Part of the Problem

I would argue that for Stickers and CCGs the randomness and trading aspect is the point of the thing. It's a huge part of the experience. You're supposed to see what you get and go around trading with your friends to complete the sets/build your deck. No one goes into it not knowing that.

But without being forewarned about it, there is nothing to suggest that Battlefront II (As the most egregious example), is that kind of game. You're putting down £40-£50 for what you think is a fun Star Wars shooter. You wouldn't know that progression is heavily weighted towards this random sytem unless you were told before going in. It's shady as strawberry float.

Hime wrote:I'm sure there are a handful of cases that children have run up "hundreds and thousands" on card packs and the like but dont panini stickers, Pokemon cards, etc show that children enjoy the blind box thing? I totally agree that it needs some form of regulation, especially with the odds of getting certain items but maybe there is a middle ground?

Everyone enjoys it because our brains make us feel good for 'success' through luck/"skill", a biological loophole which things like lootboxes and blind boxes exploit for financial gain.

Trelliz wrote:

Hime wrote:I'm sure there are a handful of cases that children have run up "hundreds and thousands" on card packs and the like but dont panini stickers, Pokemon cards, etc show that children enjoy the blind box thing? I totally agree that it needs some form of regulation, especially with the odds of getting certain items but maybe there is a middle ground?

Everyone enjoys it because our brains make us feel good for 'success' through luck/"skill", a biological loophole which things like lootboxes and blind boxes exploit for financial gain.

Lots of things that we find fun are down to neurological impulses aren't they? If there is a method of attaining loot boxes without the need for additional financial investment then it comes down to the individual. As already said, I agree that regulation is necessary but that doesn't mean the system needs to be removed entirely if people enjoy it.

Perhaps I would say digital sales getting popular,especially for consoles.
Sure it can be convenient,but if said system eventually shut down,we dont know where your money went. You do have to invest money into physical storage,too.. The only real console i have a problem with is the PS Vita,because there's little to no physical release for the console now,pretty much everything is digital. You want to keep your save ? Plug it into your computer for half an hour. The 64gb memory card that can only be used on the console is about £70. Also,there's probably only the english version available,because there's no other customers in Europe than the UK

Doeragynn wrote:Perhaps I would say digital sales getting popular,especially for consoles.
Sure it can be convenient,but if said system eventually shut down,we dont know where your money went.

I've said it before, but the backup strategy for old consoles digital sales is piracy. Old consoles tend to be quite easy to crack, and then you can load """backups""" of software onto the console.

Hime wrote:As already said, I agree that regulation is necessary but that doesn't mean the system needs to be removed entirely if people enjoy it.

To me lootboxes etc are artificial fun; things you enjoy because your brain is wired to reward you with feel-good chemicals that compel you to do it more, compared to gameplay mechanics or systems which require your actual input. As an example there's a german GT Sport card game thing which consists of opening packs of cards to collect all of them; you get points per day and can't buy them, so its fundamentally pointless (i only signed up for some free ingame cash as a launch promo) however i still come back to it every now and again because my brain does a little dance when i get a new card. I'm not doing anything that requires thought, skill or creativity.

Winckle wrote:I've said it before, but the backup strategy for old consoles digital sales is piracy. Old consoles tend to be quite easy to crack, and then you can load """backups""" of software onto the console.

That's what i used to do with my games when i was lending them to friends on my Wii,haha. USB was quicker to load than the discs,too,so that wasn't that bad.

Trelliz wrote:

Hime wrote:As already said, I agree that regulation is necessary but that doesn't mean the system needs to be removed entirely if people enjoy it.

To me lootboxes etc are artificial fun; things you enjoy because your brain is wired to reward you with feel-good chemicals that compel you to do it more, compared to gameplay mechanics or systems which require your actual input. As an example there's a german GT Sport card game thing which consists of opening packs of cards to collect all of them; you get points per day and can't buy them, so its fundamentally pointless (i only signed up for some free ingame cash as a launch promo) however i still come back to it every now and again because my brain does a little dance when i get a new card. I'm not doing anything that requires thought, skill or creativity.

I agree but who are we to judge what people should enjoy?

Sure, and there's nothing inherently wrong with any form of gambling. I wouldn't judge someone who liked to take a few hundred quid to a casino or bet on sports or whatever.

I think the games industry needs to come up with a way to make sure that kids aren't engaging with those systems without having to go through a parent, and implement something like spend limits so someone vulnerable (addicted) couldn't blow thousands on in-game hats. I don't think that's even super restrictive, I think that's taking a basic level of responsibility for your own business model. I also feel consumers ought to reject very expensive games that are also pay-to-win, because they are such poor value, but ultimately it's down to the fans of those games to do that.

If lootboxes were classed as gambling wouldn't that almost immediately bring them under a huge amount of legal protections and limitations that people are asking for?
The only 'downside' would be that any game with lootboxes would automatically be given an 18 rating, and I don't think that's a bad thing at all.

Lastpostamorph wrote:If lootboxes were classed as gambling wouldn't that almost immediately bring them under a huge amount of legal protections and limitations that people are asking for?
The only 'downside' would be that any game with lootboxes would automatically be given an 18 rating, and I don't think that's a bad thing at all.

Except if you're Disney and you're locked into another 6 years of a 10 year contract with EA. Star Wars games with an 18 certificate?

Tell Karl his brother is dead wrote:Sure, and there's nothing inherently wrong with any form of gambling. I wouldn't judge someone who liked to take a few hundred quid to a casino or bet on sports or whatever.

I think the games industry needs to come up with a way to make sure that kids aren't engaging with those systems without having to go through a parent, and implement something like spend limits so someone vulnerable (addicted) couldn't blow thousands on in-game hats. I don't think that's even super restrictive, I think that's taking a basic level of responsibility for your own business model. I also feel consumers ought to reject very expensive games that are also pay-to-win, because they are such poor value, but ultimately it's down to the fans of those games to do that.

Agreed.

As for pay to win, don't loot boxes theoretically remove that model as you can't just buy the better stuff? Obviously if you buy more loot boxes you have a better chance of getting good stuff but it's not as simple as buying the best thing in the game.

I also think the industry needs to tone down the hysteria a bit. Having now played Battlefront 2 it isn't nearly as big a problem as the internet would have you believe, the base level stuff is perfectly competitive.

Lastpostamorph wrote:If lootboxes were classed as gambling wouldn't that almost immediately bring them under a huge amount of legal protections and limitations that people are asking for?
The only 'downside' would be that any game with lootboxes would automatically be given an 18 rating, and I don't think that's a bad thing at all.

If kids are putting racking up thousands on credit cards now, what is as an 18 certificate going to do?

Hime wrote:

Lastpostamorph wrote:If lootboxes were classed as gambling wouldn't that almost immediately bring them under a huge amount of legal protections and limitations that people are asking for?
The only 'downside' would be that any game with lootboxes would automatically be given an 18 rating, and I don't think that's a bad thing at all.

If kids are putting racking up thousands on credit cards now, what is as an 18 certificate going to do?

If all of a sudden a parent sees an 18 rating on the latest Fifa they're going to ask what the hell it has that certificate for when it's just Fifa, which means they're suddenly going to be made aware of things like Fifa Ultimate team gambling box bullshit. That might make them suddenly think twice about wanting their children exposed to easy online gambling like this and not buy the game, or at the very least will make them decide to de-link their credit card from the Xbox/Playstation and all of a sudden kids lose the easy access to accidental massive spends.

Well, you age-restrict things to correctly flag and label them, not with the expectation that it won't ever end up in the hands of a kid.

Tell Karl his brother is dead wrote:Well, you age-restrict things to correctly flag and label them, not with the expectation that it won't ever end up in the hands of a kid.

Oh absolutely, the latest Fifa having an 18 rating won't necessarily stop a child being bought the game, but at least non-gaming parents will suddenly become aware of lootboxes, and how predatory they can be, that most likely they aren't really aware of right now despite the attention that Battlefront 2 got.

Hime wrote:...it isn't nearly as big a problem as the internet would have you believe, the base level stuff is perfectly competitive.

If I have read your thoughts on loot boxes correctly, Hime, I believe that you are pretty comfortable with loot boxes in games on the basis that you don't have to buy them. I think part of the issue that many folk are having with them is that they don't want them in the game; they don't want the option for randomised additional purchases to be a significant feature of gaming.

For me, I chose not to purchase Battlefront II because of the alleged loot box focus and impacts. I don't want to see that kind of approach in gaming; I don't object to buying additional content (levels, characters and outfits) but the "gambling" approach is just not something I want to see become a standard (even though it perhaps already is).

I am not suggesting there is anything wrong with your view that "you can just ignore it" but I prefer to show publishers that I don't like their approach by not buying the product.

Of course, apologies in advance if my interpretation of your stance is incorrect .

Some self regulation from publishers wouldn't hurt, but we know that'll never happen.

Gemini73 wrote:Some self regulation from publishers wouldn't hurt, but we know that'll never happen.

Publishers:

I mentioned it earlier but I find the GTA style fake currency you can buy with real money just as bad. Here's a bunch of cool gooseberry fool you can spend literally hundreds of real pounds on because our in game currency is hyper inflated.

Yeah you can grind but it makes grinding a bore to try and manipulate you into getting shark cards. I'd rather buy a season pass at least it's clear what you get for your money versus fake currency that makes it hard to discern worth.