Overwatch has gathered a quick and swift controversy over its announced model. Everyone left and right assumed this would be a Free to play MOBA/FPS hybrid to compete in both departments, rivaling DOTA2 and TF2 at once. Then pre-order info leaked on a console version, and suddenly questions stirred, and then the announcement: $40 per bare entry, $60 for a deluxe or console starter entry. Quite short of free isn't it? Blizzard has recently issued out a statement on their decision, saying they're rather not compromise the gameplay quality by doing something like selling you the character, when switching characters is a big part of the game experience. Well, here are my thoughts...
Water without a container...
So first off, I want to debunk their logic because... its just in my nature. Sorry. No hard feelings against their logic on the whole, but it just doesn't completely float, and it bugs me to leave something like that unaddressed. This is also a good area to discuss other issues around the subject. Blizzard is competing against things such as Dota2, TF2, and that one game Gearbox is making (battleborn?) at the front. There's obviously more than that in the field, but when 2 out of 3 of the most biggest compared games run exactly under a F2P business model that doesn't compromise or charge for gameplay aspects, its a mockery to sit there and pretend like Blizzard would have to charge you for characters by doing F2P. Furthermore, they've got pre-planned cosmetic DLC for characters, which is exactly the kind of thing that Dota 2 (which also has WAAAAAAY more characters, all free) and TF2 run off of. At this angle, Blizzard are having their cake and eating it.
What are they up to? |
What I am worried about though is the obvious follow-up rumors that come with this report. Some people are naturally skeptical on DLC, and when Blizzard keeps dangling on that 21 character count, you have to wonder if there's a special reason. Like, oh say, DLC characters at $3-$10 a person. That'll not only invalidate their entire logic here, but it'll be because its also balance up-setting. To have a team which suddenly has more players with DLC character #3, is an obvious disadvantage for the other team. Even if that character were to be entirely balanced, they'll have new abilities, new options, and new tactics that have to be at least somewhat unique to that character. You've just created a haves and have-not uncomfortable situation among your community, have opened room for imbalances, and have gone in the F2P direction (League/Strife style) with an upfront fee like a full retail game. For the potential for this to happen on its own, I say stay back from this game for a bit and see what happens beyond the first two months. Especially if you're looking at it on consoles.
Don't spill the salt yet
Don't draw that yet! |
The only issues I have so far is the fact that 1) DLC has already been pre-planned and bundled. Its a mundane thing at this point, but I'm still of the old fashion idea that you do NOT cut content from the game to sell it off. They're doing this already half a year away from launch. 2) Consoles are forced to buy that deluxe edition. Kind of contradicts the last point to whine that they included the DLC in the base game, but it really is a bit unfair to force it on one market, while also giving the other market the better deluxe edition (tie-ins to their other games) for the exact same price. However if they can stay away from the rumored character DLC (or worse, map packs), this game is probably good enough in my book. Even cosmetic DLC is fine if its actually made and charged after the game. I'd be fine paying for some premium character decoration if they've spent extra time working on it, its just I'm bitter about paying for the ones they could have easily slipped in the main game for no extra charge.
At the end of the day though I see a lot of frustration running off of this game that I don't quite understand. I can see the fine point that some don't want to pay for an online only game, and can relate a bit myself. Still for those who would want that experience, its not an inhumane task to go against your predictions and ask for some money for their product. They didn't owe you this for free, and they didn't have to go on a cosmetic DLC model just to follow Valve's tail. This isn't exactly another The Order 1886 situation either where their so off that they're just wrecking the game by ignoring competitive pricing. There really does look to be a lot of worthwhile content for the price you pay, and the game wants to be unique enough that maybe you really can't find a competitor good enough. Maybe you should take a risk on its asking price instead of settling for your free Dota 2 game, which is still your same basic MOBA from an overhead view, with mundane characters, and that same old map again and again. Overwatch looks amazing to me personally, and I really hope they do make it worth the asking price. I think they can pull it off.
Keep an eye on this one |
No comments:
Post a Comment