A recent thread discussed the ESA's response to Hawaii's Loot Box proposals, from a gamesindustry.biz article. Down in the comments section, the majority of posts were pro-loot box and from a single person. He's a dev who (I believe) recently had a part in releasing a CCG mobile game) and describes himself on linkedin as follows:
I aim to deliver fun and engaging content to drive user acquisition, retention and monetization.
I am a strong believer in Games as a Service and the free-to-play business model. I think it's crucial to be creatively led and data driven. By driving and implementing an informed iterative process, 'Design, Deploy, Measure, Analyse and Iterate' I've worked to make good games better, more engaging and more profitable.
As it's not common for people in the industry to go into too much detail, I thought this might be thread-worthy, as he's gathered all his thoughts on the matter in a gamasutra blog post. Here's a few excerpts:
There's lots more (including a pretty hefty disclaimer) here:Much Ado About Loot Boxes
Thoughts? I'm not massively keen on some of the tactics employed in the post. Equating loot-oriented and lootbox-ridden experiences being one of them. Pokémon GO's incense and loot boxes are two very different things, IMO.
Charge me $4.99 for 10 random chances to do better in my 2nd thread if old/unsuitable/etc.
I aim to deliver fun and engaging content to drive user acquisition, retention and monetization.
I am a strong believer in Games as a Service and the free-to-play business model. I think it's crucial to be creatively led and data driven. By driving and implementing an informed iterative process, 'Design, Deploy, Measure, Analyse and Iterate' I've worked to make good games better, more engaging and more profitable.
As it's not common for people in the industry to go into too much detail, I thought this might be thread-worthy, as he's gathered all his thoughts on the matter in a gamasutra blog post. Here's a few excerpts:
Ian Griffiths said:I think we need to consider the relevance of why so many are saying loot boxes are the same as gambling; it's because we are looking to conflate it with something that is considered potentially damaging and hence restricted by law.
Ian Griffiths said:One test we could consider for whether loot boxes are harmful is to see if they are behind a lot of bankruptcies. I really couldn't find any cases of loot boxes being responsible for serious financial harm though it's possible that it's just not recorded in this way.
Ian Griffiths said:Frankly, parents have got to step up and do more. An iPad isn't a babysitting device, you don't get to ignore your kids because they're busy playing Mario Run. ...
I think the issue of whether loot boxes are suitable for children should be up to the parent. It's not an acceptable excuse for parents to say they don't know the content of a game because that's precisely their responsibility.
There's lots more (including a pretty hefty disclaimer) here:Much Ado About Loot Boxes
Thoughts? I'm not massively keen on some of the tactics employed in the post. Equating loot-oriented and lootbox-ridden experiences being one of them. Pokémon GO's incense and loot boxes are two very different things, IMO.
Charge me $4.99 for 10 random chances to do better in my 2nd thread if old/unsuitable/etc.