Are Black Lion Keys "Loot Boxes" ?

[Teratus.2859]

Guildwars 2 is one game I would honestly give and exception to regarding this lootbox problem but I expect that should any legal restrictions come around Gw2 will be effected by them as well.

 

Are Black Lion Chests Lootboxes?..

Yes, I think it's obvious to say they are.

 

Are Black Lion Chests unfair and malicious ingame items designed to nickle and dime the players and exploit additive behavior for financial gain?..

Absolutely not!

 

I want to make it absolutely clear that when it comes to Lootboxes.. Anet is one of the only companies I know of who does them right and doesn't screw their consumers over with them..

Sure we get some cool items exclusive in them which does make me want to buy keys from time to time but with keys being fairly common rewards for map completion and story chapters as well as the rare random drop.. plus the ability to convert in game gold into gems and then into keys, It is absolutely unfair to even put Anet, and Gw2's Black Lion Chests on the same level as the greedy, malicious, morally bankrupt lootbox practices of companies like EA..

 

They're not even remotely the same thing by comparrison because Anet does them right and fairly..

Where as most other companies see them exclusively as a tool to exploit their players..

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > @"Trise.2865" said:

> > > Though by far one of the more "fair" and "optional" microtransactions in any game, Black Lion Chests are, by definition, loot boxes. Even with the prizes listed along with potential chance of each, it is an unknown, random digital product bought with cash.

> >

> > So when people are talking about "key farming" they're talking about getting out their wallet and buying keys?

> The very idea of microtransactions is to pressure to you give them *money* in exchange for *time*. It applies to pretty much every f2p game. They say it's free and oh you can play it totally for free. And then you have the option between doing something every 24h... or pay $1 to do it right away. Oh and you need to do it at least 3 times a day to compete with the people paying. And you can only pay in $5 increments.

>

> Key farming is just another variant of this.

>

> There are many different levels of hell and for loot boxes its the same thing. BL chests are *technically* loot boxes, but they arent something that is considered oppressive and hangs like a shadow over the game. Even some things that would be considered "bad" such as bag slots, bank slots and characters werent really designed to be showstoppers from the start, unlike how many games rip features out and basicly force you to pay for them (I say "from the start" because I would argue that Anet went waaaaay overboard with clogging the inventory over the years). Anet has clearly made a game that both we and them enjoy, instead of trying a quick cash grab. And that's great. But BL chests are still *technically* loot boxes.

>

> The problem I see with any FTC investigation is that it will be stiff businessmen or so called "experts" doing the investigation, instead of actual gamers playing the actual games. The game industry **clearly** cannot regulate itself since they will just blanket say "its not gambling" even if its a game about gambling that only contain gambling and you're playing it at a casino so in that sense I guess its fine... but I doubt much good will come of it. Maybe it'll dial back the worst game microtransactions but at the same time games like GW2 will suffer for it.

 

I'm very much aware of what it means, what it's intent is. The point is, unless you're feeling like you have to have this skin, right now, the chests aren't all that important. The keys can, in fact, be obtained w/out spending a dime on them, and so, the point I was arguing against is in fact invalid. Yes, people will buy the keys, people, as a whole, will buy anything. There is no requirement, however, to buy keys to open the chests, and you aren't required to buy the chests, they pretty much drop like candy in all levels of play. So one can, if one chooses, play with them for free, for the life of the game, unless something changes about how you can acquire the keys. The poster I was quoting evidently feels as if they are oppressive, otherwise why exaggerate, to be polite, about how the keys are acquired, and how important the fact that you don't know for sure what's in them is?

 

We can't have gamers doing it either. In AC Odyssey, they have an item that you can only buy with a special currency that can only be obtained in game. You can't buy the gifts, or the currency from the cash shop, only from this particular vendor has the gifts, and yet, I have seen them described as P2W. P2W gets thrown around a lot here too, by people that have absolutely no concept for the actual meaning. Getting a special mount skin isn't P2W. It offers no advantages to another player in PvP, nor does the actual skin add any advantages in PvE. I've seen the claim that the indestructible tools are also P2W. So really, who's left? The biggest problem I see is "we need more government interference in our lives, because we're not capable of running them on our own". The children referenced in the study in this thread are spending, according to the brief provided later, their own money on loot boxes. Even when they're spending their parent's money, who's responsibility is that? All of the people claiming "there needs to be a law" are saying, in no uncertain terms, that it's the government's responsibility. It's really not. Loot box legislation isn't going to keep our borders safer, and it's not going to pay to support our military, or keep our highways functional. These are the responsibilities of government, not insuring that Joe and Mary Sue's kids aren't spending every time they make on loot boxes.

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > > > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > > > It's up to each nation's government to decide what is or isn't gambling, what is or isn't a loot box, and whether that's the sort of practice they want to regulate. When I see a headline (or worse, a politician) saying

> > > > >... Commission that found 31% of children in the country had at one point or another paid money to open a loot box

> > > > I want to know:

> > > > * Was this an estimate or did they actually count everyone?

> > > > * How did they define "loot box"?

> > > > * Where did the money come from? (Already in the account or using a credit card for the transaction.)

> > >

> > > Gamestop and other stores sell gem cards and many other gaming currencies so getting real money onto an account without a credit card isn't that much of a problem. Also, a lot of the ATM cards being issued now are debit cards which can be used for online purchases just like a credit card (however, a debit card doesn't offer credit, you can only spend money that's in the account).

> > >

> > > > * What games was this in? PC? Console? Mobile?

> > > > * What age ranges?

> > > > * Of those kids who opened one, how many went on to open more?

> > > > * In what way do the lootboxes affect the outcome of the game? (e.g. many mobile games, lootboxes are required to 'win')

> > > >

> > > > Good public policy isn't based on alarming headlines. It requires distinguish those people who can benefit from a change in rules versus those who won't be affected versus those who might be harmed.

> > > >

> > > > I am not suggesting that the FTC shouldn't consider the issue; there's no question in my mind that the various gaming studios (big & small) aren't regulating themselves to prevent this sort of thing, even after Belgium's decision earlier this year. I just hope that people will keep things in perspective and not treat all lootboxes as the same thing, not assume that RNG+money = evil.

> > >

> > > Some of that is or should be irrelevant to policy makers, they don't and shouldn't care if one loot box is better value than another or whether a game is pay to win, they should only care if this practice is or should be considered gambling by whatever definition they use (even if it means redefining gambling). If it is then it should be regulated as such.

> > >

> > > At the least that means that the company should require a gambling license to operate in any given country and no doubt it will have tax implications for those companies. It would also generally mean that games with loot boxes would have to carry 18+ age ratings.

> >

> > No. Redefining gambling isn't a way to go. If we want to go there, then it will end up a totally subjective thing, and you can say bye to the beetle races, because you could be considered to be gambling on your skill to finish them in the set time. Any time you have to redefine a term to fit a narrative, there's something wrong with the narrative. As much as I don't buy loot boxes, I have yet to get a key that yielded absolutely nothing in return for the time investment I put in to get it. The "popular" definition is "I didn't get what I wanted, so I didn't get anything", which is closer to an oxymoron than a fact.

>

> I'm not talking about you or I redefining what gambling is to suit our own needs, I agree that's a silly thing to do, I'm talking about policy makers possibly having to change their country's _legal_ definition of gambling to cover loot boxes. Changing the legal definition will not result in it being a subjective thing. I personally tend to avoid them because they feel like a mugs game to me but I think they probably should be treated like scratch cards or lottery tickets and I know that where I'm from you can't buy those of you're under 18.

>

 

It's no less silly to say "the government needs to redefine a word to protect us from ourselves". At the end of the day, that's what insisting on legislation around loot boxes is, attempting to protect us from ourselves. Companies can offer anything they want on their market places. If people don't buy it, they'll have to figure out something else, if they want to turn a profit. But we have the "I want it now" crowd, that will buy anything, including random loot boxes, in order to get it, and as I said earlier, this isn't something that can be fixed with legislation.

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"Trise.2865" said:

> > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > @"Trise.2865" said:

> > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > > > @"Trise.2865" said:

> > > > > Though by far one of the more "fair" and "optional" microtransactions in any game, Black Lion Chests are, by definition, loot boxes. Even with the prizes listed along with potential chance of each, it is an unknown, random digital product bought with cash.

> > > >

> > > > So when people are talking about "key farming" they're talking about getting out their wallet and buying keys?

> > >

> > > Does key farming guarantee, or "lock in" the result of the box? Does key farming remove the product from the cash shop?

> >

> > Does the fact that I can gain keys in game w/out spending a dime make that irrelevant? Yes, yes it does. It's free, so it's a fun minigame to pass the time. "But my results aren't guaranteed" doesn't matter, when, despite what you claimed, you don't have to spend a dime to play.

>

> So an item being sold, but also given away for time spent, is suddenly not being sold? and that's irrelevant to the discussion somehow, despite being part of the literal and legal definition, because... you said so?

>

> Well, I'm convinced... /sarcasm

 

If you lack the self control to keep your wallet in your pocket, that's not a gaming issue. I'm not buying keys, but I've opened a few dozen boxes in my time here, all with keys that, despite your claim, I got for free. "But I don't want to spend the time required, so I pay for keys" isn't an argument either: You made a choice to spend money on a completely optional item, didn't get what you wanted, and now it's someone else's fault?

 

These items aren't available for free simply because I said so, just as they aren't only available for cash, as you attempted to claim. You had to distort the truth to support your argument. What that tells me is that there's something wrong with your argument, otherwise, you could simply present the facts, and go on.

[Zunki.3916]

> @"Ashantara.8731" said:

> > @"Zunki.3916" said:

> > Thats just like saying make alcohol illegal because children can eventually buy it anyways. It shoul be illegal to sell it to this audience.

>

> Alcohol _should_ be illegal, just like cigarettes should be, because it _is_ a drug in many regards (addiction potential, clouds your mind, potential to cause severe harm to your health). In Sweden, they recently raised the price for any alcoholic product to a set minimum to discourage people from buying alcoholic beverages frequently.

>

> As for loot boxes, yes, they are gambling - they should be globally banned from any game. Only time will tell if this will ever happen, though.

 

This "forbid what I don't want" mentality is what is getting us to a censored Internet. Don't make stuff illegal by law and alienate the consumers. I'm fine with encouraging to not use any drug, or to raise Prices. But making it so that you are a criminal out of consuming such drugs doesen't really make it better, it only encourages black market and corruption, and crime.

[Swagger.1459]

This stuff again...

 

Ummm Black lion “keys” are not loot boxes.

 

Black lion chests mostly contain items you can buy directly with gems on the gem store, or convert gems into gold and buy items on the TP.

 

Players also don’t have to spend a dime getting black lion keys, that open chests, because you can exchange gold for gems and buy them, among a lot of other stuff... Esentially making most things in gw2 obtainable through a cash FREE process.

 

Long story short... Kids don’t have to use their mom’s or dad’s credit card to buy stuff, because they can get free stuff with game gold...

 

 

...Careful what some of you wish for, because the future of every game just might be mandatory monthly access fees to play, and high “game store” prices on direct purchase items... I’m not a fan of predatory practices by game companies, but cash has to come from somewhere to pay for things so get ready for more qq in the future...

[Gehenna.3625]

They are lootboxes since the result is RNG and you can buy them with real money. I think they are less intrusive than in some other games but the reality is that the keys are not cheap exactly and people can really blow a lot of money on them just to get that one item.

 

I think that when it comes down to it, ArenaNet would be wise to plan for alternate ways to deal with this side of the cash shop. I think that having BLCs with keys dropping purely from game activities can be a fun activity as such. The rest will have to be down to making it just like the rest of the items: direct sale only.

 

I get that for companies selling something with a high repeat value is attractive but it's not a customer-oriented approach. Again, I think ArenaNet have most certainly been quite a bit milder in their approach to RNG loot. Even the mount licenses were guaranteed to not give doubles but I think in due course they will have to rethink the RNG strategies in relation to real money spending. And there are other things that do not fall under lootboxes that are out there that they can use. It may not be as easy and profitable but unfortunately the gaming industry has proven to be unable to self-regulate across the board and that's why governments are getting involved now.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

While there is a sense of 'gambling' here, I don't think it qualifies since the only items available from BL chests are cosmetic in nature, and don't impact your ability to complete content, as well as you are guaranteed 1 BL statuette + 1 bag o' the month from each chest, with 2-3 other random items.

 

So you could make the case that you are spending a BL key to get 1 statuette + 1 reward from that series of chests, and you get 2 (or 3 if lucky!) bonus items.

 

Personally I'm not a fan of the BL chests, but I don't object to them either. I've opened several chests but all with keys that were earned from map completion, RNG drops, or from weekly key farming. I don't intend to ever buy one with gold or real money, but I won't stand in the way of others who wish to do so. We can all choose to support this game in our own way.

[Catslock.3074]

Does the box contain items that are randomized? Yes. When opening said box do you know exactly what you are about to get? No. It's a Loot Box. Can you buy each of the items in the loot box separately/ or earn them in game from event/dungeons so you don't have to open a single Loot Box? No. Example, Envoy Staff skin can only be obtained via Loot Box and cannot be sold on the trade post once obtained meaning all players who want it must play Loot Boxes. Is GW2 labeled Adult Only? No. So children under the age of 18 have access to random chance boxes that they can/do spend real world cash on for a 'chance' at an item. Black Lion Tickets used to be whole items and had a decent drop chance. They split these tickets into scraps to lower the chances and increase spending on Loot Boxes. This was not an accident. Some of the coolest looking skins in game are locked behind tickets. These skins cannot exist on trade post unless someone somewhere has gambled for those scraps and whole tickets.

[Swagger.1459]

The future...

 

FTC... “Lootboxes are bad for kids. no more lootboxes.”

 

Gamers... “Oh yeah, we won! Rejoice my sisters and bros!”

 

Game Companies... “FTC ruling has killed off a source of income that helps pays the bills and employees, funds future development and maintenance... so here are your awesome new monthly membership options... $20 monthly basic membership, $30 monthly advanced membership, $40 monthly premiere membership, $50 monthly super VIP membership...”

 

Game Companies part 2 “You can now purchase ALL items on the gem store (triple the original cost)! We also removed the gold to gems exchange function as a result of this awesome new QoL direct buy feature!”

 

Gamers... “QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ“

 

 

 

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"Catslock.3074" said:

> Does the box contain items that are randomized? Yes. When opening said box do you know exactly what you are about to get? No. It's a Loot Box. Can you buy each of the items in the loot box separately/ or earn them in game from event/dungeons so you don't have to open a single Loot Box? No. Example, Envoy Staff skin can only be obtained via Loot Box and cannot be sold on the trade post once obtained meaning all players who want it must play Loot Boxes. Is GW2 labeled Adult Only? No. So children under the age of 18 have access to random chance boxes that they can/do spend real world cash on for a 'chance' at an item. Black Lion Tickets used to be whole items and had a decent drop chance. They split these tickets into scraps to lower the chances and increase spending on Loot Boxes. This was not an accident. Some of the coolest looking skins in game are locked behind tickets. These skins cannot exist on trade post unless someone somewhere has gambled for those scraps and whole tickets.

 

Actually, as can be seen by the post directly above yours, you do, in fact, know exactly what you're going to get. As to children being exposed to it, I've covered this already: If Joe and Mary Sue gamer are unable to monitor how their kids are spending in online games, the issue isn't with the online games. The first step to this is to simply deny access to the card to their kids. It doesn't matter what it is they want, if they have to spend money, then they're going to have to ask for it. If, on the other hand, they spend their allowance on cards for gems, and are limited by what they have on the card, there's no issue. If their psyche is so fragile that they can't handle the concept of "you don't always get what you want", then Joe and Mary Sue have some work to do. Raising our children to understand life, and fiscal responsibility isn't the government's job, it's our job.

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> They are lootboxes since the result is RNG and you can buy them with real money. I think they are less intrusive than in some other games but the reality is that the keys are not cheap exactly and people can really blow a lot of money on them just to get that one item.

>

> I think that when it comes down to it, ArenaNet would be wise to plan for alternate ways to deal with this side of the cash shop. I think that having BLCs with keys dropping purely from game activities can be a fun activity as such. The rest will have to be down to making it just like the rest of the items: direct sale only.

>

> I get that for companies selling something with a high repeat value is attractive but it's not a customer-oriented approach. Again, I think ArenaNet have most certainly been quite a bit milder in their approach to RNG loot. Even the mount licenses were guaranteed to not give doubles but I think in due course they will have to rethink the RNG strategies in relation to real money spending. And there are other things that do not fall under lootboxes that are out there that they can use. It may not be as easy and profitable but unfortunately the gaming industry has proven to be unable to self-regulate across the board and that's why governments are getting involved now.

 

What part of "I can get the keys for free" makes them "not cheap"?

[Blocki.4931]

> @"Swagger.1459" said:

> The future...

>

> FTC... “Lootboxes are bad for kids. no more lootboxes.”

>

> Gamers... “Oh yeah, we won! Rejoice my sisters and bros!”

>

> Game Companies... “FTC ruling has killed off a source of income that helps pays the bills and employees, funds future development and maintenance... so here are your awesome new monthly membership options... $20 monthly basic membership, $30 monthly advanced membership, $40 monthly premiere membership, $50 monthly super VIP membership...”

>

> Game Companies part 2 “You can now purchase ALL items on the gem store (triple the original cost)! We also removed the gold to gems exchange function as a result of this awesome new QoL direct buy feature!”

>

> Gamers... “QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ“

>

>

>

 

It's not going to happen for GW2, but EA would be the first to push this, just like these companies keep pushing the "AAA games are expensive to make" bs, when they make multiple billions from microtransactions alone, not even sales.

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > The future...

> >

> > FTC... “Lootboxes are bad for kids. no more lootboxes.”

> >

> > Gamers... “Oh yeah, we won! Rejoice my sisters and bros!”

> >

> > Game Companies... “FTC ruling has killed off a source of income that helps pays the bills and employees, funds future development and maintenance... so here are your awesome new monthly membership options... $20 monthly basic membership, $30 monthly advanced membership, $40 monthly premiere membership, $50 monthly super VIP membership...”

> >

> > Game Companies part 2 “You can now purchase ALL items on the gem store (triple the original cost)! We also removed the gold to gems exchange function as a result of this awesome new QoL direct buy feature!”

> >

> > Gamers... “QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ“

> >

> >

> >

>

> It's not going to happen for GW2, but EA would be the first to push this, just like these companies keep pushing the "AAA games are expensive to make" bs, when they make multiple billions from microtransactions alone, not even sales.

 

Where is the income from the various RNG items on this store going to come from if it's "outlawed"? So you think AAA games are cheap, because "billions off of microtransactions", but that companies won't need to replace that income to keep them that way? You're mistaken. Hugely mistaken. I wonder, what does the average gaming company employee make a month? I wonder how much skilled people in the industry make? Are you under the erroneous impression that they aren't paid except for when they're actively developing a new title, or DLC? I wonder how many employees an average gaming studio has on it's payroll year round? I wonder what the benefits packages cost, per month, to maintain for those employees? How about the investors, how much are they paid, and where does that money come from?

 

There's this thing in business called overhead. It is a constant drain on a company's resources, because it has to be paid, regardless of whether there's a new game on the shelves, or active microtransactions running. Last month's profits are this month's expense money. If microtransactions are regulated out, then that income will have to be replaced somehow. So, back to my original question: Where is that money going to come from? Kickstarter? A Go Fund Me? Nope, they're going to have to change their business model, and that may well mean that they have to start charging subscription fees to keep the lights on. In ANet's case, it may mean that GW 1 will have to be shut down. Maintenance mode or not, w/out a revenue stream to pay for the server upkeep, and the electricity to keep it going, and internet access, they'll lose money trying to maintain what they can offer now.

 

None of this stuff is free, and those profits are where the money comes from to pay the overhead required to run an online game.

 

[Ashen.2907]

> @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > > The future...

> > >

> > > FTC... “Lootboxes are bad for kids. no more lootboxes.”

> > >

> > > Gamers... “Oh yeah, we won! Rejoice my sisters and bros!”

> > >

> > > Game Companies... “FTC ruling has killed off a source of income that helps pays the bills and employees, funds future development and maintenance... so here are your awesome new monthly membership options... $20 monthly basic membership, $30 monthly advanced membership, $40 monthly premiere membership, $50 monthly super VIP membership...”

> > >

> > > Game Companies part 2 “You can now purchase ALL items on the gem store (triple the original cost)! We also removed the gold to gems exchange function as a result of this awesome new QoL direct buy feature!”

> > >

> > > Gamers... “QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ“

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > It's not going to happen for GW2, but EA would be the first to push this, just like these companies keep pushing the "AAA games are expensive to make" bs, when they make multiple billions from microtransactions alone, not even sales.

>

> Where is the income from the various RNG items on this store going to come from if it's "outlawed"? So you think AAA games are cheap, because "billions off of microtransactions", but that companies won't need to replace that income to keep them that way? You're mistaken. Hugely mistaken. I wonder, what does the average gaming company employee make a month? I wonder how much skilled people in the industry make? Are you under the erroneous impression that they aren't paid except for when they're actively developing a new title, or DLC? I wonder how many employees an average gaming studio has on it's payroll year round? I wonder what the benefits packages cost, per month, to maintain for those employees? How about the investors, how much are they paid, and where does that money come from?

>

> There's this thing in business called overhead. It is a constant drain on a company's resources, because it has to be paid, regardless of whether there's a new game on the shelves, or active microtransactions running. Last month's profits are this month's expense money. If microtransactions are regulated out, then that income will have to be replaced somehow. So, back to my original question: Where is that money going to come from? Kickstarter? A Go Fund Me? Nope, they're going to have to change their business model, and that may well mean that they have to start charging subscription fees to keep the lights on. In ANet's case, it may mean that GW 1 will have to be shut down. Maintenance mode or not, w/out a revenue stream to pay for the server upkeep, and the electricity to keep it going, and internet access, they'll lose money trying to maintain what they can offer now.

>

> None of this stuff is free, and those profits are where the money comes from to pay the overhead required to run an online game.

>

 

The average game dev salary in ANets area is in the 70k range. The cost to employ multiplier is as much as 1.3. ANet has 350(ish?) employees (not all game devs, but some will make significantly more while others less). Almost 32 million dollars a year in payroll costs alone.

[Blocki.4931]

> @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > > The future...

> > >

> > > FTC... “Lootboxes are bad for kids. no more lootboxes.”

> > >

> > > Gamers... “Oh yeah, we won! Rejoice my sisters and bros!”

> > >

> > > Game Companies... “FTC ruling has killed off a source of income that helps pays the bills and employees, funds future development and maintenance... so here are your awesome new monthly membership options... $20 monthly basic membership, $30 monthly advanced membership, $40 monthly premiere membership, $50 monthly super VIP membership...”

> > >

> > > Game Companies part 2 “You can now purchase ALL items on the gem store (triple the original cost)! We also removed the gold to gems exchange function as a result of this awesome new QoL direct buy feature!”

> > >

> > > Gamers... “QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ“

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > It's not going to happen for GW2, but EA would be the first to push this, just like these companies keep pushing the "AAA games are expensive to make" bs, when they make multiple billions from microtransactions alone, not even sales.

>

> Where is the income from the various RNG items on this store going to come from if it's "outlawed"? So you think AAA games are cheap, because "billions off of microtransactions", but that companies won't need to replace that income to keep them that way? You're mistaken. Hugely mistaken. I wonder, what does the average gaming company employee make a month? I wonder how much skilled people in the industry make? Are you under the erroneous impression that they aren't paid except for when they're actively developing a new title, or DLC? I wonder how many employees an average gaming studio has on it's payroll year round? I wonder what the benefits packages cost, per month, to maintain for those employees? How about the investors, how much are they paid, and where does that money come from?

>

> There's this thing in business called overhead. It is a constant drain on a company's resources, because it has to be paid, regardless of whether there's a new game on the shelves, or active microtransactions running. Last month's profits are this month's expense money. If microtransactions are regulated out, then that income will have to be replaced somehow. So, back to my original question: Where is that money going to come from? Kickstarter? A Go Fund Me? Nope, they're going to have to change their business model, and that may well mean that they have to start charging subscription fees to keep the lights on. In ANet's case, it may mean that GW 1 will have to be shut down. Maintenance mode or not, w/out a revenue stream to pay for the server upkeep, and the electricity to keep it going, and internet access, they'll lose money trying to maintain what they can offer now.

>

> None of this stuff is free, and those profits are where the money comes from to pay the overhead required to run an online game.

>

 

They're not going to go under if they have to change the system. Assuming that is going to happen is just as stupid.

 

But I really cba to argue this. You know damn well most of that is going to the top dogs. I'm not arguing against microtransactions either, they can be done right (like GW2 does them) and aren't exactly harmful that way. But these companies keep pushing that narrative and people eat it up. No, they don't have to make games unplayable and extremely grindy baseline and remind you that you can make your life easier by buying microtransactions and boosts to help you out just because they have to somehow pay their employees. It went from offering games to offering "live services", THAT is the big issue there. None of them would have to starve if they moved from lootboxes.

 

But that's not the point of this thread so I'll peace out.

[Will.9785]

Yes, and I hope they are removed from all games including GW2. If you want to sell me something then do it. Don't try to hind it behind lootbox RNG (looking at you mount pack #1, desert king throne, etc).

 

I know 2 people who opened over 50 chests each to get the new chair and only 1 of them actually got it.

 

This seems like something that would be VERY easy to manipulate.... like if you know someone is inclined to spend more cash then you would lower the drop rate for them to bleed them for more money. And no one would be able to tell because "RNG".

[jbrother.1340]

> @"Ashantara.8731" said:

> > @"Zunki.3916" said:

> > Thats just like saying make alcohol illegal because children can eventually buy it anyways. It shoul be illegal to sell it to this audience.

>

> Alcohol _should_ be illegal, just like cigarettes should be, because it _is_ a drug in many regards (addiction potential, clouds your mind, potential to cause severe harm to your health). In Sweden, they recently raised the price for any alcoholic product to a set minimum to discourage people from buying alcoholic beverages frequently.

>

> As for loot boxes, yes, they are gambling - they should be globally banned from any game. Only time will tell if this will ever happen, though.

 

the more you prohibit these types of items the more a black market flourishes. We have historical evidence of what that will cause with alcohol and very compelling modern day current evidence of what the black markets are doing to many countries and victims around the world. Teaching people to have self control would be a much better plan.

 

These of course are only my opinions and I am sure there are many valid views on this and a combination of things might be more warranted than just acting in a heavy handed way trying to ban things to the point that governments start parenting all of their populations. Teaching is a much better tool than legislating. Sadly that seems to be moving back towards the wrong direction quickly.

 

At least in a game like this the company controls that and their cannot really be a black market for the so called loot boxes or keys really. Substances are another story.

 

education and experience often trump regulation in reality. We don't learn well as large groups quickly.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Ashantara.8731" said:

> > @"Zunki.3916" said:

> > Thats just like saying make alcohol illegal because children can eventually buy it anyways. It shoul be illegal to sell it to this audience.

>

> Alcohol _should_ be illegal, just like cigarettes should be, because it _is_ a drug in many regards (addiction potential, clouds your mind, potential to cause severe harm to your health). In Sweden, they recently raised the price for any alcoholic product to a set minimum to discourage people from buying alcoholic beverages frequently.

>

> As for loot boxes, yes, they are gambling - they should be globally banned from any game. Only time will tell if this will ever happen, though.

 

I dont know where you are from, but we tried making alcohol illegal here inthe U.S. at one point. That experiment's disastrous failure should, IMO, be a solid indication that its a bad idea. The trend towards legalization of marijuana supports that point.

 

Caffeine is an addictive drug. I wonder how criminalization of cola, coffee, and tea would would go over in the west.

[Swagger.1459]

> @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > The future...

> >

> > FTC... “Lootboxes are bad for kids. no more lootboxes.”

> >

> > Gamers... “Oh yeah, we won! Rejoice my sisters and bros!”

> >

> > Game Companies... “FTC ruling has killed off a source of income that helps pays the bills and employees, funds future development and maintenance... so here are your awesome new monthly membership options... $20 monthly basic membership, $30 monthly advanced membership, $40 monthly premiere membership, $50 monthly super VIP membership...”

> >

> > Game Companies part 2 “You can now purchase ALL items on the gem store (triple the original cost)! We also removed the gold to gems exchange function as a result of this awesome new QoL direct buy feature!”

> >

> > Gamers... “QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ“

> >

> >

> >

>

> It's not going to happen for GW2, but EA would be the first to push this, just like these companies keep pushing the "AAA games are expensive to make" bs, when they make multiple billions from microtransactions alone, not even sales.

 

You never know what's going to happen once companies and industries become even more government regulated...

 

I get there have been abuses, and shady cash grab practices, by some game companies... BUT there have been lots of complaints by a big segment of gamers who want everything for FREE. They want to buy a game for like $10 and never pay a dime for anything. They complain about monthly fees. They complain about cash shop stuff. They complain about rng lootboxes. They complain about having to buy xpack… Unfortunately for them, game companies are businesses and NEED TO MAKE MONEY TO SURVIVE. And for a game company to survive extra government regulations, ALL options start going on the table. ALL of them, because no business really wants to intentionally crash and burn and put hundreds of real people, and their families, in bad financial situations...

 

 

F2P and cash shop monetization became popular and well accepted, but things will change if laws are changed on how mmos can and can't do business. This includes our beloved Anet and GW2.

[Bloodstealer.5978]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said:

> > > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> > > The only marketing I've ever received is the Newsletter, which gives information on major releases.

> > > Anyone else received anything in their emails?

> >

> > Not yet, but this new sweepstake, is iirc, much like the recent joint promo competition mess, tied in with other companies, not just the ANET newsletter. Let's hope those companies act responsibly with the material they might choose to push out (if any at all) to players who sign/signed up.

> >

> > EDIT - Of course BL keys in a total GW2 sense can't be totally classed as a loot box gamble, being how we can loot keys and chests in game, get awarded with keys through story/levelling/map completion so there is nothing to loose in that regards. I guess one of the arguments in defence of BL keys/chests is the fact you always get a guaranteed return of the statuette and are guaranteed 3 sometimes 4 additional items all of which have a use in game, whether players want it or not.

>

> It's not the first time ArenaNet has offered sweepstakes/contests with joint partners (Alienware, For Fans By Fans, Razer, etc.). I've always been "opted-in", and still yet to receive anything but the Newsletter. I don't know why these same partners would not have sent promotional material before; or are you suggesting ArenaNet is suddenly going to sell the information now, when they have had the opportunity to do so ever since the first partnership?

>

> Besides, the Official Rules state:

>

> _By entering this Promotion, any personal information entrants submit will be disclosed to the Administrator and Sponsor and will be used *only* by ArenaNet and Administrator consistent with Sponsor’s privacy policy. Sponsor may use entrants’ personal information, including postal and email addresses, to contact entrants regarding Sponsor related goods and services and any other offers and/or promotions that they believe might be of interest to entrants._

>

> Who is the 'Sponsor'?

>

> _ArenaNet (“Sponsor”)_

 

No didn't say or mean anything about what ANET might do with our details.. that is clearly defined and has always been.. so it's our choice.

But ANET do not control or censor anything that their partners may choose to send out.. if they choose to send anything.. which is what I already said.

As I stated one of the main issues with child gambling in the UK is the unrestricted advertising of such things. That isn't to say ANET or their partners will ever engage in such practices, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility in this day and age.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

> @"Bloodstealer.5978" said:

> > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> > > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said:

> > > > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> > > > The only marketing I've ever received is the Newsletter, which gives information on major releases.

> > > > Anyone else received anything in their emails?

> > >

> > > Not yet, but this new sweepstake, is iirc, much like the recent joint promo competition mess, tied in with other companies, not just the ANET newsletter. Let's hope those companies act responsibly with the material they might choose to push out (if any at all) to players who sign/signed up.

> > >

> > > EDIT - Of course BL keys in a total GW2 sense can't be totally classed as a loot box gamble, being how we can loot keys and chests in game, get awarded with keys through story/levelling/map completion so there is nothing to loose in that regards. I guess one of the arguments in defence of BL keys/chests is the fact you always get a guaranteed return of the statuette and are guaranteed 3 sometimes 4 additional items all of which have a use in game, whether players want it or not.

> >

> > It's not the first time ArenaNet has offered sweepstakes/contests with joint partners (Alienware, For Fans By Fans, Razer, etc.). I've always been "opted-in", and still yet to receive anything but the Newsletter. I don't know why these same partners would not have sent promotional material before; or are you suggesting ArenaNet is suddenly going to sell the information now, when they have had the opportunity to do so ever since the first partnership?

> >

> > Besides, the Official Rules state:

> >

> > _By entering this Promotion, any personal information entrants submit will be disclosed to the Administrator and Sponsor and will be used *only* by ArenaNet and Administrator consistent with Sponsor’s privacy policy. Sponsor may use entrants’ personal information, including postal and email addresses, to contact entrants regarding Sponsor related goods and services and any other offers and/or promotions that they believe might be of interest to entrants._

> >

> > Who is the 'Sponsor'?

> >

> > _ArenaNet (“Sponsor”)_

>

> No didn't say or mean anything about what ANET might do with our details.. that is clearly defined and has always been.. so it's our choice.

> But ANET do not control or censor anything that their partners may choose to send out.. if they choose to send anything.. which is what I already said.

> As I stated one of the main issues with child gambling in the UK is the unrestricted advertising of such things. That isn't to say ANET or their partners will ever engage in such practices, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility in this day and age.

 

And how would their partners, in this instance (or any other), get the information on where to send anything? As stated above, *only* ArenaNet is privy to that information.

[zombyturtle.5980]

Loot boxes arent legally gambling in most countries. They are gambling by every other definition of the word. Especially when it comes down to the psychological manipulation they utilize. I believe the only reason they arent legally gambling in most countries is because laws regarding technology are so out of date.

Gaming commissions have been utterly incompetent at self regulation, totally ignoring their own guide lines in favor of profits. So while I dont like government regulation, I believe in this case, where the industry has totally failed to self regulate, they are needed.

 

Gw2's lootboxes arent that bad compared to other game companies (EA). However being the lesser of 2 evils doesn't mean they are ok, or that they wont cause gambling addictions for some people.

 

Usually I hate the 'think of the children' argument but in the case of addictive vices, I think its a valid consideration. Blaming parents wont solve the issue of children getting addicted to gambling. There are afk parents who raise their children through games and credit cards however many many children spend their own personal money on these practices and thats not always something a parent can regulate. Especially in the age of online purchases where money can be spend in seconds, any hour of the day.

 

While I personally have a hatred for lootboxes, I dont think they necessarily should be 100% removed from games. However I do think they should adhere to regulations that every other company who sells addictive products or experiences go through. Including being limited to 18+ only, and sometimes requiring a licence or being required to cut off customers they see who have a serious problem.

 

Overall if regulations of loot boxes did happen, which I believe they will sooner or later, I cant predict whether it will be good or bad for gw2. On one hand, it would force the company to listen to concerns and try and please ALL its customers, and not just the whales that buy boxes, or when outrage is so widespread it reaches news media. Id much prefer that my concerns are listened to without having to spend upwards of 1k a month.

On the other hand, it would force anet to adopt a different money making practice which wont be as predatory but still might suck for consumers. Gem store prices would rise and I could see in game rewards being severely limited, to push gem store sales further.

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"zombyturtle.5980" said:

> Loot boxes arent legally gambling in most countries. They are gambling by every other definition of the word. Especially when it comes down to the psychological manipulation they utilize. I believe the only reason they arent legally gambling in most countries is because laws regarding technology are so out of date.

> Gaming commissions have been utterly incompetent at self regulation, totally ignoring their own guide lines in favor of profits. So while I dont like government regulation, I believe in this case, where the industry has totally failed to self regulate, they are needed.

>

> Gw2's lootboxes arent that bad compared to other game companies (EA). However being the lesser of 2 evils doesn't mean they are ok, or that they wont cause gambling addictions for some people.

>

> Usually I hate the 'think of the children' argument but in the case of addictive vices, I think its a valid consideration. Blaming parents wont solve the issue of children getting addicted to gambling. There are afk parents who raise their children through games and credit cards however many many children spend their own personal money on these practices and thats not always something a parent can regulate. Especially in the age of online purchases where money can be spend in seconds, any hour of the day.

>

> While I personally have a hatred for lootboxes, I dont think they necessarily should be 100% removed from games. However I do think they should adhere to regulations that every other company who sells addictive products or experiences go through. Including being limited to 18+ only, and sometimes requiring a licence or being required to cut off customers they see who have a serious problem.

>

> Overall if regulations of loot boxes did happen, which I believe they will sooner or later, I cant predict whether it will be good or bad for gw2. On one hand, it would force the company to listen to concerns and try and please ALL its customers, and not just the whales that buy boxes, or when outrage is so widespread it reaches news media. Id much prefer that my concerns are listened to without having to spend upwards of 1k a month.

> On the other hand, it would force anet to adopt a different money making practice which wont be as predatory but still might suck for consumers. Gem store prices would rise and I could see in game rewards being severely limited, to push gem store sales further.

 

How many times have you opened a loot box and gotten nothing? When I gamble, if I lose, I get nothing. When I open a chest here, I'm guaranteed to get at least 4 things, 5 if the bonus slot opens, and I know one of them will be a Lion Statuette. If I'm opening these chests looking for a specific item, even if that item isn't there, I still get something. How is that gambling? No matter what, I'm coming out ahead, especially since I didn't buy a key. From where I'm sitting, that's more like getting a paycheck, than blowing a paycheck "gambling".

[robertthebard.8150]

> @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > @"Blocki.4931" said:

> > > > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > > > The future...

> > > >

> > > > FTC... “Lootboxes are bad for kids. no more lootboxes.”

> > > >

> > > > Gamers... “Oh yeah, we won! Rejoice my sisters and bros!”

> > > >

> > > > Game Companies... “FTC ruling has killed off a source of income that helps pays the bills and employees, funds future development and maintenance... so here are your awesome new monthly membership options... $20 monthly basic membership, $30 monthly advanced membership, $40 monthly premiere membership, $50 monthly super VIP membership...”

> > > >

> > > > Game Companies part 2 “You can now purchase ALL items on the gem store (triple the original cost)! We also removed the gold to gems exchange function as a result of this awesome new QoL direct buy feature!”

> > > >

> > > > Gamers... “QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ“

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > It's not going to happen for GW2, but EA would be the first to push this, just like these companies keep pushing the "AAA games are expensive to make" bs, when they make multiple billions from microtransactions alone, not even sales.

> >

> > Where is the income from the various RNG items on this store going to come from if it's "outlawed"? So you think AAA games are cheap, because "billions off of microtransactions", but that companies won't need to replace that income to keep them that way? You're mistaken. Hugely mistaken. I wonder, what does the average gaming company employee make a month? I wonder how much skilled people in the industry make? Are you under the erroneous impression that they aren't paid except for when they're actively developing a new title, or DLC? I wonder how many employees an average gaming studio has on it's payroll year round? I wonder what the benefits packages cost, per month, to maintain for those employees? How about the investors, how much are they paid, and where does that money come from?

> >

> > There's this thing in business called overhead. It is a constant drain on a company's resources, because it has to be paid, regardless of whether there's a new game on the shelves, or active microtransactions running. Last month's profits are this month's expense money. If microtransactions are regulated out, then that income will have to be replaced somehow. So, back to my original question: Where is that money going to come from? Kickstarter? A Go Fund Me? Nope, they're going to have to change their business model, and that may well mean that they have to start charging subscription fees to keep the lights on. In ANet's case, it may mean that GW 1 will have to be shut down. Maintenance mode or not, w/out a revenue stream to pay for the server upkeep, and the electricity to keep it going, and internet access, they'll lose money trying to maintain what they can offer now.

> >

> > None of this stuff is free, and those profits are where the money comes from to pay the overhead required to run an online game.

> >

>

> They're not going to go under if they have to change the system. Assuming that is going to happen is just as stupid.

>

> But I really cba to argue this. You know kitten well most of that is going to the top dogs. I'm not arguing against microtransactions either, they can be done right (like GW2 does them) and aren't exactly harmful that way. But these companies keep pushing that narrative and people eat it up. No, they don't have to make games unplayable and extremely grindy baseline and remind you that you can make your life easier by buying microtransactions and boosts to help you out just because they have to somehow pay their employees. It went from offering games to offering "live services", THAT is the big issue there. None of them would have to starve if they moved from lootboxes.

>

> But that's not the point of this thread so I'll peace out.

 

I'm not assuming they'll have to change the system, that's a given if loot boxes are outlawed, and any of their items are classified as such. As far as how they'll change it, that's based on what's currently known to be available in the market. If, however, they don't change their models appropriately, or if, as can happen, they do go to a sub based model, and people leave in droves, which is also likely to happen because "ANet lied to us, and went to a pay to play model". Just a side note, here, we're discussing an MMO. As a rule, an MMO has always been a live service. So assuming that going to a live service is what's killing the industry is sort of putting the cart before the horse. If they don't find a way to cover that revenue stream, they can go under. We've got people now that won't buy keys, myself included, what's going to happen with GW 1 when/if they start requiring a sub to keep the lights on over there? Some will pay it, of course, but will they be enough to keep the lights on? There've been plenty of MMOs folded over the last decade that had a dedicated player base that just wasn't big enough to keep the MMO afloat.