[mmmmmbop]

All you said is true, but now you're shifting goal posts. You previously said Blizzard's last 'decent' game was 10 years ago, not the last game that was 'basically a pillar in the gaming wold'.

While Overwatch may not have achieved it's lofty ambitions, it's still extremely well-regarded [0], had 50 million players (which is quite impressive given that it's not free-to-play) and has grossed over $1 billion. It arguably brought the modern hero shooter genre to mainstream popularity and caused a flood of similar games to follow it. You're right, nowadays there are more popular games in that genre, but at the time it was quite a novel concept.

Since you said 10 years since the last 'decent' game from Blizzard, I assume you referred to Diablo 3. I wonder, by what metric is Diablo 3 a decent game and Overwatch isn't?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_considered...

[ayngg]

The game I was thinking about was Hearthstone, which basically legitimized digital card games as a mass market genre. Perhaps I am too harsh on Overwatch, but it is a lot like Diablo 3, which made huge releases with huge hype initially (based on expectations created from their earlier games) and see great initial success but ultimately are unable to retain or grow in the same way their competitors are.

Keep in mind that the profitability of the game is also a result of it being a paid game that also has microtransactions, and even then the gaming market has grown so much that a competitor like Apex is close to making 1 billion a year in comparison.

[abletonlive]

So you're using Hearthstone as an example when it's also P2W and has lootboxes?

Why is everybody so irrational on hackernews now.

[ayngg]

Under the context of industry impact, yes. If you wish to be pedantic, maybe I should have been clearer in saying that I consider everything past vanilla WoW to not be of the same caliber of the games that preceded it. Regardless, the point is that they are a shadow of their former self.