Lootbox Backlash

Andy

Andy

Well-Known Member
Cornerstone Member
Sep 11, 2013
14,514
4,619
14,180
OpenCritic joins the loot box backlash
“We’re going to take a stand” against the rising tide of microtransactions

OpenCritic, one of the biggest game review aggregation sites, is throwing its weight behind the ensuing uproar about microtransactions. The website announced on Twitter that it planned to “take a stand against loot boxes,” updating its display filters to warn customers of the nature of paid content in games.

“We’re looking into ways to add business model information to OpenCritic,” the first of several tweets reads. “Let us know your thoughts on how we can categorize and display ‘business model intrusiveness’ on game pages in a fair and scalable way.”

Potential categories that readers can search for include whether a game’s content is “exclusively paid” or available for free in-game; whether it can be purchased directly or only acquired through loot boxes; whether there’s a store where players can purchase extra content or prompts to buy it during gameplay; and, notably, whether the content sold through microtransactions is cosmetic or has gameplay ramifications or boosts.

The increased presence of downloadable content in major game releases has many players on edge this fall. Middle-earth: Shadow of War, Forza Motorsport 7 and NBA 2K18 are among the most cited recent examples of full-price games featuring additional paid content. Even Assassin’s Creed Origins and Star Wars Battlefront 2, which had its first public beta over the weekend, are already getting fans riled up over their potential DLC.

In the case of this week’s Shadow of War, a “bonus ending” can be reached without spending cash — but the game encourages players to pay up by making it extremely time-consuming otherwise. Situations like these are what get players riled up on places like Reddit, where the general games subreddit is constantly filled with frustrations about loot boxes and microtransactions.

It sounds like we’ll all be remembering 2017 as the year that loot boxes hit a fever pitch — not that it looks like publishers are willing to make concessions quite yet.

https://www.polygon.com/2017/10/9/1...ransactions-backlash-loot-boxes-shadow-of-war
 
Loot boxes should not exist if they're the only means of accruing items in games. Items should be earned through doing well in the game. If you've gotten 50 kills with a certain character, 50 headshots with a certain weapon, or won first place 50 times with a specific vehicle, you should be rewarded for your investment with items that fit that character/weapon/vehicle, be it skins, attachments, or car mods. Not more credits to open a box that gives you items that don't fit your particular play style. If I just won 50 matches with character X, why should I be rewarded with a skin for character Y, someone I have no interest in playing as?

It's just lazy and edges on extortion to me.
 
I don't have a major problem with micro transaction so long as they aren't pay to win (multiplayer) or keep me from enjoying a game I paid money for (holding back basic content to be sold later as dlc); the thing I REALLY have a problem with is loot boxes like what are found in games like Smite. Don't get me wrong, I really like the game and have sunk hundreds of hours into it, but when they release content that can only be accessed through a crate that you have to pay real money for merely a CHANCE to get that cool skin you want. Drives me crazy. Hey developers; you have this cool content that I would gladly pay for, but I refuse to give you money to merely have a CHANCE to get that skin that I want. SCREW THAT!
 
Andy said:
In the case of this week’s Shadow of War, a “bonus ending” can be reached without spending cash — but the game encourages players to pay up by making it extremely time-consuming otherwise. Situations like these are what get players riled up on places like Reddit, where the general games subreddit is constantly filled with frustrations about loot boxes and microtransactions.
Click to expand...
The only thing I'll ever pay for in a game are expansion packs, and the odd DLC for an RPG, so I'll never buy loot boxes or any of the microtrans... Although borderlands 2 tricked me once, I purchased a skin for a character I didn't own.

But the hubub and uproar about needing to grind in an RPG for the final ending?

Ummm... Are these people even gamers? Grinding in RPG's is pretty common, especially when associated with alternate endings/bosses/weapons/armour.

It's a bunch of brats chucking a tantrum because there is an OPTION for someone to jump ahead.

If the content was behind a paywall entirely, then I think it would be an issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy
Almighty_bob said:
I don't have a major problem with micro transaction so long as they aren't pay to win (multiplayer) or keep me from enjoying a game I paid money for (holding back basic content to be sold later as dlc); the thing I REALLY have a problem with is loot boxes like what are found in games like Smite. Don't get me wrong, I really like the game and have sunk hundreds of hours into it, but when they release content that can only be accessed through a crate that you have to pay real money for merely a CHANCE to get that cool skin you want. Drives me crazy. Hey developers; you have this cool content that I would gladly pay for, but I refuse to give you money to merely have a CHANCE to get that skin that I want. SCREW THAT!
Click to expand...

Stay away from Battlefront 2.
 
It depends on whether game design has been affected.
 
Totally pointless.

Gamers will pay, end of.

Bellybama said:
The only thing I'll ever pay for in a game are expansion packs, and the odd DLC for an RPG, so I'll never buy loot boxes or any of the microtrans... Although borderlands 2 tricked me once, I purchased a skin for a character I didn't own.

But the hubub and uproar about needing to grind in an RPG for the final ending?

Ummm... Are these people even gamers? Grinding in RPG's is pretty common, especially when associated with alternate endings/bosses/weapons/armour.

It's a bunch of brats chucking a tantrum because there is an OPTION for someone to jump ahead.

If the content was behind a paywall entirely, then I think it would be an issue.
Click to expand...

It is exactly this kind of thinking that paves the way for this bulls***.

How far does it have to go before you take notice?
 
As a gamer, all I want to know is how much a game is going to realistically cost at the moment I buy. Just as a simple example, buying a COD game for multiplayer means map packs, so let me know how many and how much they are up front. Then, I can make an informed decision with my money. $60 for the base game, plus 4 map packs at $15 each or buy them up front, etc.

Where things get murky is when I don't really know how much I have to spend to fully enjoy a game. So far, the games with loot boxes have not forced me to buy. Forza 7 and Destiny 2? Don't need to buy them and if anything, gives me more enjoyment out of playing as I get an added reward along with the fun of playing.

That's where things start to go downhill. Will Battlefront 2 be fine or a rip off? I don't know. Maybe it will be fine. The not knowing isn't a great place to be for me.
 
Even though I think they deserve criticism for Battlefront 2 at least there is a benefit to the gamer in free DLC. Games like COD do loot boxes and paid map packs. Games like that, NBA, Shadows of War, and Destiny are all worse to me.

No question that Overwatch is the most notable recent example of doing it completely right but I have even seen complaints about that
 
menace-uk- said:
It is exactly this kind of thinking that paves the way for this bulls***.

How far does it have to go before you take notice?
Click to expand...

If you aren't happy with a game, don't buy it.

No-one is forcing you to buy the game. It's not restricting your gameplay experience in anyway, other than offering an option for expediating a few things.

And I thought I was the drama queen.

Are you pissy about DLC too?
 
yankeessuck said:
Even though I think they deserve criticism for Battlefront 2 at least there is a benefit to the gamer in free DLC. Games like COD do loot boxes and paid map packs. Games like that, NBA, Shadows of War, and Destiny are all worse to me.

No question that Overwatch is the most notable recent example of doing it completely right but I have even seen complaints about that
Click to expand...
I don't really play shooters that often (or sports games), but what did Overwatch do differently than battlefront 2?

I watched a few videos of people opening loot boxes in Gears of War, and them getting pissy bout Xmas skins. Lol.

And isn't all the DOA5 content now about $500?

You just KNOW there are a bunch of people out there with all those costumes.
 
Bellybama said:
I don't really play shooters that often (or sports games), but what did Overwatch do differently than battlefront 2?

I watched a few videos of people opening loot boxes in Gears of War, and them getting pissy bout Xmas skins. Lol.

And isn't all the DOA5 content now about $500?

You just KNOW there are a bunch of people out there with all those costumes.
Click to expand...

The content in the loot boxes in Overwatch are cosmetic only.
 
There's a way to do it right. Take a look at Overwatch.

Shadow of War pops it up every chance it can!
 
Getting up in arms about having to grind for an alternate ending seem silly. It's a game. An ACTION RPG. So what if someone wants to pay to skip the grind. They are paying to have less playtime, ffs. Who cares? We've been grinding in games for as long as they've been around.

I do not, however like the idea of paying money for a RANDOM draw, like in Halo 5 or Destiny. Still, that's why I don't.

A lot of people seem to buy these loot boxes. They make whole videos on Youtube about opening them. The developers are following a demand. The only way it's going to stop is if people quit buying them, and that is highly unlikely. I'm not sure why people are up in arms over developers providing what they are told people want (by actual metrics like paying for them). Silly to me, and I've never felt like I wasn't getting enough gaming for my money.

Non-issue as long as it's not being forced.
 
Grimmy said:
There's a way to do it right. Take a look at Overwatch.

Shadow of War pops it up every chance it can!
Click to expand...

Does it? I recall seeing a review that said it's absolutely a non-issue. In fact, all it does is allow you to skip actually playing the game, which makes no sense to me.
 
I just don't like the direction the industry is heading, with GaaS strategies. Loot boxes and MTs, etc.

Just don't build artificially tedious segments, just to soak the player.
 
yankeessuck said:
Even though I think they deserve criticism for Battlefront 2 at least there is a benefit to the gamer in free DLC. Games like COD do loot boxes and paid map packs. Games like that, NBA, Shadows of War, and Destiny are all worse to me.

No question that Overwatch is the most notable recent example of doing it completely right but I have even seen complaints about that
Click to expand...

That's kind of the problem - there's always the "collector" who feels entitled to every single cosmetic thing.

The cosmetics in Overwatch are set up in a way that most players will never come close to getting them all, so on one hand you have something fun to work for over the long haul, but on the flip side if you main character X and love the look of skin Y you may never, ever get it.

With Overwatch, people play because they like the game and competition, not ultimately to collect skins. Some people get sort of wrapped up in it though.

It is kind of a paradox, if every skin came unlocked with the game, nobody would want them as once you take away the "rarity" the value disappears.
 
Loot boxes are a huge thing and if people don't like them they shouldn't buy them or the game that sells them. I'm more concerned with how this influences children. Its like loot boxes are introducing them to gambling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy
Star Wars Battlefront 2 has a loot crate problem
EA cannot be Sidious.

"The only way to get new abilities and weapons in Battlefront 2 is from opening loot crates, bought either with in-game currency or real-world currency (price TBD) or gifted to you for various reasons. Either you randomly receive the ability or weapon directly from the loot crate, or you randomly receive an amount of scrap to go towards eventually crafting it - although scrap costs are high and amounts received torturously low."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-10-09-star-wars-battlefront-2-has-a-loot-crate-problem
 
Kerosene31 said:
The cosmetics in Overwatch are set up in a way that most players will never come close to getting them all, so on one hand you have something fun to work for over the long haul, but on the flip side if you main character X and love the look of skin Y you may never, ever get it.
Click to expand...

Only really an issue for people that want every item. If you want a specific item you can save the credits you get to buy it.
 
yankeessuck said:
Only really an issue for people that want every item. If you want a specific item you can save the credits you get to buy it.
Click to expand...
Having not played much Overwatch, that's good to know. If you can get a skins by saving up for it, great! People can get the content they want without having to role the dice.

Smite has skins that CANNOT be obtained except through their chests. You could literally pay $100.00 on chests and still not get that ONE skin that you wanted. It's why I don't buy their chests.

DOAs dlc I don't mind at all. You see a skin/costume you like, you buy it. End of story. If they keep making skins that everyone wants and are willing to buy them, it's a win/win. Devs have a revenue stream and the customers get more of what they want. The base game starts you with something like 12 skins for each character, so you don't feel ripped off if you bought the game and don't plan on buying more skins.
 
Path of Exile gets it right. I actually spent some money to get stash tabs even though I probably won't play enough to really need them, just because I appreciate that they're doing it right.
 
Poll: What are your overall thoughts on microtransactions in games? (181 votes)
http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2017/10/poll_where_do_you_stand_on_microtransactions

They should be abolished, period
16%

Keep them in free-to-play games only, please
43%

They have no place in single-player games
16%

Unless they negatively impact gameplay, I don't care
23%

I don't know, I haven't really thought about it
0%

Microtransactions have been blown out of proportion, they're not that bad
2%

I actually like the option of being able to make in-game purchases
1%


I'm with #4 (Unless they negatively impact gameplay, I don't care.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frozpot
instead of just being negative about it why doesnt people like open critic look to how to better it so it can co-exist. Because i dont think its going away anytime soon.
 
Ohh snap, just read a comment about a solution to this loot box situation over on Kotaku. The poster said to have the ESRB classify any game with loot boxes as gambling and rate the game AO (Adult Only). Do that and watch publishers reverse course on loot boxes since none of them want their game classified as Adult Only which would kill game sales. I'm not sure that's the answer but I agree about the gambling part and the potential harm it could cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lord Majestic
At first I hated micro transactions in games and bitched about it. After awhile I just stopped letting it bother me. I spend zero money on micro transactions in games I play and still enjoy those games. Now if they take this trend too far to the point you have to spend more money to complete a game or to get the best guns/equipment/skills in MP then I will just quit buying those games.
 
They suck, but it is what it is. As long as the game design isn't being altered i don't really care. Coalition was acting shady with Gears of War 4 and everyone called them for it on the forums. They haven't been as bad lately, but it's still a weak practice.
 
BUSTERMAN said:
Ohh snap, just read a comment about a solution to this loot box situation over on Kotaku. The poster said to have the ESRB classify any game with loot boxes as gambling and rate the game AO (Adult Only). Do that and watch publishers reverse course on loot boxes since none of them want their game classified as Adult Only which would kill game sales. I'm not sure that's the answer but I agree about the gambling part and the potential harm it could cause.
Click to expand...

That looks like a no-go. The ESRB doesn't consider loot boxes gambling.

“ESRB does not consider loot boxes to be gambling,” said an ESRB spokesperson in an e-mail. “While there’s an element of chance in these mechanics, the player is always guaranteed to receive in-game content (even if the player unfortunately receives something they don’t want). We think of it as a similar principle to collectible card games: Sometimes you’ll open a pack and get a brand new holographic card you’ve had your eye on for a while. But other times you’ll end up with a pack of cards you already have.”

https://kotaku.com/esrb-says-it-doesnt-see-loot-boxes-as-gambling-1819363091
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back