Blizzard's latest update to Overwatch seems to have posed another set of issues, mostly pertaining to the question of whether fake nice is better than true toxicity. Naturally, views on the subject vary as wildly as Blizzard's creativity.
You didn't even need to play Overwatch to hear about its community, with many players claiming it to be among the most toxic out there. Blizzard has always made addictive games and Overwatch only polished the formula further, but with the good came the bad.
Blizzard was hoping to make a difference with the endorsements update and make it they did, for better or for worse. In fact, Overwatch has turned into a pleasing community Overnight, prompting some to start waxing ethical over how real any of this is?
You've probably heard the standard response a million times - I'd rather have an honest a$$h01e than a fake nice guy. At least he's honest, right? It's one of those romanticised piece of verbal smithery that crosses each of our minds first.
But would you? Would you, really? Would you rather have a guy in your voice coms pretending to be nice, with the end result being normal communication, than a social miscreant doing what he does best - being himself? If he's going to pretend he's something he's not, why not pretend he's nice while you're enjoying your time off.
To be fair, the term toxicity has been oversimplified lately, because its core definition doesn't only mean being rude to others. The implications of its name are that these people breed more toxicity by trigger other, often unwilling participants, who end up being just as toxic as their "creators". It's definitely something to think about.
Overwatch's subreddit already has a lengthy thread debating the consequences of the update, although most seem to be more than fine. Every fifth response seems to indicate players genuinely seeing an improvement, even if it is conditioned with loot boxes.
Did Blizzard just fix toxicity? And is this going to last? Well, we guess we'll see once the Overlootbox hype subsides.