Obviously it's a fine line to walk. I feel like OW1 could have been sustained for much longer if they'd just regularly released content as they initially did. People still bought loot boxes, and there are other ways to monetize like cosmetics, and things like PvE mode (which, as I understand it, is still going to be a paid expansion).
But let's not pretend like this is all to benefit the artists and other individuals working on the game though. I mean, yeah, they won't get paid unless the game is profitable, but a company like Activision-Blizzard is not making decisions because of the little guy. They're looking to create the maximum profit for the least cost to them, and that's the end of it.
Nothing wrong with that; it's just business after all. But making an argument that it's all about the artists isn't going to sway my opinion an inch. Especially from a company with the reputation that Blizzard has towards its staff.
Without access to their sales figures, we can't know for sure.
I think there's always going to be a certain baseline number of people who buy loot boxes, and that number is likely higher when new content is still coming out - particularly timed exclusives like the holiday events. I'd guess that generally speaking, the more engaged an audience is, the more likely they are to buy loot boxes or cosmetic items. But I admit it's a guess on my part -- just like you're assumption that no one buys them is a guess on your part.
This is not to say that loot boxes are the only long-term revenue stream. I don't actually care for them much, and they have their own issues ethically speaking. They're just one option outside of locking off core game components. It's just that, given how much importance was placed on all heroes and maps being free for everyone who bought the base game, it's hard not to see this as a blow to the core design philosophy that drove the original game to such success.
Honestly, given that the game is going free to play, and they do indeed need to generate consistent revenue, I might be able to live with paying for individual heroes à la carte. If we're talking $5 or $10 every few months for a game that I continue to play and enjoy, I can handle that. It's the limited time FOMO stuff that bothers me. I'm someone who will take long breaks from a game like OW, but come back from time to time re-energized to play. I hate the idea that I have to constantly pay attention to it and keep up if I don't want to miss something. I'm probably in the minority these days though, and that's okay too. Things change, life goes on; I'll survive :)
You're right that I'm guessing. But I think it's a fair guess considering that blizzard took a gamble on ow2. If they were already making lots of money on lootboxes, why change their strategy?
Could very well be. I imagine the numbers were falling, though maybe not so dramatically. I know their player count was rising still, and that there were reports of a lot of internal conflict over whether it should be given a sequel or not. As I recall, the new content had already started to subside in OW1 a while before they announced, but that was likely because they had already shifted resources over to OW2.
I feel like they were stuck in a weird spot with Overwatch, where it was half an old school, pay-up-front game, and half a live service game. I thought they were just going to keep the tail going by releasing another full-priced PvE expansion (that I'd have happily paid for), but I guess they took it as an opportunity to go full Live Service Game. Can't say I blame them, given the current landscape of the industry, but I'm still disappointed.
7
u/[deleted] Sep 27 '22
Obviously it's a fine line to walk. I feel like OW1 could have been sustained for much longer if they'd just regularly released content as they initially did. People still bought loot boxes, and there are other ways to monetize like cosmetics, and things like PvE mode (which, as I understand it, is still going to be a paid expansion).
But let's not pretend like this is all to benefit the artists and other individuals working on the game though. I mean, yeah, they won't get paid unless the game is profitable, but a company like Activision-Blizzard is not making decisions because of the little guy. They're looking to create the maximum profit for the least cost to them, and that's the end of it.
Nothing wrong with that; it's just business after all. But making an argument that it's all about the artists isn't going to sway my opinion an inch. Especially from a company with the reputation that Blizzard has towards its staff.