Loot boxes and Micro-transactions

kunst nugget

"Ultimate Team" sports micro-transactions business generated $800 million in high-profit margin sales for the company during the previous year?!?!

Jesus, there is some amount of absolute spanners playing Fifa…

marcbrophy

kunst nugget wrote: »

"Ultimate Team" sports micro-transactions business generated $800 million in high-profit margin sales for the company during the previous year?!?!

Jesus, there is some amount of absolute spanners playing Fifa…

I'd say a good chunk of it ends up being paid for by advertisers!

Search for "fut opening" on youtube, and you'll get 882,000 results.
These people are in a spend money to make money cycle!

It's the people watching this tripe that really make me wonder... :mad:

super_furry

For a lot of people, FIFA is the only game they play - ever. They'll play it like an MMO, invest heavily in Ultimate Team and then see all money disappear when the next edition comes out.

Dcully

Dcully wrote: »

Only one way to stop this utter BS ,thankfully i have never or never will indulge.
Similar to loot crates im sick of devs releasing paid DLC a month after release.
Destiny 2 DLC incoming early December , they have some neck after deceiving players all this time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2gKbE9RbeM

So he has a huge issue with Loot Crates and in 2018 all games with them should be hammered by the gaming media, does that mean that he will be going back and re-reviewing Overwatch to condemn it for having Loot Crates.

Penn

https://twitter.com/britishgaming/status/935646019211194368

Dcully

@ Darko Why is that?

He said lootboxes were BS back then and said dont buy them.

scroll to 13:38

Penn

Penn wrote: »

https://twitter.com/britishgaming/status/935646019211194368

I've said from day one that if I'm Han Solo was a paid for DLC then I would be all over that. I would buy multiple copies of the game if mid way through a match you could make everyone watch your Han dance to the full song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg_FoEy8T_A

Dcully

Dcully wrote: »

@ Darko Why is that?

He said lootboxes were BS back then and said dont buy them.

He said they were bull and they are but he also went on to call Overwatch a great game. He wants every journalist to hammer any game with Loot Crates in 2018 but he's had no problem celebrating games with Loot Crates in the past. I do believe that Overwatch was the game which led to the current trend, it normalised the idea and people celebrated it as Loot Crates done right but by normalising the idea we have ended up here.

super_furry

Overwatch is a great game and Overwatch does loot crates the right way.

Not buying that they normalised the concept either. Valve did it with TF2 and DOTA.

Dcully

He said they were bull and they are but he also went on to call Overwatch a great game. He wants every journalist to hammer any game with Loot Crates in 2018 but he's had no problem celebrating games with Loot Crates in the past. I do believe that Overwatch was the game which led to the current trend, it normalised the idea and people celebrated it as Loot Crates done right but by normalising the idea we have ended up here.

He called it BS in that vid which was the open beta review, he also predicted they would start to charge for these lootboxes when the full game released.

I do take your point about Overwatch normalising the idea and its a fair and valid point, its very possible overwatch loot boxes have contributed to where we are now but there are far worse culprits out there, skillup`s recent video explains it in great detail but he didnt mention CSGO which was doing what overwatch is doing now long before overwatch.

Dcully

Dcully wrote: »

He called it BS in that vid which was the open beta review, he also predicted they would start to charge for these lootboxes when the full game released.

I do take your point about Overwatch normalising the idea and its a fair and valid point, its very possible overwatch loot boxes have contributed to where we are now but there are far worse culprits out there, skillup`s recent video explains it in great detail but he didnt mention CSGO which was doing what overwatch is doing now long before overwatch.

Point is that you can't demand that others slate a title that has Loot Crates when you yourself have in the past celebrated a game with them. Saying that Overwatch is the best of a bad bunch ignores the point that it is still part of the problem. If people we as disgusted by Loot Crates as they claim then they should not be supporting any game that has them and this includes Overwatch. But gamers are a fickle bunch and are quite happy to jump on the bandwagon and flog EA while defending Blizzard.

super_furry wrote: »

Overwatch is a great game and Overwatch does loot crates the right way.

Not buying that they normalised the concept either. Valve did it with TF2 and DOTA.

It may be a great game but it still has paid for Loot Crates and if you support or defend their inclusion in the game then you can hardly argue that Loot Crates in other games are bad. Overwatch popualrised and normalised the idea of Loot Crates, sure previous games had them but it was the sheer amounts of money that Blizzard made from Loot Crates in Overwatch that made other developers interested.

Penn

I think the Skillup video (reposted again below) was a fascinating video which definitely lays the blame for the current style of lootboxes (and particularly with Battlefront 2) at EA's door with how profitable the Fifa packs have been for them and how they're trying to implement same in their other games. Overwatch's lootboxes are cosmetic and don't affect gameplay, and I'm led to believe the same goes for CS:GO loot (though they can be sold on and traded for insane amounts of money which I still don't understand).

Does anyone have any info on his claim that the money Blizzard makes from lootboxes is relatively small compared to the sales:MTX ratio for the likes of Fifa?

Andrew76 wrote: »

Another great video from Skill Up, it discusses the source of the lootbox phenomenon - EA's CEO Andrew Wilson and Fifa 09.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTLFNlu2N_M

Mickeroo

This uproar started with pay to win loot crates in battlefront and Shadow of War, the stuff about loot crates in general being gambling is just faux outrage off the back of that. If the crates in battlefront/SoW had been cosmetic this conversation probably wouldn't even be happening.

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

Point is that you can't demand that others slate a title that has Loot Crates when you yourself have in the past celebrated a game with them. Saying that Overwatch is the best of a bad bunch ignores the point that it is still part of the problem. If people we as disgusted by Loot Crates as they claim then they should not be supporting any game that has them and this includes Overwatch. But gamers are a fickle bunch and are quite happy to jump on the bandwagon and flog EA while defending Blizzard.



It may be a great game but it still has paid for Loot Crates and if you support or defend their inclusion in the game then you can hardly argue that Loot Crates in other games are bad. Overwatch popualrised and normalised the idea of Loot Crates, sure previous games had them but it was the sheer amounts of money that Blizzard made from Loot Crates in Overwatch that made other developers interested.

Again, the difference comes with condoning a game which does something right and condemning a game which tries to do that same thing but does it badly/unfairly. Gamers are willing to put up with lootboxes to a point. It's up to individual gamers to determine where that point is for themselves, and whether or not to condemn a game which crosses that point.

surfturf

Deleted User wrote: »

Point is that you can't demand that others slate a title that has Loot Crates when you yourself have in the past celebrated a game with them. Saying that Overwatch is the best of a bad bunch ignores the point that it is still part of the problem. If people we as disgusted by Loot Crates as they claim then they should not be supporting any game that has them and this includes Overwatch. But gamers are a fickle bunch and are quite happy to jump on the bandwagon and flog EA while defending Blizzard.



It may be a great game but it still has paid for Loot Crates and if you support or defend their inclusion in the game then you can hardly argue that Loot Crates in other games are bad. Overwatch popualrised and normalised the idea of Loot Crates, sure previous games had them but it was the sheer amounts of money that Blizzard made from Loot Crates in Overwatch that made other developers interested.

Loot crates are just lazy design pure and simple. Blizzard will be able to manage it in the US through lobbying but Oz, Belgium and China are pushing ahead to legislate RNG loot crates for what they are - gambling - which will spread regionally. My 2 lads were sucked into the whole pre-order and hyper DLC cycle but have finally seen the light thanks to the debate happening around it. Its tough enough for indie game developers without having pressure from publishers to monetise their games via loot crates.

ShadowHearth

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He said they were bull and they are but he also went on to call Overwatch a great game. He wants every journalist to hammer any game with Loot Crates in 2018 but he's had no problem celebrating games with Loot Crates in the past. I do believe that Overwatch was the game which led to the current trend, it normalised the idea and people celebrated it as Loot Crates done right but by normalising the idea we have ended up here.

He said in video:
Dont buy loot boxes
Dont buy ultimate, deluxe editions, buy standard editions.

So I dont know where is your issue. Overwatch is good game, but just dont buy lootboxes.

And he is right. They dont make games to be fun anymore, they make games to make money as much money as they can.

And for now, the only shooter that I played this year, which is actually really fun and has no lootboxes and other add on pay **** is splatoon 2. Its a blast to play, have fun modes, constant updates of new gear, weapons, maps that can be gotten for in game currency. No bull****. The game design is from ground up built to be fun, not to openly take a piss and make you spend money.

Penn

Penn wrote: »

I think the Skillup video (reposted again below) was a fascinating video which definitely lays the blame for the current style of lootboxes (and particularly with Battlefront 2) at EA's door with how profitable the Fifa packs have been for them and how they're trying to implement same in their other games. Overwatch's lootboxes are cosmetic and don't affect gameplay, and I'm led to believe the same goes for CS:GO loot (though they can be sold on and traded for insane amounts of money which I still don't understand).

Does anyone have any info on his claim that the money Blizzard makes from lootboxes is relatively small compared to the sales:MTX ratio for the likes of Fifa?

There is no exact figure for Overwatch but in 2016 Activision/Blizzard made over $3.6 billion dollars from in-game content. Overwatch by May of this year had already made over a billion dollars so I would imagine that it compares to FIFA in regard in-game purchases.

Mickeroo wrote: »

This uproar started with pay to win loot crates in battlefront and Shadow of War, the stuff about loot crates in general being gambling is just faux outrage off the back of that. If the crates in battlefront/SoW had been cosmetic this conversation probably wouldn't even be happening.

Are you seriously telling me that posters in this thread and others are not fighting Loot Crates so as to protect children from the normalisation of gambling? Shocked I am.

I think that even had crates been cosmetic that gamers would have taken up a campaign as the likes of Jim Sterling and his poorly thought out and poorly researched videos would have done their damndest to bring in that Patreon money by enraging gamers.

I played a decent amount of Battlefront 2 in early access and never really felt it was pay to win, I did come across a lot of people who had obviously paid to get the best in-game content but never felt like they had an advantage. I managed to get most of the unlocks I wanted or needed through playing the game and honestly found that anyone who purchased loot Crates for an advantage was an idiot. Unlocking heroes with real world money is all well and good but if you aren't good at the game you may find yourself flailing around in multiplayer waiting to earn enough points so as to spawn as Vader. One lad I know spent quite a bit to unlock Vader and Luke and has only gotten enough to play as Vader twice as he generally only gets 5-6 kills a match.

Penn wrote: »

Again, the difference comes with condoning a game which does something right and condemning a game which tries to do that same thing but does it badly/unfairly. Gamers are willing to put up with lootboxes to a point. It's up to individual gamers to determine where that point is for themselves, and whether or not to condemn a game which crosses that point.

So basically Loot Crates are fine as long as it's not by EA.

Saying we will put up with it to a point is a problem if you find Loot Crates as predatory and disgusting as some gamers claim. If you have an issue with Loot Crates do not support the games that have them, even if you love the license and want to just walk away. But gamers can't, we see it all the times in these threads where people complain about Loot Crates but then go ahead and buy the game as they feel that they should not have to miss the game. I have no doubt that Overwatch is a good game but as it has Loot Crates I never bothered with it.

Watching as every youtube personality is up in arms over Loot Crates is actually rather fun, Jim Sterling and the like are playing gamers and the faux outrage is reaching hysterical levels.

There's a change coming to the gaming industry and I don't think gamers are going to like it, we've reached the point where paid for DLC, Season Passes and Loot Crates are being demonised at every turn and with the price of games being cheaper than they were 20 years ago the only thing to come is an increase in the base price of a game. I can see games hitting a 100+ euro in the year or two to come, that is until the Netflix model launches and we no longer pay for single titles but rather a subscription to access all a publishers titles for a monthly fee.

ShadowHearth

ShadowHearth wrote: »

He said in video:
Dont buy loot boxes
Dont buy ultimate, deluxe editions, buy standard editions.

So I dont know where is your issue. Overwatch is good game, but just dont buy lootboxes.

And he is right. They dont make games to be fun anymore, they make games to make money as much money as they can.

And for now, the only shooter that I played this year, which is actually really fun and has no lootboxes and other add on pay **** is splatoon 2. Its a blast to play, have fun modes, constant updates of new gear, weapons, maps that can be gotten for in game currency. No bull****. The game design is from ground up built to be fun, not to openly take a piss and make you spend money.

Splatton 2 has a decent amount of additional in-game content that can only be unlocked by purchasing Amiibos. Everyone gives Nintendo a pass on Loot Crates but Amiibos are just as bad as Loot Crates, especially when you have Nintendo locking difficult levels to the purchasing of them as happened with the new Metroid.

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

So basically Loot Crates are fine as long as it's not by EA.

No, Shadow of War has also come in for much criticism for their lootboxes, as did Assassin's Creed Unity years ago. Destiny 2's lootboxes are cosmetic, but unlike other games (like Overwatch) they also have a season pass and microtransactions in addition. Injustice 2 I'd condemn because their cosmetic items affect your characters stats, but I personally never found them to have any real affect on gameplay (maybe because I don't play online). I don't play Call of Duty so can't really comment fully on same.

However, given how EA's lootboxes in primarily multiplayer games have a huge effect on gameplay, yes I believe they are deserving of more criticism than most, and particularly so after watching the SkillUp video and how the profits EA have been making from the Fifa model and how they're trying to implement that in their other games.

I don't generally hammer the whole "gambling" part of the argument because I'm largely skeptical about that argument. My argument is simply more that gameplay is being changed to incorporate grinding and randomise rewards in order to push people towards buying lootboxes (where you still may not get what you want) or else find themselves at a disadvantage to those who do pay.

'Pay to win', you might say.

super_furry

Deleted User wrote: »

It may be a great game but it still has paid for Loot Crates and if you support or defend their inclusion in the game then you can hardly argue that Loot Crates in other games are bad.

Of course I can - it's not just a black and white issue. I absolutely support loot boxes in Overwatch, particularly as they're funding the on-going development of that give with the important content - maps, game-modes and characters all being delivered for free.

Since launch Overwatch has grown as a game in content and still has people working on it. You pay nothing for that - it's free - but if you want you can take the chance of paying for skins that don't have any effect on gameplay. I personally don't buy them, but I'm glad that because other people do, I get a better game for free.

It's the same with TF2 and DOTA. They're games you actually get for free, offering hundreds of hours of gameplay and they're still being supported and updated now because people buy skins and hats for the characters.

When it comes to Battlefront 2, a game whose very progression is tied to buying loot boxes and which allows people who spend money on these boxes to have a real playing advantage over those who don't, that's where I believe it's not acceptable. As a result, I didn't buy Battlefront 2, despite really enjoying the game in the 10 hours I played the free trial.

ShadowHearth

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Splatton 2 has a decent amount of additional in-game content that can only be unlocked by purchasing Amiibos. Everyone gives Nintendo a pass on Loot Crates but Amiibos are just as bad as Loot Crates, especially when you have Nintendo locking difficult levels to the purchasing of them as happened with the new Metroid.

You just actually proved the point how good Splatoon 2 is, as I play it and I never knew I can get stuff in it with ammibos. I enjoyed the game without that content. I have no idea what they give!
Come to think of it, amiibos are giving all games something that support it. So same one can be used in several games. Its not even something major or good, but just a nice extra if you got one amiibo laying around.
What is even more important you actually get the small cool statue. A lot of people collect them just for that. Like those vynil heads.
And no, I dont own any amiibos. Even if I did it would not be for its digital value, but just a cool thing to put on my pc desk.

kunst nugget

ShadowHearth wrote: »

You just actually proved the point how good Splatoon 2 is, as I play it and I never knew I can get stuff in it with ammibos. I enjoyed the game without that content. I have no idea what they give!
Come to think of it, amiibos are giving all games something that support it. So same one can be used in several games. Its not even something major or good, but just a nice extra if you got one amiibo laying around.
What is even more important you actually get the small cool statue. A lot of people collect them just for that. Like those vynil heads.
And no, I dont own any amiibos. Even if I did it would not be for its digital value, but just a cool thing to put on my pc desk.

And you just proved his point that people are willing to give Nintendo a free pass on stuff like this. You really get the feeling if EA tried to introduce a system like this people would lose their shít altogether.

Full list of benefits from Splatoon Amiibos in Splatoon 2:

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2017/07/guide_all_the_splatoon_2_amiibo_unlocks

super_furry

super_furry wrote: »

Of course I can - it's not just a black and white issue. I absolutely support loot boxes in Overwatch, particularly as they're funding the on-going development of that give with the important content - maps, game-modes and characters all being delivered for free.

Since launch Overwatch has grown as a game in content and still has people working on it. You pay nothing for that - it's free - but if you want you can take the chance of paying for skins that don't have any effect on gameplay. I personally don't buy them, but I'm glad that because other people do, I get a better game for free.

It's the same with TF2 and DOTA. They're games you actually get for free, offering hundreds of hours of gameplay and they're still being supported and updated now because people buy skins and hats for the characters.

When it comes to Battlefront 2, a game whose very progression is tied to buying loot boxes and which allows people who spend money on these boxes to have a real playing advantage over those who don't, that's where I believe it's not acceptable. As a result, I didn't buy Battlefront 2, despite really enjoying the game in the 10 hours I played the free trial.

The season pass for Battlefront 2 is free no doubt due to the fact that Loot Crates were part of the game. I honestly find games like Destiny 2 and Call of Duty far worse for Loot Crates than Battlefront 2, both those games have a base game, Loot Crates, Season Passes and additional DLC. At least with Battlefront 2 you can get the full experience simply by paying for the base game. And the plan for the game is to grow with additional content which you don't have to pay for and in that regards Overwatch and Battlefront 2 are quite similiar.

I never felt like anyone had an advantage in Battlefront 2, having everything unlocked means nothing if you have no skill, much like having Messi in your team in FIFA does not mean that you can't be beaten. I have issues with Loot Crates and don't support games which use them but would have more problem with Destiny 2 having them than Battlefront 2.

Penn wrote: »

No, Shadow of War has also come in for much criticism for their lootboxes, as did Assassin's Creed Unity years ago. Destiny 2's lootboxes are cosmetic, but unlike other games (like Overwatch) they also have a season pass and microtransactions in addition. Injustice 2 I'd condemn because their cosmetic items affect your characters stats, but I personally never found them to have any real affect on gameplay (maybe because I don't play online). I don't play Call of Duty so can't really comment fully on same.

However, given how EA's lootboxes in primarily multiplayer games have a huge effect on gameplay, yes I believe they are deserving of more criticism than most, and particularly so after watching the SkillUp video and how the profits EA have been making from the Fifa model and how they're trying to implement that in their other games.

I don't generally hammer the whole "gambling" part of the argument because I'm largely skeptical about that argument. My argument is simply more that gameplay is being changed to incorporate grinding and randomise rewards in order to push people towards buying lootboxes (where you still may not get what you want) or else find themselves at a disadvantage to those who do pay.

'Pay to win', you might say.

I don't buy the pay to win arguement, as I have said from my expereince of the trial I never felt like anyone had a distinct advantage over me. Shadow of War and the others got a little bit of blow back but nothing compareable to what happened with Battlefront and of them all Battlefront 2 at least offered something of note, the fact that it is offering a season pass for free is something we rarely see.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

You just actually proved the point how good Splatoon 2 is, as I play it and I never knew I can get stuff in it with ammibos. I enjoyed the game without that content. I have no idea what they give!
Come to think of it, amiibos are giving all games something that support it. So same one can be used in several games. Its not even something major or good, but just a nice extra if you got one amiibo laying around.
What is even more important you actually get the small cool statue. A lot of people collect them just for that. Like those vynil heads.
And no, I dont own any amiibos. Even if I did it would not be for its digital value, but just a cool thing to put on my pc desk.

So, if the additional content comes in a cheap piece of plastic tat and Nintendo release it then it's fine. I bet that if EA released Battlefront 2 figures that greanted you an ingame advantage you would be up in arms over how wrong it was.

K.O.Kiki

kunst nugget wrote: »

And you just proved his point that people are willing to give Nintendo a free pass on stuff like this. You really get the feeling if EA tried to introduce a system like this people would lose their shít altogether.

Full list of benefits from Splatoon Amiibos in Splatoon 2:

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2017/07/guide_all_the_splatoon_2_amiibo_unlocks

Are they NOT available in-game without Amiibo?

ShadowHearth

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The season pass for Battlefront 2 is free no doubt due to the fact that Loot Crates were part of the game. I honestly find games like Destiny 2 and Call of Duty far worse for Loot Crates than Battlefront 2, both those games have a base game, Loot Crates, Season Passes and additional DLC. At least with Battlefront 2 you can get the full experience simply by paying for the base game. And the plan for the game is to grow with additional content which you don't have to pay for and in that regards Overwatch and Battlefront 2 are quite similiar.

I never felt like anyone had an advantage in Battlefront 2, having everything unlocked means nothing if you have no skill, much like having Messi in your team in FIFA does not mean that you can't be beaten. I have issues with Loot Crates and don't support games which use them but would have more problem with Destiny 2 having them than Battlefront 2.





I don't buy the pay to win arguement, as I have said from my expereince of the trial I never felt like anyone had a distinct advantage over me. Shadow of War and the others got a little bit of blow back but nothing compareable to what happened with Battlefront and of them all Battlefront 2 at least offered something of note, the fact that it is offering a season pass for free is something we rarely see.



So, if the additional content comes in a cheap piece of plastic tat and Nintendo release it then it's fine. I bet that if EA released Battlefront 2 figures that greanted you an ingame advantage you would be up in arms over how wrong it was.

Additional content, that is just small extra that can be completely ignored and not baked in as massive part of the game. And you get physical item that works on other games too.

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't buy the pay to win arguement, as I have said from my expereince of the trial I never felt like anyone had a distinct advantage over me. Shadow of War and the others got a little bit of blow back but nothing compareable to what happened with Battlefront and of them all Battlefront 2 at least offered something of note, the fact that it is offering a season pass for free is something we rarely see.

I think Battlefront 2 got the most blowback due to its implementation being more egregious, particularly with how long it was going to take to unlock Vader/Luke and EA's extremely poor response to it. That Reddit post, more than anything else, is what really got the ball rolling more than ever, particularly due to the name brand recognition Star Wars/Vader/Luke has compared to other games (Shadow of War doesn't have Lord Of The Rings anywhere in the title for example).

Again, it's not the lootboxes themselves per se that most people have an issue with, it's how the game is designed to push more people towards lootboxes because of the effect they have on gameplay (even if you didn't find that to be the case yourself, Star cards etc do demonstrably affect gameplay as opposed to cosmetic items) and forcing players into a grind to unlock items if they don't pay.

As for the removal of season pass etc and how the lootboxes help fund additional content, again I don't think most people would take any major issue with that so long as the lootboxes/mtx were implemented in such a way as to not affect gameplay, as other games (like Overwatch) have successfully done.

kunst nugget

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Are they NOT available in-game without Amiibo?

As far as I can tell, they are unique to the Amiibo.

ShadowHearth

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Additional content, that is just small extra that can be completely ignored and not baked in as massive part of the game. And you get physical item that works on other games too.

It gives you an ingame advantage over others but I suppose it's Nintendo so by all means defend them. Why do I think that if EA did the same thing you would take issue with it.

Penn wrote: »

I think Battlefront 2 got the most blowback due to its implementation being more egregious, particularly with how long it was going to take to unlock Vader/Luke and EA's extremely poor response to it. That Reddit post, more than anything else, is what really got the ball rolling more than ever, particularly due to the name brand recognition Star Wars/Vader/Luke has compared to other games (Shadow of War doesn't have Lord Of The Rings anywhere in the title for example).

Again, it's not the lootboxes themselves per se that most people have an issue with, it's how the game is designed to push more people towards lootboxes because of the effect they have on gameplay (even if you didn't find that to be the case yourself, Star cards etc do demonstrably affect gameplay as opposed to cosmetic items) and forcing players into a grind to unlock items if they don't pay.

As for the removal of season pass etc and how the lootboxes help fund additional content, again I don't think most people would take any major issue with that so long as the lootboxes/mtx were implemented in such a way as to not affect gameplay, as other games (like Overwatch) have successfully done.

I think that the problem at the start was that people were basing a lot of their information on youtubers and random posts on forum boars. The whole 40 hours to unlock Vader thing, for example, was something that I never felt was true, on PC I have used 4 hours of my trial and already unlocked Vader and got a lot of the cards and abilities I wanted. I've seen people posting on here that they got Vader after 2 hours of play so where the 40 hours came from as far as I know EA did not drop the credits required by 90%.

I played a decent amount of the game on the three platforms and never once felt it was pay to win, as I said, someone, I know did spend a lot of money to unlock things and so far has only played as Vader twice given that he's crap at the game and never gets enough ingame points to spawn as Vader. He's actually upset that after paying to win he can't win.

gizmo

Penn wrote: »

EA loses $3bn in stock price

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/28/eas-day-of-reckoning-is-here-after-star-wars-game-uproar.html

Context

Penn wrote: »

I think Battlefront 2 got the most blowback due to its implementation being more egregious, particularly with how long it was going to take to unlock Vader/Luke and EA's extremely poor response to it. That Reddit post, more than anything else, is what really got the ball rolling more than ever, particularly due to the name brand recognition Star Wars/Vader/Luke has compared to other games (Shadow of War doesn't have Lord Of The Rings anywhere in the title for example).

Again, it's not the lootboxes themselves per se that most people have an issue with, it's how the game is designed to push more people towards lootboxes because of the effect they have on gameplay (even if you didn't find that to be the case yourself, Star cards etc do demonstrably affect gameplay as opposed to cosmetic items) and forcing players into a grind to unlock items if they don't pay.

As for the removal of season pass etc and how the lootboxes help fund additional content, again I don't think most people would take any major issue with that so long as the lootboxes/mtx were implemented in such a way as to not affect gameplay, as other games (like Overwatch) have successfully done.

Regarding the highlighted part though, it kind of is and it's part of the reason why discussing the topic can be a little frustrating sometimes. More often than not, you'll have people complain about "lootboxes" and then, almost in the same breath, say Overwatch does them fine. This is blatant cognitive dissonance and as you've correctly pointed out, is more of an issue with their implementation rather than their existence. What makes this more important is that if you look at the "wins" which have been achieved since the pushback began, those in Forza, NBA 2K18 and BFII in the future, it's in this area which they've occured. A line in the sand needs to be drawn and if it's going to come from a position of self-regulation within the industry, it's more than likely going to be P2W and unnecessarily grindy unlock rates, not their outright removal.

ShadowHearth

Do you have a stock in EA and you are just angry, because it is going down harder then hookers knickers in brothel?

I can't even see sense how you can compare amiibos to loot boxes. Amiibo is a small toy that gives little bit as an extra in games. And lets be clear, in all games that amiibos supported. You pay and you know what you get. You dont buy a pack of ammibos and have a chance to get a random amiibo. So how the hell you got to conclusion its ad bad as Ea loot boxes is beyond reason.
Not a single nintendo game gave a feeling that I am missing out, by not buying amiibo. Its just little junk, which is take it or leave it. And you still ignore the major idea, that its a little statue of a character, that people collect and majority of people buy it just for that.
What kind of advantages you talking about. In fairness I genuinely dont know.
Another thing. Ea and all other games just openly push it down your throat with loot boxes! Constant reminder and openly in menus to try to temp you with. I havent seen a single amiibo mentioning in any nintendo game I played so far. Then again, it would be relevant comparison, if the amiibos would be anything even comparable to lootboxes!!!!