Are lootboxes gambling & should games be regulated. BF2 and OW under investigation

[zito]

Yep, EA shook the cage too hard and this is the outcome of it.

glorious

now I'm curious to see companys way around lootboxes. Think blizzard can get away with what they did in china and add currency to each box?

[Jtbrig7390]

glorious

now I'm curious to see companys way around lootboxes. Think blizzard can get away with what they did in china and add currency to each box?

Nope because that won't matter if these types of games are legally labeled as gambling. Many stores like Gamestop,Amazon.Best Buy will outright just not sell these games ether. To add there will be a new ranting label for the US at lease as well. At current M is 17+ and A is 18+. But you can't gamble unless you are 21+.

The only way around this is company's start to charge more for DLC/Games to make up for the loss of lootbox's.

[varren]

Good stuff. Loot boxes/micro transactions are a fucking blight on gaming.

[Belize]

The only way around this is company's start to charge more for DLC/Games to make up for the loss of lootbox's.

Or they could just you know.. be happy with being profitable instead of squeezing every single penny from their customers.

We've already had proof that games are profitable without nickle and diming every little thing. See: GTA and Take 2.

[Jtbrig7390]

Or they could just you know.. be happy with being profitable instead of squeezing every single penny from their customers.

We've already had proof that games are profitable without nickle and diming every little thing. See: GTA and Take 2.

GTA being the only game Take 2 isn't trying to nickle and dime people in. Have you not seen the recent NBA game?

But ya for the most part you are correct, but greedy company's will be greedy.

[unfilteredJW]

I can just imagine Blizzard face-palming as the rampant greed of EA brings the entire little system they've been working to set up crashing down and catching all the other AAA developers in the backlash. Political action was coming as soon as that reddit comment made history.. especially at this time right now with all the craziness going on in US politics, there are many who will be happy to leap on board and score a political win by attacking something unpopular with the public.

Especially at a voting bloc that largely stayed home on election day.

[Aliven]

I can just imagine Blizzard face-palming as the rampant greed of EA brings the entire little system they've been working to set up crashing down and catching all the other AAA developers in the backlash. Political action was coming as soon as that reddit comment made history.. especially at this time right now with all the craziness going on in US politics, there are many who will be happy to leap on board and score a political win by attacking something unpopular with the public.

Blizzard brought it on itself. They bring lootboxes on stage. Yes, loot boxes existed before overwatch but overwatch make such an impact that nearly every fucking game now has some sort of lootboxes.

[Cattleya]

Or they could just you know.. be happy with being profitable instead of squeezing every single penny from their customers.

We've already had proof that games are profitable without nickle and diming every little thing. See: GTA and Take 2.

i'm sure there are better examples you could've used than GTA, considering its incessant focus on only GTA Online because it sells Shark Cards.

As for Overwatch, they could just, y'know, make a shop where you buy cosmetics rather than boxes with a chance at cosmetics.

[Vespian]

Always online/DRM? Every Ubisoft, Blizzard, and EA game requires it. While I was continue the good fight, I'm not holding my breath. That said, I'm more concerned ATM about Net Neutrality than I am about loot boxes.

---off topic---
There is a difference there though. DRM is invasive, intrusive and disruptive of your system. It runs on your system to prevent you from copying or otherwise hacking/cracking the game. Online only is simply requiring that active connection.

The end result is the same, you need to have a legal copy, but one is designed to keep you online. The other is designed to BE online.

Like the difference between Sim City and Diablo III. One never really needed to be online only, but was crammed in to be a form of DRM, the other can't go without being online. (Which is a development philosophy, obviously, but a legit one).

That's all I'm going to discuss on this subject, but my statement is; Online Only /=DRM
---off topic---

[Dhrizzle]

Or they could just you know.. be happy with being profitable instead of squeezing every single penny from their customers.

We've already had proof that games are profitable without nickle and diming every little thing. See: GTA and Take 2.

You mean the GTA that made $500m in microtransactions and prompted Rockstar to say they'll be adding them to all future games?

- - - Updated - - -

---off topic---
There is a difference there though. DRM is invasive, intrusive and disruptive of your system. It runs on your system to prevent you from copying or otherwise hacking/cracking the game. Online only is simply requiring that active connection.

The end result is the same, you need to have a legal copy, but one is designed to keep you online. The other is designed to BE online.

Like the difference between Sim City and Diablo III. One never really needed to be online only, but was crammed in to be a form of DRM, the other can't go without being online. (Which is a development philosophy, obviously, but a legit one).

That's all I'm going to discuss on this subject, but my statement is; Online Only /=DRM
---off topic---

Diablo 3 could have been made to work offline like previous games in the series did, both companies deny it but I'm sure anti-piracy was a factor in both of their design decisions.

[Vespian]

You mean the GTA that made $500m in microtransactions and prompted Rockstar to say they'll be adding them to all future games?

- - - Updated - - -



Diablo 3 could have been made to work offline like previous games in the series did, both companies deny it but I'm sure anti-piracy was a factor in both of their design decisions.

(Which is a development philosophy, obviously, but a legit one).


Diablo III was designed to be online. From a game design perspective, that's completely understandable. I see no ill will. Lots of people do, but that's their problem. DII had its core gameplay revolving around online, even Open Battle.net, was still online. Yes, you could play SP, but the majority played the game online. There's no reason to invest money in creating a single player game.

[Dhrizzle]

(Which is a development philosophy, obviously, but a legit one).


Diablo III was designed to be online. From a game design perspective, that's completely understandable. I see no ill will. Lots of people do, but that's their problem. DII had its core gameplay revolving around online, even Open Battle.net, was still online. Yes, you could play SP, but the majority played the game online. There's no reason to invest money in creating a single player game.

There was a good reason for all the people who wanted to play offline and not lose hardcore characters to server lag, and at least Maxis listened to complaints and eventually got around to making an offline mode.

[Vespian]

There was a good reason for all the people who wanted to play offline and not lose hardcore characters to server lag, and at least Maxis listened to complaints and eventually got around to making an offline mode.

Oh buhuhuhuh, rarely ever experienced lag, beyond the release month. You don't see anyone going around asking for Single Player in PoE either. Stop crying. You disagree with their development philosophy, fine, but don't pretend it's not a legit reasoning.

[Dhrizzle]

Oh buhuhuhuh, rarely ever experienced lag, beyond the release month. You don't see anyone going around asking for Single Player in PoE either. Stop crying. You disagree with their development philosophy, fine, but don't pretend it's not a legit reasoning.

Ooh sorry, didn't mean to hit a nerve. Honestly I'm not bothered by it always being online as I have solid internet, seldom game whilst traveling and only play softcore. I just think their reasoning of leaving out an offline mode so people weren't confused when they tried to take SP characters into MP games was a bit flimsy, it seems both Blizz and Maxis wanted a game that was always online and worked out ways to justify it.

[Vespian]

Ooh sorry, didn't mean to hit a nerve. Honestly I'm not bothered by it always being online as I have solid internet, seldom game whilst traveling and only play softcore. I just think their reasoning of leaving out an offline mode so people weren't confused when they tried to take SP characters into MP games was a bit flimsy, it seems both Blizz and Maxis wanted a game that was always online and worked out ways to justify it.

No you hit my eyebrow. It went up in contempt.

Maxis put a hardcoded online-check in to see whether there was actually a connection, even though the game itself only required a connection once so often. It was entirely local beyond that. How people see that as the same thing with DIII is beyond me.

[Dhrizzle]

No you hit my eyebrow. It went up in contempt.

Maxis put a hardcoded online-check in to see whether there was actually a connection, even though the game itself only required a connection once so often. It was entirely local beyond that. How people see that as the same thing with DIII is beyond me.

I guess as long as you didn't mind playing without health, crime, fire risk, pollution, trade, tourism or cross region sharing of resources like utilities, emergency services and commodities.

The similarities with D3 come from the fact both companies could have made a game that worked offline, but both chose to make it only work online.

[Remilia]

No you hit my eyebrow. It went up in contempt.

Maxis put a hardcoded online-check in to see whether there was actually a connection, even though the game itself only required a connection once so often. It was entirely local beyond that. How people see that as the same thing with DIII is beyond me.

Console version of D3 has offline mode... so.... no they just want it online for no reason other than DRM since it's obvious that the capability to have it offline is there.

[zealo]

Console version of D3 has offline mode... so.... no they just want it online for no reason other than DRM since it's obvious that the capability to have it offline is there.

Console D3 multiplayer is also infested with cheaters to a degree PC does not even come close to. It's definitely not without reason.

[Remilia]

Console D3 multiplayer is also infested with cheaters to a degree PC does not even come close to. It's definitely not without reason.

That's half true. It's not a problem as far as I can tell for PS4/Xbone season one. What happened was people using hacked PS3/Xb360s to hacked items and Blizzard decided it'd be a good idea to let people transfer saves. It's also a problem of them just flat out neglecting it for a long time.

[The One Percent]

Except you DO know what your purchase includes. It includes a box that you open and will contain items. There is only a small number of different types of items you can usually get in a loot box (in game currency, outfits, sprays, character, weapons/armor)

Hey kids, I just opened this new place where you can give me 10 bucks and I'll give you a box. The box can have 50 bucks or a stick of gum. It isn't gambling because you know all the possible outcomes of these boxes, and you always end up with something!