• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Why is Overwatch $40 for PC but $60 for PS4 and Xbox One?

PC games are almost always cheaper, and that's completely fair considering we often pay premium for our parts and what not. Also Blizzard doesn't have to share a cut on their own platform.
 
Then why is LoL rated by the ESRB if they have no physical release?

Dunno, if I had to guess they got it rated when it first came out and selling PC games physically was still a thing.

If you want a counter example, go look at pretty much any other PC only game and look for an ESRB rating.
 
Why are WoW Expos $50. -_-

Because people are going to pay it every single time. Expansion costs are not the reason why people get out of playing WoW.

Hell, look at the prices they charge for characters/skins in Heroes of the Storm. Blizzard is charging what people will pay for and their fans will pay.
 
Because the $40 version is only available digitally and directly from Battle.net.

If you don't purchase directly through Blizzard, it's $60 on PC too.

It's also a little disingenuous to say the game costs different amounts on PC versus console when that isn't actually true.
 
Yeah, I don't get this I don't need all the fancy do dads from other Blizzard games. But if the beta is badass, I guess so.
 
Yeah, I actually just got the Origins edition on PC due to this. You can actually use all the bonuses on PC as well.
Wut? Dammit just bought origins for both PC and PS4. Will all purchased skins carry over to different platforms? I understand no cross play m+kb advantage bla bla, but if I can take my "profile" with me back and forth through blizz.net that would be amazing!
 
I see a lot of defense for ONLY having the 59.99 console version physically, but I think the absence of the 39.99 base version digitally for consoles is pretty scummy.
Do people really think the cut Sony or Microsoft take is so huge that Blizzard wouldn't make money on a 39.99 base digital version?
 
I see a lot of defense for ONLY having the 59.99 console version physically, but I think the absence of the 39.99 base version digitally for consoles is pretty scummy.
Do people really think the cut Sony or Microsoft take is so huge that Blizzard wouldn't make money on a 39.99 base digital version?

They probably wouldn't lose that much but then they might have to deal with retailers pulling a fit.
 
Console tax or whatever. Complained about since the pricing was revealed but no one else seemed to care or want to ask Blizzars about it.

Still feel there should have been a "Standard" version of Overwatch for consiless though. If console tax was such a big issue make it 50 and digital only so that way it's not affecting the SKUs in stores.

I know Xseed has done similar type things with their PS4 releases.
 
I see a lot of defense for ONLY having the 59.99 console version physically, but I think the absence of the 39.99 base version digitally for consoles is pretty scummy.
Do people really think the cut Sony or Microsoft take is so huge that Blizzard wouldn't make money on a 39.99 base digital version?

It's comparable to Steam (30%), which is still more than the 0% from Battle.net.
 
I see a lot of defense for ONLY having the 59.99 console version physically, but I think the absence of the 39.99 base version digitally for consoles is pretty scummy.
Do people really think the cut Sony or Microsoft take is so huge that Blizzard wouldn't make money on a 39.99 base digital version?

It is as scummy as pricing NA, europe and asian countries differently. The prices are made to maximize profit, not because somebody likes some people from different countries better or because plattform this and that.

The 20 dollar cut is only there because pc players would not touch this game if it was full priced, blizzard or not. There is actual competition on pc so they have to compete in price. With console it is not the case, they dictate the market.

Simple as that.
 
It is as scummy as pricing NA, europe and asian countries differently. The prices are made to maximize profit, not because somebody likes some people from different countries better or because plattform this and that.

The 20 dollar cut is only there because pc players would not touch this game if it was full priced, blizzard or not. There is actual competition on pc so they have to compete in price. With console it is not the case, they dictate the market.

Simple as that.

It's a MP FPS, seems like there's plenty of competition for that. If you get to the specific type of MP FPS it is, then both on Consoles and PC there isn't much like it. TF2 and Battleborn are the closest thing and neither are very close.

----

Also want to add I still think the origins edition goodies for the console versions are so weird. Especially the Starcraft, Hots, and Wow stuff. Like I get they hope maybe it'll get more people into those games, but if you're buying it on consoles there's probably like a 90% chance you don't do any gaming on PC. It's like they want people to just sell those goods.
The Hearthstone and Diablo stuff at least make some sense (hearthstone is on mobile and Diablo is on consoles). Still it's such a weird package to offer value.
 
Ah great a useless teammember who only plays tracer or widowmaker. LOL

Glad its not f2p, it would be stupid as hell.

Let me know now before I decide to buy this game if this is what the community is looking for. I'm not upset about it, but I'd hate to have to play a "role" in this game when I just want to play a character I think looks cool.

Can anyone on consoles/PC confirm if people act up when you don't pick the "right" class/character?
 
Let me know now before I decide to buy this game if this is what the community is looking for. I'm not upset about it, but I'd hate to have to play a "role" in this game when I just want to play a character I think looks cool.

Can anyone on consoles/PC confirm if people act up when you don't pick the "right" class/character?

On the console ps4 beta no one even talks and I've played like 15 matches
 
Let me know now before I decide to buy this game if this is what the community is looking for. I'm not upset about it, but I'd hate to have to play a "role" in this game when I just want to play a character I think looks cool.

Can anyone on consoles/PC confirm if people act up when you don't pick the "right" class/character?

I would definitely try to encourage you to pick a character that helps balance your team, but most people won't care what you pick.
 
Let me know now before I decide to buy this game if this is what the community is looking for. I'm not upset about it, but I'd hate to have to play a "role" in this game when I just want to play a character I think looks cool.

Can anyone on consoles/PC confirm if people act up when you don't pick the "right" class/character?
I mean if the team tips says you need a support character for the team and you decide to pick Widowmaker don't be surprised if someone says something.
 
Let me know now before I decide to buy this game if this is what the community is looking for. I'm not upset about it, but I'd hate to have to play a "role" in this game when I just want to play a character I think looks cool.

Can anyone on consoles/PC confirm if people act up when you don't pick the "right" class/character?

Then prepare to lose a lot, because playing a role is pretty much how the game works once you get out of the "everyone is still learning the game" phase. It's one of the biggest complaints with the game - both from a perspective of liking certain classes and wanting to play them; and people complaining when others on the team don't play a role the team needs and they lose.
 
On the console ps4 beta no one even talks and I've played like 15 matches

I would definitely try to encourage you to pick a character that helps balance your team, but most people won't care what you pick.

I mean if the team tips says you need a support character for the team and you decide to pick Widowmaker don't be surprised if someone says something.


Thanks guys! This changes everything.
 
It's a MP FPS, seems like there's plenty of competition for that. If you get to the specific type of MP FPS it is, then both on Consoles and PC there isn't much like it. TF2 and Battleborn are the closest thing and neither are very close.

----

.

Valve is holding down almost the entire pc mp shooter market with csgo and tf2. Then there is Battlefield 4 by EA and thats practically all there is, everything else is peanuts compared to those games.

You people realize Activision Blizzard released the multiplayer for Call of Duty for pc @ 15 euros? Its exclusive to pc, console players have to pay full price for the full game. You know why this deal exists? Because else CoD would die immediatly thanks to overwhelming competition. Blizzard as soom room with Overwatch and can price it as a premium online shooter, but not at full price. On console, they can price it whatever. Also Titanfall and Evolve were a good learning experience. Communities on consoles held up for a bit, but pc was dead immediatly. Pc players are just different there.

Also that Tf2 remark is cute. You ever played it? Overwatch is a copy through and through, they just broke up the classes into more heroes.
 
I see a lot of defense for ONLY having the 59.99 console version physically, but I think the absence of the 39.99 base version digitally for consoles is pretty scummy.
Do people really think the cut Sony or Microsoft take is so huge that Blizzard wouldn't make money on a 39.99 base digital version?

1. The 40$ version is only available from Bnet. They are the only ones digitally selling this game. Everyone else is a retailer, hence even if you are buying it "digitally". All you're doing is buying an Origins Edition key.

2. As stated multiple times, the reason for the mark up is retailer/console cuts. They are paying 22$ on consoles alone. Even if they went digitally, they would still be paying about 20$.

3. Because it is available at only Bnet, it means they get 100% of that money. If it was on XBL, they would only get about 27$. Same with Steam, PSN, Amazon, etc.

If you wanted to play it on PC. The 40$ option is there, waiting, nothing is barring you from it. If you want to argue it is scummy, then why are you supporting the retailer's gripe on the console market? or how a large chunk of the proceeds will be going to MS/Sony rather than the developer? I would argue it is in the eye of the holder. Blizzard has it where they will be getting the same amount of money regardless of where you purchase it, rather than punishing PC players by forcing them to pay more to make it the same price as consoles. So once again, blame yourself and your support of the retail/console market.

You people realize Activision Blizzard released the multiplayer for Call of Duty for pc @ 15 euros? Its exclusive to pc, console players have to pay full price for the full game. You know why this deal exists? Because else CoD would die immediatly thanks to overwhelming competition. Blizzard as soom room with Overwatch and can price it as a premium online shooter, but not at full price. On console, they can price it whatever. Also Titanfall and Evolve were a good learning experience. Communities on consoles held up for a bit, but pc was dead immediatly. Pc players are just different there.

I would argue it is because those games are heavily supported. Unlike COD. COD and BF issues are mostly the same. COD is an annual release. This has never worked on PC. Typically you make one game and support that game for the next 4 or 5 years with free content and patches, while making your money on cosmetics and such. You can't expect a base to build when you have a new release every year. And same with BF. Though once again, they split it with DLC packs. Which work fine on consoles, but again, PC is more use to Expansions.
 
It's $40 on PC? Didn't even know, might actually pick it up. Even cheaper than their going price for a new WoW expac.
 
PC games are almost always cheaper, and that's completely fair considering we often pay premium for our parts and what not. Also Blizzard doesn't have to share a cut on their own platform.

Charge the people with more propensity to spend more, less? Somehow that does not compute with me.

"Hey, you spent $1000 on that graphics card, so you can save $20."

I think there are other reasons. Like all the competitive resellers, legit or not. And the fact that most games are digital and once the key is used, the bits are worthless. Unlike the physical disc world of consoles. There are different margin points to contend with in retail. And games can be resold, cutting into sales.
 
It's comparable to Steam (30%), which is still more than the 0% from Battle.net.

Good point, the 39.99 PC version is only available from them directly, from what I understand. A shame we won't be getting anything but the Origin version for foreseeable future. I think my own subjective opinion comes into play here, just not seeing value at 59.99. Especially knowing that the game sans 4 skins and extras for other Blizzard games (practically worthless for me) exists for 20.00 less on PC.


It is as scummy as pricing NA, europe and asian countries differently. The prices are made to maximize profit, not because somebody likes some people from different countries better or because plattform this and that.

The 20 dollar cut is only there because pc players would not touch this game if it was full priced, blizzard or not. There is actual competition on pc so they have to compete in price. With console it is not the case, they dictate the market.

Simple as that.

Agreed about how some countries tend to get screwed on pricing, but still doesn't make me feel any better that a 39.99 version exists but not for my platform. It's the perfect price point for Overwatch IMO.
Really feels like they are pushing 59.99 as not to devaluate their product or appear as anything less than "a full AAA game", but I can't help but wonder if offering both versions of the game (at least digitally) for consoles would be a good move.
 
This! I have been upset about this since pricing was announced. I want this game, but after Titanfall, Evolve and Rainbow Six I can't bring myself to spend $60 on primarily online games. Then for PC to have a $40 version a d console doesn't it's like twisting the knife in the wound. I wouldn't mind the extra $20 as much of the bonuses werent all for other games, most of which aren't even on the console.
 
Charge the people with more propensity to spend more, less? Somehow that does not compute with me.

"Hey, you spent $1000 on that graphics card, so you can save $20."

I think there are other reasons. Like all the competitive resellers, legit or not. And the fact that most games are digital and once the key is used, the bits are worthless. Unlike the physical disc world of consoles. There are different margin points to contend with in retail. And games can be resold, cutting into sales.
Open market vs closed market if you're talking generally. and 0% vs 30% if you're talking specifically this game. That's it that's all
 
Yes and those are the only two characters I had fun playing as. Its not being narrow minded people have preferred play styles. And I'm not playing multiplayer games to be srs time e-sports guy. I play to have fun and I had fun with those two characters.

Do your thing man, why care about what others think?

And I'm saying this as someone who is a BIG team player on Battlefield. I've taken a bullet thousands of times to save an objective or a vehicle. Change classes constantly based on team needs. Just ask the PS3/PS4 regulars on the OT. I have around 1K hours on BF4 alone, and modesty aside I'm pretty good at the game.

As much as I would like everyone to PTFO like me, it's your money and I wouldn't impose some play style or tactics on anyone.
 
Do your thing man, why care about what others think?

And I'm saying this as someone who is a BIG team player on Battlefield. I've taken a bullet thousands of times to save an objective or a vehicle. Change classes constantly based on team needs. Just ask the PS3/PS4 regulars on the OT. I have around 1K hours on BF4 alone, and modesty aside I'm pretty good at the game.

As much as I would like everyone to PTFO like me, it's your money and I wouldn't impose some play style or tactics on anyone.

+1 Respect, nice post honestly. Wish more people were as open minded about things.
 
At $20, the retailer takes a $5 margin, and the $12 fee still applies. Publishers earn about as much as they do on a $5 digital game (where it's always a 30% fee), which is why the price rarely goes below that.

When they're selling at $10, they're actually selling overstock copies at a loss if it's the retail edition.

I actually know someone who handles this kind of stuff for a publisher. Retail sucks.

IIRC, those "Greatest Hits" type releases actually do get a license fee break, but I think that's it.

If we don't believe me though, we can look at Shovel Knight's numbers: http://gamasutra.com/blogs/DavidDAn..._One_Million_Copies_of_Shovel_Knight_Sold.php

They say the following:



$25 - $12 = $13. $5 retail fee puts us at $8.

$15 * 0.7 = $10.50

So they're actually having to pay even more to retail than $5 at $25 since they say they make $3-$4 less on a $25 retail game than a $15 digital game, and this only accounts for $2.50.


I thought Sony had a tiered license fee model to account for lower priced retail product? Are they really still taking $12 regardless of retail price?
 
Top Bottom