Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

MMORPG.com : General : Hawaii's Chris Lee: 'Step Up' to Changing Predatory Gaming Practices

1235»

Comments

  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Member UncommonPosts: 5,483
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 
    laseritIselinMadFrenchieScotPhaserlightHorusra

    "We have met the enemy and he is us." ~Pogo Possum. 

  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Member UncommonPosts: 5,483
    edited December 2017
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!

    Why should they make anyone competitive? I'll never be competitive even if I play 24/7 and own the gaming company. I'm old and slow. If you don't like the game don't play. Play games that are suitable for you. 

    With every government regulation comes compliance costs. To tell you what the odds were for loot boxes not only would they have to be computed, which isn't as simple as it looks because companies are cheating in favor of players who haven't gotten anything good lately, it has to be reported to the government. There are hidden costs associated with dealing with the bureaucracy. Ever notice the first loot box a player buys has something nice in it? It's a deceptive practice which means the government will ban it and you'll get squat. Then the government gets to decide what is abusive and sure enough they'll be setting the percentages. Pretty soon the only people who will be able afford to make games at all are companies like Activision and EA who control the lobbyists. Once they have their hooks into congress any hope of legislation protecting gamers will be gone forever. Great deal for the consumer. 
    #BigGovSucks
    Post edited by zymurgeist on
    Iselin

    "We have met the enemy and he is us." ~Pogo Possum. 

  • mgilbrtsnmgilbrtsn Member EpicPosts: 3,251
    How much do you want to bet he's a disgruntled gamer who spent $$ and didn't get that extra special sword.

    Concentrate on enjoying yourself, and not on why I shouldn't enjoy myself.

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,706
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!

    Why should they make anyone competitive? I'll never be competitive even if I play 24/7 and own the gaming company. I'm old and slow. If you don't like the game don't play. Play games that are suitable for you. 

    With every government regulation comes compliance costs. To tell you what the odds were for loot boxes not only would they have to be computed, which isn't as simple as it looks because companies are cheating in favor of players who haven't gotten anything good lately, it has to be reported to the government. There are hidden costs associated with dealing with the bureaucracy. Ever notice the first loot box a player buys has something nice in it? It's a deceptive practice which means the government will ban it and you'll get squat. Then the government gets to decide what is abusive and sure enough they'll be setting the percentages. Pretty soon the only people who will be able afford to make games at all are companies like Activision and EA who control the lobbyists. Once they have their hooks into congress any hope of legislation protecting gamers will be gone forever. Great deal for the consumer. 
    #BigGovSucks
    The company always knows the odds.  If they or you are afraid of showing those odds then that's a problem.

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • laseritlaserit Member EpicPosts: 5,727
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 
    Sounds like you live a sheltered life.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 11,827
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 
    Envy garbage? LMAO. You don't even know what you're seeing do you?

    OK let's try again with a different graph- this time from 1950-2016. Notice any difference before and after they started spouting that "big government is bad" and "regulations are bad" horsehit?

    Yeah that's right, everyone was making gains at roughly the same pace.

    No one in their right mind believes that regulations are bad. The top 1% are in on the lie - hell they created it - and are the only ones with a stake in selling it to the other 99% whom they depend on to swallow it hook line and sinker and vote accordingly.



    So go spout you regulations are bad nonsense somewhere else.
    MadFrenchie
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 18,003
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!
    No matter what the outcome of this angry mob fiasco ends up being, we're never going back. The days where "vets" who spent hundreds or thousands of hours in a game lording it over the rest is over. It's never going to happen.
    traveller, interloper, anomaly

    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ


  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,706
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!
    No matter what the outcome of this angry mob fiasco ends up being, we're never going back. The days where "vets" who spent hundreds or thousands of hours in a game lording it over the rest is over. It's never going to happen.
    Oh I can see market fragmentation where people who like game play to dictate success have their niche and people who just want to skip playing a game and buy success have their niche.

    Once that happens I can see the "purchase power people" getting bored that their sheep are gone and then coming back to the light side where game play matters.
    IselinRhoklaw

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 11,827
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!
    No matter what the outcome of this angry mob fiasco ends up being, we're never going back. The days where "vets" who spent hundreds or thousands of hours in a game lording it over the rest is over. It's never going to happen.
    Oh I can see market fragmentation where people who like game play to dictate success have their niche and people who just want to skip playing a game and buy success have their niche.

    Once that happens I can see the "purchase power people" getting bored that their sheep are gone and then coming back to the light side where game play matters.
    Yeah. All of a sudden it seems that picking one MMO to play and sticking with it for a few years is a weird thing. When the fuck did that happen? I never got the memo.
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 2,622
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 
    Righhhht.... the top 1% are obviously the most highly skilled, extensively educated, hardest working people in America, and the door is open to anyone looking to join the club. 

    It's definitely not about being well-connected...

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 131 missions in Vendetta Online

  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member EpicPosts: 5,927
    Iselin said:
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!
    No matter what the outcome of this angry mob fiasco ends up being, we're never going back. The days where "vets" who spent hundreds or thousands of hours in a game lording it over the rest is over. It's never going to happen.
    Oh I can see market fragmentation where people who like game play to dictate success have their niche and people who just want to skip playing a game and buy success have their niche.

    Once that happens I can see the "purchase power people" getting bored that their sheep are gone and then coming back to the light side where game play matters.
    Yeah. All of a sudden it seems that picking one MMO to play and sticking with it for a few years is a weird thing. When the fuck did that happen? I never got the memo.
    This all came about during the same era as participation trophies and ADD/ADHD.
    Slapshot1188Iselin

  • ScotScot Member EpicPosts: 9,600
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!
    No matter what the outcome of this angry mob fiasco ends up being, we're never going back. The days where "vets" who spent hundreds or thousands of hours in a game lording it over the rest is over. It's never going to happen.

    This is the people speaking against predatory practices Torval, you are choosing to see that as an angry mob. Those days are still here, except that both whales who spend thousands and those who spend untold hours in game are "lording it" over the rest. I got to know crafters in BDO who were on the top 10 money list by being online most of the day and players who paid through the nose for everything to "lord it".

    For me time is a fairer playing field than money, yes its not perfect but what is? I remember a couple of MMO's (not sure now FF?) which limited the time you could be on line. There is a suggestion for equality of time.

    I can just see how that would go down in todays gaming company board room. "So you want us to limit the time they are in game, less time to be in the cash shop, less time for us to tempt them to buy? No!" :D

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,706
    Scot said:


    For me time is a fairer playing field than money, yes its not perfect but what is?


    Success in game should depend on what happens in game.
    Rhoklaw

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • HorusraHorusra Member RarePosts: 3,934
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 

    You can not educate sheep.  
    IselinGdemami
  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 2,622
    edited December 2017
    Horusra said:
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 

    You can not educate sheep.  
    Except that what he is saying just isn't true; that's putting it kindly.

    Here, if you want to educate people, try the following Stanford law professor's video:



    According to her there is "profound segregation" between people of different economic classes which has become much more pronounced in recent years.  To repeat my above (rather sarcastic) comment: it's not an issue of lack of education, skills, or work ethic as much as it is an issue of social connectivity.

    Your viewpoint might have been valid up until ~1980, but as the graph hints the economic world has undergone some drastic upheavals in the last 4 decades.
    Post edited by Phaserlight on
    MadFrenchie

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 131 missions in Vendetta Online

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Scot said:
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!
    No matter what the outcome of this angry mob fiasco ends up being, we're never going back. The days where "vets" who spent hundreds or thousands of hours in a game lording it over the rest is over. It's never going to happen.

    This is the people speaking against predatory practices Torval, you are choosing to see that as an angry mob. Those days are still here, except that both whales who spend thousands and those who spend untold hours in game are "lording it" over the rest. I got to know crafters in BDO who were on the top 10 money list by being online most of the day and players who paid through the nose for everything to "lord it".

    For me time is a fairer playing field than money, yes its not perfect but what is? I remember a couple of MMO's (not sure now FF?) which limited the time you could be on line. There is a suggestion for equality of time.

    I can just see how that would go down in todays gaming company board room. "So you want us to limit the time they are in game, less time to be in the cash shop, less time for us to tempt them to buy? No!" :D

    Im glad you're off the whole gambling train and you're focused on the real issue, which is predatory mechanics. That's the big problem here and I would definitely agree with you. That being said, money will never NOT be a factor since you can still hire people to achieve the success you want and that won't go anywhere, unfortunately. Levelling the field by throttling playing time would actually prevent that, too, though, but as you said, that won't happen. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 11,827
    Horusra said:
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 

    You can not educate sheep.  
    Agree 100%. Those who don't want to get regulated say "regulations are bad" and the sheep all say "bahhhhd."
    PhaserlightMadFrenchieJamesGoblinGdemami
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 11,827
    Rhoklaw said:
    Iselin said:
    Torval said:
    Scot said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Loot boxes do NOT benefit games in any way. The only defense I've seen brought up by gaming companies is it allows people with less time and more money to stay competitive. That's a load of crap from the silver tongue devil. Loot boxes are gambling and to those who say otherwise are seriously in denial. I'm so tired of this stupid argument and the trollish responses from the usual trolls.
    Unfortunately, math is on their side. Lets look at how this works. If LootBox A gives the good item 10% (numbers chosen for easy use, not real numbers) of the time, and 10 people buy one, then on average, one person will have it. Now, if that one person is not the top 10% spender, then it is reasonable to assume that this spender will buy 10 more, and then get one themselves. Now, we have 2 people with the item, vs having the item being 10x more expensive, and only the top spender paying for it.

    The reality is that the big spenders are going to pay enough for the items that they want... but the small spenders are much more sensitive to the price. They would generally not pay the high prices... and never get the items. Having lower price randomization allows them for a chance to get the item, and as a whole, increases the number of the item that are in the game.

    Might I suggest that there may be other ways to make people with lless time and money competitive?

    How about making it just about time? I know shocking right...a principle of gaming ethos, that we play on a fair playing field is now shocking!
    No matter what the outcome of this angry mob fiasco ends up being, we're never going back. The days where "vets" who spent hundreds or thousands of hours in a game lording it over the rest is over. It's never going to happen.
    Oh I can see market fragmentation where people who like game play to dictate success have their niche and people who just want to skip playing a game and buy success have their niche.

    Once that happens I can see the "purchase power people" getting bored that their sheep are gone and then coming back to the light side where game play matters.
    Yeah. All of a sudden it seems that picking one MMO to play and sticking with it for a few years is a weird thing. When the fuck did that happen? I never got the memo.
    This all came about during the same era as participation trophies and ADD/ADHD.
    There's a current thread in the ESO forums from someone complaining about how long it takes to unlock the Mage's Guild rank 10 so you can use the spiffy ultimate ability you get at that point. You advance that skill line by finding and reading special books throughout the world each of which give you some experience toward that skill line.

    His request for a solution? I's not to have the books give you more experience or lowering the XP required for each rank. He wants them to sell Mage's guild skill ups in the cash shop.

    Fuck me. It's the attack of the mobile gaming casuals.
    Slapshot1188Asm0deusScotMadFrenchieGdemami
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,706
    Horusra said:
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 

    You can not educate sheep.  
    Except that what he is saying just isn't true; that's putting it kindly.

    Here, if you want to educate people, try the following Stanford law professor's video:



    According to her there is "profound segregation" between people of different economic classes which has become much more pronounced in recent years.  To repeat my above (rather sarcastic) comment: it's not an issue of lack of education, skills, or work ethic as much as it is an issue of social connectivity.

    Your viewpoint might have been valid up until ~1980, but as the graph hints the economic world has undergone some drastic upheavals in the last 4 decades.
    Look... I'm not going to say yes or no to your underlying point but I will say that I would take the opinion of a random guy on the street more seriously than a college professor.  Colleges used to be a bastion of free speech but now they are places that support group-think and frown on individual thoughts that vary from the self-enforced consensus.


    Phaserlightalkarionlog

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • alkarionlogalkarionlog Member RarePosts: 1,870
    Horusra said:
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 

    You can not educate sheep.  
    Except that what he is saying just isn't true; that's putting it kindly.

    Here, if you want to educate people, try the following Stanford law professor's video:



    According to her there is "profound segregation" between people of different economic classes which has become much more pronounced in recent years.  To repeat my above (rather sarcastic) comment: it's not an issue of lack of education, skills, or work ethic as much as it is an issue of social connectivity.

    Your viewpoint might have been valid up until ~1980, but as the graph hints the economic world has undergone some drastic upheavals in the last 4 decades.
    Look... I'm not going to say yes or no to your underlying point but I will say that I would take the opinion of a random guy on the street more seriously than a college professor.  Colleges used to be a bastion of free speech but now they are places that support group-think and frown on individual thoughts that vary from the self-enforced consensus.


    unfortunally its true, its even worse if you don't belive on any of the leftist garbage thinking
    FOR HONOR, FOR FREEDOM.... and for some money.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 6,900
    Horusra said:
    Iselin said:

    The market already decided loot box games are a winner and now a minority is trying to get the government to buck the trend. People forget the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' Reagan was absolutely right about that. 
    Regan? You mean the guy that was elected in 1980? You don't suppose there was another agenda at work there?



    Don't even try that envy garbage. People get money by earning it. It's easier to earn money if you already have skills and money. No one stole a thing from poor people. The top 1% pay fifty percent of taxes. Income mobility is greater in the United States than any other country in history. 

    You can not educate sheep.  
    Except that what he is saying just isn't true; that's putting it kindly.

    Here, if you want to educate people, try the following Stanford law professor's video:



    According to her there is "profound segregation" between people of different economic classes which has become much more pronounced in recent years.  To repeat my above (rather sarcastic) comment: it's not an issue of lack of education, skills, or work ethic as much as it is an issue of social connectivity.

    Your viewpoint might have been valid up until ~1980, but as the graph hints the economic world has undergone some drastic upheavals in the last 4 decades.
    Look... I'm not going to say yes or no to your underlying point but I will say that I would take the opinion of a random guy on the street more seriously than a college professor.  Colleges used to be a bastion of free speech but now they are places that support group-think and frown on individual thoughts that vary from the self-enforced consensus.


    Been outta college for less than a decade, majored in political science, that was not my experience at all 

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.