Ok then there is predatory design that goes beyond loot boxes, how does that change what we are saying? This is like CrazKunuks arguments, "there is far more to this", that does not matter, one step at a time.
It does not have to be "established as gambling". Once again, I expect it to be established, some countries lean to saying it is, some lean to saying it is not. I am not sure what my agenda is meant to be and a discussion about what a fact is will lead us up a tree without a paddle.
On a more interesting note the value of virtual items was raised. I expect this to change, we have already seen a major shift in the lifestyles of people to being online. As we spend more and more of our lives online more value will be given to virtual goods. I am not saying I want or do not want that to happen, just that it will.
You keep using the gambling argument. You can't use and then dismiss it when it's shown to be specious.
Again, what do you specifically hope to accomplish here?
To stop gambling mechanisms in games, its not rocket science.
This will not be stopped by players only buying good products, that would be ideal but it is not going to happen. The environment we have is not acceptable, that's why so many of us our voicing that we don't accept it.
The grass will be greener on the other side because its the old grass we had before there were gambling mechanisms...yum, yum I can taste it now.
Seriously, I do realise gaming companies will fight back and we may get more insidious mechanisms like Bungie's invisible xp scaling. But one step at a time and this is a good one. I will be far happier knowing that with gambling mechanisms gone, kids are not exposed to something we never had to deal with.
BUT THEY ARE!!!! It's already been acknowledged by you with that survey. That same survey has shown us that even with strict regulation of ACTUAL gambling, there are still many, many children who are engaging in gambling. So, again, what is the problem you're suggesting that they address? Gambling among children? That's about as direct a question as I can ask. Are you saying that they should be addressing gambling among children? OR!! Are you suggesting that they specifically address gambling mechanics in games? OR!!! Would you prefer that game companies remove predatory progression systems from games altogether? Each of these is a WILDLY different undertaking. Unfortunately, this step is, really, NOT a "good one".
"Are you saying that they should be addressing gambling among children? Are you suggesting that they specifically address gambling mechanics in games? Would you prefer that game companies remove predatory progression systems from games altogether?"
Stopping gambling in games helps do all those things. It is not either/or. It helps stop children gambling, it specifically stops gambling in games, it stops one of the predatory systems we find in gaming.
You can want something to be done for more than one reason...I find it hard to believe I am having to explain that. It won't solve all child gambling, no one on here apart from you and Torval seems to think that's an issue. Most changes to regulations are like that, they don't stop all of anything.
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!
And does anyone see a problem with requiring that Loot Boxes show the odds on their purchase site? Is there anything wrong with giving people information to make informed decisions?
Such an obvious and small compromise and yet it's only done in China where the law requires it.
Nothing shows the deceptive intent behind the sale of loot boxes better than the fact that it's not done voluntarily and routinely.
Exactly my point. All these folks are railing about how people should be able to make their own choices without government interference. All I'm saying is that people should be given the info to MAKE that choice. It's obvious that these gaming companies won't provide that information on their own.
And by odds I don't mean simply broken down by common, uncommon, rare etc...
I mean specifically that there is a .00021 percent chance of getting the Sword of Doom and a .91 percent chance of getting a small healing potion.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
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!
Games should always depend on what happens inside them and not what happens externally.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
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.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
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.
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.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
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.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
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.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
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 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
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!"
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.
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.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
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!"
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.
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."
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
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.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
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.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
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
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
Comments
Stopping gambling in games helps do all those things. It is not either/or. It helps stop children gambling, it specifically stops gambling in games, it stops one of the predatory systems we find in gaming.
You can want something to be done for more than one reason...I find it hard to believe I am having to explain that. It won't solve all child gambling, no one on here apart from you and Torval seems to think that's an issue. Most changes to regulations are like that, they don't stop all of anything.
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!
And by odds I don't mean simply broken down by common, uncommon, rare etc...
I mean specifically that there is a .00021 percent chance of getting the Sword of Doom and a .91 percent chance of getting a small healing potion.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
Games should always depend on what happens inside them and not what happens externally.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
I self identify as a monkey.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
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.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
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.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
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 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
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!"
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
You can not educate sheep.
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.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
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
----------------
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
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.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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