Overwatch or Overpriced?

Is Overwatch worth the $60 price tag on PS4 and Xbox One? It's an online-only game with, what seems like, a small amount of content at launch. How has the colorful shooter been able to win over so many players?

[JakeNoseIt]

Anybody else picking this up day 1? I can't help myself, I have too much fun playing as Hanzo, D.Va, and others. I've been having beta withdrawals!

[iDadio]

Exactly, I've been waiting for this since beta (thank god for uncharted 4 right).

I don't have the problem with the price, I mean if I lay £40 down and get 100+ hours out of it (which I will easily with friends also picking it up) then how is it overpriced against a single player game of the same price but i'' only get 12 hours out of if I'm lucky?

[Clown_Syndr0me]

This is always my answer for arguments like this.
I think games should be priced differently. There shouldn't be a set standard price for games. Why should the majority of games be priced at £45 when the all offer such a different range of content? But that being said, I'm happy to pay £40 for a single player only game, or a multiplayer only game as thats jjust the way it is.

[a7madRyan]

u can play it with a controller on pc if u want too

[JakeNoseIt]

I would have constant anxiety about being at a disadvantage! Like when I play other shooters and I think other players have better guns/loadouts than me haha

[Kalebninja]

I'm sick of the "it's online only" complaint, being online only isn't a negative unless its something like Hitman where it's not even a multiplayer game.

[Hoffmann]

Every online game is a wasteland sooner or later, that's why online-only is never as good as a game that offers offline modes as well.

Why are there no modes for single players with offline options like bots?

[All_Consoles]

Um, no...
Look at every other blizzard game. Wow, Starcraft, hearthstone have had millions of players for years. Counterstrike go gets 10 million unique players per month. Dota, league of legends, team fortress 2, etc are all insanely popular. So no, multiplayer only games are not a wasteland. Well, maybe not on consoles, but that's a different problem

I would argue that the average multiplayer game has a much larger lifespan than the average single player game. You beat the 10 hour campaign or whatever and have little reason to play it again

[The 10th Rider]

Well, even on consoles Splatoon has been seeing an increase in players since it's release. It all depends on the game.

[UnHoly_One]

Maybe I'm the exception, choc_twirl, but I go back and replay single player games all the time.

Sometimes when a new game is coming out, say like a new God of War, I will go back and replay the whole series in order in preparation for it.

I used to do that a lot more, but some of these franchises are getting too big. I'm not going to play all 10 Assassin's Creed games every year, for instance. lol

[INMATEofARKHAM]

@All_Consoles is right buy he doesn't go back far enough... The online component for the orginal Diablo is still up. Hell, its were the battle.net name comes from. :)

Anyhow, on PC I snagged a Origins copy from Amazon for $37.02 so not even close to 60 bucks so I'm happy.

[jmc8888]

Depends on what you like. My backlog is so huge, I'm never going to 're-play' a game. Hell most games I don't even complete. Too many games. Way too many games.

So I sort of don't mind that a game eventually expires. Because... I have and will always have too many games to play.

In the meantime, and that could be 10 years or more for a game like Overwatch with Blizzard support, is that long enough?

I don't need EVERY game that I own to be able to play forever, especially given the fact that with so many games I will never play 99 percent of them again.

People need to be a bit more realistic. Of all the games you've bought in your life and all the ones you are going to, and if it's like me it's in the thousands right now, and thousands more in the future, are you telling me you are going to replay them all? Or you just want the option?

It's like having a gamer packrat mentality.

But one that is excluding you from some great times, all because of some position that really doesn't matter.

[_-EDMIX-_]

"Every online game is a wasteland sooner or later"

Not really, not if its actually good.

"that's why online-only is never as good as a game" nope. I can't agree with that bud, MMOs do just fine, if the game's concept is online only......then the game's concept is online only. Not sure why you are trying to say whats good for another's game...

[s45gr32]

I agree with you on that; in the past online only games did exist like :

Tribes Franchise
Unreal Tournament Franchise
Quake Franchise
Team Fortress franchise
Counter Strike franchise

It is also to know that these franchises had these features;

LAN support
Map editors
Mod Support
Offline splitscreen multiplayer

So, no a game does not need a single player campaign to be successful. It does need offline splitscreen multiplayer, map editor, LAN support, and mod support.

[spicelicka]

THIS exactly.

We have become accustomed to being ripped off, with both single player and multiplayer, but specially this gen with multiplayer-only games. There is NOTHING wrong being multiplayer-only, but not when their content is barebones. If someone can make something like Unreal tournament again I'll gladly pay $60.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Agreed, but "unless its something like Hitman" isn't online only....

Its digital only at the moment, but not online only. I'm not sure where you heard that. I'm playing it right now and I've played it few times with zero internet connection. The online portion of Hitman is for the live events which are optional.

I agree though. A MP online game that is online only, is no different the a SP game that is offline only lol

Different strokes for different folks.

[burza1982]

Overpriced for me.
That game should be free to play. And that what Blizzard was saying at the beginning.
Sorry but few game modes, no really big things to unlock (just skins and some crap)...nope, no spending money for something what really is worth maybe half of the price.

People going crazy just because is a Blizzard. This game should be Free to play, that is my opinion.

[All_Consoles]

There are no unlocks because this game is designed to be competitive and winning is based on skill rather than what upgrades you have. There is a reason why games like counterstrike have no unlocks. They could have hidden half the characters away at the start, but they give them to you all up front and the rest will be free dlc

[ChronikCanuck]

There are no unlocks as you've already paid for them, hence why this game costs way too much money, 90 freaking dollars here in Canada on console!

[Ginpachi-sama]

Lol blizzard already confirmed it would release more game modes and characters for free. But ur prolly the type that thinks singleplayer games being 60$ is justified. Lol

[DragonDDark]

So Street fighter 5 is okay now?

[s45gr32]

I am glad DLC is free, in the meantime how many modes the game has. Is better to wait for game of the year edition

[Urbz7870]

If it was free to play it would of been pay to win. Overwatch is just a few games I Dnt mine paying a full 60 bucks cause most games that are made nowadays are made with a DLC barrier.

[s45gr32]

So no LAN SUPPORT, Mod Support, or even splitscreen multiplayer. At least it has a map editor right. 😨

[_-EDMIX-_]

"Overpriced for me.
That game should be free to play" ???? LMFAO!

Why would they give it to you for free? Are you out of you're mind? Do you even have a solid reason why you shouldn't have to pay for a product that cost them millions to make?

OH YES, its SOOOO crazy to have to pay for a product....../s

[Khaotic]

That's actually called balanced. People are to used to cod and other games hiding items behind progression systems to artificially lengthen a games life. A truly balanced game gives everyone access to the the same load out's from the start

[iJihaD]

I believe a 60$ price tag should not be related to type of game, but rather the quality and lifespan of the game.

What people are lacking, especially on consoles, is the capability to determine what is quality of game in offline games and multi-games. While it's true the biggest pillars in quality of game in offline games is: the story, graphics and mechanics. In multi-games this is totally not true! The quality is far trickier and difficult! its in the competitive mechanics, the balancing, the diversity.. and lots more.. and if the game was successful in each one of them, this one hell of a high-quality-60$-worth game; because perfecting multi-game quality aspects requires lots and lots of time, testing, smartness and risk.

It's absolutely not fare to judge a multi-game with offline-game checklist to determine how much it's worth. This is absolute nonsense.

[jcnba28]

Too expensive for an online only multiplayer game imo.

[Hoffmann]

Yeah. Might buy it if its $20. These online only games should never be sold for the same price as games that also offer offline stuff.

[CorndogBurglar]

Should single player only games be full priced then?

Because I can tell you that i get way more play time out of Multiplayer only games then I ever would out of single player offline only games.

[UnHoly_One]

How about we all stop for a second and realize that there are two sides to this argument, and both sides are RIGHT, for themselves.

If you're primarily a solo guy, a multiplayer only game isn't worth it to you.

If you're a big multiplayer guy, a solo game isn't worth it to you.

There is no RIGHT answer. Neither side is WRONG.

Games like this are 60 bucks because the people that love multiplayer think it is worth 60 bucks. Meanwhile those same people might think the solo guy is a fool for paying 60 bucks to play The Order or Quantum Break or whatever.

It's like trying to tell your friend that only plays RTS games that they aren't worth 60 bucks and he should only play RPGs, or vice versa.

I'm just saying we can argue till we are blue in the face but it isn't going to change anything.

[_-EDMIX-_]

@UnHoly_One- SERIOUSLY! THANK YOU!

Would give you a bubble if the system was still up!

Could not have said it better myself.

Its $60 because it justifies the price, because the team still spent time and money on the game, marketing it, testing it, designing it. Someone not caring for MP only titles, doesn't take away from what the team has just spent creating it.

[Khaotic]

That's the stupidest thing I have ever heard. If it was your millions poured into development I bet you wouldn't be saying that.

[Ginpachi-sama]

I feel like every singleplayer game should be 25$

[BiggerBoss]

Well that's because your brain isn't functioning right

[ShaunCameron]

@ BiggerBoss

Nah. It's because he can't stand his own company.

[The 10th Rider]

Eh, dota 2 is free to play on PC, but is one of the most played PC games. It only has 1 map and mode. If all the skins were unlockable through playing it for $60, I'd probably buy it.

[UnHoly_One]

That game seriously only has 1 map and 1 game mode?

I know people that have been playing it every day for like 5 years. I just assumed there was a ton of variation.

wow.

[BEASELY]

Yeah, an endlessly replayable, heavily supported game polished to a sheen in which all future DLC will be free is totally overpriced, man.

But a single player game with literally only 8 hours of gameplay, TOTALLY worth $60!

Man, I'm SO TIRED of these "no campaign, no buy," people. So hypocritical.

If you want a story to be told to you, read a book, watch a movie, or play a game like Uncharted.

This mentality that every game known to man must be this narratively driven novel with deep lore is getting exaughsting.

[jcnba28]

Cam down dude, was just my opinion. I'm not into online multiplayer games, relying on servers and other players in order to enjoy a game. At least with a single player game you know what you are getting (once you do your research) and can play it anywhere.

[_-EDMIX-_]

@jcn- "Cam down dude, was just my opinion. I'm not into online multiplayer games, relying on servers and other players in order to enjoy a game."

??

But buddy, that is you. YOU don't value MP titles, others do. I actually equally value BOTH SP and MP only titles for what they offer. I will be buying BF1 this fall FULL PRICE JUST for its MP, I'm likely not even going to play the SP mode...but don't care. I bought BF series for YEARS when it was JUST MP and it was 100% worth it every time.

That isn't to say I didn't also play titles like God Of War or RE4 or Uncharted etc that were SP only focused.

". At least with a single player game you know what you are getting" ??? O_O? WHAT? Buddy, you KNEW what The Order 1886 was before it released? You have bad SP games just like you have bad MP only games.

"(once you do your research)" ANNNNNND can't you apply this to MP titles too? Just because you don't get it, doesn't mean its value is less to the team. I don't care for MOBAs or dance games either bud, doesn't mean they shouldn't be full price. Someone cares about the, someone cares enough to buy it full price for them to even market it at full price in the first place

If you don't like 'relying on servers and other players in order to enjoy a game" don't buy MP only games then, its seriously that simple, but by default you also offer zero input to tell others what a genre should be worth that you are by default bias against and don't play.

I can't tell a MOBA or Dance game fan, how much THEIR favorite genre should be charged for based on me not liking it.

So I don't like Coco Cola, so it should be free right bro? /s

Self centered much?

[BEASELY]

The "how long would the servers stay on?" argument is hella weak as well.

1. You can log in thousands of hours before that ever happens making it worth your money 50 times over.
2. By the time servers could come remotely close to getting shutdown (if that were to even happen), you're most likely done with it anyways.

Just admit what we all know about you single player guys - you get crushed in PVP and complain about MP only games because you just want to explore the universe/world, but refuse to put up with the competition.

[_-EDMIX-_]

"Too expensive for an online only multiplayer game imo"

Yet a single player only game that is less then 20 hours is worth full price though right? I mean....that isn't how this works bud. Just because you don't care for online only MP games ,doesn't mean others don't either.

That is like saying because I don't care for RTS, they should be free.

Funny....

[jcnba28]

I disagree bud but it all comes down to preference okay bud?

Everyone has an opinion bud. No need to get upset over someone else's okay bud?

[_-EDMIX-_]

@Jcn- "I disagree bud but it all comes down to preference okay bud?" NOPE!

Comes down to the majority.

I'm not really sure why you think why how you personally, emotionally feel sets the price of an item This isn't some emo auction bud. lol

The majority find it a value, thus will be marked full price.

Thats all you need to know. No on cares how you personally feel about it. You are not MILLIONS of the majority, thus irrelevant to any company's pricing model.

Stay in school, take an economics class. You are using an "opinion bud" to set a price to a game. Not really sure how that works lol

I don't like Burger King, I guess in my "opinion bud" it should be free right? /s

Stay in school...seriously.

[iJihaD]

I believe a 60$ price tag should not be related to type of game, but rather the quality and lifespan of the game.

What people are lacking, especially on consoles, is the capability to determine what is quality of game in offline games and multi-games. While it's true the biggest pillars in quality of game in offline games is: the story, graphics and mechanics. In multi-games this is totally not true! The quality is far trickier and difficult! its in the competitive mechanics, the balancing, the diversity.. and lots more.. and if the game was successful in each one of them, this one hell of a high-quality-60$-worth game; because perfecting multi-game quality aspects requires lots and lots of time, testing, smartness and risk.

It's absolutely not fare to judge a multi-game with offline-game checklist to determine how much it's worth. This is absolute nonsense...!

[Relientk77]

I'll wait for price drop

[Clown_Syndr0me]

I agree. I reckon it will be about £20 pretty quickly.

[Bebedora]

...and some patches

[ClickbaitAF]

And more content...

[Tedakin]

I do kind of feel it should be free to play and let you buy what you want. 60 seems way high. It's 40 on PC if you get the low end version, which is digital only. Hrmm...... Just from what I've seen it def feels like it shouldn't be as expensive as it is.

[Dixiedevil]

After playing the beta, I can safely say that I wouldn't get my money's worth. I know I'd play a few hours and be on to the next game. Going into the pile of games that I look at and think I might play again for a second and...nah. Titanfall or Evolve, anyone?

[BEASELY]

Well, you're just not as hardcore into online shooters as enthusiasts of the genre would be. You fly through single player game. That's cool.

But there are others who can dote on a single game for nearly a thousand hours.

[NotoriousWhiz]

Exactly, while most gamers don't appreciate SF5's lack of single player content. It's the only game that I've been playing consistently since release.

[s45gr32]

If the game has mod support, lan support, and offline splitscreen multiplayer. I guarantee you hardly anybody would complain about its price.

[BEASELY]

Mod support in an only online game, do you hear yourself? Split-screen???!! It's 60 frames... And why would you want to shoot bots. That's boring as shit unless you're playing with a 5 year old that doesn't know anything. Lan support can be added in an update.

Anything else?

[raclarsa]

A lot of people enjoyed the beta, including me. I'm picking up my copy this weekend and I will surely enjoy it. For an online game, it's well-made and the characters have interesting and varied play styles so I can always try other ones in case I get bored. Plus, it's a Blizzard game and, judging from my experience with Diablo III, Blizzard satisfactorily delivers on post-launch support with patches and expansions.

I respect the fact that some people enjoy single-player games (most of what I play are such), but perhaps people should also do the same to people who enjoy online-only ones. Besides, there have been pricier online games with less content and expensive expansion passes. The pricing for Overwatch isn't that bad to fuss about.

[GearSkiN]

somebody will sell it online and I'll wat then

[Braxmapoutras]

The wise thing to do is always to wait for a while before jumping in.But I don't blame anyone wanting to buy it and enjoy it :-)
The only difference from the other multi-player only games is the support it will receive from blizzard... It may not be worth it now but in the long-run it will be worth it's buck.
That's just my opinion after all, have fun either way and enjoy whatever you may play. :-)

[pompombrum]

Might be full price, might have less content but in terms of fun and replayability, easily is worth the value for money. More content doesn't necessarily mean a better game, just look at COD as the perfect example of that. Not to mention with Blizzard's history of post game support, this game will grow and we'll still be seeing new stuff for years to come.

[senorfartcushion]

Depends on how much Team Fortress 2 was on the day of release?

[Kyosuke_Sanada]

Yeah I am going to wait for a price drop, sixty dollars is just too much for a shooter that I cant play anytime I feel like. This isn't like an MMO that offers a wealth of content that I can explore either, hell Final Fantasy XIV; A Realm Reborn was forty dollars for Playstation 3.

[Sarah_Ch]

I enjoyed the beta but I don't think it's worth 60$ especially there is no SP.

[Findingcrybabies]

It has nothing to do with being "online only" It's just that the small amount of maps and objectives to do in them make it repetitive so fast.

[jmc8888]

12 maps to start with is not a small amount. It's the 'normal' amount. In fact, these days, it's more than the normal amount.

21 characters. Yes because when I play online shooters, there's more than 21 characters in all of them. Oh wait, no, most have like 4 which you can customize, but still TWENTY ONE completely different players.

Plus there's more maps, modes, and characters coming... ALL FREE.

If it's not your thing that's fine. You can say it will get repetitive to you fast.

But the other stuff is just crap.

[Findingcrybabies]

I played the hell out of the beta. When I first started playing it I loved the game....I am not the biggest fan of the art style, but regardless I fell in love with the game. Maybe its mostly the same modes over and over....but I did have the feeling like "this map again!?" quite a lot when playing. It may have 12 maps, but it honestly felt like 4 or 5 to me. It's just how my experience went. Maybe when the game has been out and they release more objectives and maps I will give the game a go and love it.

[Dario_DC]

It should be free to play IMO.

[NotEvenMyFinalForm]

the game gets a free pass cus Blizzard fanboys. Blizzard could sell feces in a box and it'd sell millions.

[BEASELY]

So Overwatch is feces in a box?

Man this site is dumb.

[jmc8888]

Actually I don't play Bilzzard's other games. Overwatch is amazing because it's amazing. Great gameplay. Fun times.

[kevnb]

Single player only is ok but multiplayer only isn't? I know the typical site visitor here mostly only plays single player games with story focus, but for the rest of us..

[BLow]

Well, if this game was made by Dice/EA or Activision, I feel that this would be a much bigger issue. But I'm probably way off on that assumption because it's cool to hate on those companies. Got to follow the bandwagon...... O_o

[link2Dpast]

Damn loved the game but did some research and what was on the beta is the samething On the original, there's nothing new, no new modes , nothing new at all. 60$ is a bit much for what there offering . 50$ would of been more reasonable 40$ ideal. That's not taking away that it's a really good game but there not enough in it for 60$

[jmc8888]

$39.99 on PC. $60 on consoles + they upgrade the edition to having some perks for their other games (like skins and crap).

But remember $12 goes to Sony/Microsoft for every game. That's how it is with EVERY game.

So really Blizzard is getting $48 and the rest goes to Sony/Microsoft.

If you have a PC get the PC version. It's not very demanding.

Plus you forget all future content... new modes, new characters, new maps are ALL FREE.

[mochachino]

It was going to be F2P so maybe.

[hiawa23]

I rented the game from Gamefly and quickly sent it back when I discovered it was online only. Other than Star Wars or Titan Fall, online only games just don't keep my interest as I am more a sp gamer, so this is a no buy for me.

[XX_The_Assistant_XX]

To me it's not worth a $60.00 price tag, it's too bare bone for me. If anything I say this should have been a $40 release. I liked the beta but I would have liked this game to have a single player mode or something else. My arguement isn't online vs offline it's getting more bang for my buck. Games like WoW and starcraft are games that offer so much content that it's justified being strictly online. Dota and League of Legends are Free to play so they can get away with being online only because you don't have to pay to play. SF5 is another game I don't think is was worth the money because it had nothing more than online play....game should have gone for $40 out the gates as well. Just my opinion

[jmc8888]

It is on PC.

[Clown_Syndr0me]

I think I'll wait on this one, I have a feeling it's going to drop in price very quickly.

[jmc8888]

Why? Because it was the biggest beta ever in terms of number of people playing.

Because just about everyone said they had a blast playing it. Even people who said they wouldn't buy it, because it's not their thing... but they liked the beta. Things like that really don't happen. Only on great games.

Because yesterday, when I saw there were about 400,000 people watching on twitch, about 4x that of any other game.

Because it's simply an amazing game with all future content being free? Free maps, free characters, free modes.

Because after the beta the comments were everywhere online about how people just wanted to play the game some more and couldn't wait until the game.

Because Blizzard is a fly by night company that doesn't support their games and could be out of business at anytime?

Hey, maybe you'll be able to find a good deal on CDKeys or G2A or something for the PC version, but other then that, or simply Blizzard/Activision trying to blow up the game even more and being nice with a discount, you're going to be waiting a long time.

Whatever you are basing your feelings on, they are quite wrong. Like Darth Vader choking people is a good feeling wrong.

[Clown_Syndr0me]

If it doesn't drop, and turns out to be a success I'll just pay full price. But I've already seen it for under £35 on console.
A lot of great games drop in price quickly so unless I'm dying for the game I'm happy to wait a few weeks to see if it does.

[yarbie1000]

Amazon has dropped the price for Overwatch on consoles http://amzn.to/1WMnLL0

[jmc8888]

Looks like more of a promotional thing. One of those, you have to add to cart before we let you see the price.

That's not a price drop, that's a retailer discount.

I highly suggest people take advantage if they don't have Best Buy GCU.

[jmc8888]

Considering all future characters and maps are free, yes it's worth $60. It already has 12 maps and 21 characters.

But the fact you can get it for $39.99 on PC makes it a steal.

Winston FTW

[syne49]

I have never bought a Blizzard game that hasn't paid for itself within a month.

[s45gr32]

Ok my questions are:

Does it support mods?
Does it have LAN support?
Does it have splitscreen multiplayer?
Does it have a map editor?

Is this game like the rest of today's online games with 3 or 2 modes max, 4-8 maps, microtransanctions, and pray that the DLC is free of charge. Is not entitlement, but play the original unreal tournaments, quake franchise, team fortress franchise, counter strike franchise. All of those franchises (online only by the way) had:

Mod Support
LAN SUPPORT
Splitscreen Multiplayer

Only Unreal and Quake franchises offered map editors.

Learn your gaming history and fight back.

[Wyld-Woo]

Was going to download it last night but It's £55 on PSN! Which IMO is way too expensive. I pick up Battleborn for £30 last night from Tesco in store. I enjoy both SP and MP, plus the co-op on-line is brilliant. Not that I'm comparing the two games but I am with the content compared with price. I'll wait for the hardcore to level up, a few updates and the servers to reach optimal levels and I'll jump in July time or when I see a deal.

[Elda]

I paid 60 for Battleborn but I'm enjoying the sp & sp co-op including the incursions on private mode,the game is a blast!

[Get_A_Job_Foxtrot]

In my opinion, online-only shooters, who gimp you out of a campaign, PLUS have the nerve to not even have enough content in the said online only mode...these companies who do that should provide all future DLC at no additional cost. Rainbow Six did that. Street Fighter V is doing it. I'm not paying full price PLUS a season pass for a game with no campaign AND it has barebone lack of content even in the online package.

[Elda]

It definitely is for an online only multiplayer game with NO campaign.That is why I didn't buy it. 30 dollars would have sufficed.

[zombiewombie]

I'm waiting on a price drop like I did for Rainbow Six. I think 30 bucks is the sweet spot.

[jwillj2k4]

I learned my lesson with destiny. No more 60 dollar online only "it's only phase one" games for me.

[Naughty_Cloud]

On the PC it might be worth getting the $40 version. If Blizzards history is anything to go on, it will at least have a long lasting community behind it. Not sure about how long it will last on consoles. Time will tell I guess.

[BlackDoomAx]

Overhyped :)

[Chexs1990]

Well, i'm guessing with a season pass that doesn't cost nearly as much as the game itself, free future dlc's and some tactical depth related to choice of character :D