Microtransactions: the Future of Games? (LootBoxes and Gambling)

[Deleted member 11852]

They should work it like a skill tree. You use ingame credits to buy skill points that you can apply exactly how you want. It would likely even increase their revenue if people could get exactly what they want instead of RNG Jesus blessings.

Would that make things better or worse? If you can literally pay x to win that's better than gambling but surely that makes the pay-to-win scenario worse as those not willing to gamble lots to get their desired bonuses/skills may now be tempted too if they know the exact outlay.

Removing the gamble element could exacerbate the disparity of skills in multiplayer. Perhaps splitting the online communities between people who paid for their skills and those who didn't would be the answer?

 

[Billy Idol]

P2W is a non issue imo, if the ingame progression system is fast and fair itself. Further, unlocks should be balanced by smart game design as good as possible.

Battlefield games had the fast track option since forever: I can insta unlock all sniper class gear when I buy the sniper class expansion (no gambling). However, ingame progression was fast and fair, gear was not overpowered.

As far as I am aware off, no one called Battlefield Bad Company 2 a pay to win game...


In short: if the progression system is artificially slow, is only here as an alibi to write that in theory no money needs to be spend as a pr move, and paying is the only sane option for gamers...this then is a problem of course, and something one could call P2W, or just “shyte”!

 

[BRiT]

It seems that Bungie can't seem to get out of their own way in the F-up department these days.
Reports are coming in that Fated Engram, the engram that costs you 97 Legendary shards and is supposed to guarantee an exotic you don't already have, is dropping dupes.

In addition, 3 of 9 coins that Xur sells for 31 Legendary shards is actually lowering your chances of getting exotic engrams.

No explanation from Bungie yet.

​

Regulation around micro-transactions as it applies to video games can't come soon enough when you have what many considered a top tier developer doing things like the above. [The post quoted from the Destiny 2 thread]. If a major developer like Bungie is doing questionable things then there's really no telling what might really be going on in other games.

EDIT:

Forbes article on the subject -- https://www.forbes.com/sites/insert...iny-2s-three-of-coins-right-now/#4dbc121b3a69

And the link to the Reddit thread...

https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252FDestinyTheGame%252Fcomments%252F7k7k3p%252F

 

[BRiT]

Apple requires apps with loot boxes to disclose odds of winning.

https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

• Apps offering “loot boxes” or other mechanisms that provide randomized virtual items for purchase must disclose the odds of receiving each type of item to customers prior to purchase.

 

[Malo]

How does one verify that the percentage chance for each item presented by the app is real? What's to prevent developers from making up numbers?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Yeah, I wonder that. You could get data from users - it'd be easy for users of SWBF2 for example to notice if they're getting the paybacks or not, certainly if you have low odds like 5:1. I guess for mainstream developers, the risk of having their corporate account banned would be sufficient to ensure they can't be found out with such cheating.

 

[BRiT]

Perhaps Apple/Google/Etc should setup their own Loot Box service that Apps can use similar to how they offer Ad Services for Apps to use. The apps then provides the Main Provider with a database of items with their chances to win. For multi-combo loot-boxes they can be described and specified the same way. That way the providers such as Apple/Google can guarantee the odds are correct (assuming they can implement it properly to begin with)

 

[AzBat]

Perhaps Apple/Google/Etc should setup their own Loot Box service that Apps can use similar to how they offer Ad Services for Apps to use. The apps then provides the Main Provider with a database of items with their chances to win. For multi-combo loot-boxes they can be described and specified the same way. That way the providers such as Apple/Google can guarantee the odds are correct (assuming they can implement it properly to begin with)

I need to get into the loot box odds verifying business. So companies can hire me test & verify their games.

Tommy McClain

 

[Malo]

Imagine how much money app developers can make solely from the amount of sample data required to prove the odds!

 

[Deleted member 11852]

How does one verify that the percentage chance for each item presented by the app is real? What's to prevent developers from making up numbers?

Probably only the fear of being banned. The lootbox economy is something that is only really profitable over time in a sizeable community, which takes time to build.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Probably only the fear of being banned. The lootbox economy is something that is only really profitable over time in a sizeable community, which takes time to build.

That's where it's stupid. If the odds where high and the prices low, they'd probably make far more sales. People probably wouldn't complain either, just seeing them (20p card packs) as throw-away money.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

That's where it's stupid. If the odds where high and the prices low, they'd probably make far more sales. People probably wouldn't complain either, just seeing them (20p card packs) as throw-away money.

Maybe, maybe not, Who knows the motivating factors for people who invest in micro-transactions. I've invested virtually nothing in the games that offer them and making them cheaper won't change that but if another user who does invest is after something in particular and can get it at a fraction of the price how will that help? Would increasing the payout odds on fruit machines mean more people play them? Would roulette wheels with 25 slots instead of 38 result in greater profits?

I think the M/T economy / gambling impetus / desire for digital shit is more complicated that than.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Of the few I've seen, a significant reason I would never invest in them is it's something like a buck for a 0.001 % chance of getting anything. That's asking me to throw money away. If there are collectibles and instead of having to spend >$100 to finally get one, it was a guaranteed $1 to get one, the value proposition is completely different and in the realms of shopping for really cheap items rather than gambling against ridiculous odds. I've been okay buying Pokémon cards, for example, especially early on to fill up your roster where most cards are something new or usable. But the offerings from these games are utter, utter shite and anyone with half a brain is going to avoid them because there are virtually zero value.

 

[Malo]

And what if the "loot box" could contain 1 of 100 different items? If the user is looking for one in particular, does the app developer then have to design an interface to show the % chance for each specific item?

 

[BRiT]

And what if the "loot box" could contain 1 of 100 different items? If the user is looking for one in particular, does the app developer then have to design an interface to show the % chance for each specific item?

They really should be held accountable for all percentage chance of winning each specific item. Maybe then the games will transition to non gambling microtransactions.

 

[dobwal]

The ink on a small iiiuuuujnnmukpojkkm jjljkjjnko

 

[Shifty Geezer]

And what if the "loot box" could contain 1 of 100 different items? If the user is looking for one in particular, does the app developer then have to design an interface to show the % chance for each specific item?

Then you have to calculate it using your high-school education! All those kids asking, "when will I ever use this maths?" will be able to get a proper response now.

 

[Grall]

Perhaps Apple/Google/Etc should setup their own Loot Box service

Nah. That'd just be cementing the current bad system which we know promotes compulsive gambling tendencies in those so afflicted. It's obvious that black box loot boxes are nothing more than a method of fishing players for more money than they necessarily should have to, or even want to spend.

I'm much more in favor of the previously suggested method of simply letting you pay for what you want directly, and fairly convinced that it could end up being at least as commercially successful as gambling for an item through loot boxes, as there's undoubtedly countless people deliberately avoiding the random loot box scheme for being just that. Me included.

 

[Malo]

Then you have to calculate it using your high-school education! All those kids asking, "when will I ever use this maths?" will be able to get a proper response now.

You can't calculate anything if the items vary a lot in their chance, which is how most of them work.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Well, random is random, but statistics gives means to determine likely chances from distributions. I remember someone telling me that for a completely random event you need ~2.5x the opportunities to be sure it has happened. I think it tends towards the constant e.

Giving the odds of a loot box is realistically as far as they need go. If you're looking for a 1 in a 100 rare item and have a 1 in 10 chance of getting one of those rare items, you should be able to notice you'll need hundreds of boxes at the least. If that's not good enough for someone, they should ask at StackOverflow or Quora.