Home Top Global NewsTechnology Overwatch “2” isn’t a sequel—it’s a marketing gimmick

Overwatch “2” isn’t a sequel—it’s a marketing gimmick

by Ozva Admin

surveillance 2

surveillance 2
Image: Blizzard Entertainment

Each Friday, audio-visual club Our weekly open thread is started by staff members for discussion of gameplans and recent glories of the game, but of course the real action is in the comments, where we invite you to answer our eternal question: What are you going to play this weekend?

How crazy must be the people who make money from Blizzard Entertainment’s extremely popular and brightly colored online shooter! Supervision have been in December 2017?

That, after all, is the month that Epic Games Fortnite launched its first “battle pass” monetization scheme, popularizing an idea that had been kicking around about “How the hell do we get money out of people for ‘free’ video games?” gaming side for a few years at the time. (A battle pass, for those of you who don’t know because they’re cool, is a subscription plan that gives players in-game items in exchange for achieving certain goals… and shelling out real money for the initial subscription Your genius lies as much in allowing players to feel as if they are winner unlocks and creating a strong sense of FOMO for those who don’t buy). In a moment, Fortnite redefined the way free-to-play games make money from their players, coding a new subscription-based model to dole out cosmetic items left behind SupervisionThe “loot box” model, with its ugly reminders of more open gambling, an instant relic of the past.

Well, rest assured folks: Blizzard and Activision weren’t going to let that indignity stand. But they couldn’t completely remove the loot boxes that boosted player progression in Supervision in favor of some new scheme, right? People could rebel! However, Blizzard’s final solution was much more cunning, although it took a few years to implement: they converted Supervision off for a day, added a handful of new maps and characters that they’d been steadily rolling out for years, swapped crates for a battle pass, reduced team sizes from six to five, turned everything back on, and called him surveillance 2.

That’s a cynical reading, to be sure. We’re sure the actual developers at Blizzard could explain to us, in intensive detail, all the ways that surveillance 2 it’s a true sequel to the original class-based game that it’s now literally replaced on people’s systems, rather than a retread. But it wouldn’t change the practical realities of logging in to play this “new” title, when and if they can log in to play it, either because of technical issues or because of Blizzard’s weird decision to remove people on prepaid phones from its mandatory SMS verification system—and realizing that it’s… Supervision.

Overwatch 2 Launch Trailer: That’s It everybody the new characters, by the way.

It’s the same gameplay, with 95 percent of the same characters, albeit with some reworked to suit smaller teams. (RIP holo-shield of Orisa; our turtle tactics will miss you). It’s the same basic art, with a few tweaks. It’s the same ups and downs, that feeling of disparate skills coming together to achieve something almighty, or the feeling of being trampled on because you and the randos you teamed up with never got to click. The characters remain brilliantly drawn (yeah, uh, still questionably designed), with power plays that remain some of the most thought out in the entire sphere of class-based gaming. (Also persists: The moral oddity of giving even an iota of support to Activision Blizzard after all their recent HR issues.)

In all significant ways, surveillance 2 it is Supervisionthe same game we’ve been in and out of since 2016. Even the battle pass is the same as hell, filled as it is with the same old cosmetics and a host of originals. Supervision Heroes for new players to rise from the dust. (Fortunately, people who shelled out real money for the first game are entitled to those unlocks.) What we have here, then, is not an innovation in game design, but an innovation in game design. marketing. After all, if games are going to become these permanent institutions, constantly updating and retaining as many players as possible for years to come, then why should they also give up the flashy lure of introducing something new and fresh with a two in the name? (Even if the actual deals get decidedly hot.) It’s honestly a triumph, just not in a way that really means much to real gamers.

You may also like

Leave a Comment