Disagree. Cards from packs can be bought in singles, sold, and traded. "But CCG's..." is not an argument. Cosmetics should be included in the discussion as they possesses far more intrinsic value for players, and given Activision filed a patent revolving around them it shows enough clear evidence they should be part of the discussion. Lootboxes are also a measure of pure greed as proven by EA in a letter to their shareholders stating the removal of the lootbox microtransactions would not affect their bottom line in the slightest. http://www.pcgamer.com/ea-t...
Also saying, "it's up for the players to stop" is a remark founded in ignorance as it lacks an understanding of how human psychology works in regard to behavior modifiers such as variable reward systems. Go read some B.F Skinner. Given nearly all the big publishers have started to include them, what are you saying? Those people should just leave and not play games anymore?
So lootboxes are manipulative, exploitative tools of pure avarice. Now I have to ask: How on earth do these make our games better? Would we really lose so much if they vanished completely? If you woke up tomorrow and found in Overwatch at the end of each match you were given coins where you could go to an open shop and buy the things you wanted directly, would you honestly be upset?
Because a game like Hearthstone is F2P and MTs make sense in that, not to mention that it's a completely different genre of game? Also, the only price of admission for TCG/CCGs in real life is to have cards to play with. Heck, I think Hearthstone even starts you off with a basic deck (though it has been a long time since I've played it). Anyways, people tend to feel more entitled to content and despise MTs when they already dropped $60 (or $80 here in Canada) on a game.
I'm not a huge fan of Loot Boxes but I did get really annoyed with them in games like Overwatch and ESPECIALLY Injustice 2 where I kept getting items I had no interest in.
It got so bad that I was actually willing to pay for the stuff I wanted rather than go through opening boxes and getting crap.
I wouldn't mind look boxes if they were only earned by playing the game. It's BS that someone could theoretically drop $100's on loot boxes and never get the gear they want.
Which is a big reason why I decided to never spend money on Fortnite again. They have these daily Llamas advertising what you "could" get; and the guarantees (which rarely appear) cost at least $20+ which the coin packs start at $10 for 1000 coins, and the guarantees are at least 1200+ coins. I like the game, but hate the fact I spent way more money than anticipated for nothing.
At least with Warframe, you know what you're buying; which is why I don't mind buying Prime packs when something I like releases. I know what I'm paying for, not "a chance."
Because what is - arguably - to be considered gambling is being more and more incorporated into what was once suppose to be a finished retail product.
You're no longer directly paying $60 for a game, but $60+whatever a publisher feels they can justify. And whatever they feel can be justified are things they're directly engineering into games, at the cost of a game's value.
And yes, not going to bother clicking/reading an article that by title brings up a question and will likely preach an answer that defends loot boxes.
Loot boxes in paid for games are are anti consumer bullshit. Keep them in free to play where they belong. This sums it up https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Click bait article.
Disagree. Cards from packs can be bought in singles, sold, and traded. "But CCG's..." is not an argument. Cosmetics should be included in the discussion as they possesses far more intrinsic value for players, and given Activision filed a patent revolving around them it shows enough clear evidence they should be part of the discussion. Lootboxes are also a measure of pure greed as proven by EA in a letter to their shareholders stating the removal of the lootbox microtransactions would not affect their bottom line in the slightest. http://www.pcgamer.com/ea-t...
Also saying, "it's up for the players to stop" is a remark founded in ignorance as it lacks an understanding of how human psychology works in regard to behavior modifiers such as variable reward systems. Go read some B.F Skinner. Given nearly all the big publishers have started to include them, what are you saying? Those people should just leave and not play games anymore?
So lootboxes are manipulative, exploitative tools of pure avarice. Now I have to ask: How on earth do these make our games better? Would we really lose so much if they vanished completely? If you woke up tomorrow and found in Overwatch at the end of each match you were given coins where you could go to an open shop and buy the things you wanted directly, would you honestly be upset?
Because a game like Hearthstone is F2P and MTs make sense in that, not to mention that it's a completely different genre of game? Also, the only price of admission for TCG/CCGs in real life is to have cards to play with. Heck, I think Hearthstone even starts you off with a basic deck (though it has been a long time since I've played it). Anyways, people tend to feel more entitled to content and despise MTs when they already dropped $60 (or $80 here in Canada) on a game.
I'm not a huge fan of Loot Boxes but I did get really annoyed with them in games like Overwatch and ESPECIALLY Injustice 2 where I kept getting items I had no interest in.
It got so bad that I was actually willing to pay for the stuff I wanted rather than go through opening boxes and getting crap.
I wouldn't mind look boxes if they were only earned by playing the game. It's BS that someone could theoretically drop $100's on loot boxes and never get the gear they want.