|
MisterBibs posted:The flaw with this is the same flaw in what cat doter suggested: in the end, the players as a whole are a-ok with this thing you're mad about. If folks didn't ultimately like the lootcrate stuff, they wouldn't funnel cash into it. If they had a beef with AAA publishers, they wouldn't buy them in the first place. people do things that are bad or harmful to them all the time, like how you keep eating hot dogs for some reason even though your lovely, idiot rear end in a top hat body keeps trying to kill you for doing it
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
Has anyone checked out YongYea's videos? He apparently did something on NeoGAF, but the other video titles on his channel don't seem to reek of Gamer. Gamers are pissed after all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
somekindofguy posted:Has anyone checked out YongYea's videos? He apparently did something on NeoGAF, but the other video titles on his channel don't seem to reek of Gamer. YongYea's pretty chill, he's like a halfway between Jim Sterling and Angry Joe, but without the gimmick and showmanship, he's fun. The man has a crazy love for Metal Gear too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
Alaois posted:people do things that are bad or harmful to them all the time Thing is, you'd have to convince a ton of people that spending a few dollars here or there is bad/harmful/worth joining a crusade over. The same folks, I remind you, who are the same ones who are occasionally kicking in those few dollars in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
Alaois posted:people do things that are bad or harmful to them all the time, like how you keep eating hot dogs for some reason even though your lovely, idiot rear end in a top hat body keeps trying to kill you for doing it Yeah, a lot of people are overlooking the whole "data-driven psychological manipulation" aspect. It's a bit like downplaying the opiate epidemic with "well, a lot of people really like opiates" because, I mean, yes, a lot of people do enjoy lootcrates whether or not lootcrates are good for them. I'm not going to walk back the opiate comparison either, since we have the architects of the microtransaction economy on tape talking about "whales" and "dolphins." The root of the system is exploitation of addictive behaviour patterns. Anyway it doesn't matter because Gamers are going to stan for huge publishers even if they start harvesting players' blood rather than providing even modest pressure towards sustainable business practices, and it's going to end up coming down to some draconian anti-gambling regulations that will massively over-shoot the mark and destroy much of what we currently think of as the game development industry, like the ION Storm crash x1000.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
John Murdoch posted:Wasn't somebody here hoping for a new Everything Wrong With Everything Wrong With? gently caress this was cathartic 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
FoldableHuman posted:Yeah, a lot of people are overlooking the whole "data-driven psychological manipulation" aspect. It's a bit like downplaying the opiate epidemic with "well, a lot of people really like opiates" because, I mean, yes, a lot of people do enjoy lootcrates whether or not lootcrates are good for them. I'm not going to walk back the opiate comparison either, since we have the architects of the microtransaction economy on tape talking about "whales" and "dolphins." The root of the system is exploitation of addictive behaviour patterns. i was just trying to make a joke about the hot dog idiot but thank you for this well-considered reply. you make good videos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
FoldableHuman posted:It's a bit like downplaying the opiate epidemic with "well, a lot of people really like opiates" because, I mean, yes, a lot of people do enjoy lootcrates whether or not lootcrates are good for them.... The root of the system is exploitation of addictive behaviour patterns. We're talking about literal video game content, though. Police stations across the country aren't carrying vials of player skins because poor Jimmy hasn't had his lootcrate fix in a few days. Lives are not being lost because someone bought too much Star Citizen jpgs. Nobody is going to jail because they desperately needed the funds for a DLC and robbed a place. Public health officials aren't screaming at whoever'll listen about season passes being the worst crisis in American history. Publishers and players have agreed that throwing a few bucks into a game - be it a mobile one or a AAA blockbuster - is something normal. That bell can't be unrung, and both parties involved don't want it to. How are you (general you) going to suddenly make this into something to crusade against? Take away the lootcrate stuff, and people will just be asking where the lootcrate stuff is. MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 00:39 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:We're talking about literal video game content, though. Police stations across the country aren't carrying vials of player skins because poor Jimmy hasn't had his lootcrate fix in a few days. Lives are not being lost because someone bought too much Star Citizen jpgs. Nobody is going to jail because they desperately needed the funds for a DLC and robbed a place. Public health officials aren't screaming at whoever'll listen about season passes being the worst crisis in American history. You're right that police aren't carrying around the "vials of player skins" because you're a dumbass who's trying to undercut the core point and insist it's not a problem simply because the two problems don't map to each other in a 1 to 1 ratio. Superficially you're correct that the consequences aren't as dramatic or sudden as a drug overdose, but for that keen observation of the bark on the tree you're missing the actual consequences, the slow, insidious decline into debt, a decay amortized over months and excused specifically because of the invisibility that makes it deadly in the first place. Since you seem to be standing on the docks while the boat of common sense pulls out of the harbour, the financial pressures imposed by a gambling habit, doubly assisted once credit cards are brought into the mix, is a well studied issue. That the people enthralled in a gambling addiction don't match the cartoon picture of desperation you hold as the benchmark, a barely coherent tweaker scratching at the imaginary bugs under their skin, just makes you a dumbass chronically short on both imagination and empathy. Trust me, though, that it'll only take a few more high profile examples of parents saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in debt because their kid got hooked on lootboxes. Eventually one of them is going to hit the mainstream, the words "gambling" and "children" side-by-side, and the whole house of cards will fall faster than you imagined it could under the weight of a right proper moral panic. It only took one example of a kid buying a couple hundred dollars worth of fake currency in a Smurfs game and Apple changed the app store basically overnight. And Jesus, no, no one outside of accounting is going to miss lootcrates when they're gone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
The reason why people hate lootcrates in games is because it's gambling and even worse is that it normalises gambling. I play DBZ Dokkan Battle and I always find myself wondering why I play it when getting decent characters is just gambling. It's true of gacha games in general. And as stated prior to my post, nobody is going to miss lootcrates. People are just reserved to them being in a game because they have just become the big thing this year. Testekill fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
FoldableHuman posted:You're right that police aren't carrying around the "vials of player skins" because you're a dumbass who's trying to undercut the core point and insist it's not a problem simply because the two problems don't map to each other in a 1 to 1 ratio. Superficially you're correct that the consequences aren't as dramatic or sudden as a drug overdose, but for that keen observation of the bark on the tree you're missing the actual consequences, the slow, insidious decline into debt, a decay amortized over months and excused specifically because of the invisibility that makes it deadly in the first place. Since you seem to be standing on the docks while the boat of common sense pulls out of the harbour, the financial pressures imposed by a gambling habit, doubly assisted once credit cards are brought into the mix, is a well studied issue. That the people enthralled in a gambling addiction don't match the cartoon picture of desperation you hold as the benchmark, a barely coherent tweaker scratching at the imaginary bugs under their skin, just makes you a dumbass chronically short on both imagination and empathy. you're arguing with someone who's only point in any debate is "it made money, so it's good" and also got owned repeatedly by trying to eat hot dogs
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
FoldableHuman posted:You're right that police aren't carrying around the "vials of player skins" because you're a dumbass who's trying to undercut the core point and insist it's not a problem simply because the two problems don't map to each other in a 1 to 1 ratio. You're the one who explicitly said that you aren't going to walk back the analogy, so I provided examples of actual addictive behavior that has actual consequences that actual people acknowledge we need to deal with. There's no such things with lootcrates and video game DLC. There's no problems that your average everyday game-player experiences that makes them think there's an issue. Especially after they've probably plunked down some money on that stuff, and aren't upset over it. Your first step with regards to ending lootcrates/etc is to show that there's a problem. You know, like all the things that people opposed to lootcrates have been able to do. quote:Trust me, though, that it'll only take a few more high profile examples of parents saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in debt because their kid got hooked on lootboxes. Eventually one of them is going to hit the mainstream, the words "gambling" and "children" side-by-side, and the whole house of cards will fall faster than you imagined it could under the weight of a right proper moral panic. There is a God, there is a plan, and the spaceship is coming! It's not about trust, or prophecies of an eventual public health crisis (over video game content, I remind you) that'll make people stop buying lootcrates and DLC. It needs to be something legitimate. No matter how Jim kvetches about them, they still exist because folks like them and publishers like the money. What are the actual problems, if any? What are the concrete-and-currently-exant reasons why they must be droped? Not some high-minded nonsense, actual legitimate reasons. How are you going to tell Phil that the five bucks he spent on some DLC (which he's entirely happy about) is some horrendous and evil thing? People complaining about lootboxes are currently the same people who swore up and down they'd boycott whatever-game-it-was because it didn't have dedicated servers. Last I checked, they are currently playing whatever-game-it-was. FoldableHuman posted:And Jesus, no, no one outside of accounting is going to miss lootcrates when they're gone. Of course they will. They'll want the stuff they currently expect. DLC, skins, models. More stuff. Lootcrates and DLC stuff is the New Normal of gaming. You buy a game, and you're sold additional other stuff. You either do it, or you don't, because you're an adult or someone with a parental guardian. MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:There's no such things with lootcrates and video game DLC. yes, there is quote:There's no problems that your average everyday game-player experiences that makes them think there's an issue. There's no problems that your average everyday beer-drinker experiences, but that doesn't stop alcoholism from being a thing. quote:People complaining about lootboxes are currently the same people who swore up and down they'd boycott whatever-game-it-was because it didn't have dedicated servers. Last I checked, they are currently playing whatever-game-it-was. I think that game was Modern Warfare 3? That was quite a while ago, though, like, well before lootcrates were even a thing, so I dunno what that has to do with anything? quote:Of course they will. They'll want the stuff they currently expect. DLC, skins, models. More stuff. It's part-and-parcel of gaming, now. It's the Normal of gaming. You buy a game, and you're sold additional other stuff. You don't have to actually buy them, or actually gamble for them, so you just don't spend the money if you don't want. I have well over a thousand dollars worth of Rock Band DLC. Probably closer to two. But, see, that's not gambling. That's purchasing. If I had to gamble to get more songs? If I had to buy a set of five lootcrates that had a random chance of having a new song with another four I might already have? Or if new songs were mixed in with new shirts and guitars? If I tried that every week? I probably would have ten at most, because I'm not gambling away hundreds of dollars for a chance of getting something I want. SatansBestBuddy fucked around with this message at 02:08 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
SatansBestBuddy posted:yes, there is Fine, show me it. Something on par or equal to any other gambling issue. Something that has caused widespread-enough-to-warrant-doing-something-about-it levels. Not predicting future levels, but right now. SatansBestBuddy posted:There's no problems that your average everyday beer-drinker experiences, but that doesn't stop alcoholism from being a thing. I agree; there's no reason to to change the system. Especially since, you know, alcoholism is a real thing and the other thing we're discussing is extra video game content you can gamble for. SatansBestBuddy posted:I think that game was Modern Warfare 3? That was quite a while ago, though, like, well before lootcrates were even a thing, so I dunno what that has to do with anything? Gamers overreact to things; treating molehills as mountains, for hits and attention. Show me someone who won't buy a lootcrate/extra poo poo here or there on moral principles, and you'll show me someone lying or very weird. Like I said, it's the new normal for gaming. SatansBestBuddy posted:I probably would have ten at most, because I'm not gambling away hundreds of dollars for a chance of getting something I want. Exactly. You're like most people. If you're not going to get what you want very well, you don't pull the trigger on it. So why, then, do you suppose that extra video game stuff is somehow different? MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 02:17
|
|
|
Max Wilco posted:https://twitter.com/the_moviebob/status/922812758218899456 I feel like the fact that he had acquaintances, plural, that believed in the illuminati does a lot to explain what kind of a person Bob is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 02:25
|
|
|
Imagine thinking you're so smart you would be even invited to potentially "sign up" to join a supposed "Illuminati." I wish I had that kind of self-confidence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
Max Wilco posted:https://twitter.com/the_moviebob/status/922812758218899456 Lot going on here. Wild that someone who was really into the Illuminati as a New Atheist power fantasy grew up to be the most insufferable self-regarding pseudointellectual on a platform that also hosts Sargon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
Where's Mr. Bibs, you are horribly incorrect
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
Doesn't gambling imply you might lose your money and earn nothing? With lootcrates you're getting something no matter what or am I missing something
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
Like for instance the Shadow of War lootcrates say stuff like "You'll get three items at least of which at least one will be Legendary" and I know I'm getting three items of which at least one will be Legendary, and it could be two or even three. I'm not risking getting nothing
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
Whereas if I go to a casino or whatever I can gamble and lose all my money or get something in return, it's a gamble, that's the definition of gambling
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:Doesn't gambling imply you might lose your money and earn nothing? With lootcrates you're getting something no matter what or am I missing something When the things you get can be things you already have or don't need, they amount to losing money, because you paid real money for it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:Like for instance the Shadow of War lootcrates say stuff like "You'll get three items at least of which at least one will be Legendary" and I know I'm getting three items of which at least one will be Legendary, and it could be two or even three. I'm not risking getting nothing Nope, you've got it right. The only way to "get nothing" is something you already have, but you're still always getting something for what you're paying for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
TheMaestroso posted:When the things you get can be things you already have or don't need, they amount to losing money, because you paid real money for it. Again, in SoW I can break down those items I got for in game resources or maybe they have different upgrades or stats than the ones I already have
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:Again, in SoW I can break down those items I got for in game resources or maybe they have different upgrades or stats than the ones I already have That's completely irrelevant to the issue of using real money on a mystery box of in-game resources. E: Also, this vvv
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:Doesn't gambling imply you might lose your money and earn nothing? No, it just implies "you might end up in a better spot, or you might end up in a worse spot". If you have a chance at getting something you feel is worth the money if you bought it directly, and you have a chance at something you feel isn't worth the money if you bought it directly, that's gambling. Like if I said "you pay me a dollar, I flip a coin; on heads I give you $1.50, on tails I give you $0.50", that's still clearly gambling even though you'll always still end up with something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
But still basing myself off the sow example you're paying money for digital goods and services that provide a net good for you. You're not getting gear or orcs that make your gameplay experience worse than if you hadn't gotten themTheMaestroso posted:That's completely irrelevant to the issue of using real money on a mystery box of in-game resources. I mean the game gave me the currency for free and I used it to buy a loot box and I was satisfied with what I got but not enough to feel like I had to spend money to get ahead in the game, nobody's forcing you
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
Idran posted:No, it just implies "you might end up in a better spot, or you might end up in a worse spot". If you have a chance at getting something you feel is worth the money if you bought it directly, and you have a chance at something you feel isn't worth the money if you bought it directly, that's gambling. It's more like pay me a dollar and I flip a coin, on heads you get $1.00 of resources and on tails you get $1.00 of resources because it's abstract intangible gear that is not exactly easy to quantify
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:I mean the game gave me the currency for free and I used it to buy a loot box and I was satisfied with what I got but not enough to feel like I had to spend money to get ahead in the game, nobody's forcing you This is a stupid argument because, yes, you didn't feel forced to. That doesn't mean other people didn't. The entire point of the lootbox system, and all the research that goes into gambling-related stuff, is to prey on human psychology. People with addictive personalities have much harder times not buying into the system and that's a bad thing when doing so requires actual money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:I mean the game gave me the currency for free and I used it to buy a loot box and I was satisfied with what I got but not enough to feel like I had to spend money to get ahead in the game, nobody's forcing you "Nobody's forcing you" is the weakest argument you can make for this. If a game has a screen full of options for purchasing loot boxes, and also points you toward using real money to buy more in-game currency, it is nudging you toward buying loot boxes. If said game also creates situations where it becomes tedious to progress without getting loot boxes, then it is nudging you even more toward buying loot boxes. It's the same psychological effect that fuels the majority of mobile games (though the timer-based economies therein make it more obvious you're being taken advantage of).
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:It's more like pay me a dollar and I flip a coin, on heads you get $1.00 of resources and on tails you get $1.00 of resources because it's abstract intangible gear that is not exactly easy to quantify Yeah, that's why it's subjective when you're not talking about money for money. If all possible rewards are a gain as a person sees it, if nothing would ever make them disappointed or regret spending the money, then it's not gambling. If some of them are disappointing, then it is gambling. So the same thing can be gambling for one person and not gambling for another.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
Genocyber posted:This is a stupid argument because, yes, you didn't feel forced to. That doesn't mean other people didn't. Nobody has ever been forced in a video game to buy extra stuff for their video game, full stop. There's been nag screens, there's been time delays, but there's never been any sort of force. If you have such a strongly addictive personality that a video game's purchasing system might cause that, don't play the drat game. That's on you; do your research about games with specific triggers before you fork over money for it. By that nonsense logic, we shouldn't have bars because some people feel forced to drink alcohol. poo poo, even video games without lootbox/dlc systems push that Feel Good button, sometimes to some people's detriment. Do we ban video games because those people feel 'forced to' play them for ages? No, we don't. MisterBibs fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
FoldableHuman posted:because you're a dumbass who's trying to undercut the core point and insist it's not a problem simply because the two problems don't map to each other in a 1 to 1 ratio.  If I had a nickle for every time someone nitpicked the edge cases of a analogy instead of addressing the thing being discussed itself, I'd have, like... this thing by now: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Wow who could've guessed bibs would argue from a lovely anti-consumer standpoint.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:Wow who could've guessed bibs would argue from a lovely anti-consumer standpoint. Consumers have made it clear they approve of lootboxes. If everyone agreed with Jim, we wouldn't have had the Mage's Tower because Horse Armor made Bethesda reconsider the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:Wow who could've guessed bibs would argue from a lovely anti-consumer standpoint. But anti-consumer stuff makes money so therefore it's good and furthermore
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
Mr. Bibs thinks that "certain groups do more illegal things" and also his own body realizes how much of a drain on the world he is and violently rebels when he tries to eat hot dogs
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
Loot Crates are in games that little kids play gently caress. That. poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
And just a note... The whole "Whale" and "Dolphin" terminology? It comes from casinos. It's how casinos describe people who they can make lots and lots and lots of money from. And by "make money", they don't mean by selling them useful goods and services in a mutually beneficial exchange. They mean by getting this person to gamble and lose lots and lots and lots of money. So-- when those gambling regulations DO come down, it'll come as absolutely no surprise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
Blizzard actually had to walk back their seasonal lootcrates a step when they first started, because you couldn't spend Credits on the rewards to buy them outright. Yhey fixed that by making the skins cost triple the Legendary skins. Credits can still only be obtained by chance in Loot Crates. MisterBibs posted:Nobody has ever been forced in a video game to buy extra stuff for their video game, full stop. There's been nag screens, there's been time delays, but there's never been any sort of force. The whole issue of an addiction is they cant control themselves you idiot, and the publishers are actively banking on that fact. Also I don't think you've considered your comparison through, given how hard ads for alcohol go to hide that quick mention of drinkresponsibly at the end. Neddy Seagoon fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Oct 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2017 04:29
|
|
