My Thoughts On In Game LootBoxes & The EA BattleFront II Debacle
13This is EA being sorry (but only temporarily) that they received a public outcry against paying for a game again and again. A game should be enjoyable from start to end for the amount of money you originally paid for it and not be hidden behind additional pay walls.
The sense of ownership has been diluted over the years and I reckon it seemed like a clever way of the publishers to let the consumers pay for the upkeep of the servers without having to increase the initial purchase price of the always online games - which actually had also happened too. Games for the new generation of consoles have gone up in price considerably, just because it is possible as people willingly pay much more than previous generations.
The sad part is that only a portion of the consumers seem to have issues with these kinds of practices. Hence EA thinking they might get away with only selling you part of their new game for the initial price you paid for it and having you pay multiple times for actually playing through it, hoping the short term memories of the masses won’t notice or just shrug their shoulders. Well quite a few consumers do and buy the game anyway. They don’t make a stand because they don’t care and aren’t aware of consumer’s rights and safety that are at play here. I think the only way to really change things is to vote with your wallet and not get these games that bleed your dry financially.
At what point does rng become gambling? At the point of payment? What if the payment is through in game currency only? That's for lawyers to decide I reckon. Game economies have always been part of games especially the early D&D and RPG games have been riddled with those. But they always served a purpose in-game, serving as a game mechanic that introduced a sense of scarcity and a goal to achieve. It didn't amount to people forking out more real world money paid to the developer/publisher of the game in order to keep playing.
The moment real money in-game is used for items / experiences that could otherwise not be obtained it turns into a game of chance where the gamer is enticed to spend more money to hopefully increase their chances. When in game currency can be bought with real money it creates an uneven playing field. When in game currency can only be obtained through in game mechanics it is still a game of chance but it has no real financial ramifications in the real world.
It seems that affluentitis is also infecting the games industry. Throw enough money at a game and you'll master it and won't be subjected by the same rules as everyone else.
Even casual gaming adults have hard times staying away from micro-payments within these mobile games let alone kids. How on earth will they learn the value of things. They won't learn it through the game mechanics of EA's Battlefront II.
NOTICE: FAIR USE, the video is for informational purposes
"Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."
Links:
https://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
Youtube Video game and software content
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/138161?hl=en