I hope that everyone who so roundly castigated @BillMurphy in his article last week, appreciate and understand that our staff has a diverse set of opinions and we're not afraid or reluctant to present both sides of the issue.
So much for the tin foil hat supposition that we're paid by developers, wouldn't you say?
IMO, Bill was out of line. He got called out for it too. As for the rest of your post, did you really need to say it? It sounds contrived if you ask me.
Why is someone voicing their opinion out of line? Especially because they did not do it in a way other than professional?
He expressed his opinion that I should not express my opinion on valid, specific issues that do not violate the ROC.
I hope that everyone who so roundly castigated @BillMurphy in his article last week, appreciate and understand that our staff has a diverse set of opinions and we're not afraid or reluctant to present both sides of the issue.
So much for the tin foil hat supposition that we're paid by developers, wouldn't you say?
IMO, Bill was out of line. He got called out for it too. As for the rest of your post, did you really need to say it? It sounds contrived if you ask me.
Why is someone voicing their opinion out of line? Especially because they did not do it in a way other than professional?
He expressed his opinion that I should not be able to express my opinion on issues that he deems "off limits".
Why is that NOT out of line?
Sure they own the board, and have the final rights, but Dam, how much can you bite the hand that feeds?
I think that's just a bit too sensitive.
I took the whole thing to be "these are things that players complain about that really aren't worth complaining about" over "don't express yourself when it comes to these things'.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I hope that everyone who so roundly castigated @BillMurphy in his article last week, appreciate and understand that our staff has a diverse set of opinions and we're not afraid or reluctant to present both sides of the issue.
So much for the tin foil hat supposition that we're paid by developers, wouldn't you say?
IMO, Bill was out of line. He got called out for it too. As for the rest of your post, did you really need to say it? It sounds contrived if you ask me.
Why is someone voicing their opinion out of line? Especially because they did not do it in a way other than professional?
He expressed his opinion that I should not be able to express my opinion on issues that he deems "off limits".
Why is that NOT out of line?
Sure they own the board, and have the final rights, but Dam, how much can you bite the hand that feeds?
I think that's just a bit too sensitive.
I took the whole thing to be "these are things that players complain about that really aren't worth complaining about" over "don't express yourself when it comes to these things'.
And who decides what is "worth complaining about"? If this is what players are complaining about over and over, and yet, the issue remains largely unaddressed, and continues to progress in a direction these same players are saying they don't want, you think these players should just shut up already?
I mean, if that's what this site officially wants, then well................OK.
I dont necessarily hate lootboxes, I hate when lootboxes replace loot and all you get is crap and lootboxes. I also hate when you are constantly getting lootbox messages on the screen like in STO. Please dont rub my face in the fact I opened 100 boxes and didnt get a ship while Bob opened one and got the coolest ship in the game.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
I hope that everyone who so roundly castigated @BillMurphy in his article last week, appreciate and understand that our staff has a diverse set of opinions and we're not afraid or reluctant to present both sides of the issue.
So much for the tin foil hat supposition that we're paid by developers, wouldn't you say?
Well it is a generalized topic that is not pointing fingers at any one developer.When a named developer is in question it is always praise.None the less not really the topic at hand and we never know the entire circumstance.Example might be a slow day on dev money so need to talk about something as well once in a blue moon does not a common trend make.
Most importantly is that what someone says one day does not mean the opinion of feelings are held for the rest of eternity.This site ALWAYS has the ability to change public opinion and perceptiveness on a daily basis.
Anyhow...On the topic at hand,one very important is missed.
Loot boxes are quite fine IF and ONLY if,there is no cash shop in the game.Under that circumstance,the developer can be trusted to be doing it for the right reasons and keeping it fair in their opinion.
However it is obvious that once a cash shop is introduced it is NEVER a good idea and will always be a win win for the developer and a lose lose for players.The phrase ALWAYS used with loot boxes is "chance to win".The TRUTH is you have a bigger chance to LOSE than to win,but in marketing you stick with positive terms because you are in the business of selling and making money.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Don't buy them. Problem solved. It seems an awful lot of people have problems with how other people spend their money. If people wanna gamble a bit, let them.
The problem is that it ruins the monetization for the rest of us. I wouldn't mind it half as bad if these were like true gachas in that if you buy a loot box containing a costume, you'd get a costume. It might not be the costume you want but at least it's a costume.
But no, the way it works now is that you have a 1% or less chance to get any costume and the rest is full of exp gain scrolls or other worthless junk. And the more we let people "just gamble a bit" the more companies are going to start taking advantage of that and the less we see options to buy things honestly and outright.
Don't buy them. Problem solved. It seems an awful lot of people have problems with how other people spend their money. If people wanna gamble a bit, let them.
I generally don't have an issue with how other people spend their money; what I do have a problem with is how the company behind the game makes its money.
The specific problem with these sorts of lockboxes is that they tend to become a major part of the company's revenue stream, and they do so for a relatively minimal development cost. This means that the game itself (and any upgrades, expansions, or bug fixes to that game) are no longer the primary money maker. This means that once a successful transition to lockboxes has been made, the company has little incentive or motivation to maintain the quality of the game itself, and so the game is often neglected and development drastically reduced in favor of the better return on investment of lockboxes.
So no, simply not buying these does not solve the problem, unless you can get everyone to stop buying them. As long as even a small percentage of a game's population is willing to throw significant amounts of money at these sorts of things, the company will only be answerable to that small group rather than their player base as a whole. And the game quality will suffer because as long as that small group keeps getting their lockbox fix and stays happy, the company will keep bringing in revenue in exchange for minimal effort.
You know we all do this whining about loot boxes but has anyone ever tried reporting these games for having online gambling included in their game? I mean it stands to reason they'd be forced to remove the lootboxes if the government were actually made aware that it exists and is a problem.
Fact of the matter is it's unregulated online gambling in which players have no way of determining their odds or ever have a chance of winning anything. Your lootboxes never have to pay out. That's why online gambling was outlawed in the first place.
No matter how the games word it, no matter what terms they make you agree to to log in, and no matter what disclaimer they add they are still all breaking the law. I think it's as simple as no one has ever bothered to report them so they've been getting away with it for years.
When money is exchanged for this type of gambling it becomes illegal. They're just playing off a twist on words by calling the games "free" and making law enforcement think you're not paying for the boxes.
Comments
If the game isn't good enough to survive without loot boxes, it's simply not good enough.
Why is that NOT out of line?
I took the whole thing to be "these are things that players complain about that really aren't worth complaining about" over "don't express yourself when it comes to these things'.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
If this is what players are complaining about over and over, and yet, the issue remains largely unaddressed, and continues to progress in a direction these same players are saying they don't want, you think these players should just shut up already?
I mean, if that's what this site officially wants, then well................OK.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Well it is a generalized topic that is not pointing fingers at any one developer.When a named developer is in question it is always praise.None the less not really the topic at hand and we never know the entire circumstance.Example might be a slow day on dev money so need to talk about something as well once in a blue moon does not a common trend make.
Most importantly is that what someone says one day does not mean the opinion of feelings are held for the rest of eternity.This site ALWAYS has the ability to change public opinion and perceptiveness on a daily basis.
Anyhow...On the topic at hand,one very important is missed.
Loot boxes are quite fine IF and ONLY if,there is no cash shop in the game.Under that circumstance,the developer can be trusted to be doing it for the right reasons and keeping it fair in their opinion.
However it is obvious that once a cash shop is introduced it is NEVER a good idea and will always be a win win for the developer and a lose lose for players.The phrase ALWAYS used with loot boxes is "chance to win".The TRUTH is you have a bigger chance to LOSE than to win,but in marketing you stick with positive terms because you are in the business of selling and making money.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
The problem is that it ruins the monetization for the rest of us. I wouldn't mind it half as bad if these were like true gachas in that if you buy a loot box containing a costume, you'd get a costume. It might not be the costume you want but at least it's a costume.
But no, the way it works now is that you have a 1% or less chance to get any costume and the rest is full of exp gain scrolls or other worthless junk. And the more we let people "just gamble a bit" the more companies are going to start taking advantage of that and the less we see options to buy things honestly and outright.
I generally don't have an issue with how other people spend their money; what I do have a problem with is how the company behind the game makes its money.
The specific problem with these sorts of lockboxes is that they tend to become a major part of the company's revenue stream, and they do so for a relatively minimal development cost. This means that the game itself (and any upgrades, expansions, or bug fixes to that game) are no longer the primary money maker. This means that once a successful transition to lockboxes has been made, the company has little incentive or motivation to maintain the quality of the game itself, and so the game is often neglected and development drastically reduced in favor of the better return on investment of lockboxes.
So no, simply not buying these does not solve the problem, unless you can get everyone to stop buying them. As long as even a small percentage of a game's population is willing to throw significant amounts of money at these sorts of things, the company will only be answerable to that small group rather than their player base as a whole. And the game quality will suffer because as long as that small group keeps getting their lockbox fix and stays happy, the company will keep bringing in revenue in exchange for minimal effort.
Fact of the matter is it's unregulated online gambling in which players have no way of determining their odds or ever have a chance of winning anything. Your lootboxes never have to pay out. That's why online gambling was outlawed in the first place.
No matter how the games word it, no matter what terms they make you agree to to log in, and no matter what disclaimer they add they are still all breaking the law. I think it's as simple as no one has ever bothered to report them so they've been getting away with it for years.
When money is exchanged for this type of gambling it becomes illegal. They're just playing off a twist on words by calling the games "free" and making law enforcement think you're not paying for the boxes.