Jump to content

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


You

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Sicho said:

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 ...

Battlefront 2 is rated T for Teens, and star wars has always been aimed towards the younger crowd. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

Battlefront 2 is rated T for Teens, and star wars has always been aimed towards the younger crowd. 

 

Teens are not Kids, they are Teens.

I mean Teens can drink legally in some countries, they can drive legally... hell most of them probably fuck already ;)

Kids for me are like 9-year-olds or something like that.

And I don't think that Star Wars in general is aimed at younger crowds. The first movie was IMO clearly aimed at adults. As was Leia in a golden bikini ;)

Star Wars The Clone Wars TV series - now that's aimed at kids! But that's a whole other vibe then "general" Star Wars and especially Battlefront ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sicho said:

 

Teens are not Kids, they are Teens.

I mean Teens can drink legally in some countries, they can drive legally... hell most of them probably fuck already ;)

Kids for me are like 9-year-olds or something like that.

And I don't think that Star Wars in general is aimed at younger crowds. The first movie was IMO clearly aimed at adults. As was Leia in a golden bikini ;)

Star Wars The Clone Wars TV series - now that's aimed at kids! But that's a whole other vibe then "general" Star Wars and especially Battlefront ;)

Sorry, but legally speaking, anyone under the age of 18 is still a kid. Maybe so, but I know most people that saw the original trilogy were only around 7 to 8 years old at the time, and most take their kids to see the new ones now too. Also just because they can drive legally doesn't make them an adult, they're still kids. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SnowxSakura said:

Sorry, but legally speaking, anyone under the age of 18 is still a kid. Maybe so, but I know most people that saw the original trilogy were only around 7 to 8 years old at the time, and most take their kids to see the new ones now too. Also just because they can drive legally doesn't make them an adult, they're still kids. 

 

Legally yes but when it comes to game ratings f.ex., there is a difference ;) Or let's say: there's more granularity.

Battlefront II is not meant for 9-year-olds.

And the Star Wars movies also have age ratings.

And of course young kids often see movies or play games that aren't appropriate for their age... but that does not mean that the game/movie specifically targets them.

The Minions are targeted at Kids. Star Wars isn't IMO.

Edited by Sicho
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sicho said:

 

Legally yes but when it comes to game ratings f.ex., there is a difference ;) Or let's say: there's more granularity.

Battlefront II is not meant for 9-year-olds.

And the Star Wars movies also have ratings.

And of course young kids often see movies or play games that aren't appropriate for their age... but that does not mean that the game/movie specifically targets them.

The Minions are targeted at Kids. Star Wars isn't IMO.

Yes they do actually, PG. Only 2 of the film's have received a pg-13, so yes they are targeted to kids. Regardless loot box gambling shouldn't be targeting 8 year olds or 16 year olds. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you ever played gta 5?

1ST

The shark card's only came 2 months after the release.

2ND

you can finish gta story mode in 2 or 3 weeks and you don't need shark cards.

3RD

the main focus of the game is the multiplayer, all contents added was for the online not story mode.

4TH

i have more then 1100 hours in gta (do you whant to see my stats on social club?) 

5TH

nothing is hidden behind pay walls and as became easyer to make money whit every update they put in.

Trophy related reach lv 100 is the only trophy that takes time and you will not get there whit MTX.

the ps4 version came whit a lot extra content and grafics were gratelly inproved.

 You May not know that Rockstar also give money to player's from time to time, i've receive more or less 7 millions for free. I don't think you can teach me anything about gta 5. 

You are just try to justify something that can't be justified.

Edited by Facas
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Facas said:

3RD

the main focus of the game is the multiplayer, all contents added was for the online not story mode.

 

Until Ill-Gotten Gains Part 2, with the exception of the Heists update, GTA5 received new cars and weapons for Story mode. The same ones added to multiplayer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, cam_wick said:

games are the cheapest digital media you could possibly buy.

 

I definitely agree with this, and you have made some other good points in your various posts. Compared to most other ways of entertaining yourself, digital or otherwise, games are pretty cheap when you look at the amount you pay vs the number of hours you will likely spend consuming the content. Going to see a 3D movie in Canada is $15 per adult and it goes up to something like $22 if you want to have those DBOX rumbling seats (:rolleyes:), and that experience is typically going to last you between 90 minutes to 2.5 hours. Buying a new movie digitally costs around $25 here and represents under 3 hours of entertainment unless you re-watch repeatedly over time, etc.

 

That doesn't make a MSRP of $80 for new games in Canada an easier pill to swallow, but the "value" is there for sure.

 

I think the issue many have is with the actual concept of a "loot crate" in video games. Regardless of them being entirely optional, they still represent a gambling-style experience IMO that doesn't belong in video games. If a company like EA or Bungie want to sell things in-game for real money then just sell those things. Sell the Star Cards, or Sparrows, or Cosmetic things directly, don't put them into a box where the contents are unknown and the odds of getting the content you want is unknown. The only reason these companies do this is because they know they will make more money doing it this way. Although guys like you or me are able to ignore them, there are lots of other people who, for whatever reason, cannot, and those people are the ones who will drop $50, $100, $500 or more on in-game currency to gamble with loot boxes just to get a helmet or some other silly shit. To me, microtransactions aren't so much "the problem" (although I'm not a fan of them), it's the surge in loot boxes and their gambling-style mechanics that exist for the sole purpose of generating more MT revenue than would otherwise be generated that I think need to go.

 

Like I said in an earlier post, I don't care at all if someone wants to spend $5 to ride around on a Unicorn in AC Origins, but I do care if the only way for anyone to get the Unicorn is to repeatedly purchase loot crates at $2-$3 a pop until you randomly get the Unicorn at some point down the road. That business model doesn't belong in video games and needs to either be voluntarily or legislatively removed from the experience.

Edited by Swotam
different words
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, FawltyPowers said:

 

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.

 

 

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.

 

 

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.

I disagree, I don't think MTX are greedy. They're not greedy in GTA 5, they're not greedy in The Last of Us and they aren't greedy in Assassin's Creed. So what exactly makes them greedy here? If someone wants to superficially accelerate their progress in a game, why not allow/offer it? Then, of course, one could argue that the feature should be free, so why charge money for it? But then why charge more money for prioritizing mail? Why charge more money to let people stream in 4k vs full HD? Why charge more money for street parking in some cities than in others? Is it all greed? If profit = greed then yes, yes it is. But if the company is trying to maximize profits in order to be able to reinvest in future projects, how is that greed? It's called business and EA is a business just like Rockstar, Ubisoft and Naughty Dog/Sony. You can't make SWBF3, if half your audience waits until BF2 and BF1 are on sale for 80%, or even worse, buy it used. And that is the absolute truth that everyone conveniently "forgets". Yeah retail price for the standard edition is 60 USD. And if 1 million people buy it, that's 60mio in their pocket. But the reality is, that since it's a Star Wars license, probably 50% is Disney's cut, then you have brick and mortar distributors skimming off the top. Ad campaigns. Employee salaries. Development hardware and software. Insurances. Patents. Development of new engines. All costs coming out of that 60$. Now another 5 Mio buy it, but on Black Friday for half off, another half mio buy it used after half a year. and people just upgrading to PS4 (yes, really) buy it in  a year for $10. At this point you're not sure whether you can break even on this project. Shit happens to movies all the time, studios write it off as a bad investment, there is no patch or removal of functions to fix it. Done deal. So why would you not have some sort of additional system in place cushion the transition into the next project, if available? Oh I almost forgot all the people still downloading cracked versions of games on pc, jesus, talk about sticking it to the man. Maybe you should be mad at them, too, since everyone buying used games and downloading games illegally or driving up prices and turning the games industry into a money grubbing machine.

 

I'm honestly not sure about xbox or pc, but on the PlayStation system, you can setup a subaccount tied to your master account and restrict any purchases whether in the psn store or in game. That's called parenting, paying attention to what your child is or isn't doing. If you don't know whether or not your kid is buying hundreds of dollars worth of loot crates, that's your fault, not EA's. You're not gambling money unless you are actually spending it in MTX, which I KNOW are totally unnecessary to play and enjoy the game. period. they're just an option. the lootboxes aren't the problem, that seems to be a huge part of what is getting mixed up in this whole PR disaster. The progression system could use some tweaking, yes, and if you had lootboxes dedicated to each class, it would fix a lot. I've played the game for a week and not once have I felt at odds with this system or felt cheated or somehow underpowered. it's all media hype at this point. and yes, to your point, people should make informed decisions, especially parents. but it's the parent's responsibility to review and gather information and not buy it, pop in the disc, and be like "omg my 10 year old is gambling for star cards"

 

and yes if you are an addict seek help, don't blame it on others, that is right up there next to lying about your addiction. so you're saying because battlefront2 didn't incl. a regulated "play responsibly" slogan in their ad campaign they're preying on kids. do you think alcoholics actually read or care about the disclaimers everywhere, or smokers or any other addicts..?

 

and not that it's anyone's damn business, but I was NOT squeaky clean. alcohol 13, cigs 13, sex 14, rated r film 11, rated m game I wanna say 12... either way, I was being sarcastic. but even still, it's the parent's responsibility to watch what their kids are doing. think "parental advisory" stickers. helping or hurting? things are getting blown out of proportion is what I'm saying. if your kid can play a $60 FPS then your kid can buy a freaking $10 loot crate. and if you're kid has a gambling problem, maybe you really are just a bad parent. But I'd just LOVE to see the statistic showing kids who are now gambling addicts because of MTX. just like politicians and worried mothers across the globe banned together for a decade claiming video game violence promotes violence in real life and kids who play violent games and watch violent movies are more aggressive. give me a break.

 

and lastly, yes when games went gold back in the day, that was it. but honestly the scale and production quality has increased exponentially. so unless you want to wait 10 years for the next SWBF, you may need to accept that devs are going to release games that still need more polish through patches because dev cycle times keep getting shorter and shorter and gamers are at fault as well. so there are really only 3 scenarios: evil MTX stay, season passes return, or game prices rise up 20-30%. take your pick 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SnowxSakura said:

Sorry, but legally speaking, anyone under the age of 18 is still a kid. Maybe so, but I know most people that saw the original trilogy were only around 7 to 8 years old at the time, and most take their kids to see the new ones now too. Also just because they can drive legally doesn't make them an adult, they're still kids. 

that is so not true :D my mom saw the original movies when they released in 77, 80, 83 in theaters and were obviously not aimed at kids. star wars has become this kid magnet since they got introduced to video games in the 90s and LEGO got the license and then Disney just bombarded kids with licesned toys the last 5 years. but and FPS, whether Star Wars or not, is not "aimed at kids". if it is, then society is broken. because in the game you are literally gaining points by shooting fellow gamers in the face or bashing them to death with lightsabers. so while in theory there is no blood in the game, in real life this would be awful.

 

but you are correct, drinking, driving having sex does not make you an adukt legally speaking. but neither does being 18 for that matter. being an adult has to do with maturity. and being mature enough to play this or anyother game is at the discretion of your parent until you reach said maturity. or 18, if you move out and tell them to f off :D

2 hours ago, SnowxSakura said:

Yes they do actually, PG. Only 2 of the film's have received a pg-13, so yes they are targeted to kids. Regardless loot box gambling shouldn't be targeting 8 year olds or 16 year olds. 

 

a movie rating only being pg does nto mean it targets kids. take romatnic comdies for example. a lot are rated pg. but they're for adults. the rating jsut means that a kid over the age of 6 could theoretically watch it without seeing something they shouldn't, but neglects the fact that no 6 year old could possibly comprehend the wit or emotional weight of the movie. and it's parent's jobs to review the movie or game or whatever before letting their kid see/play it etc. and if there is a certain aspect of said media they don't like, they need to either restrict it or convey their concern to their kid. now active adult gamers on the other hand have the opportunity, nay responsibtilty to voice their own concerns to EA, etc. but not to the US gov. that'll make everyhting worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EA doesn't need lootboxes or microtransactions. They've admitted it themselves. The $60 they get up front almost always makes them a huge profit. The extra stuff is just that. So no, if there weren't any MTs or lootboxes, EA would not need to raise the launch price. 

 

Btw, if you buy the game at all, whether it be at launch or two years later for $20, you're still supporting them. You're still telling them that the way they do business at all is ok. If you are really against this practice, stop supporting these companies at all.

 

Here's a great video with a bunch of EA quotes thrown in about the subject. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Facas said:

Do you ever played gta 5?

1ST

The shark card's only came 2 months after the release.

2ND

you can finish gta story mode in 2 or 3 weeks and you don't need shark cards.

3RD

the main focus of the game is the multiplayer, all contents added was for the online not story mode.

4TH

i have more then 1100 hours in gta (do you whant to see my stats on social club?) 

5TH

nothing is hidden behind pay walls and as became easyer to make money whit every update they put in.

Trophy related reach lv 100 is the only trophy that takes time and you will not get there whit MTX.

the ps4 version came whit a lot extra content and grafics were gratelly inproved.

 You May not know that Rockstar also give money to player's from time to time, i've receive more or less 7 millions for free. I don't think you can teach me anything about gta 5. 

You are just try to justify something that can't be justified.

almost didn't catch your response without the quote..

 

yes I played gta 5, like I said about 100hours. your argument had been that GTA5 sold millions of copies without MTX. but there are MTX in the multiplayer there too. you say you've played 1100 hours, I believe you. but then you should know not to lie about it...that was the point. yeah see how you say it's beem easier to make money with every update. it's been ONE week since SWBF released so people haven't given EA enough time to rectify their mistakes. I'm not justifying anything, or defending EA or anyone else for that matter. but FACT is: GTA5 also has MTX that allow you to artificially progress online. so you cannot in good conscience claim that they made millions without MTX. it's just not true. nothing is hidden behind paywalls in SWBF2 either, I've been playing since the release and have unlocked all heroes, at level 20 and opened multiple loot crates at this point. all without spending anything through MTX. I'm not saying the lootcrate system in place is good. it's definitely flawed. but jsut think about what the name of the topic is: "Belgium says loot boxes are gambling". people, gamers and non-gamers alike are getting concepts of lootboxes mixed up with MTX and it's all getting muddied and blown out of proportion.

1 minute ago, Phil said:

EA doesn't need lootboxes or microtransactions. They've admitted it themselves. The $60 they get up front almost always makes them a huge profit. The extra stuff is just that. So no, if there weren't any MTs or lootboxes, EA would not need to raise the launch price. 

 

Btw, if you buy the game at all, whether it be at launch or two years later for $20, you're still supporting them. You're still telling them that the way they do business at all is ok. If you are really against this practice, stop supporting these companies at all.

 

Here's a great video with a bunch of EA quotes thrown in about the subject. 

 

 

yes, because EA is the evilest corporation in the world. so I refuse to support them, I will boycott everyhting they ever make until they stop this gambling addiction lootboxing MTX satan worshipping nonsense and I'll let it be known while I drive my dieselgate VW, talking on my made by Foxconn iPhone, wearing my fair trade Nikes and complaining about Colin Kaepernick's non-patriotic ways.

but seriously everybody, I love the passionate responses from everybody, escpecially when you paly devil's advocate ?

 

the gaming community is by far the most ridiculously argumentative bunch this corporate greed ridden world has to offer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Swotam said:

 

 

I think the issue many have is with the actual concept of a "loot crate" in video games. Regardless of them being entirely optional, they still represent a gambling-style experience IMO that doesn't belong in video games. If a company like EA or Bungie want to sell things in-game for real money then just sell those things. Sell the Star Cards, or Sparrows, or Cosmetic things directly, don't put them into a box where the contents are unknown and the odds of getting the content you want is unknown. The only reason these companies do this is because they know they will make more money doing it this way. Although guys like you or me are able to ignore them, there are lots of other people who, for whatever reason, cannot, and those people are the ones who will drop $50, $100, $500 or more on in-game currency to gamble with loot boxes just to get a helmet or some other silly shit. To me, microtransactions aren't so much "the problem" (although I'm not a fan of them), it's the surge in loot boxes and their gambling-style mechanics that exist for the sole purpose of generating more MT revenue than would otherwise be generated that I think need to go.

 

Like I said in an earlier post, I don't care at all if someone wants to spend $5 to ride around on a Unicorn in AC Origins, but I do care if the only way for anyone to get the Unicorn is to repeatedly purchase loot crates at $2-$3 a pop until you randomly get the Unicorn at some point down the road. That business model doesn't belong in video games and needs to either be voluntarily or legislatively removed from the experience.

in all honesty I agree, in SWBF2 the lootcrate system is convoluted and the MTX paired with it is atrocious. but the two separate are not a huge deal. last of us had MTX that could get you perks for mp, totally worked. so many cool games have lootboxes / RNG systems that totally work. just pairing the two was an unfortunate choice...

 

I feel like if they had given players the possibility to dierectly buy star cards with credits and attach that to MTX it'd be ok. but then I'm sure everyone would yell paytowin. so then perhaps the overwatch route, purely cosmetic. the lootbox system could also work, it just needs fixing. which the are currently working on...

 

so liek you said tying the two systems together has proven problematic.. but I feel like a lot of people aren't getting that connection

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you people never heard the term "slippery slope"?

 

You have the ability already to simply NOT buy games that feature loot boxes. I didn't buy Star Wars Battlefront II. Have no intention of buying it, with or without loot boxes. Making a choice is easy. You want to give governments the power to make that choice for you? By banning games? Or by enforcing laws that dictate what developers can and can't do? Very dangerous precedent.

 

If your government can ban games that feature gambling, how long until games are banned for being violent? Lewd? Offensive? Addictive? What happens when a game with a hacking mini-game (i.e. Deus Ex: Human Revolution, or Watch Dogs) is deemed "dangerous" and your government wants to ban it? A game is deemed by some government committee to be "too addictive", and gets banned - Is this what you want?

 

You don't need the government to ban games. You need to be able to make choices for yourself about what you buy. Vote with your wallet.

 

Loot boxes are bad. Governments wanting to ban games, and take away your choices, is much, much, much worse.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bullstomp said:

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.-

 

 

well I am a 90s kid so... ;) oh no your quip was great, something out of a will ferrell movie. classic

 

like I've said repeatedly, not defending EA, or anyother studio implementing lootboxes, MTX or season passes. not defending my purchase either. I love the gaem it's a lot of fun. I'm jsut here playign devil's advocate, sitting on the other side of the table just cause it's so comfy and spacious over here ;)

 

I'll be honest, I pre-ordered SWBF2 just like EA anticipated. I even got the $80 deluxe version to play 3 days early. ouch that's gotta hurt right? but it doesn't, because while it's progression system is flawed, not for one second have I felt like I was ripped off or needed to buy more loot crates with MTX than I was able to purchase through just playing the game. fine whatever, not counting leveling, I already have a decent amount of crafting material and green as well as blue cards (not counting any cards from the deluxe version). but you should know the level of cards you can craft is tied to your mp level, so it is absolutely relevant, not comparing apples and grenades...

 

and yes, if you wanted you could buy it all. and if you don't you could play 4000 hours, but that is totally your deal. Idoubt EA actually expects either of those outcomes because they are totally ludicrous. think of For Honor. fans voiced similar concerns about maxing out class stats and ubisoft was like: yeah, you're not supposed to max all class stats. you're supposed to pick one and level that class up duh. and here why would you possibly need to max all the classes and every hero in the game?? like when are you gonna be like, "yeah this map could really use a maxed out officer"  or "man I wish had the credits to max out my star cards for princess leia" ?? gotta get some MTX crystals to open up some more lootboxes damn EA :D

 

LOL I see people somehow immediately feel attacked when I use the phrase "bad parenting" like it's offensive. I think I saw my first gun fight in a movie when I was like 7, but that's missing the point. poeple saying the game is aimed at kids is BS, it's a FPS, regardless of Stat Wars. the only reason it gets away with the Teen rating is because it's Star Wars, ergo there's no blood. you are running around the map shooting fellow gamers in the face. now I know society is totally jaded, but how is THAT not worse than allowing your kid to buy a loot crate?! and if you don'T want them to buy a lootcrate, just remove the credit card info from their subacct. how hard is that? in this case NO money, NO problems.

yes another 90s reference. deal with it

 

oh and that update. yeah it's all over the media, it's just turning into a politcal bandwagon. and a PR nightmare for everybody involved. I'd like to remind everybody: songs didn't used to be censored, the FCC regulated it in the 90s, in part thanks to NWA. this is how far gov. can take it when they get involved. when was the last time you saw a nipple on live television? janet jackson perhaps? but god forbid, amc's the walking dead ever puts out a gore free episode. so yeah, let's see how this goes. when congress takes a closer look at video games and just- holy hell what is this wolfenstein?? because trust me - if that was the game in question, people would still be crying about MTX and lootcrates not about blowing people's heads off. even if the kid playing is only 11

11 minutes ago, blendercat27 said:

Have you people never heard the term "slippery slope"?

 

You have the ability already to simply NOT buy games that feature loot boxes. I didn't buy Star Wars Battlefront II. Have no intention of buying it, with or without loot boxes. Making a choice is easy. You want to give governments the power to make that choice for you? By banning games? Or by enforcing laws that dictate what developers can and can't do? Very dangerous precedent.

 

If your government can ban games that feature gambling, how long until games are banned for being violent? Lewd? Offensive? Addictive? What happens when a game with a hacking mini-game (i.e. Deus Ex: Human Revolution, or Watch Dogs) is deemed "dangerous" and your government wants to ban it? A game is deemed by some government committee to be "too addictive", and gets banned - Is this what you want?

 

You don't need the government to ban games. You need to be able to make choices for yourself about what you buy. Vote with your wallet.

 

Loot boxes are bad. Governments wanting to ban games, and take away your choices, is much, much, much worse.

thank you for this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, cam_wick said:

 

 

 i didn't lie. they broke records on day one and in the first week, the online came 1 month later and you don't need mtx to progress online, i can prove it anytime. the only thing that i didn't say was that the updates that came first added content to online and single player.

when you say that people didn't give time to EA to fix things i ask.....

when did EA listen to the feedback of their custemers? when did they change anything in any of their games?

they did change this time only because DISNEY is involved, they are the real boss (star wars license owner) as you know. i started to play games 30 years ago i know EA games since they appear and for some reason i stop buying their products 5 or 6 years ago. the only execption are the games that i receive as gift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Facas said:

 

 i didn't lie. they broke records on day one and in the first week, the online came 1 month later and you don't need mtx to progress online, i can prove it anytime. the only thing that i didn't say was that the updates that came first added content to online and single player.

when you say that people didn't give time to EA to fix things i ask.....

when did EA listen to the feedback of their custemers? when did they change anything in any of their games?

they did change this time only because DISNEY is involved, they are the real boss (star wars license owner) as you know. i started to play games 30 years ago i know EA games since they appear and for some reason i stop buying their products 5 or 6 years ago. the only execption are the games that i receive as gift.

they changed the credits for heroes the day before release that was without Disney's word of god and promised to adjust progression. the MTX afterwards yes. so you say, and I know GTA5 did extremely well at launch. but STILL, completely different game, different cloud, not everyone like online FPS, open world 3rd person is much bigger now. AND GTA5 was highly anticipated since GTA4, SWBF 1 isn't really that old. plus, if they were doing so well why did they implement MTX to begin with? to keep revenue steady that's why

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cam_wick said:

I disagree, I don't think MTX are greedy. They're not greedy in GTA 5, they're not greedy in The Last of Us and they aren't greedy in Assassin's Creed. So what exactly makes them greedy here? If someone wants to superficially accelerate their progress in a game, why not allow/offer it? Then, of course, one could argue that the feature should be free, so why charge money for it? But then why charge more money for prioritizing mail? Why charge more money to let people stream in 4k vs full HD? Why charge more money for street parking in some cities than in others? Is it all greed? If profit = greed then yes, yes it is. But if the company is trying to maximize profits in order to be able to reinvest in future projects, how is that greed? It's called business and EA is a business just like Rockstar, Ubisoft and Naughty Dog/Sony. You can't make SWBF3, if half your audience waits until BF2 and BF1 are on sale for 80%, or even worse, buy it used. And that is the absolute truth that everyone conveniently "forgets". Yeah retail price for the standard edition is 60 USD. And if 1 million people buy it, that's 60mio in their pocket. But the reality is, that since it's a Star Wars license, probably 50% is Disney's cut, then you have brick and mortar distributors skimming off the top. Ad campaigns. Employee salaries. Development hardware and software. Insurances. Patents. Development of new engines. All costs coming out of that 60$. Now another 5 Mio buy it, but on Black Friday for half off, another half mio buy it used after half a year. and people just upgrading to PS4 (yes, really) buy it in  a year for $10. At this point you're not sure whether you can break even on this project. Shit happens to movies all the time, studios write it off as a bad investment, there is no patch or removal of functions to fix it. Done deal. So why would you not have some sort of additional system in place cushion the transition into the next project, if available? Oh I almost forgot all the people still downloading cracked versions of games on pc, jesus, talk about sticking it to the man. Maybe you should be mad at them, too, since everyone buying used games and downloading games illegally or driving up prices and turning the games industry into a money grubbing machine.

 

I'm honestly not sure about xbox or pc, but on the PlayStation system, you can setup a subaccount tied to your master account and restrict any purchases whether in the psn store or in game. That's called parenting, paying attention to what your child is or isn't doing. If you don't know whether or not your kid is buying hundreds of dollars worth of loot crates, that's your fault, not EA's. You're not gambling money unless you are actually spending it in MTX, which I KNOW are totally unnecessary to play and enjoy the game. period. they're just an option. the lootboxes aren't the problem, that seems to be a huge part of what is getting mixed up in this whole PR disaster. The progression system could use some tweaking, yes, and if you had lootboxes dedicated to each class, it would fix a lot. I've played the game for a week and not once have I felt at odds with this system or felt cheated or somehow underpowered. it's all media hype at this point. and yes, to your point, people should make informed decisions, especially parents. but it's the parent's responsibility to review and gather information and not buy it, pop in the disc, and be like "omg my 10 year old is gambling for star cards"

 

and yes if you are an addict seek help, don't blame it on others, that is right up there next to lying about your addiction. so you're saying because battlefront2 didn't incl. a regulated "play responsibly" slogan in their ad campaign they're preying on kids. do you think alcoholics actually read or care about the disclaimers everywhere, or smokers or any other addicts..?

 

and not that it's anyone's damn business, but I was NOT squeaky clean. alcohol 13, cigs 13, sex 14, rated r film 11, rated m game I wanna say 12... either way, I was being sarcastic. but even still, it's the parent's responsibility to watch what their kids are doing. think "parental advisory" stickers. helping or hurting? things are getting blown out of proportion is what I'm saying. if your kid can play a $60 FPS then your kid can buy a freaking $10 loot crate. and if you're kid has a gambling problem, maybe you really are just a bad parent. But I'd just LOVE to see the statistic showing kids who are now gambling addicts because of MTX. just like politicians and worried mothers across the globe banned together for a decade claiming video game violence promotes violence in real life and kids who play violent games and watch violent movies are more aggressive. give me a break.

 

and lastly, yes when games went gold back in the day, that was it. but honestly the scale and production quality has increased exponentially. so unless you want to wait 10 years for the next SWBF, you may need to accept that devs are going to release games that still need more polish through patches because dev cycle times keep getting shorter and shorter and gamers are at fault as well. so there are really only 3 scenarios: evil MTX stay, season passes return, or game prices rise up 20-30%. take your pick 

 

 

 

I honestly worry about your stance on this subject.

 

If I'm reading everything you've written correctly you don't feel that developers of games that include gambling of real money have any responsibility. There should be no warnings that they are included in games and if impressionable people were to indulge in what stares them enticingly in the face, even though they brought the game to play the game and not to gamble it is their own fault.

 

No-one needs to know about them, we can trust the developer to do things right? Well isn't that funny, that is exactly how this has gone, it started with cosmetic items that people grumbled at but largely it slipped by, this has been going on for the past couple of years. Now EA brings a game out that revolves around loot boxes and in the beta a pay-to-win system that can give you a chance of getting items immediately or grinding for thousands of hours. This has caused a revolt, EA have showed their intentions, Activision are showing their intentions with their accepted patent and it's scaring people where AAA games are heading. They had their chance of handling this, but no they had to push the boundaries of acceptability and now IT NEEDS regulating because these greedy corporations will keep pushing and pushing because they can't help themselves.

 

The only reason they took this out TEMPORARILY was not because of the consumer, but because of higher influences.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blendercat27 said:

Have you people never heard the term "slippery slope"?

 

You have the ability already to simply NOT buy games that feature loot boxes. I didn't buy Star Wars Battlefront II. Have no intention of buying it, with or without loot boxes. Making a choice is easy. You want to give governments the power to make that choice for you? By banning games? Or by enforcing laws that dictate what developers can and can't do? Very dangerous precedent.

 

If your government can ban games that feature gambling, how long until games are banned for being violent? Lewd? Offensive? Addictive? What happens when a game with a hacking mini-game (i.e. Deus Ex: Human Revolution, or Watch Dogs) is deemed "dangerous" and your government wants to ban it? A game is deemed by some government committee to be "too addictive", and gets banned - Is this what you want?

 

You don't need the government to ban games. You need to be able to make choices for yourself about what you buy. Vote with your wallet.

 

Loot boxes are bad. Governments wanting to ban games, and take away your choices, is much, much, much worse.

 

Has any government said anything about banning any game? I'm pretty sure they haven't. I know here in the USA, gambling in video games is fine, however, they'rerequired to lable it as such. Also, it instantly gets an Adults Only rating, as it should. Even Belgium didn't say anything about banning the games. They will just require the offending companies to obtain the proper licensing. 

 

Edit: I seem to be reading different things about Belgium from different sources. The article the op shared says ban, however, it's the first time I've heard about a ban on them. I've read several sources prior that they were just going to make gaming companies get a gambling license as well as lable the game as such. So, who knows. Maybe there's something getting lost in translation. I know in the USA, the games won't get banned. They'll just get an AO rating.

Edited by Phil
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, FawltyPowers said:

 

I honestly worry about your stance on this subject.

 

If I'm reading everything you've written correctly you don't feel that developers of games that include gambling of real money have any responsibility. There should be no warnings that they are included in games and if impressionable people were to indulge in what stares them enticingly in the face, even though they brought the game to play the game and not to gamble it is their own fault.

 

No-one needs to know about them, we can trust the developer to do things right? Well isn't that funny, that is exactly how this has gone, it started with cosmetic items that people grumbled at but largely it slipped by, this has been going on for the past couple of years. Now EA brings a game out that revolves around loot boxes and in the beta a pay-to-win system that can give you a chance of getting items immediately or grinding for thousands of hours. This has caused a revolt, EA have showed their intentions, Activision are showing their intentions with their accepted patent and it's scaring people where AAA games are heading. They had their chance of handling this, but no they had to push the boundaries of acceptability and now IT NEEDS regulating because these greedy corporations will keep pushing and pushing because they can't help themselves.

 

The only reason they took this out TEMPORARILY was not because of the consumer, but because of higher influences.

 

see this is where we are not seeing eye to eye, I still don't think it's gambling. is it making them more money in the long run? yes. was it poorly implemented in this particular game? absolutely. does it consitute gambling? no. otherwise magic and baseball card packs and the likes would also be gambling and they are not either.

 

and yes, if people buy the game blindly expecting there to be no MTX and then complaining about them being there without no necessity of making use of them - that is their own damn fault. read a review or two or three, wait till the price goes down, do what makes you feel warm and fuzzy but don't expect the gov to fix this, they'll will surely overshoot the issue here. if gamers don'T like the games either don't buy them until it changes or voice your opinion- but toward EA. now it's out of everybodies hands.

 

and seriously, since when has a warning label ever stopped anyone from doing anything? people still smoke, drink, drive too fast, let kids watch rated r movies and listen to rap. why suddenly decide this whole gaming fad is the root of all evil and is destroying the youth of today...?

 

and I can't stress this enough - I was always referring to the reduction of hero credits, making progression fast enough to negate the necessity of MTX.

 

I'm out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cam_wick said:

so many cool games have lootboxes / RNG systems that totally work.

...

I feel like if they had given players the possibility to dierectly buy star cards with credits and attach that to MTX it'd be ok.

 

This is the point I've been trying to make in my earlier comments. If these companies want to sell people things in-game for real money, then just sell people the thing. Microtransactions themselves aren't necessarily the issue, it's loot boxes that (to me) are the issue. If EA wants to sell Star Cards, or Crystals, or whatever the hell you can potentially buy in the game then just sell these things to people who want to buy them and leave it at that. You seem to be arguing that the existence of loot boxes in games isn't the issue, but I'm suggesting that they are precisely the issue, and they are definitely the reason why this particular situation has escalated much further than either EA or Disney would like.

 

Loot boxes have no place in video games. It doesn't matter if the game is targeted at children, or teens, or adults. They are unnecessary to the experience. They add no value to the experience. They are simply a method to extract more revenue from the MT model by randomizing the chances of getting the thing you want, therefore (usually) increasing the amount of money spent to get that thing. They are doing it to make more money, period. It's not there to enhance the player experience, it's there to inflate their bottom line, period. They often give you a few loot boxes for free, or give you a means to periodically get one for free, likely to quiet people who would complain otherwise, but also as a "push" to buy them if you want more. These companies have introduced a mechanism into games that smells an awful lot like gambling without having to comply with the laws and regulations that currently exist related to gambling. If that's the case then they either need to be subject to the same / similar rules, or they need to take these things out of their games.

 

Based on my experience, the items that are sold in loot crates don't need to be offered in loot crates. They could easily be sold individually or in bundles as straight purchases for set prices through the various MT systems that these vendors have. The reason they don't do this is because they would make less money and that's unacceptable to these businesses.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Has any government said anything about banning any game? I'm pretty sure they haven't. I know here in the USA, gambling in video games is fine, however, they'rerequired to lable it as such. Also, it instantly gets an Adults Only rating, as it should. Even Belgium didn't say anything about banning the games. They will just require the offending companies to obtain the proper licensing. 

 

Edit: I seem to be reading different things about Belgium from different sources. The article the op shared says ban, however, it's the first time I've heard about a ban on them. I've read several sources prior that they were just going to make gaming companies get a gambling license as well as lable the game as such. So, who knows. Maybe there's something getting lost in translation. I know in the USA, the games won't get banned. They'll just get an AO rating.

Not only that, but it would also have to be regulated by the us gaming commission, just as all other forms of gambling 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Swotam said:

 

This is the point I've been trying to make in my earlier comments. If these companies want to sell people things in-game for real money, then just sell people the thing. Microtransactions themselves aren't necessarily the issue, it's loot boxes that (to me) are the issue. If EA wants to sell Star Cards, or Crystals, or whatever the hell you can potentially buy in the game then just sell these things to people who want to buy them and leave it at that. You seem to be arguing that the existence of loot boxes in games isn't the issue, but I'm suggesting that they are precisely the issue, and they are definitely the reason why this particular situation has escalated much further than either EA or Disney would like.

 

Loot boxes have no place in video games. It doesn't matter if the game is targeted at children, or teens, or adults. They are unnecessary to the experience. They add no value to the experience. They are simply a method to extract more revenue from the MT model by randomizing the chances of getting the thing you want, therefore (usually) increasing the amount of money spent to get that thing. They are doing it to make more money, period. It's not there to enhance the player experience, it's there to inflate their bottom line, period. They often give you a few loot boxes for free, or give you a means to periodically get one for free, likely to quiet people who would complain otherwise, but also as a "push" to buy them if you want more. These companies have introduced a mechanism into games that smells an awful lot like gambling without having to comply with the laws and regulations that currently exist related to gambling. If that's the case then they either need to be subject to the same / similar rules, or they need to take these things out of their games.

 

Based on my experience, the items that are sold in loot crates don't need to be offered in loot crates. They could easily be sold individually or in bundles as straight purchases for set prices through the various MT systems that these vendors have. The reason they don't do this is because they would make less money and that's unacceptable to these businesses.

 

 

I respectfully disagree in the point that loot boxes have no place in video games. many good games have good lootbox systems in place. jsut like a lot of games have good MTX systems in place. it's when they connect the two that it becomes a problem. but I still don't think it's a good idea when politics and gov gets involved. that has never gone well for any media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, cam_wick said:

I respectfully disagree in the point that loot boxes have no place in video games. many good games have good lootbox systems in place. jsut like a lot of games have good MTX systems in place. it's when they connect the two that it becomes a problem. but I still don't think it's a good idea when politics and gov gets involved. that has never gone well for any media.

The ESRB was born because of government intervention, they don't want to regulate the industry, they just want them to self-regulate and they'll only step in when the ratings board fails

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SnowxSakura said:

Not only that, but it would also have to be regulated by the us gaming commission, just as all other forms of gambling 

 

As well as it should. I'm all up for freedom to be douche bags, but if they want to be lazy and not register or get licensed, that's on them. I, for one, will never support any game that has a pay-to-win system. I think just not buying the game is the way to go. It's too bad there are too many FIFA and NFL shills for EA to give two fucks about losing Star Wars.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...