this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
496 points (96.4% liked)
Technology
59295 readers
5011 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And 7 years after the fact, how is your one time $40 purchase still paying to keep the servers running?
I don't like the monetary scheme that Blizzard settled on for OW2, I'm never paying $25 for a skin, but the $10 battle pass every 2 months is reasonable in my opinion.
If that battle pass contained all of that season's cosmetic content and followed a FOMOless scheme more similar to Halo MCC or Deep Rock Galactic, I think most people wouldn't complain but clearly we have whales that are willing to dump stupid amounts of cash on singular skins.
I love how you're pretending that the exact business model Blizzard operated on successfully for 15 years doesn't work.
What other Blizzard titles relied on a single time purchase and loot boxes for their payment scheme? Wasn't WoW subscription based WITH paid expansions? StarCraft and Diablo definitely had paid expansions.
Maybe the argument could be made for Hearthstone or HotS but I won't consider them Blizzard's flagship titles either.
Overwatch also had paid lootboxes and skins. Overwatch was very heavily monetized.
The company as a whole is profitable, and have been for at least the last few years. I'm on mobile so I'm not able to read their annual investor reports, but do they actually mention overwatch being a loss for the company on a premium model, or are you assuming that?
I'm making assumptions but I don't think it's asinine to assume that they would rather run their service with a constant steady income from a subscription model rather than a one time purchase over the period of half a decade. It would have been one thing if they released paid expansions to the base game every few years but they never did that.
It also doesn't matter if the company as a whole is profitable if Overwatch itself isn't. They aren't Kirkland with the food court hotdogs or rotisserie chickens, as in trying to use Overwatch to pull people into their other games even though it's a net negative for them to continue to support.
What do you even accomplished by white Knight ingredients for a big media company with a long history of shitty business practices?
Not picking up a pitchfork and joining the mob is now white knighting? Get the fuck outta here with that shit.
I'm not here to defend Blizzard, frankly fuck them and their mismanagement of a great IP, but people are definitely blowing Overwatch's failure out of proportion and just hopping on a bandwagon.