3 ms·
The segment of HN's readership whose ideology is simply "privacy or bust" are unsurprisingly vehemently opposed to this, but for everyone else this is super rea
by ajkjk 4y ago
The segment of HN's readership whose ideology is simply "privacy or bust" are unsurprisingly vehemently opposed to this, but for everyone else this is super reasonable... anything to improve the integrity of the competition so your progression feels fair and meaningful.
- JadoJodo 4y agoThis is only necessary because Blizzard decided that IAPs + Free-to-Play (Overwatch 2) was worth more than charging customers outright for a quality product (Overwatch).
- aaomidi 4y agoThe alternative side is, games are very expensive in a lot of the world. F2P games are one of the only ways a lot more people get to enjoy them.
- Gigachad 4y agoIt’s becoming almost required to follow this business model. These games live and die on active player count. And the easiest way to get the most players is to lower the barriers to entry. You need to get players in for free and then charge the ones open to paying later with cosmetics.
- odessacubbage 4y agoi can guarantee you that requiring a wired connection for ranked matches would do far more to improve your experience than any kind of blizzard panopticon scheme will.
- ajkjk 4y agoThat's absurd. Match quality is fine even with people having slightly less than optimal ping. And then you get one troll every few games that just totally ruins it.