• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

MisterHero
Super Member
(10-06-2017, 09:44 PM)
MisterHero's Avatar

Originally Posted by shimon

As long as people buy them they will be part of gaming now. And people DO buy them. Don't expect them to go away EVER.

I would have bought the GTAO DLC as expansions but not with their Shark Card scheme. You only afford a few features for every $100 card you buy. LOL
JeffGrubb
Member
(10-06-2017, 09:45 PM)
JeffGrubb's Avatar

Originally Posted by Maintenance

Count the expansions, dlcs, etc. They already do.

A lot of games that introduce loot boxes make map packs -- that they previously would have sold -- free for everyone. I agree it sucks when they don't do at least that.
Mesoian
Member
(10-06-2017, 09:46 PM)
Mesoian's Avatar

Originally Posted by Plumpbiscuit

That was the argument that was said to me in response to the whole Shadow of War/NBA/Forza/Battlefront controversy with loot boxes. To cut a long, long argument short: I am against loot boxes in paid-for AAA games, and in fact the only one who was in the group conversation, and everyone else were okay with loot boxes. However, a collective agreement by them concluded that loot boxes are good and that they are fine with it because "life isn't fair" and that they PREFER people to buy P2W loot boxes for their advantage because "it's more satisfying to kill them knowing they have an advantage over me".

Am I out of touch here or is this it? Are [P2W] loot boxes in $60 AAA games here to stay now? When people are saying to me they LIKE loot boxes like this, and I bring up how they could have been free cheat codes or if tournaments and real life events like a football match introduced unfair elements, how that fairs against their argument, they call me out for being ridiculous. For instance, I said, if life isn't fair then would they be okay if goalkeepers paid referees to shorten their goal length as this is P2W and it would make them satisfied having scored a goal in a net that is shorter than their own one. I also said what if tournaments with cash prizes allowed its participants to buy loot boxes over other players for an instant advantage, and at that point, I was thrown with insults and being called ridiculous etc and some of them left.

Is this what the games industry is now? It seems like loot boxes are here for fucking good.

That is the opinion of someone who doesn't care.

"Yeah, the other team and the rules are favoring the other team for no reason other than favoritism. OH WELL I GUESS WE'LL JUST ROLL WITH IT BECAUSE LIFE SUCKS RIGHT!!?!!!"

No. Balance your shit. If your game requires outside purchases in order to get your character in fighting shape, you've ruined your own game balance and your game is bad.
Evil Monkey DTT
Banned
(10-06-2017, 09:46 PM)
Loot boxes are here to stay until people stop buying games ruined by them. We vote with out wallets and for me we crossed my level of too much a long time ago.

Also I think loot boxes are scummier then microtranactions because it's gambling without any real benefit. Gambling was supposed to be illegal online and I see no difference between this shit and cs go lotto.
Arkeband
Banned
(10-06-2017, 09:46 PM)

Originally Posted by shimon

As long as people buy them they will be part of gaming now. And people DO buy them. Don't expect them to go away EVER.

I've said this before, gamers are fucking morons and will buy anything. Lootboxes are our own fault for not being discerning consumers. Look at all the stupid collectors editions publishers have given us that end up selling - Dead Island Riptide came with a bloody woman's torso with big tits and somehow that sold. Gamers are fucking idiots, holding out their wallets for publishers to freely take from. It's undeniable.
Lime
Member
(10-06-2017, 09:47 PM)
Lime's Avatar
it is supremely fucked up that so many games are straight up gambling delivery mechanisms
Killdozer
Member
(10-06-2017, 09:48 PM)
Killdozer's Avatar

Originally Posted by Plumpbiscuit

...
Snip
...

My first questions to you are:
How old are these people?
Would you consider them members of the 'rich kids on twitter' demographic?
Would you consider them members of the 'shrieking tweens that like watching "Lets Play" videos' demographic?
Are they acolytes of pewdiepie?
NullPointer
#INTESTINAL
(10-06-2017, 09:50 PM)
NullPointer's Avatar

Originally Posted by JeffGrubb

Loot boxes are here for good.

Fuck that. Guess I'll just continue to shift gears away from these AAA slot machines.

Right now at least there are still plenty of alternatives.
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
(10-06-2017, 09:53 PM)
Hero_of_the_Day's Avatar

Originally Posted by NullPointer

Fuck that. Guess I'll just continue to shift gears away from these AAA slot machines.

Right now at least there are still plenty of alternatives.

Yep. This is what I said in the Battlefront thread. I was 100% buying BF. I am 100% not now. I have a fuck ton of awesome games on my Switch to catch up on, Divinity 2 on PC, and Mario and Wolfenstein at the end of the month. I have no problem not supporting this shit. There are plenty other games out there.
Plumpbiscuit
(10-06-2017, 09:54 PM)
Plumpbiscuit's Avatar
Alright guys judge for yourselves, I copied the text over from Discord and replaced the names. What's the best way to link here a long text convo?
AkimbO_Arcana
Member
(10-06-2017, 09:55 PM)
AkimbO_Arcana's Avatar

Originally Posted by Aters

People also voted with their wallet for Heroin.

Heroin > Loot Boxes
Transistor
Banned
(10-06-2017, 09:55 PM)

Originally Posted by Aters

Don't blame f2p games for the shit publishers do in their $60 games. Loot boxes are perfectly fine in f2p games.

I'm not blaming them, I'm simply saying publishers saw it and still that model.
Crayon
(10-06-2017, 09:56 PM)
Crayon's Avatar

Originally Posted by NullPointer

Fuck that. Guess I'll just continue to shift gears away from these AAA slot machines.

I'm taking a hard line on this as well. When hell freezes over and we get a truly Innovative can't-miss game from a AAA publisher that includes loot boxes maybe I'll reconsider.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
(10-06-2017, 09:56 PM)
Relaxed Muscle's Avatar
I feel mobile gaming and others, showed that are quite a number of ppl that enjoys enough income to spend on lootboxes or rather the value the time they save quite highly.

I think the problem is:

1. How we reached this point in AAA industry were 60Ä + 30Ä season passes + DLC aren't enough to sustain it.

2. How this affects the design of the games: I was playing BF0 for a couple of weeks and it was unbearable the amount of grinding to unlock equipment (and the amount of unlockables), how slow was to level up clases compared to past games in the series. And the reasoning is simple, unlike in past games now you can buy kits that unlock all the stuff.

I can see myself skipping most of these games in the trends follows and is as bad as is becoming.
Aztechnology
Member
(10-06-2017, 09:57 PM)
Aztechnology's Avatar
We've established precedent and your average gamer doesn't care enough about being taken advantage of to stop buying something that gives them a high in the moment because they can't see the long term effects. In fact I'd say humans in general are horrible about long term thinking. In America we definitely perpetuate this way of thinking too, with "Carpe Diem" like mantras and focus on enjoying the moment you're in now and not worrying about the consequences later etc. I think there's a lot of factors at play that lead to ant-consumer practices being used and disgustingly even defended by consumers. But it's fighting the current at this point.
Plumpbiscuit
(10-06-2017, 10:03 PM)
Plumpbiscuit's Avatar

Originally Posted by Killdozer

My first questions to you are:
How old are these people?

Adults with jobs, most of them.

Originally Posted by Killdozer

Would you consider them members of the 'rich kids on twitter' demographic?

Hmm... not exactly, but not not completely untrue.

Originally Posted by Killdozer

Would you consider them members of the 'shrieking tweens that like watching "Lets Play" videos' demographic?

Nah.

Originally Posted by Killdozer

Are they acolytes of pewdiepie?

No. :P
Demacabre
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:07 PM)
Demacabre's Avatar
So I'll present this again as my point of view.

I am alright with direct sale microtransanction. You want "X" item in addition to the purchase of the game and Publisher wants to charge something stupid like $1,000.00. You know the price and you know what you are getting. You make the decision. Even in my not so micro hyperbole, it's a straight up transaction. (We can have discussion how DLC cuts up full games and I might end up agree with you. BUT it is still a legit and direct transaction.)

It's employing RNG and gambling mechanics that the issue arises. Don't care if it's cosmetic, paywalling, or game breaking. It's scum and shit. Even if your game of choice uses said RNG profit to provide the community with free maps or whatever. It still implies it is using manipulative practices to exploit those with a compulsive tendency to that end. (And it takes some serious social darwinism "I got mine" logic to justify that)

That's scummy and it needs regulation like gambling. If regulation happens and the publisher wants to employ these tactics and abides to whatever rules are established, pay the taxes, discloses the RNG mechanics, they can have loot boxes, crates, or a literal slot machine on their start screen for all I care. Make your record profits and I won't make a peep.
Necron
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:08 PM)
Necron's Avatar

Originally Posted by thegirlleastlikelyto

A better fanbase.

Guess 1st post in the technical advancements thread was indeed correct.
Killdozer
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:10 PM)
Killdozer's Avatar

Originally Posted by Plumpbiscuit

Adults with jobs, most of them.

Hmm... not exactly, but not not completely untrue.

Nah.

No. :P

Thanks for the clarification. It's strange because I game with a bunch of people that fall in the same demographics, half of which work in gaming and half that don't, and I can't think of a single person that actually advocates this. The only people I can think of that could possibly be OK with those are those that I stopped regularly gaming with about ~7 years ago since they were mostly into CoD at the time.
Fox Mulder
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:12 PM)
Fox Mulder's Avatar
I just really don't care.

I'm an adult and just won't buy games with fucking disgusting implementations. Despite all the crying about Forza 7, I'm actually playing it and progressing the same way I always have. The game is giving me plenty of cars and money and I'm not feeling forced to buy shit.
kikiribu
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:13 PM)
kikiribu's Avatar
I’m not buying anymore games that have them. Sold my copy of Overwatch a long time ago. Don’t give a fuck
The Last Wizard
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:17 PM)
The Last Wizard's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rellik

People buy them so they will stay. People voted with their wallet.

Simple as this. Canít even say itís just casuals cause head over to any overwatch thread during an event and see how many people tripping over themselves to buy a bunch of lootboxes.
TetraGenesis
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:18 PM)
TetraGenesis's Avatar
This thread was the ultimate twist, hahahahaha
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
(10-06-2017, 10:20 PM)
TechnicPuppet's Avatar
I've never purchased one and despite playing hundreds of hours of Rocket League I really have no idea how the crates work.

It really annoys me seeing folk sitting not playing the game cause they are typing instead, about trading.

I have no issue with cosmetics I suppose though I do think they should just sell the things and let people buy them.
Vlade
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:21 PM)
Vlade's Avatar
I actually like randomness and dealing with the hand im dealt. If that's the balance of the game. That's not the case with loot box games at all, it's a predatory exploitation of the fact that publishing games is hard leaving you with few choices.

The idea that loot boxes are good because life isn't fair is idiotic. It's like saying i like reading books, but i prefer to buy random pages and just read what i get.

Originally Posted by Sami+

If I'm paying real money I should get what I pay for, it's really simple.

Exactly.
Rain City Gamer
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:21 PM)
Rain City Gamer's Avatar

Originally Posted by 2n2

I stongly disagree with this statement. Just because they are cosmetic doesn't mean they should get a pass on predatory practices. Also, this is how they creep into the areas you're concerned about.

I don't mean "in the clear" as in it is OK. I just mean that people won't complain or make as big of a deal about it if it is only cosmetic stuff.

EDIT:
I also want to say that the days of gamers getting more for free are unfortunately over. (Just like we will never not pay for our bags on Airlines) Companies and devs will get your money anyway they can. Our buying patterns will govern most of it but it will be there in some form whether it is a season's pass / lootboxes / Microtransactions, etc. AAA games are just too expensive to produce and consumers have shown that they will invest in games that they enjoy playing. Don't like it? Don't invest. But that becomes an issue when if you don't invest you are at a disadvantage which is why the uproar has happened with Forza, Shadow of War, Battlefront II, (Destiny 2 last month)
Sami+
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:23 PM)
Sami+'s Avatar
If I'm paying real money I should get what I pay for, it's really simple.
TheShampion
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:24 PM)
TheShampion's Avatar
I feel like their reasoning is a symptom of a greater problem of people just accepting shit instead of taking a stand. Acknowledging its not fair, and then rationalizing it as "life isn't fair," sounds like something a boss would say to justify unpaid overtime or something,
FRS1987
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:26 PM)
FRS1987's Avatar
I'm conflicted on the issue.

On one hand games have become way more expensive to develop and back in the cartridge era in the 90s, new SNES games were 60$ and sometimes even higher. I hate the idea of loot-boxes and micro-transactions because you're locking content through a paywall no matter what it is, be it cosmetic or game-play.

Back then these things were locked through playing the game. Want this cool new outfit/character/item? Do something cool/difficult to unlock it. Awesome. Want to get another ending? Beat it in less time or harder difficulties. I don't agree with the idea that these should be locked by a paywall and loot-boxes, sure you can continue to play for free and HOPE to get a certain skin but, your chances are near nil to even get it so you're forced to pay for ANOTHER chance of the possibly not even getting the item you want.

I already paid for the game, why do I have to pay more for an option? I can understand on mobile and F2P games because that's the only way to make a profit but not for "completed" games that end up having 40% worth of content that is later drip fed to us in DLC and paywalls.

TLDR; don't agree with it, We used to be able to unlock through playing and toolboxes and micro-transactions should be saved for F2P games

/end rant
Human Trashcan
Banned
(10-06-2017, 10:27 PM)
It's literally gambling. It's not complicated.
Transistor
Banned
(10-06-2017, 10:30 PM)

Originally Posted by Human Trashcan

It's literally gambling. It's not complicated.

And it needs to be treated as such
orborborb
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:32 PM)
I prefer pay to win loot boxes over cosmetic loot boxes because creating cosmetics people want to buy ruins how the game looks and my immersion which I always care about while pay-to-win ruins the competitive aspect of games which I usually don't care about.

In both cases I can just avoid playing the game if it's filled with ugly cosmetics or isn't fun to progress in without paying more than the experience is worth..

BUT

When the game is an always online service and there's no way to play the immersive and balanced good version of a game because it's been replaced by an ugly unbalanced version, that's when I get angry that they've stolen the thing I paid for away from me.
ZangBa
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:33 PM)
ZangBa's Avatar
Loot boxes containing P2W aspects are bad for game design and balance. It's worth criticizing games that employ that nonsense.

Loot boxes with just cosmetics, totally fine. Complaining about these is just straight up entitlement to me. Cosmetics are meaningless, it's basically just new age unlockables.
CountAntonius
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:34 PM)
CountAntonius's Avatar
Plenty of games have died because of pay 2 win schemes on PC. Important to note cosmetic loot boxes are not pay to win and have generally been embraced by the PC market for years. That's not going away. But pay 2 win has killed communities on PC real quick. Hopefully that continues to be the case.
Avallon
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:40 PM)
Avallon's Avatar

Originally Posted by To Far Away Times

How good can a game realistically be if it has loot boxes? What's the ceiling? 7/10 maybe?

Overwatch.

Originally Posted by Sami+

If I'm paying real money I should get what I pay for, it's really simple.

How are you not getting EXACTLY what you paid for?
Tapejara
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:41 PM)
Tapejara's Avatar

Originally Posted by Demacabre

So I'll present this again as my point of view.

I am alright with direct sale microtransanction. You want "X" item in addition to the purchase of the game and Publisher wants to charge something stupid like $1,000.00. You know the price and you know what you are getting. You make the decision. Even in my not so micro hyperbole, it's a straight up transaction. (We can have discussion how DLC cuts up full games and I might end up agree with you. BUT it is still a legit and direct transaction.)

It's employing RNG and gambling mechanics that the issue arises. Don't care if it's cosmetic, paywalling, or game breaking. It's scum and shit. Even if your game of choice uses said RNG profit to provide the community with free maps or whatever. It still implies it is using manipulative practices to exploit those with a compulsive tendency to that end. (And it takes some serious social darwinism "I got mine" logic to justify that)

That's scummy and it needs regulation like gambling. If regulation happens and the publisher wants to employ these tactics and abides to whatever rules are established, pay the taxes, discloses the RNG mechanics, they can have loot boxes, crates, or a literal slot machine on their start screen for all I care. Make your record profits and I won't make a peep.

In the Battlefront II thread a few people were saying the new lootbox system is essentially no different than the Shortcut microtransactions in previous Battlefield games, wherein you would pay a fee to unlock all of the items for a class. I asked how lootboxes were a better value proposition to consumers:

Originally Posted by Tapejara

Compared to the shortcut kits in Battlefield, isn't this a worse value proposition for consumers though? If in Battlefield 1 you wanted to save on time and unlock all of the medic gear it'd cost $13 (CAD, not sure what USD prices are or if that's the original price) for a shortcut kit and you'd know exactly what you're paying for. While we don't know the exact details of lootbox implementation in Battlefront 2, it does seem unlikely that spending $13 on boxes would yield the same amount of content as a one time shortcut kit purchase, whereas spending $30 on crates still wouldn't guarantee you getting the items you want (comparatively all of the Battlefield 1 infantry shortcuts are available in a $40 bundle). I just can't see how this a better value proposition for the consumer compared to the one-time purchase of a shortcut kit.

Even if people feel they can ignore lootboxes, I still can't see how their implementation is better than one-time microtransactions. I mean, there's certainly a case against MTs as well, but compared to lootboxes they're easily the better option. At least I know what I'm paying for.
jayu26
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:43 PM)
jayu26's Avatar

"it's more satisfying to kill them knowing they have an advantage over me".

Where is the sportsmanship?
Phrozenflame500
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:44 PM)
Phrozenflame500's Avatar
Defending P2W on the grounds of "it's more satisfying to be at a disadvantage!" feels like a gigantic bait argument to me.

Originally Posted by Avallon

Overwatch.

Probably the best implementation of lootboxes, albeit it doesn't really fit OP's example cause it's all cosmetic.
tiebreaker
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:44 PM)
tiebreaker's Avatar

Originally Posted by MotionBlue

What was this group?

WB's investor meeting
Forward
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:44 PM)
Forward's Avatar

Originally Posted by JeffGrubb

Games went from $50 to $60 with the Xbox 360 in 2005. $60 in 2005 is worth $76 today. So games have essentially seen a significant price cut and publishers have eaten that. On top of that, games are more expensive to make today than they were in 2005. So game creators are feeling it on both sides. This is why they try to drive up the average value of each player by introducing collector's editions, season passes, and loot boxes -- $60 isn't enough for games.

Holy myopia, Batman!

Pay scales, inflation, housing costs...

I hate when these stupid non-arguments pop up. Vacuous vacuums.

Money being worth less per dollar today affects everything.
nuclearaddict
Banned
(10-06-2017, 10:45 PM)
I can't wait for AAA games to begin utilizing energy credits.

*in the middle of a heated Battlefield match* Uh oh! You've used up all of your energy credits for the day. Please head to the loot store to purchase more to continue : D
Transistor
Banned
(10-06-2017, 10:46 PM)

Originally Posted by nuclearaddict

I can't wait for AAA games to begin utilizing energy credits.

*in the middle of a heated Battlefield match* Uh oh! You've used up all of your energy credits for the day. Please head to the loot store to purchase more to continue : D

Shut up, they'll hear you!
Papo Swing
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:52 PM)
Papo Swing's Avatar
This again. I don't know why it bothers me this much, maybe it is because eI works with software and I see how stupid fighting against it this is, but it really has made me passionate about it.

Loot Boxes are the video games industries way of monetizing gaming as a service. ALL software everywhere in all fields are going towards the SaaS model. There is no stopping it we have bought in without a choice.

So instead of bitching and whining as a community that they should just it away we should stop and think that we cannot stop the future/change and maybe come up with ideas to battle it or alternatives.

Originally Posted by nuclearaddict

I can't wait for AAA games to begin utilizing energy credits.

*in the middle of a heated Battlefield match* Uh oh! You've used up all of your energy credits for the day. Please head to the loot store to purchase more to continue : D

Oh come on. Arcade game where doing this 20 years ago and it is impossible it would get this bad. I don't get the exaggeration, it is not realistic. I'll et a lead pipe if it ever gets that bad.
NullPointer
#INTESTINAL
(10-06-2017, 10:54 PM)
NullPointer's Avatar

Originally Posted by nuclearaddict

I can't wait for AAA games to begin utilizing energy credits.

*in the middle of a heated Battlefield match* Uh oh! You've used up all of your energy credits for the day. Please head to the loot store to purchase more to continue : D

I can think of several ways they could pull off exactly this with the way these AAA and GaaS games are structured. Same end result but they'd never have to call it energy.

The design of these games nowadays allows for all kinds of indirect monetization efforts, which is why I'm wary of a lot of the fundamental design trends we're seeing, even outside of any announcement of microtransactions and crates. The field is being prepped.
Avallon
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:54 PM)
Avallon's Avatar

Originally Posted by Phrozenflame500

Probably the best implementation of lootboxes, albeit it doesn't really fit OP's example cause it's all cosmetic.

It wasn't directed at the OP. It was directed at this post:

Originally Posted by To Far Away Times

How good can a game realistically be if it has loot boxes? What's the ceiling? 7/10 maybe?

Deputy Moonman
(10-06-2017, 10:54 PM)
Deputy Moonman's Avatar
I saw the thread title and immediately started laughing. Excellent point not
Giga Man
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:55 PM)
Giga Man's Avatar
I'm more baffled that they got so upset with you that they insulted you and left. Like... do they identify with loot boxes or something? I can't wrap my head around the reactions.
Piscus
Member
(10-06-2017, 10:56 PM)
Piscus's Avatar
We don't buy and play games to replicate life's fairness.
uncle_koploski
Banned
(10-06-2017, 10:57 PM)
Well designed video games are supposed to be fair.

That's good game design.
AAMARMO
Banned
(10-06-2017, 10:58 PM)
So you saying its okay for kids get addicted to gambling?

Thread Tools