So can we all agree that lootboxes are fine as long as the contents are exclusively cosmetic?
Is it safe to say none of this controversy would have ever happened if EA just had the lootboxes unlock voice clips/ customizations for your clone trooper instead of trying to push the limit and lock away actual heroes?
Lootboxes in any form are fine.
It's not gambling if you always win something.
Look up the definition. Gambling is a win or lose not win or win.
Yes.
I don't care that you charge me out the ass for cosmetics, because it's not in the way of me fully enjoying the game.
>Gamble at the slots
>Put in $10, bet it all
>Machine says you won $0.10
>Can't play anymore because bet requires $1 per spin.
I could play a game of slots where I "always win" and it would still be gambling. I think the definition that saves digital content is that although it's definitely gambling from a normal perspective, from a legal perspective they're selling randomized, non-monetary prizes.
Yes but slots are at a casino you idiot. And there is also a chance you will not get anything.
Lootboxes are a guarantee that you get something. So it's not gambling dumbass.
Unlicensed casinos in the U.S. tried this shit by giving every losing player a "prize" which was just a worthless token or item alongside tokens that they could redeem for real money. Logic was they always won tokens. Feds shut that shit down real quick.
>Spend hundreds of dollars on cosmetic shit
>Servers for all these shitty games will either close or be dead in less than 5 years anyways
Just laugh at the people that empty their wallets over this shit and move on.
Being at a casino isn't what makes it gambling. The gambling being there is what makes it a casino. That's why gambling sites are called "online casinos".
The only reason you don't always win some trifling amount of money at the slots is because there's no legal reason you have to always win a penny. And be realistic, none of these cosmetic items have any tangible value. At best, they're worth speculator money, but if the game closes down all that value drops to zero. I feel like when you gamble for digital goods, you lose on every roll. I don't mind if people outright buy some cosmetic item on a secondary market - that's fine because they know exactly what they're getting, but when it's random chance that your money won't produce anything of value to you, it's, in a layman's sense, gambling.
Well then the government's wrong.
Look up the definition. It's not chance if there is reward.
Too long didn't read
Please stop replying to me
Are you saying the government is morally wrong for regulating those poor, unlicensed casinos just trying to get by in a harsh world full of sharks trying to rip the shirt off your back? Or are you saying that trick to get around the law should have worked and the feds made a mistake?
Because both possibilities are stupid, but they're different types of stupid and I don't understand which one you mean.
Make me
stockholm syndrome
Well the government's are usually wrong about most things anyway. And I already have said why I am right. You're just spewing bs and are trying to bait others and me.
10 cents has been deposited into your account
So, "don't tread on me or on the much larger snake eating me" stupid, is basically what I'm hearing.
>Well the government's are usually wrong about most things anyway
The government that has helped keep you alive and protected literally your entire life?
>waa waa I can't make a choice if I want to buy lootboxes or not
>The government that has helped keep you alive and protected literally your entire life?
Come on, I doubt he's in the tip of the upper class.
They did provide the local infrastructure, though.
>So can we all agree
No.
Joke aside, lootboxes are never okay when the game revolves (even partially) around them, i.e. they become a 'necessary step' in the game (play X number of games, earn e-money, use e-money to buy lootboxes, use the content of the lootbox to be better/prettier in the next round). This here is pure cancer because publishers will ALWAYS throw the balance of the game out of the window to incite you to use real money 'to save you time, because we understand not everyone has time to play the game :((( and time is money ;)))'
You know what would be quicker? The possibility to pay for the exact skin I want, when I want, instead of buying a chance to get the shit I want. Or (much, MUCH) better yet: allow it to be unlocked (FOR FREE) in the game, with an achievement or some shit
>b-but not will be able to get it then!
Indeed, only the ones who play the fucking game. Also, I'm not asking for 'kill 100000 people in multiplayer' kind of achievement, which are just pure grind; I'm talking about shit that have a decent chance of happening during play: double-kill with a grenade, 5 kills without dying, being MVP twice in a row, etc.
Spend money on random items non comerciable or consumibles, yes random part had begin study as addiction.
Just fucking remove the lootboxes and allow people to just buy whatever cosmetic you want for like, 5 bucks, and then have a gold option that you can grind out in-game
Remove the need for gambling to begin with
inb4
>b-but devs need monies
Not nearly as much as you think. I'm okay with feeding the devs' families, I'm not okay with making sure shareholders get their annual +10%
If I took money from your wallet and spent it on a jar of peanut butter from the store to give it to you, am I providing you with food?
Yes. And saving me a trip to the store it sounds like. You have no idea how much peanutbutter I go through.
Absolutely not, all those cosmetics should have come with the game I already paid money for. There's absolutely no justifying nickle and diming customers for content you could have given them from the start.
Only shills and Jews defend this type of blatant anti-consumer practice.
I forgot to mention that I'm taking a service fee of 50%.
the only game i see that did it right is injustice 2
Well that would make your analogy retarded because the government taxes me 30%, since I'm self-employed and I get a double-whammy with SSN/Medicaid tax.
But here's food for thought. Suppose that you go to the store and and buy peanut butter for me and the entire neighborhood. How much money did you save in gas prices if everyone had to drive out and buy peanut butter on their own? With enough people, by the sheer scale, you're saving thousands of dollars. If you want to spend those thousands of dollars to build - I don't - a trolley system down town to further justify people not wasting their money on cars or car insurance, that's just fine.
My real concern is just that if you're the only one buying peanut butter, you're maybe only buying one brand and inevitably creating a peanut butter monopoly when that industry wouldn't naturally trend towards monopoly. In that case, the peanut butter company will eventually start price gouging and the savings will vanish. Now, the only thing you could do then is regulate the peanut butter industry, but you'd have to divert some funds to an enforcement mechanism.
I mean tap-dancing Christ. Can I charge you for lessons, because you're clearly having a hard time spinning a yarn to support yourself, son. Do you understand any of this or you still on "don't tread on this big snake eating me, he has rights"? Because I can't help you if you don't want help.
lootboxes are fine if you don't have to spend money to get them/open them and they offer absolutely no p2w garbage
no
>the peanut butter company will eventually start price gouging
that's when you go for a different more cheaper brand
Not when there's only ONE peanut butter company. You don't de-regulate a monopoly in the bizarre assumption that there's dozens of alternatives to the monopoly. If your system creates a monopoly, you either have to devise a way to revert it, OR you have to regulate. You can't choose to keep the monopoly and abolish regulations.
Especially when it comes to the question of natural monopolies, like the ones you get with roadways, water, electricity, and, yes, ISPs.
Sometimes you just have to regulate. Otherwise things get trashy and there's nothing to do but wait for the catastrophic breaking point.
That's exactly how gambling works. It wouldn't be addictive if you always won the prize you wanted or lost with nothing in between. The reason gambling is addictive is the near constant tiny prizes that keep people at the table/slot that distracts them from the net loss of money they're taking. It's the winning small that's addictive, not the big jackpot.
monopoly is illegal
No they aren't. Not if the regulators say they aren't. Not if the monopoly is a big campaign donor. Monopolies aren't inherently illegal if the government doesn't deem it a problem. If the FTC doesn't deem a monopoly to be an issue, they leave it standing.
These days, there are plenty of monopolies and oligopolies in the US, and the FTC has no problem with it, probably because they get funding from those monopolies and oligopolies.
except that the law states that a company can't hold a monopoly
i think loot boxes are fine if
-cosmetics only (retail game)
or
-anything goes ("free" to play game)
What the fuck laws you reading? I hope you're not politically active because you're clearly one of those convenient idiots they rely on to keep themselves in office every year.
And this is why corporate lawyers get paid the big salaries. No group holds an explicit monopoly, but there are certainly plenty of agreements chock full of legalese designed to maintain the appearance of competition, but in reality only maintain territories for the incumbents. It falls well within the laws but functions exactly like a monopoly.
It’s a case by case basis. Being cosmetic is not an excuse as you’re still gating content you bought for full price behind another paywall. If you give them an inch, they’ll try to take the whole house with them on the next game and that’s what happned with EA, Waner bros and all the other rats.
Some cases like Ubisoft and AC origins having lootcrates seems to be something I can accept being both stupid and not really a big deal. The shop is out of the way enough and isn’t constantly being highlighted but they’ve still installed a feature in the game that lets you skip the game, what does it say about the developers mindset that they’re ok with you buying your way to not play their game they bothered to make? On the whole the system is redundant givin how fair the leveling system is for Origina but it could be removed tormoarrow and nothing would be lost. Imagine the time wasted in development that could’ve gone into the story of combat mechanics that were wasted because they needed to fit this shop it at all.
Than there’s the overwatches case. It’s egregious how long it takes level up to get a lootcrate and the fact that there’s always more voicelines and sprays added mixed in with the skins means that if I don’t pay up money, I may never get all the skins.
Even their changes to duplicates hampers your ability now to collect coins which can be used to buy skins, limited events or otherwise, limiting further how much you can avoid using money to buy crates. Literally the only thing blocking it from being utterly despise (like that stops others on Sup Forums from despising it ) it is the constant reminder that “it’s just cosmetic”.
It’s an insulting excuse. Why make something highly desirable but than pretend like the best way to get it isn’t just buying the crates and even if you bought 20 crates, you’re chances are still low. 100 is still low. Because there’s too much shit things in the crate that are worthless
I literally don't understand why this controversy exists. You get a loot box each time you level up. I'm silver now, and I have nearly every skin, etc, and I never payed for any boxes.
People are just lazy and retarded.
Lots of people also pay rent