Anyone avoiding games with loot boxes this Fall and beyond?

#51
As long as it stays that way and the game economy is reasonable then I'm ok with it.

If they add the option to buy them with real money then no bueno.
Assassin's Creed games had MT since AC3 and every single year there was thread where people complained about it and every single year we got AC game where by the second half of the game you get so many resources that you can buy whatever you want from merchants. I don't like MT and i hate loot boxes but i never ever felt that MT impacted any of the Assassin's creed games. Hell many people didn't even noticed that they are in there.
 
#52
If loot boxes are purchased with in game currency (like it is the case with Assassin's Creed I believe) then I have no problem, as long as it does not gate content. After all, equipment in loot boxes is just a reskin of gambling vendors like in Diablo.
 
#53
I treat it on a case by case basis. This is a subject that has a lot of hysteria surrounding it, or if not hysteria then hyperbole.
Take Destiny 2 for example. On launch, there was the whole to-do around Destiny now being pay 2 win. The most minute amount of examination revealed that this actually wasn't at all the case. It also turned out to be one of my favourite games of the year, without sinking a single penny into it beyond the buying the game itself.

If a game is legitimately pay 2 win because of loot boxes, I'll be less inclined to play the game on some level, sure, but if I think the games qualities will shine out beyond that, I'll probably still play, and just not indulge in the loot boxes. If it's something like Forza 7 where the loot boxes genuinely seem to ruin the balance of the game for people who do not pay for loot boxes, it's probably a skip.

However, the amount of games I see getting released where loot boxes really ruin the balance for casual players are few and far between.

So no, I won't be avoiding all loot box games wholesale.
 
#54
I'm not sure if I even own a single game that uses micro transaction supported lootboxes yet. I've avoided them by chance so far. If a title I want contained them for none cosmetic purposes then there is a good chance I'd not buy the game as I feel they are counter to what I value most which is well balanced game design.
 
#55
Personally I don't care, I haven't spent a single dime for MTAs/lootboxes in AA(A) games and don't plan to. Not buying them on release due to my backlog alone.
I'll probably get Shadow of War and Origins for cheap at some point and by then I'm sure people have found plenty workarounds on PC for content that is locked behind those lootboxes.
 
#56
I’ve never gone out of my way to avoid a so-called loot box, yet I’ve never played a game that included them. Most of the games that are being mentioned as offenders are completely unappealing to me for reasons other than this issue.
 
#60
The games with loot boxes don't tend to be the kind I'd ever play so it's not been an issue for me yet. I'm sure it will continue spreading though
 
#61
If the single player has lootboxes I'll skip the game, I might make exceptions if the content of the boxes is cosmetic or if I am really really interested in the game, but so far this has never been the case.
 
#62
Thankfully at the moment it's only the makers of blandless focus tested to the death games so nothing of value is lost by boycotting them. Being fan of mid tier AA gaming never felt better.
 
#64
I was thinking about buying AC, as I havent bought one in many years. Found out about the loot boxes here on gaf yesterday, decided not to buy it.
 
#65
Not really. Never open them anyway (if its possible), or spend money on it.

If people want to waste money on it, be my guest. Still, I would prefer people doing it less, as it affects all future games. Sooner or later every game from a major publisher will have it.
 
#66
Unless you're literally forced into buying them to continue playing a game or it's really pay 2 win I honestly couldn't care less.


Also, can anyone point out where AC Origins actually has loot boxes?

Or are we now saying any form of RNG loot drop is a loot box?
 
#68
If BFII didn't have a single player campaign and co op arcade I definitely wouldn't be buying it. The loot box presence and foreboding nature of it in the beta has almost put me off completely.
 
#69
I could have some flexibility on this, but where I'm at is that I'm only getting these games if they're at a lower price than usual, on PC, and not always online, ie. I can run trainers to fix this problem if it becomes one.

Because of UWP I'm not sure what the trainer situation will be like with Forza 7, and because of Play Anywhere, it's more expensive than usual. So I'm holding off on that one.
 
#70
As a primarily single player gamer (am I in the minority now?), I haven't had to actively avoid loot boxes thus far. I won't have too much of a problem this side of Christmas, as I never buy those big name shooters anyway.

I generally prefer niche titles (Japanese/single player focused, RPG'S, etc.), and those increasingly come out in the first part of the year. How long until even these games are tarnished by microtransactions? We've seen a trace of it in some RPG's already, e.g. buy a potion for real money, but nothing egregious.

If publishers can't come up with a better way of turning a profit, then I'm sad to say it, but this industry is just making a bad name for itself.
 
#71
I find all of this loot box complaining to be rather silly.

Until I see the concept misused in a game, I'll continue to buy and play games that happen to have loot boxes in them. There's a lot of fear mongering over companies nickel and diming us to oblivion and changing games to balance for loot box drops. I get it, that would be terrible, but I haven't seen a game do this yet. So a lot of these complaints just feel frivolous.

EDIT: I also find it pretty silly that the OP draws the line at "cosmetic" loot boxes. That's just as bad if not worse then the games you listed containing loot boxes.
 
#73
Loot box is nothing but crazy expensive DLC where publisher get way too much for selling DLC content.
Traditionally publisher sell one cosmetic content for $5, which is fair, but when they put the same content in a 1% drop rate $1 loot box they get $100 instead, that's where I draw the line.
They make too much money for too little effort, it's not fair business for us.
 
#78
Yes, but then I generally don't engage with the likes of Activision, 2K, EA, WB, Ubisoft or Microsoft because of practices like these and honestly most of their catalogues aren't anything more than mediocre anyway.
 
#80
Nope, couldn't care less if there are loot boxes in my games. Never had a problem with them before where I felt that the devs made me feel like I was missing out on stuff if I didn't spend money on loot boxes. I think loot boxes are good for the industry so long it is done smart and they don't "force" you to spend extra money just to enjoy the game.

We will see how these games turn out soon enough, I'll buy most of them. Maybe it'll be a shitshow and change my view on this entirely :p right now I cant wait for Shadow of War tho!
 
#82
I was thinking about buying AC, as I havent bought one in many years. Found out about the loot boxes here on gaf yesterday, decided not to buy it.
In the end it is your choice but loot chest in AC origins is not same as loot boxes people should avoid.

Unless you're literally forced into buying them to continue playing a game or it's really pay 2 win I honestly couldn't care less.


Also, can anyone point out where AC Origins actually has loot boxes?

Or are we now saying any form of RNG loot drop is a loot box?
Origins has merchant that roams around the world and sells Heka Chest that contains random loot. It is not standard loot box.
 
#83
I find all of this loot box complaining to be rather silly.

Until I see the concept misused in a game, I'll continue to buy and play games that happen to have loot boxes in them. There's a lot of fear mongering over companies nickel and diming us to oblivion and changing games to balance for loot box drops. I get it, that would be terrible, but I haven't seen a game do this yet. So a lot of these complaints just feel frivolous.
Every game that uses the concept is a "misuse" when the game is full priced, because rather than allowing you to get content you want through natural progression or finding it in a set location, it gives you a blind chance via a loot box with the added bonus of getting items you don't need. The games then offer you two choices, grind fo more chances to get what you want - which is not the perference for the developers, which is why the grind is so extreme in some cases - or pay money to get boxes to, again, potentially get the content you want.

The problem is that it's gambling and, unlike microtransactions where you were picking the content you wanted and making a one off purchase, this is now random and requires that extreme grind or repeat purchases.

So, I'm not sure how complaining about a free to play economy in full priced games is "silly". I'm not sure how being annoyed that games are encouraging gambling is "silly".
 
#84
No. Life is too short to be deliberately avoiding games with certain elements within them. Just go out, buy and enjoy the game. I can't think of any game i've played where micro- transations, loot boxes or what ever you wish to call them these days has had a profound negative impact on my experience. I just simply ignore them and i don't realise they are there.

Sure its ok to vote with you wallet, but at the same time developers get data in game from who spends money and who doesn't. It's the same thing, but you probably going to enjoy the game for what it is anyway.
 
#88
Not into AAA stuff, so wouldn't buy anyway. I'm scared of this trend coming to the games I enjoy tho. DLC was bad, but locking content behind gambling with real money is insane, especially with games that can be played by children.
 
#89
No. Life is too short to be deliberately avoiding games with certain elements within them. Just go out, buy and enjoy the game. I can't think of any game i've played where micro- transations, loot boxes or what ever you wish to call them these days has had a profound negative impact on my experience. I just simply ignore them and i don't realise they are there.

Sure its ok to vote with you wallet, but at the same time developers get data in game from who spends money and who doesn't. It's the same thing, but you probably going to enjoy the game for what it is anyway.
Life is too short to spend time and money on glorified gambling schemes when there's so many other fantastic games releasing every month that also happen to respect their customers
 
#91
Nope, I just avoid the loot boxes themselves.

I'm sure every single one of the games that I'm interested in are still enjoyable without engaging in the loot boxes.

I completely understand why people don't want them in gaming, I'm just not that bothered by them.
 
#92
Every game that uses the concept is a "misuse" when the game is full priced, because rather than allowing you to get content you want through natural progression or finding it in a set location, it gives you a blind chance via a loot box with the added bonus of getting items you don't need. The games then offer you two choices, grind fo more chances to get what you want - which is not the perference for the developers, which is why the grind is so extreme in some cases - or pay money to get boxes to, again, potentially get the content you want.

The problem is that it's gambling and, unlike microtransactions where you were picking the content you wanted and making a one off purchase, this is now random and requires that extreme grind or repeat purchases.

So, I'm not sure how complaining about a free to play economy in full priced games is "silly". I'm not sure how encouraging gambling is "silly".
While you're right, so far I can't think of any game that has been ruined for me personally from their inclusion. They've been walking on the right of the line, barely.

I have the utmost respect for people who vote against this stuff with their wallets though. It is after all the only thing that these publishers hear.

I wonder if there's a significant enough amount of you to be heard though?
 
#93
For the most part, it's a real deterrent from buying. There is lots of games releasing and it's easy to pass a game if they are design with loot boxes in mind as a $60 title.

If I really like the game and they pull this shit, hells yeah I am buying the used copy. Maybe even wait a year to get the definitive GOTY used copy with all DLC included.
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
#94
Yes, but then I generally don't engage with the likes of Activision, 2K, EA, WB, Ubisoft or Microsoft because of practices like these and honestly most of their catalogues aren't anything more than mediocre anyway.
Same. They never made games I care about. The only game EA ever made that I really enjoyed was Dead Space but they killed that great IP with Dead Space 3.
 
#97
Loot boxes have never bothered me, not one bit.

I simply ignore them. Where do I draw the line? If it intervenes with game completion.

Here's a thought. Its the people buying the loot boxes that propagate this thinking, not folks getting the actual game.
 
#99
No? I have self-control and I have the ability to judge games on other more important factors. Shadow of War just looks like a bloated Shadow of Mordor so I wasn't getting that anyway, the SWBFII beta sucks in terms of visuals and gameplay so I'm not getting that either. But AC this year looks like a genuine effort to change up the series and the loot boxes won't affect that. Are people upset that people might complete a game before them because they paid $1.50? :(
 
Every game that uses the concept is a "misuse" when the game is full priced, because rather than allowing you to get content you want through natural progression or finding it in a set location, it gives you a blind chance via a loot box with the added bonus of getting items you don't need. The games then offer you two choices, grind fo more chances to get what you want - which is not the perference for the developers, which is why the grind is so extreme in some cases - or pay money to get boxes to, again, potentially get the content you want.

The problem is that it's gambling and, unlike microtransactions where you were picking the content you wanted and making a one off purchase, this is now random and requires that extreme grind or repeat purchases.

So, I'm not sure how complaining about a free to play economy in full priced games is "silly". I'm not sure how being annoyed that games are encouraging gambling is "silly".
You're just talking about a supposed doomsday scenario, which is basically further proving my point. Again, where are these $60 games that force you grind for extreme amounts of time and demand you put tons of money into the game to get anywhere?

I will continue to call these complaints silly, because that's what it looks like to me. People were calling for blood when microtransactions seeped into games a few years ago. Annnd nothing has really changed at all. The progression in games still respect our time and they don't demand that we pay more money just to have a good time.