-
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.
Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft to require loot box odds disclosure
- Thread starter iconmaster
- Start date
alabtrosMyster
Banned
Those are great dance emotes!
iconmaster
Banned
This will address one of my main complaints about loot boxes: that developers can adjust the odds at open time for maximum manipulation. With published odds, gamers can run tests to make sure the game is playing by its own rules (and I'm sure they will -- look at how they drill down into everything else).
bitbydeath
Gold Member
DunDunDunpachi
Banned
Better for self-regulation than for a government mandate. Good job, platform holders. EA am cry.
EightBit Man
Member
They should be gone. Plain and simple. Wasn't the ESA in favor of lootboxes? And what is the ESA really? A lobbying association with all the big publishers on board. As if something will change.
mcz117chief
Member
I enjoy lootboxes as a concept myself. It all depends on how you implement them. I really like them in League of Legends where you earn them for being a positive team player, leveling up and participating in events. Buying them outright is a complete waste of money since they give you random stuff from the store so you can buy almost anything that is present in lootboxes. They work mostly to give non-paying players a chance to earn some skins and for paying customers they really don't add that much. Unless you are a super whale who desperately wants that hex tech skin which requires 10 gemstones with a drop rate of about 4% per box, in which case get ready to be milked 
cormack12
Gold Member
Actually EA already display them in FUT if you press R3
I mean, you can only see this as good, but ultimately it's down to presentation and packaging. They'll just widen and tighten the scopes so they 'look' more appealing but the data behind it will make sure there's not a massive gap or chance ratio. I don't think the problem is the ratio to be honest. I think the problem is the tracking. If you come up against someone with a dream team, if it said they had spent £500 and opened 650 packs then I'd laugh and be like 'fair play'. But it's suspicious when you see those odds and everyone is walking round with TOTT filled teams. There's just an element of distrust in the whole thing.
And anything in a loot box should be able to be directly bought. Getting locked out of content or timed rewards sucks ass.
I mean, you can only see this as good, but ultimately it's down to presentation and packaging. They'll just widen and tighten the scopes so they 'look' more appealing but the data behind it will make sure there's not a massive gap or chance ratio. I don't think the problem is the ratio to be honest. I think the problem is the tracking. If you come up against someone with a dream team, if it said they had spent £500 and opened 650 packs then I'd laugh and be like 'fair play'. But it's suspicious when you see those odds and everyone is walking round with TOTT filled teams. There's just an element of distrust in the whole thing.
And anything in a loot box should be able to be directly bought. Getting locked out of content or timed rewards sucks ass.
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
Epic Games commits to loot box transparency across portfolio
Epic Games and THQ Nordic are joining the growing list of major companies weighing in on the issues surrounding loot bo…
www.gamesindustry.biz
Zenaku
Member
So they'll basically copy Japan and China. We'll see developers try to get around it though.
Iirc, when China implemented the same for paid lootboxes, Blizzard changed Overwatch from buying lootboxes to buying in-game currency. With free lootboxes. That was enough to skirt around it and avoid revealing the odds. Not sure how Japans version works though.
Iirc, when China implemented the same for paid lootboxes, Blizzard changed Overwatch from buying lootboxes to buying in-game currency. With free lootboxes. That was enough to skirt around it and avoid revealing the odds. Not sure how Japans version works though.
TacosNSalsa
Member
This is a step in the right direction but them offering to do it themselves seems suspect. They're heading the govt. off at the pass so they'll step back for a while till it hits a critical mass again .
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Who are the ones that voted ‘unnecessary’?
Explain?
Explain?
Last edited:
If the ESA actually does any lobbying, after this past week companies should get their money back because boy did they fail.
Petrae
Member
I’m rooting for the ESA to get destroyed by litigation resulting from its info dump/“leak”. It’s been a shit organization for years. The ESA and ESRB are industry pawns, with only corporate interests in mind.
The smart thing would be to spin off the ESRB as an independent entity. Its hands-off approach to MTX and lootboxes, save for a tiny content descriptor that one in a thousand consumers take time to look at, has been nothing short of worthless.
fourfourtwo
Neo Member
Won't it? Some of the YouTubers who upload videos opening lootboxes may or may not know that their odds of getting rare items are improved by the developers. It's unlikely that young Braxton will be aware such skullduggery, and is proceeding encouraged to spend that $300.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Exactly. Though I would definitely go for AO.
SlicedBread3
Member
This is about them requiring all Devs and publishers to show loot box odds when selling games on their platforms. Not just for first party games.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
For Microsoft, a big one would be the Forza series.
Slings and Arrows
Banned
1 in 3 chance of getting a legendary items*
*on average of opening 10000 loot boxes
*on average of opening 10000 loot boxes
MS have lootboxes in all their major games Forza/Gears/Halo.
This isn't about that though it's about the platform holders adding a policy for all games on their systems.
Last edited: