explain how someone else purchasing a skin in let's say Overwatch with their own money is affecting their gameplay enjoyment? 

I could sit here forever and list tons of reasons but I'll just list a few: Peer pressure, Looking the best, and it means if I want cosmetics I need to shell out tons of money when I've already paid money for a game upfront it feels like I've been shortchanged.

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, Arokhantos said:

 

You do decide where it go's buy your favorite team skins and you support that team directly.

No but I'm saying I'd like to choose not to be able to give any to the team.

 

I want to be able to say 100% goes to the publisher or 50% goes to the publisher or 75% goes to the publisher or whatever.

[DanielMDA]

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Activision Blizzard, your favorite match making psychologically manipulative ex that you still can't get rid of, has added 312 new skins to Overwatch.

 

Can you guess why?

 

Oh right, Micro-transactions of course. It is suspected that this is to fund their upcoming eSports Tournaments.

 

The new Micro-transaction currency is called "League Tokens".

 

1 skin costs 100 Tokens.

 

So individual skin costs effectively between $2.60 USD per skin to $4.99 USD per skin (Depending on micro-transactions amounts.

 

To buy every skin in Overwatch using Tokens it would cost between  $129.97 (2600 Tokens + 400 Tokens + 200 Tokens) and $1556.88 (312 x 100 Tokens) USD

 

Ouch. That's definitely not pro-consumer.

 

It has been stated that 50% of the micro-transactions will go directly to the e-Sports teams

 

Every Day you login to Overwatch until February 13th you'll receive 100 Tokens.

 

Of course, as I've probably said many times. I would not give overwatch half the slack I do if it was Free To Play. If it was completely Free To Play this would be acceptable.

But Activision Blizzard are greedy snakes and want customers to pay for a game's own e-Sports league. Oh well....

 

Source:

 

Are these skins of the same carefully made and hand drawn quality as Blizzard made skins?

[AlTech]

Just now, DanielMDA said:

Are these skins of the same carefully made and hand drawn quality as Blizzard made skins?

Guessing based off of the comments made by Jim Sterling I'm going to hazard a guess that they're not.

[Misanthrope]

2 minutes ago, WereCat said:

But you can get most skins for free by just playing the damn game. You get free loot box for every lvl + for completing the weekly stuff + events and you get 5 items from each loot box. You dont have to spend a dime on any skins at all.

I really dislike microtransactions as well but Overwatch is one of the least intrusive games with the microtransactions as you can earn everything by just playing.

Gameplay is not affected at all anyway...

Let's say you don't enjoy playing the game all that much. It's reasonable fun, you're ok with a few matches but you would be bored if you had to play for hours and hours on end each day.

 

Ok now we have a shittier game. Let's say this game was rather popular, probably among kids. Kids are rather gullible and don't know how to deal with peer pressure and such so it's quite understandable.

 

Let's say the game put more emphasis on the "heroes" and their look, still just cosmetic but made the skins really stand out and represent someone who is rather invested in the game, effectively a social status symbol.

 

Now you decide to charge for those skins as well and naturally, there's always a percentage of your players that would otherwise play more casually but have this incentive, that's not directly tied to game mechanics mind you, to play more, invest yourself more in the game and if there's financial possibilities, purchase said items if the option was there.

 

Was it really that difficult to see how we lead people into buying shit they don't need in reliable numbers? This is a tried-and-true method we've seen in gaming across several platforms. The main contention is that most of those games don't actually charge money up-front. Why not? Simply because they couldn't get away with it since their games are not that engaging and they're not that popular.

 

Blizzard bypasses this 2 problems and can get away with charging up-front and also up-sale the "cosmetic" items while providing their more "hardcore" base the rouse that this is completely optional because "it's just cosmetic, doesn't really matters!". What really matters here is that Blizzard is expecting to get paid twice without properly justifying the need here.

[DanielMDA]

Just now, AluminiumTech said:

Guessing based off of the comments made by Jim Sterling I'm going to hazard a guess that they're not.

Oh, F*ck. I liked the high quality Blizzard used to put to its skins, they took their time and made the flawlessly. I loved the Sombra Skins, Bastions Blizzcon 2016 skin, and Reaper`s winter and charro skins.

[DanielMDA]

6 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Guessing based off of the comments made by Jim Sterling I'm going to hazard a guess that they're not.

Darth Vader Voice Noooooo

[Bouzoo]

19 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

One man once said, "there's no such thing as a bad product, just a bad price" and I feel charging money for Overwatch in it's current state is greedy and disgusting.

You can get the game for $20 on literally every sale. That is not a bad price. I don't play, I don't own it (got only to lvl 20ish in free weekends)  $40 is too much, but $20 is really not.

 

19 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

There's nothing wrong with Blizzard's system except the price of the game.

So, if it has cosmetics it should be a free game? You have got to be kidding me. 

 

17 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

and it means if I want cosmetics I need to shell out tons of money when I've already paid money for a game upfront it feels like I've been shortchanged.

 

19 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

I generally don't support most DLC practices. I support a few good ones such as Witcher 3 but most are garbage.

In that case, and I'm serious, why aren't/weren't you making a fuss about Tomb Raider (2013) or Mass Effect 2 that have cosmetic DLCs which you can ONLY unlock by paying real money, no option to unlock them by playing. It's even worse than what Overwatch is doing since you can unlock stuff just by playing the game (as long as it's reasonable and the game is not build around loot boxes, i.e. Battlefront 2). It sounds to me like you literally hate Activision Blizzard (Activision more so since you've been pointing them and COD out most of the time even though it's not their game) and are going all out on it. 

 

Just for transparency, I'm not a fan of Blizzardr. I stopped playing HoTS due to them not paying attention to the community even though I had 2k+ games (much worse state than Overwatch). 

[WereCat]

15 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

 

 

Was it really that difficult to see how we lead people into buying shit they don't need in reliable numbers? 

 

Literally every advertisment ever?

 

If parents let their kids to spend money on loot boxes, that is their fault.

 

Yes, cosmetics in OW are a great deal but it is so easy to obtain them for free that there is absolutely no point in spending actual money. I barely even played the game and I have most skins for every hero I could ever want.

 

At least there is no need to buy DLC for every hero that comes out on top of that like in BF1 where they push all the DLC and loot crates into your face on every main menu screen possible.

[Misanthrope]

Just now, WereCat said:

Literally every advertisment ever?

 

If parents let their kids to spend money on loot boxes, that is their fault.

 

Yes, cosmetics in OW are a great deal but it is so easy to obtain them for free that there is absolutely no point in spending actual money. I barely even played the game and I have most skins for every hero I could ever want.

 

At least there is no need to buy DLC for every hero that comes out on top of that like in BF1 where they push all the DLC and loot crates into your face on every main menu screen possible.

If there is no need to get them or spend actual money at all then why even try? Are you telling me that these skins and such are so easy to get their entire effort was pointless and they'll manage to obtain close to no money for the intended purpose of the e-sports pool?

 

Well that seems wasteful and stupid, but I guess we'll see exactly how "easy to obtain" they were in the end and how much money gets put towards the e-sports things as a results. Though I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being at least 500,000+ USD of "easy to obtain" skins people bought anyways.

[Whispre]

So I'm a 40 something gamer that has been gaming since before many on this forum were alive... and I don't see anything wrong with how Blizzard is doing things here.

 

I've been playing for quite a while, I'm level 150 something... and I've never paid a dime beyond what I paid to buy the game initially. 

 

In that time I've also received many new characters, maps, and game styles to play... for free.

 

As to the loot boxes.. I see them as rewards for playing more than anything else... and totally unnecessary though some skins are definitely desirable. My game play doesn't change based on skins or other cosmetics. I also see no reason to buy them... I mean I get several a week just from the easy and quick leveling, and another what... 9 or 10 a week from bonus's in the arcade? Any skin I really wanted I have bought from the in game money I get from the loot boxes I earn. I think  I must have opened over 300 free loot boxes by now, and 'purchased' at least half a dozen specific skins from the currency gained in those boxes.

 

I bought the game and I have the same characters, maps, weapons, abilities, etc. as every other player... and I get prizes just for playing! Whats wrong with that?

 

 

As to the new coin/skins for esports.... they just gave me a free skin... which I probably won't redeem because I don't care about esports. If people want to buy fan items for their teams... cool, nice feature.

 

 

[WereCat]

2 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

If there is no need to get them or spend actual money at all then why even try? Are you telling me that these skins and such are so easy to get their entire effort was pointless and they'll manage to obtain close to no money for the intended purpose of the e-sports pool?

 

Well that seems wasteful and stupid, but I guess we'll see exactly how "easy to obtain" they were in the end and how much money gets put towards the e-sports things as a results. Though I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being at least 500,000+ USD of "easy to obtain" skins people bought anyways.

idk about the new skins for tokens, i was talking about the old ones.

But at least the money goes for esports. I believe that Dota 2 did something simmilar?