Belgium says loot boxes are gambling, wants them banned in Europe

[Bullstomp]

22 minutes ago, cam_wick said:

Well now you just proved my point because yes, the witcher 3 is an amazing game with excellent production value, in fact among my favorite of all time. BUT the expansion pass cost additional money and they rereleased the complete edition to make money off the same product again... so while EA’s marketing is way more extravagant than CDPR’s, the latter is not exempt from capitalizing on gamer’s insatiable love for additional content. They too follow the season pass model. And the prices being lower than they were is definitely a valid point for publishers and developers alike. Because if you can’t ask for more money at POS and people hate on season passes and then the gov looks into banning/regulating micro-transactions... they're getting backed into a corner. It’s the same with itunes and Netflix etc nowadays, they’re all device models where people pay to listen/watch as much as they want but god forbid they raise prices by $1-2 a month, people lose their freaking minds. If we don’t want the prices for the base games to rise, we need to allow for different kinds of monetization models, whether it be season passes or micro-transactions or even subscriptions, like PlayStation plus - duh, it’s a huge chunk of the money Sony makes in the gaming market and they just raised prices last year!

So are micro- transactions in this specific game poorly implemented and wrecklessly tied to a broken profession system. Yes, yes they absolutely are. But I don’t think banning or regulating either through the government is a good idea because it generally illicit sweeping declarations that overshoot the goal. I think it was good that people voiced their concern through reddit and similar outlets and it’s a show of goodwill that EA listened so far and agreed to make adjustments. But honestly the game has only been out a week and it feels like half a year with what’s been going on. Give EA Aand DICE a chance to breathe and fix the problem before getting gov entities involved. 

 

Bottom line- EA hit the PR nightmare jackpot that was only made possible by a license as hot and coveted as Star Wars and now everyone is mainstream media and politicians are perking up as if it’s the first game to ever use this system. Next thing you know, it’ll be part of some senator’s ad campaign. It’s getting out of control. 

Dude, you are really reaching by comparing Netflix to pay to play. Do you have a job @ EA or is it just an aspiration at this time?

 

Your argument about giving them a chance to fix it is like going to buy a car expecting to pay $20k as advertized. Then the salesperson tries to sell that car to you for $30k because they added a bunch of charges without saying anything, like $500 for floormats. Poor salesman, he didn't know what he was doing. Give him a chance to fix it. Fuck that shit.

 

Battlefront II, as it is right now,  gives a gameplay advantage for cash. The Star Wars franchise absolutely targets kids. Making kids pay money for randomized loot boxes (you pay money for stuff and don't even know what you get, most of which is crap) is evil.

 

So yeah, Happy Holidays EA, I hope you enjoy your just desserts this Thanksgiving. I know I am enjoying watching you eat 'em, you greedy bastards!

[Lance_87]

45 minutes ago, Bullstomp said:

Do you have a job @ EA

 

He wants their demise, lol.

[StrickenBiged]

Side note: a really interesting article regarding loot-boxes, from developers' points of view.

 

55 minutes ago, cam_wick said:

BUT the expansion pass cost additional money and they rereleased the complete edition to make money off the same product again... so while EA’s marketing is way more extravagant than CDPR’s, the latter is not exempt from capitalizing on gamer’s insatiable love for additional content. They too follow the season pass model.

 

Completely different, IMO. Witcher 3 was a single player game, the DLC's were developed post-launch, and were both larger experiences than many AAA games are at launch. Assuming you're talking about Battlefront 1 when you mention EA there, that was a multiplayer game where the DLC was always going to and did split the player base, and was planned in advance (and not to mention eye-wateringly expensive).

 

Gamers' don't have an insatiable love for additional content, by the way. The majority don't buy season passes (that info is from an article I read a while ago, and now can't find, but the proportion was a significant minority of players. It may have changed.)

 

1 hour ago, cam_wick said:

If we don’t want the prices for the base games to rise, we need to allow for different kinds of monetization models, whether it be season passes or micro-transactions or even subscriptions, like PlayStation plus - duh, it’s a huge chunk of the money Sony makes in the gaming market and they just raised prices last year!

 

I completely agree. If you look above, I said that I did not want loot-boxes to go away. I argue for better labelling - we should be told the odds of any particular item in the loot boxes so that we, as consumers, can make informed buying decisions. My serious concern with loot boxes is that, at the moment, a game does not have to tell you its odds, whether those are dynamic (e.g. if your data suggests that you buy more loot boxes after a run of not having had a legendary in say, 15 boxes, so it stops giving you legendaries to encourage you to make a purchase). 

 

The more pricing models the better, IMO. There isn't one that suits all games. 

 

1 hour ago, cam_wick said:

Bottom line- EA hit the PR nightmare jackpot that was only made possible by a license as hot and coveted as Star Wars and now everyone is mainstream media and politicians are perking up as if it’s the first game to ever use this system. Next thing you know, it’ll be part of some senator’s ad campaign. It’s getting out of control. 

 

Yes, politicians are bandwagoning. That doesn't necessarily mean any regulation that comes out will be bad. Personally, I think it should stop at labelling and some kind of assurance that the odds are as stated, so that consumers can make informed decisions. 

[FawltyPowers]

1 hour ago, cam_wick said:

Well now you just proved my point because yes, the witcher 3 is an amazing game with excellent production value, in fact among my favorite of all time. BUT the expansion pass cost additional money and they rereleased the complete edition to make money off the same product again... so while EA’s marketing is way more extravagant than CDPR’s, the latter is not exempt from capitalizing on gamer’s insatiable love for additional content. They too follow the season pass model. And the prices being lower than they were is definitely a valid point for publishers and developers alike. Because if you can’t ask for more money at POS and people hate on season passes and then the gov looks into banning/regulating micro-transactions... they're getting backed into a corner. It’s the same with itunes and Netflix etc nowadays, they’re all device models where people pay to listen/watch as much as they want but god forbid they raise prices by $1-2 a month, people lose their freaking minds. If we don’t want the prices for the base games to rise, we need to allow for different kinds of monetization models, whether it be season passes or micro-transactions or even subscriptions, like PlayStation plus - duh, it’s a huge chunk of the money Sony makes in the gaming market and they just raised prices last year!

So are micro- transactions in this specific game poorly implemented and wrecklessly tied to a broken profession system. Yes, yes they absolutely are. But I don’t think banning or regulating either through the government is a good idea because it generally illicit sweeping declarations that overshoot the goal. I think it was good that people voiced their concern through reddit and similar outlets and it’s a show of goodwill that EA listened so far and agreed to make adjustments. But honestly the game has only been out a week and it feels like half a year with what’s been going on. Give EA Aand DICE a chance to breathe and fix the problem before getting gov entities involved. 

 

Bottom line- EA hit the PR nightmare jackpot that was only made possible by a license as hot and coveted as Star Wars and now everyone is mainstream media and politicians are perking up as if it’s the first game to ever use this system. Next thing you know, it’ll be part of some senator’s ad campaign. It’s getting out of control. 

 

Sounds like you actually feel sorry for EA?

 

EA's profit runs into the billions, they aren't struggling. It's time gambling in games for real money is properly regulated, please stop justifying this shit whether it's cosmetic or pay to win. It still targets those with addictive tendencies and impressionable people to gamble, just to see what they can get, it's that anticipation that hooks people.

 

A show of good will that EA listened? That's probably the most naïve comment I've read so far. It was Disney contacting EA directly and the fact that this is being investigated. It has caused widespread condemnation and damaged Disney's reputation.

 

I really wish EA lost their exclusivity rights to the stranglehold they have on Star Wars and Fifa etc. People have had to put up with the shit they produce for too long.

 

 

[StrickenBiged]

52 minutes ago, cam_wick said:

I keep seeing these accusations stated as “facts” with no source. Where are the actual number and figures supporting these arguments that they’re making “many times as much from games with micro-transactions”?

 

EA is a publicly traded company. You can look it up. Here's FY 2016/2017 figures.

 

TL;DR: They made revenue of 1,297,000,000 on "extra content", not including mobile, in the FY ending March 2017. This was roughly 43% of their sales. (See page 5 and do some maths.)

[soniq]

2 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

by charging money for loot boxes the publishers and developers were able to make a lot of money from stupid/rich people without increasing the price for normal players.

 

I never bought any, as I am neither rich nor stupid, and so they never affected me. If they disappear that makes no difference to me, but I am sure it will lead either to a general increase in game prices, or some new profit maximisation avenues to cover the revenue reduction.

 

Those could be worse in the long run.

 

I liked the fact that my (admittedly dwindling) ‘AAA’ game playing was being subsidised by a tax on dumb people. I’d be sad if suddenly normal people were losing out instead!

The flipside to that is, that the games are being made worse on purpose for everyone, to sell lootboxes or premium currency to a few.

I personally really dislike the trend of putting mmo mechanics and things like an endgame in singleplayer games, because all it does is waste my time in hopes that I buy tickets, keys or boxes for a random chance to speed up a process that is (to me) tedious and boring.

Maybe this is selfish, but it makes AAA games less enjoyable to me.

 

As a fan of the Gears of War series and especially the multiplayer, the last three games had different approaches to unlocking characters and skins that got worse each time:

 

Gears 3: Reach a certain level or unlock a certain medal in the game. For example level 10 rewards you with a certain character, killing 6000 enemies with a specific weapon gives you an onyx skin for that weapon. Want to play as the Kantus? Do 600 revives. You could work towards a certain thing you wanted to get and there was a specific task to accomplish it. The only randomness about it were other people, but mostly this is skill dependant. Unlocking some of the more difficult things felt very rewarding.

 

Gears Judgment: You get different kind of crates for either killing enemies, earning ribbons or leveling up. They contained random items, but it was still easy enough to get what you wanted quickly with a few exploits. Felt less rewarding than previously.

 

Gears 4: You get cardpacks with cards, that can be bought and there's a chance for duplicates, but cards can also be turned into scrap and scrap can be used to buy cardpacks again. I don't know, it's a mess and I stopped caring. Maybe I'll get Kait's Black Steel skin some day, or I won't. Whatever.

 

Imo the way Gears 3 did it was wonderful and rewarded me for playing a lot but also playing well, which is something that these random lootbox lotteries don't do at all. There is no satisfaction from pushing a button and watch the machine roll the dice for you.

Now if you have a singleplayer game that gates progress behind those dice rolls and makes you either wait or pay, that's not something I want in my games. Sadly there is no option to pay 30€ extra and get the real version without all the fat and cartilage, or whatever else makes eating a good steak less enjoyable.

[xZoneHunter]

3 hours ago, madbuk said:

The difference is CCGs give you the odds for all the types of cards they contain, which lootboxes don't do, and you can trade/sell any unwanted cards to fund more packs until you eventually get what you want. Is it gambling? Kinda, but at the end you're walking away with something you can use to get what you actually want. If you buy a lootbox hoping for a rainbow hat and instead you get a bunch of red hats, well, you're kinda fucked. You can't do anything with those red hats.

 

CCG stands for collectible card game. It is different from a TCG ( trading card game) in the sense that in a CCG you cannot trade or sell unwanted cards. The thing that happens with unwanted card is that theyre transformed in an in game currency, much like the duplicates you get from lootboxes.

 

Most digital card games are CCGs. Also you dont have the exact drop rates of cards all the time. Unless you mean the "This pack contains at least one rare card" stuff.

Edited November 22, 2017 by xZoneHunter

[that_dude_cam_ps]

3 hours ago, Bullstomp said:

Dude, you are really reaching by comparing Netflix to pay to play. Do you have a job @ EA or is it just an aspiration at this time?

 

Your argument about giving them a chance to fix it is like going to buy a car expecting to pay $20k as advertized. Then the salesperson tries to sell that car to you for $30k because they added a bunch of charges without saying anything, like $500 for floormats. Poor salesman, he didn't know what he was doing. Give him a chance to fix it. Fuck that shit.

 

Battlefront II, as it is right now,  gives a gameplay advantage for cash. The Star Wars franchise absolutely targets kids. Making kids pay money for randomized loot boxes (you pay money for stuff and don't even know what you get, most of which is crap) is evil.

 

So yeah, Happy Holidays EA, I hope you enjoy your just desserts this Thanksgiving. I know I am enjoying watching you eat 'em, you greedy bastards!

I’m in no way affiliated with EA, nor have I ever planned to be. LOL. But seriously, I understand that it’s much easier to rationalize my views by suggesting I’m an EA employee preaching jusification. But fortunately, that’s not the case. I have a ears and eyes and a highly functioning brain that allows me to perceive and process exterior stimuli and data and a mouth to vocalize my interpretation.

 

So I stand by my statements. Yes, Star Wars Battlefront 2 uses a games-as-a-service model, that will periodically be updated with additional new content, much like Netflix or iTunes is periodically updated with new movies and series and music. Yes I realize the latter are subscription based service vs “pay to play“, but the two are comparable in a sense that they also offer higher tier ultra hd subscriptions for a couple bucks more per month if you want it, or you can also just get the base plan, the same way as you can get the base game in SWBF 2 and are not required to buy anything else, unless you want it. I would know I’ve been playing for a week without spending anything (obviously since it’s also currently removed) and have unlocked all heroes and am at level 20 and have multiple star cards at level 2-3 and a handful at epic. 

 

Besides which, your car analogy doesn’t hold up. Nor does it really make sense. why would anyone buy a car with unnecessary upgrades in the first place...? EA isn’t selling you something more expensive than it is. You know what the game costs and you know that you can purchase extra stuff, if you want. The car analogy would have to be: you buy a 20k car and then realize you wanted a 6 cylinder instead of a 4 and a turbocharger to boot. That puts you at 30k oh and your $500 floor mats, so say 30.5k. And that, my friend, is a lot of cash for floor mats btw lol.

 

I also disagree that they are specifically targeting kids, that seems too sinister and implies criminal intent. I honestly think, it’s a poorly implemented loot crate progression system developed by DICE that has been monetized by EA, without enough consideration to the implications and consequences in regard progress AND the whole “gambling” angle.

 

[that_dude_cam_ps]

2 hours ago, StrickenBiged said:

 

EA is a publicly traded company. You can look it up. Here's FY 2016/2017 figures.

 

TL;DR: They made revenue of 1,297,000,000 on "extra content", not including mobile, in the FY ending March 2017. This was roughly 43% of their sales. (See page 5 and do some maths.)

Thank you I will actually take a look at this

[Facas]

Don't compare F2P whit EA. because you don't pay for the game in the 1st place and all the transactions in the games that i know you have a description of what your are buying. 

I finished gems of war, soul calibur, tekken revolution, spartacus and ace combat infinity whiteout spending a cent.

 And EA is targeting people whit gamble adiction and kids. 

If you ask kids what they like to play a lot of them will say racing and sports games. Did anyone heard or read about kids that stole credit cards from parents and spent thousands of dollars in micro transactions.?

[Swotam]

IMO you inevitably need to have the Government step in to regulate this sort of thing, since expecting the corporations to regulate themselves is pointless. They'll keep pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable until they cross some invisible line and suddenly their previously ignored behavior ends up splashed all over the home pages of major news organizations and becomes a point of interest for Government representatives.

 

Of course, it's logical to assume that the companies involved with fight back by lobbying the politicians to not support changes, and odds are that will result in some sort of watered-down compromise.

 

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out, and how some of the big game companies react to it. Off the top of my head I can think of the following console games that use Loot Crates as part of their MT strategy.

• Destiny 1 / Destiny 2
• Call of Duty WW2 and previous incarnations
• Middle Earth: Shadow of War
• Star Wars Battlefront 2 (duh)
• Overwatch
• The Division

Obviously there's a lot more, these are just some that came to mind right away.

 

I don't have an issue in general with the concept of microtransactions in games, as long as the content is sold in a way where you know what you're getting and are able to buy what you want and isn't pushing some sort of pay to win agenda. I don't generally buy MT content myself, but if I look at a recent game like Assassin's Creed Origins, where most of the MT content is either unique cosmetic outfits or unique weapons (that are no better or worse than what you will obtain for free just by playing) I can't really say that I have a problem with someone deciding they want to pay $5 to ride a Unicorn around Egypt if that's what floats their boat. They knew they were getting the Unicorn, they knew it would cost them $5, and they made an decision to buy that thing for the price being asked.

 

On the other hand, if you're pushing the purchase of in-game currency with real $$ as a means of selling randomized loot boxes where the content you will receive is unknown, and the odds of receiving specific content is unknown, then you are basically selling a gambling-style experience, despite whatever objections you may make to calling it what it actually is. That, I have a problem with, and that's what I think the Government is likely going to have to regulate out of games because you can be sure the corporations won't do it themselves.

[Stargazer2600]

I don't like the idea of the government telling us whats acceptable and whats not. Maybe the gaming community just made a deal with the devil, yeah we can get rid of loot boxes but now they have a foot in our door

[ragnarok2887]

In my view, this is one small step in the right direction.  The big question that we will all want to know is HOW they plan to regulate microtransactions/lootboxes, or whether they will be banned outright.

 

I reckon that lootboxes (as they are now) will be age restricted, just like sex & violence are in video games.  That would mean that lootboxes could exist in the exact same form if they were in an adult 18+ (or whatever classification it is in the USA) game.  Games like Star Wars would need to change as clearly that is aimed at kids, so they would have to remove them, or come up with a much more acceptable system.  Most FPS games are 18+ classification, due to blood & gore.  Therefore lootboxes could potentially remain in most titles.

 

I do however think that the fallout from the Battlefront 2 fiasco will (hopefully) make developers think twice about how they implement microtransactions into future games.  At the very least "pay 2 win" needs to be removed from all future titles.

 

You can bet that games currently in development (cough ANTHEM cough) are freaking out about having to redo their progression system, as clearly they were going to follow the Battlefront 2 formula.  That game will 100% be delayed.  

[Leaderboards]

26 minutes ago, Stargazer2600 said:

I don't like the idea of the government telling us whats acceptable and whats not. Maybe the gaming community just made a deal with the devil, yeah we can get rid of loot boxes but now they have a foot in our door

 

The government would have to remove my ps4 controller and my copy of Onechanbara Z2: Chaos - 'Banana Split' Edition from my cold dead hands!

 

 

Edited November 22, 2017 by TurdFlingingApe

[Bullstomp]

7 hours ago, cam_wick said:

Besides which, your car analogy doesn’t hold up. Nor does it really make sense. why would anyone buy a car with unnecessary upgrades in the first place...? EA isn’t selling you something more expensive than it is. You know what the game costs and you know that you can purchase extra stuff, if you want. The car analogy would have to be: you buy a 20k car and then realize you wanted a 6 cylinder instead of a 4 and a turbocharger to boot. That puts you at 30k oh and your $500 floor mats, so say 30.5k. And that, my friend, is a lot of cash for floor mats btw lol.

Yes they are and I really don't understand why you don't see it. I remember way back in the day when you spent $60 to buy a game and got the full experience for that money. Then came DLCs. Then came microtransactions. And season passes. 

 

Battlefront 1 set the stage for EA's greed with this license, selling the base game for $60 and selling a season pass for $50 without even setting expectations of what to expect for that money. That is still the most expensive season pass ever. Many thought they were getting the game for $60 and didn't realize they had to double their investment for the full experience. That's shady.

 

Battlefront 2 took out those DLC charges and replaced them with MTX . And they made the play for progression rewards so restrictive it would almost require people pay extra to get what they want. In that Reddit thread someone did the math and calculated a gamer would have to grind over 4,000 hours to get all level 4 cards if they didn't buy loot boxes.Four.thousand.hours. That's beyond fucked up.

 

So defend EA  as much as you like but the pattern of money grubbing and complete disregard for their customers is obvious. 

 

Just remember, you can't spell "stEAl" without "EA".

Edited November 22, 2017 by Bullstomp

[Undead Wolf]

I heard about this earlier and it brought a smile to my face.  While this in of itself probably won't bring about any changes, it shows a growing resentment towards microtransactions, not just in our little corner of the internet, but in the mainstream as well. I'm so glad people are finally starting to realise how predatory they are. If nothing else, I hope this serves as an example to other publishers and dissuades them from implementing microtransactions in future releases.

[Swotam]

47 minutes ago, Stargazer2600 said:

I don't like the idea of the government telling us whats acceptable and whats not. Maybe the gaming community just made a deal with the devil, yeah we can get rid of loot boxes but now they have a foot in our door

 

There’s a big difference between the Government telling you what’s acceptable or not vs them requiring corporations to behave appropriately. This is a case of the latter.

 

You can’t realistically expect publicly traded corporations like EA or Activision to limit their business ventures or not push the boundaries, especially when doing so can result in them making a larger pile of money. After all, the majority of these companies operate under the assumption that cash is king and anything that makes more money needs to be exploited as much as possible. In the gaming industry, these companies are not going to remove gambling-style microtransactions from their games because a small number of customers take issue with their business model. They will only do so if they’re told to do it, and ultimately the Government is the only body with the power to make them do it.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Swotam

[Fing3rButt3r3]

14 hours ago, enaysoft said:

Oh Wow! Belgium AND Hawaii, I mean wow. Hawaii is basically the US, yes I know it is the US. However Hawaii coming out and saying the words "this is gambling" and a man saying he needs to protect his daughter from these horrible practices. This is quite literally the most disasterous thing for Disney and EA.

 

First ever I'm happy games and Politics got mixed together. I hope EA burns, they deserve it.

Yay...Hawaii...with 1.4million people...i wonder how many actually play games.

21 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

I heard about this earlier and it brought a smile to my face.  While this in of itself probably won't bring about any changes, it shows a growing resentment towards microtransactions, not just in our little corner of the internet, but in the mainstream as well. I'm so glad people are finally starting to realise how predatory they are. If nothing else, I hope this serves as an example to other publishers and dissuades them from implementing microtransactions in future releases.

 

Do they really want to ban it or want in on the share. #rolleyes

[that_dude_cam_ps]

9 hours ago, Bullstomp said:

Yes they are and I really don't understand why you don't see it. I remember way back in the day when you spent $60 to buy a game and got the full experience for that money. Then came DLCs. Then came microtransactions. And season passes. 

 

Battlefront 1 set the stage for EA's greed with this license, selling the base game for $60 and selling a season pass for $50 without even setting expectations of what to expect for that money. That is still the most expensive season pass ever. Many thought they were getting the game for $60 and didn't realize they had to double their investment for the full experience. That's shady.

 

Battlefront 2 took out those DLC charges and replaced them with MTX . And they made the play for progression rewards so restrictive it would almost require people pay extra to get what they want. In that Reddit thread someone did the math and calculated a gamer would have to grind over 4,000 hours to get all level 4 cards if they didn't buy loot boxes.Four.thousand.hours. That's beyond fucked up.

 

So defend EA  as much as you like but the pattern of money grubbing and complete disregard for their customers is obvious. 

 

Just remember, you can't spell "stEAl" without "EA".

Just gonna start at the bottom here. That is the lamest phrase I’ve ever heard. Ever.

 

Nobody is stealing your money, nobody is forcing you to pay them anymore than you're willing to and nobody, not even EAvil EA, is responsible, if you purchase something without researching what you are getting. If you don’t want to pay so much, then just wait till it’s on sale. Over the past year I’ve seen the SWBF ultimate edition (incl. season pass) for $10 on the ps store, multiple times. That’s 91% off the original price.

 

You keep calling EA money grubbers and compare them to car salesmen jacking up prices. Let me ask you this: have you ever seen a brand new car model go down 91% a little over a year after release?

 

I honestly think gamers are the whiniest, most spoilt bunch of overprivileged juveniles on the face of the planet.

 

“The game is way too expensive!” 

“EA is ripping me off!!”

”Micro-transactions are the evil that will consume the last flickering light humanity!!!”

 

Games are NOT expensive, not even EA’s retail price $110 SWBF incl. season pass. Because news flash: games are the cheapest digital media you could possibly buy.

 

If that’s shady then I suppose going to the movies is shady, too. Because guess what: it’s like $10+ to go see a movie plus for the “full experience” you have to pay another $10 for popcorn and soda. And I guess listening to the regular version of an album is a rip off, too. Because the deluxe version costs $5 more.

 

Besides the fact that games are less expensive now that’s they were 20 years ago, even with season passes. Adjusted for inflation games like Super Mario Bros would cost about $115 today. It’s a side scroller, a hand full of levels, no multiplayer, no full hd/4K, no first and third person views in 3 dimensional space.

 

EA already drastically reduced the amount of credits necessary to purchase heroes and promised to adjust the progression system. And leveling up is fast as all hell, I would know. Because now, even without MTX, I already have all heroes and am level 20 after a week. So wooooow, yeah it’s all evil and shady. And the game is terrible. And I hate EA for forcing me to pre-order it at full price. And I totally feel coerced into buying lootcrates. And the government needs to come save me from this horrible fate. Not

[Sicho]

People get angry over lootboxes and argue that "the game is aimed at kids" ... rightfully so ... but when did it become acceptable that a First Person SHOOTER where you kill opponents is aimed at kids?

I must have missed something ...

[that_dude_cam_ps]

20 hours ago, FawltyPowers said:

 

Sounds like you actually feel sorry for EA?

 

EA's profit runs into the billions, they aren't struggling. It's time gambling in games for real money is properly regulated, please stop justifying this shit whether it's cosmetic or pay to win. It still targets those with addictive tendencies and impressionable people to gamble, just to see what they can get, it's that anticipation that hooks people.

 

A show of good will that EA listened? That's probably the most naïve comment I've read so far. It was Disney contacting EA directly and the fact that this is being investigated. It has caused widespread condemnation and damaged Disney's reputation.

 

I really wish EA lost their exclusivity rights to the stranglehold they have on Star Wars and Fifa etc. People have had to put up with the shit they produce for too long.

 

 

I don’t feel sorry for EA. But what everybody is forgetting is EA is a business just like any other business in the world. And the number one priority for any business that is not non-profit is growth through profitability. There is nothing sustainable about gamer’s delusional expectations. 

 

I was referring to EA reducing the credits for heroes, not turning off MTX. That directly negates the necessity of buying credits with real money. This was before Disney entered the conversation.

 

All this nonsense about lootboxes targeting people with addiction and kids is a total conspiracy theory. Kids need to be parented and you can’t buy anything on a ps sub acct without credit card access. And if you have a gambling addiction, seek help, EA isn’t trying to exploit you. Just like if you’re an alcoholic, Budweiser isn’t trying to prey on you with super bowl commercials every year.

 

holy shit, how jaded 

36 minutes ago, Sicho said:

when did it become acceptable that a First Person SHOOTER where you kill opponents is aimed at kids?

I must have missed something ...

Yes, exactly. If you’re worried the loot system in this FPS is turning your 10 your old into a gambling addict... I think you’re a bad parent lol

Edited November 23, 2017 by cam_wick
Typo

[FawltyPowers]

11 minutes ago, cam_wick said:

I don’t feel sorry for EA. But what everybody is forgetting is EA is a business just like any other business in the world. And the number one priority for any business that is not non-profit is growth through profitability. There is nothing sustainable about gamer’s delusional expectations. 

 

Forgetting? What are you talking about? We all know the number one priority for any business is to make a profit. This isn't about profit, this is about greed. Are you saying games do not make profits without having microtransactions? Microtransactions = Greed.

 

13 minutes ago, cam_wick said:

All this nonsense about lootboxes targeting people with addiction and kids is a total conspiracy theory. Kids need to be parented and you can’t buy anything on a ps sub acct without credit card access. And if you have a gambling addiction, seek help, EA isn’t trying to exploit you. Just like if you’re an alcoholic, Budweiser isn’t trying to prey on you with super bowl commercials every year.

 

As far as I know every time you click on a lootbox you don't have to enter your credit card information? Sometimes the account owners already have this set up. If you have a gambling addiction seek help? Wow, again, just wow. But anyway that's my point, this needs to be removed from games, you play games to play games not to gamble money, you've already paid for the game! EA are not trying to exploit you? It's hard to carry on reading this. Did you actually see the Activision patent recently? Will you still say that their intentions are not exploitative?

 

Budweiser is an alcoholic drink. We know it's alcohol, we are told its alcohol, "drink responsibly" even appears on the commercials. People who are alcoholics should stay away from alcohol. Erm yes. I see all the advertising for Battlefront 2 everywhere, massive online multiplayer experience, lush graphics, hmm, don't see lootboxes shown anywhere, no disclaimer, even though the game revolves around it. All that's happened now is people who weren't aware of these practices now are and this is the response. But you're right if you're using that comparison, we should know that a game has lootboxes before we buy so we can make an informed choice. That will hopefully happen now.

 

21 minutes ago, cam_wick said:

Yes, exactly. If you’re worried the loot system in this FPS is turning your 10 your old into a gambling addict... I think you’re a bad parent lol

 

So bored of the bad parenting angle. Maybe you were that squeaky clean child growing up. Didn't drink alcohol until you were 18, never touched a cigarette until you were 16, no sex until 16, never watched an 18 certificate film until you were 18, never played a computer game with an 18 certificate until you were 18. Wait what you did? Then you had really bad parents.

 

Oh and just to add when it comes to the gambling aspect. When I was younger and you brought a game from a shop it was the complete game, it had to be, there was no second chances and this is how a lot of parents probably still see games. Lootboxes is relatively new and people aren't really aware of them. Well now they are. Now everyone is.

[Bullstomp]

4 hours ago, cam_wick said:

EA already drastically reduced the amount of credits necessary to purchase heroes and promised to adjust the progression system. And leveling up is fast as all hell, I would know. Because now, even without MTX, I already have all heroes and am level 20 after a week. So wooooow, yeah it’s all evil and shady. And the game is terrible. And I hate EA for forcing me to pre-order it at full price. And I totally feel coerced into buying lootcrates. And the government needs to come save me from this horrible fate. Not

First of all, thank you. I get it now. You need to defend,  no validate, your purchase. Completely understand.

 

You are right, no one is forcing me to spend my money. I do my research. Do I have a copy of Battlefront? I have a copy of the first one that I bought when they released the complete edition for $20. However, the vast majority of Star Wars fans will jump in because it's Star Wars. In fact, EA is banking on that. That's what makes it deceptive.

 

Not to mention think about what you said a moment: gamers should do their research. Why? Why shouldn't someone selling a product be more transparent? How much research do you do when you buy a magazine or a movie?

 

You also completely side-stepped my assertion on if you want to get all level 4 Star Cards without spending money it has been calculated it would take you 4 thousand hours. Four thousand hours. Let me add if you wanted to get them all through buying lootboxes it was calculated it would cost $2,100.And then you say levelling is fast and you are already max level 20. You are comparing apples and hand grenades. Well done, EA would be proud!

 

Btw, I agree that "bad parents " argument is BS offered by politicians and virgins. Guess what? There is a shit ton of violence in the Star Wars movies that kids watch that involve images of real people, not pixelated images. How old were you when you first saw a gun fight in a movie? If you expect teenagers to play Sesame Street you really have no idea what you're talking about.

 

Final note: Sorry my quip didn't impress you but at least I was original. Closing your post by saying "Not" is something I haven't seen since the 90s. . .

 

UPDATE: Belgium, Hawaii and Australia have made their thoughts known, see below.-

 

 

Edited November 23, 2017 by Bullstomp

[Facas]

 

4 hours ago, cam_wick said:

I don’t feel sorry for EA. But what everybody is forgetting is EA is a business just like any other business in the world. And the number one priority for any business that is not non-profit is growth through profitability. 

 

So explain me how Rockstar's GTA 5 made bilions and broke every sales records whitout microtransactions or sesson passes and continue to update the game for free. 

[that_dude_cam_ps]

4 minutes ago, Facas said:

 

 

So explain me how Rockstar's GTA 5 made bilions and broke every sales records whitout microtransactions or sesson passes and continue to update the game for free. 

"without MTX "lol, have you played GTA5?! you know you can drop serious cash on "shark cards" on the psn store which give you in game money. so there's that. and GTA5 is a completely different game, with a huge amount of single player content, I easily dumped 100 hours into that open world story. online maybe 5 hours, don't really like it. point being SWBF is an online FPS competing with the likes of COD and even EA's other title, battlefield. oh not to forget FPS RPG Destiny. and a bunch of other awesome FPS games that don't have/require online play, like far cry or wolfenstein. so yeah GTA 5 sold 80 million copies world wide to date, that game is a freak of nature though. it is not exempt from skimming off the top with MTX though. and not to forget they rereleased it on the ps4 and god knows how many people repurchased it, after already owning the ps3 version, I know many personally.