Jump to content
  • Sign Up

"Loot Crates" and GW2


Korval.3751

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Uhm, GW2 have a loot crate system. Its called BL chests that are unlocked with BL keys. Is it a bad system? No one playing GW2 think so I am sure, but the fallout of EAs mess could most definetly come down on GW2 too... luckily Anet isnt some US publisher thats modifying a Korean game with 1 years reaction time, if they want or need to change anything, they will.

I question whether anything will come out of the debacle though. Many will expect far more action but in reality I think the "solution" will be relativly simple. ESRB rate the games 18+, just like gambling has an 18 year age limit. Publisher dont want that? Well take it out then. Its not gonna harm any already released games in any substantial way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:Uhm, GW2 have a loot crate system. Its called BL chests that are unlocked with BL keys. Is it a bad system? No one playing GW2 think so I am sure

I do think that the BL-gambling is bad and on the old forum where a lot of voices that also think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem isn't even necessarily that the SWBF2 was pay to win, that was just the last straw. Many people have a problem with the practice in principal. It is gambling, it is encouraging people to gamble. It is encouraging chidren to gamble. So far loot boxes have escaped scrutiny as gambling soley on the fact that they require a digital currency. Despite the fact that real money is required, more of then than not, to get this money. The BL tickets have been a step further away from scrutiny due to the fact that most of what's in the crates can be gained through other means and the currency for them (Black lion keys, rather than gems) can be gained through playing. They're easier to aqcuire than gems, so it's less of an issue.

No mount skin can be gained through play, aside from grinding for gold, then converting to gems and the only way to acquire more than one dye channel for mounts is to gamble using the harder to get gems. This is encourages people to pay with real money. ie gambling, it targeting minors with incentives to gamble.

The mount adoption license is that step too far and that's why GW2 could be in jeopardy from these changes. People think that consumer based laws tend to be black and white. They're not, especially in Europe. Consumer law is designed to be flexible and cover grey areas. The belgian ruling, essentialy seeks to wipe out the distinction between digital currency and real world currency. It makes the two equivelent since one can only be acquired (at a reasonable rate or at all) through the other. This means that gambling with gems is still gambling. Which would mean that GW2 is breaking the law by encouraging minors (people under the age of 18 in the case of gambling) to gamble. Black lion chests are gambling but given the nature of them, they would probably slip by. Mount adoption on the other hand is absolutely a loot box. It is absolutely gambling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:Uhm, GW2 have a loot crate system. Its called BL chests that are unlocked with BL keys. Is it a bad system? No one playing GW2 think so I am sure, but the fallout of EAs mess could most definetly come down on GW2 too... luckily Anet isnt some US publisher thats modifying a Korean game with 1 years reaction time, if they want or need to change anything, they will.

I question whether anything will come out of the debacle though. Many will expect far more action but in reality I think the "solution" will be relativly simple. ESRB rate the games 18+, just like gambling has an 18 year age limit. Publisher dont want that? Well take it out then. Its not gonna harm any already released games in any substantial way.

ESRB has 2 content descriptors for gambling: Real and Simulated Gambling. I doubt they give GW2 a Real Gambling label but a simulated gambling label is possible. However, a game that contains simulated gambling isnt automatically rated 18+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think nobody forgot about BLCs. But if you want to compare the law to anything, maybe try a spanish war galeon. It is superslow and easy to escape from with the right ship but it very durable and packs a mean punch when it hits. It is totally alien to me personally why people whine over strong states and rather lay their fortune into the hands of amoral big companies who only want your best, your money. Not to say that a state should take everything from you, but it is made for the people from the people, not by some billionaire who was at the right place at the right time with the right idea and made out like a bandit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Korval.3751 said:Black Lion Chests are for random vanity items. The loot crate system in SWBF2 was a Pay-2-Win model. My fear is both will be treated as the same.My
hope
is that they'll be.

Besides your personal opinion...Please see this from the perspective of debate. Lootcrates like GW2 and other games have been around for more then a decade. There where some people complaining, but there was no huge debate. No attention in the regular media. No talkshow items.

The way SWBF2 does it did deliver huge debates. A lot of attention in regular media. Items in talkshows. etc. etc.

Banning something that in general has always been accepted, cause one company crossed a line, is bad leadership. It is like banning all busses and trucks, just cause a terrorist drove one into a crowd of people.

It is not the lootcrates that are bad, but the way it is utilized. To illustrate this a list of all lootcrates in GW2:https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Category:Containers

Yet we only talk about 2 or 3The reason is that those are paid with real money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@wolfyrik.2017 said:The problem isn't even necessarily that the SWBF2 was pay to win, that was just the last straw. Many people have a problem with the practice in principal. It is gambling, it is encouraging people to gamble. It is encouraging chidren to gamble. So far loot boxes have escaped scrutiny as gambling soley on the fact that they require a digital currency. Despite the fact that real money is required, more of then than not, to get this money. The BL tickets have been a step further away from scrutiny due to the fact that most of what's in the crates can be gained through other means and the currency for them (Black lion keys, rather than gems) can be gained through playing. They're easier to aqcuire than gems, so it's less of an issue.

No mount skin can be gained through play, aside from grinding for gold, then converting to gems and the only way to acquire more than one dye channel for mounts is to gamble using the harder to get gems. This is encourages people to pay with real money. ie gambling, it targeting minors with incentives to gamble.

The mount adoption license is that step too far and that's why GW2 could be in jeopardy from these changes. People think that consumer based laws tend to be black and white. They're not, especially in Europe. Consumer law is designed to be flexible and cover grey areas. The belgian ruling, essentialy seeks to wipe out the distinction between digital currency and real world currency. It makes the two equivelent since one can only be acquired (at a reasonable rate or at all) through the other. This means that gambling with gems is still gambling. Which would mean that GW2 is breaking the law by encouraging minors (people under the age of 18 in the case of gambling) to gamble. Black lion chests are gambling but given the nature of them, they would probably slip by. Mount adoption on the other hand is absolutely a loot box. It is absolutely gambling.

Actually the mount skins are in less danger than BLC. When you buy a mount license you are guaranteed always an equal return (subjective opinion doesn't matter as far as which skin you prefer). Since you can't sell or exchange skins you are literally getting your monies worth plus the total amount of available skins gets reduced.

From a current legal definition, the mount license are not a huge issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mercury ranique.2170 said:Yet we only talk about 2 or 3The reason is that those are paid with real money.

If we talked about all of them then most role playing games wouldn't exist, and not only RPGs as chests with random loot exist in a variety of genres. Even single player games do it. Of course the problem is when they are paid with real money. The main benefit of black lion chest items is that most of them can be traded on the trading post, plus many don't complain about the Guild Wars 2 system because you can get gems with gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know how the law regarding Marihunana is in my country? It is forbidden to possess, sell or distribute. You will be put on trial for slling and distribution and also for possession if it is clearly not only for your own use. So what we have here is a substance that is causing addictions and is by all means forbidden to have, but the small time customer does not get put to jail for it. The law is basically willingly turning a blind eye toward it because it would make prisons flow over and hopelessly stuff courthouses with generally trivial stuff. If it turns out tomorrow that Marihuana not only helps with but actually cures cancer, it will be faster legalized than you can smoke it. If it turns out tomorrow that it causes genital warts, its medical use will be revoked and it will be illegal again.

A toleration is the weakest possible state of allowance and quick to fall in one or the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Korval.3751 said:I hope ArenaNet isn't harmed by EA's greedy actions. I am very concerned that the rapidly moving efforts towards labeling this as gambling might have negative repercussions on Guild Wars 2; which doesn't have a loot crate system. :anguished:

Please do not minimize the truth.

->Loot System- Gambling->Greed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Torolan.5816 said:I think nobody forgot about BLCs. But if you want to compare the law to anything, maybe try a spanish war galeon. It is superslow and easy to escape from with the right ship but it very durable and packs a mean punch when it hits. It is totally alien to me personally why people whine over strong states and rather lay their fortune into the hands of amoral big companies who only want your best, your money. Not to say that a state should take everything from you, but it is made for the people from the people, not by some billionaire who was at the right place at the right time with the right idea and made out like a bandit.

All governments are a Ponzi scheme. And now for something else:


I remember when City of Heroes introduced Superpacks. You could buy them for real money or get them regularly if you had a subscription. These packs had costume parts, unique inspirations (potions, basically) and unique equipment that was really strong but unobtainable anywhere else. Before launch people were skeptical of these things because they were indirectly a pay-to-win system, but afterward it was mostly praise. First, the whales who liked supporting the game were finally glad they could dump as much money as they wanted into it. Second, the packs were generally rewarding and had plenty of useful and fun stuff. Since everything was tradeable, all of the goods hit the market and launched everyone into a massive trading frenzy to try and grab whatever enhancements they needed. And to think, I have seen this before...

The Superpacks, and by extension the BLCs, are a callback to the OG loot box: Magic: the Gathering booster packs. Go to a local game store on new set day for any popular CCG or TCG, and you'll see happening what happened with the release of the Superpacks. The loot boxes (and card boxes) may appear to be pure gambling on the outset, but there are things that differentiate it.

Here in Vegas, when you put money into a slot machine or down on a table, your options are "win and get more money" and "lose and get nothing". But when you use a black lion key or buy a pack of cards, you aren't giving your money away for potentially nothing. You are making a trade for the contents within that box, and though random there is never nothing in the box. If you buy an M:tG booster pack, you're getting 15 cards. Whether these 15 cards have a market value greater than what you paid for them is going to be random, but you'll always get 15 cards. The BLCs always give at least 3 items, with 1 loot package and 2 additional service items. They can give a lot more, but they can't give you less.

Second, there is no direct exchange market. In Vegas, you play money for money. They use chips as a medium for table games, but those chips are directly exchanged for cash by the casino. If you buy a pack of M:tG cards, there is no method to directly exchange them for cash. Yes, you can liquidate your cards on the secondary market, but that is entirely peer driven and unofficial. BLCs are similar to this, in that there is no way for Arenanet to give you money in exchange for the stuff contained within the BLC. You are buying random goods, not gambling. The fact that it is random is not too dissimilar from other markets. I.E. if you buy a new comic book, there's no guarantee that it'll be good or that it'll have a resale value equal to its printed price.

Third, the ability to buy things with in-game currency means that ultimately the gemstore is considered a game of skill. This is how carnival games skirt the legal lines of gambling: they are contests, not gambles. A "game of skill" is significantly different from a slot machine, since the direct inputs from the player have an effect on the outcome of the game. M:tG and other TCGs are similar to this, in that while you are in a tournament, the skill factor cannot be dismissed. Luck plays a part, but that can be said of nearly any sport or contest. In GW2, the ability to obtain black lion keys is directly proportional to your ability to gather gold in the game, and as that option exists it isn't truly a "gamble" if you don't have to lay money down. You just have to be good enough at the game.

The real question is this: In spite of all of the above, do loot boxes still encourage people to gamble? I've never seen evidence for it myself. The fact that you're obtaining some set items for your exchange isn't going to be lost on the player. The player is eventually going to see a trend, and see buying the boxes as "random boosters and a repair canister" instead of a way to double their money in a game of chance. There isn't that same lure of "make more money than you already have" that you get with IRL gambling. Even with mounts, you're going to get the ones you want eventually, and once they are all sold that is it.

Quite frankly, I think that all of the hullabaloo over mount adoption licenses and loot boxes is being overblown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mercury ranique.2170 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Korval.3751 said:Black Lion Chests are for random vanity items. The loot crate system in SWBF2 was a Pay-2-Win model. My fear is both will be treated as the same.My
hope
is that they'll be.

Besides your personal opinion...Please see this from the perspective of debate. Lootcrates like GW2 and other games have been around for more then a decade. There where some people complaining, but there was no huge debate. No attention in the regular media. No talkshow items.

The way SWBF2 does it did deliver huge debates. A lot of attention in regular media. Items in talkshows. etc. etc.

Banning something that in general has always been accepted, cause one company crossed a line, is bad leadership. It is like banning all busses and trucks, just cause a terrorist drove one into a crowd of people.

It is not the lootcrates that are bad, but the way it is utilized. To illustrate this a list of all lootcrates in GW2:

Yet we only talk about 2 or 3The reason is that those are paid with real money.

It hadn't been accepted. If you haven't noticed the opposition to them was brewing (and growing) for a very, very long time already. The protest wasn't just a sudden thing that's been caused by SW:BF alone. Even without hat game, it would have happened eventually.

And yes, you're right that it's about the boxes that are being bought with real money. Black Lion Chests are bought with real world money.(also, if you haven't noticed, the BLCs now are not the same chests as they were 5 years ago)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:Since you can't sell or exchange skins you are literally getting your monies worthIt's exactly opposite. Since those skins do not have the resell value, their "money's worth" is and always will be subjective - different for each and every buyer. If there's even a single buyer that was disappointed in getting one of those skins, that means that person didn't get their money's worth at all.And if we get truly literal, then noone is getting their money's worth, because, since you can't sel lthe skins, they do not have any monetary value attached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Korval.3751 said:I hope ArenaNet isn't harmed by EA's greedy actions. I am very concerned that the rapidly moving efforts towards labeling this as gambling might have negative repercussions on Guild Wars 2; which doesn't have a loot crate system. :anguished:

"Didn't have a loot crate system."

I don't want anything bad to happen with GW2 either, which is why ANet should get ahead of this mess and remove loot boxes themselves before anyone tries to force them into it.

@Korval.3751 said:Black Lion Chests are for random vanity items. The loot crate system in SWBF2 was a Pay-2-Win model. My fear is both will be treated as the same.

My fear is that for some reason they won't. They are the same thing. You can argue that you care about one and not the other, but that's entirely subjective. The simple fact is that they both operate on the same principle, getting people to spend more on the thing they want than they would likely pay on a direct purchase of that thing. If "just cosmetic" items were not worth people being bothered about, then they would not be worth including as "prizes" in a gamble box. So long as the gamble box has enough value that people actually gamble on it, it has enough value to constitute gambling.

@Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:People like gambling, though.

And there can be gambling, if the game is rated 18+, and ideally if there are pure alternatives to the gamble in ALL cases, so that players who don't want to gamble don't have to. There is nothing you can get in a Vegas casino that you can't get elsewhere in life, and yet people still go to Vegas.

@Wanze.8410 said:ESRB has 2 content descriptors for gambling: Real and Simulated Gambling. I doubt they give GW2 a Real Gambling label but a simulated gambling label is possible. However, a game that contains simulated gambling isnt automatically rated 18+.

Ecto gambling in Amnoon would probably be considered "simulated gambling."* Anything on the gem store involving chance, however, would be actual gambling because actual money is involved.

* And even here, there is leeway due to the gem exchange. Since you can convert cash into gems, and gems into gold, and gold into Ecto, being able to buy Ecto using cash and gambling with it would, technically, be actual gambling, though perhaps far enough removed that they wouldn't care.

@Shiyo.3578 said:Why do people forget black lion chests have been in the game since..probably beta? Release at the least.

I don't think anyone forgets that. It's just not relevant to the conversation at hand.

@"mercury ranique.2170" said:Banning something that in general has always been accepted, cause one company crossed a line, is bad leadership. It is like banning all busses and trucks, just cause a terrorist drove one into a crowd of people.

This is how pretty much ALL laws happen. Host human behaviors are tolerated in small doses, minor inconveniences. People don't like it, but they put up with it. But then some jerk crosses the line and does something so crazy that action is taken, and that action sweeps up the more minor inconveniences too. This is a good thing.

Btw, here is the "worst case scenario," from ANet's perspective at least:

All gambling in GW2 would become "adults only," requiring it to be removed or for the game to be classified as "adults only." Since the latter would cause way more harm than good, they would likely remove all gambling from the game. Now what would constitute "gambling?" Obviously Mount Licenses and Black Lion Chests, but it's also possible to define it as "any RNG mechanism that can be purchased directly or indirectly with anything fungible with real money," which basically means anything that can be bought using gold. That would rule out Ecto gambling, and would also likely mean that all "loot bags" would need to be removed from the TP. This would remove one "gamble industry" in the game, of people buying up tons of loot bags and opening them in hopes of making a profit, and might even go so far as to impact buying gear for the purpose of salvaging it (unless ANet made the salvage results fixed across the board). It might also reduce some of the RNG from the Mystic Forge options.

There could still be RNG in the game, obviously. Anything that is account bound, where you could not "buy an ante" using gold, can remain RNG. Mob/event/quest drops, RNG. Treasure chests in the world, RNG. "Loot boxes" purchased from NPCs using account-bound currencies, that's fine too. It just can't be anything using gold, or that could be purchased using gold, so long as the gold/gem exchange is functional.

Now, personally, I would be satisfied with far less than that, I just want the RNG removed from the gem store (without them deliberately hiding the same interactions elsewhere, obviously), but that's the furthest this could impact the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Since you can't sell or exchange skins you are literally getting your monies worthIt's exactly opposite. Since those skins do not have the resell value, their "money's worth" is and always will be subjective - different for each and every buyer. If there's even a single buyer that was disappointed in getting one of those skins, that means that person didn't get their money's worth at all.And if we get truly literal, then noone is getting their money's worth, because, since you can't sel lthe skins, they do not have any monetary value attached.

No, that's not how law works. All the skins are equally without value no matter your subjective preference. When buying a license you are aware that any outcome you are about to receive is equally out of value. Thus it's not even gambling (according to current regulation). On top of which, since all results are equal (again without personal preference considered) you are always receiving equal value on your purchase.

Exactly, since you can't sell the skins, you are giving consideration well aware that you are purchasing something of no real life value. Again, it's closer to a purchase than the current legal definition of gambling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good developer would just abandon rng boxes altogether, no matter ih these are p2w or just cosmetics. Gambling is bad, the game is not rated 18+ so dev should act reasonable to its target audience. Since market was unable to regulate itself with lootboxes, regulators are stepping in. If it hurts anet in the process it's their fault only - they don't need gambling boxes to earn money. But they chose to use them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:No, that's not how law works. All the skins are equally without value no matter your subjective preference. When buying a license you are aware that any outcome you are about to receive is equally out of value. Thus it's not even gambling (according to current regulation). On top of which, since all results are equal (again without personal preference considered) you are always receiving equal value on your purchase.

Subjective value is still value. So long as the outcome is uncertain, it is gambling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shiyo.3578 said:Why do people forget black lion chests have been in the game since..probably beta? Release at the least.

Because BLCs used to be ok. People used to be able to purchase everything on the TP without rolling the dice even once. Until 2017, more specific the Elemental Sword skin, it was possible to just ignore BLCs. The Elemental Sword did cause some player complaints, but most people who weren't interested in the sword probably never realized that gambling was the only way to get it.

Now, I don't want any harm to come to ANet's business, but if they don't provide alternatives to their recent gambling bullshit, I hope they get forced by law to change it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...