Investigating Overwatch's Stingy Loot System

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Uh, guys, I think the whole sense of progression with the "Getting good at the game" argument as far as multiplayer games are concerned is thrown out the window when a 17 year old can disband an entire "professional" esports team.

Spoiler

Wow, there are sponsered E-sports teams already for this game? It hasn't even been out that long. Probably why they're acting so immature i guess.
As for those presenters...Eek, how annoying and awkward can you get? I generally avoid gaming youtube series' for this exact reason, something alway feels really off and cringe inducing with the presenters and i haven't found any that make me not quit mid episode. Either something is terribly wrong with me or gaming news personalities need a serious step up in their method of presentation.
Good for the lady though! She weaseled out a couple of undeserving immature dickheads by skill alone, i hope she gets to rightfully take their place.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Something I realized after watching the ZP and reading this is the need for a "sense of progression." I guess I might be in the minority of this, but for games like Overwatch especially, the largest sense of progression I get is actually getting better at the game. Being an online competitive game, the main source of enjoyment (at least for me) is the competition against other real peoples. So being able to beat more and more people is the biggest sense of progression I have in the game. Thinking that getting more cosmetics (especially because of the way you get them) is the only "progress" you can make in the game is... weird to me. I'd agree that it's the most tangible "progress" as skill is much more personal and hard to measure, but you get a lot more out of games then what they tell you you have.

Long story short, the biggest sense of progression in games like Overwatch is realizing you are getting better at them, not any digital items.

Totally agree. This is all multiplayer games SHOULD need if they can stand on their gameplay alone. I think Overwatch does this. Putting in a progression system just gives the illusion of more content, but it's rarely ever all that meaningful. I'm glad they didn't put in anything like that (barring the ranked mode that will be coming soon, of course) and are instead going to be working on adding more stuff that actually matter: heroes and maps.

If you care about the loot boxes in this game, it's really probably not for you. They're a nice little thing that you get for playing after about an hour. Do I think someone is going to 100% Overwatch? Absolutley. I probably won't be putting in that many hours, but I bet a lot of others will. Besides, why do you NEED to 100% the collections? Realistically, you can probably get your favourite skins for your favourite heroes after leveling to 100. If you seriously care that you don't own all different colours of the basic skin, I have to question your priorities.

Having said all that, I do absolutely agree with the sentiment that it was a shitty thing for Blizzard to make the 60 dollar version mandatory for consoles.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I distinctly remember, in reference to Pokemon Black and Yakuza 4, that Yahtzee admittedly doesn't care about 100% completion. So, why exactly does the completely optional loot system matter?

Because it's the only thing Overwatch has by way of measuring progress/offering long-term goals. Even Pokemon has an endgame.

 

[Roboshi]

Does Blizzard honestly expect anyone to 100% this sodding Overwatch game?

No, they don't. Why in the fuck would you even want to? Roughly 1050 items in the game, and only roughly 126 items are equippable.

They don't expect EVERYONE to 100% it, but all they need is a few people to at least TRY to and they're in the money.

Wait a minute, that sounds like a system I've heard about before....Oh yeah! It's the microtransaction systems that look to ensnare "whales".


Don't kid yourself here, that content is made to be earned and bought or it wouldn't be an option. Did they HAVE to make the loot randomised and have the loot boxes provide duplicates? Did they have to make half of it sprays? (something nice, but ultimately so worthless they really should be free) Did they have to have a GAMBLING rather than just selling them each for a couple of bucks as DLC packs?

No they didn't, by having then "earnable" in game they're making the system LOOK fair, but they've tipped the probability scales in such a way that if you've got a few skins you want you're gonna need to grind for a loooong time or pay for those rolls of the dice.

 

[Kahani]

My only reason to play is for laughs and Loot boxes.

And this is the important point - things like loot boxes aren't there with the expectation that people will actually collect everything, they're there so that there's always a reason for people to keep playing. It's a goal that you can always aim for, not one you actually want to achieve. Once people actually have everything, most of them will quickly get bored and do something else. Games generally end once you've levelled up and got all the powerful items, stories end once the characters have finished their quest and tied up all the plot threads, and so on. As cliche as it is, it's the journey that people enjoy, not the destination. Reaching the destination means you've finished, and the whole point of multiplayer games like this is that you're not ever supposed to finish.

 

[SirSullymore]

Remember vanilla TF2? Me (and a great deal of others) put thousands of hours into that game with nary a spray or hat to be unlocked.

 

[Rednog]

It feels cheap and stingy, there's no doubt about that.
Improvements are easy to make without destroying the microtransaction:
1. Increase loot gains by 1 per box
2. Guarantee a skin for each box (but keep duplicate chances)
3. Milestone rewards at tens, twentys or fifties in the form of level divided by ten boxes (5 at fifty etc)
4. Increase duplicate worth
5. Enable "dusting" owned cosmetics
6. Enable multiple rare/epic/legendaries per box
7. All of the above

Whenever I get a loot box I get annoyed and even when I get something nice it results in an exasperated "finally". That's not very satisfying and I'd honestly prefer the loot system not to be there at all.
That being said, do I think the system is totally unfair? No, but it sure as fuck feels like it is.

The combination of this being a full price game with a relatively small amount of content, the loot system/microtransactions, the scrapped Titan project, the somewhat incompetent matchmaking system and the horde of developer apologists makes it all the worse; The loot system is "not in a vacuum" as people are fond of saying.

I just want to address 6. You can get multiple rare/epic/legendaries per box. I've gotten both a Legendary skin and a legendary coin box in the same box. I've also gotten a legendary and an epic together. Definitely not super often but it does happen.

 

[Nurb]

yea, the longer you play, the loot boxes drop sharply in value because of duplicates, making you less likely to buy boxes over time.

I bought 24 the second week, got some nice stuff, but just the other day my most recent box after leveling up was 3 duplicates worth 5-25 credits and one player icon.

I'd ask Blizard why would I want to waste money on loot boxes at this point, and I'm nowhere near the half-way mark on any one hero's unlocks.

 

[Necrozius]

I'm about as casual as you can get and I'm pretty happy with the loot boxes so far. Just reached level 11 and already have an alternate skin for my favourite character. One of the extra items for another character was interesting enough to convince me to try them out.

IMHO, the loot crates are just bonus. The fun of the game is, well, playing it.

 

[Hawk of Battle]

Something I realized after watching the ZP and reading this is the need for a "sense of progression." I guess I might be in the minority of this, but for games like Overwatch especially, the largest sense of progression I get is actually getting better at the game. Being an online competitive game, the main source of enjoyment (at least for me) is the competition against other real peoples. So being able to beat more and more people is the biggest sense of progression I have in the game. Thinking that getting more cosmetics (especially because of the way you get them) is the only "progress" you can make in the game is... weird to me. I'd agree that it's the most tangible "progress" as skill is much more personal and hard to measure, but you get a lot more out of games then what they tell you you have.

Long story short, the biggest sense of progression in games like Overwatch is realizing you are getting better at them, not any digital items.

Yeah I've never understood the need for "leveling up" in a game where all you get is cosmetic items. I guess it's just sort of a nice bonus for long time play? And who really cares if you get ALL the items in the game? Most of them are redundant and you won't use even half of them, so just throw a couple changes on characters you care about and play often, maybe spend a few credits if you have them and have done with.

Back in the day we played Unreal Tournament which didn't even have leveling and we enjoyed the fuck out of it, but for some reason people need incentives beyond simply having fun to play games now?

 

[otakon17]

You know what's NOT stingy with it's rewards? Battleborn. Yeah the difficulty spikes in Advanced are all over the place but for the most part, all the unlocks can be completed through just general gameplay and I got access to all but 1 of them in about 20 hours of gameplay?

Not to nitpick too much, but this is a pretty inefficient way of using your credits. A better way would have been, at the end of each cycle (after opening the loot boxes), to check the total value of the wallet against the total cost of the unobtained items and end the simulation if the value is greater than the cost.

Basically, you want to save all your purchases for the end, if you're going for 100% completion. That way you never get an item that's a duplicate of one you bought. Your way just wastes most of the early credits. Since you're going to be buying the last few dozen items either way, saving all those early credits to do so is the way to go. If the average item costs a couple hundred plus credits by then, then, e.g., 50 "must-buy" items times 250 credits, cut by a fifth to account for duplicates of purchased items, divided by an average of say 40 credits per box, and you've "overworked" yourself by about 250 boxes.

It's not a huge cut from your overall calculation, but it's still a pretty significant amount.

tl;dr: Yatzhee's estimates should be cut by about 10%.

I agree with this. It occurred to me while reading that it would be better to do it like this to assure less credits spent to be duplicated later. It's not dissimilar to an Offset Mortgage, where the positive capital acts against the amount owed, and when the two meet can cancel out. It means a lot more empties will be filled with random drops, saving credits and makes the most efficient use of credits earned from duplicates.

You realize that the game can and WILL give you duplicates and then just make it so you get a measly pittance worth of credits for them right? I think it's like, 10 for a spray up to 250 for a skin.

 

[otakon17]

I'm about as casual as you can get and I'm pretty happy with the loot boxes so far. Just reached level 11 and already have an alternate skin for my favourite character. One of the extra items for another character was interesting enough to convince me to try them out.

IMHO, the loot crates are just bonus. The fun of the game is, well, playing it.

The leveling in the early hours of the game is pretty fast from what I hear and slows down a LOT around the 20's or so, requiring several winning matches to get up a rank.

 

[Necrozius]

The levelling in the early hours of the game is pretty fast from what I hear and slows down a LOT around the 20's or so, requiring several winning matches to get up a rank.

That's unfortunate. I'll cross my fingers and hope that I get a few more credits before that time. Good to keep in mind that the well will indeed dry up.

 

[1981]

They are trying to squeeze a few more coins from you. Why else would they bother keeping track of how many items you've acquired? It takes a few extra lines of code to do that.

Snip

8. Make them tradable. Ideally, they should also be marketable, but we're not talking about Steam here.

I've gotten more clothes than I can wear in Don't Starve Together, but I still get excited when that gift box icon pops up. I don't mind that it's a grey T-shirt and not a legendary character skin worth 20 euros.

 

[SiskoBlue]

Wished I'd never bought Overwatch.

Admittedly there IS something fun and just-one-more-round about it but I should never have bought it.
- Partly because I'm not great at competitive shooters. I can try but I'm old, and slow.
- "Full of colourful characters" - The closest any of these two dimensional arse wipes get to character is bordering on racism. I know this game is meant for kids but my 8 year old pointed out they seem a bit babyish. I appreciate they have put production value in but a a Pixar rip-off is not really for me.
- It has zero content except for multiplayer. You can't even choose modes of gameplay. The one shining gem is the cleverness of how the different abilities of the characters blend, counter, and overlap each other. It really is genius, but other than that what is there? Of course you can say the same of a lot of popular games, Tetris, Pac-man, Chess, Rocket League. So maybe that's the hook. Simplistic context, deep rules, repetitive experience.

I can see why people love it. I can't see why SO many people love it. I personally don't love it.