Apex Legends New Timed Event Takes Monetization To A Whole New Level

Hyun Sai

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,845
Again this is exactly the type of post I’m talking about.

The drive by “it doesn’t affect me” post.

It’s been discussed to death how loot boxes are predatory by design. Ea and respawn along with a gigantic group of devs/pubs are building games that are predatory in nature towards gambling addicts and children.

It’s that simple. You should care because it affects people. It might not hurt you in any way but it is a problem for a ton of people who have impulse control issues and gambling issues.

And when the economy becomes even more predatory.....REMEMBER!!!! They are targeting people who may have already payed 200$ or more to them at this point.



Of course I expected "whataboutism" to minimize this, and it already happened.
 

Thera

Member
Feb 28, 2019
999
EA put awful monetization in a full price gold (or whatever name) version of MP games. In a free to play, it couldn't have been well, you all know it. They bait and hooked, no it is time to pay. Is this an heroin / crack dealer way of selling ? Yes it is, happy gaming everyone !!!
 

Papercuts

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,016
I really want to emphasize that heirloom. By its very existence, whales are already in on this regardless of what they do, since it’s a guaranteed way to get an item that otherwise has a pity counter of 500 loot boxes. It’s an endgame to the spending of this event, which is not common in games like this to begin with.

With that in mind—Respawn/EA would likely make more money selling these skins a la carte anyway. At their usual high price of $18 per skin they would grab a lot of people who just want one single skin. The alternative is the people who would buy one skin now need to buy atleast two of the loot boxes, and it still doesn’t come out to as much. The thing is—this STILL gets the whales. They still want that heirloom, and would just buy all the skins anyway. Only now it’s a lot more expensive for them.

Let’s even imagine they were more generous than usual and made the epic items $5 each, legendaries $10. 12 of each means $120 on legendaries, $60 on epics, $35 for the axe. $215, whereas currently all the loot boxes + axe equal $203. Whales end up spending more, and I highly doubt they would even make the prices that low. They could make the two quests that currently give boxes give a voucher instead. One voucher for an epic, or two for a legendary, that way you get one free legendary or two free epics. Still ends up being more expensive than what it is now. This begs the question...

What is gained from this current system? The people who want one skin but can’t directly buy it enter a lottery system. Those people are manipulated and tempted to be pushed into trying to get a few boxes and getting the one item they want, and if they don’t, it’s a sunk cost fallacy for them. People that might have just spent for one skin now end up spending over.

That is literally the only thing gained from this. Again, whales WILL get that heirloom and could actually have been milked a lot more. This system only gains from the people teetering on the edge already. The fact that this IS how they did things is telling enough, as there must be a whole lot of people that end up being pushed to biting on this where it exceeds some internal number, even at the cost of blatantly pissing off the userbase. That’s scummy as absolute fuck.
 

Strider0457

Member
Dec 27, 2017
1,392
EA executives are the worst but saying those kind of stuff are harmless and ok is as bad, defending this shit is terrible, fuck you EA.
Honestly, i doubt Respawn has any say in this.

But i would like to know if they get to profit from it as well, anyone know? I guess it all depends whats in their contract?
From the great philosopher Nelly: EA, EA, uhoh it’s tumbling down.
And not a single person has or will produce even one piece of evidence that EA is singlehandedly forcing this. Devs are the same as pubs. Stop pretending pubs are the bad guys and devs are selfless angels who only care about making games and have no interest in silly things like profit or the job security disgusting amount of whaling cash can provide.
 

Antrax

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,254
It's disheartening that folks are so willing to just sweep this under the rug and move on. Companies need to be called out for their scumminess when applicable.
A bad value proposition isn't what I'd call scummy.

$180ish for all these things is pretty bad, but that just means I won't pay for them.
 

ieandrew

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
265
The weird thing for me was, I played this a bunch and only after spending money to get the Season 2 Battle Pass did I actually get turned off the game. It felt like after investing in the game I was not where I had hoped to be and would never, ever get there without spending a ludicrous amount of money.

So Respawn got $20 out of me and turned me away, instead of charging me $40 or $60 for a complete game. Guessing they're going to win in the end though. I can't comprehend the spending money some people have.
 

Onikage

Member
Feb 21, 2018
229
Putting in time for a randomized reward isn't gambling, but you're right in that it is also addictive, it is another type of skinner box (which is what lootboxes also are).

This is why gaming addiction is a thing. It can be bad, but it's certainly a whole lot less destructive than a gambling addiction. (unless, of course, you put gambling in games)
I think grindy gaming addiction is almost the same thing.
Both are consuming your time for "useless random things".

You are spending 800 hours on diablo or 800 hours on a casino.
But one is more "destructive" because it is draining your money.

Since gambling, drinking, using drugs, prostitution and other "damaging" things will always exist (in my opinion), I think we are better off just regulation and bringing them to light instead of banning it. We will never be able to "save" everybody and get the world rid of these things.
As we agreed, even games are hard to analyse. When is a game too addictive, harmful, or not? It is hard to tell. The human being will always have to make a choice in the end.

So, regarding lootboxes, I would vote for regulation and making every game with paid lootboxes a 18+ game.
I think Apex is 16+. We could vote to change that.
 

Eisen Sora

Member
Jun 22, 2018
324
The costs of these packs and the total to get the heirloom axe are completely ridiculous. I love the game but I cant pay those kind of prizes for some ( still awesome) cosmetic items.

Its a lot of money but I remember that for you to obtain the Wraith heirloom you have to buy like 300-500 apex packs and those cost a lot too ( or be extremely lucky with that 0,5% chance per pack to get it)
 

MrNewVegas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,908
And not a single person has or will produce even one piece of evidence that EA is singlehandedly forcing this. Devs are the same as pubs. Stop pretending pubs are the bad guys and devs are selfless angels who only care about making games and have no interest in silly things like profit or the job security disgusting amount of whaling cash can provide.
Wat? It dosent matter who implemented it. EA has built their brand and corporate governance around bilking consumers with micro transactions while making as few games as possible.

So if Respawn did implement this it’s because of EA. I am sure they’ve seen enough companies “papa EA’d” to be fearful.
 

ShadowFlare

Member
Oct 28, 2017
63
These loot box prices are absolutely BS.

There were some things listed that are currently regulated (not well if you ask me) and they still cause problems for society. We still have lots of alcoholics, drug addicts, gambling addicts, and people with obesity. I don't believe limiting the purchase of loot boxes to adults or showing the drop rates will actually change much. The only surefire way is to outright ban them, but that just leads to the question of why don't we ban other things that people can get addicted to.
 

MechaBreaker

Member
Jun 26, 2018
1,792
I think grindy gaming addiction is almost the same thing.
Both are consuming your time for "useless random things".

You are spending 800 hours on diablo or 800 hours on a casino.
But one is more "destructive" because it is draining your money.

Since gambling, drinking, using drugs, prostitution and other "damaging" things will always exist (in my opinion), I think we are better off just regulation and bringing them to light instead of banning it. We will never be able to "save" everybody and get the world rid of these things.
As we agreed, even games are hard to analyse. When is a game too addictive, harmful, or not? It is hard to tell. The human being will always have to make a choice in the end.

So, regarding lootboxes, I would vote for regulation and making every game with paid lootboxes a 18+ game.
I think Apex is 16+. We could vote to change that.
I'm not saying we should ban everything that we can be addicted to, because that would be literally everything in existence. But we should definitely try and prevent corporations from exploiting addictions for personal gain, and try and limit peoples exposure things that are inherently addictive.
 

m_shortpants

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,166
it's a free game and these are all cosmetic...soooooo.....

I understand more people are upset with the nature of the drops and so on, as it is essentially curating gambling habits, that I understand.

I don't understand why more games just don't go with the Fortnite model. Battlepass is super transparent. The store has a rotation of items, no RNG. Everyone is happy, and Epic seems to be making fistfuls of money any way?
 

Strider0457

Member
Dec 27, 2017
1,392
Wat? It dosent matter who implemented it. EA has built their brand and corporate governance around bilking consumers with micro transactions while making as few games as possible.

So if Respawn did implement this it’s because of EA. I am sure they’ve seen enough companies “papa EA’d” to be fearful.
I'm saying the silly, childish "devs are good and pubs are bad" attitude people always bring to this conversation is overly simplistic and reductive. There's no way to tell who's promoting this shit with Apex. People like to blame publishers so they can absolve devs of any responsibility for their own cynical behavior. Devs can also be greedy, exploitative people.

EA is a dumpster company that singlehandedly pushed the lootbox frenzy into the public consciousness with their Battlefront bedshitting, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're pulling all the strings in this particular situation. People should holds devs accountable in the same way they look at publishers.
 

MrNewVegas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,908
I'm saying the silly, childish "devs are good and pubs are bad" attitude people always bring to this conversation is overly simplistic and reductive. There's no way to tell who's promoting this shit with Apex. People like to blame publishers so they can absolve devs of any responsibility for their own cynical behavior. Devs can also be greedy, exploitative people.

EA is a dumpster company that singlehandedly pushed the lootbox frenzy into the public consciousness with their Battlefront bedshitting, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're pulling all the strings in this particular situation. People should holds devs accountable in the same way they look at publishers.
I never said devs are good or pubs are bad. I’m saying this is EAs fault. They don’t need to pull the strings. They’ve created the environment that their devs need to survive in.
 

thonerayman

Member
Oct 27, 2017
779
it's a free game and these are all cosmetic...soooooo.....

I understand more people are upset with the nature of the drops and so on, as it is essentially curating gambling habits, that I understand.

I don't understand why more games just don't go with the Fortnite model. Battlepass is super transparent. The store has a rotation of items, no RNG. Everyone is happy, and Epic seems to be making fistfuls of money any way?
If they were just selling skins that would be one thing. I'm not averse to all MTX in a f2p game. It does have to make money. What I am averse to is loot boxes because of how it psychologically affects people. And I'm not just talking in theory, I'm talking from experience. If you haven't gone back and read my other post, you should, but here is another example.

I used to play Marvel Heroes. It had characters/skins to unlock via MTX. Which was fine, I didn't mind paying for the character and odd skin here or there. Then one day they added in these cards (Loot boxes) and one of the rewards was a Dr Doom companion. Doom being my favorite comic character ever I started buying them. Took me 120 dollars worth before I got him (this was LONG before he was announced as a playable character). This was in december of 2014, I was almost exactly 8 months into sobriety and I had no clue how still how my addiction worked. But I knew I wanted that Doom, and wouldn't stop until I got it. We won't go into the fact that my water almost got turned off because that money I spent was to pay the bills. See I thought I would be lucky, I would spend maybe 10, 15 dollars and get it, still having plenty of money left over. Then the sunk cost fallacy kicked in, that little guy in the back of my head was screaming that it was Doom! I couldn't not get him! I look back now with such clarity but then, even just a little less than 5 years ago I was so dumb.
 

Jakisthe

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,089
Suggestions of regulation for this sort of thing - namely, ones that seek to limit it - are absurd. It doesn’t effect public health like smoking. It doesn’t provide cover for possible tax manipulation like gambling. It doesn’t have the potential for immediate physical danger like a car. It doesn’t have the potential for direct internal bodily harm like food.

Forget gambling; people often like buying anything at all to the point of destitution. That's the predation inherent in everything being sold; it's called marketing. There are people who blow their entire life savings on buying action figures, and while they might conceivably be said to have a problem with consumption, it’s their prerogative to do so. The law doesn’t exist to give personal cover for, and restrict usage based on, every single specific use case problem that might ever possibly arise for anything for anyone. There are not, and should not be, legal restrictions in place just because “some people might spend a lot of money on a thing and no other reason” for anything.
 
Last edited:

The Idler

Member
Apr 22, 2019
38
I would love to see the math on this being the most profitable model possible. Surely they ran the numbers for all the different scenarios, it just blows my mind this is the way they decided to make the most money. Why anyone would buy something is beyond me.
 

DaveLong

Member
Nov 2, 2017
534
I think they should just let you buy the cosmetic stuff for a flat rate price on each item, but this is a really fun game to play so I just play it and have never spent a penny on it. It's free to play. I got some neat stuff here and there from playing, but the act of playing is a blast.


What confuses me most about these sorts of threads is that none of it affects the gameplay. I'm sorry some people struggle with gambling problems. I really am. I have a problem with buying retro games. Nobody is lobbying congress on my behalf. It's just weird that all we ever seem to talk about these days is everything BUT the actual gameplay.
 

Servbot24

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
17,919
  • The game will give you two loot boxes for free by playing the game, but that's it. After that you have to buy more loot boxes, ten of them will cost you $70.
  • Even if there are no dupes, getting hold of all 24 items would therefore cost $154.
  • Once you've done that, there's another item you will then have to pay a further $35 to unlock.
So if you’re incredibly lucky, it will cost you the same as

THREE BRAND NEW FULL PRICED GAMES

to get 25 digital knick knacks within this single game. And it will most likely cost way more than that.

Sometimes it feels really good to not care about online gaming.
 

Moebius

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,693
I stopped engaging with games with lootboxes. I'm done. They are so over the top now that it just turns me away.
 

rocket

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,150
Guaranteed. You must open 24 boxes (700 coins times 22-24) and then buy it for 3500 additional Apex Coins. It is also the minimum you have to spend.
So if someone actually want that skin and they don't mind paying for it they can essentially buy it, albeit via currency then buy crates for it, and they will get that item after spending a set amount of money which is like $170 USD +/-, correct?
 

o Tesseract

Member
Oct 28, 2017
747
Guaranteed. You must open 24 boxes (700 coins times 22-24) and then buy it for 3500 additional Apex Coins. It is also the minimum you have to spend.
I don't think you necessarily need 22/24. You have a CHANCE of getting more than one of the 24 items in each box. But you also have the CHANCE of getting only 1/24.

So TECHNICALLY if you're REALLY lucky, you might be able to get all of the items in 12 boxes instead of 22/24.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,389
So if someone actually want that skin and they don't mind paying for it they can essentially buy it, albeit via currency then buy crates for it, and they will get that item after spending a set amount of money which is like $170 USD +/-, correct?
Yes.

I don't think you necessarily need 22/24. You have a CHANCE of getting more than one of the 24 items in each box. But you also have the CHANCE of getting only 1/24.

So TECHNICALLY if you're REALLY lucky, you might be able to get all of the items in 12 boxes instead of 22/24.
No. You only get one item per box. The loot box itself still has the regular box opening animation with 3 drops, but the two other drops are always +15 Crowns. The "50% odds" text refers to the loot box rolling whether you get an item from the Epic pool or the Legendary pool.

So you need 24 boxes, you can only get 2 through playing the game.
 

o Tesseract

Member
Oct 28, 2017
747
No. You only get one item per box. The loot box itself still has the regular box opening animation with 3 drops, but the two other drops are always +15 Crowns. The "50% odds" text refers to the loot box rolling whether you get an item from the Epic pool or the Legendary pool.

So you need 24 boxes, you can only get 2 through playing the game.
Are you certain on this? I got 60 crowns (2 +30s) and a legendary from a single crate. Does it specifically say that you only get 1 actual item per box anywhere?
 

RumHam

Member
Feb 12, 2019
49
I never understand the outrage over lootbox cosmetics. It doesn't affect the game play in any way so why get upset?
 

Atolm

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,165
Fortnite is F2P too. Anyone complaining about it?

No.
Yeah, and we know how the working conditions in Fortnite are to keep the update schedule.

Apex has a normal update cycle, so the game needs to make money with far less content and this is how you do it.

Games need to be profitable after all.
 

TitlePending

The Fallen
Dec 26, 2018
755
Are there any other F2P games with lootbox/gacha mechanics that actually guarantee buyers with a desired income after spending a certain amount of money?
 

Lone_Prodigy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,841
How is this monetization to a whole new level?

At least there's an upper limit to getting everything? Some MTX games can make you spend thousands with no guarantee of obtaining everything you want.
 

benzopil

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,861
Yeah, and we know how the working conditions in Fortnite are to keep the update schedule.

Apex has a normal update cycle, so the game needs to make money with far less content and this is how you do it.

Games need to be profitable after all.
Fortnite has one "character" so lootbox shit like this would make much more sense. Apex has a lot of heroes, if you let people buy 1-2-3 skins for their favourite characters I'm pretty sure Respawn either won't lose that much money or even will gain more profit. At least in my case, I bought some skins in Fortnite but participating in this "event" is absurd. But maybe there's enough whales I dunno.