EA killed for "Surprise Mechanics", TencentGGG slides on "Mystery Box". How?

> The fact that GGG sells them at all is grey area in the first place (regarding their promise not to be pay to win) IMO but that's a different debate.

I don't agree that it's even marginal. The various stash tbas just represent a players eventual agreement to actually buy the game.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Miská wrote:

This reply kinda sums up the quality of this topic. This guy actually thinks they can do all that, and keep prices the same. You are living in a fairytale land my friend. I'm honestly getting a bit tired of young folks believing that companies ( that need to pay wages and have costs) should pretty much pay them to play their game. Out of thin air.

Its unfortunate if you actually believe that. Companies are more than capable of having monetization strategies that are not rooted in exploitation or predatory practice.

GGG didnt always have loot boxes, and I have purchased many supporter packs, stash tabs, mtx's, ect...

I have spent thousands over the years, and haven't really felt bad about it, because I believed I was supporting an ethical company that needed it to continue doing what they were doing.

I hate the loot box era in gaming. It's not that I dont have the money, I do, but it's so damn shady. That fact that it's a big money maker is equal parts sad and frustrating.

Bottom line is GGG doesnt have to operate like this, and they have viable options (obviously imo)

The entire point of the topic is for debate. Its clear you dont see it this way, and are in favor, or at least dont mind, loot boxes. I just dont see it that way. Thanks for the debate, we just are on opposite sides it appears.

Edit: spelling and grammar, phone autocorrect is OP

You can have your opinion. But saying things like 'They have other options' or 'they don't have to operate like this' kinda makes it weird imo. You should remember that you are only voicing your own opinion, and many facts you believe in is merely your own opinion. I and many other in this thread don't believe mtx boxes with clear cut rewards and 100% transparacy considering what's in them are shady. Imo they are not even grey. Pretty far from people like yourself who think this is predatory business. (again, you might wanna look up what that actually means.)

This game is ment for adults. I like a lootbox now and then and have never felt disappointed. If I get a double I know exactly that can happen and that it's why when I also can get lucky and get a 60 bucks mtx for a fiver. You can't give away premium mtx on the cheap while asking 100 dollar for some of them in the shop. Relative to how this game earns its money mtx boxes are fine. And completely something else from lootboxes in some other games. Wich I despise btw.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Mythreindeer wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

That was the entire point of my OP.

Why do people have issue with EA loot boxes and not GGG? You just "feel" differently? What does that even mean in context?

Its the same predatory function.

Please do feel free to point out where I have inaccurately portrayed the GGG loot box. I was very clear and concise about them.

Still, I'm not sure it is a predatory function or moreso that adults playing PoE need protection from it (as for EA I don't have 1st hand knowledge of their boxes as I haven't played their games). Yes I agree there are people who will fail themselves with poor decision making time after time but I'm not sure the world should concern itself with protecting them from themselves.

Ugh that is very linear thinking, and obtuse at best.

By that logic there is literally no unethical or shady business practice because adults can make their own decisions.

I'd already mentioned there are times when people should be protected from bad business practices so your last sentence is not valid. You are arguing adults need to be protected from gambling (as you define GGG lootboxes to be) which extended to its logical conclusion means you think all forms of gambling should be illegal. Is that really where you want to go?

"

Mythreindeer wrote:

I'd already mentioned there are times when people should be protected from bad business practices so your last sentence is not valid. You are arguing adults need to be protected from gambling (as you define GGG lootboxes to be) which extended to its logical conclusion means you think all forms of gambling should be illegal. Is that really where you want to go?

Real Money lootnboxes with gambling mechanics are shady and unethical.

If you are ok with giving companies that utilize them a pass simply because we are adults, that's on you. I think its awful.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree here.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

I suppose there is a cosmetic/P2W angle you could take, but the entire premise of that hearing that EA embarrassed themselves was regarding the gambling nature of the contents, regardless of what the contents were used for.

This is where I'm a bit confused. The contents in both cases are still a resultive gamble.

Well considering that they are NZ-based and not nearly as big as a company like EA I doubt that GGG is going to be public enemy #1 for US/EU/etc.

people still thinking that GGG is a small indie company.. starting to questioning myself if they are using internet explorer still doesnt make any sense since the same people has several "supporter" packs on..

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Mythreindeer wrote:

I'd already mentioned there are times when people should be protected from bad business practices so your last sentence is not valid. You are arguing adults need to be protected from gambling (as you define GGG lootboxes to be) which extended to its logical conclusion means you think all forms of gambling should be illegal. Is that really where you want to go?

Real Money lootnboxes with gambling mechanics are shady and unethical.

If you are ok with giving companies that utilize them a pass simply because we are adults, that's on you. I think its awful.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree here.

I happen to agree that gaming companies should not use lootboxes as a matter of choice and I agree it is naught but a money grab, however, the same could be said for horseracing tracks, casinos, etc. Do we want a universal antigambling law for adults? Where do we stop with it?

Enjoyed the debate, thanks.

"

Mythreindeer wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Mythreindeer wrote:

I'd already mentioned there are times when people should be protected from bad business practices so your last sentence is not valid. You are arguing adults need to be protected from gambling (as you define GGG lootboxes to be) which extended to its logical conclusion means you think all forms of gambling should be illegal. Is that really where you want to go?

Real Money lootnboxes with gambling mechanics are shady and unethical.

If you are ok with giving companies that utilize them a pass simply because we are adults, that's on you. I think its awful.

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree here.

I happen to agree that gaming companies should not use lootboxes as a matter of choice and I agree it is naught but a money grab, however, the same could be said for horseracing tracks, casinos, etc. Do we want a universal antigambling law for adults? Where do we stop with it?

Enjoyed the debate, thanks.

I suppose if you want to take it to that level, there is a basic expectation associated with a product or service purchase, as opposed to a gambling establishment like a horse track or casino. And in those cases there are specific laws and regulations covering those establishments.

For example when we buy a car, or purchase clothing, or hire a plumber, there is a basic understanding that we are not gambling with the resulting product or service, and they cannot advertise as such.

I think the same should apply to video games. There should be no real money gambling for mtx, or basic game services. At least that's my perspective.

"

Xystre wrote:

people still thinking that GGG is a small indie company.. starting to questioning myself if they are using internet explorer still doesnt make any sense since the same people has several "supporter" packs on..

...And you think that they're on the same level as Electronic Arts, a company that publishes Star Wars and FIFA games on their own service (Origin)?

If you were looking to change laws would you choose EA to make your case against or would you choose GGG, a NZ-based company with one game that barely anyone knows about outside of PoE players? Does GGG have offices in the US or EU? Are they publicly traded? Are they in every household marketing games to all age groups on all platforms?

I'm sure GGG will be affected by and comply with any regional/national laws that are put into place wherever they want to sell their game, but expecting some sort of public outcry or inquiry is a bit much. They are not the big fish in the pond.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

For example when we buy a car, or purchase clothing, or hire a plumber, there is a basic understanding that we are not gambling with the resulting product or service, and they cannot advertise as such.

GGG's boxes give you MTX according to openly disclosed rates--this is about as honest as it gets. The guys doing your renos probably won't tell you that they might just stop showing up to work on your house and the car salesman probably won't tell you that you really should look elsewhere for a better deal, so you likely have more reliable information from the GGG lootboxes than from many other services.

Not to say you aren't gambling with them, but I'm not of the mind that gambling itself is such a horrible thing--lots of people enjoy doing it. Were players coerced into gambling by offering, say, exclusive upgrades required to stay competitive (as many games do), I can't say I'd be a fan, but with GGG? Eh. Gamble if you want to. Or don't. If a person has issues keeping their wallet closed when they know better they need to get help with that in general, and GGG will even disable lootboxes on your account if you ask them.

I too miss the days where you just bought a game once and that was it--where it was up to game quality and word-of-mouth (and admittedly, advertising) to sell more copies. I feel that microtransactions have weakened the link between game quality and profitability, and that sucks--but that's where the tech is now and it can't be stopped. But as far as gambling mechanics go, GGG has about the most honest and least impactful implementation out there.