EA managing the "most downvoted comment" on reddit.

"

CanHasPants wrote:

Quit being greedy, people, corporate jets are expensive.

"

Xavderion wrote:

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand microtransactions. The intent is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of Austrian economics most of the money will go out of a typical gamer’s wallet. There’s also EA’s opportunistic scheming, which is deftly woven into its monetization- its corporate philosophy draws heavily from Hobbesian literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the sense of pride and accomplishment, to realise that they’re not just looking at average per-player credit earn rates on a daily basis- they say something deep about challenges that are compelling, rewarding, and OF COURSE attainable via GAMEPLAY. As a consequence people who dislike Star Wars™ Battlefront™ 2 truly ARE armchair developers- of course they wouldn’t appreciate, for instance, the humour in EA’s existential catchphrase “It's In The Game,” which itself is an ironic reference to Norah McClintock’s young adult novel Truth and Lies. I’m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated nerf herders providing candid feedback in earnest as EA’s avarice unfolds itself on their computer screens. What sheep.. how I pity them. 😂
And yes, by the way, i DO have a Star Wars™ Battlefront™ 2 tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It’s for the twi'leks’ eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they’re within 60,000 credits of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid 😎

"

I'll say it again I fear that after all the fun people are having bashing EA, we are going to let this entire issue blow over once again. People outside the community are going to see this as gamers being upset at EA once again over specific features in a game, but that's not what the issue is.

There is a much larger issue here that now affects the entire gaming industry and is only going to get worse and worse, until it gets to the point of needing regulation like we do with slot machines.

Have you ever heard of a "Skinner Box"?

In science its known as a "Operant conditioning chamber" and is frequently referred to by the name of its creator, the famous behavioral psychologist B.F.Skinner. It has an "operandum" (also called "response lever" in rat based experiments) that when activated feeds some reward for performing the action, conditioning the organism to continually activate the operandum. A rat presses the response lever and gets a tasty treat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning_chamber

This thing isn't even about Star Wars or first person shooting, the entire game is created to be just a lure to get you into a virtual Skinner Box where you can be mentally rewarded when you do the digital equivalent of hitting a response lever by feeding money into the microtransaction store.

The entire progression system within these types of games is created to manipulate you into gambling for the social reward of being on the top of the charts and having the most prestigious gear. With endless online leaderboards, ranks, achivements and other digital stickers, you see easily see how the other rats have it so much better than you with better hero, and encourage you to pursue the validation that you get from obtaining these.

It is created to be even more insidious in the way it exploits human psychology, for example its well known within the field of psychology that the most effective form of positive feedback is unpredictable positive feedback. It uses a powerful cognitive quirk described by B.F. Skinner back in the 1950s, what is now called "a variable schedule of rewards". Skinner observed that lab mice responded most voraciously to random rewards. Unlike the mice that received the same treat every time, the mice that received variable rewards seemed to press the lever compulsively.

It uses randomized rewards so that buying a lootbox one time doesn't guarantee the same treat as you might get the next time you press it. By design it incentivizes you to continually put in more money, because you are constantly anticipating that this next time, you just might get a better reward.

Once you do finally get that reward, the cycle begins again. Everyone gets better at the game over time and acquires better loot, so you must continually respond with more money to keep up. There is a new hero, a new weapon, a new bigger flashier skin, a new way to be better at the game and hence get the pleasure of being known as one of the best. All you need to do is just feed that operandum a few more dollars. After all you spend $5 every day on a latte, why not get some mental pleasure of knowing you're the fucking Darth Vader with a super powerful gun as you tower and destroy all those who don't have your loot yet?

This isn't really about EA or Battlefield II. Everyone from 2K Games to Valve to single player developer gods Rockstar is jumping on this because of how lucrative it is. Hell even CDPR isn't immune from the lootbox syndrome.. It is actually Activision and not EA that is on the forefront of this revolution with its new patented matchmaking system to exploit microtransaction, pairing you with stronger opponents to tempt players to buy microtransaction items that improve your character then pairing you with weaker opponents so you feel a sense of reward enforcement (and your opponent himself feels a desire to pay for microtransaction items).


The system may include a microtransaction engine that arranges matches to influence game-related purchases," according to the patent. "For instance, the microtransaction engine may match a more expert/marquee player with a junior player to encourage the junior player to make game-related purchases of items possessed/used by the marquee player. A junior player may wish to emulate the marquee player by obtaining weapons or other items used by the marquee player.

The real actual issue here that this type of digital Skinner Box is not only legal, but completely unregulated.

Slots and poker machines are regulated in terms of payoff and their programming so they operate on chance rather than conspiracy. They are not legally allowed for example to be programmed to give you a win after a string of losses, to keep you interested. They have regulated payout ratios as a percentage. Video game companies on the other hand are allowed to exploit your psychological quirks by committing some very anti-consumer practices. And that goes across the gaming industry.

"

Xavderion wrote:

The sad thing about all this is that BF2 will still sell 15 million copies and 1% of those who bought the game will be whales who'll spend thousands of dollars on lootboxes so in the end EA wins.

"

AbdulAlhazred wrote:

There is a post in GD where Sarno makes comments on the comparison of gambling and loot boxes when the topic of EA's sketchy business model comes up. I'm sure he'd agree with this poster about the unregulated gambling nature of loot boxes. In fact, it's probably exactly what he was trying to get across in that thread.

Albeit, I don't necessarily agree that the boxes GGG do are in the same level as the ones mentioned in the quote, but I completely understand Sarno's position.