Oh Blizzard, how you have fallen (Diablo Immortal).

[Ghost of Cow]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/victim

1 : one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent
the schools are victims of the social system
: such as
a(1) : one that is injured, destroyed, or sacrificed under any of various conditions
a victim of cancer
a victim of the auto crash
a murder victim
(2) : one that is subjected to oppression, hardship, or mistreatment
a frequent victim of political attacks
b : one that is tricked or duped
a con man's victim
2 : a living being sacrificed to a deity or in the performance of a religious rite

Where in there do you see anything about the victim being required to have not made certain choices?

Now I want you to read that definition and ask yourself what it means to have agency in making a decision versus having something happen to you.

[Elim Garak]

I'm not complaining about people spending their money on lootboxes. I'm complaining about a predatory implementation of loot boxes.

But if people willingly spending their own money on lootboxes - then there is nothing predatory. Or are you AGAIN going to claim they are weak-minded and easily exploited?

If there are "good ones" then that means there are "bad ones", so thank you for admitting that it depends on the specifics.

I literally said "worst ones", are you familiar with spectrums and the theory of relativity?
All MMOs are awesome. Some of them are better than the others.

[PC2]

It is a FACT that DI has loot boxes which you can spend $10,000+ on without getting the item you need.

That just means certain things are very rare. That's a good thing in an open-ended MMOARPG because it means there will always be another item or upgrade that you can search for. Otherwise you would deterministically beat the game very quickly and there wouldn't be very much replay value.

[NineSpine]

But if people willingly spending their own money on lootboxes - then there is nothing predatory. Or are you AGAIN going to claim they are weak-minded and easily exploited?

Are pyramid schemes not predatory because people choose to buy in? Of course they are predatory, because the fact that people make choices doesn't change whether something is predatory.

Your definition of "predatory" is meaningless because it would mean something as reprehensible as bumfights is not predatory because the targets "chose" to be involved.

I literally said "worst ones", are you familiar with spectrums and the theory of relativity?
All MMOs are awesome. Some of them are better than the others.

Spectrums, you mean like how implementations of lootboxes exist on a spectrum from good to bad? You also specifically said "the good ones" which necessarily means there are one that are NOT GOOD, also known as BAD.

- - - Updated - - -

That just means certain things are very rare. That's a good thing in an open-ended MMOARPG because it means there will always be another thing or upgrade that you can search for. Otherwise you would just deterministically beat the game very quickly and there wouldn't be very much replay value.

Do you think there might be some kind of reasonable middle ground between "Play the game for 50 years or spend $50,000" and "very quickly"?

[MoanaLisa]

Some weird flattening here to imply that a small company in the mid 90s is 100% exactly the same as a giant company in 2022.

All business exist to make money. Not all businesses prioritize it the same way as a structure of size, function, public v private, etc. And in the 90s especially, a lot of video games were produced by tiny underpaid teams who just really wanted to make something awesome.

I mean, come on.

I mean, come on. The gaming market is the same in 2022 as it was in the early 2000s? New, easier and most importantly successful ways of getting revenue from customers have been discovered? Game developers are structuring their games to take advantage of that market to grow their sales?

For what it's worth: I didn't say or even imply that Blizzard in the early days is exactly as they are now. What I actually said was that making a profit and taking care of Blizzard has always been #1 with them (as it should be with for-profit companies and corporations). Gaming has gotten meaner and more cut-throat in this respect as it has become bigger business and increased competition from other things like streaming television and the like. What's most objectionable about all of these threads is cutting Blizzard out as some special case. They are not. They've been playing this game fairly aggressively since Hearthstone and their turn to make all of their games player competitions. It's what is sometimes called progression. It's a bad thing for those who remember gaming as it used to be but the mobile market is not for those people for the most part.

[NineSpine]

Now I want you to read that definition and ask yourself what it means to have agency in making a decision versus having something happen to you.

I guess I'll repeat myself: Where in there do you see anything about the victim being required to have not made certain choices?

[MoanaLisa]

I'm not complaining about people spending their money on lootboxes. I'm complaining about a predatory implementation of loot boxes.

What exactly would be an agreeable-to-most non-predatory implementation of loot boxes?

[Talon8669]

ofc not, they addapted, if they didnt they would "die" simple as that... if you think no blizz games are better than what we got thats you opinion, but i tend to disagree...

I didn't make any reference to any game specifically my reference was Blizzard was the gold standard of gaming. They made amazing and quality games. It was pretty universal, blizzard game released and you were going to buy it because you knew it would be good. So not sure wtf you're on about but you get a solid pat on the back sport for participating.

[NineSpine]

What exactly would be an agreeable-to-most non-predatory implementation of loot boxes?

Hearthstone is a reasonable example.

[Ghost of Cow]

I guess I'll repeat myself: Where in there do you see anything about the victim being required to have not made certain choices?

You still can't see a difference between having agency in a choice versus having something happen to you?

You really, truly, don't understand the difference?

Ok. Well, you have a nice day.

[NineSpine]

You still can't see a difference between having agency in a choice versus having something happen to you?

You really, truly, don't understand the difference?

Ok. Well, you have a nice day.

I understand the difference. I also understand the difference between a watermelon and a grapefruit. Neither has anything to do with whether someone is a victim or not.

[Elim Garak]

Are pyramid schemes not predatory because people choose to buy in? Of course they are predatory, because the fact that people make choices doesn't change whether something is predatory.

They are predatory because people are LIED to.
I don't remember seeing anywhere on any loot box saying "buy this lootbox and get this item" unless it literally gave you that item.

But you are reaching instead of admitting even a iota of possibility of being in the wrong.

Your definition of "predatory" is meaningless because it would mean something as reprehensible as bumfights is not predatory because the targets "chose" to be involved.

I gave no definition

But your definition makes employees who ask for a promotion predatory towards an employer who cannot let them go.

Spectrums, you mean like how implementations of lootboxes exist on a spectrum from good to bad? You also specifically said "the good ones" which necessarily means there are one that are NOT GOOD, also known as BAD.

Lootboxes don't exist on a spectrum (MMOs do). They are a singular mechanic. Which is essential for lootbased games.
Your beef is clearly with the business models. But until you agree that lootboxes are essential and awesome we cannot get to the meat of your problem

[NineSpine]

They are predatory because people are LIED to.
I don't remember seeing any there on any loot box saying "buy this lootbox and get this item" unless it literally gave you that item.

But you are reaching instead of admitting even a iota of possibility of being in the wrong.

Pyramid schemes do not always lie. They often just tell you that if you do X you will make money. What they leave out is that X is not feasible by a certain point in the scheme. There is absolutely no requirement of lying.

I gave no definition

But your definition makes employees who ask for a promotion are predatory towards an employer who cannot let them go.

Lootboxes don't exist on a spectrum (MMOs do). They are a singular mechanic. Which is essential for lootbased games.
Your beef is clearly with the business models. But until you agree that lootboxes are essential and awesome we cannot get to the meat of your problem

Lootboxes are objectively speaking not a singular mechanic. They can be implemented in innumerable different ways. Let me know when you grow up enough to talk about that.

[oplawlz]

Can you cite these studies?

sure: https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=study...m+of+lootboxes

[Elim Garak]

Pyramid schemes do not always lie. They often just tell you that if you do X you will make money. What they leave out is that X is not feasible by a certain point in the scheme. There is absolutely no requirement of lying.

That's literally lying. "Will" != "may or may not". Also lying by omission.
All scams lie. Why are you defending pyramid schemes all of a sudden?

Lootboxes are objectively speaking not a singular mechanic. They can be implemented in innumerable different ways. Let me know when you grow up enough to talk about that.

Lootboxes objectively speaking are a singular mechanic.

Sure one game can be coded in C++ - another game may be C#, and the third game will use RenPy. Different implementations but the mechanic will be the same. There are also different ways of picking a random item - but that's mostly for optimization reasons.

There might be additional mechanics added on top, after the lootbox is opened, but those are separate mechanics.
And we cannot talk about them until lootboxes are awesome.

[NineSpine]

That's literally lying. "Will" != "may or may not". Also lying by omission.
All scams lie. Why are you defending pyramid schemes all of a sudden?

Lootboxes objectively speaking are a singular mechanic.

Sure one game can be coded in C++ - another game may be C#, and the third game will use RenPy. Different implementations but the mechanic will be the same. There are also different ways of picking a random item - but that's mostly for optimization reasons.

There might be additional mechanics added on top, after the lootbox is opened, but those are separate mechanics.
And we cannot talk about them until lootboxes are awesome.

Let's say WoW got a lootbox that had a 99% chance to give you a full set of BiS gear, and it cost $1. Would that be a good loot box?

[rhorle]

Just because you have a parent company doesn't mean anything. I've worked placed with parent companies that didn't give a fuck as long as a profit was generated and never got involved in any decision making.

Doesn't that just prove the point? As long as profit is being generated they don't care how the company goes about it but it was always a focus.

[NineSpine]

That's literally lying. "Will" != "may or may not". Also lying by omission.
All scams lie. Why are you defending pyramid schemes all of a sudden?

That's not lying. They guarantee that IF you are able to get X number of people in, you'll make money. That's true, and that's how the people near the top make money.

- - - Updated - - -

Doesn't that just prove the point? As long as profit is being generated they don't care how the company goes about it but it was always a focus.

Generating a profit doesn't mean that your only goal is maximum profit. Those aren't the same thing.

[rhorle]

Generating a profit doesn't mean that your only goal is maximum profit. Those aren't the same thing.

So how do you know that Blizzard changed goals between the past and now?

[Elim Garak]

Let's say WoW got a lootbox that had a 99% chance to give you a full set of BiS gear, and it cost $1. Would that be a good loot box?

From whose point of view? Clearly not Blizzards. But you once again going rogue. You are speaking about a bussiness model not a loot box. it can as well be a guaranteed BiS set for $2. Would it be bad? Nope - well not for players.

So if 100% chance of getting BiS gear for $2 is not bad. And lootboxes are awesome - where the bad part comes from?