What do you think of Crown Store Random boxes/Lottery box?

JD2013 · August 2016

No I dislike the random crown store boxes, to much of a gamble

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Hand_Bacon wrote: »

elvenmad wrote: »

Not exactly you pay for a pack of x amount of cards, you receive x amount of cards, contract complete... law ends.

I think that's where people are getting tripped up a little. You aren't purchasing a chance of loot, you are purchasing loot. Just like the cards, you don't know what loot is inside, but there is loot. Contract still complete regardless of what the buyer is hoping to get out of the crate.

exactly...... kinder eggs anyone?

Kinder Egg never started as just chocolate then charged people for a "chance" of getting chocolate xD

i used to give my kids a little bit of money so they could buy a couple kinder eggs each. they weren't that interested in the chocolate - just the toys inside. they had a collection of them.... always excited to open them because they never new what they would get....

My dad used to buy me Kinder Eggs as a treat. I loved them so much. Got some great toys from them too! My favourite being an Uncle Scrooge figure from DuckTales that I still have to this very day.

JKorr · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Hand_Bacon wrote: »

elvenmad wrote: »

Not exactly you pay for a pack of x amount of cards, you receive x amount of cards, contract complete... law ends.

I think that's where people are getting tripped up a little. You aren't purchasing a chance of loot, you are purchasing loot. Just like the cards, you don't know what loot is inside, but there is loot. Contract still complete regardless of what the buyer is hoping to get out of the crate.

exactly...... kinder eggs anyone?

Kinder Egg never started as just chocolate then charged people for a "chance" of getting chocolate xD

i used to give my kids a little bit of money so they could buy a couple kinder eggs each. they weren't that interested in the chocolate - just the toys inside. they had a collection of them.... always excited to open them because they never new what they would get....

How often did they want a specific toy? How many eggs did they have to buy to get the specific toy?

i have no idea. but i think your question is intended to be vexatious so i won't ring them up to check.

No, just noticing they were happy no matter which toy they received because they had no specific one they really wanted. If there was a certain specific item they really wanted, and didn't get, how many eggs would they [or you] have bought, trying to get the certain specific toy?

jedtb16_ESO · August 2016

Yes I like the random boxes idea so Long as they only have cosmetics

Cazzy wrote: »

Plus you really can't compare the two, no matter how hard you try

Hand_Bacon made the point that the purchase of a loot box was not a purchase of a chance of loot but definite loot - you just don't know which loot you are going to get. same for the eggs.... you will get a toy but you don't know which toy.

so, yeah. you can compare them because in both cases you are purchasing a definite, but unknown, something.

Eiagra · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Some of the postscripts on the answers are a little out there, but just from how I'm understanding it and looking at the numbers here for this post (as of Aug 23):

264 are for it, cosmetic only.
7 are for it, equipment only.
13 are for it, equips and cosmetic.
Total for it: 284

120 are against it, gambling protest.
467 are against it, for other reasons.
Total against it: 587.

32.61% for it. 67.39% against it.

The voice of the players is clear here. The large majority of players so far do not wish to see this feature. There are over 50 pages of posts with explanations.

ZOS, I would urge you to consider these voices very... very... carefully. It's your game, yeah. But what audience do you REALLY want? How disposable is the audience you have now? Are you willing to sacrifice one for the other? And at what cost?

Cazzy · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

Plus you really can't compare the two, no matter how hard you try

Hand_Bacon made the point that the purchase of a loot box was not a purchase of a chance of loot but definite loot - you just don't know which loot you are going to get. same for the eggs.... you will get a toy but you don't know which toy.

so, yeah. you can compare them because in both cases you are purchasing a definite, but unknown, something.

I don't think you quite understand... I can buy a costume in a few days. It's only available for a few days but I can buy it if I want. <fast forward to December>. There's a costume I want but I can't buy it now. Instead I have to pay a lot at a chance of buying it.

Khaos_Bane · August 2016

There are so many uninformed people going off on this it's ridiculous. Some of you need to chill out and actually get your facts straight.

Esquire1980g_ESO · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Abeille wrote: »

I get really indecisive when I see law debates here because, as a lawyer, I do want to participate on it. But, because I know the law is different everywhere, I also know that it doesn't matter much if I participate on it lol
Note: Although there are no ZOS servers here in Brazil, for any company to offer their services here, they must follow our law. Since there are Brazilian costumers, I decided to weight in.

I don't think that, here, this would be considered gambling - which is forbidden, lotteries being a monopoly of the government and any other kind of raffle needing to be authorized first - for two reasons:
1 - Crowns wouldn't be considered legitimate currency, but something that you buy within a game for legitimate currency - and you always get the exact number of Crowns you paid for.
2 - The definition of a gambling game in my country's Criminal Law is "A game on which winning or losing depend exclusively or mainly on luck". When you open a box, you won't find an empty box. Ever. Therefore, I doubt any judge will consider "losing" if you only get consumables. I don't think they would even consider opening the box "a game"; more like buying consumables and having a chance of getting something extra - and this is allowed.

Councillor,

For your review. https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2010/fil10035a.pdf for overveiw. For US statute, see 31 USC 5361 - 5366, 12 CFR Part 233, and 31 CFR Part 32 (Treasury) called out in the overview referenced above. This Act does have specifics for "Cross Border" included. The definitions seem to be broad and the term "Due Diligence" is used more than once. You can read the overview/Statute and gain a opinion if such would be included. There are cases filed, by State Atty Generals now per this Act and they are making their way thru the Courts at his moment under authority of the UIGE.

The problem I see here, is customers making complaints v gaming companies to " transaction companies" with which "Due Diligence" would then be required and/or a State/Fed Atty General looking for another trial case.

Civil Tort is also being used, in fact now v a gaming company where customers are asking the Courts for relief. http://www.polygon.com/2016/6/23/12020154/counter-strike-csgo-illegal-gambling-lawsuit-weapon-skins-valve and this article included the actual complaint, which is why I linked the article and not the case, itself.

I have also refrained from offering legal opinions on a gaming forum altho I now have one. I have reviewed other legal opinions on Martindale, etc. You are free to make your own conclusions.

Khaos_Bane · August 2016

MarkusLiberty wrote: »

I would like this, there are several mounts I've been wanting to get which I never got originally, and I dont mind spending some money for a second chance at these.

I just have one request, please make it so that I cant get the same mount twice, it sucks having to spend money and get nothing in return.

If I counted correctly, there have been 17 time limited mounts available in the crown store. If already purchased mounts don't count, then the number of available mounts would degrees.

Which would mean that I have a 3 out of 15 chance of getting one of the mounts that I want. I can live with that.

You will get something in return. Consumables. You shouldn't be guaranteed a new mount every time.

Abeille · August 2016

No I dislike the random crown store boxes, to much of a gamble

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

Plus you really can't compare the two, no matter how hard you try

Hand_Bacon made the point that the purchase of a loot box was not a purchase of a chance of loot but definite loot - you just don't know which loot you are going to get. same for the eggs.... you will get a toy but you don't know which toy.

so, yeah. you can compare them because in both cases you are purchasing a definite, but unknown, something.

I think it depends on if you consider the consumables to be comparable to the costumes, mounts and pets. With Kinder Eggs, you would always get a toy, and they were comparable - they were all toys, you wouldn't get, say, peanuts instead. You won't always get a mount, costume or pet from the boxes - you will too get just consumables.

SilentRaven1972 · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

DO NOT WANT! After my experiences with other lockbox systems in other games, I will never play a game that has them again. If this is implemented, sorry ZOS, but I'll be done. I don't mind buying an item outright from the crown store. At least I know exactly what I'm getting. A random low chance at something good, yet more likely will just be junk? No.
I love this game because I could buy the cosmetic items that interested me, and I can earn/work towards other things (potions, motifs, etc).
Once you start down this road, it will just get worse and worse, as others have said, until it becomes P2W. You want to give people a chance at old pets/mounts/costumes? Bring them to the store for limited time (2 weeks would be good, since some are paid bi-weekly), same for special mounts. There are a few I would have bought, but the "weekend" time limit made it so it wasn't possible.
Also, as others have stated, you would be feeding on those with gambling issues. It's immoral and abhorrent.

Cazzy · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Khaos_Bane wrote: »

MarkusLiberty wrote: »

I would like this, there are several mounts I've been wanting to get which I never got originally, and I dont mind spending some money for a second chance at these.

I just have one request, please make it so that I cant get the same mount twice, it sucks having to spend money and get nothing in return.

If I counted correctly, there have been 17 time limited mounts available in the crown store. If already purchased mounts don't count, then the number of available mounts would degrees.

Which would mean that I have a 3 out of 15 chance of getting one of the mounts that I want. I can live with that.

You will get something in return. Consumables. You shouldn't be guaranteed a new mount every time.

But I didn't want consumables, else I would have bought them.

Abeille · August 2016

No I dislike the random crown store boxes, to much of a gamble

Esquire1980g_ESO wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

I get really indecisive when I see law debates here because, as a lawyer, I do want to participate on it. But, because I know the law is different everywhere, I also know that it doesn't matter much if I participate on it lol
Note: Although there are no ZOS servers here in Brazil, for any company to offer their services here, they must follow our law. Since there are Brazilian costumers, I decided to weight in.

I don't think that, here, this would be considered gambling - which is forbidden, lotteries being a monopoly of the government and any other kind of raffle needing to be authorized first - for two reasons:
1 - Crowns wouldn't be considered legitimate currency, but something that you buy within a game for legitimate currency - and you always get the exact number of Crowns you paid for.
2 - The definition of a gambling game in my country's Criminal Law is "A game on which winning or losing depend exclusively or mainly on luck". When you open a box, you won't find an empty box. Ever. Therefore, I doubt any judge will consider "losing" if you only get consumables. I don't think they would even consider opening the box "a game"; more like buying consumables and having a chance of getting something extra - and this is allowed.

Councillor,

For your review. https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2010/fil10035a.pdf for overveiw. For US statute, see 31 USC 5361 - 5366, 12 CFR Part 233, and 31 CFR Part 32 (Treasury) called out in the overview referenced above. This Act does have specifics for "Cross Border" included. The definitions seem to be broad and the term "Due Diligence" is used more than once. You can read the overview/Statute and gain a opinion if such would be included. There are cases filed, by State Atty Generals now per this Act and they are making their way thru the Courts at his moment under authority of the UIGE.

The problem I see here, is customers making complaints v gaming companies to " transaction companies" with which "Due Diligence" would then be required and/or a State/Fed Atty General looking for another trial case.

Civil Tort is also being used, in fact now v a gaming company where customers are asking the Courts for relief. http://www.polygon.com/2016/6/23/12020154/counter-strike-csgo-illegal-gambling-lawsuit-weapon-skins-valve and this article included the actual complaint, which is why I linked the article and not the case, itself.

I have also refrained from offering legal opinions on a gaming forum altho I now have one. I have reviewed other legal opinions on Martindale, etc. You are free to make your own conclusions.

Thank you for the information, I will certainly give it a read.

I love studying international law, although Consumer Rights isn't really my area. I work with Criminal Justice - In fact, my final presentation on College was an analysis of the evolution of age of majority and of criminal responsibility in England and Wales, in light of the recent discussion about lowering the age of criminal responsibility in Brazil.

Law in the USA is heavily based on legal precedents, which makes this very interesting to study because it is so different from here. Here, what a judge decides doesn't stop other judges for deciding differently, unless we are talking about the Supreme Court and they specifically say "That's how it is decided from now on". Yes, two cases that are identical can have completely different outcomes here, even in the same city.

I'll be sure to accompany the development of that case.

nimander99 · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Abeille wrote: »

Esquire1980g_ESO wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

I get really indecisive when I see law debates here because, as a lawyer, I do want to participate on it. But, because I know the law is different everywhere, I also know that it doesn't matter much if I participate on it lol
Note: Although there are no ZOS servers here in Brazil, for any company to offer their services here, they must follow our law. Since there are Brazilian costumers, I decided to weight in.

I don't think that, here, this would be considered gambling - which is forbidden, lotteries being a monopoly of the government and any other kind of raffle needing to be authorized first - for two reasons:
1 - Crowns wouldn't be considered legitimate currency, but something that you buy within a game for legitimate currency - and you always get the exact number of Crowns you paid for.
2 - The definition of a gambling game in my country's Criminal Law is "A game on which winning or losing depend exclusively or mainly on luck". When you open a box, you won't find an empty box. Ever. Therefore, I doubt any judge will consider "losing" if you only get consumables. I don't think they would even consider opening the box "a game"; more like buying consumables and having a chance of getting something extra - and this is allowed.

Councillor,

For your review. https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2010/fil10035a.pdf for overveiw. For US statute, see 31 USC 5361 - 5366, 12 CFR Part 233, and 31 CFR Part 32 (Treasury) called out in the overview referenced above. This Act does have specifics for "Cross Border" included. The definitions seem to be broad and the term "Due Diligence" is used more than once. You can read the overview/Statute and gain a opinion if such would be included. There are cases filed, by State Atty Generals now per this Act and they are making their way thru the Courts at his moment under authority of the UIGE.

The problem I see here, is customers making complaints v gaming companies to " transaction companies" with which "Due Diligence" would then be required and/or a State/Fed Atty General looking for another trial case.

Civil Tort is also being used, in fact now v a gaming company where customers are asking the Courts for relief. http://www.polygon.com/2016/6/23/12020154/counter-strike-csgo-illegal-gambling-lawsuit-weapon-skins-valve and this article included the actual complaint, which is why I linked the article and not the case, itself.

I have also refrained from offering legal opinions on a gaming forum altho I now have one. I have reviewed other legal opinions on Martindale, etc. You are free to make your own conclusions.

Thank you for the information, I will certainly give it a read.

I love studying international law, although Consumer Rights isn't really my area. I work with Criminal Justice - In fact, my final presentation on College was an analysis of the evolution of age of majority and of criminal responsibility in England and Wales, in light of the recent discussion about lowering the age of criminal responsibility in Brazil.

Law in the USA is heavily based on legal precedents, which makes this very interesting to study because it is so different from here. Here, what a judge decides doesn't stop other judges for deciding differently, unless we are talking about the Supreme Court and they specifically say "That's how it is decided from now on". Yes, two cases that are identical can have completely different outcomes here, even in the same city.

I'll be sure to accompany the development of that case.

Game companies get around this by making us buy in game currency i.e Crowns. So the service we are purchasing is Crowns, what we do with them is not protected by the many anti internet gambling laws across EU. Its why games like TERA and Neverwinter get away with selling their gambling boxes.

I've been so excited for the future of this game, One Tamriel is right around the corner. Holiday events are coming up. Vvardenfel etc. But this has really taken the wind out of my sails.

chjumaliev · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

I am really upset. I used to play Allods, it was terrible experience. Same boxes, first with skins after pay2win. All my team stopped playing that game.

Why I can not have opportunity to buy exclusive mount without gambling???

Esquire1980g_ESO · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Abeille wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

Plus you really can't compare the two, no matter how hard you try

Hand_Bacon made the point that the purchase of a loot box was not a purchase of a chance of loot but definite loot - you just don't know which loot you are going to get. same for the eggs.... you will get a toy but you don't know which toy.

so, yeah. you can compare them because in both cases you are purchasing a definite, but unknown, something.

I think it depends on if you consider the consumables to be comparable to the costumes, mounts and pets. With Kinder Eggs, you would always get a toy, and they were comparable - they were all toys, you wouldn't get, say, peanuts instead. You won't always get a mount, costume or pet from the boxes - you will too get just consumables.

But then, the "value" consideration comes into play.

Abeille · August 2016

No I dislike the random crown store boxes, to much of a gamble

Esquire1980g_ESO wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

Plus you really can't compare the two, no matter how hard you try

Hand_Bacon made the point that the purchase of a loot box was not a purchase of a chance of loot but definite loot - you just don't know which loot you are going to get. same for the eggs.... you will get a toy but you don't know which toy.

so, yeah. you can compare them because in both cases you are purchasing a definite, but unknown, something.

I think it depends on if you consider the consumables to be comparable to the costumes, mounts and pets. With Kinder Eggs, you would always get a toy, and they were comparable - they were all toys, you wouldn't get, say, peanuts instead. You won't always get a mount, costume or pet from the boxes - you will too get just consumables.

But then, the "value" consideration comes into play.

Which is why I think that, using Kinder Eggs as an analogy, it is closer if we say that you are buying the chocolate and getting the toy as an extra. Because this is a way of seeing the boxes: You are buying consumables and getting costumes, pets or mounts as extras. Although it still leaves the issue that, using that analogy, Kinder Eggs always give you something extra while the boxes do not. Altogether I think Kinder Eggs are not a good analogy.

SilentRaven1972 · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

My memory finally kicked in.....I used to play Neverwinter. Towards the end, I started using the test server to see just what it would take to get the "rare" drop from lockboxes. The last two tests I did before I quit it took 400 tries to get the "special" item. Another (different box since they drop new ones every 2-4 weeks) I opened over 1000 and never got the rare item. Granted, that was on a test server, but it told me all I needed to know. Those test servers are almost exact duplicates of the live servers.
If ZOS opens the door a tiny bit with those boxes, they may as well open the floodgates, put in an auction house, allow a crown exchange, and put out the welcome mat for the bots and gold sellers.

Eiagra · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

I feel a little insightful education may help some, so here's a few videos from the Extra Credits crew that I highly recommend. Some of them show warnings of what the industry is doing, while others show support for what the industry is doing. Some of them have to do with the Free-to-Play model commonly seen on the mobile market, but I believe they still have some relevance here. Hopefully these are useful.

Microtransactions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXA559KNopI

The Skinner Box

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWtvrPTbQ_c

Free to Play Laws - Can We Stop Predatory Practices?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBtXyv0Q1Eg

Doing Free to Play Wrong - How Bad Monetization Harms F2P Games

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhz9OXy86a0

Free to Play Is Currently Broken - How High Costs Drive Players Away from F2P Games

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwI0u9L4R8U

There's probably some others I could find, but I got to get on with my day. Seriously, they have a lot of insightful videos regarding the video game industry, and while they might not be spot-on with EVERYthing, they are fairly close to the mark with many things. Give their channel a look, because they rally as much for the player as the developer, and that's something I can respect them for.

jedtb16_ESO · August 2016

Yes I like the random boxes idea so Long as they only have cosmetics

JKorr wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Hand_Bacon wrote: »

elvenmad wrote: »

Not exactly you pay for a pack of x amount of cards, you receive x amount of cards, contract complete... law ends.

I think that's where people are getting tripped up a little. You aren't purchasing a chance of loot, you are purchasing loot. Just like the cards, you don't know what loot is inside, but there is loot. Contract still complete regardless of what the buyer is hoping to get out of the crate.

exactly...... kinder eggs anyone?

Kinder Egg never started as just chocolate then charged people for a "chance" of getting chocolate xD

i used to give my kids a little bit of money so they could buy a couple kinder eggs each. they weren't that interested in the chocolate - just the toys inside. they had a collection of them.... always excited to open them because they never new what they would get....

How often did they want a specific toy? How many eggs did they have to buy to get the specific toy?

i have no idea. but i think your question is intended to be vexatious so i won't ring them up to check.

No, just noticing they were happy no matter which toy they received because they had no specific one they really wanted. If there was a certain specific item they really wanted, and didn't get, how many eggs would they [or you] have bought, trying to get the certain specific toy?

the events described happened over 30 years ago.... do you really expect me, or anyone for that matter, to recall the details of a trivial event like that?

seriously?

starkerealm · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

nimander99 wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

Esquire1980g_ESO wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

I get really indecisive when I see law debates here because, as a lawyer, I do want to participate on it. But, because I know the law is different everywhere, I also know that it doesn't matter much if I participate on it lol
Note: Although there are no ZOS servers here in Brazil, for any company to offer their services here, they must follow our law. Since there are Brazilian costumers, I decided to weight in.

I don't think that, here, this would be considered gambling - which is forbidden, lotteries being a monopoly of the government and any other kind of raffle needing to be authorized first - for two reasons:
1 - Crowns wouldn't be considered legitimate currency, but something that you buy within a game for legitimate currency - and you always get the exact number of Crowns you paid for.
2 - The definition of a gambling game in my country's Criminal Law is "A game on which winning or losing depend exclusively or mainly on luck". When you open a box, you won't find an empty box. Ever. Therefore, I doubt any judge will consider "losing" if you only get consumables. I don't think they would even consider opening the box "a game"; more like buying consumables and having a chance of getting something extra - and this is allowed.

Councillor,

For your review. https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2010/fil10035a.pdf for overveiw. For US statute, see 31 USC 5361 - 5366, 12 CFR Part 233, and 31 CFR Part 32 (Treasury) called out in the overview referenced above. This Act does have specifics for "Cross Border" included. The definitions seem to be broad and the term "Due Diligence" is used more than once. You can read the overview/Statute and gain a opinion if such would be included. There are cases filed, by State Atty Generals now per this Act and they are making their way thru the Courts at his moment under authority of the UIGE.

The problem I see here, is customers making complaints v gaming companies to " transaction companies" with which "Due Diligence" would then be required and/or a State/Fed Atty General looking for another trial case.

Civil Tort is also being used, in fact now v a gaming company where customers are asking the Courts for relief. http://www.polygon.com/2016/6/23/12020154/counter-strike-csgo-illegal-gambling-lawsuit-weapon-skins-valve and this article included the actual complaint, which is why I linked the article and not the case, itself.

I have also refrained from offering legal opinions on a gaming forum altho I now have one. I have reviewed other legal opinions on Martindale, etc. You are free to make your own conclusions.

Thank you for the information, I will certainly give it a read.

I love studying international law, although Consumer Rights isn't really my area. I work with Criminal Justice - In fact, my final presentation on College was an analysis of the evolution of age of majority and of criminal responsibility in England and Wales, in light of the recent discussion about lowering the age of criminal responsibility in Brazil.

Law in the USA is heavily based on legal precedents, which makes this very interesting to study because it is so different from here. Here, what a judge decides doesn't stop other judges for deciding differently, unless we are talking about the Supreme Court and they specifically say "That's how it is decided from now on". Yes, two cases that are identical can have completely different outcomes here, even in the same city.

I'll be sure to accompany the development of that case.

Game companies get around this by making us buy in game currency i.e Crowns. So the service we are purchasing is Crowns, what we do with them is not protected by the many anti internet gambling laws across EU. Its why games like TERA and Neverwinter get away with selling their gambling boxes.

I've been so excited for the future of this game, One Tamriel is right around the corner. Holiday events are coming up. Vvardenfel etc. But this has really taken the wind out of my sails.

Again, people keep bringing that up. And, it honestly wouldn't surprise me of some of the people in said companies think it's enough. It might actually be an effective screen in other countries, but in the US, gambling regulations can attach when betting occurs using tokens that have been purchased with actual money.

As I recall, one of the original purposes of casino chips was an attempt to skirt around existing laws regulating gambling. Rather obviously, that loophole got closed a long time ago.

starkerealm · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

SilentRaven1972 wrote: »

My memory finally kicked in.....I used to play Neverwinter. Towards the end, I started using the test server to see just what it would take to get the "rare" drop from lockboxes. The last two tests I did before I quit it took 400 tries to get the "special" item. Another (different box since they drop new ones every 2-4 weeks) I opened over 1000 and never got the rare item. Granted, that was on a test server, but it told me all I needed to know. Those test servers are almost exact duplicates of the live servers.
If ZOS opens the door a tiny bit with those boxes, they may as well open the floodgates, put in an auction house, allow a crown exchange, and put out the welcome mat for the bots and gold sellers.

Unless they've changed it, Cryptic's grand prize items have a .5% drop rate. Giving those items a rough value of ~$200.

It's a large part of why, when ZOS says, "yeah, we're going to do this," I am completely unenthused. I still remember seeing people blowing a grand when they first introduced them trying to get the new ship and coming up empty.

Cazzy · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

@ZOS_GinaBruno do you know when the article will be available with all the info? Also, do you by chance know if exclusive mounts will still be available to purchase or are they all going into the boxes?

jedtb16_ESO · August 2016

Yes I like the random boxes idea so Long as they only have cosmetics

Abeille wrote: »

jedtb16_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

Plus you really can't compare the two, no matter how hard you try

Hand_Bacon made the point that the purchase of a loot box was not a purchase of a chance of loot but definite loot - you just don't know which loot you are going to get. same for the eggs.... you will get a toy but you don't know which toy.

so, yeah. you can compare them because in both cases you are purchasing a definite, but unknown, something.

I think it depends on if you consider the consumables to be comparable to the costumes, mounts and pets. With Kinder Eggs, you would always get a toy, and they were comparable - they were all toys, you wouldn't get, say, peanuts instead. You won't always get a mount, costume or pet from the boxes - you will too get just consumables.

good grief....

Hand_Bacons comment was related to the fact that some posters were getting carried away with the idea that the random box may contain nothing. he pointed out that they would in fact contain something. i then made the analogy with kinder eggs.

i.e. you are not buying a chance at something. you are buying something. there will be something in the box, or egg.... you just don't know what it is. it is a blind purchase. are you managing to keep up so far?

you are being sold something. it is not an empty box, or egg for that matter. you just don't know what is in the box, or the egg.. clear so far?

so to summarize.....

my comment made no mention of the contents of the box or the egg. it was about the fact, yes the fact, that there would be something rather than nothing in the box, or egg.

to be honest i could not give a flying *************** what is in either the box

or the egg.

now that is cleared up could we move on to something completely different?

or even interesting?

Cazzy · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

...and will there be motifs in them?

starkerealm · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Cazzy wrote: »

...and will there be motifs in them?

I think, 1500 posts ago, I said, that would be a hilarious *** you to crafters. Because you'd end up with a book, either way. It's technically a prize, but if it's a motif your crafter already knows, then it's meaningless to you, and just soaking up space.

MissBizz · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Cazzy wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno do you know when the article will be available with all the info? Also, do you by chance know if exclusive mounts will still be available to purchase or are they all going into the boxes?

As an addition to these questions (although it may have been Cazzy's intention). Will the "exclusive" mounts be available by gems, or are they completely exclusive to only being inside the box.

anitajoneb17_ESO · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Cazzy wrote: »

...and will there be motifs in them?

Why do you ask ? Didn't you uninstall the game and install FF instead ?

Thornen · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

Gamble boxes thats great...........

jedtb16_ESO · August 2016

Yes I like the random boxes idea so Long as they only have cosmetics

and another thing.....

if the mystery items in the loot boxes are otherwise on sale for the same or higher price than the loot box you are not gambling.

you are making a blind purchase...

Cazzy · August 2016

No, don't ever add these into the game.

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Cazzy wrote: »

...and will there be motifs in them?

Why do you ask ? Didn't you uninstall the game and install FF instead ?

I unsubbed not uninstalled

I haven't played since Friday either - but I don't want to leave. It just may force me to.

Edit: yeah, I've been playing FF and NMS