Why microtransactions, IAPs and LootBoxes are here to stay thread

[Asura]

Would this ultimately lead to tweaking lootboxes in stuff like Overwatch or the removal of them?

Depends if they're regarded as gambling, by whatever specific measure they choose.

The problem could be that this may set up an arms race, where the publishers keep modifying the boxes just enough to get around legislation. For instance, Apple, a while back, were apparently considering banning random boxes on the AppStore; publishers changed the boxes so you can't buy them with real money, you had to buy virtual currency and buy the boxes with that currency instead. It got around the change.

In China, I believe they once had a point where they were going to ban the practice of receiving random items in boxes, but the publishers changed it so that the users were buying in-game currency, and they would receive a "free gift" with said currency... Which was just a loot box. But because the user wasn't buying the lootbox per se, it got around the change, and I think the rule never came in anyway.

Not that these outliers are a reason not to try; far from it. Just it probably won't be something which happens overnight. The biggest change may come if the US consumer is swayed to think these are gambling, as the US is... Weird... About gambling. They have quite complex rules about it, and people have strong opinions about it too.

[Neon Ignition]

They should put the company exec bonuses in a company wide loot box and see how long they keep the practice to get their 100% guaranteed bonus back

[MartyG]

Wouldn't work - the spin would be rigged, the same way they have been shown to be in FUT: https://www.reddit.com/r/FIFA/commen...ct_3800_later/

[Digfox]

Depends if they're regarded as gambling, by whatever specific measure they choose.

The problem could be that this may set up an arms race, where the publishers keep modifying the boxes just enough to get around legislation.

I'm not sure it has to be that they are found out to be gambling. In fact it may be new rules which recognise them as a hybrid but requiring more protection. Even if it does legitimise Lootboxes I think the fact that these agencies and law/policy makers are investigating further is a good sign. It's acknowledgement of that point what we don't know, could be dangerous. I'm sure the Videogame industry will be lobbying hard against any any changes to the current free reign they have.

And absolutely devs and pubs will look at every loophole possible, but in the end may push them towards 'fairer' business models, if even amongst the smaller devs/pubs.

However there were two points that were pleasing to me, firstly the further acknowledgement of third-party websites allowing 'cashing out' of winnings, and secondly the fact protection for Children was mentioned.

They should put the company exec bonuses in a company wide loot box and see how long they keep the practice to get their 100% guaranteed bonus back

Wouldn't work - the spin would be rigged, the same way they have been shown to be in FUT: https://www.reddit.com/r/FIFA/commen...ct_3800_later/

Lol. No exec would be that stupid to accept those garbage odds.

Further bad PR for the industry:

Australian investigation finds loot boxes are "psychologically akin to gambling" Report suggests restricting sale of games containing loot boxes to players of legal gambling age [gi.biz news story]

A survey of over 7,000 gamers has found "important links between loot box spending and problem gambling"

The results were revealed today during a public hearing by the ECRC, led by Dr David Zendle and Dr Paul Cairns of York St. John University and University of York respectively.

Zendle and Cairns' investigation found the more severe an individual's gambling addiction, the more they typically spent on loot boxes, suggesting the results support claims that loot boxes are "psychologically akin to gambling".

The report added that "these results also suggest that there is a serious risk for loot boxes to cause gambling-related harm".

Additionally, restricting the sale of games that contain loot boxes to players of the legal gambling age should be given "serious consideration".

"Industry statements typically disassociate loot boxes from gambling," reads the report transcript. "They instead highlight similarities between loot boxes and harmless products like trading cards or Kinder Surprise eggs...

"By contrast, researchers argue that loot boxes share so many formal similarities with other forms of gambling that they meet the 'psychological criteria' to be considered gambling themselves. These researchers further suggest that buying loot boxes may therefore lead to problem gambling amongst gamers."

[fishbowlhead]

All too little too late. The people at the top making the silly money have already done so, the people addicted to loot boxes wasting money have already done so.

By the time anything meaningful gets passed through to law they will simply skirt it by changing things slightly to keep the cash flowing.

Only thing to do would be shut lootboxes down full stop in all games going forward and absolutely stomp on anyone pushing gambling on minors with prison time.

[Neon Ignition]

EA releases it's official FIFA FUT percentage chance figures:

[eastyy]

Ermmm I dunno how it works with these loot boxes and my maths are not great but that does not look right to me

Edit oh hangon just thought if they get multiple cards per pack then it makes more sense, still lousy odds though

[Digfox]

Less than 1% = 0.002%

Or they don't want to admit they adjust it. Either way it's much near zero than one.

[Cassius_Smoke]

https://news.sky.com/story/children-with-gambling-problems-quadruple-in-two-years-11559190

Children with gambling problems have increased dramatically in the last two years, and this article mentions, but doesn't lay blame at Loot Boxes.
If I'm right, loot boxes started to become a big thing from about 2014ish? And essentially we have seen a year on year increase in children gambling since then. I don't want to say its all loot boxes but it can't be helping.

[Digfox]

It very likely a factor. Although 10+ bookmakers on every high street, thousands of online bookmakers and adverts in-between sports events and on most TV channels day long probably doesn't help.

[Dogg Thang]

Yep. The ads for online gambling are all over the place. While it has been around far longer than two years now, I also think there has been a gamified approach to life recently that possibly contributes too, particularly across social media. Likes are a currency that make people feel good and, while I don't gamble, I imagine the feeling of a win isn't all that different. There are likely a whole load of factors all hitting at once.

[Dogg Thang]

In other news, the boss of Bet365 is the UK's best-paid boss and business is booming: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46289499

[Asura]

In other news, the boss of Bet365 is the UK's best-paid boss and business is booming: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46289499

"A fool and his money" indeed.

[Cassius_Smoke]

Snake eyes. House wins.

[Digfox]

Your maths aren't off. The rumours/estimates are Epic are making $300-500m+ a month (which will obviously mostly be from Fortnite BR mtx given their catalog). So this would put Epic on track to be doing $3.6bn-$6bn in a year.

Sorry quoting myself again. But this might close off the discussion some of us had in the summer about Epic/Fortnite.

A report today from Superdata estimates Fornite has done about $2.4bn USD in revenue during 2018 making it the most annual revenue of any game in history: Fortnite tops SuperData's 2018 chart with $2.4 billion digital revenue Epic's game toppled Honor of Kings in the free-to-play chart, PUBG was the highest earning premium title[gi.biz]

Although an estimate still, it might be more accurate than this recent report from another analyst which has EPIC Games at $3bn USD profit: Epic Games, the creator of Fortnite, banked a $3 billion profit in 2018 [techcrunch]

Either way whether the truth is in the middle or somewhere inbetween the guesses, weren't that far off. At least in the same ball park, if not the same stand.