Support NeoGAF

[Lime]

Self-explanatory for many people, but Heather Alexander wrote this really good article on the problems of lootboxes and how they rarely if ever can be excused since they're designed to prey on the vulnerable. Whether it is simply pay 2 win or even cosmetic lootboxes, they are all exploitative. It's also a necessary statement because I've seen developers argue that lootboxes are necessary to support developers and their income (thereby overlooking how publishers are the one taking all the money)

On top of this, loot systems are designed to maximize use through carefully crafted audio and visual design. In interviews with my colleague Cecilia D'Anastasio earlier this year, the designers from games like Overwatch and Duelyst explain how their crates are designed to be a pleasurable experience.

”When you start opening a loot box, we want to build anticipation," an Overwatch developer said. ”We do this in a lot of ways—animations, camera work, spinning plates, and sounds. We even build a little anticipation with the glow that emits from a loot box's cracks before you open it."

Moment for moment, loot boxes are engineered to capture attention with a mixture of spectacle and psychological trickery not unlike what you might find at a slot machine.

Whether they dole out cosmetics or gameplay-affecting items, loot boxes of any sort exist for the purpose of exploiting players. Whether it's offering the chance to get Symmetra's new skin or get a better rifle in Battlefront II, the only reason the loot box exists is to prey on the economically vulnerable. You are not a valued player; you are a statistic on a spreadsheet. You are red or black ink. Loot boxes certainly aren't there for fun. They have always been designed for the purpose of making sure that a company turns a profit.

Here's the really fucked up thing: while I can arguably afford this addiction (and, really, I can't) plenty of people who have started up with loot boxes or gacha games can't afford it at all. They know it, but I promise you plenty of them are logging into Overwatch right now to get those Halloween skins.

When you go to a casino, they give you chips. When I log into Fire Emblem Heroes, they give me orbs. This isn't a problem that started with Shadow of Mordor. It is something that has been a cornerstone of games for years now. Pull that lever and you'll realize that these boxes are designed to fuck you over and take your cash. For every person who can step away, plenty of people can't. It's a system that preys on addiction, built upon mountains of research on how best to trick people into letting companies rob them.

I still play my gacha games. I still play Overwatch. I write about those games here. I think they're fun. But we need to acknowledge what loot boxes are. They're slot machines in everything but name, meticulously crafted to encourage player spending and keep them on the hook.

The problem isn't just that games cost more to make or that loot boxes might affect multiplayer balance. The problem is that I can't delete these games. The problem is that I'm not the only one. And that's exactly what publishers are counting on.

Heather Alexander had some other great points on her twitter:

https://kotaku.com/loot-boxes-are-designed-to-exploit-us-1819457592

 

[Alexander DeLarge]

The way these kinds of business practices use human psychology to prey on people is really scummy. Also, even cosmetics are dangerous because I'd imagine a lot of kids would gladly pull out their mother's credit card to look the "coolest". I don't look forward to being a parent to a child that plays games in today's industry. These things should not be the norm and unless it's a free2play game, there's no excuse to having these things in a game. Especially single player ones. It's funny how many of the top free2play games have fairer business models than $60 purchases.

 

[almostjuliuscaesar]

Explained perfectly.

 

[Juice]

This feels obvious but I guess it's worth saying regularly and explicitly.

I'm pretty affluent. Me and my friends don't buy any micro transactions in mobile games or loot boxes or any of it. Even if we have "addictive" personalities we apparently have other avenues for that.

We also don't borrow from payday lenders or buy cars on subprime, repo-prone loans. Even if we need money we have other avenues for that.

This whole thing just feels like example #999 of preying mostly on people who can't afford it for the benefit of people who are much better off. After all, I play a bunch of micro transaction-supported games and pay zero of them

 

[Arkeband]

I’m glad that gaming websites have taken up this task of informing the public of this shitty practice. There are still way too many lootbox apologists on GAF.

 

[GHG]

I’m glad that gaming websites have taken up this task of informing the public of this shitty practice. There are still way too many lootbox apologists on GAF.

I don't understand why either because there's not a single game that is made better by the existence of these things.

 

[PhantomThief]

I’m glad that gaming websites have taken up this task of informing the public of this shitty practice. There are still way too many lootbox apologists on GAF.

Sadly yes. Good article indeed.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

I will add to the argument

"It's not legally gambling"

-Just because it doesn't legally meet the definition of gambling doesn't mean it shouldn't be regulated. Regulations are suppose to adapt to new predatory schemes, not ignore them because its not "technically" illegal.

"I get free updates in overwatch"

-Microtransactions dont have to be hidden behind an RNG designed by mental health professionals for maximum exploitation, Titanfall 2 gives you the option of buying whatever skin you want, and they give free DLC

"The game gives plenty of boxes in game"

-They didnt go through the trouble of putting them in there if they didnt think people would buy them, and if you keep supporting games that do this publishers will see how far they can go, how much they can get away with. "Its cosmetic only" very quickly turned into P2W lootboxes in Battlefront, and this is just the start of it.

"Game development costs have gone up, they need lootcrates to survive!"

-The struggling and smaller publishers aren't the ones pushing lootcrates in their premium games, its the biggest and most successful publishers in the history of the industry. EA, Activision, Ubisoft, and Take Two are by far the biggest publishers, and they're the ones pushing this stuff. How could they have become so successful if prices stay the same and development costs went up? Because they make a ton of money selling DLC and the size of these companies make it hard for other publisher to compete with them, so they sell tens of millions of copies. And i'll point out again, they can have microtransactions WITHOUT putting them behind blind boxes.

"Its not that bad, just ignore them"

-If "Its not that bad" or "Just ignore them" is the absolute best defense you can come up with for a mechanic, then that mechanic has no business being in a video game.

 

[Drencrom]

No lies detected

 

[Falk]

It's funny how many of the top free2play games have fairer business models than $60 purchases.

I think something the article doesn't quite nail in differenciating is any single f2p game doesn't operate in a vacuum. In ecosystems (say, Japan) where there are dozens of other alternatives, if you so much as piss off a playerbase with the appearance of being unfair people can and do leave for the alternatives, to the point official statements and/or adjustments are made to salvage flashpoint situations.

In other words, there's a marked difference between games built around a gacha system in which they have to be balanced accordingly to (or, practically, at least make a public-facing attempt to) maintain a healthy playerbase to minimize churn (and which only the successful games do really, really well, in no small part thanks to big data analysis, etc) and retail games where loot boxes are a small, relatively insignificant subsystem, rather than the literal deciding factor on progress.

Since games like Overwatch and most other retail games with lootbox flashpoints in recent history don't completely sink or swim based on the randomized loot systems the way gacha games do (e.g. people play Battlefront because they want Star Wars, not because they want to get more currency for random draws to maybe progress further) that sink-or-swim factor based on perception of how fair the system is isn't quite as pronounced. Even so, at least people are talking about it now - It'll take at least a long while for the latter to get to some form of 'appearance of fairness equilibrium', if it hasn't (hopefully) gone away by then.

edit: legibility

 

[Beartruck]

Informative article, not sure how much effect it'll have. Every new OW event has dozens of people in this forum talking about the $50 in boxes they spent for it. No publisher will ever turn down that kind of money.

 

[Syril]

I'll admit that I've been happy personally with what I've gotten out of free loot boxes in Overwatch, but it's always bothered me how the fact that you can buy lootboxes and not coins is blatantly designed to prey on the vulnerable, and the fact that almost every skin they've added has been part of a limited time event only rubs it in.

 

[Fewr]

Good article, thanks OP.

 

[CookTrain]

I don't understand why either because there's not a single game that is made better by the existence of these things.

You're not wrong. There's always a compromise in something otherwise you wouldn't be able to ask for money for it.

For me personally, I think cosmetics as a subsidy for paid gameplay content is the best... (least bad?) system we've seen so far when it comes to extracting more money after initial purchase. Map packs split the community, weapon packs are typically pay to win. That said, putting the cosmetics in loot boxes instead of straight up purchase power is really slimy stuff for maximum money siphoning.

 

[angelic]

Reaching critical mass on these things now. Personally I think theyre poison, glad most people agree.

 

[Gotchaye]

I guess the obvious question is: how many people is this actually hurting?

Like, the big concern about gambling is that some people are literally going to lose everything they have chasing a big payout. It's more than just "this is a fairly expensive hobby and some people are spending a bit more on it than they should". Are these sorts of games producing anything like the stereotypical gambling addict who empties his kid's college fund to try to recover his losses from a really bad day at the track?

The sorts of arguments I've seen about this just seem very focused on certain features of how loot boxes are designed and implemented and not very concerned with whether they have effects comparable to gambling. I mean, we don't regulate gambling because slot machines use bright lights and sounds to make playing them more fun.

 

[shimon]

Informative article, not sure how much effect it'll have. Every new OW event has dozens of people in this forum talking about the $50 in boxes they spent for it. No publisher will ever turn down that kind of money.

Good read but I agree. Don't expect any MT changes.

 

[Brotherhood93]

It's extremely odd that this even needs pointing out to some people. As far as I am concerned I see no justification for not allowing people to just pay for the content they want.

Like, the big concern about gambling is that some people are literally going to lose everything they have chasing a big payout. It's more than just "this is a fairly expensive hobby and some people are spending a bit more on it than they should". Are these sorts of games producing anything like the stereotypical gambling addict who empties his kid's college fund to try to recover his losses from a really bad day at the track?.

Yes. The term "whale" doesn't exist for no reason.

 

[angelic]

I guess the obvious question is: how many people is this actually hurting?

Like, the big concern about gambling is that some people are literally going to lose everything they have chasing a big payout. It's more than just "this is a fairly expensive hobby and some people are spending a bit more on it than they should". Are these sorts of games producing anything like the stereotypical gambling addict who empties his kid's college fund to try to recover his losses from a really bad day at the track?

The sorts of arguments I've seen about this just seem very focused on certain features of how loot boxes are designed and implemented and not very concerned with whether they have effects comparable to gambling. I mean, we don't regulate gambling because slot machines use bright lights and sounds to make playing them more fun.

It's hurting everyone who plays games because they're now designed around crates not fun.

 

[Syril]

I guess the obvious question is: how many people is this actually hurting?

Like, the big concern about gambling is that some people are literally going to lose everything they have chasing a big payout. It's more than just "this is a fairly expensive hobby and some people are spending a bit more on it than they should". Are these sorts of games producing anything like the stereotypical gambling addict who empties his kid's college fund to try to recover his losses from a really bad day at the track?

The sorts of arguments I've seen about this just seem very focused on certain features of how loot boxes are designed and implemented and not very concerned with whether they have effects comparable to gambling. I mean, we don't regulate gambling because slot machines use bright lights and sounds to make playing them more fun.

I remember reading articles back in the Team Fortress 2 days about people who would spend significant portions of their paychecks on crate keys, and that's a game where they aren't the only way to get anything.

 

[Gotchaye]

It's hurting everyone who plays games because they're now designed around crates not fun.

Sure, but I mean a sort of harm that anyone should actually care about as more than just a personal preference about the kinds of games they like.

 

[Ryuuga]

Informative article, not sure how much effect it'll have. Every new OW event has dozens of people in this forum talking about the $50 in boxes they spent for it. No publisher will ever turn down that kind of money.

I imagine the people gloating about funding this insidious cash vacuum are the "works fine for me" kind in troubleshooting threads.

 

[Falk]

It's hurting everyone who plays games because they're now designed around crates not fun.

I think this sentiment can (and has) also be applied to progress-accelerating microtransactions in general. If your game's leveling is so slow that a ~~~2x XP BOOST SPECIAL~~~ is appealing, then it's time to look at the game itself.

 

[Garryk]

People are getting paid to make the lootbox content. People buying this stuff is keeping someone on the payroll. Cosmetic fluff isn't hurting anyone.

As for mental exploitation, what do you think any form of advertising is?

 

[Hero]

Guys, video games are designed to waste our time.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Sure, but I mean a sort of harm that anyone should actually care about as more than just a personal preference about the kinds of games they like.

The only people that know this are the publishers, and i doubt they'd give it up willingly, the way they wont give us drop rates.

 

[alstein]

I guess the obvious question is: how many people is this actually hurting?

Like, the big concern about gambling is that some people are literally going to lose everything they have chasing a big payout. It's more than just "this is a fairly expensive hobby and some people are spending a bit more on it than they should". Are these sorts of games producing anything like the stereotypical gambling addict who empties his kid's college fund to try to recover his losses from a really bad day at the track?

The sorts of arguments I've seen about this just seem very focused on certain features of how loot boxes are designed and implemented and not very concerned with whether they have effects comparable to gambling. I mean, we don't regulate gambling because slot machines use bright lights and sounds to make playing them more fun.

Even if it's not very many people, whales tend to spend tons of money- so it's probably hurting some people a ton. There have been cases of big bills being racked up in the past by children. They are producing these types of addicts.

While I think the term "economic violence" in the opening tweet is overdramatic in a way hurts credibility, I do agree with the premise and the opinions. I would support an outright ban on this sort of thing.

 

[Trickster]

Guys, video games are designed to waste our time.

they are designed to be entertainment.

 

[Falk]

I imagine the people gloating about funding this insidious cash vacuum are the "works fine for me" kind in troubleshooting threads.

That's a stretch. I don't go to Starbucks, etc. since I think it's overpriced. If people want to spend their money a certain way, that's totally up to them. I don't see how that's insidious unless they're actually gloating. In the "ha ha you poor suckers, look at me get stuff you don't have" way.

 

[Bits N Pieces]

Not everything is evil all the time.

Like countless others, many of us here at 343 have been impacted in a variety of ways by the seemingly unending string of challenges reality has thrown humanity’s way recently. From the Gulf Coast to Puerto Rico, from hurricanes to earthquakes to wildfires, there’s been no shortage of unbelievable hardship suffered by folks from all walks.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned about the Halo community though, it’s that when the hour seems darkest, help is always on the way. With that in mind, this morning we launched the Relief & Recovery REQ Pack, the proceeds from which will go to GlobalGiving in effort to aid those still in desperate need of some assistance and respite.

In addition to assisting with recovery efforts, the Relief & Recovery REQ Pack will receive five permanent REQs selected from the most popular visual customization REQs of ultra-rare or better rarity, if available, as well as ten rare or better boost cards. You can grab the pack from Oct. 12-23 both in the Halo 5 in-game REQ Store or in the Xbox Live Store for $9.99 USD.

And to any community members directly affected by these recent disasters, know that we’re rooting for you every step of the way. You’ve got Spartans on the ground, and we’re not going anywhere…

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/news/diminishing-daylight

I'm buying this REQ Pack

 

[test_account]

I don't understand why either because there's not a single game that is made better by the existence of these things.

I disagree. I've played Uncharted 4 multiplayer for over a year now, and one reason for that is lootboxes. Having unlocking goals to work towards makes the game more fun for me. I've bought two specific outfits, otherwise i've unlocked almost everything (not counting color variations) with in-game credits achieved through playing. I hope The Last of Us 2 multiplayer also will have tons of unlocks. Good thing about lootboxes in Uncharted 4 is that theres no duplicates, so you always get something new.

 

[CookTrain]

Even if it's not very many people, whales tend to spend tons of money- so it's probably hurting some people a ton. There have been cases of big bills being racked up in the past by children. They are producing these types of addicts.

While I think the term "economic violence" in the opening tweet is overdramatic in a way hurts credibility, I do agree with the premise and the opinions. I would support an outright ban on this sort of thing.

I don't know if the children are addicts in many of those cases, as much as they are simply unappreciative of the value of money. Full on skinner-box behaviour in that they push a button and get a reward. The fact it is clearing out bank accounts isn't even a concept in a lot of cases.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

It's hurting everyone who plays games because they're now designed around crates not fun.

But... what if many people playing games like this gameplay loop?

 

[Forkball]

I was listening to the Beastcast and Vinny had a good idea where it should show you how much you've spent on the game every time you make a new purchase. I think that might cause people to rethink their monetary investment in a single game, similar to a calorie count on menu items. Would you feel ok dropping another $10 on a game after you've spent $234.67? There are three F2P games where I actually spent money on them: TF2, Dota 2, and Hearthstone. I'm not sure how much I spent on each one, but they are all around $50-$70 if I had to guess, the price of a full game. I'm not sure if I would spend even half of that if I was greeted with my current "tab" every time I went to the store page.

I bought Overwatch, but never paid for crates. I think they have a good system as everything's cosmetic, so it has zero impact on overall gameplay. And people who are dropping hundreds of dollars on the game are funding Blizzard so they can continue to make updates. So I am directly benefiting from people blowing their cash on lootboxes. That does make me feel icky at times though, as I'm sure some people are unknowingly investing way too much money and yet I'm reaping the rewards.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

But... what if many people playing games like this gameplay loop?

We have strong evidence to suggest that they like games that happen to have lootboxes in them, or that they tolerate lootboxes. We have no evidence that they like lootboxes themselves, we have strong evidence to the contrary.

If you gave someone the option to buy what they wanted in overwatch or buy a lootcrate, what do you think they'd choose?

 

[Vintage]

On similar note, this year's Nobel prize for economics was won bey Richard H. Thaler who showed that our financial decisions are based on impulse, not logic.

This is science, companies know that and these joyful lootcrates that have funky animations actually have a great deal of math behind them.

 

[Trickster]

But... what if many people playing games like this gameplay loop?

I like Overwatch gameplay, I fucking loathe lootboxes. 9/10 times they are straight up dissapointing to get since the vast majority of the stuff you get are totally pointless

 

[PhantomThief]

Informative article, not sure how much effect it'll have. Every new OW event has dozens of people in this forum talking about the $50 in boxes they spent for it. No publisher will ever turn down that kind of money.

Which is pure sadness and reminds me of this cs go vid

https://youtu.be/Q9RjDRLBWio

Those ppl are already under the influence.

 

[CookTrain]

I was listening to the Beastcast and Vinny had a good idea where it should show you how much you've spent on the game every time you make a new purchase. I think that might cause people to rethink their monetary investment in a single game, similar to a calorie count on menu items. Would you feel ok dropping another $10 on a game after you've spent $234.67? There are three F2P games where I actually spent money on them: TF2, Dota 2, and Hearthstone. I'm not sure how much I spent on each one, but they are all around $50-$70 if I had to guess, the price of a full game. I'm not sure if I would spend even half of that if I was greeted with my current "tab" every time I went to the store page.

While a good idea, I imagine the counterpoint would be that on food, to extend your example, there's no reasonable way a person can discern that information at the point of purchase, nor even reasonably after a longer time. Whereas when you're spending your money, you are in charge and can track it as you please. That'd just be asking developers to provide disincentive and I can't imagine they'd be too receptive to that.

 

[Aureon]

A pinch hyperbolic?

I mean, between a $40 game with cosmetic lootboxes and a $60 with said cosmetics a bit easier to get with playing and no MTs, i know i'd take the $40.

Are there whales for cosmetics? I know Gacha games get harsh on their users, but cosmetics?

I know a pair of whales who spent 2k+ on Brave Exvius, but they could definitely afford it. It was 2% of their income or so, definitely within hobby range.

 

[Ryuuga]

That's a stretch. I don't go to Starbucks, etc. since I think it's overpriced. If people want to spend their money a certain way, that's totally up to them. I don't see how that's insidious unless they're actually gloating. In the "ha ha you poor suckers, look at me get stuff you don't have" way.

Maybe gloating wasn't the best word to use. Certainly I wouldn't tell others how to spend their money, but it wouldn't be a stretch to think that someone willing to spend exorbitant amounts aren't above defending these practices. Also I was referring to the lootbox system as insidious, a feeling I still hold as things will likely get worse due to apathy.

 

[Gotchaye]

Yes. The term "whale" doesn't exist for no reason.

This seems qualitatively different. Whales are typically just not spending that much money, relative to what problem gamblers go through. Like, with Hearthstone it is hard to see how anyone would even have a use for more than, say, $100 a month. I see some suggestions that you could buy every possible thing in Overwatch for a few thousand dollars. I played Fire Emblem Heroes briefly and while you can probably get something out of spending more than thousands of dollars on it, there are huge diminishing returns. These games typically do not offer the sorts of long odds and big jackpots common to gambling which can result in people pouring tens of thousands of dollars into them or more.

 

[PhantomThief]

But... what if many people playing games like this gameplay loop?

Because its tailored to addictive personalitys. Ofcourse they like the loop if they get the reward (lootbox ) they have been mentally trained/conditioned to like them.

 

[elchebib]

I don't understand why this is an issue now.


This has present years ago. Lego minifigure packs, card packs, collectible packs, etc. There are countless packs out there that act like lootboxes in that you don't know whats in the pack until you buy it.

The only new thing is that its moved over to digital stuff. Thats the only difference.

This issue will ever be present. Business practice dictates making money. And publishers/developers will always be forced to come up with ways to do.

Is it shady? Of course. But its all self control. If I passby the store, and am a Lego addict, and I see new Lego pack. I will be enticed to buy it. The same applies for Overwatch or any other game.

Personally, I've never spent anymore money apart from DLC that contain full one new levels and areas to explore.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

A pinch hyperbolic?

I mean, between a $40 game with cosmetic lootboxes and a $60 with said cosmetics a bit easier to get with playing and no MTs, i know i'd take the $40.

We're getting $60 games with lootboxes and season passes, and $60 games with straight up P2W lootboxes in them.

Titanfall 2 is an example of a game where they let you buy exactly what skin you want, and use that money to give everyone free maps and titans. They dont have to hide MTs behind blind crates, they dont have to hire mental health care professionals for maximum exploitation.

 

[Trickster]

A pinch hyperbolic?

I mean, between a $40 game with cosmetic lootboxes and a $60 with said cosmetics a bit easier to get with playing and no MTs, i know i'd take the $40.

Are there whales for cosmetics? I know Gacha games get harsh on their users, but cosmetics?

I know a pair of whales who spent 2k+ on Brave Exvius, but they could definitely afford it. It was 2% of their income or so, definitely within hobby range.

Seriously? There's so many people that spend a ton of money every overwatch event to buy lootboxes.

I know there's one gaffer who buys something like 100-200 lootboxes every event

 

[alstein]

Constructive question: if you were to ask for legislation to deal with this, how would you do it?

My suggestion would be to mandate that all in-game items that are avaliable in a loot box be made buyable individually, and all odds are to be posted, as they are in China.

The second thing is something we already do for state lotteries, why should companies get easier standards than the state lottery?

 

[benzopil]

People who never spend money on MTs worry too much about those who are able to drop $50 or whatever for Overwatch skins etc.

Retail games will likely never be designed around lootboxes, especially since they are moving to games as service model. Publishers need you to play more, not spend money in 5 minutes and forget about the game.

Plus what's the difference between getting random loot from boss in RPG or open world game and getting a lootbox? Sure, you can spend real money on a lootbox, but the idea is basically the same. If you like to play, just play.

 

[Duffk1ng]

I like the "OW is lootboxes done right" thing.

Even if it is done "right", it's still a crap system for unlocking things when you compare it to traditional level up rewards or you know, being able to choose what you spend your unlocks on.

Want that one specific thing? Fuck you, get lootboxes until you get it or you get enough duplicates to get it.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

Constructive question: if you were to ask for legislation to deal with this, how would you do it?

My suggestion would be to mandate that all in-game items that are avaliable in a loot box be made buyable individually, and all odds are to be posted, as they are in China.

The second thing is something we already do for state lotteries, why should companies get easier standards than the state lottery?

-Show odds.
-Warning that it migh be addicting (like gambling).
-18+

Also in China, while Chinese companies release the odds, Blizzard e.g. just circumvented the rules and is selling Gold with free lootboxes, so they dont have to publish the odds again.

Even if it is done "right", it's still a crap system for unlocking things when you compare it to traditional level up rewards or you know, being able to choose what you spend your unlocks on.

You can buy the skins you want with ingame money.