This Game is a Star Wars Themed Online Casino

mavrocket said:
You can buy boxes (once they turn it back on), but you don't have too. You get a daily login crate and earn them through playing otherwise.

So it's not that different, they just added in the pay shortcut for the silly rich kids.
Click to expand...

No. They built the progression system around loot crates. They didn't just add them in.
 
mbelue said:
Either higher prices-per-game or less content.

When I say "gut the industry" I'm referring to the thousands of people employed by the ridiculous budget these AAA publishers outlay. I could care less about the corporations like EA and Zenimax.

Crunch time is already bad enough for some of these folks. New budget constraints could negativity affect the way these people are treated.
Click to expand...

Edited: I'm not so much disagreeing with you as following a train of though that starts with you, and running off on my own tangent.

Except that I don't really need to hear Gary Oldman do the Admiral thing in Star Citizen. It's not going to make or break the game for me, someone else can do it just fine, someone who doesn't draw such a huge paycheck and ramp up the studio's costs until they feel they must charge more and do sleezy shit for their game to make the money back along with their profits. I'm just saying, there is a lot that some developers do that add a lot of costs to a game and no real value as far as the customer is concerned.

That being said. I think the world is going crazy over nothing here. I here the bitching about loot boxes and the time to unlock characters and I am thinking really? No one ever noticed Lineage II, World of Tanks and it's sisters, Warplanes and Warships, MechWarrior Online, and the dozens of others?

40 hours to grind out a character, whoopie doop, that's nothing compared to working for a couple of months to earn a tier ten tank in World of Tanks, or to gather the materials to make a Class B Bow in Lineage II, or to grind a toon in Lineage II to level 60 which took me over a year. These whining wankers need to get real. And this isn't gambling unless you can get money back. As long as what you get is either part of the entertainment or stays within the game world, it's not gambling. It's bullshit.
 
Derangel said:
Yes and no. Loot boxes are designed to hit the same addiction triggers as gambling does. Buying something here and there, that's personal responsibility, being psychologically manipulated into getting addicted is not quite the same. Publishers pay psychologists to help design these systems in order to make sure to trigger that response in the highest amount of people they can. And it's not just loot boxes that are designed to trigger addiction, all forms of microtransactions are designed that way, from mobile phones to stuff like GTA Online. Pretty much every single game released with some form of recurrent paying model is designed to psychologically manipulate the player into spending more and more money. It doesn't happen to everyone, of course, but it happens to enough that it makes billions of dollars for the game industry every year.
Click to expand...

Bingo. MMO's have long used psychology specialists to help with the grind in their games, dating back for ages. They do everything they can to make the game addictive and entice you to keep playing or spend a "bit more" on some bonuses.

The game companies know exactly what they are doing, and how sneaky as fuck it is. ;)
 
kring said:
But it's not paying to Level up or paying to win, you can pay if you want.. but you don't have to and it's still the same great $60 game.

And for years it was about make progression so it lasts and I get a lot of time out of my game... that's what everyone begged for when AAA games were coming in at 6 hours of content..... so now there's a year of content and people are complaining? the progression system is to long and hard.... you want instant gratification or ability to "Pay"... making you a hypocrite.

Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE who is up bent out of shape about this are hypocrites, chronic cheaters, pay-2-win supporters, band-wagon riders and ambulance chassing supporters.


99.95% of all gamers are not the top level... most of us who have gaming history have hours a week, some hours a day... but the reality is we can't compete with those <1%'s who game for 20 hours a day. and we can't maintain that pace... WoW is the ultimate manifestation of it... and it's praised.. why is SWBF2 taking the heat for WoW's establishing the standard....the dedicated hardcore gamer dominate. I and all of you have to accept that. their hard effort and long hours, get them something to be proud of that they earned... higher levels, loot, rare items, dominance in the game..etc...

WHY IS THAT BAD?

SWBF2 came out 4 days ago - I put a lot of hours in and am like level 16... there are people at level 27, 35, 42 that I've seen out there fully loaded with all the gear... I still like and enjoy the game, and kill them just as much with my non-upgraded gun.


Sorry but I'm calling all of you out - You are hypocrites and ill informed.... so enjoy the ride on this band-waggon, it's going straight to the outhouse for lunch... and thank you for dragging in politics and wasting our valuable tax dollars while you ride your crap-house ride.
Click to expand...

I only have one question ..... it's a simple question and please don't read anything into it. I'm just hoping I'll get a straight forward answer and I swear I won't be an asshole whether you play it or not.

You own and play this game right?
 
This business model targets “whales”. There are loads of people on mobile games who think nothing about dropping a hundred dollars on card packs or whatever else gives a competitive edge over others for weekend. This top few percent of users generates almost all the profit for the game company.
 
mbelue said:
Glad someone in government is ready to start taking about this.

Maybe if enough get talking AAA publishers won't like the negative attention and make changes.

I just hope it's handled delicately enough to not gut the industry.

Good luck to us all and may The Internet come out on top.
Click to expand...

Given our governments propensity for siding with corporations (muh' economy), the likely outcome will be a redrafting the definition of "gambling" so that these games don't fall into it.


Truthfully, the game developers will likely find a loophole around the definition anyway. They use psychology (started with Mobile) to drive behavior of the user.

Gambling needs consideration, chance, and prize. Game developers are trying to fall into the "sweepstakes" definition.

With most sweepstakes, you can be entered in two ways - by buying a product with automatic enrollment or by mailing a form (entered free of charge). SCOTUS ruled long ago that this doesn't facilitate consideration.

Since you can play the game and get loot boxes by playing (no purchase necessary for the chance to win the prize), they're trying to use this definition.
 
Derangel said:
Yes and no. Loot boxes are designed to hit the same addiction triggers as gambling does. Buying something here and there, that's personal responsibility, being psychologically manipulated into getting addicted is not quite the same. Publishers pay psychologists to help design these systems in order to make sure to trigger that response in the highest amount of people they can. And it's not just loot boxes that are designed to trigger addiction, all forms of microtransactions are designed that way, from mobile phones to stuff like GTA Online. Pretty much every single game released with some form of recurrent paying model is designed to psychologically manipulate the player into spending more and more money. It doesn't happen to everyone, of course, but it happens to enough that it makes billions of dollars for the game industry every year.
Click to expand...

And what is wrong with it?

Look, as long as you are playing a server based game that is a service oriented product, then if you are playing, they need to be collecting money. Of course they want you to keep playing their game, but if it weren't their game you'd be doing what? Playing someone else's game. You play, you pay, you pay up front, or pay every month, or pay for "premium time", or pay for items, or pay for loot boxes for items.

What you aren't doing is paying for a chance to make more money back, that would be gambling.

Now you show me a game where you pay microtransactions and it's a single player game with no server support involved and then I see a roster in the henhouse. Short of that, I'm good with it.
 
lcpiper said:
And what is wrong with it?

Look, as long as you are playing a server based game that is a service oriented product, then if you are playing, they need to be collecting money. Of course they want you to keep playing their game, but if it weren't their game you'd be doing what? Playing someone else's game. You play, you pay, you pay up front, or pay every month, or pay for "premium time", or pay for items, or pay for loot boxes for items.

What you aren't doing is paying for a chance to make more money back, that would be gambling.

Now you show me a game where you pay microtransactions and it's a single player game with no server support involved and then I see a roster in the henhouse. Short of that, I'm good with it.
Click to expand...

A monetary prize is not a requirement of gambling. It never has been. Go look up the legal definition of gambling.

And don't give me that bullshit about them needing MT and loot boxes to support servers. Take-Two does not need A BILLION GOD DAMN DOLLARS in profit to support servers. MTs have NOTHING to do with game cost. Absolutely nothing. It is 100% about profit.
 
I REALLY hate all the in game purchasing. Hate it enough that I cancelled my order for Battlefront II. However as some have mentioned. This is in to what is or should be considered parental responsibility territory. To call it gambling is stretching it so far out of proportion it's scary. Instead of policing one's own home and children the cry is for government to do it. Then people wonder why the government is messing around with net neutrality and doing things it has no business doing.
 
Gigus Fire said:
You know what would make these "predatory practices" go away? If people stopped buying into them and refused to play. That is literally the only way for this shit to stop.
Click to expand...


You are absolutely dead wrong. You cannot provide this service to the public and expect children and young teens, irresponsible people in general not to be tempted, overwhelmed and ultimately taken advantage of. Look, if there wasn't a 'problem' then none of this would be happening right now. It's all over the news! It's going nuclear as we speak. You are literally going against the greater good here. I want as less Government in my day to day life as the next person. But this is very dangerous and unstable ground. It really does take your breath away to think this is the future of gaming? No way can we let this happen. There is no way any logical level headed person can be okay with this. Not when they can achieve the same results using different mechanics that doesn't take advantage of people.

"just one more scratch off ticket, just one more .... ok, I'll buy $10 more dollars worth, just one more, I'm going to win anytime now, damn! Ok just a few more, just one more and I know I will win! .... Fuck, ok, another $20 dollars, I know I will win this time ............ "

You don't fix problems in the world, at home or inside video games by ignoring them and wishing them away. That never ever works. The vulnerable people that these predatory systems are designed for are incapable of what you suggest.

You think the fat kid is going to stop eating the Chocolate Cake because you removed it from the kitchen counter and put it in the refrigerator? You really think that would fix the problem? Hell no it wouldn't! You fix the problem by removing it.
 
Last edited:
Jim Kim said:
Without that sweet filthy lucre from lootboxes AAA game prices will now be $120 to appease Wall Street.
Click to expand...

Who do you think owns EA? Surprise, surprise, the owners are primarily Wall Street. http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-overview.html?t=EA
Who says they create nothing? :troll:

Anyway, I agree with personal responsibility, but as I've stated previously, my nephew was one of those idiot kids who racked up a several thousand dollar bill on in game purchases. Why my sister gave him her credit card, I'll never know. But at the same time, I've come to realize that there needs to be a base level of how far personal responsibility can go. She knows nothing about computers or video games. In her mind, consoles are like the NES, and she can't fathom anything different. And she's never going to learn better, because they're not important to her. Her children are the ones who know how to use them.

And this is where it differs from something like Pokémon or MTG cards. She knows nothing about those either, but she can control the credit card, because shopping at a physical store is a known experience. Unlike in game purchases, she understands that. And to add onto that, if a 10 year old child came into a store alone and threw down a credit card, the store clerk is probably not going to let that child purchase an item.

Along with trying to make loot boxes psychologically addicting, I do feel that they're also trying to exploit the ignorance of the parents.
 
Dan_D said:
I don't think DLC is a problem by itself. You can't expect game expansions to be released without monetary gains to incentivize companies like EA to produce them. I don't agree with paid DLC for multiplayer games as it does fracture the player base. However, single player DLC is an add on for a game you wouldn't ordinarily get and it's totally optional. I'm fine with that. DLC doesn't "ruin gaming" anymore than traditional expansion packs for games did. Microtransactions are another thing entirely. If it's cosmetic shit, then I don't care. I think many of us can agree that people should just vote with their wallets there. The biggest problem is gambling, which frankly I'm surprised hasn't become a bigger topic for law makers before now. I guess that's Star Wars' mass market appeal for you.
Click to expand...

There are some games that I own with no DLC. I couldn't play multiplayer because the majority of players were on the DLC maps. No one was playing on the vanilla version anymore, and I was left behind. Same game, just lacking the DLC.

Single player? Some DLC is worth it. It greatly expands the game. Some DLC can make it almost like a new game, while others are overpaid BS with nothing more than a few extra levels and guns.

Make it worth it, and it's fine. Multiplayer DLC? Nah.
 
Jumpy-B-L said:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-brain-gets-addicted-to-gambling/

The brain is a helluva thing. Video game publishers are targeting the same pleasure centers and they KNOW it.
Click to expand...

Cool, so you want the government to step in and solve this for you? The same government that runs lotteries and casinos around the country? You know, because we have now clearly established that loot boxes in a video game are clearly on the same level of danger to society as heroin.
 
HockeyJon said:
Cool, so you want the government to step in and solve this for you? The same government that runs lotteries and casinos around the country? You know, because we have now clearly established that loot boxes in a video game are clearly on the same level of danger to society as heroin.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. I want customers like you to give a fuck. Just the threat of regulation, in addition to public outrage over a business model/behavior can be enough. Being all 'not my problem, it's just the market being the market', isn't helpful. The marketplace is not some ethereal being that just exists and has always existed. Forever and ever, amen. It is a human invention and can be manipulated to benefit few (as it is now) or manipulated to benefit society.
 
Gigus Fire said:
What you're saying doesn't make any sense.
No one is saying that the kid in the story should have personal responsibility. It was the parent's fault for handing a phone to a kid to be a babysitter while the phone had direct access to his credit card. That's where the personal responsibility comes into play. It would be the same as if a parent handed a loaded gun to a kid. It's an awful idea and you should just never do it. The consequences for both are awful.

You do not need the government to determine if loot boxes should be in a game or not. The market should do that. The parents on the other hand should make a decision to buy these games or not. That's where personal responsibility comes into play. If you buy these shit games for your kids, you'd better know about what the game is about. You'd better know that the game encourages the kid to buy extra crap. No one forces you to buy these games.

You know what would make these "predatory practices" go away? If people stopped buying into them and refused to play. That is literally the only way for this shit to stop.
Click to expand...

Precisely.
 
SixFootDuo said:
You are absolutely dead wrong. You cannot provide this service to the public and expect children and young teens, irresponsible people in general not to be tempted, overwhelmed and ultimately taken advantage of. Look, if there wasn't a 'problem' then none of this would be happening right now. It's all over the news! It's going nuclear as we speak. You are literally going against the greater good here. I want as less Government in my day to day life as the next person. But this is very dangerous and unstable ground. It really does take your breath away to think this is the future of gaming? No way can we let this happen. There is no way any logical level headed person can be okay with this. Not when they can achieve the same results using different mechanics that doesn't take advantage of people.

"just one more scratch off ticket, just one more .... ok, I'll buy $10 more dollars worth, just one more, I'm going to win anytime now, damn! Ok just a few more, just one more and I know I will win! .... Fuck, ok, another $20 dollars, I know I will win this time ............ "

You don't fix problems in the world, at home or inside video games by ignoring them and wishing them away. That never ever works. The vulnerable people that these predatory systems are designed for are incapable of what you suggest.

You think the fat kid is going to stop eating the Chocolate Cake because you removed it from the kitchen counter and put it in the refrigerator? You really think that would fix the problem? Hell no it wouldn't! You fix the problem by removing it.
Click to expand...
Lol.
young teens and children DO NOT HAVE PURCHASING POWER. Full stop. If parents are enabling this behavior by giving them their credit cards, then the parents are at fault.

Everything after that is nonsense. Your entire premise is wrong.

There are so many other predatory business schemes that are in existence that overshadow this whole "massive" problem of loot boxes. Ever buy a car from a car dealership? Where's the crusade to eliminate that experience?
 
Ur_Mom said:
There are some games that I own with no DLC. I couldn't play multiplayer because the majority of players were on the DLC maps. No one was playing on the vanilla version anymore, and I was left behind. Same game, just lacking the DLC.

Single player? Some DLC is worth it. It greatly expands the game. Some DLC can make it almost like a new game, while others are overpaid BS with nothing more than a few extra levels and guns.

Make it worth it, and it's fine. Multiplayer DLC? Nah.
Click to expand...

DLC in MP focused games is a challenge. Though, personally I think that maps should always be free and never be DLC. Leave DLC to things that are actually optional to the experience. Or do cosmetic only MTs if they don't want to do DLC but want to justify further content development.
 
Aireoth said:
It is not dumb, you have no idea what your talking about. These systems are designed to take advantage of the same reward mechanisms as gambling, companies like EA hire specialists to insure their games are as addictive as possible, they study the amount of reward required to create a cycle of repeat customers, this is absolutely gambling, its targeting children, and it stinks.
Click to expand...
Substantiation please. Proof that EA has hired "specialists" to prey on childeren.
 
Gigus Fire said:
Lol.
young teens and children DO NOT HAVE PURCHASING POWER. Full stop. If parents are enabling this behavior by giving them their credit cards, then the parents are at fault.

Everything after that is nonsense. Your entire premise is wrong.

There are so many other predatory business schemes that are in existence that overshadow this whole "massive" problem of loot boxes. Ever buy a car from a car dealership? Where's the crusade to eliminate that experience?
Click to expand...

One of the biggest problems with a lot of that is simply that parents are poorly informed. Outside of Nintendo, no one does a good job of informing parents about safety features on game systems. Its all vague nonsense and kids are usually the ones more capable of setting the systems up. Smart phones too, neither Apple nor any major brand of Android does a good job guiding someone through child settings. The only device I can think of off hand that actually does a good job is Amazon's Kindle, the one specifically designed for children to use. Most people have no bloody clue about technology, they're not even aware that their kids can spend that kind of money on games.

I'm unsure if I think governments should butt in here or not, but I think the pressure is a good thing. All this pressure might convince the industry to self-regulate and heavily scale back on certain tactics, including pay-2-win loot boxes schemes. The ESRB has a policy where anything they deem as gambling is automatically AO, but since the ESRB is directly funded by the very publishers they rate games for it is currently in their best interests to declare them as "safe". If this pressure causes publishers to panic that could change.
 
The funniest thing to me, is I can only imagine they have an untapped market, if they didn't use loot boxes on a $60 game. Why not just sell the stuff from the loot boxes as dlc, worked pretty good before... Lol.
 
They want to increase demand from younger demographics. They want to generate sales. I don't see how this is some sort of predatory practice. Nothing in that article proves their goal is to turn kids into gambling addicts with the plastic they pull out of mom's purse.

Derangel said:
http://www.apa.org/gradpsych/2012/01/hot-careers.aspx And that was back in 2012, before the whole MT craze took off. Hiring has definitely gone up since then.
Click to expand...
 
Riptide_NVN said:
They want to increase demand from younger demographics. They want to generate sales. I don't see how this is some sort of predatory practice. Nothing in that article proves their goal is to turn kids into gambling addicts with the plastic they pull out of mom's purse.
Click to expand...

Studios don't specifically target kids, that would be stupid. What these tactics do is target the same addiction triggers that casinos use, specifically slot machines. I believe that slots are, by far, the most addictive form of gambling. Or, at least, the one most likely to trigger addiction impulses. Make no mistake, casinos are predatory. All of their tactics are predatory. Publishers want people to get addicted. They don't care how young or how old, as long as they keep spending money. Loot boxes use the same tricks as slot machines and can create the same "high" when you get a good outcome. Since loot boxes are not regulated like casinos, a company can easily change drop rates on the fly, without informing anyone, and tweak them to cater to specific users.

For example: Say some big streamer with millions of viewers is streaming the game. They could tweak the streamer's drop rate to ensure they get better pulls, making the streamer excited for what they got and also giving the audience the impression that those drops are more likely. This would encourage the streamer's viewers to play the game and purchase loot boxes. They can also do the opposite. If they see someone buying a lot of boxes they can tweak their drop rate to give them a lower chance of getting a good pull and further encouraging them to spend more because they're already in for a lot. There is no way for any user to know this or prevent it. Casinos not only have to inform the gambling commission of the odds on slot machines but they also have to inform anyone playing on a slot when they change the pay-out values. The gambling commission makes this information publicly available.

This is one of the big things separates that form of gambling for, say, trading card games. TCG companies list the odds of getting rare cards in packs and will also publish and average number of rare, ultra rare, etc cards per box and per crate. Once they make this information known they stick with it. People buying packs, boxes, or crates can have an idea of how likely they are to get cards they're after because this information is readily available.
 
I don't care for the loot box system. I don't buy them. I wouldn't buy them even if I could use actual money on them. If they would take it out of the game OK fine.

I also don't think it's a big deal and I'm not bent over it. The game is fun enough on it's own to be worth the cost of the purchase.
 
Derangel said:
Studios don't specifically target kids, that would be stupid. What these tactics do is target the same addiction triggers that casinos use, specifically slot machines. I believe that slots are, by far, the most addictive form of gambling. Or, at least, the one most likely to trigger addiction impulses. Make no mistake, casinos are predatory. All of their tactics are predatory. Publishers want people to get addicted. They don't care how young or how old, as long as they keep spending money. Loot boxes use the same tricks as slot machines and can create the same "high" when you get a good outcome. Since loot boxes are not regulated like casinos, a company can easily change drop rates on the fly, without informing anyone, and tweak them to cater to specific users.

For example: Say some big streamer with millions of viewers is streaming the game. They could tweak the streamer's drop rate to ensure they get better pulls, making the streamer excited for what they got and also giving the audience the impression that those drops are more likely. This would encourage the streamer's viewers to play the game and purchase loot boxes. They can also do the opposite. If they see someone buying a lot of boxes they can tweak their drop rate to give them a lower chance of getting a good pull and further encouraging them to spend more because they're already in for a lot. There is no way for any user to know this or prevent it. Casinos not only have to inform the gambling commission of the odds on slot machines but they also have to inform anyone playing on a slot when they change the pay-out values. The gambling commission makes this information publicly available.

This is one of the big things separates that form of gambling for, say, trading card games. TCG companies list the odds of getting rare cards in packs and will also publish and average number of rare, ultra rare, etc cards per box and per crate. Once they make this information known they stick with it. People buying packs, boxes, or crates can have an idea of how likely they are to get cards they're after because this information is readily available.
Click to expand...

I agree; My big gripe with loot boxes is not them existing but the fact that they don't have to publish drop rates. If I go to Vegas I know exactly how much I'm getting fucked with each game at least, and at least they give me free drinks.

Which brings up my money making idea that I don't quite understand why it hasn't happened yet - If Vegas/Casinos were smart they'd start building arcades in their casinos and get with publishers like EA to develop AAA quality games that pay out real cash instead of worthless digital items.
 
Riptide_NVN said:
I don't care for the loot box system. I don't buy them. I wouldn't buy them even if I could use actual money on them. If they would take it out of the game OK fine.

I also don't think it's a big deal and I'm not bent over it. The game is fun enough on it's own to be worth the cost of the purchase.
Click to expand...

You still engage with the system if you play a game that requires the use of them. Giving free loot boxes is akin to a drug dealer giving you the first hit for free. It can still trigger that addition impulse. It doesn't happen to everyone, some people are more suspectible to addiction than others, but the goal isn't to make everyone spend money. The goal is to hook the highest number possible and turn them from "players into payers". And that disgusting line comes directly from a marketing pitch for a company that helps publishers design recurrent spending techniques.
 
Am I supposed to feel guilty for playing a game I paid $60 for because some minority of players have a predisposition towards a gambling problem?

Are you serious?
 
Riptide_NVN said:
Am I supposed to feel guilty for playing a game I paid $60 for because some minority of players have a predisposition towards a gambling problem?

Are you serious?
Click to expand...

No, not at all. I presume you're an adult. You're welcome to spend money however you like and not feel guilty about it. I'm just explaining the system and how its used and the problems with it.
 
Mchart said:
Which brings up my money making idea that I don't quite understand why it hasn't happened yet - If Vegas/Casinos were smart they'd start building arcades in their casinos and get with publishers like EA to develop AAA quality games that pay out real cash instead of worthless digital items.
Click to expand...

As awesome as this sounds do casinos really want any game where players could win on skill?
 
Derangel said:
No, not at all. I presume you're an adult. You're welcome to spend money however you like and not feel guilty about it. I'm just explaining the system and how its used and the problems with it.
Click to expand...
I would love free drinks casino style while I play. I'm not sure it would help my score however.

FWIW if the game, any game, isn't good enough to be fun on it's own without purchasing loot crates then it is a bad game IMO. Not many people would buy if that were the case.
 
mbelue said:
As awesome as this sounds do casinos really want any game where players could win on skill?
Click to expand...

All the Casino does is make it available and distribute funds that people put in. Some will win and some will loose. Ultimately they can fix it so people loose more then they will win, but still have a marginal chance of defying the odds.

Look at World of Warships / Tanks. My serious complaint with those games is that they target a 46% W/L ratio for players, and there are all sorts of behind the scenes values that then get changed in order to make those above 46% loose more and those under win more. Ultimately though it's targeting 46% so notionally the house is winning in this example. (Infuriating when you just want to play the game for fun and are above average in skill. This is where you get match after match of being paired with absolute retards, and RNG on shots so your rounds don't even go where you point them at.)

They can easily rig the game using the way Wargaming.net does it so the Casino is ultimately bringing money in. Some players will actually draw money in and be up top - But on average more people will be loosing rather then winning. The system is designed so they win just often enough to make them keep coming back though, but there is still a decent level of skill factor along with luck that also makes it fun to play. Further, this would draw a whole new crowd back into the Casinos and potentially get more money into the slots, etc. Finally you have the progression/profile aspects that would also keep people coming back. You could allow people to progress in these games faster while playing in a Casino and also use their same normal profiles.

If I were a Casino executive i'd make this idea happen, and I really can't figure out why they haven't yet. If a Casino exec reads this comment and decides to make it happen i'll be satisfied with $1000 casino cash and a week in Vegas for my idea.

Wargaming.net games + a big Casino group like Caesar's = A shitload of new folks to come to the Casino for a completely different type of gambling/gaming experience. There are -many- people who shy away from the Casino's because they don't want to learn or aren't skilled enough to play games like poker decently and know the slot machines are just a waste of money. This idea would significantly expand the market.
 
Last edited:
I think part of the problem is that AAA publishers are trying to recoup costs for things that they shouldnt be spending on. I find it crazy that advertising for a AAA game can cost more that the development of a AAA game. Most people who are going to buy your game are roughly paying attention to its development. You dont need to splay it out in every form of advertising as much as you do
 
And why this will only be getting worse:

Should You Stuff Your Stocking With Video Game Stocks?

Unleashing Recurring Revenues
One of the reasons Spencer remains bullish is that the gaming industry has found a way to keep money coming in, even when no new games are coming out. In the 1990s (when everyone wanted to own a Super Mario game), companies made money off new consoles and cartridge sales. Granted, Nintendo and others brought in a lot of cash with this approach. But for these businesses to succeed, people had to spend $200 on a machine and then another $60 on a game.

Today, most games come with in-game downloads, whereby people can buy additional levels, tools, and other items to enhance their video game experience. And these add-on sales have allowed companies to generate additional revenues off a single game.

"It used to be that there was no opportunity to keep people engaged in a particular game beyond a certain point," says Spencer. "Many of these franchises have more staying power."

Increasing revenues off already existing games is also a boon to margins, adds George Cipolloni, a portfolio manager at Chartwell Investment Partners and manager of the Silver-rated
premIcon.gif
Berwyn Income (BERIX).

"If you're buying extra ammo or weapons, that's really additive to the bottom line," he says. "It's pure margin for these companies, and we have seen margins and free cash exploding as a result."
Click to expand...
 
u could buy lootcrates in games like battlefield for ages never bougth a single one. farmed out all the unlocks on my own that is part of the fun. ofc unlocking all weapons and attachements instantly will give u an edge over ppl with no unlocks, it would anyway. aslong as its not something u need to do to unlock something i dont care. it's kind of like league of legends, pushing 10 skins per champion or more, u can play it for free. but ive spent some cash on skins, fair enough. but yeah, u notice it over the years how they get better at milking ppl for money. its not like the old days u buy a game and u own it no microduddel or anything. if it was up to me gambling would be illegal anyway, mostly it's just a few very lucky that win. and for most part its just the ppl owning it profiting. and the rest pays for that. in reality this society need a do over and rework of how the mechanics of this society works. at this rate it wont happen in my life. there is no balance in this world, its like a scale from 1 to 10. where most is around 5 + and below. and numbers of ppl per number just decrease as it goes upward where all the gold is. society is not designed to be fair as it is, it is suposed to be unfair, that is it's design. it's prety much the society just getting more and more influence over the internet/gaming ++ it wasnt very mainstream before and u would get called a nerd for having a pc literally. now everyone of those fuckers sit with their nose in facebook prety much and instasnap ++ lol. and ive spent enough time with wow and blizzard games, they are not much better then EA. i will give EA credit on origin acces vault and discounts on their games because its the best free content i found on the internet. it's not just EA but mostly everyone.
 
Last edited:
Derangel said:
Studios don't specifically target kids, that would be stupid. What these tactics do is target the same addiction triggers that casinos use, specifically slot machines. I believe that slots are, by far, the most addictive form of gambling. Or, at least, the one most likely to trigger addiction impulses. Make no mistake, casinos are predatory. All of their tactics are predatory. Publishers want people to get addicted. They don't care how young or how old, as long as they keep spending money. Loot boxes use the same tricks as slot machines and can create the same "high" when you get a good outcome. Since loot boxes are not regulated like casinos, a company can easily change drop rates on the fly, without informing anyone, and tweak them to cater to specific users.

For example: Say some big streamer with millions of viewers is streaming the game. They could tweak the streamer's drop rate to ensure they get better pulls, making the streamer excited for what they got and also giving the audience the impression that those drops are more likely. This would encourage the streamer's viewers to play the game and purchase loot boxes. They can also do the opposite. If they see someone buying a lot of boxes they can tweak their drop rate to give them a lower chance of getting a good pull and further encouraging them to spend more because they're already in for a lot. There is no way for any user to know this or prevent it. Casinos not only have to inform the gambling commission of the odds on slot machines but they also have to inform anyone playing on a slot when they change the pay-out values. The gambling commission makes this information publicly available.

This is one of the big things separates that form of gambling for, say, trading card games. TCG companies list the odds of getting rare cards in packs and will also publish and average number of rare, ultra rare, etc cards per box and per crate. Once they make this information known they stick with it. People buying packs, boxes, or crates can have an idea of how likely they are to get cards they're after because this information is readily available.
Click to expand...
Ugh, hate it but you're too right. There's probably no going back on this now (from a general gaming industry perspective). EA's investors wouldn't let it even if EA magically decided to not be greedy. All that's left is to push the limits by talking 2 steps towards addiction manipulation, one step back to look good. Unfortunately the monster will probably keep growing until laws kick in. Otherwise, yeah, there's no going back.

Sad
 
lcpiper said:
I only have one question ..... it's a simple question and please don't read anything into it. I'm just hoping I'll get a straight forward answer and I swear I won't be an asshole whether you play it or not.

You own and play this game right?
Click to expand...
Yes, I purchased it, and have put in about 20ish hours since it went live.
 
I think this is also a way to monetize the rental market and used game market. It helps guarantee continual income no matter who owns the game. Still kind of evil. If the game was free Inwouldnt care about any of this but then loot crates would probably be required by all in some way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top