When playing Battlefield 5 beta last weekend, I was actually thinking about this. I'm wondering how they'll approach it in that game. I have a bit of a double feeling about this as a Belgian - on the one hand I think it's a good direction for the industry. We didn't have that crap a decade ago and I'll be happy to see it removed. OTOH, I hope they don't just remove content for the Belgian market as it'd potentially c…
> It is EA after all, a company I don't have a lot of faith in. Why are you playing their games then?
Because they are fun? I mean, I hate a lot of things that EA does, but I still enjoy BF1 and Madden.
> Video game publishers have been trying consistently to implement a "less for more" attitude when it comes to their products. Isn't maximizing profits just a natural consequence of having a for-profit business? It's not just evil video game publishers, everybody wants to sell less for more.
>Isn't maximizing profits just a natural consequence of having a for-profit business? It's not just evil video game publishers, everybody wants to sell less for more. I think less for more naturally would come with inflation across the board but the less for more approach isn't the only way to increase profits or even the most popular one. The computer industry for example is known for scaling by giving more for less…
That is a good point. Since every IP is a state sponsored monopoly, this leads to the state of the game industry. You don't add loot boxes to a new franchise, but to existing ones that people are emotionally invested in. For example, you might have competition in the genre of action RPG set in space, but Star Wars is a monopoly, and another company cannot legally make an alternative, so the people who want a Star Wars game are a more captive audience that can be maximally exploited.
I'm so happy with this, it will create a precedent. I know people that have spent a lot of money in counter-strike boxes, it works like slots machines, designed to keep you exited while you get a reward. The worst thing is now is the rule in every game (pubg, heartstone and so on..). Good job Belgium!
Counterstrike boxes contain purely cosmetics. I can't get wound up about that. You can even buy the thing you actually want on the open market. CS:GO is not a game using lots of shitty in game mechanics/restrictions etc to drive people to spend money in order to play/compete. Same with Dota2.
It's still gambling... even more so if you can exchange the cosmetics back for real money. Which means it's still exploiting some people's gambling addition tendencies, which is the justification for gambling regulations in the first place. They don't regulate video poker because the gambling is making that arcade machine less fun.
That seems like a hack that won't hold up in court. Now it's still loot box gambling, but with the n+1 th box instead.
Actually I think that's a common salesman trick ? Put the product in the hand of the customer, so that they feel they already have it, then they have to pay.
Its that too, but that aspect of it isnt gambling. It's the part where buying the existing loot box gives you access to a second, yet unknown, gambling outcome.
The problem is that in their pursuit of profit they are creating slot machines with the actual game on the side. Then they are crippling the game so that you have to use the slot machine to have any sense of fun while playing the game. Therefore there are two choices: Either they get regulated as other slot machine makers around the world, including being taxed as both a slot machine maker and as a slot machine opera…
Which games are you talking about that require you to open loot boxes in order to have fun in the game? The most popular games that I can think of with loot boxes, Hearthstone, Dota 2, Overwatch, CS:GO, PUBG, all either have strictly cosmetic items in the loot boxes, or have ways of getting the loot boxes free through gameplay. Saying that major developers are creating games that require you to buy loot boxes in orde…
> ...have ways of getting the loot boxes free through gameplay...
That's actually rather reprehensible as well since the free loot boxes involve spending extensive time in the game grinding. These children are essentially Judas goats; living enticements to other children to join their friend in the game and possibly spend money.
They were also heavily criticized for adopting this game mechanic in star wars battlefront and eventually decided to drop it. I don't even understand the appeal of wanting to play games that have this sort of predatory feature.
It's been around for a while and I've honestly never even been remotely attracted to games like that.
I definitely feel like this has exponentially increased since iOS games called 'freemium'. Generally, the game will be free but then things can take 30minutes to be accomplished unless you buy diamonds that cost 1$ and you get instant gratification.
With MTG you can skip the whole booster buying and just get the cards you want from people who have them. The rarest most desirable cards in standard are $10-$50 at most. If you want a rare overwatch skin you have no option but keep buying boxes until you get it.
This is more nuanced. You get in-game currency for skins/cards you already have in both Hearthstone and Overwatch, which is equivalent to being able to sell your cards
With hearthstone, can't you also "sell" any card you have for in-game currency, in addition to getting currency when you obtain a duplicate? In overwatch, you just get currency for duplicates (or randomly from a box).
They were also heavily criticized for adopting this game mechanic in star wars battlefront and eventually decided to drop it. I don't even understand the appeal of wanting to play games that have this sort of predatory feature. It's been around for a while and I've honestly never even been remotely attracted to games like that. I definitely feel like this has exponentially increased since iOS games called 'freemium'.…
> I don't even understand the appeal of wanting to play games that have this sort of predatory feature.
For some people, the fun of the real gameplay outways the negative of the lootboxes
Mandatory disclosure: I am a programmer working for EA and the following are my personal opinions. I do not represent EA in any official capacity. It's my strong opinion that the whole loot box phenomenon makes games as a whole worse. For me, it's not the gambling aspects of it, per se. I am an avid Magic: the Gathering player and never decried the way its loot boxes (boosters) work. It's the fact that, the way these…
Yes, I have been thinking this for a while as well. The issue isn't the microtransactions themselves, but the natural incentives associated with them. If you are old enough to remember coin operated arcades, they operated on the same principle. Just one more coin and you can beat this boss! It really hurt the game mechanic in a lot of cases, but I'm sure it improved profitability. I really hate seeing this trend come…
> If you are old enough to remember coin operated arcades, they operated on the same principle. Just one more coin and you can beat this boss! It really hurt the game mechanic in a lot of cases, but I'm sure it improved profitability.
I beg to differ. Most of the arcade games of yore were gated on skill; you could avoid having to pop in another quarter if you played well enough, and that was where the fun came from.
Where is the skill and gameplay involved in spinning a virtual roulette wheel until a powerful enough unit or item pops out to let you advance to the next level of gameplay? And, of course, the answer is that there is none; it's merely taking advantage of those prone to gambling addiction.