|
Video games have always been designed around appealing to your "lizard brain," lootboxes are an iteration of baseball cards or INSERT COIN TO CONTINUE 10...9...8... from my childhood. This isn't dismissing the potential danger to some vulnerable portion of the population, but the discussion is circular until there are studies confirming/enumerating the ill effects, or until some regulating body actually acts on it, or until modern capitalism implodes completely. Til then it's mostly shitposting about how games were better when we were younger and how people who play slot machines aren't actually having the correct version of fun
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
Don't defend lootboxes.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
wyoak posted:Video games have always been designed around appealing to your "lizard brain,"  Most video games don't contain slot machine elements. Some do: quote:lootboxes are an iteration of baseball cards or INSERT COIN TO CONTINUE 10...9...8... from my childhood. Indeed, that's accurate. And that poo poo was lovely back then, too. Thankfully a lot of that poo poo is less common these days, and people are a lot more aware and vocal about their shittiness. Lootboxes are arguably a continuation of what was once the norm for the video game industry, but it's inaccurate to say that all video games are equally exploitative, and it's unwise to say that we should ignore the matter simply because we used to put up with similarly bad practices quote:This isn't dismissing the potential danger to some vulnerable portion of the population, but the discussion is circular until there are studies confirming/enumerating the ill effects, or until some regulating body actually acts on it, or until modern capitalism implodes completely. Til then it's mostly shitposting about how games were better when we were younger and how people who play slot machines aren't actually having the correct version of fun These studies already exist, the work has been done, we have become exceptionally skilled at using psychology to create addiction and your "it's all just fun" argument doesn't track against reality.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
I meant lizard brain in the more general "ritual action - instant feedback" sense, not narrowed down to just slot machines. Video games have always been fancy skinner boxes Anyway this can all be blamed on Nintendo 
wyoak fucked around with this message at 00:20 on May 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
I think the amount of free lootboxes is kind of a thing, too- like, if it's a tiny dripfeed, then the "casinos giving out free plays" analogy makes sense but there's a finite number of things you can win in overwatch from lootboxes, and you get, at a bare minimum, four free boxes a week from arcade (usually five because they'll have the 3 from wins in any mode + a first win one for modes they want people to try), and one every level up if you're playing the game actively, then there's very little incentive to buy lootboxes because it constantly shits them out at you and you will run out of things to get, without paying a cent, well before they put in new stuff meanwhile PUBG, despite theoretically being similar, honestly feels a lot more predatory to me because it's a much smaller drip feed, with much lower chances of getting something cool, and no recourse other than spending real money to get stuff if you don't get lucky (Overwatch letting you save up in game currency from dupes if you want a specific thing seems like it also helps mitigate the problem, since there's less of a compulsion to buy a fuckton of boxes to try and get something specific- whaling is actively a less efficient way of trying to get stuff).
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:24
|
|
|
You know Overwatch does limited time things with jacked up prices and also you can't sell poo poo you don't want, right? Overwatch's model is not good, and others being worse doesn't change that.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
Allowing you to sell stuff you don't want would make things way worse
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:29
|
|
|
wyoak posted:Video games have always been designed around appealing to your "lizard brain," lootboxes are an iteration of baseball cards or INSERT COIN TO CONTINUE 10...9...8... from my childhood. Early arcade games could literally be cleared on one quarter if you were good enough. Same as pinball. Framing the continue screen as analogous to lootboxes is a very, very bad analogy.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:I think the amount of free lootboxes is kind of a thing, too- like, if it's a tiny dripfeed, then the "casinos giving out free plays" analogy makes sense If you're the kind of person who can say 'I'm getting enough looboxes' you're not the target market for lootboxes, and your experience suffers so they can wring out those sweet sweet thousands of dollars from people who can't.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Early arcade games could literally be cleared on one quarter if you were good enough. Same as pinball. Framing the continue screen as analogous to lootboxes is a very, very bad analogy.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:43
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Early arcade games could literally be cleared on one quarter if you were good enough. Same as pinball. Framing the continue screen as analogous to lootboxes is a very, very bad analogy. There were both fair and predatory models for arcade games, stuff like Final Fight can't really be compared to bullshit trial-and-error stuff like Dragon's Lair.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:45
|
|
|
I don't think Final Fight was possible to beat without continues, at least the way most arcades tuned it
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Early arcade games could literally be cleared on one quarter if you were good enough. Same as pinball. Framing the continue screen as analogous to lootboxes is a very, very bad analogy. The detail you've identified is actually a psychological trap that's more similar to what lootboxes do than you may realize: arcade machines lead some players to conclude that they can "save" money by just getting really good at the game, so then they smash themselves against deliberately-unfair mechanics over and over while chasing that incentive. Lootboxes derive from that same incentive-chasing behavior, but their target audience is much wider for a number of reasons, and their addiction-invoking mechanics are much more well-designed I don't think he's saying they're the same, but there is a logical connection between them
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:51
|
|
|
wyoak posted:Allowing you to sell stuff you don't want would make things way worse I too remember diablo 3 real money market
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:55
|
|
|
a medical mystery posted:There were both fair and predatory models for arcade games, stuff like Final Fight can't really be compared to bullshit trial-and-error stuff like Dragon's Lair. hee hee funny you should bring that up... beating Dragon's Lair and becoming the envy of every kid at school cost me a couple bucks for my SECRET WEAPON https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/518828819553592643 (top left corner) There were also books on beating Pac-Man and other poo poo. They were very common - I got mine from the scholastic book fair. QuarkJets posted:The detail you've identified is actually a psychological trap that's more similar to what lootboxes do than you may realize: arcade machines lead some players to conclude that they can "save" money by just getting really good at the game, so then they smash themselves against deliberately-unfair mechanics over and over while chasing that incentive. Thought experiment: Is a version of Dark Souls where you have to pay 1 quarter per life (everything else is exactly the same except the YOU DIED screen asks for a quarter to continue) a psychological trap? Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 01:15 on May 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:
There was (apparently still is?) a real money online FPS, which is a sort of similar? It's called Kwari. Videogaming is in and of itself a kind of psychological trap in my opinion. But it's one people willingly subject themselves to. The only question is to what degree are the games exploitative. $30 for a 20 hour singleplayer campaign that you enjoy is a pretty transactional thing. The whole thing is presented to you up front and you decide to pay or not to pay, it's pretty straightforward. I think you can start talking about real 'traps' and exploitation with a different kind of thought experiment where you assess everything in hindsight and put it up front. Would people agree to play a game if they knew that they'd end up spending $1000 on loot boxes over their play time? Would people sign up to an MMO if they knew they the price would be 15,000 hours and all the myriad of opportunity costs that would bring? Obviously no game is nearly so effective to have that effect on 100% of their playerbase. Probably a fraction of a percent. But whether the games encourage or enable that outcome is a different story.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 02:00
|
|
|
I think with MMOs, they do know (or should by now anyways). Between FTL and Isaac alone I've spent roughly a million hours, some to most of which could have been spent doing something better, but I don't think I can fault the devs here, making something enjoyable is the whole idea here. When it moves from enjoyable to habituating there are problems, but, and while devs should avoid making problematically habituating games, if they're not profiting from the continued interaction (lootboxes, arguably MMO subs) its hard to call it intentional vs excessively successful. Also, I've never played Dark Souls, at a quarter a life that's 240 deaths to complete. How many times does someone usually die on their first playthrough? (Also, arcade games, in addition to being brutally difficult, required that you beat them in one sitting).
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Thought experiment: Is a version of Dark Souls where you have to pay 1 quarter per life (everything else is exactly the same except the YOU DIED screen asks for a quarter to continue) a psychological trap? Yeah, absolutely, since the game is designed around death being a common thing with no real penalty and a preponderance of 'gotcha' traps. Paying 25c per game over in Dark Souls would be ludicrously exploitative. Especially with the way online multiplayer works "Well, looks like you beat a bosss so you're automatically opted in to be invaded until you die next. Better hope you're a better player than the legions of people who just spend their time ganking others online' and it would be even worse in 2/3 where you're always able to be invaded. Zore fucked around with this message at 03:17 on May 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
Jeza posted:There was (apparently still is?) a real money online FPS, which is a sort of similar? It's called Kwari. Comparing lootboxes to the opportunity cost of playing a game is a bad argument; humans have always craved leisurely and entertaining activities. Obviously doing some sort of real work will be of greater benefit than doing something leisurely like playing a game, reading a book, or doodling. It's not exploitative to write an entertaining novel that people want to read, and people aren't falling into a psychological trap for wanting to read books, play games, or draw. It is wrong to assume that modern forms of entertainment have somehow lessened us, as you'll find that throughout history people have found all sorts of pointless ways to spend their free time. That said, your later point about certain types of video games actually being exploitative is accurate. Lootboxes are actual psychological traps. They exist in the same design space as slot machines; their sole purpose is to extract as much profit from the user as possible. This is what all publishers want, but ultimately most entertainment products have something to offer to the user other than an addiction
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 06:45
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Thought experiment: Is a version of Dark Souls where you have to pay 1 quarter per life (everything else is exactly the same except the YOU DIED screen asks for a quarter to continue) a psychological trap? Yes, and adding the cost element makes it so for the same reason that difficult arcade machines were exploitative. A choose-your-own-adventure book full of random deaths that charged 1 quarter per life would also be exploitative.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 06:48
|
|
|
Harrow posted:Absolutely. I just want to know what the threshold is for when a game isn't respectful of a player's time. multiplayer games should have no unlocks at all ever, it's very simple
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 06:52
|
|
|
ItBreathes posted:If you're the kind of person who can say 'I'm getting enough looboxes' you're not the target market for lootboxes, and your experience suffers so they can wring out those sweet sweet thousands of dollars from people who can't. my point is that the number of people who can say that is not necessarily fixed, and can vary based on how the game distributes them, how much there is to get out of them, the nature of what you get out of them, etc like, is this a controversial statement? because this is really the core of what i'm trying to get at. i'm not saying games that are less bad are innocent, just that they're... less of an issue than the really, really awful ones. there are meaningful ways to mitigate this problem, even if they don't totally remove it.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 06:52
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:my point is that the number of people who can say that is not necessarily fixed, and can vary based on how the game distributes them, how much there is to get out of them, the nature of what you get out of them, etc For the casual lootbox buyer I'm sure these factors make a difference, but the kind of people who make lootboxes worth implementing aren't swayed by these considerations, they're going to drop loads of cash until they get (thing they want / everything), and will repeat this every time there's a new (thing). The issue isn't in the details of their implementation, it's that there's a slot machine jammed into the middle of the game, and people can and will drop all of their money into them, one quarter at a time (20¢ per pull if you buy $200 worth up front). Just because one game has 'looser slots' doesn't stop it from being a slot machine. The ancillary issue is that things that would have be free/integrated into gameplay get pulled out to be put into these slot machines, so even if you don't care about people with gambling issues, it's still impacting you negatively, just by existing.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:multiplayer games should have no unlocks at all ever, it's very simple I think spending cash for digital goods is fine, the main issue is lootboxes aren't that: they're payment for a pull of a slot machine
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
wyoak posted:I meant lizard brain in the more general "ritual action - instant feedback" sense, not narrowed down to just slot machines. Video games have always been fancy skinner boxes Further back, the 2nd game had a literal slot machine at the end of each level. Now that I think about it, I wonder why console videogames especially rpgs like dragonquest and pokemon all had drat casinos and slot machines since they were before microtransactions, and most people i know grinded to buy the casino coins or save scummed so they weren't very effective at padding the game length either. Tengames fucked around with this message at 03:22 on May 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 03:19
|
|
|
A lot of games and apps had me confirm my age or sign of a diclaimer the last few days, did some new legislation pass?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 17:20
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:A lot of games and apps had me confirm my age or sign of a diclaimer the last few days, did some new legislation pass? Yes, the GDPR in Europe. If you're European your data now belongs to you. http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/21/technology/gdpr-explained-europe-privacy/index.html It's made my work life a bit of a pain in the rear end but it's good legislation and I support it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
Ah, thought it might be a step to restricting children or something - but this is cool, too. 
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
According to jim sterling, CS:GO and DOTA 2 disabled some poo poo in the netherlands due to netherland gambling laws https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NexbBzXiXkI
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2018 17:30
|
|
|
Third World Reggin posted:According to jim sterling, CS:GO and DOTA 2 disabled some poo poo in the netherlands due to netherland gambling laws Yeah. Here's a Eurogamer article about it too. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-06-20-dutch-loot-box-threat-forces-valve-to-pull-cs-go-and-dota-2-item-trading-in-the-netherlands
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 09:01
|
|
|
Valve's response is hilarious. "They say the loot box items should not be transferable, so do we have to... disable item transfer? We don't understand."
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 09:13
|
|
|
The shittiest bit is, they waited in silence until the deadline and then disabled it, instead of giving people a headsup so they could divest of their lovely skins before they're worthless.
Truga fucked around with this message at 09:43 on Jun 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 09:25
|
|
|
I'm glad that the kansspelautoriteit is not looking the other way at this obvious workaround to gambling and I hope this sets a precedent for other countries to follow. Too bad it's just the Netherlands (for now), I feel like the EU as a whole has a lot more clout and has actually forced change on a global level in regard to consumer rights, whereas the Netherlands pushing back by itself will probably just lead to devs hitting the disable trade for this country button like this and calling it a day. What I mean is, if enough countries tell game makers to take out the gambling they might actually alter the game design, rather than just sell exactly the same game minus the gambling. Also, it's still only the tradable component where untradable lootboxes still seem like gambling to me. But hey, baby steps.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 09:41
|
|
|
EU isn't competent for gambling, if I remember correctly. It's a nationally sensitive issue because there's an element of morality in there, and some countries forbid it entirely while others regulate it to varying degrees. However, let's hope indeed that other countries will follow the Dutch example. The Belgian minister of Justice already said in the press that lootboxes "clearly seemed like gambling targeted to children" so we're probably already at 2 countries in the near future.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 09:54
|
|
|
That's wrong, they're gambling targeted to manchildren.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 10:42
|
|
|
Is fortnight gambling?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2018 07:01
|
|
|
joats posted:Is fortnight gambling? The version of Fortnite everybody plays doesn't have lootboxes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2018 10:43
|
|
|
Oh it doesn't? That's nice, how do they make money?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2018 12:20
|
|
|
Shy posted:Oh it doesn't? That's nice, how do they make money? AFAIK you buy V-bucks, which can then be used to buy skins, emotes and similar?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2018 12:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
Shy posted:Oh it doesn't? That's nice, how do they make money? Pretty much -all- cosmetics have to be paid for in one way or another whether directly or by buying a battle pass to make the grind more reasonable. Grinding them without money is technically possible but in practice never gonna happen. The cosmetics are then restricted to a rotation so players need to keep checking in if they have one thing they really want that isn't available yet. This is second-hand from a friend complaining at me since I don't play Fortnite so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong or they've changed anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2018 12:44
|
|