please end mystery boxes (loot boxes, glorified gambling)

I dont care about it. It's funny how players blame GGG for having lootboxes, instead of blaming the people who fall for them. Yes, if I buy a lootbox and get something good from it, it leads to a full load of dopamine, giving me the feeling of having been rewarded. But if I'm a person with a strong will, I still can decide if I can afford any more lootboxes or not. If I can't, I just don't buy them, even if they potantially give me a good feeling.

It's like people want to fuse their 6L or use crafting to get it. Trying to fuse it yourself is like using a lootbox. If it works in your favour, it's very rewarding, but if it doesn't, it leads to anger and it will be very time consuming (like a lootbox is very money consuming). The problem isn't GGG, the problem are the players who buy the boxes. If no one would buy them, GGG wouldn't put them on their store.

I find the stash tabs a bigger cash grab and P2W additions than loot boxes tbh.

"

Zephota wrote:

GGG's gambling system is already illegal under several current country regulations. I expect they'll adapt so that lootboxes become invisible for europe soon.

For a while GGG was the model of what a gamedev studio should be - amazing monetization, dedication to the community. But they had that blight of lootboxes dragging it all down, and then added another one by selling out to Tencent.

I think the latter is actually worse than the lootboxes, eventually Tencent will drop the 'independent studio' farce and we'll have chinese style monetisation up the wazoo.

IMO the way Chris handled the acquisition was worse than the acquisition itself (bad as that was):
Trying to spin it as an "investment" in GGG rather than coming clean and telling loyal fans and customers what was really going on.

I've said it before: I'm a pragmatist. By all means, sell your business if it is the best thing for you and your family. But don't lie to your supporters.

That's just a completely shitty thing to do.

So yeah, I think I have to agree with Xtorma's prediction that gambling boxes are going nowhere without legal compulsion. Without a strong degree of moral fortitude on the part of GGG management, the only other thing which will change this situation is a quantifiable impact on GGG's bottom line due to PR issues.

And, as Anonymous##### pointed out earlier in this thread, exploitation, even exploitation that is internationally recognized as immoral, is more predictably profitable than courting positive PR.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

"

Zephota wrote:

GGG's gambling system is already illegal under several current country regulations. I expect they'll adapt so that lootboxes become invisible for europe soon.

For a while GGG was the model of what a gamedev studio should be - amazing monetization, dedication to the community. But they had that blight of lootboxes dragging it all down, and then added another one by selling out to Tencent.

I think the latter is actually worse than the lootboxes, eventually Tencent will drop the 'independent studio' farce and we'll have chinese style monetisation up the wazoo.

IMO the way Chris handled the acquisition was worse than the acquisition itself (bad as that was):
Trying to spin it as an "investment" in GGG rather than coming clean and telling loyal fans and customers what was really going on.

I've said it before: I'm a pragmatist. By all means, sell your business if it is the best thing for you and your family. But don't lie to your supporters.

That's just a completely shitty thing to do.

So yeah, I think I have to agree with Xtorma's prediction that gambling boxes are going nowhere without legal compulsion. Without a strong degree of moral fortitude on the part of GGG management, the only other thing which will change this situation is a quantifiable impact on GGG's bottom line due to PR issues.

And, as Anonymous##### pointed out earlier in this thread, exploitation, even exploitation that is internationally recognized as immoral, is more predictably profitable than courting positive PR.

Boxes were there long before the plan for the entire acquisition was even conceived. It couldn't have come from Tencent.

"

Xavathos wrote:

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

"

Zephota wrote:

GGG's gambling system is already illegal under several current country regulations. I expect they'll adapt so that lootboxes become invisible for europe soon.

For a while GGG was the model of what a gamedev studio should be - amazing monetization, dedication to the community. But they had that blight of lootboxes dragging it all down, and then added another one by selling out to Tencent.

I think the latter is actually worse than the lootboxes, eventually Tencent will drop the 'independent studio' farce and we'll have chinese style monetisation up the wazoo.

IMO the way Chris handled the acquisition was worse than the acquisition itself (bad as that was):
Trying to spin it as an "investment" in GGG rather than coming clean and telling loyal fans and customers what was really going on.

I've said it before: I'm a pragmatist. By all means, sell your business if it is the best thing for you and your family. But don't lie to your supporters.

That's just a completely shitty thing to do.

So yeah, I think I have to agree with Xtorma's prediction that gambling boxes are going nowhere without legal compulsion. Without a strong degree of moral fortitude on the part of GGG management, the only other thing which will change this situation is a quantifiable impact on GGG's bottom line due to PR issues.

And, as Anonymous##### pointed out earlier in this thread, exploitation, even exploitation that is internationally recognized as immoral, is more predictably profitable than courting positive PR.

Boxes were there long before the plan for the entire acquisition was even conceived. It couldn't have come from Tencent.

I never said or implied otherwise.

"

Johny_Snow wrote:

I find the stash tabs a bigger cash grab and P2W additions than loot boxes tbh.

Lootboxes are no P2W and I doubt anyone ever said this here. And Stash Tabs are also no P2W. People should finaly realize what P2W means. It means getting a huge advantage over other players that let them WIN at the game more easily. How do stashtabs let players win more easily? POE isnt a competetive game. Most players play solo and the only achievement you can have in this game to create new successful characters. Ofc some builds are very expensive and therefore it is an advantage to have storagetabs to make it easier to sell stuff. But if it's about beating the game/content, then you can do this perfectly without one extra stash tab.

Stash tabs are clearly P2W, the only saving grace being that they are not overly expensive(except for the map stash tab).

I wish people could just let other people decide what they wanna do with their money instead of thinking you know what's 'best'.

If you are prone to gambling, the big bad internet has alot worse to offer then some silly lootboxes.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

Of course, the core of the debate is about responsibility, and there will never be a 'right' or 'wrong' answer there either.

Here I (might) disagree.

My first post in this thread was very short. It was a simple statement:

1. People with a gambling sickness are responsible for their own behavior.
2. People who exploit people with a gambling sickness to achieve profit are responsible for their own behavior.

I still maintain that this is true.

Spoiler

Utterly tangential, but: I try and live my life by this principle as well. If you say something rude to me and I get really mad and have a horrible day because of it, you are not responsible for my bad day. You are only responsible for saying something rude, no more and no less. The responsibility for my getting mad and having a horrible day rests entirely with me. This might seem a little weird at first, but I actually find it quite liberating: It means I too am not responsible for other people's reactions to my mistakes; I am only responsible for the mistakes themselves. In any case, the point is GGG is responsible for its own behavior, regardless of anyone else's.

Now, where do we draw the line for this "exploiting people" ?
If you make it so that mostly people with a gambling problem fall for your trap and get every cent you can get from them, I'd say we're completely in there.
The problem is, if you are proposing this kind of service on the internet, somewhere, some people with a gambling problem (even if so slightly), will get touched anyway ... and I don't think that we can speak of exploitation just because at least only one individual with a problem is being 'unreasonable' with it.
So, where do we draw the line about this ? It isn't simple imho.

Well, it's more or less what you guys have been talking about I guess, my answer is late.

About the tangencial part :
That's a very good way to see things, probably not always easy to stick to, but I like it.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

This raises another interesting question: If this is indeed a huge source of income for GGG, then many people will of course consider it a bad thing, as that is prima facie evidence of exploitation.

On the other hand, if it is not a huge source of income, then why do it at all, in light of the moral implications and bad PR?

Because it's good for anybody not addicted to gambling ?
It does increases GGG's sales because buying couple of boxes is a source of income, and can make people who would never have bought most things in the box buy one or more of them.
It also allows them to set some special limited "free box on point spent" kind of events.
It's good thing for the player as it gives interesting deals, and I guess it's a slight boost of dopamine for many when opening it too ?
And people get free stuff once in a while with it as well.

"

emphasy wrote:

Those people would have to identify themself though, which is not very likely. The thing with those boxes is they are very different from actual gambling, there is no promise of a jackpot, there are just a bunch of things that are on average cheaper. The best use of the box would be to buy a few of them and get the missing pieces later.

We tried, we tried.
(it didn't lead anywhere)

"

Xtorma wrote:

Then you have the people who like to buy a few and take a chance. Sort of like passing by a slot machine and dropping in a few coins every now and then, just for fun. Win or lose , it puts a smile on their face. get rid of loot boxes on moral grounds and that will no longer be an option for these people. So what ends up happening is we get prohibition.

I guess most people complaining about the mystery boxes just cannot see/understand that it benefits other people, possibly the majority of the playerbase (buying mtx), and does participates to the enjoyment of the game.
Which is the reason why I called many selfish, by just wanting to remove boxes (and for some, being just plain rude towards anybody with a different opinion in the process).

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

I think it's not so radical to say that there are good ways to do business, and that those "good" ways involve full consent between buyer and seller. No deception, and no deliberate emotional exploitation.

By that logic, any company using marketing services is doing (at least partly) business in a "not good" way, as marketing is based on manipulating/exploiting triggers in the human brain.
And that means pretty much any big company in the world.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

I think it's not so radical to say that there are good ways to do business, and that those "good" ways involve full consent between buyer and seller. No deception, and no deliberate emotional exploitation.

By that logic, any company using marketing services is doing (at least partly) business in a "not good" way, as marketing is based on manipulating/exploiting triggers in the human brain.
And that means pretty much any big company in the world.

You're not wrong, and the ethics of hacking people will increasingly become an issue in the decades to come.

But that is going really really deep into this issue, and this thread is probably not the place to do it. Google "Tristan Harris" if you are interested. (And pour yourself a double of your favorite poison and get ready to read some fascinating stuff for the following two hours.)

Someone mentioned whataboutism earlier in this thread, and while the Russian political metaphor isn't perfect, it is apt. A vegetarian wearing a leather belt is not a hypocrite; he is just doing the best he can in a universe that makes that difficult.

We ask our heroes to do no less, including when our heroes are game developers.