Oh boy. I'm pretty sure a large portion of all people are trash regardless of sex or ethnicity. That much is statistically obvious. The problem is when you specifically criticize a large group of people based solely on anecdotal evidence. If you're not offended, that's fine, but I'd hope you would at least understand why others would be. And no, being offended by a negative generalization does not mean that generalization is accurate or that you fit within it. That reasoning could be applied to any negative generalization about any group of people.
My biggest takeaway from this is that toxic fan behavior and an unprofessional response has masked the fact that a company thinks a cosmetic item is valued at nearly a third the price of a box product.
And I can buy multiple games for $1. Pricing is relative. So saying you can buy a full game for $18 doesn't mean anything.
As a customer and a functioning adult, you are within your right to decide what is worth for you. Whether that is a game, an in game item, or anything else.
I don't get this argument. At the end of the day we are talking about video games here. My point is that something that was considered a freebie in a game ten years ago is now valued at $18. I understand the business decisions behind moving away from something being free to paid particularly as this is a f2p game. However, it is still a game and will still be compared to its peers whether they are f2p or not. Is Apex/EA alone in this? Hell no. There are lots of overpriced addons in games. My issue is that EA/Respawn pushed the envelope of what was considered acceptable (knowingly), backtracked to look like the good guy and now we end up where EA/Respawn wanted to be in the first place in being able to charge nearly a third the price of a full release. This is my opinion but I just looks shady.
Of course and I do. I very rarely purchase these style of addons. I dropped off of Apex when the first Battlepass came out because I felt that it was lackluster. I do not have an issue with the Battlepass model because it rewards companies for outputting content. if done well there can be quite a few Battlepass seasons per year resulting in more income than a traditional retail release in the long run. I just cannot get over $18 for a skin. I have the self control to not buy it but I know lots of people don't.
Your thoughts on the professional research done on the subject?Yeah, and 10 years ago this game wouldn't be free, you'd have to pay $60 upfront to play it. Things change, some good for you the consumer, some not so good. Given that the vast vast majority of people won't pay a dime to play this game I don't think their monetisation strategy is so crazy or shady. What's "acceptable" is subjective based on who you are and your relationship with your money, that's my issue with these arguments. Video games are a luxury good, this isn't water or food or electricity, the pricing of this has no material effect on anyone's life. Therefore, positioning this as some immoral or unfair decision makes no sense to me.
Complain about how this is too expensive for you, that's fine, I think that's a good thing to do. However, when you start saying stuff like "what of the people who don't have self-control and will just buy it", that has nothing to do with you. You have no idea what relationship with their money the people who buy this have, you're just projecting your own idea of what is expensive and so unacceptable unto other people.
Your thoughts on the professional research done on the subject?
Video game loot boxes are linked to problem gambling: Results of a large-scale survey
Loot boxes are items in video games that can be paid for with real-world money and contain randomised contents. In recent years, loot boxes have become increasingly common. There is concern in the research community that similarities between loot boxes and gambling may lead to increases in...journals.plos.org
Should we all be like you and just say, "fuck it, let those people drown"? Is clear and present exploitation all good so long as it doesn't affect you and you benefit from those who are being preyed upon? Do you think the industry is not aware of these issues? Do you feel predatory tactics are acceptable?
Ultimately, one as to decide if you are you your brother's keeper or if defense against shady tactics is only ever a concern exclusively when it impacts us personally and the effort to say something about it is not inconvenient. To understand you're part of a community or to be so self-centered as to not have any care or empathy for anyone but yourself. The research is already out there and has been done by professionals and doctors in appropriate fields. Only thing left is to decide on what side you want to fall on: the corporate apologists or those who see what's happening and see a need for real regulation.
Think about it like this: if someone said that black men are criminals, should innocent black men be offended? I mean, according to your logic, they aren't criminals so why should they be offended? Hell, we could even extend your reasoning to government surveillance. Who cares if your privacy is being invaded if you haven't done anything wrong?
Just because you personally agree with something offensive doesn't make it any less offensive to people who don't.
As a customer and a functioning adult, you are within your right to decide what is worth for you. Whether that is a game, an in game item, or anything else.
Yeah, and 10 years ago this game wouldn't be free, you'd have to pay $60 upfront to play it. Things change, some good for you the consumer, some not so good. Given that the vast vast majority of people won't pay a dime to play this game I don't think their monetisation strategy is so crazy or shady. What's "acceptable" is subjective based on who you are and your relationship with your money, that's my issue with these arguments. Video games are a luxury good, this isn't water or food or electricity, the pricing of this has no material effect on anyone's life. Therefore, positioning this as some immoral or unfair decision makes no sense to me.
Complain about how this is too expensive for you, that's fine, I think that's a good thing to do. However, when you start saying stuff like "what of the people who don't have self-control and will just buy it", that has nothing to do with you. You have no idea what relationship with their money the people who buy this have, you're just projecting your own idea of what is expensive and so unacceptable unto other people.
I don't think there is $18 in value here and i believe many would agree.
And that's okay. Just don't become toxic about it (not saying you specifically are).
Digital items that are simply cosmetic do not have the worth that Respawn asked for.
And that's okay. Just don't become toxic about it (not saying you specifically are).
And?My biggest takeaway from this is that toxic fan behavior and an unprofessional response has masked the fact that a company thinks a cosmetic item is valued at nearly a third the price of a box product.
Man, the amount of people trying to justify $18 skins because "lol prices for different things are different" is absolutely mental.
People are willing to put themselves through abusive relationships all the time. No reason to normalize abusive relationships.I bought an Overwatch skin for $15. Of course, it's a little different cause the money went to charity. However, if people are willing to pay for it, what's the problem?
I bought an Overwatch skin for $15. Of course, it's a little different cause the money went to charity. However, if people are willing to pay for it, what's the problem?
Have you ever spoken to a child about these skins? The only reason they are buying them is because if you are a "default" it means you are considered to be a fucking loser. People are begging their parents to dip into these $18 skins so that they can get over their FOMO and not get bullied. Devs are just taking advantage of that.
Plus, even if the above weren't the case, maybe don't rip people off? Just because someone is willing to pay for something doesn't mean you should rip them off.
As a customer and a functioning adult, you are within your right to decide what is worth for you. Whether that is a game, an in game item, or anything else.
Man, the amount of people trying to justify $18 skins because "lol prices for different things are different" is absolutely mental.
People are willing to put themselves through abusive relationships all the time. No reason to normalize abusive relationships.
I agree about directly priced items thought hey really need pricing tiers and better skins in general to justify their asking prices. Lootboxes, less so.$18 cosmetics seem ridiculous to me, but so do $100 t-shirts. Its crazy that people are willing to pay those prices, but its also unproblematic.
I don't understand why workers feel the need to defend their corporation under scrutiny from customers unless they're in PR.
Yeah, and 10 years ago this game wouldn't be free, you'd have to pay $60 upfront to play it. Things change, some good for you the consumer, some not so good. Given that the vast vast majority of people won't pay a dime to play this game I don't think their monetisation strategy is so crazy or shady. What's "acceptable" is subjective based on who you are and your relationship with your money, that's my issue with these arguments. Video games are a luxury good, this isn't water or food or electricity, the pricing of this has no material effect on anyone's life. Therefore, positioning this as some immoral or unfair decision makes no sense to me.
Complain about how this is too expensive for you, that's fine, I think that's a good thing to do. However, when you start saying stuff like "what of the people who don't have self-control and will just buy it", that has nothing to do with you. You have no idea what relationship with their money the people who buy this have, you're just projecting your own idea of what is expensive and so unacceptable unto other people.
Thats reductive. There's a additive quality to these things and just plain "gamers are responsible for their own behavior" is just plain predatory.
And let's not forget that these players aren't all adults (not that preying on less stable adults is any better).
Digital items that are simply cosmetic do not have the worth that Respawn asked for.
People paying $800 for a cosmetic in games like DOTA 2 would beg to differ.Digital items that are simply cosmetic do not have the worth that Respawn asked for.
Have you ever spoken to a child about these skins? The only reason they are buying them is because if you are a "default" it means you are considered to be a fucking loser. People are begging their parents to dip into these $18 skins so that they can get over their FOMO and not get bullied. Devs are just taking advantage of that.
Plus, even if the above weren't the case, maybe don't rip people off? Just because someone is willing to pay for something doesn't mean you should rip them off.
Maybe don't project your own valuing of items and products onto others. I am sure you own stupid shit that I would accuse you of being ripped off by that you don't see that way.
Probably not because I don't buy anything outside of games, consoles and TVs (which I get on deals/cheap).
those are marketable, trade-able, resell-able items that appreciated over time due to rarity and character popularity.People paying $800 for a cosmetic in games like DOTA 2 would beg to differ.
lol c'mon bruhProbably not because I don't buy anything outside of games, consoles and TVs (which I get on deals/cheap).