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

[Jtbrig7390]

You can just refer to the first sentence of my post.

And you can read my reply to say sentence/post. You clearly don't know what the difference is between a bias and a bought review. Has nothing to do with being Ignorant, Unless you can provide proof of reviews being bought you are the Ignorant one here sorry.

[Yunru]

So much ignorance...makes you wonder how gaming companys can scruv people so easy.

[Lanfall]

If lootboxes are gambling then so are Magic the Gathering Card packs, Yu-gi-oh, Pokemon etc.

[Edge-]

So much ignorance...makes you wonder how gaming companys can scruv people so easy.

So...who is saying this? I got a bit over a minute into the video and it seems like nobody is actually saying this, the guy just wanted an excuse to make another video about this since everyone is clicking on these videos that are largely mildly-informed folks repeating the same handful of talking points over and over...

[Mister Cheese]

So...who is saying this? I got a bit over a minute into the video and it seems like nobody is actually saying this, the guy just wanted an excuse to make another video about this since everyone is clicking on these videos that are largely mildly-informed folks repeating the same handful of talking points over and over...

Shareholders. Groups of people on EA's forums. There will always be ignorant morons that defend these company's practices.

- - - Updated - - -

Edge never said there is no bias. But there is a vast difference in a bias and being bought. Everyone on the face of this planet is bias about something even if its the most little of bias.

But there is ZERO proof any reviews have been bought.

https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/kan.../1900-6182836/

The guy that got fired for writing this can say otherwise.

[Jtbrig7390]

https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/kan.../1900-6182836/

The guy that got fired for writing this can say otherwise.

1) That is over a decade old.
2) He was fired for giving a bad score., That doesn't equal to them being bought for a good score/review and there has been no reports in the past decade of something like that happening again.

This has already been explained so once again no proof.

[Mister Cheese]

1) That is over a decade old.
2) He was fired for giving a bad score., That doesn't equal to them being bought for a good score/review and there has been no reports in the past decade of something like that happening again.

This has already been explained so once again no proof.

Some that happened isn't proof? It's been explained that he was brought in and demanded that he change his review because the advertisers and Eidos weren't happy with the review. And when he wouldn't do it he was fired. Don't bullshit. There is obvious pressure from these big publishers for these major outlets to write positive reviews for their games. And that needs to be kept in mind.

[Yunru]

So...who is saying this? I got a bit over a minute into the video and it seems like nobody is actually saying this, the guy just wanted an excuse to make another video about this since everyone is clicking on these videos that are largely mildly-informed folks repeating the same handful of talking points over and over...

Well he is talking to sheeps and trys to convice them to not be a dumb sheeps that just follow a flock.

And more interesting stuff:

[Jtbrig7390]

Some that happened isn't proof? It's been explained that he was brought in and demanded that he change his review because the advertisers and Eidos weren't happy with the review. And when he wouldn't do it he was fired. Don't bullshit. There is obvious pressure from these big publishers for these major outlets to write positive reviews for their games.

That story isn't proof that a review was bought, Its proof someone was fired for giving a bad score.

Also once again its over a decade old, Do you got anything recent? No didn't think so. All you are doing is assuming.

Edge has already explained this once on the last page.

Please provide evidence of this happening.

And before you cite Gerstmann/Gamespot, which was what, like a decade ago at this point, note that he wasn't paid for a good score. He got forced out after giving a game a bad score, and there aren't any reports of similar behavior from gaming sites since then.

In case you didn't know its illegal to buy reviews in the US because then its considered as a paided Promotion and must disclose as such. No review company (IGN.Gamespot ect..)is going to risk getting sued over a paided review.

[Gorsameth]

That story isn't proof that a review was bought, Its proof someone was fired for giving a bad score.

Also once again its over a decade old, Do you got anything recent? No didn't think so. All you are doing is assuming.

Edge has already explained this once on the last page.


In case you didn't know its illegal to buy reviews in the US because then its considered as a paided Promotion and must disclose as such. No review company (IGN.Gamespot ect..)is going to risk getting sued over a paided review.

Sure, its not direct money. Its "you have been shit to us so we will not give you a review copy, meaning you can't have a review up for release which costs you traffic and therefor money".

[Jtbrig7390]

Sure, its not direct money. Its "you have been shit to us so we will not give you a review copy, meaning you can't have a review up for release which costs you traffic and therefor money".

Ok that still isn't a bought review and many sites including Gamespot seem to be doing just fine.

[Yunru]

Ok that still isn't a bought review and many sites including Gamespot seem to be doing just fine.

Well i have been hearing a rummors that some big sites now use your computer as a bitcoin mining machine. (wich can be stoped with addblock and no-script)

Also...if the sites were true in their rewievs and actuly talked abauth lootboxes, their add money from a specific company would be gone forever.
They cant tell the true *truth* as its bad for them, but people who do this solo are simply more trustworty.

[Jtbrig7390]

Well i have been hearing a rummors

They cant tell the true *truth* as its bad for them, but people who do this solo are simply more trustworty.

Top: Rummors mean nothing.

Bottom: http://www.metacritic.com/game/plays...critic-reviews

And yet many review sites including IGN and Gamespot did tell the truth. You not liking a review and them telling the truth is two different things.

The p2w shit show that was BF2 sucked, But it still had a solid experience (In MP) and was a step up from last years Battlefront. Sadly the game was ruined by the p2w shit show.

People who do it solo are more trust worthy.. Your kidding right. You do realize those people also make money from ads and relies more heavy on them right? They are as trust worthy as anyone else doing a review.

A review is a opinion and each opinion is worth a grain of salt.

[Edge-]

Well he is talking to sheeps and trys to convice them to not be a dumb sheeps that just follow a flock.

So...people he imagined?

It's curious that you're so hostile towards media that engage in self-serving clickbait but when it comes to Youtubbers it's suddenly not remotely an issue and is instead viewed as "good" because it "spreads awareness", even if they're being dishonest.

Sure, its not direct money. Its "you have been shit to us so we will not give you a review copy, meaning you can't have a review up for release which costs you traffic and therefor money".

This doesn't happen very often at all. Bethesda yanked pre-release review copies across the board, and others very selectively, if at all, deny pre-release review copies.

They are under no obligation to provide media with pre-release review copies to begin with, that's a courtesy that they provide to media as it serves both the media and publishers interests.

It's not that expensive to buy games on launch day to review them.

Well i have been hearing a rummors that some big sites now use your computer as a bitcoin mining machine. (wich can be stoped with addblock and no-script)

Rumors from where? What sites?

Yes, browser hijacking with spurious links exists, but I've yet to see any remotely credible rumor that any major gaming news site is intentionally engaging in this behavior.

Also...if the sites were true in their rewievs and actuly talked abauth lootboxes, their add money from a specific company would be gone forever.

This isn't remotely true. Despite media sucking off Blizzards boxes in Overwatch, loot boxes and the controversies surrounding them in other games like Battlefront 2, Shadow of War, Destiny 2 etc. have all received plenty of critical coverage from press either at the time of the review or in the surrounding weeks.

This is patently false, as is most of what you've been posting lately.

They cant tell the true *truth* as its bad for them, but people who do this solo are simply more trustworty.

Are you serious? Influencers are routinely getting caught hiding videos sponsored status, they're routinely engaged in dishonest content for clicks, and plenty of other shit. They've been cleaning up their act under pressure from the FCC and viewers, as have been media, but pretending that they're more "trustworthy" just because they have a youtube page is ludicrous.

[shaunika123]

is it gambling if you always get something?

[Jtbrig7390]

is it gambling if you always get something?

Yes by definition it is.

gam·ble
ˈɡambəl/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: gambling
1.
play games of chance for money; bet.
"she was fond of gambling on cards and horses"
synonyms: bet, place/lay a bet on something, stake money on something, back the horses, game; informalplay the ponies
"he started to gamble more often"
2.
take risky action in the hope of a desired result.
"the British could only gamble that something would turn up"
synonyms: take a chance, take a risk; More

[Shadowsgrace]

IF they give some sort of Game play advantage, You could argue yes, if not, then no. Also the Government can regulate my Game rewards... when they finally go 1 month without a Sex, Corruption, or any other type of Scandal.

[Polarthief]

Yes, absolutely.

That said, this could affect TCG/CCGs too though. Dunno if it should/n't be specifically for card games. It's a bit of a different type of "gambling" that I think everyone's used to by now. If the game gives enough freebie packs then it's not a big deal, but if it's stingy like Hearthstone, bit of a difference.

IF they give some sort of Game play advantage, You could argue yes, if not, then no. Also the Government can regulate my Game rewards... when they finally go 1 month without a Sex, Corruption, or any other type of Scandal.

If the game is free, I agree. If you have to pay money for the base game, cosmetics should NOT be locked behind a paywall.

"It's just cosmetics" is a horrible argument for games you already fucking paid for.

[Halicia]

If lootboxes are gambling then so are Magic the Gathering Card packs, Yu-gi-oh, Pokemon etc.

Nah, cards can be traded and resold, so assuming there is a variance in value, there is potential profit and loss to be made from purchasing collectible cards. Why jump to gaming cards, btw ? Sports cards would be the easier reference, imo.

So long as lootboxes are a purchase where the customer has no legal option to sell the results for "real" currency, I don't see how this could be mistaken for gambling.

If anything, Diablo3's realmoney auctionhouse was more susceptible to gambling allegations, as it allowed people to transfer money --> gold --> gambling --> gold --> money. Personally, I have little issue with this, but I can understand how it would run afoul of gambling laws.

[Yunru]

Rumors from where? What sites?

Yes, browser hijacking with spurious links exists, but I've yet to see any remotely credible rumor that any major gaming news site is intentionally engaging in this behavior. 1!

Fucking lol, are you serious? Influencers are routinely getting caught hiding videos sponsored status, they're routinely engaged in dishonest content for clicks, and plenty of other shit. They've been cleaning up their act under pressure from the FCC and viewers, as have been media, but pretending that they're more "trustworthy" just because they have a youtube page is ludicrous.2!

1: https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@crypto-...n-mining-slave
And more detailed: https://singularityhub.com/2017/12/2...cryptojacking/

2: Tubers and bloggers (and other kind of posters), if they try to lie and some other person who does the same calls them out it causes a huge drama instantly on any social media.
As for big sites when it comes to add money, we dont realy know what deals the sites do with a publishes behind a closed doors. But it is more than just a free copy of the game.
Its very easy to do this: https://www.trulioo.com/blog/ad-netw...ey-laundering/

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, absolutely.

That said, this could affect TCG/CCGs too though. Dunno if it should/n't be specifically for card games. It's a bit of a different type of "gambling" that I think everyone's used to by now. If the game gives enough freebie packs then it's not a big deal, but if it's stingy like Hearthstone, bit of a difference.



If the game is free, I agree. If you have to pay money for the base game, cosmetics should NOT be locked behind a paywall.

"It's just cosmetics" is a horrible argument for games you already fucking paid for.

You can counter this by sending those players to play older games that didnt have this.