Let's talk about Loot Boxes

[Oz]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-10-16-online-petition-forces-government-response-to-loot-boxes

[Gorf King]

On 14/10/2017 at 18:51, Broker said:

It was genuinely and definitely harder to customise your colour in the first game before they were consumables that came from lootboxes, because they were infinite use items that coloured your whole outfit at once the requirements for getting them were ridiculous, meaning I had to play for over a hundred hours and grind a number of activities for ridiculous amounts of time in order to make my armour black, something I could accomplish in the new game within a few hours of completing the campaign. I know you feel these things are all as bad as each other, but in that game it's the emotes which you use to communicate and have fun with other players being locked away in the loot box system which is shit. The shaders are, regardless of your thoughts on loot boxes, massively improved from the first game.

 

There were a few black shaders in D1. One of them - Superblack - you could get within twenty minutes of playing last year's Festival of the Lost, by collecting sweets from NPCs and giving them to other NPCs. It was a 100% guaranteed reward. A couple of other black shaders were rank package rewards from Dead Orbit - which is why many people joined them instead of the other factions. The Old Guard shader was another black one; to get that you had to have reached light level 30 and played TTK no later than Feb 2016 - almost five months after it was released. I don't think any of those were ridiculous requirements or required hours of grinding. The new loot box shaders, however, being consumables awarded by RNG, do require grinding, because if you get one you like it is consumed per use on each item and if you want to put it on something else, you have to play lots of unspecified content to gain exp which generates another loot box on a fake level up. Then you have to hope that RNG gives you the shader you want at some point in one of those loot boxes. And you have to keep doing this every time you consume the shader by using it on another item.

 

With the quantities of shaders that drop - cluttering up the inventory/postmaster/vault with dozens of unwanted items even week - I'm not really bothered by the loot boxes and haven't been at all tempted to pay actual money for extra ones. But the process of getting them is far more grindy, and far less about completing certain specified activities, than in D1. If you play a lot of Destiny 2, eventually you'll probably get what you want, and if you enjoy playing lots of Destiny 2, you probably won't mind. If you're very lucky, or want a more common shader or item, you may have to play less than that. But they are almost the definition of untargeted grind rewards. I think they're a very minor issue myself, because there are far more serious problems with Destiny 2 - a lack of genuinely satisfying rewards for specific endgame activities being one - but the low-level grind for trivial and/or cosmetic items (as well as for stuff like Iron Banner and raid armour) is very, very real. You only have to look at the vendor/raid/Iron Banner token system, which continually gives no choice in what rewards you receive and takes no (positive) account of what you already have, to see that.

 

I much preferred it when you had to do a particular thing to get a particular shader (or ornament, or whatever). It kind of associated that shader with the accomplishment - e.g. anyone who'd done Crota had Cryptographic, and Crota HM had Glowhoo, and everyone who did that thing could wear that shader. There was more of an identity to it, and somehow more value; and you could target an activity to get a particular thing you wanted. If anything, D2 has moved even more towards just throwing random stuff at you for no particular reason, and throwing more of it if there is a particular one (i.e. you've paid cash). Far more than the 'cash for shaders' non-scandal, it's the fact that everything feels so divorced from what you've done in the game that I think is the real issue. Hence why many people feel endgame activities feel relatively unrewarding - aside from the challenge of doing them in the first place.

[Harsin]

This fucking industry,

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/news/how-activision-uses-matchmaking-tricks-to-sell-in-game-items-w509288

 

Activision was granted a patent this month for a system it uses to convince people in multiplayer games to purchase items for a game through microtransactions.

 

”For example, in one implementation, the system may include a microtransaction engine that arranges matches to influence game-related purchases," according to the patent. "For instance, the microtransaction engine may match a more expert/marquee player with a junior player to encourage the junior player to make game-related purchases of items possessed/used by the marquee player. A junior player may wish to emulate the marquee player by obtaining weapons or other items used by the marquee player.”

 

In a particular example, the junior player may wish to become an expert sniper in a game (e.g., as determined from the player profile)," according to the patent. "The microtransaction engine may match the junior player with a player that is a highly skilled sniper in the game. In this manner, the junior player may be encouraged to make game-related purchases such as a rifle or other item used by the marquee player. "

 

 

 

[Nespresso]

Yup pretty abhorrent in so many ways. 

 

That being said I doubt Activision are the only ones doing this. It wouldn't surprise me if Warframe, Diablo, Paths of Exile and pretty much every MMO under the sun employ similar tactics for this type of Whale Hunting™.

[TehStu]

Online games didn't used to, but I guess the days of 14.99 a month are over, and this is the new model. The whole thing can get to fuck, I'll partake in none of it.

[BossSaru]

There is no need to buy the games which carry this crap. Looking at the release schedule for the rest of the year shows plenty of amazing-looking titles which are free of in-game purchases.

[deerokus]

Quote

Due to this technicality, regulating boards such as PEGI, UKIE and the ESRB will not add a gambling disclaimer to games which include loot boxes or similar features.

 

 

This is a shameful excuse, industry. Games like Yakuza, Red Dead etc have gambling marked on the content warning bit even though it's not really gambling, just pretending to gamble. Gambling themed mini games where no money is involved,  you don't win anything, and more often than not the odds are heavily rigged in the player's favour, so that you are guaranteed to make an in-game profit if you play enough times. It's not really gambling at all. 

 

But actual gambling doesn't trigger this notice because of an arbitrary definition of gambling! Fuck sake. 

 

It feels sickening to say this, but we might need the Daily Mail to get angry about it for anything to happen. 

[Ivanho]

Why can’t you just vote with your wallet and not buy the Loot Boxes?  I will buy SW:BF2 because I love SW and me & my son have had some brilliant fun playing the first one together, 99% of which was offline and I suspect the same will be true of the sequel.  I did buy the DLC Maps, but only because they were pennies on the store & played them with some free trial codes.  I won’t buy any loot boxes though (because they just seem stupid & I doubt they will break the offline game) so if everybody does the same then maybe EA, etc, will stop.

[Benny]

Because if you really were voting with you wallet you'd have to not buy any games that feature them. Because regardless of your own personal feelings or refusal to spend more on boxes, publishers will not see a decrease in sales so will assume players don't care enough to not buy it, so they will keep doing it.

[MW_Jimmy]

Yeah - don't buy Star Wars Battlefront II. It must be a pretty easy thing to do considering that there are about a million multiplayer shooters out there, and if you want something Star Wars why not try X-Wing Vs Tie Fighter: https://www.gog.com/game/star_wars_xwing_vs_tie_fighter

 

+ Not supporting EA

+ Not supporting Loot Boxes

+ Great Single Player and Multiplayer game

+ No Kylo Ren

+ 1/6th of the price with no extra DLC to pay for!

[Ivanho]

And as soon as it’s on the PS4 I’ll snap it up!!

 

Anyway, my son couldn’t give a fig about buying loot boxes, he just wants to play in the SW universe (he also doesn’t care about EA) and if we don’t get it he’ll be swiping at my ankles with his Kylo Ren lightsaber!

[Harsin]

That's what makes the whole thing extra skeezy though. EA are putting all this shit in a game marketed at children. Get 'em while they're young and all that.

[Mortis]

10 minutes ago, Ivanho said:

And as soon as it’s on the PS4 I’ll snap it up!!

 

Anyway, my son couldn’t give a fig about buying loot boxes, he just wants to play in the SW universe (he also doesn’t care about EA) and if we don’t get it he’ll be swiping at my ankles with his Kylo Ren lightsaber!

 

 He doesn’t care about loot boxes just now but he will care when he’s matched up with players that do buy them and he becomes cannon fodder - maybe he’ll see a YouTuber opening some loot boxes “sponsored by ea” and then it’ll be “daaad can we just get a boba fett box”. 

[TehStu]

Who here has had their kids whine at them for "DLC" in mobile games? I can't wait until they get older and encounter loot boxes.

[Ivanho]

7 minutes ago, Mortis said:

 

 He doesn’t care about loot boxes just now but he will care when he’s matched up with players that do buy them and he becomes cannon fodder - maybe he’ll see a YouTuber opening some loot boxes “sponsored by ea” and then it’ll be “daaad can we just get a boba fett box”. 

 

Possibly, but I will resist.  I will also reserve final judgement until the game is released.  After all, we’ve only had the demo to go by and as things can be changed & patched even after it goes Gold (is that still a thing?) so maybe it won’t be as bad as the doomsayers predict.

[Stanley]

That Activision patent is bullying. How the fuck is this even legal?

[Broker]

15 hours ago, Ivanho said:

Why can’t you just vote with your wallet and not buy the Loot Boxes?  I will buy SW:BF2 because I love SW and me & my son have had some brilliant fun playing the first one together, 99% of which was offline and I suspect the same will be true of the sequel.  I did buy the DLC Maps, but only because they were pennies on the store & played them with some free trial codes.  I won’t buy any loot boxes though (because they just seem stupid & I doubt they will break the offline game) so if everybody does the same then maybe EA, etc, will stop.

 

The balance of of the game is affected, so if you don’t spend extra on the boxes you’ll be getting the shit kicked out of you in multiplayer by people who have.

 

14 hours ago, TehStu said:

Who here has had their kids whine at them for "DLC" in mobile games? I can't wait until they get older and encounter loot boxes.

 

My kids know that I don’t pay for IAPs in mobile games. The only thing I’ve ever bought them are Robux, but after the hundreds of hours of free entertainment we’ve gotten out of roblox I don’t feel bad about that.

[TehStu]

Neither do I (thank you, Amazon Underground) but they still whine about it. I hope it's not setting them up for the notion of handing over money for extra tat being the norm.

[Broker]

My kids are a bit weird about games. They mention sometimes that their friends think it's weird that there's no tablet in our house, and they've played less and less mobile games, only really playing them at all during a brief period where they seemed bothered about fitting in and being a part of what their friends were playing. I'm quite negative about mobile games in general, and especially their monetisation methods and have frequently explained why to them, and told them what I think is unfair about the IAP model and why I'm not as interested in games that mostly involve jabbing a button then waiting to be allowed to jab it again (whilst being pressured to pay to remove that wait).

[Dig Dug]

Has this been posted?

 

[Harsin]

You can now buy loot boxes of emotes on Twitch.

 

We're through the looking glass people.

[carlospie]

Over watch is great, no performance enhancing items. Just play the game for games sake. 

[Harsin]

9 minutes ago, grindmouse said:

 

Siege doesn't have performance enhancing items either - it's all aesthetic. Like... I love D.Va's gaming emote, and character customisation in general. It's an added incentive to play. I have no idea when I will be able to unlock that emote in Overwatch. And if I like her seasonal skin, no guarantee I will get it in a loot box.

 

You mean apart from actual characters that you have to grind for with in-game currency or pay real money?

[Oz]

22 hours ago, grindmouse said:

Lootboxes need regulating, and the industry needs to move away from them. OW is one of the worst offenders no matter how much of a darling the game is.

For anyone still disagreeing with this. or arguing that it is fine as long as it is just cosmetic. I hope that psycologist working for blizzard are proud of themselves.

[Dig Dug]

Anyone else who signed the petition to parliament regarding lootboxes get this email?

Spoiler

The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Adapt gambling laws to include gambling in video games which targets children.”.

Government responded:

The Gambling Commission has strong powers to regulate gambling and is monitoring convergence between gambling and video games closely. The government is committed to protecting children from harm.

Protecting children and the vulnerable from being harmed or exploited by gambling is a core objective of the regulation of gambling in Great Britain, and a priority for the government. The Gambling Commission, as the regulator for gambling in Great Britain, has powers to regulate online gambling, and is committed to using its powers and expertise to contribute to creating a safer internet.

The Gambling Commission released a position paper in March 2017 detailing existing protections in relation to virtual currencies, eSports and social casino gaming. The paper can be found on the Gambling Commission’s website at the following address: http://www.gamblingGambling Commission.gov.uk/PDF/Virtual-currencies-eSports-and-social-casino-gaming.pdf

Where gambling facilities are offered to British consumers using in-game items that can be converted into cash or traded for items of real-world value, then such activities must be licensed by the Gambling Commission and adhere to strict requirements for the protection of children and the vulnerable, which include measures to prevent underage gambling. It is an offence to invite a child to gamble, and where there is a failure to prevent underage gambling, the Commission will take regulatory and/or criminal action.

Where the facility exists for players of video games to purchase a key to unlock a bundle containing an unknown quantity and value of in-game items as a prize, and where there are readily accessible opportunities to cash in or exchange those awarded in-game items for money or money’s worth, then these elements of the game are likely to be considered licensable gambling activities. In contrast, where prizes are restricted for use solely within the game, such in-game features would not be licensable gambling. The Gambling Commission is committed to working with the video game industry to prevent gambling-related harm related to their platforms.

Consumers are also protected by the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. This includes a requirement on businesses not to subject anyone to misleading or aggressive marketing practices, or, for example, direct exhortation to buy products, such as games content, including in-game purchases such as loot boxes. The government is committed to ensuring that consumers are properly protected and that children’s vulnerability and inexperience is not exploited by aggressive commercial practices.

The Video Standards Council (VSC) Rating Board is the designated body for classifying video games, and applies the Europe-wide PEGI ratings to video games supplied in the UK. The PEGI criteria currently make provision for games depicting simulations of traditional gambling, and such games would generally attract a minimum PEGI rating of 12. The VSC Rating Board is discussing these issues with the PEGI Council and its Experts Group to determine whether any changes to the PEGI criteria need to be made.

The Gambling Commission monitors the participation of children in gambling through a range of data sources including complaints, academic research and the annual Young People and Gambling Survey, which in 2017 included specific questions in relation to eSports and video gaming. The results of the survey are due to be published soon. The Gambling Commission has also asked the Responsible Gambling Strategy Board to examine the wider relationship between children and gambling.

On 11 October the government published the Internet Safety Strategy, setting out plans to make the UK the safest place in the world to be online. The Strategy outlines how the government will work with online platforms, game publishers and game developers, and with agencies such as the VSC Rating Board, to continue to improve online safety in games. This includes promoting further awareness and understanding of PEGI age ratings, parental controls and advice on safe gaming.

The government recognises the risks that come from increasing convergence between gambling and video games. The Gambling Commission is keeping this matter under review and will continue to monitor developments in the market.

Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport

Click this link to view the response online:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/201300?reveal_response=yes

The Petitions Committee will take a look at this petition and its response. They can press the government for action and gather evidence. If this petition reaches 100,000 signatures, the Committee will consider it for a debate.

The Committee is made up of 11 MPs, from political parties in government and in opposition. It is entirely independent of the Government. Find out more about the Committee: https://petition.parliament.uk/help#petitions-committee

Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament

You’re receiving this email because you signed this petition: “Adapt gambling laws to include gambling in video games which targets children.”.

To unsubscribe from getting emails about this petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/signatures/39240405/unsubscribe?token=UguDyp9FAuoX6dZss59R

TL;DR - Lootboxes currently don't legally class as actual gambling so can't be put under gambling regulations.

[Qazimod]

This bit:

 

Quote

Where the facility exists for players of video games to purchase a key to unlock a bundle containing an unknown quantity and value of in-game items as a prize, and where there are readily accessible opportunities to cash in or exchange those awarded in-game items for money or money’s worth, then these elements of the game are likely to be considered licensable gambling activities. In contrast, where prizes are restricted for use solely within the game, such in-game features would not be licensable gambling.

 

So they think it's only gambling if you can trade your in-game items for money... but paying to roll the dice for in-game items is fine because they only have value in-game? Sounds like they've missed the point somewhere. Or I have? I dunno.

[Mortis]

It just shows the regulators being a step behind the industry unfortunately - it’s not for real stuff so it can’t be addictive. 

[Soulstar]

Wouldn't this concept work like a pack of cards or stickers where the contents are random but have that personal or actual worth, which is based on not knowing what one will find out until they buy and open the packet? This is akin to a lootbox is it not? But this isn't classed as gambling obviously. 

 

I personally hate the idea of loot boxes in games by the way. 

[Mr Cochese]

Loot is bollocks. I played Magic the Gathering for too many years and have therefore had enough random distribution for one lifetime already. However, if buying CCG packs is not legally gambling, then neither is this.

[TehStu]

Hadn't thought of the TCG/CCG parallel, somehow that's completely acceptable. I would venture that it's FAR easier to participate when payment is electronic and feedback immediate, though.

 

Loot is bollocks.