• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
The backlash against loot boxes was strong in 2017, but the results of a Game Developers Conference survey of more than 4500 developers who have attended a GDC event in the past three years strongly suggests that they're not going away anytime soon. 11 percent of developers who responded to the survey said they are currently working on a game that will monetize via the sale of "paid item crates," and some developers say they're necessary to ensure the continued stability of the industry.

Loot boxes are also an integral part of videogame markets outside of North America and Europe, another noted, particularly in China and Japan—which also have laws aimed at protecting consumers from abuse. That reflects the real issue, one developer said, which isn't the loot boxes themselves but how they're implemented.

"Time is money," one developer wrote in follow-up comments. "So long as, A, the content is also accessible by playing the game; and, B, this and all parts of the game are balanced for gameplay first and monetization second, then I see no legitimate basis for complaints."

It's necessary for developers to figure out how to incorporate loot boxes in a way that works for Western audiences, another explained, because straight-up game sales are often not enough to enable the development of games that people want to play. That, in turn, could have a detrimental effect on the industry as a whole.

"Microtransactions have to be a part of your strategy in triple-A gaming. So everyone will need to figure out what works for them," they wrote. "I'm sad [Star Wars] Battlefront [2] got it so wrong. This whole controversy will have a lasting impact on the industry and I am most worried it will affect game creators' jobs more than anything."

Source: http://www.pcgamer.com/gdc-survey-indicates-that-loot-boxes-arent-going-away/

Another snippet around F2P/DLC

Across all games, loot box or not, just under half of the developers surveyed said they were releasing a traditional, paid game, with 39% saying their next title would be "free to download." 23% are working on a game with DLC, and 22% are working on something which will sell in-game items for real money.

Source: https://www.pcgamesn.com/gdc-survey-loot-boxes

Panic averted, no one needs to worry they're going away. More confirmation as well devs need them just to be stable. Strong and stable, like Theresa May's Government. Remember, you also have no legitmate basis to complain if the devs tell you they are doing it the proper way.
 

Toriko

Banned
Dec 29, 2017
7,711
Isn't it sad that game making is becoming more and more about mastery in consumer psychology and less and less of an art form. Game makers seem to view products as numbers and less as art. Pretty disappointing and sad to be honest.
 
OP
OP

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Well duh, gamers whine about lootboxes but buy them in the end.

This is true. While following Audioboxer on Resetera will get you your daily dose of LOOT BOX NEWS through a "slightly" negative lens, in private, at home, I'm furiously hammering my credit card 3 digit security code into PSN to get crystals, coins, space bucks and loot box keys. New Overwatch skins have arrived, must enter that security code a few more times! It appears like devs hate me due to my negativity, but really, they love me.

Silly internet banter aside, I'm actually quite surprised only 11% said they were trying to fit in paid crates. No doubt that is heavily assigned to games from certain companies where it is more a matter of EVERY game being released by them has the first bulletpoint in development as "must support loot boxes". Aka, EA games.
 

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
13,967
Meanwhile actual paid DLC that splits online communities is starting to vanish, and more games are getting free post-launch support.
 

Bunkles

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,663
People thought they were going away?
 

Jawmuncher

Crisis Dino
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
38,512
Ibis Island
I mean 1/10 ain't bad. Seems pretty acceptable.
They're not as bad as say Online Passes where they needed to be 100% expunged.
 

Conkerkid11

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
13,967
Lol no.
Era and reddit =/= Mainstream audience
What are you trying to say here? That mainstream audiences don't complain about lootboxes, or that mainstream audiences don't buy lootboxes? Both of those statements are false.

Ok? So replace one set of terrible practices with another set?
One set of practices is harmful to everybody. The other set is harmful only to those who feel the need to spend real money on cosmetics.

I mean 1/10 ain't bad. Seems pretty acceptable.
They're not as bad as say Online Passes where they needed to be 100% expunged.
Assuming you're talking about Xbox Live Gold and PlayStation Plus?

The problem with those is they won't go away until the leader in the pack gets rid of their subscription model, and I don't see that happening.

If you're not called COD, Destiny, Ghost Recon, Forza and Battlefield (season passes were still in prior to BF2). Season passes and loot boxes are still making the rounds in the same game.
Destiny 2's currently seeing the repercussions for that. I dunno why Battlefront 2 got so much flack, as all the games you listed deserve it so much more.
 
OP
OP

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Meanwhile actual paid DLC that splits online communities is starting to vanish, and more games are getting free post-launch support.

If you're not called COD, Destiny, Ghost Recon, Forza and Battlefield (season passes were still in prior to BF2). Season passes and loot boxes are still making the rounds in the same game.

I mean 1/10 ain't bad. Seems pretty acceptable.
They're not as bad as say Online Passes where they needed to be 100% expunged.

Kind of. All that really happened was PSN now charges everyone to play online, even if you buy a game new. Even Nintendo is going to start charging for online... eventually.
 
OP
OP

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
What are you trying to say here? That mainstream audiences don't complain about lootboxes, or that mainstream audiences don't buy lootboxes? Both of those statements are false.


One set of practices is harmful to everybody. The other set is harmful only to those who feel the need to spend real money on cosmetics.


Assuming you're talking about Xbox Live Gold and PlayStation Plus?

The problem with those is they won't go away until the leader in the pack gets rid of their subscription model, and I don't see that happening.


Destiny 2's currently seeing the repercussions for that. I dunno why Battlefront 2 got so much flack, as all the games you listed deserve it so much more.

Battlefront 2 was pay to win? Even those that love loot boxes, like myself, tend to rank P2W higher than "every cosmetic in this game is now stuffed into a paid game of random chance".
 

MattWilsonCSS

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,349
Of course they're not going away yet, the government hasn't stepped in. But they will eventually, as long as the industry refuses to self-regulate. Even after they step in, though, there will still be loot box mechanics in some games, but they will be altered for sure.

Ultimately, though, 11% is a concerning number but does seem quite reduced from where it was a year ago, if you consider that GDC can encapsulate mobile, indie and AAA devs. How much of that 11% is mobile devs, for example. If we even split it right down the middle (and I'd argue these kind of gacha elements are far more on mobile than anywhere else), 5.5% of non-mobile titles.. that means maybe a couple of titles will have these scummy elements at all this year in the AAA space. Realistically though I'd say the % of AAA titles doing this will be way lower though.

The idea that they are necessary for the stability of the industry is a joke, though. These companies are not forward-thinking in the slightest. Loot boxes provide stability like propping up an uneven table with a bouncy ball. More experimentation is ultimately necessary and if devs think they can settle on this, those devs won't last for much longer.
 

Ailanthium

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,275
The gaming industry thrived before the advent of lootboxes and it will survive without them. I have no doubt that lootboxes are profitable and that companies who employ them are happy to justify their use, but that doesn't change the fact that they're a predatory practice. Developers' unwillingness to curtail their own practices has led to the massive uproar that we're seeing now. If they've become so dependent upon lootboxes to make the games they like I hope they're prepared for heavy regulation that will follow. That being said, I don't think they'll outright stop this practice until it's not obscenely profitable, i.e., not any time soon.
 

Foffy

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
16,392
If an industry needs this stuff to survive, then let it die. It's very simple.
 

Deleted member 10551

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,031
lootboxes will cannibalize studios as folks will only play 1 or 2 lootbox games max. Lootboxes will cause a lot of devs to go broke in the next few years when their games fail.

You'll also see more backlog and more push away from AAA.
 

Rizific

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,952
uhhh yeah, i kind of figured that out on my own. they found something else that people will pay for, WHY ON EARTH would you not accept that money?
 

Joezie

Member
Nov 6, 2017
577
And here I was afraid that my choices in games was going to get harder as time went on. Still bites, but at least make filtering through games that much easier.
 

Scuffed

Member
Oct 28, 2017
10,896
No one ever said they were going away they just said that the controversy will certainly modify how they are handled in the future.
 

Bran Van

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
1,540
Just put a pay cap on the amount one can spend on loot boxes. If somebody has spent $60 after buying the game already on additional loot boxes, then the whole game should be open to them at that point

I wouldn't take issue if it was just the people who spend $5 here and there. The issue are those who end up pouring hundreds of dollars into the game
 
Oct 28, 2017
1,277
My desire for AAA games is quickly disappearing.

Just remember, it only takes a couple AAA failures to sink a publisher and in a way, I'm looking forward to the next industry crash. A renewed interest in AA will rise from the ashes and maybe I won't be expected to subsidize bloated development costs from studios with teams in the hundreds or even thousands while based in the most expensive cities in the world.

Something's gotta give and if they think it's gonna be me, not gonna happen. I'd rather the government regulate the hell out of microtransactions just to see these greedy fucks suffer than put up with these awful business practices.
 
Last edited:

Border

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,859
We're on the verge of legalizing NBA sports betting and people think the government is going to do something about loot boxes?
 
Oct 31, 2017
10,056
much like a certain genius in the White House

Nah

2010.jpg
 
OP
OP

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
My desire for AAA games is quickly disappearing.

Just remember, it only takes a couple AAA failures to sink a publisher and in a way, I'm looking forward to the next industry crash. A renewed interest in AA will rise from the ashes.

I wouldn't say that would be a good thing, lots of jobs lost, but pubs and devs need to stop being as ridiculous as they are with game budgets and expectations then savagely laying off studios when the project manager/higher ups are really the ones at fault. Sack your fucking higher ups and lead project managers for once, instead of gutting whole teams and letting the higher ups go off to drain the carcass of another team.

EA literally seems to think it can turn every single franchise it has into an $800m+ a year GLOBAL DOMINATION quadruple A bankers bonus extraordinaire.

Well, no. Cramming loot boxes and other shite into Need for Speed is probably just going to have Need for Speed sell like shit, and review like shit. Then you cry it only made a bit of a profit, and lay off the whole studio screaming gamers are dickheads who don't buy enough games and it's all our fault we didn't kiss your ring. How about, just be happy with some franchises making a lot of money, rather than everything needing to be FIFA Ultimate Team?

Reviews EA, been paying attention to the average metacritic of your games lately? Hmmm.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,736
Well duh, gamers whine about lootboxes but buy them in the end.

And this is why I'm irritated by the entire conversation. It's all hypocritical. Whine about it, but still buy into it. Just admit that they got you and now actually move along into not buying the games period. People pick and choose who they want to be mad at and it isn't the game that they love the most.

We're on the verge of legalizing NBA sports betting and people think the government is going to do something about loot boxes?

Don't worry, NBA 2K will already have this by 19.
 
Oct 28, 2017
1,277
I wouldn't say that would be a good thing, lots of jobs lost, but pubs and devs need to stop being as ridiculous as they are with game budgets and expectations then savagely laying off studios when the project manager/higher ups are really the ones at fault.

While I have sympathy for anyone that will be affected by this, it's inevitable and there would be a lot of positives to the worst offenders being punished and forced to take an introspective look at itself and the business practices that got them there. I just don't see how AAA game development can be sustainable as teams become increasingly larger and the insistence for studios to remain in cities where a decent home costs nearly seven figures.
 

Deleted member 11018

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,419
Reviews EA, been paying attention to the average metacritic of your games lately? Hmmm.

It's perfect for EA. The bonus for developers being on metacritic score, they get squat. As long as the microtransactions rack in profit, that's all good for the higher management/board. By Law they must maximise profitability, they are just a little zealous "is all".
Like movies, they'll soon need just one over bloated microtransaction ridden game to succeed per year to finance the whole company, everything else is just bonus cash.

The recent seminars i took on the new ways to go to market are sickening as heck... glad i am not on the marketing front, i wouldn't sleep.

(btw, in the past they outlawed subliminal marketing, AHAHAHAHAHA... IT'S BACK ! )
 
OP
OP

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
While I have sympathy for anyone that will be affected by this, it's inevitable and there would be a lot of positives to the worst offenders being punished and forced to take an introspective look at itself and the business practices that got them there. I just don't see how AAA game development can be sustainable as teams become increasingly larger and the insistence for studios to remain in cities where a decent home costs nearly seven figures.

It is sustainable, it just needs sensible project leads, good budgeting and teams that manage to acrue loyalty and trust from a massive industry full of gamers who throw soo much of their salaries at gaming every calendar year. Yes it is competitive, but what industry isn't? Sometimes things will go wrong and there will be commercial failures, but this industry, more so the AAA side, seems hellbent on setting dev studios up for failure before they even release their game with mismanagement, stupid projections and slabbering their corporate boardroom hands over every single bit of a game. They act like a deer in front of headlights to allow their studios to have autonomy to focus on making great games and selling them, by behaving like AAA development is the 3rd world and Bobby Kotick can barely afford his weekly messages.

There is a cancer in AAA development, but it's not the gamers, or most parts of dev studios. It's the boardrooms and corporate culture festering away in the publishing side. If anything is causing a crash it's those running the scene. Much like the bankers were the ones that caused the banking crash. Not the consumers using the banks and investing their money in them.

One of the worst parts of these debates is watching gamers fall head over heels to turn on their own, blame entitlement culture and pretty much act as lapdogs "for the bankers". It's infuriating. Even if you enjoy loot boxes as a concept, please don't take your enjoyment as far as warping your mind into believing half of the corporate bullshit about this industry being on lifesupport and there hardly being any money to go around and support putting food on tables.

It's perfect for EA. The bonus for developers being on metacritic score, they get squat. As long as the microtransactions rack in profit, that's all good for the higher management/board. By Law they must maximise profitability, they are just a little zealous "is all".
Like movies, they'll soon need just one over bloated microtransaction ridden game to succeed per year to finance the whole company, everything else is just bonus cash.

The recent seminars i took on the new ways to go to market are sickening as heck... glad i am not on the marketing front, i wouldn't sleep.

I guess that is one way to look at it!!
 
Last edited:

spineduke

Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
8,754
There is a cancer in AAA development, but it's not the gamers, or most parts of dev studios. It's the boardrooms and corporate culture festering away in the publishing side. If anything is causing a crash it's those running the scene. Much like the bankers were the ones that caused the banking crash. Not the consumers using the banks and investing their money in them.

One of the worst parts of these debates is watching gamers fall head over heels to turn on their own, blame entitlement culture and pretty much act as lapdogs "for the bankers". It's infuriating. Even if you enjoy loot boxes as a concept, please don't take your enjoyment as far as warping your mind into believing half of the corporate bullshit about this industry being on lifesupport and there hardly being any money to go around and support putting food on tables.


This. This so fucking much - lootboxes are needed for companies to survive is the biggest pile of hogwash I've read in this whole debate. Companies building their business models solely around lootboxes can tout that line (and even then, with lootboxes unregulated ,its on their own collective risk for taking that decision). It screams of, "please don't regulate, since we're starving and theres no other way". I think people severely underestimate how profitable lootboxes are - you'll note that not a single company has dared to talk about the economics of their lootbox practices, and for good reason.
 

ffvorax

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,855
So their starting to use the same system that works on smartphones...
As long as these things don't really affect gameplay I don't care...
As usual they milk people as they have an opportunity...
Still i'm a bit worried, first the pricey DLCs with a little few exceptions (like Witcher DLC that are proper expansions worth the money)
Now it's the time for loot boxes... urgh...