Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community - Reply to Topic

Thread: [IGN] Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony Working on New Policy for Loot Box Probability Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
08-12-2019 10:05 AM
skupples nvm, missed the part that they announced "must have % to be on consoles" part.
08-11-2019 04:01 PM
UltraMega Hopefully this level of transparency will make buying loot boxes less desirable when people know the chance to get a good item is very small, and also look dumb for the game to have such small odds of winning anything good to the point that devs simply don't get enough benefit from them to bother adding them in at all. The unknown chance to win is what fuels addictive gamblers to spend tons of money on this kind of stuff. The thrill of a potential win is much less when the gambler knows for sure the chance to win in less than 1%.
08-11-2019 01:42 PM
looniam
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
That's exactly the scenario I was talking about (assuming independent control eventually takes place).
ah, i didn't understand that. thanks for clearing that up for me.
08-11-2019 01:39 PM
skupples hmmm, maybe the RNG portion of games should become middleware... I thought it already was, but apparently not.

3rd party developed, externally vetted, EA implemented.
08-11-2019 01:36 PM
ToTheSun!
Quote: Originally Posted by looniam View Post
but until the devs/publisher are open that someone is watching them and have "quality checks" in place that the odds are correct
That's exactly the scenario I was talking about (assuming independent control eventually takes place).
08-11-2019 01:04 PM
looniam
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
If protecting users from loot boxes entirely were the goal, transparency would certainly fall short.

My point is that, short of banning them, transparency is always welcome - not necessarily from a practical perspective, but on principle alone.

Now, if we're to discuss loot boxes in the context of all that they encompass, I'll say that I would want them out of any game. I'd rather have cosmetic items available for purchase individually. What concerns morality and law is not something I care for debating here.
i'm not trying to discuss morality as that changes w/person, place and time; ethics class taught me its culture related.

i have apprehension with using the term transparency. disclosure is a step towards it but until the devs/publisher are open that someone is watching them and have "quality checks" in place that the odds are correct - its a disclosure.

in other words; if i have to trust that they are doing what they say . . its not transparent.

but of course, i will admit my "dictionary" may be outdated.
08-11-2019 12:29 PM
ToTheSun!
Quote: Originally Posted by looniam View Post
i don't know, maybe i'm misreading you but . .

i can't understand avoiding to look at the whole problem just because of random forum members. most certainly any solution would not be transparent; it would very likely fail at its goal of protecting people.

personally i can't think of any policy that isn't, at times, hotly debated by policy makers.
If protecting users from loot boxes entirely were the goal, transparency would certainly fall short.

My point is that, short of banning them, transparency is always welcome - not necessarily from a practical perspective, but on principle alone.

Now, if we're to discuss loot boxes in the context of all that they encompass, I'll say that I would want them out of any game. I'd rather have cosmetic items available for purchase individually. What concerns morality and law is not something I care for debating here.
08-11-2019 10:47 AM
looniam
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
The predatory aspect of the whole thing is a more politically charged part of the equation. It's certainly more debatable, but it's also where people will go around in circles, endlessly disagreeing, especially on internet forums.

I have my own ideas regarding the above, as a gamer and as a conscious member of society. I'll keep them for now. I'm more interested in transparency, as that is unequivocally beneficial to the universe of consumers integrally.
i don't know, maybe i'm misreading you but . .

i can't understand avoiding to look at the whole problem just because of random forum members. most certainly any solution would not be transparent; it would very likely fail at its goal of protecting people.

personally i can't think of any policy that isn't, at times, hotly debated by policy makers.
08-11-2019 09:54 AM
skupples i mean... gas station owners go to prison for having RNG machines in house (even if they don't pay out cash in some states) soooooo
08-11-2019 06:52 AM
ToTheSun!
Quote: Originally Posted by looniam View Post
yes it most certainly would be. but is it enough?

the same site has several articles and viewpoints about the issue:

Loot boxes a matter of "life or death," says researcher
Academics discuss their studies and concerns surrounding game monetization at FTC workshop

What did the FTC hear in its loot box workshop?
ESA defends virtual currency and dynamic drop rates as concerns are raised about consumer protection and similarities to gambling

Consumer advocates to ESRB, FTC: Loot box odds disclosure is not enough
Consumer Reports' Anna Laitin: "A kid is not going to make a better decision with odds disclosure"

Epic Games commits to loot box transparency across portfolio
THQ Nordic also weighs in on ESA pledges: "We do not plan to implement casino-styled mechanics in our games"

though idk, i have no horse in this race as far as loot boxes since i don't play those games.

[from the apples and oranges files]
Spoiler!
The predatory aspect of the whole thing is a more politically charged part of the equation. It's certainly more debatable, but it's also where people will go around in circles, endlessly disagreeing, especially on internet forums.

I have my own ideas regarding the above, as a gamer and as a conscious member of society. I'll keep them for now. I'm more interested in transparency, as that is unequivocally beneficial to the universe of consumers integrally.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off