Thanks to EA, regulators have begun to look at loot boxes

bman · Post by **bman** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:56 am #360703

Bottom post of the previous page:

just because lootboxes are going to exist doesn't mean that companies cant introduce new ways to earn money from "volunteers"

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:33 am #360707

bman wrote:just because lootboxes are going to exist doesn't mean that companies cant introduce new ways to earn money from "volunteers"

Jesus christ I hope EA and the rest of the west doesn't catch on to the korean "stamina system" their fucking MMOs have.

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:49 am #360709

Saegrimr wrote:
bman wrote:just because lootboxes are going to exist doesn't mean that companies cant introduce new ways to earn money from "volunteers"
Jesus christ I hope EA and the rest of the west doesn't catch on to the korean "stamina system" their fucking MMOs have.

Elucidaborate.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:00 am #360711

DemonFiren wrote:
Saegrimr wrote:
bman wrote:just because lootboxes are going to exist doesn't mean that companies cant introduce new ways to earn money from "volunteers"
Jesus christ I hope EA and the rest of the west doesn't catch on to the korean "stamina system" their fucking MMOs have.
Elucidaborate.

Basically anti korean suicide measures. Either in the form of a stamina bar that depletes as you do dungeon content or other activities in-game and it replenishes every 24 hours, or by x amount of points per hour, or just limited runs.
When you reach 0 or you don't have enough otherwise you cannot play the game in any meaningful way other than sit in town/lobby, though most have a "premium" member thing you can buy to double your daily stamina, or cash shop potions to refresh it.

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:19 am #360713

>circumventable anti-suicide measures
Never was natural selection more profitable.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:09 am #360723

CosmicScientist wrote:Spiral Knights wasn't fun with its daily mist only allowing a few plays, though the game itself wasn't fun enough to make the grind worthwhile.

I think Warframe dropped the daily 4 revives per frame you could recharge with plats. Maybe because no-one used it or the regular players got too many frames to care.

Spiral Knights dropped their stamina system entirely somewhat recently, I think last year? The daily revives never stopped you from playing the game, it just meant you weren't allowed to fuck up mid-mission or you have to start over. Other notable games that really killed me with their "Stop playing our fucking game" systems being DFO, TERA, Valkyrie Sky, Elsword, Spiral Knights back when that was still active. Hell I believe most phone games right now use something like this with purchase options to keep going. Even modern MMOs like to gate content to daily/weekly timers but that's more of a really sad excuse of a balancing feature, and to artificially extend subscription time.

I guess the rant I was going on just proves there's more ways companies can pinch your shekels without relying on lootboxes, and more obstructive to your gameplay than someone having a gold plated laser blaster +1. Still fucking faggo cheap shit. S4 League did this with its cash shop and all that did was lead hackers to completely demolish the game as third worlders wouldn't shell out the money required to be an unkillable god, so they just literally godmoded and noclipped games until the playerbase died off.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:51 am #360726

cedarbridge wrote:
Takeguru wrote:I still don't see why we have to have lootboxes for cosmetics

Just have a list of shit to buy and a static price

I'll buy a 5 dollar skin over 5 1 dollar lootboxes that only have a chance of giving me said skin any day of the week
Its not a "have to have" issue. Lootboxes, for all of the "conditioning" voodoo that has been trotted out in this thread already, are something players generally like to open. Even if you get nothing good, the idea that you could is fun. That's why streamers often make a big deal out of the boxes they open. People get the same charge out of opening boxes as they do watching others open them. Its mysterious, its random, and its usually flashy. Its also good marketing because, as Qbopper mentioned, its technically limitless. If a player is motivated enough to buy 300+ of the things, that's more revenue for the project and more into the pockets of the publisher/dev.

Congrats on describing gambler's fallacy and addiction.
This is exactly why they are getting regulated.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:15 pm #360740

Malkevin wrote:
cedarbridge wrote:
Takeguru wrote:I still don't see why we have to have lootboxes for cosmetics

Just have a list of shit to buy and a static price

I'll buy a 5 dollar skin over 5 1 dollar lootboxes that only have a chance of giving me said skin any day of the week
Its not a "have to have" issue. Lootboxes, for all of the "conditioning" voodoo that has been trotted out in this thread already, are something players generally like to open. Even if you get nothing good, the idea that you could is fun. That's why streamers often make a big deal out of the boxes they open. People get the same charge out of opening boxes as they do watching others open them. Its mysterious, its random, and its usually flashy. Its also good marketing because, as Qbopper mentioned, its technically limitless. If a player is motivated enough to buy 300+ of the things, that's more revenue for the project and more into the pockets of the publisher/dev.
Congrats on describing gambler's fallacy and addiction.
This is exactly why they are getting regulated.

The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, it will happen less frequently in the future, or that, if something happens less frequently than normal during some period, it will happen more frequently in the future (presumably as a means of balancing nature). In situations where what is being observed is truly random (i.e., independent trials of a random process), this belief, though appealing to the human mind, is false. This fallacy can arise in many practical situations, but is most strongly associated with gambling, where such mistakes are common among players.

Except its not the Gambler's Fallacy at all and you're crutching on words like "fallacy" to sound more correct on the issue than you are. This is as "addictive" as gaming itself is. Gaming has always been structured on a system of rewards and promise of future rewards. Even Donkey Kong had a score system. It primes the same part of your brain. Do we need government legislation to dictate ethics in point scoring systems? Look, I get it, YOU don't like boxes and because YOU don't like boxes nobody should have the option of getting them. I'm sure you'll be fine with going back to paying full price for content updates and I'm sure the rest of you will be too. The rest of us actually like not having to pay for content updates. I like being able to pay once for a game and then optionally get more content later as it is released, but only an entitled child would presume that they are owed that content.

Saegrimr wrote:
bman wrote:just because lootboxes are going to exist doesn't mean that companies cant introduce new ways to earn money from "volunteers"
Jesus christ I hope EA and the rest of the west doesn't catch on to the korean "stamina system" their fucking MMOs have.

That exactly what these armchair pyschologists talking about "addiction" want. People can't be trusted to make rational choices regarding their purchases, play time, or whether to sit down or stand up to pee. Thus we need regulation to protect them from themselves.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:34 pm #360743

Semantics, you haven't disputed my point though.

And I'd be fine paying £15-20 again for an expansion pack and having that content immediately availible instead of either having to spend far far more to play games of chance or forced to invest far more time than is healthy in a hobby for drip fed content.

-------------------

Hey, why don't we remove the regulations on alcohol that forbid the sale to persons who are already shit faced.
Surely that'd result in cheaper beer if beer companies could sell strong but crap alcohol to a few alchies that would buy lots and lots of it.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:51 pm #360750

CosmicScientist wrote:Thank you for simplistically claiming that I'm claiming I'm entitled to content because I bought the game. You have a keen eye.

Its simplistic because the position is simplistic. Either you are entitled to the content or you are not. You are either owed the content for a first time purchase or you are not.

The duplicates for currency for buying what you want looks like a catch 22 for me to rag on. If it's not there - you can never get what you actually want if RNG doesn't permit. However if it is there - great, thanks for giving me all the sprays I already owned instead of giving me a chance at getting what I don't have. Both situations get worse the more content is added.

This is literally more bitching about how a gatcha system doesn't give you what you want and that you are entitled to get exactly what you want and not what you are given by the random number generator. And you wonder why I keep calling you entitled. If the currency system exists you can get the thing you want. Great! That's what its for. If there is no currency system, you're at the mercy of RNG. Boo hoo. You are not entitled to the thing you want merely because random chance denied it to you. I'm not entitled to open a specific card out of every pack of MTG. I'm not going to demand that Wizards of the Coast give me the card I want instead of having to buy the packs for it. The fact that its a physical item means they can't stop me from trading currency with other people for that specific item but it doesn't make the pack opening system 1) less fun 2) moral or immoral.

Lootboxes are a joke. A slot machine. One to get your favourite waifu's cosmetics as soon as you roll the dice and get everyone else's. This is not a choice between time and money, this is a choice between time+gambling and money+gambling, there is no paying for what you want.

You can make all the vague comparisons to Vegas all you want but they're not arguments. You are not entitled to get the thing you want because the thing you want is not offered for purchase. Period. This is not something that requires a degree in economics to understand and screeching "reeee gambling" isn't an argument. The item is either available to you or it is not. The box is the product and contains any random assortment of items from a pre generated list. You purchase the container, not the contents. You are not promised at any time "this is the contents of your box, enjoy the contents of your box" you are told "these are the things that could be in your box, good luck getting the thing you want out of your box." And you're patently wrong, it is literally is a choice between time and money. Lazily tacking on "+gambling" to the end of those choices is not an argument. (x+1) + (y+1) = ? You didn't seriously think that through at all.

To be a tad lighter on my above comment though, Volvo does permit first party trading, so you can go and get what you want. Kind of surprised Overwatch doesn't have any form of that, oh I guess they want you to play the slots instead! Hm, I remember Destiny having something like that for number buffing class specific loot drops...

So this is really just more complaining that certain box systems don't allow you to get certain items you want but external trading systems (the ones that allow actual gambling to occur) are ok because they do? Really?

You could honestly just fuck off, cedar, because you seem to love to nitpick, transform arguments and ignore rebuttals when pressed.

Are you seriously going to pull the "You didn't line-by-line my rant so that means you're nitpicking" thing? You're right, one of us should fuck off. Its you.

I'm also going to go to this post, please tell me if I'm reading it wrong:

>it's not you have to have what's inside

Read the post this is responding to. The previous post's asked why we "have to have" lootboxes. I explained that its not a case that we "have to have" them, merely that they're not the boogieman you're making them out to be.

>"conditioning" is a buzzword, players just like to open it

The way you're using it, conditioning is a buzzword. In this case, players really just DO like opening them. You're welcome to prove that they don't and that I've just been hallucinating /vg/ bragging about their box openings and streamers "rewarding" new subscribers to their channel by opening a crate of something upon that new subscription. I'll wait.

>it's fun, mysterious, random, flashy

Waiting for the argument.

>it can't be conditioning to be given a reward for the behaviour of dropping down some phat dollar or playing enough until you level up

I'm conditioned into buying a hotdog because if I offer the nice man with the cart a "phat dollar" he gives me one and it tastes good. Last time I gave him a dollar he gave me a hotdog, therefore nefarious conditioning has occurred.

>let's ignore Cosmic's previous comment about how there are droughts and windfalls in Overwatch of chest rewards that to his layman/armchair psychologist mind comes off as here's a lot isn't it great how you're getting one every game, oh no what happened? remember the time when you had all the lootboxes? there's none here in the place where you open them! oh but there's this button which lets you buy more to have your fun, mysterious, random, flashy times again

More "reee you didn't line by line my page spanning paragraph rant" bullshit. Calm yourself or stop posting.
1) Scarcity is intentional for rarity of items sake. Rare items have prestige and items that can be merely purchased have no prestige outside of "look at the money I spent on this guise"
2) Droughts and windfalls can be planned for by players, controls the amount of an item in circulation, assists the above rarity/prestige system and are not evidence of some sort of nefarious plot. If this were, then (even anecdotally) I would have bought boxes at some point. I'd have done it because I've played games with boxes for years and still do. The mere fact that something is not present and that you've given the opportunity to purchase those items in place of a time grind (a time grind that still exists even if it is slowed) is not a prime for a conditioned response. I'm glad you're admitting that this is armchair psychology because the first step to stopping is recognizing that you're doing it.

>it's good marketing, who cares about the player? Takeguru you shouldn't want to buy the skin you want because the publisher and rarely the developer gets to have all of the dollar, don't you want your game to be a cash cow?

You made it all the way through your post without a strawman and then you did this. Repent.

>oh wow, the cool stuff is super dooper rare, isn't it fun to play the slots lots until you get that big payout?

Calling it a slot machine doesn't make it one, calling it a slot machine doesn't make it gambling. You're literally calling the fucking gatcha egg machines at the grocery store some sort of nefarious plot on the part of plastic egg producers to get rich by conditioning people to the pop noise they make when you open them.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:59 pm #360752

Malkevin wrote:Semantics, you haven't disputed my point though.

Not semantics. You called it something it wasn't for a reason and I pointed out what you did and why it was dumb.

And I'd be fine paying £15-20 again for an expansion pack and having that content immediately availible instead of either having to spend far far more to play games of chance or forced to invest far more time than is healthy in a hobby for drip fed content.

Then vote with your wallet. You're not obligated to pay for boxes or pay for the content those boxes offer. You're not even obligated to play the game those boxes are contained in. You've presented no reason for government intervention where your own choice to just ~play something else~ would not suffice.

Hey, why don't we remove the regulations on alcohol that forbid the sale to persons who are already shit faced.
Surely that'd result in cheaper beer if beer companies could sell strong but crap alcohol to a few alchies that would buy lots and lots of it.

Not comparable at all unless your solution is to 1) limit the amount of purchases a person is allowed to make to protect them from themself, because you know best for them 2) ban the sale of boxes to people with actual gambling addictions and not the armchair psych stuff in this thread 3) impliment the aformentioned stamina system to control how much time a person is allowed to play games online before the game locks them out as playtime addiction is 100$% more prevalent than lewtbox addiction. (as though such a thing even existed.)

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:59 pm #360753

Triple post fuck this thread. I'm going to go farm some boxes to open.

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 4:09 pm #360757

CosmicScientist wrote:
Qbopper wrote:snop
because people

1. didn't really care since it's all cosmetics
2. didn't have a reason to jump on the bandwagon - the most downvoted digg post ever is a bit of an event, so people heard about it and memed about it and jumped on the pile
reeee get angry like me!

-dismissing my opinion literally because i'm "mad"
-failed to read any of my posts where i'm being (admittedly overly) annoyed with the outrage culture that caused lootboxes to be removed from battlefront 2

if you read the quoted post and think that i'm mad and i'm trying to get people to be angry you're not really trying to have a serious discussion

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:26 pm #360801

CosmicScientist wrote:
Qbopper wrote:-dismissing my opinion literally because i'm "mad"
-failed to read any of my posts where i'm being (admittedly overly) annoyed with the outrage culture that caused lootboxes to be removed from battlefront 2

if you read the quoted post and think that i'm mad and i'm trying to get people to be angry you're not really trying to have a serious discussion
When I said meee I meant meeeeeeee, not yoooou. Though I understand why you took it that way. You're never angry, Qbop and I would be sad if you did fall down to my level.

oh i misread what you were saying whoops

my bad

Lumbermancer · Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:49 pm

Lootboxes are only a symptom of progression-system cancer.

killerx09 · Post by **killerx09** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:20 pm #360810

Saegrimr wrote:
bman wrote:just because lootboxes are going to exist doesn't mean that companies cant introduce new ways to earn money from "volunteers"
Jesus christ I hope EA and the rest of the west doesn't catch on to the korean "stamina system" their fucking MMOs have.

Destiny 2 had it so that the more you played the game, the less EXP you get, down to 4% of what you're originally getting, which only got removed after people discovered it.

https://www.digg.com/r/DestinyTheGame ... ith_xp_in/

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 9:23 pm #360819

killerx09 wrote:Destiny 2 had it so that the more you played the game, the less EXP you get, down to 4% of what you're originally getting, which only got removed after people discovered it.

https://www.digg.com/r/DestinyTheGame ... ith_xp_in/

Sounds like the start of that popularly quoted WoW thing about changing the playtime exp nerf into a rested exp boost and just halving all the numbers and everybody shut up and was happy even though nothing changed.

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 10:33 pm #360842

Lumbermancer wrote:Lootboxes are only a symptom of progression-system cancer.

this will never go away and games that don't feature progression systems will remain niche compared to mainstream titles

it's unfortunate but true

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:10 pm #360855

Cant we just have real progression?

You know, stuff like learning the maps, understanding strategy and how to use items well, and becoming more skillful at something rather than 'lol blue version of the suit'

killerx09 · Post by **killerx09** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:26 pm #360863

Saegrimr wrote:
killerx09 wrote:Destiny 2 had it so that the more you played the game, the less EXP you get, down to 4% of what you're originally getting, which only got removed after people discovered it.

https://www.digg.com/r/DestinyTheGame ... ith_xp_in/
Sounds like the start of that popularly quoted WoW thing about changing the playtime exp nerf into a rested exp boost and just halving all the numbers and everybody shut up and was happy even though nothing changed.

https://www.digg.com/r/DestinyTheGame ... _not_even/

The start you say? It's spooky how accurate you are too, they already halved the numbers.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Sat Nov 25, 2017 11:59 pm #360867

XSI wrote:Cant we just have real progression?

You know, stuff like learning the maps, understanding strategy and how to use items well, and becoming more skillful at something rather than 'lol blue version of the suit'

Hey dude, have you heard this cool game I play?

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Sun Nov 26, 2017 12:30 am #360872

I dont know what you're referencing there

onleavedontatme · Sun Nov 26, 2017 12:31 am

XSI wrote:Cant we just have real progression?

You know, stuff like learning the maps, understanding strategy and how to use items well, and becoming more skillful at something rather than 'lol blue version of the suit'

You still have that though. How does someone buying a blue suit erase your map knowledge?

captain sawrge · Sun Nov 26, 2017 2:51 am

This thread got incredibly gay

Shoutouts to Ninto for a new sploon weapon for free every week and like 4 new maps + a bunch of revised old ones since launch

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:23 am #360890

captain sawrge wrote:This thread got incredibly gay

Shoutouts to Ninto for a new sploon weapon for free every week and like 4 new maps + a bunch of revised old ones since launch

Have they actually figured out whether you're a squid or a kid though?

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Sun Nov 26, 2017 4:19 am #360896

Kor wrote:
XSI wrote:Cant we just have real progression?

You know, stuff like learning the maps, understanding strategy and how to use items well, and becoming more skillful at something rather than 'lol blue version of the suit'
You still have that though. How does someone buying a blue suit erase your map knowledge?

It doesn't. But it still annoys me when people think cosmetic shit is really progression. It's just different art, nothing actually progressed.

Takeguru · Post by **Takeguru** » Sun Nov 26, 2017 6:56 am #360915

I don't think most people are complaining about cosmetics aside from them being locked behind RNG instead of available for purchase

And on the "vote with your wallet" tripe that was posted earlier, the only time that works is when you have a digg shitstorm a la EA and Gamblefront 2
Most of the time, voting with your wallet leaves you just straight up without any solid game releases unless you feel like wading through the swamp of indie releases to find the few gems

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sun Nov 26, 2017 8:27 am #360929

lntigracy · Post by **lntigracy** » Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:09 am #360933

cursed images

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:18 am #360935

Saegrimr wrote:

makes me laugh every time

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:38 pm #360973

Takeguru wrote:I don't think most people are complaining about cosmetics aside from them being locked behind RNG instead of available for purchase

And on the "vote with your wallet" tripe that was posted earlier, the only time that works is when you have a digg shitstorm a la EA and Gamblefront 2
Most of the time, voting with your wallet leaves you just straight up without any solid game releases unless you feel like wading through the swamp of indie releases to find the few gems

I've been voting with my wallet on EA for years now and don't feel like I've missed anything
But that might be because EA only puts out garbage anyway and I can't understand why people buy any of it in the first place

killerx09 · Post by **killerx09** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 2:04 am #361013

XSI wrote:
Takeguru wrote:I don't think most people are complaining about cosmetics aside from them being locked behind RNG instead of available for purchase

And on the "vote with your wallet" tripe that was posted earlier, the only time that works is when you have a digg shitstorm a la EA and Gamblefront 2
Most of the time, voting with your wallet leaves you just straight up without any solid game releases unless you feel like wading through the swamp of indie releases to find the few gems
I've been voting with my wallet on EA for years now and don't feel like I've missed anything
But that might be because EA only puts out garbage anyway and I can't understand why people buy any of it in the first place

I like Titanfall.

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:05 am #361035

XSI wrote:I've been voting with my wallet on EA for years now and don't feel like I've missed anything
But that might be because EA only puts out garbage anyway and I can't understand why people buy any of it in the first place

"I haven't bought any of their games"

"all of their games are dogshit"

lntigracy · Post by **lntigracy** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 4:38 am #361045

He's right though.

None of their games have been exceptionally memorable to be worth giving them money, except maybe Titanfall 2.

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 5:36 am #361049

Even Ubisoft has the occasionally good game in between the Steeps and the For Honor, and some old games that are still worth playing

EA has nothing that survives a week past its release date

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 8:29 am #361074

System Shock was an EA game.

lntigracy · Post by **lntigracy** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 8:56 am #361081

I forgot the word "recent" in my post.

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 9:16 am #361082

Titanfall is an EA game too, and Titanfall is kinda fun.

XSI · Post by **XSI** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 9:36 am #361084

DemonFiren wrote:System Shock was an EA game.

It's also older than EA's target audience

DemonFiren · Post by **DemonFiren** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 9:55 am #361087

XSI wrote:
DemonFiren wrote:System Shock was an EA game.
It's also older than EA's target audience

Is it sad that this is true?

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 2:58 pm #361122

I mean, considering how many beloved studios have been cannibalized by EA saying "Its an EA game" isn't really saying much.

Ikarrus · Post by **Ikarrus** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 6:04 pm #361177

BUY MY LOOTBOXES

Lumbermancer · Mon Nov 27, 2017 6:21 pm

DemonFiren wrote:System Shock was an EA game.

Only published. And from the time when EA name wasn't synonymous with smallpox.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:20 pm #361239

Early EA gave us Maxis and Bullfrog and Origin Studios.

Then they sucked all the creative juice out of those studios to become the hollow husk it is today.

onleavedontatme · Tue Nov 28, 2017 6:13 am

Ricotez wrote:BULLSHIT

Wyzack wrote:I confused how can they be making thousands of dollars from all these people but also say removing it will have no material effect on the company that doesn't make sense

EA sold 1.7 billion worth of microtransactions (this includes map packs etc) last fiscal year

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/57475/ea ... index.html

Their income after expenses/taxes/etc for the same time period was 967 million. They would be heavily in the red if they just stopped all dlc

https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/s ... financials

onleavedontatme · Tue Nov 28, 2017 6:24 am

Saegrimr wrote:

Gamers deserve the bad things that happen in the industry

Takeguru wrote: Most of the time, voting with your wallet leaves you just straight up without any solid game releases unless you feel like wading through the swamp of indie releases to find the few gems

How can you simultaneously care so much about videogames that you apparently cant resist paying people you hate but care so little you cant bother to find games from people doing what you want?

Plenty of great games with either little or reasonabme dlc out there, not a job for the government to force the entire market to sell things exactly how you want

@cosmicscientist

Not getting the mcdonalds toy you wanted is a pretty silly reason to make a new law as well

Ikarrus · Post by **Ikarrus** » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:18 am #361444

I avoid most AAA games because I've accepted the fact that they don't really cater to me anymore, and haven't for the last 10 years. That doesn't stop me from spending an inordinate amount of time at home on my ass in front of a monitor and enjoying it.

I think the only AAA game I've played in the last few years was Prey.

Don't forget it's not just limited to indies or AAA, either. There are lots of decent mid-sized studios that probably make exactly what you want. You just have to not be a complete sucker for AAA marketing campaigns.

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:53 am #361451

Are you suggesting that its a lack of collective bargaining power and not a rational choice on the part of the consumer to buy a substandard product when the desire to have that substandard product outweight the specific desire for the lacking feature? What is the solution to this quandry that would require government intervention? Your ability to vote with your wallet and abstain from purchasing a thing is not dictated by the purchase patterns of others because literally nobody is requiring you to purchase the thing. This is especially true where there are alternatives to the thing in question. The image Sae posted is evidence not that there is some sort of market-side wrong that needs intervention or correction but rather that the consumer is willing to ascribe a higher value to the name and franchise than to the fleeting demand for addition of a supposedly missing feature.

FantasticFwoosh · Tue Nov 28, 2017 10:29 am

oranges wrote:it doesn't have to be lootboxes though. That shit's obviously exploitative of peoples gambling tendencies.

Look at paradox for an example of how to do great DLC strategy.

CK2 was released in 2012 and they are still releasing DLC for it, I'm still playing it even today and I've paid for all the DLC, including some of the graphical content packs.

That's 5 years of ongoing support

Not a single microtransaction in sight.

The Kiwi defends the pickled red-herring

Paradox DLC is scandalous enough, if anything im suprised they won't be at the heart of then next great controversy surrounding DLC microtransactions because they effectively produce a new DLC every time they could have upgraded game versions and they've said this themselves while continuing to make a profit out of the same game.

People are still playing Europa Universalis released in 2012 with ever decreasing fractions with very scant 'free features', its barely enjoyable without a ever expanding DLC cash grab for essential mechanics like presented in "Common Sense" to just raise your local development (make the tiles you draw money/trade/manpower on less crap for normie explanation) and effectively cut game content massively with each DLC.

People wont buy Battlefront 2 because publically it's known its a expensive habit & long gone are the days where you could buy A++ titles (at time of release) in single installments then a completely co-optional expansion or two to enhance the experience, and many of those expansions ended up being stand-alone games. People know and are angry at Paradox's infamous dlc inflation & practices and its mainly sustainable though means of seasonal steam sales, id NEVER buy a retail release except to load the base game with DLC pre-planned out to shell out for as a individual game in its current state.

CIV 5 had a modern but not inflated DLC (but thats a inferior game in scope that eats more time in my opinion) with lots of little tidbits that outside of multiplayer remain self involved to its DLC packages, there's nothing left wanting from singleplayer as no carrot on a stick is dangled infront of you tauntingly all the time that shelling out money for X dlc will make a feature straightforward. Multiplayer is very much a sticking point for new DLC policy, its effectively also barring players from playing with each other and showcasing the changes between them since you'll be denied service if your DLC isn't compatible with someone elses in matchmaking. Say if i have Korea civ DLC and the person i intend to play with does not.

Malkevin wrote:Early EA gave us Maxis and Bullfrog

Then they sucked all the creative juice out of those studios to become the hollow husk it is today.

Those two studios (origin is a 'literally who to me') basically printed money with appraised good quality investments, gold-dust

Its like Warner Bros, at the end of the day; studio executives, deadlines & rushing have collectively managed to fuck up most studios and business practices to the brink of breaking them entirely or affecting the product. New studios, same shitty company.

Qbopper · Post by **Qbopper** » Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:34 pm #361485

we should just ban anyone from buying games unless i personally veto them and let them be sold

cedarbridge · Post by **cedarbridge** » Tue Nov 28, 2017 3:51 pm #361508

CosmicScientist wrote:
cedarbridge wrote:Are you suggesting that its a lack of collective bargaining power and not a rational choice on the part of the consumer to buy a substandard product when the desire to have that substandard product outweight the specific desire for the lacking feature? What is the solution to this quandry that would require government intervention? Your ability to vote with your wallet and abstain from purchasing a thing is not dictated by the purchase patterns of others because literally nobody is requiring you to purchase the thing. This is especially true where there are alternatives to the thing in question. The image Sae posted is evidence not that there is some sort of market-side wrong that needs intervention or correction but rather that the consumer is willing to ascribe a higher value to the name and franchise than to the fleeting demand for addition of a supposedly missing feature.
I'm confused with what you're getting at.

The image pepsi posted was that people are funny.

Funny, dumb, poorly motivated. potato pot-ta-toe