|
Please be advised:
We will be closing this General thread in 24 hours. It will remain searchable.
After that we will require new threads to discuss topics.
Questions should go in the stickied Q&A thread, screenshots and PotG will go in the PotG sticky, QQ/Rage/Complaints should go in the QQ/Rage thread. If you want to talk about maps or strategies open a new thread.
Any comments or concerns will be logged please forward them to ZeromuS. This new forum is still fluid so we will try this out. General TL rules will still apply to new threads. |
Exactly.
The only point you left out is that Blizzard had this EXACT choice with HotS a year ago and so we literally know exactly how they approach this decision and how little interest they have in granting access to all gameplay elements of a game for free. Hell, we even have a pretty good idea of how outrageously priced most characters will be lol.
The funny part is that at this point, they actually have enough of an eco-system of games with items etc that they could actually set up a steam-marketplace of sorts thru battle.net with diablo items, hearthstone stuff, WoW items, SC2 vanity stuff, HotS heroes/skins, and now Overwatch. But I think the D3 RMAH has scared them off of that. And besides, I don't think that kind of system is how blizzard see themselves as a company whereas it fits in with valve's company philosophy much better.
|
I don't think there will be a hero rotation model like in LoL. The game would have to have a looot of heroes for that to make sense. Even if they were to make, say, 30 heroes, that wouldn't be enough for a rotation model. The game is 6v6, so 12 playable heroes at a time is the bare minimum to avoid duplicates. To open more strategical possibilities in team setup and add a little bit of variety, make that 15-20. At that point, if more than half of the heroes are playable at a time (the rest next week), they may as well not limit the hero pool at all. A Dota model with cosmetic purchases or maybe a fee for new maps would make more sense.
|
I would expect a same model as TF2.
|
On November 19 2014 19:06 -Archangel- wrote:
I would expect a same model as TF2.
when HotS adopt's dota's model let me know and i'll agree with you
|
On November 19 2014 19:06 -Archangel- wrote:
I would expect a same model as TF2.
Please no... I prefer actually fair and good model.
|
On November 20 2014 00:32 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 19:06 -Archangel- wrote:
I would expect a same model as TF2. Please no... I prefer actually fair and good model.
?
well its easy to tell who has never played tf2 before
There are definitely issues with the specific implementation tf2 used but the general model of "all gameplay content free" is pretty much exactly what every consumer should want.
|
Am I really the only one who'd rather pay €50 once than be forced to either grind like crazy or pay for stuff? Being one of the people who actually paid full price for the Orange Box back in the day, I wasn't pleased when Valve announced that TF2 was going to be free.
|
On November 20 2014 00:46 maartendq wrote:
Am I really the only one who'd rather pay €50 once than be forced to either grind like crazy or pay for stuff?
No, but the only way game companies can make money from that method these days is doing it call-of-duty style where they re-release the same game at least once a year for another €50 or whatever. Especially given the increased expectation of content updates (starcraft balance patches, for example), the "up-front-payment" model is only kept alive by consoles where they haven't figured out a better monetization system.
So the real choice is between a true free-to-play game (the valve system) or a "free to download" game with most content behind a paywall or prohibitive grind-wall (the Riot model, if you will). Blizzard have clearly demonstrated in the past that they prefer the Riot model (with both HearthStone and Heroes of the Storm ascribing to it mostly).
I too paid in full for the Orange box, and am in general quite content to pay up-front for any game that I expect to play. The issue with that model is both that it doesn't generate such a large playerbase, and that it provably doesn't generate as much money, especially in games with substantial ongoing costs to the developers.
|
On November 20 2014 00:36 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2014 00:32 Pr0wler wrote:On November 19 2014 19:06 -Archangel- wrote:
I would expect a same model as TF2. Please no... I prefer actually fair and good model. ? well its easy to tell who has never played tf2 before There are definitely issues with the specific implementation tf2 used but the general model of "all gameplay content free" is pretty much exactly what every consumer should want.
I actually played it... For 2 hours. As soon as I saw that you can buy items that give you stats I left. It doesn't matter if the items can drop ingame or not. If you can buy stats, its not fair.
CS:GO has much better "model". Small price and then cosmetics in the item shop. This is what I want from today's games... To bad they go full f2p and screw things up.
|
don't forget that paying up front would likely lead down the path of the COD or battlefield4 pay model of paying upfront then charging almost the same amount as the initial game costs for the DLC maps/content. With bf4, I probably paid a total of ~50 for the base game and premium by finding both components on sale- to me, this is still preferable to a f2p model.
in summary, it is likely that paying upfront = $60 base game + $60 DLCs if Blizzard follows Activision and EA's pay model for FPS games.
|
On November 20 2014 01:51 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2014 00:36 Sn0_Man wrote:On November 20 2014 00:32 Pr0wler wrote:On November 19 2014 19:06 -Archangel- wrote:
I would expect a same model as TF2. Please no... I prefer actually fair and good model. ? well its easy to tell who has never played tf2 before There are definitely issues with the specific implementation tf2 used but the general model of "all gameplay content free" is pretty much exactly what every consumer should want. I actually played it... For 2 hours. As soon as I saw that you can buy items that give you stats I left. It doesn't matter if the items can drop ingame or not. If you can buy stats, its not fair. CS:GO has much better "model". Small price and then cosmetics in the item shop. This is what I want from today's games... To bad they go full f2p and screw things up.
Wait, I thought TL2 only sold cosmetic items?!
|
TF2 actually has this obnoxious thing where all the weapon skins have actual gameplay effects. every item with a bonus also has a drawback, its pretty balanced, but it's quite stupid that some weapons aren't "included" in the game. Many weapons are a guaranteed drop for completing achievements but not all. The ability to trade for weapons that you don't have (contrast to say hearthstone) alleviates the issue but does not remove it.
Now, the weapon skins drop like candy and the only "valuable" stuff is completely cosmetic skins (or rare versions of weapon skins that have an equal-effect common version) but it's true that TF2's implementation is preeeeeetty shitty. But the core concept is right: all classes, maps and game modes are free to play. And you get all the weapons with absolutely minimal grinding (although thats easy for me to say as a orange box buyer who has a backpack with 2-3 of pretty much every older weapon).
I just want to emphasize that 1 key (sells for $2.50) is worth about 180 random weapons (far more than exist in the game afaik).
|
back when weapons were given out for time spent in game a good friend of mine would idle on test servers in tf2 with 3 laptops at once just to collect drops. after like 4 months he had enough to buy a expensive hat, which he then turned into runescape gold and blew it all in a single night.
people are nuts.
|
On November 20 2014 01:51 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2014 00:36 Sn0_Man wrote:On November 20 2014 00:32 Pr0wler wrote:On November 19 2014 19:06 -Archangel- wrote:
I would expect a same model as TF2. Please no... I prefer actually fair and good model. ? well its easy to tell who has never played tf2 before There are definitely issues with the specific implementation tf2 used but the general model of "all gameplay content free" is pretty much exactly what every consumer should want. I actually played it... For 2 hours. As soon as I saw that you can buy items that give you stats I left. It doesn't matter if the items can drop ingame or not. If you can buy stats, its not fair. CS:GO has much better "model". Small price and then cosmetics in the item shop. This is what I want from today's games... To bad they go full f2p and screw things up.
The stock, original weapons are usually the best weapons in TF2. The other weapons offer a specialized role or utility with a negative penalty to another aspect. You're not "buying" stats.
|
On November 20 2014 00:46 maartendq wrote:
Am I really the only one who'd rather pay €50 once than be forced to either grind like crazy or pay for stuff? Being one of the people who actually paid full price for the Orange Box back in the day, I wasn't pleased when Valve announced that TF2 was going to be free.
Not the only one:
http://www.darklegacycomics.com/412
It's a little sad that the best we hope for now with games is a non-exploitative F2P model huh?
Edit: Not all games of course and not inferring anything about Overwatch, just the general trend of game monetization these days.
|
Well considering that from a consumer perspective, a non-exploitative F2P model is literally the best possible model period...
No, its not a little sad.
Regardless, if you want Overwatch to succeed you won't wish the "traditional" sc2 model on it as that won't allow it to grow and succeed the way other games have.
|
On November 19 2014 02:32 SKC wrote:
There is only 12 characters in the game so far..
I count 15 on the picture
|
On November 20 2014 15:26 SmoKim wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 02:32 SKC wrote:
There is only 12 characters in the game so far.. I count 15 on the picture
The three characters to the left haven't been revealed as playable yet, though I would guess they will be eventually.
|
On November 20 2014 02:33 Sn0_Man wrote:
TF2 actually has this obnoxious thing where all the weapon skins have actual gameplay effects. every item with a bonus also has a drawback, its pretty balanced, but it's quite stupid that some weapons aren't "included" in the game. Many weapons are a guaranteed drop for completing achievements but not all. The ability to trade for weapons that you don't have (contrast to say hearthstone) alleviates the issue but does not remove it.
Now, the weapon skins drop like candy and the only "valuable" stuff is completely cosmetic skins (or rare versions of weapon skins that have an equal-effect common version) but it's true that TF2's implementation is preeeeeetty shitty. But the core concept is right: all classes, maps and game modes are free to play. And you get all the weapons with absolutely minimal grinding (although thats easy for me to say as a orange box buyer who has a backpack with 2-3 of pretty much every older weapon).
I just want to emphasize that 1 key (sells for $2.50) is worth about 180 random weapons (far more than exist in the game afaik).
TF2 was amazing when it released but that random drop system for weapons that drastically change how you play (because they're different weapons) is about the most stupid thing TF2 ever did to be honest. I spoke out about it at the time and I still maintain it was the worst decision they could have possibly made. It was the singular thing that put me off playing TF2, and I have a beta badge from an Orange Box preorder based heavily on how good TF2 looked. I know a bunch of people who gradually just drifted off from it as they added more and more stuff in that you just had to cross your fingers and hope you picked up.
With the marketplace now and the ability to just straight up buy the weapons I guess it might be playable again but its still annoying as all hell. Cosmetics are fine, actual game-changing items are not.
In any case I just kinda hope that they put in a cosmetics system like DOTA2 rather than LoL-style "buy a character for extortionate prices" or the idiotic TF2 weapons sytem.
I mean they WON'T do that. And I'll be playing it to begin with whatever model they use. But I still hope because its the best system. :-\
|
poeple. tf2 weapons came slow and 99% are only different playstyles rather then actual power issues.
and if you spend any reasonable time you can EZ trade the first hat you get for all the weapons you need.
OR pay 2.50$ (!) and get em all. that people are complaining about a completly free game where certain styles have to be unlocked (after what, 8 years of free added content) or bought for a tiny amount is freakin insane. esp when business models like lol are widely accepted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
