Jump to content

Better Loot Boxes (Supply Caches)


No replies to this topic

#1 Pineapple Salad

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 142 posts
  • LocationFinland

Posted 14 October 2017 - 02:46 AM

Since everyone seems to be jumping on the lootbox hate bandwagon lately, I though I had to say this:

Well designed lootboxes for free to play games as a microtransaction mechanic = fine.
Any kind of lootboxes with microtransactions for games that you paid full price already = not fine.

But since MWO is a free to play game...

Why not make the lootboxes a bit better, because honestly, they suck pretty hard right now.

The roulette mechanic is fancy and all, and it's different than how everyone else makes lootboxes, but it also makes the boxes feel like really bad value.

If PGI doesn't want to change the lootboxes to be like everyone else's (blind boxes but you get everything inside) at least make the item weighing equal across all items in the box. There's no point in opening a box with some super fancy item with 0,5% chance, when you know you're more likely to get an LRM-15 with 50% chance. Also making it so that you get multiple items from a single box would work great in making them feel like better value. For example, give also items adjacent to the one where the selector landed. That way you'd get 3/8 items from each box, and a better chance of getting the one you actually want.

Also, the lootboxes are kinda pointless as a microtransaction mechanic if you can only get them randomly from matches. Make them purchaseable from the ingame store. If the lootboxes were better value, maybe people would actually want to buy them too. And also make some more reliable way of earning them in game, for example give them out to people fullfilling specific goals in the match. One for the player with most damage, one for the player with most kills, one for the player with most match score, one for the player who capped the most, etc.

And that's what I think about the lootboxes.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users