Red Dead Redemption 2 Publisher Argues Loot Boxes are Not Gambling; "Overdelivering" Is Key

Take-Two President Karl Slatoff talks about loot boxes, recurring revenues and the importance of overdelivering on the initial release of games.

[Mikelarry]

Good thing its not up to Karl Slatoff to define what is /isn't gambling.

[opinionated]

No it’s up to keyboard warriors on reddit to mass email bomb their local gambling commissions and demand results.

[RememberThe357]

Or our respective political representatives who are beginning to take notice and who are calling it gambling.

[opinionated]

Such a noble freedom fighter you are. Politicians are worse than lawyers.

[opinionated]

@rare
Laughable. I’m not the one calling anything with a random element gambling. Talking about wide brush strokes, you guys just throw a bucket of paint at the wall and see what sticks.

[IanTH]

@opinionated If people can't bring their concerns to those in a position to decide and make potential changes, including an outcome where they agree with (I assume) your positions that loot boxes aren't gambling, what do you want people to do? If it isn't up to people. Or gambling commissions. Or lawyers. Or politicians...Who exactly is it ultimately up to to decide? Perhaps I'm being obtuse, but I'm not sure what your argument here is.

[opinionated]

“If it isn't up to people. Or gambling commissions. Or lawyers. Or politicians...Who exactly is?”

There are rules already on the books for gambling and it’s different everywhere but most are pretty specific. Gambling is about money not products, win or lose money. Here in America it’s not gambling, if lootboxs were gambling it would be banned in many states. Most states have strict gambling laws compared to many nations and loot boxes don’t meet the criteria.

I get that people want to move the goalpost and say that it is gambling just to get that end result. The colluded media bring in the sociologists to confirm their pseudo intellectual biases. Thats not a noble stance to take, it’s a dirty scumbag stance based on lies and ignorance. The ends justify the means, like a Christian Right Thompson lawsuit or a Marxist identity war.

He said it’s not up to this investor of games to decide what gambling is. I agree. It’s not up to me, you or anyone on reddit to change it either. You are proud when a politician agrees with you that they should have the full authority to regulate our industies? You give away your own economic voice and choice? You think these people know better than take two about the game industry? And you all call me ignorant. The hypocrisy and irony is always amusing on here.

[thehitman1398]

So when did you sell your soul??

[opinionated]

Hah! Just because I don’t base my opinions solely on emotions like you do. You can be logical and a realist without selling your soul, try it sometime.

[RememberThe357]

Bro you can't just redefine a term for yourself just because you don't like the way people are critical. A gamble is a wager on a random outcome. Yes the term is that broad and yes it's okay to think gambling is okay. But loot boxes (that you buy in game, not the ones that are just there for the fun of finding new stuff) are a form of gambling. You don't have to like it but no one is going to take you seriously when you try to add your own definitions to words we all already know the meaning of.

[opinionated]

“Bro you can't just redefine a term for yourself just because you don't like the way people are critical.”

LMAO! Oh the irony. I can’t even... You can’t redefine the term just because you don’t like lootboxes pal. Your definition in terms of relative law is bogus, made up, nonsense. We’re not talking about your Webster dictionary definition and toddler understanding. We’re talking about business practices that (don’t) violate laws and regulations.

This take two guy is absolutely right and he didn’t redefine the term, he’s going by current law and the general consensus. YOU are the ones trying to change the law because YOU don’t like lootboxes. Keep projecting though, this shit is hilarious to me.

[shadowraiden]

but thats exactly what we pay them to do which is handle and define gambling.
ESRB is here for this exact reason to regulate what is safe for kids to access and give acceptable ratings. you can then argue they have done fuck all to stop what is a predatory practice on kids.

[opinionated]

The ESRB is a joke and a waste of money. If they had any influence whatsoever I wouldn’t be getting my ass kicked by 5 year olds in mature rated games lol.

[meka2611]

Your nuts about this shit. Ok you want logic on the gambling? From what I've seen you state since you get something that it's not gambling, then why are there gambling machines that make sure to usually let you win a little bit so you keep playing. Hell casinos base everything off of this, if you give them a little they will keep playing to win. So loot boxes do the same thing, say you want a specific costume, your going to continue to buy to get it, same as trying to win the jackpot prize in gambling, they are the same man.

[opinionated]

“then why are there gambling machines that make sure to usually let you win a little bit so you keep playing.”
These don’t exist lol. There are no gambling machines that guarantee a win every spin. Then it wouldn’t be gambling. Dummy logic. The odds are that you are going to lose your entire ante. The House always wins.

“Hell casinos base everything off of this, if you give them a little they will keep playing to win.”
They let you win a little so they can take all of your money in the end. Most people leave a casino with nothing at all, not with something they don’t want. Most people (responsible gamblers) go into a casino with money to lose. If I leave with what I came with then I see that as a win.

You have shown no logic to convince me that lootboxes are gambling and you won’t ever. Because I know I’m right.

[RememberThe357]

Again, a gamble is a wager on a random outcome. You can respond as many times as you like but a gamble is a gamble dude.
Do you even know the definitions of the words you use?

[rainslacker]

Random loot isn't gambling. It's a design choice for games.

Something you pay for, to specifically get loot, and that being random, is gambling, and not part of game design, but part of an actual separate product that doesn't actually directly tie into game play. Considering you may not get what you want, or get something completely worthless to you, it's gambling. Since there is monetary value attached to everything they give you, regardless of if it has value to the individual, it is pretty much a gamble to spend money on loot boxes. If it's a gamble, then it's gambling. Since it's a consumer product(or service), it's likely to be classified as gambling, and then it'll just go away and we won't have to worry about it anymore.

Gamblng isn't always about money. Any prize that can be won in exchange for money can be classified as gambling. Raffles for instance often don't have monetary returns, but offer up a prize in return. Sometimes multiple prizes to multiple people. But can also offer up a loss. Sometimes they can offer up a prize to everyone, that probably has some value. But raffles are considered gambling, because it's a gamble of what you will win. As such, most states don't allow them except in some non-profit circumstances. States that allow gambling, regulate them as gambling otherwise.

To me, loot boxes are very similar to a raffle where you will certainly win something, but may not win the big prize you actually want.

I'll also point out that gambling in the US is generally regulated by the individual states. There is no one specific law across the board that covers all gambling for every state. There are federal laws involving gambling, but they generally apply to collection of taxes and interstate gambling laws. In this case, loot boxes will likely fall under these laws, since they're delivered through interstate commerce. But, any individual state can still classify loot boxes as gambling, which will still mean the death knoll for them, because publishers want to sell their games in every state.

I do find it rather ironic that you are trying to decide for everyone that loot boxes are not gambling, all while demeaning all the people you say aren't capable of doing so as "keyboard warriors".

I feel I've given my reasons with enough logical thought to have my opinion be just as valid as yours, and while I did say my personal feelings on it, I also layed out how things work in the real world, and how that relates to loot boxes in general.

[opinionated]

@rain

“Random loot isn't gambling. It's a design choice for games.”
I agree.
“Something you pay for, to specifically get loot, and that being random, is gambling, and not part of game design”
I disagree. Random loot isn’t gambling. If you want to dump 100 dollars into loot boxes to find the hello kitty skin then I don’t feel sorry for you. The system itself, the practice, doesn’t violate any gambling laws. I don’t care which state it is.

“Considering you may not get what you want, or get something completely worthless to you, it's gambling.”
Worthless to you doesn’t void out actual value. It’s not in violation of any gambling laws that I know of.

“Since there is monetary value attached to everything they give you, regardless of if it has value to the individual, it is pretty much a gamble to spend money on loot boxes.”
Monetary value is gone once the loot is purchased. It is a product not a bargaining chip to cash out. Read the recent UK gambling commission decision. Basically saying as long as there is “worth” in every box (regardless of how you feel about it), it’s tied to in-game and you can’t “cash out” then it can’t be classified as gambling. It’s just common law stuff here. You don’t lose, ever. Unlike real gambling lol.

“ it's a gamble, then it's gambling”
Not always in the correct context.

I’d rather it go away because it’s stupid and people stopped buying them. I’m not going to pretend they are something they aren’t tho. If people want to waste their money I’m not going to stop them. No pity at all. Parents smack your kids.

You can’t exchange loot for money. In most states raffles are labeled donations. You donate to a cause with a chance to win a prize. There are always “loopholes”. Using bingo to fund your clubhouse or whatever, using scratch offs to support community college costs for locals. If you want to consider loot boxes a loop hole then that’s fine. I don’t think there is any real evidence to suggest that. Other than “it looks like a slot machine”. Okay fair enough, but it’s not a slot machine. Not a real one requiring a gambling license anyway.

You may not win anything in a raffle. 99% of the time it’s charity. I don’t think they are similar at all lol.

Yup but you couldn’t name a state where loot boxes fall under their gambling laws. Language that would destroy loot boxes in a courtroom without a shadow of a doubt, have you seen it? Somebody messaged me their state but the language is Swiss cheese and a soggy argument. He was convinced, naturally. Of course any state could declare lootboxes gambling tomorrow, out of the blue and without any sound evidence if they chose so. I’m saying that currently, loot boxes are not gambling in any state. And that’s reasonable to me for reasons listed.

I’m not demeaning anyone, im just being blunt lol. He said this guy’s opinions don’t matter. So I joked about the importance of the faux outrage reddit movement that started a full blown media campaign and email bombing. Then I just responded to random replies lol.

We don’t agree on much but we have had some interesting exchanges and I respect your opinion sure. I just think you’re wrong.

[1Victor]

Oh oh I smell a LOOTBOXAPALLOOZA in read dead 2

[yeahokwhatever]

you know since the EA scandal that the money vacuums at Rockstar are trying to figure out how to change their own system.

[Zabatsu]

Not only that. This greedy dude said comments earlier, that all games will be digital in 5-20 years.
Want to know why? More money. Gaming isn't what it used to be. Before you milked your games, now you milk your players. Takes the enjoyment out of gaming, for me.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Hell no there goes purchasing RDR2 Thanks Take Two for make millions of lives easier.

[FlameBaitGod]

Yeah, I think this guy wasn't thinking when he said it lol, at least lie for sales bro.

[badz149]

I think we should be surprised by this now, right? there was an article a couple of weeks back where T2 executives have had meetings and agreeing on exploring more MT practice in the future and that future certainly includes RDR2

[IanTH]

Yea, I agree. Given the money they are making on Shark Cards, and their complete abandonment of single player content for GTA5, I think we all knew in our heart-of-hearts what to expect of Rockstar games going forward, even if we want to hope against hope that such a great franchise won't be tarnished by these things.

I truly hope that if they do go this route, they at least leave the single player portion alone and relegate the nickle and diming to whatever online component they add. I cannot see how they could gracefully incorporate MTXs into the single player of a game like RDR.

If they incorporate any single player loot box economy shenanigans like WB did in Shadow of War, the outrage from that will seem but a candle's flame when compared to the fire of a thousand suns. People care far more deeply for a game like RDR - they had better tread lightly.

[DaReapa]

@ instantstupor

"I truly hope that if they do go this route, they at least leave the single player portion alone and relegate the nickle and diming to whatever online component they add. I cannot see how they could gracefully incorporate MTXs into the single player of a game like RDR."

Seeing what became of NBA 2K18, another product under Take Two's umbrella, I wouldn't hold out hope for that.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Red Dead Redemption 2 still a single player game so it's online portion I think is actually pretty irrelevant unless you really were looking to play this exclusively online.

I could care less what they do with the online I didn't even play the online for Grand Theft Auto V.

I also didn't play the online for the original Red Dead Redemption...sooooo it's irrelevant to me.

So for those who are worried about any type of pay to win aspect...... That sucks for you if you were looking forward to playing this online a lot.

I'm not and basically have no plans to really play this online.

[DarXyde]

Sad part is that they totally don't even need to do it.

I could honestly see smaller developers/publishers getting in on this, but GTA V made (and CONTINUES TO MAKE) a bloody killing. It's on five platforms. This is quite literally greed.

I'll reserve judgment until I have an idea of how T2 intends to incorporate them. If it's the loot box version of Shark Cards, I don't really care. I don't exactly condone their use, but if it's tasteful and not going to detract from the experience or put you at a profound disadvantage, I can't justify any outrage there.

Still, it's bad if a project tied to Take-Two Interactive is saying this. Don't forget: these are the "pioneers" of the season pass and Evolve's entire fiasco. The industry seems to follow Rockstar/ T2's example and I think many studios said "if they can do it, it should be okay if we do it, too".

Unfortunately, I think the industry gives Rockstar many passes, but at the end of the day, I wouldn't be surprised if this is all their publisher. Regardless, if T2 is attached to a popular project, there never seems to be much reprimanding. Evolve is an isolated incident since Turtle Rock is attached to that project, but Rockstar and T2 on Red Dead Redemption 2? Don't be surprised if loot boxes become an industry standard. They often get what they want.

[Juvia]

Juvia strongly agrees and will not be purchasing any games that have loot boxes. Vote with your wallets, fellow gamer friends!

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Agreed Juvia keep N4G to yourself plz

[Platinum_Fan]

Welp... RDR2 now confirmed to have gamble boxes. Pass on that.

[Littil_Devil]

That's a safe bet if anything...

[JackBNimble]

Well to be fair they don't say any such thing.
Looking at how successful Gta5 is, I am willing to bet any micro transactions in RDR2 will be similar to that.

[Eulderink]

cool, like 2 grind 2 days straight to buy an appartement :P
The option of paying 5 euro's seem like a bargain then xD f*ck them.

[JackBNimble]

So you're going to complain about playing the game to get for free what you can buy with real money.
I have never paid for shark cards ever and if they took out the OPTION to buy shark cards you're still going to have to grind.
I don't get some of you guys, it's like you're going to complain no matter what.

[rainslacker]

Maybe they'll reconsider. It'll be interesting to see how the community reacts if they have loot boxes like SW:BF. if it's with as much fervor as it was against EA, I think it would send a damn clear message that gamers are sick of it. No game or publisher is safe would be a really good message to send....although it sucks given just how anticipated this game is for many....although I'd imagine most will only care about the SP.

But it's still a bit too soon to call them out on it, but never hurts to let them know you aren't on board for it.

[Crazyglues]

Loot boxes are gambling, it's a very clever way of gambling.... if the item you where buying was guaranteed then ok that's fine.. but when you buy an item and it's designed to be a gamble that you might get the item or you might get something else, that's a very clever way of gambling since you can end up taking that person to the cleaners.... taking there money though trickery

Let's say some kid wants a special sword or gun, he keeps buying loot crates trying to get this item but the box is designed to not give it to him unless he spends a certain amount, if it's programmed like that, there are no laws on the book to stop that, because it's not being called gambling, it's not luck it's cheating... and there are no laws that say they must give you the item by the third try.... no it can go on over and over never giving you the item, and keep taking your money.... gambling... Loot boxes are a clever way of legal gambling, because the law makers are too stupid to understand how that is indeed gambling.

If you still think it's not gambling, let me ask you this, if I come out with an iPhone game where you buy blue coins with real money to throw at a box in the game, to try and get a super hammer so you can break boxes that might give you a big prize like $50 dollars cash... oh no.. that's gambling...

-But if I switch the prize to an in-game teddy bear instead of cash, oh now that's not gambling... right..? why because I changed the prize... LoL

maybe you should look up the meaning of -- Gambling: is the wagering of money or something of value (referred to as "the stakes") on an event with an uncertain outcome with the primary intent of winning money or material goods. Gambling thus requires three elements be present: consideration, chance and prize.

[bluefox755]

Okay, but with that logic, wouldn't Crackerjack also be gambling? Or MTG packs? Or those machines at grocery stores where a kid puts in a quarter and gets a random toy in return? Or claw machines? Should we outlaw those as well? Because they absolutely fit your criteria for what gambling is.

[XabiDaChosenOne]

Yes, those are gambling as well.

[Jinger]

By this gambling logic, yes. Ban everything with a random reward.

[The_Sage]

Well... With crackerjack it's not. You're buying the food, the prise is a free bonus. In the claw machine it's (supposedly) skill that decides if you get what you want. The toy machine?... I guess that kinda is gambling. I'm not sure what MTG packs are.

[bluefox755]

@The_Sage Magic The Gathering. Also, yes, I agree that Cracker Jack is not gambling, nor are any of these things, but by his broad and vague definition: "Gambling: is the wagering of money or something of value (referred to as "the stakes") on an event with an uncertain outcome with the primary intent of winning money or material goods.", even ridiculous things like a toy dispenser machine would be considered gambling. Given how taboo gambling apparently is with a lot of people, I'm not sure it's a good idea to lump innocent things in with something that, at least for some people, has lead them to destroy their lives through addiction. I'm not defending loot boxes, I think they are awful for gaming, I just don't think they are in the same category as casinos and sports bookies.

[TricksterArrow]

I guess I can still find a specific MTG card online, while the contents in a lootbox are ALWAYS locked, and please, let's not compare a niche physical game with something that is currently moving what some are calling billions of dollars. Most kids will not make the jump from MTG packs to slot machines, but the leap from one to the next is not that big when you consider lootboxes...

[The_Sage]

Ah... Magic the Gathering. I should have figured that out... I do see your point too.

[freshslicepizza]

Can you trade your loot crates? Since they hold no physical value you can't compare it to a plastic ring inside a box of Crackerjack.

Microtransactions should not be used as a catalyst for poor game design which forces gamers to grind. It is acceptable in free to play models but certainly not in $60 games.

[DialgaMarine]

If those are gambling, 90’s kids were gambling hardcore with Pokemon cards lol

[EatCrow]

Yes they're gambling. It's till gambling. However, usually the kids after their first try can get a good sense of whether or not it's worth a second try... And also they tend to know what they are able to get in the case of those toys you speak of. With loot boxes normally we don't know what we'll get af all.

Not sure how much it costs now... But 25cents or 50cents is much smaller then 5-20 or more dollars.

[DogJosha]

I've gone through thousands of dollars in TCGs and also in Gacha (pretty much lootboxes by another name). Both are gambling. Both are clearly capable of leading to an addiction. Both are targeted towards children. I've seen these lead a friend to a horrible addiction to "real" gambling leading to over 100k in losses. To say something can't lead to addiction just because you got lucky is pure ignorance. Some people are just more susceptible to addiction than others. Introducing something as addicting as gambling at a young age does not do anyone any good.

[Ittoittosai]

Everyone bring up this as some kind or logical response and its not. Cracker jacks arent marketed, to my knowledge, every 3 mins in your face inside a box of crcaker jacks, no one spend 15000 a month on boxes of cracker jacks. So choose your examples a little better. MTG packs are a lootbox/grabe bag type of system and yes could be considered by some people as gambling but here is a giant difference; MTG doesnt have adverse inside the card packs tell you to buy more packs, you can buy premade entire decks if you like that contain rares and epics and you know how many are in them. When buy a MTG card pack you're recieving actually real life goods that can be traded etc and yes some times for profit but there are way to purchase MTG cards and not just packs, can I buy overwatch skins directly? Like paladins? No? Oh, can I buy SwBf 2 star cards directly ? No? Oh. Everyone make these statements are usually just people very happy to spend extra money so they dont have to actually play the game and can just buy their way to being or having powerful characters if you dont have time to grind or play a game then why the hell are you buying it? Its supposed to be played thats how you enjoy it, playing it thats why its called a game and not work.

[Ducky]

That is a poor example. Gambling takes on a different picture when the reward is money, and isn't the same as when the reward is some item with no inherent value.

When the reward is money, there is a cycle which people can get trapped in, where any winnings are just placed into more bets.
For example, if someone plays a slot machine and wins a cash prize, they're likely going to spend their winnings by playing more slots in the hopes of getting more cash prizes. The end result is that they'll get cleaned out.

Now, if it's a slot machine where winning means getting a digital item, then there is no cycle to break out of. The "gambler" is aware from the outset that they're essentially making a purchase.

It's foolish to ascribe anything that has an element of chance as "gambling", or else kinder surprise is gambling, cereal box toys are gambling, anything without a rigorously well-defined outcome is gambling.

A better question would be whether or not the loot boxes are exploitative, because loot boxes themselves aren't inherently bad - they can be fun if implemented correctly, but it's the implementation of some publishers that is bad.

[RememberThe357]

If they want to turn their games into casinos, it's whatever, but they damn sure shouldn't charge a cover to get in.

[LandoCalrissiano]

By that definition a gumball machine would be gambling because a kid wanted a blue ball, not a yellow one. It doesn't matter that blue is what the kid wanted, it's that he was guaranteed a gumball and he needs to be happy with what he got or buy another. 2 things to this, you're guaranteed a product in return for money (a sale), and there's 0% chance you'll get any money back (no risk)

[Grodd]

Its a cheaper form of what the trading card industry has been doing for years. MTG, Sports Cards, Star Wars cards, Star Wars digital cards, Pokemon, etc....

[rainslacker]

It doesn't have to be money that's wagered, or even won, to be considered gambling.

Something of value has to be wagered, and even if there was a gaurantee of winning, the fact that the outcome is unknown and you may not win what you want is what makes it gambling.

While there is some lattitude in some cases, I don't see it in loot boxes, mostly because of the implementation practices which encourage people to spend money for an attempt to achieve a specific outcome.

[-Foxtrot]

Well we know how their multiplayer is going to go...so long sweet Undead Nightmare II I barely knew thee

We've given Rockstar their massive ego over the years so now they are cashing in on that and will try to push MTs and the like because of the respect they've gained. It became about money not fans in GTAV and why we never got an single player DLC...worse that they bullshitted us and said they didn't think it was "Possible or Necessary".

Sure they make some top quality games but I think if they go overboard with the online elements we need to tell them and treat them like we did with EA. Show them that it dosen't matter who they are or what they've made we're not screwing around and neither should they.

[Ittoittosai]

No its the 1 billion dollars in shark cards tards bought.

[showtimefolks]

Let the officials decide from state governments

Take two it was a great ride but I guess selling 85 million copies of gta5 is my enough and noshad it's time to make easy money

Please don't ruin the single player with mt

Gaming was always business but this is getting to another level

[AsunaYuukiTheFlash]

I going to buy RDR 2 used just like I did with GTA V.

[MetroidFREAK21]

Lol pASS

[OC_MurphysLaw]

well if they do have loot boxes lets hope they atleast learn from what has happened this year with SWBF2

[DialgaMarine]

I feel like most developers already are. Just stick to the same system that Overwatch and CoD use, and they’ll be fine.

[bluefox755]

I don't think it's gambling either, nor do I think gambling is inherently bad, but I think loot boxes are awful though and bad for the gaming industry. Gambling is actually fun, loot boxes are just bad business. And, it looks like RDR2 is another game I'll be passing on.

[BLow]

Well, I agree with everything except the first part of your first sentence.Loot boxes are a form of gambling. I really don't see anything wrong with gambling either but in video games it's not a good idea because of the age groups who play games.

I'm not sure if people are disagreeing with your entire statement or part of it. I probably go to Las Vegas 2 maybe 3 times a year. Guess how that place operates. I'm not a big gambler but I like Vegas and I don't see anything wrong with it as long as you have self control.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people that don't. I'm cheap and I only play penny slots. True story: Last time I went I was down maybe $10 or $20 dollars. We went to a machine, sat down, and put $1 in the machine. I was betting 20¢ a play. I won $75 on my second spin. I cashed out and didn't gamble for the rest of the trip. That was good enough for me lol.

Plus, I mainly just play the slots to get cheap beer/drinks. Why go to the bar and pay $7 for a beer when I can give the server a buck or two each time she comes. Self control is the name of the game.

[bluefox755]

Okay, let me ask you this. Would you consider Magic the Gathering to be gambling? Lots of kids play it and other similar card games, and spend tons of money trying to get certain cards. Should we ban yu-gi-oh cards? Or put an age restriction on them?

[Omnisonne]

Gambling can be fun like playing card games with your friends betting your favorite comic issue or a bottle of scotch. And then there's a type of gambling which sole purpose is to exploit you for as much as possible, which is what devs are doing with paid lootboxes.
Theres a reason why they don't give you the option to straight up buy the outfit or skin that you want, and instead lock it behind a roll of the dice. They know people are prone to keep rolling that dice until they get what they were after, which means more potential profit.

[Dante101]

well take 2 try it with red dead 2 and let's see if you won't receive backlash but I had expected this more for Borderlands 3

[Retard]

Wonderful. Another game I won’t be buying

[rocketpanda]

Of course publishers aren't going to say it's gambling, they are beholden to shareholders and only care about money. They will ride the lootbox gravy train as long as possible regardless of damage they're doing to the industry. Even if it gets classified as gambling they will deny it by spouting the usual BS that is helps people with less time progress their game and offering "choice" and "options".

[Silly gameAr]

Of course he is. They were going to make Red Dead a loot box fest. Why wouldn't he argue for loot boxes.

[Jinger]

Can't wait for RDR2

[Artemidorus]

I won't be buying any loot creates with Rockstar and a definite boycott if it dominates the game.

It's articles like these that makes me not want to pre order and wait for a retail verison and a review.

[Relientk77]

Ugh I'm so sick of loot boxes, microtransactions, and pay 2 win. All this damn GARBAGE.

[mgszelda1]

We play games to get an experience we can't get anywhere else in reality. I'm not wealthy in real life, so I don't need MT loot boxes in a game breaking my immersion.
I don't need a game to point out my lack of money. RL takes care of that already.

[traumadisaster]

Exactly, i haven't seen this point brought up yet, but I was explaining just that point to my brother in law over thanksgiving.

[Takwin]

This game and all future games will have their scores, sales, and profits really hurt by aggressive gambling loot boxes and microtransactions. We will see much lower scores as sites inspect games and question companies about them.

[DanteVFenris666]

Oh the president of a company that makes tons of money off of microtransactions considers lootboxes to not be gambling. No clear bias in his statement/s

[ocelot07]

I like the idea of loot boxes in RDR2 as it would mean it's 100% historically accurate. You see back in 1885 I believe it was. My great great granddad was a wanted criminal. One day the law caught up to him and was cornered. He took cover behind a big ol rock. Returning fire when he could. Then all of a sudden a massive loot box dropped from the sky next to him filled with loads of handy equipment which included some gold, ammo a gatling gun that was painted pink. A new hat and some legendary pants.

Thanks to this loot box he survived and managed to get away. True story and here I am over a 100 years later sharing this incredible story about my great great grandfather and his experiences with loot boxes.

[Cy]

He's right, they're not.

[Profchaos]

I'm so excited for rdr 2 please don't do this I can understand MT for cosmetic purchases but for anything substantial hate it

[Doomster1971]

These companies are totally amoral. Loot boxes bought with either in-game currency or real money are of course gambling. You bet with real money or in-game currency and get rewarded randomly. Gambling addictions ruin people's lives. Now, these publishers want to start targeting everyone whether it be children or adult. I bought Forza 7 and although it doesn't have microtransactions in it yet, you still have to gamble (I wish I knew about the loot boxes first. I would have avoided it). I'm not touching battlefront 2, even though my 10-year-old Son wants it and I've avoided buying overwatch for my Daughter. I'm not buying any other game that comes with loot boxes from now on. I don't like microtransactions and I don't use them but that is not the problem with these games for me. The loot boxes are a problem. These companies are seemingly trying to get everyone addicted to gambling. Even our kids. The next thing they will be telling us is to gamble responsibly. I really hope governments hurry up and regulate this.

[EazyC]

I have Overwatch and although I don't defend it in principle, the loot box stuff in that is just little silly skins that you can save up for anyway. Most people only play a few characters in it so you can definitely get what you like anyway. BF II is obviously a joke though.

[Ittoittosai]

Cause they plan on putting them in Red Dead 2

[HyperMouse]

Yes they are and im betting RDR2 will be full of them now

[CrystalFantasy]

Is buying a pack of Hearthstone, Pokémon or YUGIOH cards gambling?

[kevinsheeks]

everything you listed I can buy whatever card I want lmao . . it isn't nearly as random as loot boxes I can literally buy any one card I want . . .

with a loot box I have to hope I get what i want and if not I have to keep trying over and over

[ocelot07]

What @kevinsheeks said is 100% correct. Even if you do buy a pack of Pokemon cards you can sell or trade them cards. Can you do that with in game loot box items? Nope.

[DillyDilly]

Pirate it everybody

[DillyDilly]

Come on Government make this stuff illegal in fully priced games

[EazyC]

Wow, you'd think R* would want to preserve their legacy and not reduce themselves to such a scumbag practice. Idiotic!

[Imalwaysright]

Take two should be careful. They wouldn't want something like this to happen to them http://www.gamerevolution.c...

[Knightofelemia]

Loot boxes are actually a lot like gambling you never know what the out come or what you will be receiving from the loot box. Just like a slot machine you never know what the out come will be or what you are going to receive from the machine.

[FreddyFazbear]

Putting lootbox on a full priced game is downright criminal. Period!!

[Mega_Volnutt]

There goes one of my most anticipated game this gen, please someone tell me this it's not what I'm thinking...

[The_KELRaTH]

Well there goes another game that was at the top of my list. If it carrys on like this Ill end up not needing a console.

[Majin-vegeta]

haven't gave R* my money since SA.Guess I'll keep it that way

[Blu3_Berry]

I really hope the government looks into this as a form of gambling so that they are removed from all games in the future.

[SunnyZ]

Got kick started in Belgium, don't think they have come up with a stance on it yet, and Hawaii is in talks about it.
Hopefully it will spread and we can finally rid ourselves of this cancer.

[gbsrnctaln]

Whats up with the mung face in the pic?

[RSKnight]

"Loot boxes are not gambling", that's exactly what someone who wants to sell you loot boxes will say.

[jznrpg]

If they have single player loot boxes I am going to skip RDR2 until its in the used bargain bin

[DialgaMarine]

I somewhat agree with him. There’s no debating that if you don’t spend money on loot boxes, they’re not definitely not gambling. As long as the developer doesn’t pull an EA, and tie loot boxes directly to the progression system as a means to literally force people to buy them to actually progress, I honestly kindof like loot boxes. In CoD WW2, there’s something enjoyable about getting a supply drop through playing the game and not knowing what you’re gonna get, and the level of satisfication you feel when that Epic or Heroic card design pops up.

As long it’s all cosmetic, and you get them fairly easily without shoveling out more cash, I see no reason why loot boxes are evil.

[Godmars290]

So says someone looking to implement them into their games?

[Subzero100x]

lol yes they are its a game of chance therefor your gambling your money away. this guy is just mad the government is stopping them from stealing money away from unsuspecting buyers.

[DarkZane]

If it was gambling, you could argue any card games that sell their cards in pack would be gambling (like pokemon or yu-gi-oh cards).

[Doomster1971]

I would say that buying football card, pokemon etc is gambling too. The government don't seem to regulate card games but it is gambling. Even getting a lottery ticket is gambling when you think about it. There are many forms of gambling. Many most of us don't even think about. Its gambling none the less though. The definition of gambling is "to play a game of chance"

[Moe-Gunz]

This thing is like a virus infecting games that I would otherwise be excited about. Shadow of Mordor, NBA 2k18, BF2, etc. Make it stop already.

[Chaosdreams]

If Red Dead Redemption 2 has loot boxes in it. I'm ignoring the game. It's become that easy. Loot boxes = no purchase.

[blacktiger]

Loot boxes may not be gambling but if it is betting then it is gambling. Sure you are guaranteed to win, but that something still is betting, which to me is gambling!

[TheOttomatic91]

Welp goodbye Rockstar your products are some of my fav in gaming but if loot boxes are the way your going to go I'm out.

[xenz]

If they are cosmetics and doesn’t hinder my single player experience then sure.

What I don’t support is MTs thats required in order to progress. I like to call it the EA model.

[Vectrexer]

Developers need to make a complete game!!
Any purchases any money they try to get from you after you've paid $60 or more should be completely and utterly worthwhile to the purchase otherwise just give us the full freaking game.

[Ninjamonkey82]

Goes all the way back to cod 4 and obivions horse armor. Remember for the first time feeling like what i got out off the box wasn't worth crap.Nvidia pulled a save that year and saved pc gamers having to pay for dlc maps. Never before had it been required. wHat you got on your disk was expanded by patches on previous games v1.2 v1.5 each came with new maps. Devs and publisher didn't stick there hand deeper in your pocket. If there was more content we paid for a fully featured expansion pack, Now days hell game season pass 90 quid and then loot boxes greedy f@*Ks take us for mugs. But we played as much a hand in letting them believe we are. I still remember the petetions when the dlc horse armor hit everyone ignored it same with cod :).

[MaxiPower90]

It’s up to the gamers to decide the future of their hobby. They Are the consumer at the end of the day. Sure devs can put these trampy things in but they can’t complain when the fans bite back. Viva the revolution....

[zb1ftw777]

I think that's confirmed i won't be buying RDR then.

I feel sad that gaming has come to this.

Nothing but nickel and dime practices everywhere.

[Last_Boss]

If true, this will tell you how greedy companies are and how big of an impact cell phone games have gotten.

[Tross]

Whether it's gambling or not isn't the issue here. Devs should not charge full retail price for a game and then turn around and try to profit from us again by using a technique created for F2P games. That type of game uses MTs because that's how profits are made. With full retail releases, there's the initial price of admission. If a dev wants to profit further from such a game, they can provide us with some DLC that gives us more worthwhile content. How is this so hard for some AAA devs to understand?

I know AAA games cost a lot especially something like RDR, but such titles also sell really well so I'm sure it would easily be a financial success without MTs, and that's an understatement. Expect crazy sales figures. If anything adding MTs will cost profits as gamers with principles who would have otherwise bought the game will avoid it like the plague. How about some DLC with extra story or multiplayer content instead? That's the way to double-dip.

[DARK WITNESS]

For me, the real issue with what he points out isn't the loot box and gambling... the real keyword here is "OVERDELIVERING".

The simple fact is 99.9% of the games that get pushed out as cash cows do not overdeliver.

honestly if they did I wouldn't care if the pub's want to throw in some loot boxes, throw in as many as you like.... I don't care as long as the game is awesome and delivers... but they don't!

Then it becomes a problem because they bring out a subpar game and then focus on trying to makeup for failed sales targets with micro transactions and lootboxes instead of focusing on improving the game with content that would really make a difference to it's quality.

[NotAfanBoyy]

If they ruin this game with Loot Boxes, I will not buy it. I'm sick and tired of this crap!

[drunkenspy007]

If someone pays money to get a specific item, doesn't get that item in the random outcome, then pays more for another random chance, it's gambling. It's just how slot machines work.

[rulparra]

I smell another game that will fail as battlefront 2!

[FITSniper]

All the comments I see about how RDR2 will suck now, did you even read the article?

[Dragonscale]

Gambling or not they're insidious bullcrap that have no place in full price games.

[tehpees3]

You can't go above the law Karl. The link between loot boxes and gambling has been opened. Accept it. You lost. Go against the law and you'll be showing who the truly arrogant ones are. Yourselves.

[gantarat]

The law it's not decide yet that loot boxes are gambling or not.

[quent]

Easy to say when you have a seat at the ESRB

[Bleucrunch]

Welp, their goes my interest in Red Dead Redemption 2. I am not about this look box life.

[irishyort]

oh no! 6 shooters in loot boxes incoming :(