Let's talk about Loot Boxes

[Mortis]

That's the thing - if Nintendo see other companies raking in the money you can guarantee they'll have people looking into how best to monetise their franchises. They're not as evil as the EA's and Activisions of the world but they'll wait till it's acceptable and cash in when the dust settles on it. 

[Benny]

I refuse to buy any game that features them.

[Cosmic_Guru]

I don't have a problem with the loot crates in F7, but then again I'm not trying to accumulate every car or anything like that.  At the lowest level of investment (20k) you just get mod cards which enable you to earn more credits or XP when racing and should pay for themselves more often than not, so they are not really even gambles (it would be more so if you lose them for good if you don't satisfy their requirements when they are in play).  I wouldn't purchase them from with real money though.   I haven't been following the VIP debacle but that was plain stupid, way to lose your core fanbase for good.

 

Other experiences:

Neverwinter - didn't spend a penny to reach the first level cap

Path of Exile - haven't so far spent a penny but likely to if I go back to in any serious way, just to increase stash space, and to support the dev for a fine game

Hearthstone - spent quite a bit (probably £40-£50) before realising I wasn't improving at all, and stopped playing

 

I never ever ever buy cosmetic tat.  I'm also not a a season pass person, the only exception being for Witcher 3.

 

[Oz]

10 minutes ago, Benny said:

I refuse to buy any game that features them.

ah voting with your wallet. I agree. but one issue I take is when I hear people in the video games media saying: "well... stop complaining about it online.... vote with your wallet'... this argument is in my opinion beyond stupid.   let's explore the logic of that.

 

if I don't buy the one game I have cost the company £50 pounds in revenue. conversely, if I bitch and moan online. there is a likelihood (however small) that I convince other people. say I convince one other person. I have already doubled my impact on the company. and the likelihood that things will change.

 

so my opinion is. vote with your wallet BUT also bitch and moan about it in every forum you can. give the game negative reviews. send them messages on twitter.  when did protesting something that is wrong become reprehensible? as long as you are not being harmful to others, every channel of protest is acceptable in my view. 

[Stanley]

20 minutes ago, Majora said:

 

You're probably safe with Nintendo for a good while if you don't want your daughter exposed to shit like this.

Just don't let her see Amiibos

[MW_Jimmy]

The problem with Forza 7 is that the fans that have bought it, and would have bought it anyway, will all go and buy the VIP for £20 or whatever - effectively paying extra so that the loot crates don't effect their game. It all looks fine and dandy to them, because I love the game so £20 extra is nothing.

 

And the loyal fan is already rewarded with 'perks' for having played the previous games in the series.

 

If I were to buy Forza 7 at £40 my experience would be vastly different to those loyal fans and those willing to spend more.

[Stanley]

10 minutes ago, Benny said:

I refuse to buy any game that features them.

Me too. We all need to make a stand. I know that sounds a bit wanky, but we do.

[Benny]

Actually, I do own Overwatch, but it came with my PS4.

[Stanley]

I was going to buy Battlefront II but I won't now. And I love Star Wars, but I'll go without on this occasion. It's not as not there aren't loads of other amazing games all vying for our affection.

[footle]

The shadow of war example is odd.

i can play the game, and work towards the “true”ending, or I can take shortcuts. If I’m enjoying playing the game, the work won’t matter. If I’m not enjoying playing the game, I’m not going to pay for the shortcuts. So it’s a tax on soulless completionists.

[Benny]

It's a cynical money grabbing stunt, and despite loving the first game, I will not touch it with a bargepole.

[Broker]

I find the idea that people are willing to pay to skip parts of a game fucking bizarre. If you don’t like it enough to play it, why pay more money?

 

Conversely, I’m not as averse to all this stuff as I used to be. I ended up buying some silver in Destiny as I’d played 400 hours of the game and so paying a bit more didn’t seem unreasonable. I’m basically getting more entertainment from them than I would with any other game, so I don’t mind paying a bit more.

[Cosmic_Guru]

24 minutes ago, footle said:

The shadow of war example is odd.

i can play the game, and work towards the “true”ending, or I can take shortcuts. If I’m enjoying playing the game, the work won’t matter. If I’m not enjoying playing the game, I’m not going to pay for the shortcuts. So it’s a tax on soulless completionists.

 

I imagine achievement hunters will be all over this sort of shortcut though.  For them significant time saved is everything.

 

 

[Mr. Gerbik]

32 minutes ago, footle said:

The shadow of war example is odd.

i can play the game, and work towards the “true”ending, or I can take shortcuts. If I’m enjoying playing the game, the work won’t matter. If I’m not enjoying playing the game, I’m not going to pay for the shortcuts. So it’s a tax on soulless completionists.

Again, the last act is completely different from the previous acts. It apparently turns into a mindless grind without any story or quests to drive you forward, just repetitive stuff that you can grind out to see the ending - or! You pay money to skip the bit that has purposefully been made not fun. So they took the fun out, they made sure you're not enjoying it, to convince you to pay. If the rest of the game before that is enjoyable, then that is a pretty shitty thing to do.

10 minutes ago, Broker said:

I find the idea that people are willing to pay to skip parts of a game fucking bizarre. If you don’t like it enough to play it, why pay more money?

Again, making the last bit purposefully not fun to play while the rest of the game is fun, is a completely shitty design choice.

[Broker]

But if it’s not fun, why bother to keep playing at all? Just to say you “finished” it? It’s not like games generally have decent or compelling stories which you need to hear the end of, they’re 99% generic, poorly written shit.

[dumpster]

14 minutes ago, Broker said:

I find the idea that people are willing to pay to skip parts of a game fucking bizarre. If you don’t like it enough to play it, why pay more money?

 

Conversely, I’m not as averse to all this stuff as I used to be. I ended up buying some silver in Destiny as I’d played 400 hours of the game and so paying a bit more didn’t seem unreasonable. I’m basically getting more entertainment from them than I would with any other game, so I don’t mind paying a bit more.

Isn't the issue that the developer /publisher has a financial incentive to make long drawn out sections of the game, designed to create the desire to skip it?

 

That's the issue for me - I don't mind if people want to pay extra for extras, but the extra revenue gives a huge incentive for the publishers to spoil aspects of the game.

 

For me, Pacman S on Facebook, a game which (for 2 hours) I was the best in the world at, is a great example of this.  The game was a brilliant free pacman (like Championship Edition but way before those came out).  The game had adverts on the page.  It was a score attack, and I played it regularly, and got good at it.  Then they added boosts that you could pay for.  You could make pacman faster, the ghosts slower, stay blue longer, and have your score multiplier start off at 4x.  Basically, if you wanted to stand any chance of being the highest scorer you would have to buy and use every boost on every game, and the whole reason for the game existing was taken away.  

 

Tetris Blast on iPad is the same.  What's the point if you can buy yourself a high score when the only reason to play the game is score attack?

 

Modern gaming is slowly eating away at itself, and I feel less motivated to play current gen than ever  -  I'm ploughing through Wii games at the moment, for crying out loud.

[Opinionated Ham Scarecrow]

Just now, dumpster said:

Modern gaming is slowly eating away at itself, and I feel less motivated to play current gen than ever  -  I'm ploughing through Wii games at the moment, for crying out loud.

 

Loot boxes are a blight, but this is silly. Games have never been better.

[Broker]

Again though, if it’s drawn out and boring then why play it? If I bought a game that was dull and repetitive, I’d trade that shit right in, not cough up more money to avoid having to play it.

[Mr. Gerbik]

4 minutes ago, Broker said:

But if it’s not fun, why bother to keep playing at all? Just to say you “finished” it? It’s not like games generally have decent or compelling stories which you need to hear the end of, they’re 99% generic, poorly written shit.

You don't see how it would leave a sour taste? "I enjoyed the game right up until the last bit, but I'll never see the true ending because it's hidden behind some loot box shit" How is that acceptable? 

 

I usually love Monolith's output and I'm willing to lay the blame on WB for this (they have a history for it), but I'll be skipping this game.

[Broker]

I guess so. I very rarely complete games, often finding that something bores or annoys me so I just ditch it. I’m not really bothered about seeing the ending, let alone the true ending. I do also generally avoid games I hear have these things in because you just know it will be balanced to try to force you to pay for things.

[Stanley]

21 minutes ago, Broker said:

But if it’s not fun, why bother to keep playing at all? Just to say you “finished” it? It’s not like games generally have decent or compelling stories which you need to hear the end of, they’re 99% generic, poorly written shit.

I think the real question should be, is our game paced, weighted and balanced in line with our artistic vision? 

 

The answer, from what I can glean from the review is that, no, it isn't. Not from that point on anyway. It sounds like a last ditch attempt to cynically get those who've avoided micorotransactions thus far, to put in extra grind not necessary up until that point. There will be some who enjoy the mechanics and game play enough to continue and get the ending, and perhaps even be happy that it extended their game. But there will be others who feel like the story arc had already naturally reached its conclusion, and for whom it becomes a bit of a grind. 

 

So you then have four options; pay, don't pay, continue or give up. Not the most positive way to end a game you've enjoyed up until that point.

[Broker]

I can see why people feel negative about it, though again I feel like expecting an artistic vision from a game where the premise is “let’s steal bits of AC and Batman and slap them into Lord of the Rings” and the story is about the other one ring is super optimistic. It looks like cheap shite.

 

My issue is more with the standard “people don’t have enough time to play so they can pay not to” excuse. If you’ve not got time to play, why pay money to avoid playing? It’s never made any sense to me. I can see that practically the situation is that the game is a dull grind which you can pay to avoid, but again, why would you?

[BBBBBB]

Am also reminded of a few quotes from Jenova Chen interviews aroundbtge time Journey came out:

 

Quote

Most of the games are made to entertain the teenage boys and the young adults, particular male. And those crowds, they have a craving for the feeling of freedom, the feeling of empowerment. Because when you’re in school, you’re controlled by the school and parents. You don’t have the power to do anything you want.

And so most of the games are about becoming the space marine, becoming the superhero, becoming the secret agent. It’s because they’re designed for this demographic. I would say right now, game design has a lot of reference on empowerment, on excitement, a lot of reference on thrill.

 

If you subscribe to all of that, then I guess it's not at all surprising that things like loot crates and IAPs have crept into big AAA games.

 

[Stanley]

6 minutes ago, Broker said:

I can see why people feel negative about it, though again I feel like expecting an artistic vision from a game where the premise is “let’s steal bits of AC and Batman and slap them into Lord of the Rings” and the story is about the other one ring is super optimistic. It looks like cheap shite.

 

My issue is more with the standard “people don’t have enough time to play so they can pay not to” excuse. If you’ve not got time to play, why pay money to avoid playing? It’s never made any sense to me. I can see that practically the situation is that the game is a dull grind which you can pay to avoid, but again, why would you?

I don't think artistic vision just means story. Obviously that's part of it, but I meant the artistry of the game play design itself, which is actually - steal bits from Arkham and Assassin's Creed, but do them better, then stick our amazing nemesis system on top and set the whole thing in the LOTR world. I doubt at any point their artistic vision stretched to loot boxes. That's something that's been forced on them by the publisher.

[Harsin]

And in case anyone was wondering, Assassin's Creed Origins has loot boxes, because of course it does.

 

[MW_Jimmy]

'Requiescat in pace"

[Talk Show Host]

I don't like and I don't support any kind of season pass, cosmetic DLCs, loot boxes, pre order DLC and all this kind of drivel. We have reached a point now where a game can come into pieces and we need to pay for it over and over again. I just don't understand what compels someone to pay a corporation for something that should have been in the game in the first place. I even don't agree that cosmetics should be chargeable. Make them part of the game, why leave them out in the first place? It's not only about the money but about how blatantly abusive this mentality is to the customer. 

 

You want to release a proper expansion to your game? Sure, I will pay for it. You want to bring out a 2 hour DLC that should have been in the game in the first place though? Or try to cover your plan of bringing out two DLCs by offering a ''cheap'' season pass? Or a lootbox that has epic items or abilities? Who the hell can defend things like that with a straight face?

 

The industry is in general chaos on so many levels. Anyone can do anything actually. There are no laws or limits about things like that. Companies can keep abusing the system until it runs dry and then move on to the next thing. The more you like a game, the more they charge you. It's disgusting.

[Harsin]

It’s all pretty sinister when you look at the psychology behind it and we know that the gaming industry alphas consulted with gambling psychology experts.

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/behind-the-addictive-psychology-and-seductive-art-of-loot-boxes/

 

Quote

Why do loot boxes provide such a dark compulsion? Psychologists call the principle by which they work on the human mind 'variable rate reinforcement.' "The player is basically working for reward by making a series of responses, but the rewards are delivered unpredictably," says Dr Luke Clark, director at the Center for Gambling Research at the University of British Columbia. "We know that the dopamine system, which is targeted by drugs of abuse, is also very interested in unpredictable rewards. Dopamine cells are most active when there is maximum uncertainty, and the dopamine system responds more to an uncertain reward than the same reward delivered on a predictable basis."

 

Quote

"Modern video games then amplify this idea by having many overlapping variable ratio schedules," says Clark. "You're trying to level up, advance your avatar, get rare add-ons, build up game currency, all at the same time. What this means is that there is a regular trickle of some kind of reinforcement." Whether you're watching your XP climb up to the next level in Overwatch, or you're collecting scraps in Battlefield 1 by breaking down skins, there's a constant sense of reward leading to reward.

The clever—or insidious—bit is how a loot box is wired into a game, and how it doles out its baubles, keeping a player on the knife-edge between feeling hungry and feeling rewarded. One such system is Battlefield 1’s Battlepacks. Standard Battlepacks are earned by playing multiplayer matches. They used to be randomly awarded, but they recently switched to an Overwatch-like progression bar system for more regular drops. Each one is a guaranteed weapon skin or one of a number of pieces of a unique weapon.

The clever—or insidious—bit is how a loot box is wired into a game, and how it doles out its baubles, keeping a player on the knife-edge between feeling hungry and feeling rewarded. One such system is Battlefield 1’s Battlepacks. Standard Battlepacks are earned by playing multiplayer matches. They used to be randomly awarded, but they recently switched to an Overwatch-like progression bar system for more regular drops.

 

 

And now every big modern game, often marketed at children and teenagers  is full of this shit. At least Paddy Power and Ladbrokes are upfront about what they're doing.

 

People in the Battlefront thread talking about buying the game to play with their little kids. It feels a bit skin crawling.

[Stanley]

What angers me is that the press will happily run stories about games being too violent and even leading to violent behaviour  (with no actual evidence) and other such bollocks, yet when games companies are deliberately targeting kids or vulnerable people like this it largely goes ignored. 

[Orbital2060]

22 hours ago, Stanley said:

Just don't let her see Amiibos

 

https://amiibo.life/games/switch/super-mario-odyssey

 

Quote

 

Mario: Gain temporary invincibility

 

Peach: Receive a life-up heart

 

Bowser: Reveal regional coin locations

 

Any amiibo: See the location of a Power Moon

 

 

Ive preordered the wedding set together with an Odyssey Switch, but cant help thinking this is just as 'bad' as loot boxes in terms of providing gameplay advantages. At least they look nice on the shelf, and there is no gambling with the actual purchase of what you get although you could probably buy a lot of 'loot box' items for the price they demand in the market. (I got the odyssey amiibos @14 or so from amazon)