Jump to content
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I am really all for swift action by ANet, and don't mind making the friend's list and follower list require approval by the target of the requests. In so far as "what would actually count as harassment", however, I don't think it's a separate discussion, because "I don't care if there's a Gay Pride cape or not" was intimated to me as being an oppressor, and thus, could be counted as harassment. This actually happened on these forums. So, I believe that if this is something that is being reported as harassment, the reporter should be facing those consequences, instead of someone that ser
  2. So, if consumers took the same attitude towards them that I take, I don't know exactly what I'm going to get, so I don't buy them, they may find another way to do things. Here's the problem, some don't mind the RNG. I despise it, so I don't participate. If you're feeling "tricked" here, then I'm not sure what the real issue is, because saying "a random chance to get x" is pretty clear. Since, if I'm looking for X, I want to just buy it, and it's not available that way, I don't buy Z hoping for X. There are worse companies for this, and despite that, I still don't buy here. I'm just n
  3. People leave because it took 2 weeks to get to 80? Man, they really hate life in a Korean Grinder, where it took 2 years to get to cap, grinding every day.
  4. I literally used the definitions you provided, and oppression is in them. Laws don't just "protect" the "victims", they adversely affect people that don't mind buying the keys. There are a few threads on these forums complaining about things similar to this, one of which has to do with mount skin boxes not being available in Belgium. Enough people said "there ought to be a law", and now there is, and they can't purchase a product that is guaranteed to give them something they don't have, even if it's not the one they're hoping for. I don't mess with them because I like to know exactly
  5. Well, we can certainly take that definition of exploit to extremes. Do you return your paychecks on payday, or do you continue to exploit your employer? That paycheck is, after all, derived from a resource, your employer's money. Based on that, your employment is also predatory, right? Does your boss know? I can't remember if I've ever bought a key to open chests. I know I haven't purchased any chests; they seem to be cyclic, but when they're on, they drop like candy. So, I'm certainly not oppressed if I don't purchase any, or feeling any pressure to purchase any. It's a choice, to
  6. While I agree with your ranks assessment, I have 3 felony convictions that make your closing statement completely false.
  7. We don't. It's not my problem that someone has a gambling addiction, any more than it's my problem if someone has a drug or sex addiction. Unless they are a family member, or friend, in which case, I should, and would, try to get them help. That help does not come from the government. The problem being, they won't get help until they think they need it, no matter how many laws get passed in the meantime. All passing laws does is adversely affect people that don't have the problem. See this thread for proof of that. Any game of chance can be considered gambling. Belgium has included
  8. Um, no? The thread about what happened in Belgium is a very real thing, and so is this one. Projection, I don't think it means what you think it means? If you believe you need the government to step in and save you from the evils of loot boxes, congratulations, you got what you wanted. It has it's unintended side effect of barring anything that could be considered online gambling, but it's what you wanted, and "but it's gambling" is the main argument for banning loot boxes. The only "interesting discussion" to be had here is "how does it feel to get what you wanted"?
  9. My point was, there should be no government. As we can see, these laws have unintended side effects, the Belgium situation, and this thread in particular. I don't like loot boxes because I like to know what I'm getting when I buy something, so, I don't buy loot boxes, or even keys here. Too much is unknown. I didn't need my government to step in and prevent the sale of them, I just made a decision not to buy them. Every time I see "there ought to be a law", or "the government needs to step in and take care of this", I remember how long it takes when I have to physically go to the DMV for
  10. No. Why spend my money on something I can do for free in game. Taking bets on how long it would take for "just another cash grab" threads though...
  11. Buy a mount skin loot box, where you're guaranteed to get one you don't have, just maybe not the one you're looking for. It clearly states this on the purchase page, so you're guaranteed a unique item, and yet, you can't buy it in Belgium. There was a thread about that on these forums a while back. What I'm really curious about is when is it "too much government in one's daily life". I took the thread title's advice, and imagined there were more than 3 countries in Europe, and realized, as I did so, that that means that there are reams of laws that must be abided by covering this kind
  12. Well, thanks for informing me of why I use an emoji on a post. All this time, I had thought it was because I didn't understand what they were trying to say, or found their framing of the post to be confusing. I guess I know better now?
  13. So you didn't get what you paid for during these "criminal" spending sprees? Why in the kitten did you do it more than once? Spending money means you're entitled to what you actually purchased, not more free stuff down the road.
  14. I just looked at the Hero Panel, where it outlines the entire story of the game, in chronological order... It wasn't all that confusing.
  • Create New...