Gaming Gambling

[InFlamesForEver]

I've never heard of this before but is like a "lucky dip" - you pay, say £1 and you get a random game item? I wouldn't call that gambling unless that item could be resold for a price greater than a £1.

The problem is that a person with an addictive personality wouldn't see the distinction--they got a nice shiny new item for their money, and they might get an even better one if they spent another quid! A few hours down the line they're a thousand quid in the red and still looking for that elusive perfect item to finish their getup.

Mind you, apparently EA is going even worse with Star Wars Battlefront 2--they're not going to let anyone else take the crown of shittiest game publisher in the world, darn it! In Battlefront 2 *all* character advancement is done via randomised lootboxes. You do get these through playing the game normally, but it takes a lot of grinding to get them. If you get a duplicate item you can turn this into "scrap"--get enough scrap and you can get another entirely randomised lootbox, but apparently it takes a lot of it to do that.

It's all so insidious--the publishers push a bit to see what the public will let them get away with, there's a bit of an outcry from those in the know but mostly people just buy the damned games anyway, so the publishers push further, etc.

Yeah I just heard about this today, I was quite looking forward to it too as the first one was really good fun, but unless they change that aspect I'll have to pass.

[Redvers Ganderpoke]

The problem is that a person with an addictive personality wouldn't see the distinction--they got a nice shiny new item for their money, and they might get an even better one if they spent another quid! A few hours down the line they're a thousand quid in the red and still looking for that elusive perfect item to finish their getup.

I do understand but it's not gambling - this sort of thing has been going on for years - it's even been used to sell Cornflakes (I'm sure you're old enough to remember the Doctor Who cards in Weetabix and the ones you couldn't get! ). This seems to have crept in from those nasty little tablet/phone games where you can "progress" by spending £ or grinding.

[CBJ]

No, items in cornflake packets aren't the same. They are there to make you buy cornflakes rather than some other cereal; aside from that they are effectively free. You don't generally go and buy an few extra packets of cornflakes just to see if you can get the right item!

Making you pay money for lucky dip items is gambling, in the same way that buying a scratchcard is gambling. There's clearly a lot of money to be made by gently nudging people into gambling. I'm not generally a fan of slippery slope arguments, but in the case of gambling, sadly, that's how people get themselves into serious financial difficulties.

Personally I'd avoid any game that did this on principle.

[mrbadger]

one time, when you had to get the tokens to send off for a model of an off shore oil rig, we bought corn flakes for reasons other than just the cereal, but other than that? nope.

And we still got the cornflakes, the oil rig was a bonus.

This loot box thing is a money making con. One I won't partake of on any level.

Any game that used it would just be a gambling game with a fancy wrapping, whether it started out that way or not.

[Morkonan]

There's no question that this is "gambling." However, it does have a little twist: No matter if you "win" or "loose", you do get something for your money.

There is no "skill" involved, like paying the entry fee for a golf tournament and then winning the "grand prize." Or, paying a bit of pocket change to try your "luck" at a shooting game at the local carnival.

"Loot Crates" give you... "something."

The problem is that they give you "game content." This isn't a difference between a funny hat or a stupid hat as a vanity item award. At the end of the day, those are nothing more than decorations. (Though, strictly speaking, it's "game content", just meaningless content.)

There's surprising little regulation or oversight of the multi-billion-dollar industry of computer gaming. (At least in the US.) There are "content" regulations, so that pornographic imagery or extreme violence doesn't get marketed to children. (Yeah, right... Boobs. Boobs everywhere...and blood!) But, while a lot of gamers scream, few people actually appear to "want" government regulations being applied. They "want" the lootboxes, in a way, they just don't want to have to pay real money for them. They want the "content" they represent, but they don't want to have to pay more than the list-price of the game in order to get that content.

But, it's possible some government will take a harder look at this issue:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/201300

So close. So, you UK peeps, go sign up!

[Jericho]

Today's Ctrl-Alt-Del sums it up pretty well:



http://cad-comic.com/comic/a-handy-chart/

[Redvers Ganderpoke]

You don't generally go and buy an few extra packets of cornflakes just to see if you can get the right item!
.

Obviously you don't remember the 70's that well. That's what used to happen - some people used to do this (probably the same sort of people who buy 100 lootboxes) - it was not as easy to buy 100 packets of cornflakes as to buy 100 virtual lookboxes. All I'm saying it's not a new technique - just a new way of doing it.

Gambling is too easy to access nowadays - once you had to venture into a strange smoke filled shop with balcked out windows full of strange people and now you can do it on your phone from the comfort of home.

[Jericho]

You don't generally go and buy an few extra packets of cornflakes just to see if you can get the right item!
.

"But you don't even LIKE shreddies!"
"But mummy, I will eat them this time! I PROMISE!!!"

Never eaten Shreddies in my life...

[CBJ]

Obviously you don't remember the 70's that well. That's what used to happen - some people used to do this (probably the same sort of people who buy 100 lootboxes) - it was not as easy to buy 100 packets of cornflakes as to buy 100 virtual lookboxes. All I'm saying it's not a new technique - just a new way of doing it.

I remember them all too well, thanks! My point is that there's a big difference between buying a packet (or even 3 packets) of cornflakes, in which case you get cornflakes for your money regardless of whether you get the toy you want, and buying an otherwise-worthless chance of some item. The former is self-limiting, in that even the most persistent child is going to struggle to persuade their parent to buy 10 or 100 boxes, whereas the latter has a smooth path from buying 1 or 2, through 5 or 10, to a serious habit.

Gambling is too easy to access nowadays - once you had to venture into a strange smoke filled shop with balcked out windows full of strange people and now you can do it on your phone from the comfort of home.

On this we can agree.

[Rice]

Yes, as long as it purely cosmetic items with no gameplay impact in a Free-to-Play Game would be my Vote. "lootboxes which changes the gameplay inside a f2p are a no go for me. ... seems my personal opinion can't be covered in this votum-

Personally i still would just buy the skin instead. for the "yearly payment" for that game which i plays on and off over weeks per year.

[mrbadger]

we got tokens and had to send off for the oil rig, it wasn't in the box. the tokens were on every box, there was no gambling.

And I had to wait until we ate each box before I got my next token. I think my Nan bought some boxes too to speed it up.

It made getting my oil rig even more enjoyable, which would be why I still recall it nearly 40 years later.

It was my favorite model for many years.

The thing of having random toys inside the box came after that, probably when they realised what as great selling point it was I think.

We didn't have the money to do that, but by then I'd moved on to Blue Peter make your own toy stuff. The free toys in the cereal boxes were all rubbish anyway.

[felter]

Didn't they stop doing the free small cheep useless toys in cereals, because some people were choking on them. I suppose you could say that some people are choking on these loot boxes too.

[mrbadger]

I think so, because they wouldn't put decent sized toys in there. At least the ones you sent off for were a decent size.

But more viable too, since not everyone would have, and you didn't need one per box.

I've never played a game with Loot boxes, because I never would, so I don't actually know much about how often you get good stuff from one, other than apparently not often unless you pay.

I still haven't played Diablo 3 because they put that 'pay to win' store in it so I decided against buying it when it came out as a result, and even though the store's gone now, still haven't got it.

We're at the point where I probably won't until it's dirt cheap now, if I ever bother, I may just never play it. That's what the loot box mindset of developers does to me.

[Morkonan]

You don't generally go and buy an few extra packets of cornflakes just to see if you can get the right item!
.

Obviously you don't remember the 70's that well. That's what used to happen - some people used to do this (probably the same sort of people who buy 100 lootboxes) - it was not as easy to buy 100 packets of cornflakes as to buy 100 virtual lookboxes. All I'm saying it's not a new technique - just a new way of doing it.
...

I have memories of shoving my hand down to the bottom of the box, flakes spilling out all over the place, fishing around for that little plastic packet that would yield cereal-box gold...

Then, I figured out I could just dump it all in a big bowl. But, getting it all back in the box...

Every darn cereal box that had a prize in it ended up looking like a three-dollar hooker on a late Saturday night.

....I still haven't played Diablo 3 because they put that 'pay to win' store in it so I decided against buying it when it came out as a result, and even though the store's gone now, still haven't got it....

I got the Special Limited Uber Collector's Edition on release day... The "Store" was a game-killer, to be sure. It didn't matter what dropped for you, the only thing you were playing for was so you could buy what you wanted, with in-game currency, from the "store." Later, they introduced the "real money" store and that was just friggin ridiculous...

But, now, with all that gone? It's a darn good game. I play it regularly with a friend of mine. (Had to buy an XBox and copy of it, but at least we have a lot of fun several times a week, so it's worth it. Don't even play the PC version anymore.)

It's worth playing and it's a good game. We've been having a blast with the latest "Season", which will end Oct 20. "Seasonal" play, a period of 90 days or so, let's you create a brand new character from scratch, if you want, with no frills and then see how far you can get, with special rewards, gear, and a lot of vanity items up for grabs. Anyway, if you like Diablo and/or like "action RPG" it's a great game, much, much better than it was on release.

When they realized their error, they truly did "fix" it and, considering the content polishing and community involvement they've done, they've "apologized" for it.

[pjknibbs]

I've never played a game with Loot boxes, because I never would, so I don't actually know much about how often you get good stuff from one, other than apparently not often unless you pay.

I don't think paying for the lootbox changes the chances of getting anything good from it--that would be the scummiest of scummy moves, so it'll probably be a few months before even EA decides to give it a go. Buying more lootboxes increases your chances of getting something good simply because you're getting more boxes, though.

[felter]

Buying more lottery tickets raises your chance of winning something, but it doesn't mean that something is going to be worth a large amount. This is where the gambling comes in on the loot boxes.