9 replies to this topic

[aGentleWarrior]

Hi,
we have Supply Cache, where we don't exactly know what they contain for us.
Contrary to lootbags in events we usually have to pay MC to open them.

I dislike this. Yes I opened some of them too, but usually with the MC I earn in events.

In many countries such a concept could be seen as gambling which is regulated by laws.

I do not know how much income you hope to generate with the supply caches, or if they indeed help to motivate the player base, but generally this feature should be reconsidered.

Regards!

[Garran Tana]

From what we know they are changing the lootbox system in the future.

[Bonzai VI]

It's technically not gambling, since you are guaranteed to get something in return.
And since it's pixels you can't really say that you got ripped off either.

[Naqser]

Bonzai VI, on 17 November 2017 - 10:15 AM, said:

It's technically not gambling, since you are guaranteed to get something in return.
And since it's pixels you can't really say that you got ripped off either.

"If slot machines gave at least 5 cents each time, it would not be considered gambling"

Technically not defined as gambling, lootboxes, caches and similar systems where you wager something for an uncertain outcome, example, pay money and open a loot box, falls very close to the definition of gambling.

I don't know if you've noticed, but more and more governments have raised an eyebrow to lootboxes, and went "huh? There's this as well?". China has made an effort to regulate lootbox systems, UK is looking into it potentially, and in the wake of Battlefront II, which I seriously doubt you've missed, Belgium is taking a look at Battlefront 2 and Overwatch as well. Danish police even warned people of Battlefront 2.

And before you bring in the ERSB, they were created by the gaming industry and they essentially only protect publishers from government interference. I know they said Lootboxes aren't gambling because the legal definition of Gambling does not cover that system, it's up to governments to tie lootboxes to the legal gambling definition, but hey, EA and BFII sure made sure governments are taking notice of these practices.

Furthermore, basically any lootbox system is quite carefully crafted to be as pleasurable and exciting as possible to open.
You know, fire works, special sound effects and so forth, kind of like slot machines, in order to make them as appealing as possible, and you get those sweet free samples from time to time, not too many of course, then less people would buy them.

So a lot of the things around lootboxes can be found within the gambling industry, yes apparently it's not gambling because "you're guaranteed something". Well if that's the only thing differentiating slot machines from lootboxes in the legal gambling definition, how come casinos haven't made it so the slot machines return at a minimum, 5 cents? Because that would remove them from the "gambling" definition.

[Bonzai VI]

If you pay 1 dollar at the slot machine, and get at least 1 dollar worth of stuff back, is that gambling? If you say no, than the lootboxes aren't gambling since you can't say how much (i.e. Overwatch) the different skins are worth since you can't buy them directly for real money.

[Naqser]

Bonzai VI, on 18 November 2017 - 03:29 AM, said:

If you pay 1 dollar at the slot machine, and get at least 1 dollar worth of stuff back, is that gambling? If you say no, than the lootboxes aren't gambling since you can't say how much (i.e. Overwatch) the different skins are worth since you can't buy them directly for real money.

Essentially yes, you're wagering against an uncertain outcome. Though the price is the least amount you will get out of it.
However, you take up the point that we do not know the value of what we get, and as we can't buy them directly or sell them to others, they have no value at all. Which means you get nothing of economical value out of the boxes at all.
As we acknowledge that, there's a different type of "value" with the contents of the boxes. Items you want, items you're content with and items you do not want, and anything in between. The user him/herself values the contents differently, some items more than other. How does that happen? Cool factor and exclusitivity are often used. You'll find that Rare items are often better, or different looking than Common items of the same type, example skins.

So any higher rarity items are more than often valued / desired more than lower rarity items.
All in all, I can see three types of categories which pay real money:
A- You wager money on getting a specific or a few specific items which you may or may not get.
B- You just buy to see what you get
C- You buy for 100% unlocks.

I'd wager category A largely outnumber categories B and C combined.
And even then, B and C are still wagering on a certain outcome.

So, if it isn't gambling as long as you get something out of it, why haven't casinoes adapted that idea by returning "something" from slot machines? They'd get around all gambling regulations then with slot machines.

[Kalimaster]

I don't consider it gambling. Plus no smelly cigarettes, no loud "Ding Ding Ding" constantly going off, no drunks, etc.

[Shifty McSwift]

Naqser, on 18 November 2017 - 03:06 AM, said:

"If slot machines gave at least 5 cents each time, it would not be considered gambling"

Technically not defined as gambling, lootboxes, caches and similar systems where you wager something for an uncertain outcome, example, pay money and open a loot box, falls very close to the definition of gambling.

I don't know if you've noticed, but more and more governments have raised an eyebrow to lootboxes, and went "huh? There's this as well?". China has made an effort to regulate lootbox systems, UK is looking into it potentially, and in the wake of Battlefront II, which I seriously doubt you've missed, Belgium is taking a look at Battlefront 2 and Overwatch as well. Danish police even warned people of Battlefront 2.

And before you bring in the ERSB, they were created by the gaming industry and they essentially only protect publishers from government interference. I know they said Lootboxes aren't gambling because the legal definition of Gambling does not cover that system, it's up to governments to tie lootboxes to the legal gambling definition, but hey, EA and BFII sure made sure governments are taking notice of these practices.

Furthermore, basically any lootbox system is quite carefully crafted to be as pleasurable and exciting as possible to open.
You know, fire works, special sound effects and so forth, kind of like slot machines, in order to make them as appealing as possible, and you get those sweet free samples from time to time, not too many of course, then less people would buy them.

So a lot of the things around lootboxes can be found within the gambling industry, yes apparently it's not gambling because "you're guaranteed something". Well if that's the only thing differentiating slot machines from lootboxes in the legal gambling definition, how come casinos haven't made it so the slot machines return at a minimum, 5 cents? Because that would remove them from the "gambling" definition.

The differences here in MWO come down to the items being locked to a single player, there is no external market for "winnings" ever, they are only ever "spendings" into the game which you have decided to use on lootboxes. Sometimes those lootboxes can pay MC directly, but then you can only spend MC in the same way you always have. Plus the items in lootboxes can be directly purchased in game, there is no need to use a lootbox to get at something you otherwise couldn't access.

Some loose definitions of gambling may apply there, but more accurately it is just another microtransaction point in the game, where you purchase a random item for potentially cheaper (or more expensive) than the game would normally sell it for. Plus there is a finite source of lootboxes, meted out by the need for a player to play some on average 10 games for 1.

Substantial differences there for MWO lootboxes, they aren't cultivating an environment of gambling, and the winnings don't particulalry have value (outside of what they are, which are items that can be purchased for c-bills and MC already) it is basically just Pavlovian conditioning techniques attached to a microtransaction system.

[Naqser]

Shifty McSwift, on 20 November 2017 - 10:28 PM, said:

The differences here in MWO come down to the items being locked to a single player, there is no external market for "winnings" ever, they are only ever "spendings" into the game which you have decided to use on lootboxes. Sometimes those lootboxes can pay MC directly, but then you can only spend MC in the same way you always have. Plus the items in lootboxes can be directly purchased in game, there is no need to use a lootbox to get at something you otherwise couldn't access.

Some loose definitions of gambling may apply there, but more accurately it is just another microtransaction point in the game, where you purchase a random item for potentially cheaper (or more expensive) than the game would normally sell it for. Plus there is a finite source of lootboxes, meted out by the need for a player to play some on average 10 games for 1.

Substantial differences there for MWO lootboxes, they aren't cultivating an environment of gambling, and the winnings don't particulalry have value (outside of what they are, which are items that can be purchased for c-bills and MC already) it is basically just Pavlovian conditioning techniques attached to a microtransaction system.

Different to Overwatch, Battlefront 2, NFS: Payback, Shadow of War, CoDWWII and many other games using lootboxes which's content is locked to one account and not tradeable, how?
I also do not see how it isn't gambling if I choose to spend money on a box in order to wage against an uncertain outcome for an item I could get otherwise? I'm still putting money on an uncertain outcome, regardless if I can get it outside of the box or not. You even say oit yourself, I may get an item cheaper, or more expensive than it is based on chance, it's a wager I do.

Sure, in their current state lootboxes in MWO are limited as they aren't directly purchasable. But that doesn't change their mechanics, and that you have to spend money on them if you wish to open one, unless you've gotten some keys from an event. You're certainly aware of the big BFII controversey regarding its lootboxes, and how now Netherlands, Belgium, UK and France are taking a look, some even reached a verdict of sorts much to the despise for EA.

And you are aware that PGI did announce quite some time ago that Supply caches will see an overhaul, and the new system didn't sound all too different from now "traditional" lootbox systems. We won't need keys to open them, we can't see what's in them but we'll get everything in them. On top of that we have the incoming Mech Geometry stuff being added which can further add to contents available in the new system.

[Shifty McSwift]

Naqser, on 22 November 2017 - 12:59 AM, said:

Different to Overwatch, Battlefront 2, NFS: Payback, Shadow of War, CoDWWII and many other games using lootboxes which's content is locked to one account and not tradeable, how?

Items that are available in game through normal purchase means? That have no real sense of "rarity" and again, create no external player market based on their "trading" through account selling and the like.

I mentioned the "differences here in mwo" in relation to concepts of gambling in general, not to try and sell a specific sense of difference to a specific game, I don't know all the details of every game ever using lootboxes, and never suggested I did, just pointed out the specifics for MWO.

I'll say it again, loose definitions of gambling might apply, but just because it is a chance based system, does not define that as gambling, and neither does the spending of MC.

Of course that will vary from place to place and person to person.

Edited by Shifty McSwift, 23 November 2017 - 01:38 AM.