-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ars Technica: Dota2/CS:GO worse than 3rd party gambling sites
- Thread starter ashecitism
- Start date
Slamtastic
Member
Even before Overwatch I quit TF2 in spite of my enjoyment of the gameplay due to the scummy monetization.
Turin Turambar
Member
In one hand, I'm the type of player who totally ignore character customization and cosmetics, so for me it's ideal if a game company chooses to make a quality title free or very cheap and put tons of cosmetic micro transactions. The people who like them will pay the game for me!
In the other, I dislike how Valve, which before was a premiere game developer, has chosen to introduce over the course of years more and more micro-transactions, and lottery elements in their games, using the typical psychological tricks to get money from people who don't know any better. "Here, you won this chest, for free! Now, to open it you may need a key... it would be a waste to not open it now you that gained the chest, right?
"
And of course the steam marketplace where they also have a cut in every transaction, and how they are promoting the same tactics to other developers (steam dev days). They are not stupid, clearly.
In the other, I dislike how Valve, which before was a premiere game developer, has chosen to introduce over the course of years more and more micro-transactions, and lottery elements in their games, using the typical psychological tricks to get money from people who don't know any better. "Here, you won this chest, for free! Now, to open it you may need a key... it would be a waste to not open it now you that gained the chest, right?
"And of course the steam marketplace where they also have a cut in every transaction, and how they are promoting the same tactics to other developers (steam dev days). They are not stupid, clearly.
Don't forget the SUPER DRAMATIC animations and music as the game decides what you got from its giant roulette wheel or slot machine or whatever they're emulating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6IUv2Jrzv0
LordRaptor
Member
Cool, when we're finished fixing the PC as a platform we can fix valve too.
Non-snarky non-ad hominem response:
DOTA2 and TF2 are free to play, and are funded by the sale of vanity items. CS:GO is likely to go F2P at some point in the future when issues of cheating are resolved.
Vanity items are only purchased if there is a concept of prestige, whereby some items are more desirable than others.
One of the major ways of creating a scale of prestige is via scarcity; as all digital items are, well, digital items, scarcity is introduced either via 'limited time' offers (which is potentially unfair for anyone not playing at that specific time period) or via rarity, as used by numerous MMOs.
People who are looking for a specific prestige item are expected to trade with others to obtain it, not to sit pouring money into a fruit machine for it to arrive, just as people looking for a specific purple in WoW (or whatever) are not expected to keep trying to solo raids to get it.
If you are coming to these games from an F2P MMO perspective, this is all very familiar and deeply uncontroversial.
If you are coming to these games from a console singleplayer game perspective, the concept that you can't have it all might annoy you, but you are not an island, and frankly, if you're playing a game for free or for hundreds of hours on a$10 purchase, I have to ask why you feel entitled to make demands on how that game you are playing is maintained financially.
e:
And yes I am aware thanks to the recent furore that - omg - people gamble virtual items???? my opinion is a minority viewpoint here
Non-snarky non-ad hominem response:
DOTA2 and TF2 are free to play, and are funded by the sale of vanity items. CS:GO is likely to go F2P at some point in the future when issues of cheating are resolved.
Vanity items are only purchased if there is a concept of prestige, whereby some items are more desirable than others.
One of the major ways of creating a scale of prestige is via scarcity; as all digital items are, well, digital items, scarcity is introduced either via 'limited time' offers (which is potentially unfair for anyone not playing at that specific time period) or via rarity, as used by numerous MMOs.
People who are looking for a specific prestige item are expected to trade with others to obtain it, not to sit pouring money into a fruit machine for it to arrive, just as people looking for a specific purple in WoW (or whatever) are not expected to keep trying to solo raids to get it.
If you are coming to these games from an F2P MMO perspective, this is all very familiar and deeply uncontroversial.
If you are coming to these games from a console singleplayer game perspective, the concept that you can't have it all might annoy you, but you are not an island, and frankly, if you're playing a game for free or for hundreds of hours on a$10 purchase, I have to ask why you feel entitled to make demands on how that game you are playing is maintained financially.
e:
And yes I am aware thanks to the recent furore that - omg - people gamble virtual items???? my opinion is a minority viewpoint here
Dreams-Visions
Member
Let's not forget, dear friends: virtually all items can be purchased on the community market. The determination that goes it to whether to simply buy an item for usually a few cents to a few dollars via the community market vs opening your own RNG box is up to the individual.
For rarer items that cost tens or hundreds of dollars, one has to do the math on their own and decide if they want to take the chance opening up boxes and hoping for RNG to get their item at a total price cheaper than if they bought it off the market.
But it should be stated that for the last couple of years, the marketplace has been there as an alternative to RNG box-opening. 99% of items in these games can be acquired though the market where there is no RNG of any kind. You like it? Pay up and buy it.
As for the ethics of the thing, I think the process can be improved. Maybe instead of heavy RNG from chests, they can go back to the old system where if you liked a new set, you had the option to pay for it directly in the store. That's how it works in TF2. If you want the opportunity to get some sort of rare version, maybe you need to open some chests and pray. But with things like special events (where the top prize is something rare) you're going to have haves and have-nots...you end up rewarding people who simply have more skill and/or free time to figure out how to game the system.
Either way, these systems are how Dota 2 can have a $17,000,000.00 prize pool for a single tournament. It works well for them, that's for damn sure.
For rarer items that cost tens or hundreds of dollars, one has to do the math on their own and decide if they want to take the chance opening up boxes and hoping for RNG to get their item at a total price cheaper than if they bought it off the market.
But it should be stated that for the last couple of years, the marketplace has been there as an alternative to RNG box-opening. 99% of items in these games can be acquired though the market where there is no RNG of any kind. You like it? Pay up and buy it.
As for the ethics of the thing, I think the process can be improved. Maybe instead of heavy RNG from chests, they can go back to the old system where if you liked a new set, you had the option to pay for it directly in the store. That's how it works in TF2. If you want the opportunity to get some sort of rare version, maybe you need to open some chests and pray. But with things like special events (where the top prize is something rare) you're going to have haves and have-nots...you end up rewarding people who simply have more skill and/or free time to figure out how to game the system.
Either way, these systems are how Dota 2 can have a $17,000,000.00 prize pool for a single tournament. It works well for them, that's for damn sure.
a fair opinion.
I've spent over 1200 and probably have 400 dollars worth of skins after betting on CSGO and opening cases. Sometimes I'm ashamed but you know what It was my decision and I have to live with it. If Valve has a way to make money and people are dumb enough to do it good for them.
I love how any time someone expresses criticism about a product now people call you entitled. It's great, makes for some great level-headed discussion.
If TF2 can survive by selling hats without the implementation of a slot-machine I fail to see how CS:GO can't. They just wanted to find a way to make tons more than needed by preying on the same crowd that would waste their money in casinos and were very successful at it.
That's their choice, people have the right to criticize it.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
Comes with the territory of having economists and psychologists on their payroll. How can we exploit peoples personalities to get them to spend as much as possible.
QuantumSquid
Member
Let's look at a recent Dota 2 Treasure.
Treasure of the Plaited Nebula.
Sure, this treasure costs $2.49 to get one of the item sets within it, but let's take a look at a far more cost-effective (and popular) option to just opening the treasure normally.
The Steam Community market.
Let's say I want the "Very Rare" set from this treasure, the "Blueheart Sovereign" set for Crystal Maiden. I could spend $2.49 to have a small chance to get it, or...
...I could spend $2.20 to get the set I want, guaranteed. That's just for the 'Very Rare' set in this treasure as well - if I only wanted one of the standard rarity sets in the treasure, like the "Raiments of the Eventide" set for Phantom Assassin, I could buy that off the marketplace for just $1.27.
Remember, this is the newest non-Immortal-themed treasure we're talking about. If I go back to older sets, you can get them for way, WAY cheaper than the price Valve sets for them in the in-game store. It's like weapons and hats in TF2 - sure, you could buy that hat for $3.79 from the Mann Co. Store, OR you could be smart and buy a Supply Crate Key that is worth a ton of Refined Metal and you could use that Refined Metal to trade for a whole bunch of hats. If you have even a basic understanding of how the economy works, you can save a ton of money on the stuff you want.
Treasure of the Plaited Nebula.
Sure, this treasure costs $2.49 to get one of the item sets within it, but let's take a look at a far more cost-effective (and popular) option to just opening the treasure normally.
The Steam Community market.
Let's say I want the "Very Rare" set from this treasure, the "Blueheart Sovereign" set for Crystal Maiden. I could spend $2.49 to have a small chance to get it, or...
...I could spend $2.20 to get the set I want, guaranteed. That's just for the 'Very Rare' set in this treasure as well - if I only wanted one of the standard rarity sets in the treasure, like the "Raiments of the Eventide" set for Phantom Assassin, I could buy that off the marketplace for just $1.27.
Remember, this is the newest non-Immortal-themed treasure we're talking about. If I go back to older sets, you can get them for way, WAY cheaper than the price Valve sets for them in the in-game store. It's like weapons and hats in TF2 - sure, you could buy that hat for $3.79 from the Mann Co. Store, OR you could be smart and buy a Supply Crate Key that is worth a ton of Refined Metal and you could use that Refined Metal to trade for a whole bunch of hats. If you have even a basic understanding of how the economy works, you can save a ton of money on the stuff you want.
Effectively making the items gambling chips. The community market changes the problem rather than eliminates it.
That argument requires confusing is with ought. It also mixes gambling and grinding. Then you seem to argue that whale hunting is the only way to fund a F2P model. Even if that's the case, it misses the question of whether minors should be encouraged to gamble.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Extra/unwanted items were always bargaining chips. The Market allows people to sell their items they don't want to keep in an organized fashion. It also allows you to put that money towards other games or in-game junk if you are so inclined. As opposed to having to go to shady servers or websites and having to barter and haggle with strangers. Maybe you're new to this but I'm not. Trust me: you don't want to go back to the days of trading without the Marketplace.
witchedwiz
Member
Smart players don't rely on chance when money is involved..
After burning myself with p&d i'm now avoiding any gatcha/treasure chest like plague
After burning myself with p&d i'm now avoiding any gatcha/treasure chest like plague
7DollarHagane
Banned
Yeah, it's not a money making thing people should do, but I like the way skins have real value on csgo.
All this bullshit with the third party sites and gambling is going to kill it though. This time next year valve will probably have to lock down all the trading bots on steam and remove real money valuations from items.
Going to all be ruined by idiots and greed.
I actually really like the case and skin drops and don't mind that it's random. It's all cosmetic meaningless stuff.
Doesnt maKe it any less insidious imo
family_guy
Member
The money to be made. This is why Valve will never make another single player game.
Yep, I get that. I bought Stones of Jordan back in the day.
Still doesn't solve the issues that come along with assigning real value to items generated through mechanisms that are visually very similar to gambling. Grinding for RNG drops is essentially a gamble, but is visually very dissimilar from gambling, which seems important if you're concerned about promoting gambling to minors.
Valve's marketplace partially addresses the issues of money laundering due to the restrictions on the use of Steam funds and the cap in value. But that's limited by the availability of external marketplaces.
LordRaptor
Member
You're entitled to criticise it, but you're not entitled to declare how things 'should' be, particularly when your citicism asserts as incontrovertible fact pure assumptions such as:
TF2 has 'a slot machine' and has done before it even went F2P.
You have no concept of costs versus revenue to state they make 'a ton more'
You have no basis for calling this 'preying' or participants 'the "type" to waste money in casinos.
Gambling chips have an inherent value. If you are leaving a casino you cash them out.
Virtual items have no intrinsic value. If you decide to stop playing CS:GO, you don't get jack shit back.
"Minors" having unrestricted access to Steam funds is an entirely seperate issue
Dreams-Visions
Member
It's an interesting thing. Valve isn't assigning value to these items; the community is. Valve gives certain items a rarity, that means certain items will be less common than others, but value (on the Marketplace or anywhere else) is determined by us. If the people like an item a lot and there are few of them, the price is going to be higher, as owners of said item set the price ever higher. The price will rise until the buying slows down, at which time people lower their prices to just try to unload said item. Eventually it stabilizes, then usually drops over time as other sets or items become more popular.
But if you look at the market prices for any item in the marketplace, all you see is a history of how much an item has sold for; not how much Valve thinks you should charge. If an item has been selling for $100 and you want to sell it for $10, nothing will stop you from doing so. It's your item and you can try to charge however much or little you want to charge up to $400 I think.
Most items can be picked up from the market for less than the cost of the RNG box itself because of supply and demand. If all this was already obvious, ignore me. I haven't eaten today and it's 6PM. I'm getting delirious.
These companies have been heading in a bad direction and their inability or unwillingness to police themselves is going to make the involvement of the government(s) inevitable. And they can't say they weren't warned.
This interview's from 3 years ago and lays it out perfectly:
http://www.giantbomb.com/podcasts/maybe-addiction-isn-t-worth-bragging-about/1600-604/
This interview's from 3 years ago and lays it out perfectly:
http://www.giantbomb.com/podcasts/maybe-addiction-isn-t-worth-bragging-about/1600-604/
Ars Technica going for the click bait.
These points can have been argued (and should) for a long time rather than now. Also Blizzard don't get the same attention for the same shit, albeit rightly without the ability to trade in both Hearthstone and Overwatch (or rather doing so with a large economy that is at a scale that is really needing a regulator), aimed much more at a younger audience. And then ofcourse there are those also imitating this kind of system and soon Rocket League joins the party.
For me personally, I can see it for what it is and don't bother to partake, simply selling what I get on the marketplace for a nice chunk of change. I've only purchased two previous compendiums when I used to play Dota, and the Kelly Bailey Music thing in CSGO, because it's worth it. Nothing else
These points can have been argued (and should) for a long time rather than now. Also Blizzard don't get the same attention for the same shit, albeit rightly without the ability to trade in both Hearthstone and Overwatch (or rather doing so with a large economy that is at a scale that is really needing a regulator), aimed much more at a younger audience. And then ofcourse there are those also imitating this kind of system and soon Rocket League joins the party.
For me personally, I can see it for what it is and don't bother to partake, simply selling what I get on the marketplace for a nice chunk of change. I've only purchased two previous compendiums when I used to play Dota, and the Kelly Bailey Music thing in CSGO, because it's worth it. Nothing else
Ploid 3.0
Member
And yet people are still happily in denial about the reality of this shit and Valve's complicity in it. As if that just because its online and a video game its not really gambling... even though its all sold and bought for real money.
It's the same damn thing, only even more dangerous than casinos because all it takes is an internet connection and a few clicks.
Blizzard is also totally down with it to a lesser extent. The loot box system in Overwatch is so damn close to straight up gambling.
It's the same damn thing, only even more dangerous than casinos because all it takes is an internet connection and a few clicks.
Blizzard is also totally down with it to a lesser extent. The loot box system in Overwatch is so damn close to straight up gambling.
Seriously have you fucking seen the price of the original cards.
Yep. This is why Rocket League's decision of not using the steam marketplace is so dumb.
1- It doesn't prevent gambling at all, since they will still have trade functionality
2- You can't offset the cost of opening a crate where you got a duplicate by selling that duplicate in the market
3- With the market, you can go buy the item you want, for a certain price, without ever engaging on crate gambling. Take the market away, and now you have to either open crates or jump through several hoops to find someone willing to trade it to you.
A lot of people think that since they are reasonable that everyone else must also be. So they are OK with the fact that a game or company they like is exploiting people's weaknesses for profit.
zombieshavebrains
I have not used cocaine
Is it gambling if you ALWAYS get something you pay for?
Actually preventing people gambling but granting them the ability to trade legitimately is either convoluted to impossible to actually prevent gambling. All one could do is police it, and I doubt that any company getting involved in that kind of economy has the intention to invest in doing so. Gaming as a whole has a ton of these gambling like mechanics to point where it is endemic, and that won't change without some proper regulation from a separate body
You're assuming the majority of the people buying these are some kind of gambling-addict degenerates without absolutely no will of their own, which is frankly a extremely ridiculous narrative.
It's as much as gambling as Pokemon cards or Lootcrate is, but I don't see anyone campaigning for those to be heavily regulated.
Maintenance
Member
Don't read too much into it.
zombieshavebrains
I have not used cocaine
That's another approach. Take WOTC to court cause you bought 30 booster packs and didn't get what you want.
Damn millennials...
I'm not even sure how you managed to pull that out of what I said. You do realize that a large part of the user base are minors? This type of gambling system was exploitative on mobile, and it's just as exploitative anywhere else.
Wait
minors?
with money?
Sounds like that has nothing to do with this, and more with shitty parents then?
That, and of course, your "large part of the userbase" claim has no data to back it up.
And once again, Pokemon cards. Nobody at the shop stops them from buying them, do they? And Pokemon cards are wayyyyyy more targeted to kids than CS GO is. Where's the regulation for that?
zombieshavebrains
I have not used cocaine
But its not gambling. Therefore you don't have to be +18 to buy them. And its not exploiting anyone. And its not the same as the mobile market because you can buy the stuff in the crates separately for their market value.
This is the exact same thing as buying a booster pack for Magic the Gathering, don't buy into the sensationalism.
LordRaptor
Member
That's another approach. Take WOTC to court cause you bought 30 booster packs and didn't get what you want.
Damn millennials...
God damn! I been a gambler all this time with MTG, heck even opening cereal boxes with promos inside too. All my life...wasted.
Starbuck2907
Member
Anybody ever buy a pack of baseball cards hoping to find a specific player or card worth real $?
Was that gambling?
Notice I picked a product often bought by minors.
Was that gambling?
Notice I picked a product often bought by minors.
Wait, you don't think blind packs are exploitative? The whole point of blind packs is to convince people to buy more cards than they would if they were sold separately. I'm not sure why that is being trotted out as a defense.
The same citation that is needed to show that these are somehow the few popular games minors are not actively playing.
The act itself is gambling.
A governing body determines if that is what it would be considered under law, which is different.
LordRaptor
Member
No, I don't need to cite a source for a claim I'm not making, you have to provide a source for a claim you are.
Most demographic studies put under 18 gamers at below 30% of total gamers for what that's worth.
If an activity is deemed to legally not be gambling, then it is not gambling.
Most legal precedent does not consider the winning of merchandise via raffle or lottery to be gambling for what that's worth.