• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Anyone avoiding games with loot boxes this Fall and beyond?

I will try to avoid them. They just probably makes the game longer than necessary and most likely grindier to get everything than without loot boxes. Especially if they are random. No thanks.
 
The only game I was interested in from that list was forza 7, but so many other racers releasing made it easy to avoid that game.
 
I don't care about the "fostering gambling addiction" angle. That isn't persuasive to me.

What I do care about is the basic game design being altered, in order to motivate us to spend money -- for instance, intentionally designing a tedious grind section, in order to motivate us to spend money to bypass it.

I'm still not clear from the reviews whether this is actually the case with SoW. To tell the truth, I don't care, because I have no intention of buying the game.

I'm just concerned about the practice for the future of SP gaming. If they start intentionally shaping game design to squeeze more money out of me, I'll be intentionally buying their game used.
 
Shadow of Mordor was a great game so I do want to play the sequel, just makes me want to play it even less at launch.
 
Crossing Eden said:
But this comment on eurogamer said it takes 50 hours to beat the endgame of shadow of war.
Click to expand...

Multiple review outlets have mentioned artificial tedium in the endgame of Shadow of War in regards to unlocking the true ending. Regardless of what the exact number of hours required is and regardless of whether or not it's been exaggerated, it is a really terrible practice to insert grind into a game (particularly a full priced singleplayer game) to try to squeeze microtransactions out of your userbase. Let's take any exaggeration of the time it takes out of the equation, as we should be addressing the practice itself and not the reaction. A developer made their game worse for people who don't buy loot boxes. How is this worth defending? Why is it not seen as predatory?
 
Forward said:
The answer is to not buy the game.

Treat the condition, not the symptom.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to do that. If the micro transactions truly ruin a game, then I'm out. The shit around Forza just makes me tune out the complaints as overly dramatic by people that don't even play the game.

I've actually played it and lootboxes aren't ruining anything. They're just annoying with how the game is always telling me to buy one. I still race and earn credits and cars like all the games.
 
I'm not intentionally avoiding them. Moreso the games I buy just don't have them.
The games I'm aiming to buy for the rest of the year are .hack//GU Last Recode, Okami HD, and Tokyo Xanadu Ex+. I don't think any of them have loot boxes.

I do play Shadowverse though, but I haven't and don't intend to pay a dime for it, so I don't think its that big a deal.
 
I don't go all out to avoid them, my games just happen to not have them.

With the exception of Overwatch, I am not attached to any cast well enough to get cosmetic loot box. I don't play that many multiplayer games, even then only casually, so no weapon loot boxes for me either.
 
NullPointer said:
Oh?


Uh huh.

Some people say if you're bothered by paid lootboxes, buy the game but just don't buy the looboxes. But if you're bothered by being pestered with loot boxes? What then?

Avoiding the game as a whole sounds about right.
Click to expand...

And others that have played the game have said the opposite, the car tiering, the gatekeeping and grinding seem designed to encourage the use of lootboxes. There are always going to be people insisting that the game works for them, therefore it is no big deal. However in the case of Forza 7 we have a direct iteration to compare against, and it is clear that this iteration is compromised in comparison to the last.
 
As long as loot boxes dont give a pay to win advantage to players, I like them.
I want free multiplayer maps (to avoid splitting the player base) and Im willing to grind or pay real money for good looking costumes etc. In these instances, I feel like loot boxes are good for devs and players.
 
OrbitalBeard said:
I don't like lootboxes. However, I'd be lying if I said they're an instant drealbreaker for me.
Click to expand...

I guess this about accurate for me as well. No, I'm not avoiding games I want to play even if they have a lootbox system in them.

I bought the Ultimate Edition of Forza 7 because I like the racing in the Forza games and it looks fantastic. I won't do anything with mods in-game though. I never used them in 6 either.

I'll probably buy Shadow of War later on. I really liked the first game, but I don't think I got that when it was brand-spanking new either. I'll just get it when I need something new to play.
 
Not intentionally, but none of the games listed are games that I'll want to play this fall. My priorities this fall/holiday will be Super Mario Odyssey, Wolfenstein, SNES Classic games, and DOOM Switch. Along with clearing out some of my backlog, hopefully. I'll probably play Battlefront 2's campaign when it gets added to Origin Access though.
 
tuxfool said:
And others that have played the game have said the opposite, the car tiering, the gatekeeping and grinding seem designed to encourage the use of lootboxes. There are always going to be people insisting that the game works for them, therefore it is no big deal. However in the case of Forza 7 we have a direct iteration to compare against, and it is clear that this iteration is compromised in comparison to the last.
Click to expand...

I don't give a shit if a game encourages you to use lootboxes as long the game doesn't force you to buy them.

Ive played FM7 for over 20 hours already and haven't felt forced to buy anything. I do career races and get cars for leveling up. I already have over 100 cars in a game that's allegedly so fucked by a micro transaction economy.

I've played Forza for over 10 years and credits are going to be meaningless in a month just like the last handful of Forza games. I have like 300+ million credits in FM6. I gave away Forza Horizon 3 credits by the tens of millions to gaffers.
 
If a game has loot boxes, I will wait for impressions, from GAF or reviewers I trust, to see if the mechanics really hurt the game. Though I would normally forget about the game after a while, usually as another better game comes out, another game that doesn't have loot boxes and is made of fun.
 
Boycotting every single player experience with loot boxes from here forward. I don't really care about multiplayer, so yeah.

I know, it won't make any difference as a whole, but at-least I'll know I'm not contributing to one of my favorite hobbies, gaming - circling the drain.
 
No because I don't really have an issue with lootboxes, just how they're used in some games
Lootboxes encourage me to play a game longer.
The longer I play a game the less likely I will impulse buy other games.
 
I previously stated I was going to boycott playing games that had loot boxes that might hinder SP progression.

But after realizing I had a weaker than some conviction for this as well as now there is GAFfer feedback for both Forza and Mordor that they don't really hinder progression and that frankly there are more important issues IMO to challenge, I'm probably going to buy what I feel like playing for now (still bypassing NBA for sure though as it seems to really slow progression)

I do respect those who are boycotting; and personally just going to wait and evaluate on a game-by-game basis
 
Nah, I only skip games I'm not interested in playing, based on the actual game itself. Lootboxes are a non issue when it comes to deciding what games I'll buy... I usually toss a few bucks into loot boxes anyway, if they are available haha
 
Hm, I'll wait for reviews from certain outlets.

Games like Origins I'll bite for most likely, even without the reviews. It's got me excited and MT's have never really have a major impact on Assassins Creed's experience IMO. I mean you know it's not much of an issue if most people don't even notice MT's are in the game.
 
I don't mind loot boxes like the one Overwatch has, purely cosmetic for a multiplayer game and has zero impact on gameplay.

What I will boycott and wont touch with a barge pole is ANY type of loot box in a single player game.
 
Luckily they seem to be appearing in a lot of genres I don't play. When they start appearing in single player RPG's then i'll boycott them. Already not getting SoW because of the lootbox shit.
 
Bydobob said:
Angry Joe speaks out about BF2's loot crates and the trend in AAA games lately.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne4CnyNW9O4&app=desktop
Click to expand...

too little, too late from Joe.

He ,who actually had the "power" to at least influence sales in some way (given his huge fanbase) should have advocated for a complete boycot on ANY game that had microtransactions in it...instead ,either for cowardice or not understanding the problem, or maybe just because he couldn't keep his money in his pockets, he continued to find excuses..saying that "if they are only cosmetics they are ok" or "you can ignore them and still play the game"

problem is,that's not the point.
Putting microtransaction in a game is an (almost) zero cost adjustment from the point of view of a publisher...once you made the content,to program a rng system it's the easy and cheap part.
So, now we have a borderline costless procedure that gives the possibility to get what it's basically free money, since no service is provided for a little (or not so little) fee..do you really think they will stop putting them in their games if you don't use them? They will just tweak the system next time so that you HAVE to use them...which is whhat's happening right now.

This big time publishers only know one language,money. As long as they are not LOSING money,everything is ok..when they start losing profit, THEN things change (look at the xbone debacle for an example of that).

the only hope we gamers had to avoid this was to stop completely buying games with microtransactions, thus hurting publishers in their pockets and making them back off...instead people decide to hid behind excuses like "oh but i just don't use them" or "oh but they are only cosmetics" or "oh but they don't influence single player and i don't play multi"..just to cover the fact that they lacked the willpower to not immediately buy their so hyped games and keep their money in their pants for a while.

And now everything is lost,we lost this battle like we lost the dlc one. congratulation guys,enjoy the industry you gave you contribution in creating.
 
Majukun said:
too little, too late from Joe.

He ,who actually had the "power" to at least influence sales in some way (given his huge fanbase) should have advocated for a complete boycot on ANY game that had microtransactions in it...instead ,either for cowardice or not understanding the problem, or maybe just because he couldn't keep his money in his pockets, he continued to find excuses..saying that "if they are only cosmetics they are ok" or "you can ignore them and still play the game"

problem is,that's not the point.
Putting microtransaction in a game is an (almost) zero cost adjustment from the point of view of a publisher...once you made the content,to program a rng system it's the easy and cheap part.
So, now we have a borderline costless procedure that gives the possibility to get what it's basically free money, since no service is provided for a little (or not so little) fee..do you really think they will stop putting them in their games if you don't use them? They will just tweak the system next time so that you HAVE to use them...which is whhat's happening right now.

This big time publishers only know one language,money. As long as they are not LOSING money,everything is ok..when they start losing profit, THEN things change (look at the xbone debacle for an example of that).

the only hope we gamers had to avoid this was to stop completely buying games with microtransactions, thus hurting publishers in their pockets and making them back off...instead people decide to hid behind excuses like "oh but i just don't use them" or "oh but they are only cosmetics" or "oh but they don't influence single player and i don't play multi"..just to cover the fact that they lacked the willpower to not immediately buy their so hyped games and keep their money in their pants for a while.

And now everything is lost,we lost this battle like we lost the dlc one. congratulation guys,enjoy the industry you gave you contribution in creating.
Click to expand...

Welp. Since all is lost, I'm buying everything now. Might as well enjoy the ride
 
No because I don't have a gun to my head forcing me to buy them. Not gonna let a practice thats optional hamper my enjoyment of a game. Ever.
 
Collateral22 said:
No because I don't have a gun to my head forcing me to buy them. Not gonna let a practice thats optional hamper my enjoyment of a game. Ever.
Click to expand...

There are mobile games where they only give you enough in game currency to make a single move, after that you can wait 24 hours or pay real money to continue. Do you think that "optional" microtransactions maybe influenced the way the progression and in game economy worked in a game like that? Dont you think its a natural conclusion that (to a lesser degree obviously) microtransactions would affect progression and economies in a premium game? Why wouldn't EA and Activision do that? I dont think they're very nice people looking out for our best interests.

There's zero regulation for this, there's nothing stopping them from doing it other than gamers who refuse to accept the practice.
 
Bedlam said:
Weird. They are inherently designed to save time, bypass the artificial grind and make you play the game less.
Click to expand...

If that's the intent they've implemented it horrible and it usually hinders the process of getting what items you need by focusing more on potential profits than anything else.
 
After years of skipping AC and MP games I was actually interested in maybe getting ACO and BF2 this fall, but the whole loot crate stuff is turning me off.

The thing is I would've tolerated this shit if the games turned out to be 9/10 material, but honestly both games just look decent to me.

The whole RPG stuff in ACO is pointless imo and works in tandem with the shitty loot crate system. Same goes for the progression system in BF2. Nope, I'm out saving my money for the big guns next year.
 
I’m not above it, though loot boxes aren’t my jam. I don’t mind throwing a few bucks at a coin doubler or equivalent, especially in iOS games I enjoy that have free entry.
 
Eh, personally I'm not ready to be that up in arms yet. I'll boycott games that implement loot boxes in such a way that I feel like I personally "need" to purchase them. Shadow of War seems like they're pretty unnecessary and for Battlefront 2, they just help accelerate a gap in player "skill" that I'd run into anyway. I don't plan to "stay current" on the game so I was always going to end up playing against people with decked out skills etc... after a few months or so.
 
I like how the loot boxes in BF2 appear to be one of the laziness & uninspired implementations as well. At least in Overwatch you can unlock skins that completely change the look of your character.

And then extra icing- it just simply encourages people to macro these games. Since it doesn't matter how well you perform. Winning or losing doesn't matter. Everyone earns the same reward

That's just plain awful.

People will just be going through the motions and will ofc buy the loot crates to accelerate beyond the tedium.

Easy game to avoid for me
 
Was really looking forward to Battlefront 2, but if they're going to throw in P2W gambling, but then I'm not going anywhere near it.

Shadow of War is a singleplayer game, so I'll just grab that when it's cheap and pre-owned so WB doesn't get any of my money
 
Ron Cadillac said:
Was really looking forward to Battlefront 2, but if they're going to throw in P2W gambling, but then I'm not going anywhere near it.

Shadow of War is a singleplayer game, so I'll just grab that when it's cheap and pre-owned so WB doesn't get any of my money
Click to expand...

Not gonna condone anything "illegal" here, but I'm genuinely curious. If you want to play the game without giving the publisher/devs money, why buy it at all? In the example you provided, are you more willing to give your money to whatever used games retailer you'd get the game from?
 
If the game is good, a few loot boxes here and there really does not bother me. I can see why people get annoyed but it really does not bother me that much. If it locked out something to boxes that I had to buy, fair enough but if I have to play the game more to get it, then I will invest the time if the game is good.
 
Majukun said:
too little, too late from Joe.

He ,who actually had the "power" to at least influence sales in some way (given his huge fanbase) should have advocated for a complete boycot on ANY game that had microtransactions in it...instead ,either for cowardice or not understanding the problem, or maybe just because he couldn't keep his money in his pockets, he continued to find excuses..saying that "if they are only cosmetics they are ok" or "you can ignore them and still play the game"

problem is,that's not the point.
Putting microtransaction in a game is an (almost) zero cost adjustment from the point of view of a publisher...once you made the content,to program a rng system it's the easy and cheap part.
So, now we have a borderline costless procedure that gives the possibility to get what it's basically free money, since no service is provided for a little (or not so little) fee..do you really think they will stop putting them in their games if you don't use them? They will just tweak the system next time so that you HAVE to use them...which is whhat's happening right now.

This big time publishers only know one language,money. As long as they are not LOSING money,everything is ok..when they start losing profit, THEN things change (look at the xbone debacle for an example of that).

the only hope we gamers had to avoid this was to stop completely buying games with microtransactions, thus hurting publishers in their pockets and making them back off...instead people decide to hid behind excuses like "oh but i just don't use them" or "oh but they are only cosmetics" or "oh but they don't influence single player and i don't play multi"..just to cover the fact that they lacked the willpower to not immediately buy their so hyped games and keep their money in their pants for a while.

And now everything is lost,we lost this battle like we lost the dlc one. congratulation guys,enjoy the industry you gave you contribution in creating.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but get your head out of your arse. Games are consumer goods. Businesses make them and sell them and consumers choose to buy. They are there to make money. This idea has made every game you love and will love in the future. I think you're forgetting it's a business, and not a god given right.


I'm not happy with the amount of Microtransactions (MTX) in some games, so i choose not to buy them. They hardly ever detracted from my, and I assume others, gaming experiences. However, there are people out there who probably get enjoyment out of buying them. Its an option. If a company goes to far with AND the market also decides they've gone too far, they will lose sales and they will adjust their business practices. What you don't seem to realise is that market wanted these options, like DLC and MTX, as they wouldn't buy them if they didn't. You need to accept that and enjoy games for what they are or find a different hobby.
 
Kanann said:
Remember when we input password or cheat command to bypass tedios sections in game?

201x, we pay for it.
Click to expand...
So now you have to pay for your cheats. Oh no!

Just play your game without cheating. I love how people act like they're being forced to open crates gunpoint by Bobby Kotick.
 
pretty done said:
So now you have to pay for your cheats. Oh no!

Just play your game without cheating. I love how people act like they're being forced to open crates gunpoint by Bobby Kotick.
Click to expand...

But you do have to literally open the loot box in order to progress (at least in BF2). Sure you can never open them and perpetually suck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

New York sues Valve over loot boxes
2 3 4 5
201
1K
BlitzerRadic replied
Brazil is Banning Loot Boxes, Pay to Win in Games
News  2
72
3K
ShadyAcshuns replied
Samson Coming To Consoles This Fall
News Platform 
6
146
lh032 replied
DCS 2026 and beyond
Event Trailer 
3
283
IbizaPocholo replied
S&box has launched - (Gmod spiritual successor) - Anyone playing it, creating with it, thoughts on it?
5
79
Branded replied
Top Bottom