Loot boxes and Micro-transactions

super_furry

The biggest problem EA had with Battlefront is that they've been getting away with this kind of Lootbox system for years now and they clearly didn't expect this backlash.

FIFA's Ultimate Team mode has the exact same buy your way to better stats but the community there not only accepts it, they support it. Look at the Youtube communities built around just buying and opening card packs there.

Where EA really screwed up is in not realising that the audience for FIFA and the audience for a Starwars FPS are vastly different and one will accept being able to buy better stats and characters.

super_furry

super_furry wrote: »

The biggest problem EA had with Battlefront is that they've been getting away with this kind of Lootbox system for years now and they clearly didn't expect this backlash.

FIFA's Ultimate Team mode has the exact same buy your way to better stats but the community there not only accepts it, they support it. Look at the Youtube communities built around just buying and opening card packs there.

Where EA really screwed up is in not realising that the audience for FIFA and the audience for a Starwars FPS are vastly different and one will accept being able to buy better stats and characters.

Those have been built from YouTubers getting direct or indirect sponsorship from EA. Ultimately giving EA massive coverage and promotion.

super_furry

Either way it's an accepted and mostly endorsed part of FIFA - there's no-one from the FIFA community railing against it. They've successfully been able to extend that system to their other sports games too, so it's working for them there. They just didn't count on such a huge backlash when trying to bring it to other series.

Really FIFA's system is far more insidious than any other game's lootbox system because every year the money that's been thrown into the game becomes worthless to the people who buy cards because the new version of the game comes out.

Falthyron

super_furry wrote: »

Either way it's an accepted and mostly endorsed part of FIFA - there's no-one from the FIFA community railing against it. They've successfully been able to extend that system to their other sports games too, so it's working for them there. They just didn't count on such a huge backlash when trying to bring it to other series.

Really FIFA's system is far more insidious than any other game's lootbox system because every year the money that's been thrown into the game becomes worthless to the people who buy cards because the new version of the game comes out.

The only saving grace (and its very small) is that there is an internal market which facilitates trading. This, I believe, mitigates some of the condemnation because you can always sell your own cards to buy the ones you want instead of going down the lotto route. This is very similar to CS:GO where you have the Steam marketplace for buying/selling skins.

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh goody, they've removed loot crates from triple A titles. Way to go mick, I await the announcement from Take-Two that they are going to be removing loot crates from upcoming games.

Again, just because it hasn't changed everything, doesn't mean it hasn't changed something. And a step in the right direction is always one worth taking.

Penn

Mickeroo wrote: »

The good thing about Overwatch's loot crate implementation isn't the crates themselves, it's because it means actual worthwhile content that gets added to the game is entirely free. Halo 5 did the same thing and it was all the better for it. Would take that system over paying for a season pass any day.

Agreed. Plus in fairness to them, they do put a good bit of work into the new skins (as opposed to just palette swaps) and include new gameplay modes for events in order to sell the new content. But it's still all playable whether you spend money to buy the lootboxes or not.

I get what people are saying about how Overwatch's system helped lead to the popularity of using lootboxes to generate additional revenue, but it's unfair to blame someone for doing something right just because others took that idea and do it wrong.

gizmo

super_furry wrote: »

The biggest problem EA had with Battlefront is that they've been getting away with this kind of Lootbox system for years now and they clearly didn't expect this backlash.

FIFA's Ultimate Team mode has the exact same buy your way to better stats but the community there not only accepts it, they support it. Look at the Youtube communities built around just buying and opening card packs there.

Where EA really screwed up is in not realising that the audience for FIFA and the audience for a Starwars FPS are vastly different and one will accept being able to buy better stats and characters.

Isn't Ultimate Team essentially a near direct video game equivalent of the Premier League sticker collections though?

I've commented on this before and while I don't get it myself, I popped into the FIFA sub-forum here and I'm pretty sure you'd be lynched if you suggested they remove it .

super_furry

gizmo wrote: »

Isn't Ultimate Team essentially a near direct video game equivalent of the Premier League sticker collections though?

I've commented on this before and while I don't get it myself, I popped into the FIFA sub-forum here and I'm pretty sure you'd be lynched if you suggested they remove it .

That’s the way they paint it up, and they play off the childhood nostalgia of football stickers in their presentation of it, but at the heart is almost the exact same systm that has everyone up in arms about Battlefront. Cards that offer tangable and real gameplay advantages that can be bought with cash.

Like I say, it’s even dodgier because every time a new FIFA comes out – every 12 months – the money spent in the previous version is just gone.

gizmo

super_furry wrote: »

That’s the way they paint it up, and they play off the childhood nostalgia of football stickers in their presentation of it, but at the heart is almost the exact same systm that has everyone up in arms about Battlefront. Cards that offer tangable and real gameplay advantages that can be bought with cash.

Like I say, it’s even dodgier because every time a new FIFA comes out – every 12 months – the money spent in the previous version is just gone.

But by that logic does it not mean the complaints made against one could be leveled against the other, the latter point excluded?

super_furry

gizmo wrote: »

But by that logic does it not mean the complaints made against one could be leveled against the other, the latter point excluded?

Absolutely. My point is that EA’s biggest mistake was thinking that practices accepted in a game that’s aimed at the more casual end of the market would be easy to import to a game that would draw a more hardcore audience.

gizmo

super_furry wrote: »

Absolutely. My point is that EA’s biggest mistake was thinking that practices accepted in a game that’s aimed at the more casual end of the market would be easy to import to a game that would draw a more hardcore audience.

Ah yes, for sure then!

On a somewhat related note, either I'm getting old or this obsession with weapon skins is utter lunacy.

The 'Free' CS:GO Skin Industry Is Booming, Following Gambling Crackdown

Gerard_Smith

Out of curiosity has anyone tried contacting the government to get their position on the loot box issue? Is there any point?

ShadowHearth

Penn wrote: »

Agreed. Plus in fairness to them, they do put a good bit of work into the new skins (as opposed to just palette swaps) and include new gameplay modes for events in order to sell the new content. But it's still all playable whether you spend money to buy the lootboxes or not.

I get what people are saying about how Overwatch's system helped lead to the popularity of using lootboxes to generate additional revenue, but it's unfair to blame someone for doing something right just because others took that idea and do it wrong.

Major difference between overwatch lootboxes and other games ( Battlefront 2 ), is that for 60 quid, blizzard gives full acess to all heroes, their weapons, abilities, all maps and modes. All new updates that add maps and characters are free. All you can get from lootboxes - skins and useless collectable garbage.
Battlefront double dipped in to cookie jar and Ea had to jizz all over it with its own flavour. You pay 60eu and then characters, weapons, abilities are locked behind massive grind or paywall.

All lootboxes are evil, but from two evils, there will be always a lesser one.


In a way, it would be a cool idea, to have coolest and most badass SW characters be behind big challange wall. I would had no problem if I needed to play 40h to unlock it. When I would finally unlock it, I would be proud and feel sense of achievement. If I would see one of those characters played by someone else, I would think: Damn, he earned it and its badass, cool!
All what I said is thrown out of the window, when someone just bought it day one, because he can. To make it worse, it is done grindy on purpose, to make me go and swipe the card.

kunst nugget

gizmo wrote: »

Ah yes, for sure then!

On a somewhat related note, either I'm getting old or this obsession with weapon skins is utter lunacy.

The 'Free' CS:GO Skin Industry Is Booming, Following Gambling Crackdown

I genuinely don't understand why there is any value in them. I find it completely baffling to be honest. But then, I'd find it baffling that anyone would spend any money on loot boxes.

bigphil2

Gerard_Smith wrote: »

Out of curiosity has anyone tried contacting the government to get their position on the loot box issue? Is there any point?

The Irish Govt?? i think trying to explain the issue to them would send you around the bend,then one minister who completely missed the point would go on a rant on Joe Duffy about all Videogames being legalised gambling..

The only way this would looked at properly would be in a European context..

Sephiroth_dude

Gerard_Smith wrote: »

Out of curiosity has anyone tried contacting the government to get their position on the loot box issue? Is there any point?

I was onto them the other day, they'll be debating it in the Dail Bar tonight, I don't know if that's a good idea, could get heated if there's drink involved :pac:.

bigphil2

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

I was onto them the other day, they'll be debating it in the Dail Bar tonight, I don't know if that's a good idea, could get heated if there's drink involved :pac:.

Thursday Night is the weekly FIFA tournement night sponsored by EA..

Potential-Monke

And MT have crept into the newest NFS and ruined it!

J. Marston

bigphil2 wrote: »

The Irish Govt?? i think trying to explain the issue to them would send you around the bend,then one minister who completely missed the point would go on a rant on Joe Duffy about all Videogames being legalised gambling..

The only way this would looked at properly would be in a European context..

"That's right, Joe. They're playing this Fifa thing in Paddy Powers morning, noon and night. Children, Joe!"

With that said, I would love if we could copy China and force game companies to reveal the percentage chance of getting items in lootboxes.

Potential-Monke

I just checked Section 4 of the Gaming and Lotteries Act 1956 (yes, Ireland is that far behind...):

Gaming and Lottery Act 1956 wrote:

4.—(1) No person shall promote or assist in promoting or provide facilities for any kind of gaming—

(a) in which by reason of the nature of the game, the chances of all the players, including the banker, are not equal, or

(b) in which any portion of the stakes is retained by the promoter or is retained by the banker otherwise than as winnings on the result of the play, or

(c) by means of any slot-machine not prohibited by section 10.

(2) Such gaming is in this Act referred to as unlawful gaming.

(3) Gaming shall not be unlawful if no stake is hazarded by the players with the promoter or banker other than a charge for the right to take part in the game, provided that—

(a) only one such charge is made in respect of the day on which the game is played, and

(b) the charge is of the same amount for all the players, and

(c) the promoter derives no personal profit from the promotion of the game.

Now, my legal knowledge is the ability to read law (I was a Garda for 10 years) and to me, it reads like that lootboxes are an illegal form of gambling. Specifically 1(b), which to me reads that if the promotor makes a profit that was not as a direct result of a win, it is illegal.

Thing is, you would need someone to take a case on behalf of others, and no solicitor will 'waste' their time on this. I'm gonna keep looking into it, simply because the latest NFS is ruined by MT.

J. Marston

Monke might blow this thing wide open.

Potential-Monke

However, from what I can tell, it seems to be a criminal offence, not a civil one, so the Gardai would be required to investigate. And going by experience, no Garda will want to investigate it! However, seeing as I think i'm onto something, I will make enquires!

Falthyron

Interesting development...

http://www.pcgamer.com/belgium-may-classify-overwatch-and-star-wars-battlefront-2-as-gambling/

VinLieger

Falthyron wrote: »

Interesting development...

http://www.pcgamer.com/belgium-may-classify-overwatch-and-star-wars-battlefront-2-as-gambling/

Fingers crossed it sets off a chain reaction in the EU

VinLieger

M!Ck^ wrote: »

It's clear as day it's having an impact. You are struggling to get your head around these facts.
EA had initially removed Epic Cards from Loot-boxes on the back of direct feedback from users and a live discussion with Angry Joe.
And now have reduced the amount of credits required by 75% for accessing the main characters in the game caused by a massive backlash against the final product from users.
All this makes a difference.

No it just shows EA intentionally massively overpriced to see what they could get away with and were always prepared to drop it depending on the reaction. Note they also reduced the campaign completion reward by 75% as well.

The only thing that will make a difference is the media and governments getting involved and seriously looking at the gambling angle

Penn

VinLieger wrote: »

No it just shows EA intentionally massively overpriced to see what they could get away with and were always prepared to drop it depending on the reaction. Note they also reduced the campaign completion reward by 75% as well.

The only thing that will make a difference is the media and governments getting involved and seriously looking at the gambling angle

In fairness, I don't see them dropping the reward for finishing the campaign by 75% as being that big an issue. The reward for finishing the campaign was supposed to be enough credits to pay to unlock the campaign's main character in multiplayer if you wanted, so by dropping the cost of unlocking her, the campaign reward dropped by the same amount (otherwise you could buy her but also have enough credits to buy Vader/Luke).

Not saying it's right, but at the very least I can see the reasoning for dropping the campaign reward to match that character's cost.

VinLieger

Penn wrote: »

In fairness, I don't see them dropping the reward for finishing the campaign by 75% as being that big an issue. The reward for finishing the campaign was supposed to be enough credits to pay to unlock the campaign's main character in multiplayer if you wanted, so by dropping the cost of unlocking her, the campaign reward dropped by the same amount (otherwise you could buy her but also have enough credits to buy Vader/Luke).

Not saying it's right, but at the very least I can see the reasoning for dropping the campaign reward to match that character's cost.

Kinda makes their statement of earning a sense of achievement and accomplishment even more ridiculous though as they are reducing the sense of achievement and accomplishment for finishing the campaign

VinLieger

VinLieger wrote: »

Kinda makes their statement of earning a sense of achievement and accomplishment even more ridiculous though as they are reducing the sense of achievement and accomplishment for finishing the campaign

If you trying to imply that standing up against this is not helping then no I don't agree with that at all.

wes

VinLieger wrote: »

Fingers crossed it sets off a chain reaction in the EU

Would be hilarious if it did. EA took things to an all time low, and would love to see this loot boxes crap regulated like any other kind of gambling.

gimli2112

wes wrote: »

Would be hilarious if it did. EA took things to an all time low, and would love to see this loot boxes crap regulated like any other kind of gambling.

I've a feeling they can go much lower if left to it.