PC game Loot crates for real money, good or bad?
- Thread starter Madeddie
- Start date
Yes but you can buy them in game without spending money, HOWEVER unlike most games using that model (Forza 7 for example) based on the Beta it is going to take you a LONG LONG time to do it in game.
Forza and shadow of war are purely for the super lazy who dont want to play the game they paid for, Star wars the grind required is more in line with a game like Planetside 2 which was a free to play game not £60 worth of AAA game.
Yeah I think it's China or South Korea or something where they've had to release the odds on these crates/loot boxes iirc?
Well the Metacritic user reviews for Middle Earth: Shadow of War are certainly letting the developers know what they think of the loot boxes and the paywall towards the end of the game!
Have a look at steam, Middle Earth is topping the steam chart. Currently over 1300 positive reviews.
this has come up on a few boards. end of the day, it's people's money and if they're happy to buy look crates/premium weapons etc etc that's up to them and the trend in gaming won't stop until the money stops coming in. it can break the balance of a game by having lower grade players w/ higher powered/overpowered weapons but apart from that i think people miss the sense of achievement of earning something good simply because they were lazy and took the shortcut of paying for it. if companies want to break the playability of the game by allowing this situation, then that's a bit sad, i think. it's also a problem if they make certain aspects of the game ONLY available from purchases; if that becomes apparent i'd drop the game and probably the company's future product just on general principal.
i don't know how people justify some of the sums they spend, some of the Star Citizen purchases are eye-watering, even if you have that kind of disposable income you have to question the point of owning several dozen ships that you're never going to be able to sensible use.
i don't know how people justify some of the sums they spend, some of the Star Citizen purchases are eye-watering, even if you have that kind of disposable income you have to question the point of owning several dozen ships that you're never going to be able to sensible use.
When it was hearthstone card packs nobody had a problem, but that was a free to play game and it was completely based on that model.
People have been doing it for ages with the FUT/MUT EA sports games, not something i was interested in so I didn't much care.
CSGO did it for quite a while as did TF2 but until recently nobody complained, it was purely cosmetic and could be ignored by most people.
Overwatch was probably the next game that jumped on the band wagon, complaints were almost none existent, "its just cosmetics so who cares".
Then you get to Forza now you are effecting gameplay but in an artificial way, BUT it can all be bought in game and doesn't lock out any content with a paywall, you can grind for boxes and get lucky to get your fancy car if you need it. I was less happy with this but it wasnt gamebreakingly bad and I was far more annoyed with being missold the VIP pass which has now been fixed.
Shadow of War similar it now does effect gameplay but isnt necessary, so far ive seen no need for it but if the youtube hate brigade are to be believed it mainly becomes relevant in the end game after you have finished the campaign, if you want to dominate the whole map for the "True ending". now i haven't got that far but if its anything like Shadow of Mordor if you clear as you go it wont be an issue if you dont you will be left with 500 side quests and collecting missions. I guess we will see when i get there but so far I am not too worried.
Now for the step too far, EA got a huge amount of praise for dropping the premium model on SFBF2, well done to them then they make a game that the progression is based on crates that require long grinds (a week a weapon based on some peoples estimates using the beta as the model) then your reward could be useless to you. That's not how progression is ment to work, and ive played enough RNJesus games over the years, if i am going to get random stuff them i need a lot of stuff, see Diablo/Division/borderlands etc. Then you make the stuff people can buy be the progression? thats not right.
I had no issues with people buying shortcut packs in other battlefield games, or burnout or any of the other games that had "paid cheat codes", made no sense to me but fill your boots, i dont understand paying to not have to progress, your robbing yourself of gameplay.
I have no real issue with cosmetics even ones that have real money market places like steam for PUBG/CSGO/TF2. I dont care enough about what my Chr is wearing or what colour his gun is.
I do care about making a game ONLINE MP game that on day one someone can be kicking my ass with objectively better stuff, the BF games shortcuts were not available day one.
I do care that they are random in nature as well, encouraging the one more spin mindset.
I was in too minds about SFBF2, after playing the beta I wasn't sold and after understanding the progression system i was actively put off. Wont be buying it, I will pick it up on xbox when it rolls onto EA access next year (around july will be my guess).
EA got it so right with Titanfall 2 and then this is so wrong,
People have been doing it for ages with the FUT/MUT EA sports games, not something i was interested in so I didn't much care.
CSGO did it for quite a while as did TF2 but until recently nobody complained, it was purely cosmetic and could be ignored by most people.
Overwatch was probably the next game that jumped on the band wagon, complaints were almost none existent, "its just cosmetics so who cares".
Then you get to Forza now you are effecting gameplay but in an artificial way, BUT it can all be bought in game and doesn't lock out any content with a paywall, you can grind for boxes and get lucky to get your fancy car if you need it. I was less happy with this but it wasnt gamebreakingly bad and I was far more annoyed with being missold the VIP pass which has now been fixed.
Shadow of War similar it now does effect gameplay but isnt necessary, so far ive seen no need for it but if the youtube hate brigade are to be believed it mainly becomes relevant in the end game after you have finished the campaign, if you want to dominate the whole map for the "True ending". now i haven't got that far but if its anything like Shadow of Mordor if you clear as you go it wont be an issue if you dont you will be left with 500 side quests and collecting missions. I guess we will see when i get there but so far I am not too worried.
Now for the step too far, EA got a huge amount of praise for dropping the premium model on SFBF2, well done to them then they make a game that the progression is based on crates that require long grinds (a week a weapon based on some peoples estimates using the beta as the model) then your reward could be useless to you. That's not how progression is ment to work, and ive played enough RNJesus games over the years, if i am going to get random stuff them i need a lot of stuff, see Diablo/Division/borderlands etc. Then you make the stuff people can buy be the progression? thats not right.
I had no issues with people buying shortcut packs in other battlefield games, or burnout or any of the other games that had "paid cheat codes", made no sense to me but fill your boots, i dont understand paying to not have to progress, your robbing yourself of gameplay.
I have no real issue with cosmetics even ones that have real money market places like steam for PUBG/CSGO/TF2. I dont care enough about what my Chr is wearing or what colour his gun is.
I do care about making a game ONLINE MP game that on day one someone can be kicking my ass with objectively better stuff, the BF games shortcuts were not available day one.
I do care that they are random in nature as well, encouraging the one more spin mindset.
I was in too minds about SFBF2, after playing the beta I wasn't sold and after understanding the progression system i was actively put off. Wont be buying it, I will pick it up on xbox when it rolls onto EA access next year (around july will be my guess).
EA got it so right with Titanfall 2 and then this is so wrong,
I really despise this form of lottery based progression. Also from a battlefield player's perspective I hate the playerbase split that DLC/ season pass models result in.
I've nearly got my £100 bf1 premium pass cost/hour down to 20p, but I haven't been able to get much value from the DLC as more often than not there's someone in our squad who hasn't got the DLC, and the very essence of this sort of game is about playing with your friends.
A game like bf should have all the content available to all players with no DLC paywall and no pay to progress.
For me (in the context of battlefield and other games which are effectively mp only) the solution is subscription gaming.
Charge ~£50 for the base game and include x amount of mp gametime. Then charge a subscription to continue playing the mp component which is low enough to encourage a large number of players to continue while generating enough revenue to continue to support the game, add content and provide the servers and ongoing anti cheat effort. For a player like myself who might put in 500,1000 or more hours, I'd end up paying more (Maybe £200 over 2-3 years for instance), but for the players who aren't going to play the game to death, they would still be able to play with all content for less.
Upsides:
No pay to win
No DLC paywalls/community split
Game gets the funding it deserves (If the content is **** people stop paying)
Downsides:
I end up paying more.
I've nearly got my £100 bf1 premium pass cost/hour down to 20p, but I haven't been able to get much value from the DLC as more often than not there's someone in our squad who hasn't got the DLC, and the very essence of this sort of game is about playing with your friends.
A game like bf should have all the content available to all players with no DLC paywall and no pay to progress.
For me (in the context of battlefield and other games which are effectively mp only) the solution is subscription gaming.
Charge ~£50 for the base game and include x amount of mp gametime. Then charge a subscription to continue playing the mp component which is low enough to encourage a large number of players to continue while generating enough revenue to continue to support the game, add content and provide the servers and ongoing anti cheat effort. For a player like myself who might put in 500,1000 or more hours, I'd end up paying more (Maybe £200 over 2-3 years for instance), but for the players who aren't going to play the game to death, they would still be able to play with all content for less.
Upsides:
No pay to win
No DLC paywalls/community split
Game gets the funding it deserves (If the content is **** people stop paying)
Downsides:
I end up paying more.
Hazard0 , thats actually something I could foresee happening. When all is said and done, companies are making money from the lootboxes. At this point in time, they arent going to simply give that money up, when/if lootboxes are removed from titles the companies will actively look at other ways of raising more money so I could see what you are suggesting about subscription gaming or something like that coming to fruition.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 1,423
- Location
- Scotland
Where Loot boxes impact the quality of a games progression/challenge they are certainly bad (Battlefront 2 and Shadow of War are looking like examples of this).
In cases where it's just for cosmetics (e.g. Overwatch, Injustice 2) I'm not that fussed but still don't really like them. In these cases, the distribution ratios/chances should be clearly communicated at least. Also, getting 'useless' rewards, or skins for characters you don't play and duplicates just doesn't feel good at all, it's a bad user experience for most.
I think I have like 40 unopened loot boxes in Overwatch atm, I just don't care.
In cases where it's just for cosmetics (e.g. Overwatch, Injustice 2) I'm not that fussed but still don't really like them. In these cases, the distribution ratios/chances should be clearly communicated at least. Also, getting 'useless' rewards, or skins for characters you don't play and duplicates just doesn't feel good at all, it's a bad user experience for most.
I think I have like 40 unopened loot boxes in Overwatch atm, I just don't care.
The thing that is wrong / worrying is children gambling or being ripped off (ref the petition)
examples:
I think games like League Of Legends way of crates/unlocks etc seemed ok but so many recent games seem to be moving to loot boxes etc
If the crates don't give an advantage I think it's ok
But even then if they have direct monetary value & the ability to sell/gamble surely this falls under gambling & should require age restriction ?
(I'm thinking of CSGO)
examples:
Sep 2016
Craig Douglas and Dylan Rigby, who are both from Essex, are charged with promoting a lottery and advertising unlawful gambling.
Mr Douglas makes gaming videos on YouTube under the pseudonym Nepenthez.
He is also charged with inviting children to gamble.
Feb 2017
YouTuber Craig 'NepentheZ' Douglas and business partner Dylan Rigby have been fined £265,000 for promoting an online Fifa gambling ring to children.
Videos directed players to FUTGalaxy, a "social gaming site" with no age restrictions, which allowed minors to place bets around Fifa's in-game events and virtual currency. Douglas, who on Monday changed his plea in court to guilty, was fined £91k, while Rigby was fined £174k in costs and damages.
The pair was charged with advertising unlawful gambling in what was seen as the first case involving betting on video games.
ref
Craig Douglas and Dylan Rigby, who are both from Essex, are charged with promoting a lottery and advertising unlawful gambling.
Mr Douglas makes gaming videos on YouTube under the pseudonym Nepenthez.
He is also charged with inviting children to gamble.
Feb 2017
YouTuber Craig 'NepentheZ' Douglas and business partner Dylan Rigby have been fined £265,000 for promoting an online Fifa gambling ring to children.
Videos directed players to FUTGalaxy, a "social gaming site" with no age restrictions, which allowed minors to place bets around Fifa's in-game events and virtual currency. Douglas, who on Monday changed his plea in court to guilty, was fined £91k, while Rigby was fined £174k in costs and damages.
The pair was charged with advertising unlawful gambling in what was seen as the first case involving betting on video games.
ref
The proposed order settling the FTC’s charges prohibits Martin, Cassell, and CSGOLotto, Inc. from misrepresenting that any endorser is an independent user or ordinary consumer of a product or service. The order also requires clear and conspicuous disclosures of any unexpected material connections with endorsers
ref(pdf)
Apparently ongoing + some people suggesting UK authorities may be interested...
ref(pdf)
Apparently ongoing + some people suggesting UK authorities may be interested...
I think games like League Of Legends way of crates/unlocks etc seemed ok but so many recent games seem to be moving to loot boxes etc
If the crates don't give an advantage I think it's ok
But even then if they have direct monetary value & the ability to sell/gamble surely this falls under gambling & should require age restriction ?
(I'm thinking of CSGO)
Last edited:
I used to be dead against paid loot crates in games full stop. Hated the advantage some gave and couldnt really see the point in cosmetics back in the day I liked that the game already came with skins and you had to level up through skill to get the good stuff.
That is until today! I have been out of love with gaming but recently picked up CS:GO on PC, never played it before but I am addicted 25 hours in the past 2 weeks (a lot of gaming for me) and noticed cool skins when getting killed so had a browse and ended up spending a whole £7 or so to get a skin for each of my favourite gun on either side and can see be picking up more skins as I weapons grow on me. I would never buy a skin for over £4 though, crazy that some are going for £70 and up. Having £60 in my Steam wallet didnt help though as I was struggling to get rid of bit coins so used these to top up a while back so it didnt really seem like spending my money as it had been sat there for ages.
I personally hate loot crates that offer an advantage and if I am honest will boycot a game that offers this.
That is until today! I have been out of love with gaming but recently picked up CS:GO on PC, never played it before but I am addicted 25 hours in the past 2 weeks (a lot of gaming for me) and noticed cool skins when getting killed so had a browse and ended up spending a whole £7 or so to get a skin for each of my favourite gun on either side and can see be picking up more skins as I weapons grow on me. I would never buy a skin for over £4 though, crazy that some are going for £70 and up. Having £60 in my Steam wallet didnt help though as I was struggling to get rid of bit coins so used these to top up a while back so it didnt really seem like spending my money as it had been sat there for ages.
I personally hate loot crates that offer an advantage and if I am honest will boycot a game that offers this.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2011
- Posts
- 5,607
- Location
- UK
well there you go folks, loot boxes are deemed not gambling as you are guaranteed a prize.
http://www.pcgamer.com/loot-boxes-a...ok&utm_campaign=buffer_pcgamerfb#comment-jump
as one of the commenters said, if a slot machine always pays out the minimum of a penny, does that mean its not subject to gambling laws?
http://www.pcgamer.com/loot-boxes-a...ok&utm_campaign=buffer_pcgamerfb#comment-jump
as one of the commenters said, if a slot machine always pays out the minimum of a penny, does that mean its not subject to gambling laws?
Battlefield 4 has it right. Challenges and progression to unlock stuff. All these loot crates containing weapons is just killing multiplayer gaming for me. Thank god there are still games out there like Project Cars and Warhammer Total War otherwise i dont think id play anything anymore.
Looking back through the years as a gamer, I hate the way gaming is going. I don't mind some DLC, but these loot crates are bad and easy to get sucked into this "pay to win" style in F2P games. I remember all the way back to Spectrum and C64 days and the games were decent without big companies making/publishing them. Lots of bedroom coders back in the old days and you knew what you was buying. Now with big publishers like EA, they are all about making more and more money.
Bit late to the party, but whilst it's a good point, i still wonder if kids have a real appreciation of money.
I remember walking down to the post office with my pocket money to buy a pack of pokemon cards. The physical act of handing over cash gives you some realisation of the worth of the product you've just purchased.
Clicking buy now on a digital item and having the transaction automatically deduct from your parents credit card likely means the kid has absolutely no idea that the thing they've just purchased has actually cost money.
On this one, I firmly agree, kids have little to no sense of money these days. I am constantly amazed by how little understanding of money, finances and how much stuff costs in order to live exhibited by the young. IMO , Along with Maths and English, Money Management and Finance should be a mandatory subject at secondary school.