Maintenance for the week of March 25:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – March 28, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)

Business of addiction: How the games industry is learning from casinos

  • Gandrhulf_Harbard
    Gandrhulf_Harbard
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Arthg wrote: »
    No surprise the strong support a system that crushes the weak and leave the strong unharmed - comforting them in their knowledge of their strength.

    There used to be a time when you could do business without preying on the weak and flattering the lowest instincts.
    Just making decent, honest $$.

    Now it's all about turning people into addicts, preferably from a young age onwards.
    To endorse such predatory behaviour - shame, really.

    People turn themselves into gaming addicts by not thinking things through. Your line of thinking absolves anyone from any sort of personal responsibility. Just blame someone else or an "evil corporation" when you make unwise choices.

    I don't you think you understand even the basics of dopamine response manipulation. Many of those who do become addicted to these things have no choice about it. So in the sense that these systems exploit weaknesses that the addicts have absolutely no control over then yes it is "evil corporation" territory.

    I'm fortunate, it seems that the normal dopamine response triggers simply do not work for me; probably something to with the fact I haven't really slept (as in proper deep sleep) for more than 60 minutes a day for the last 20 years.

    I see these deliberately manipulative practices exactly for what they are - a cynical exploitation of weaknesses that those affected have no ability to mitigate against.

    I don't do gambling crates, in this or any other game, they are a rigged system. I might be persuaded to "gamble" a little if - like most other gambling systems - game companies were required to publish their "odds". Currently they don't have to do that, and so can rig the system to any degree they wish.

    All The Best
    Those memories come back to haunt me, they haunt me like a curse.
    Is a dream a lie if it don't come true, or is it something worse.
  • rotaugen454
    rotaugen454
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Nestor wrote: »
    As long as we succumb to our addictions, companies will exploit our addictions.

    Just wait until the whole face recognition systems come online. Then advertisers will target you based on the stores you went to yesterday. Just like in Minority Report.

    We are all just Sheeple for the Corporate Wolves to feast upon.

    So I'll get targeted ads from gyms, coffee shops and gaming stores? Sweet...

    It's when I get ads and junk mail over things I have no interest in that I get annoyed. I'm fine with getting a large selection to evaluate.
    "Get off my lawn!"
  • AlMcFly
    AlMcFly
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Nestor wrote: »
    As long as we succumb to our addictions, companies will exploit our addictions.

    Just wait until the whole face recognition systems come online. Then advertisers will target you based on the stores you went to yesterday. Just like in Minority Report.

    We are all just Sheeple for the Corporate Wolves to feast upon.

    So I'll get targeted ads from gyms, coffee shops and gaming stores? Sweet...

    It's when I get ads and junk mail over things I have no interest in that I get annoyed. I'm fine with getting a large selection to evaluate.

    Minority Report is tame. I'm far more concerned by what occurred in Series 1 Episode 2 of the show Black Mirror. In that, the protagonist was constantly bombarded with ads, ad nauseum (lol) interrupting his viewing of a show to the point where he would spend actual money just to quickly remove the ads. It's only a matter of time before internet commercials allow you to pay for commercials to be skipped, versus watching 5 minutes of crap. Sounds absurd right? What happens when those "unskippable" commercials become 10, 15, 20 minutes long? Personally, I would just stop watching TV or internet shows altogether if this is the case. Or seek illegal options. Plenty of people though would pay that money.

    Edited by AlMcFly on September 14, 2017 6:53PM
  • OC_Justice
    OC_Justice
    ✭✭✭
    AlMcFly wrote: »
    Nestor wrote: »
    As long as we succumb to our addictions, companies will exploit our addictions.

    Just wait until the whole face recognition systems come online. Then advertisers will target you based on the stores you went to yesterday. Just like in Minority Report.

    We are all just Sheeple for the Corporate Wolves to feast upon.

    So I'll get targeted ads from gyms, coffee shops and gaming stores? Sweet...

    It's when I get ads and junk mail over things I have no interest in that I get annoyed. I'm fine with getting a large selection to evaluate.

    Minority Report is tame. I'm far more concerned by what occurred in Series 1 Episode 2 of the show Black Mirror. In that, the protagonist was constantly bombarded with ads, ad nauseum (lol) interrupting his viewing of a show to the point where he would spend actual money just to quickly remove the ads. It's only a matter of time before internet commercials allow you to pay for commercials to be skipped, versus watching 5 minutes of crap.

    My daughter keeps telling me to watch Black Mirror, guess i know what i am doing tonight.
    And agree with your assessment on what we might expect in the future.


    Wonder when this thread will get locked?
  • zaria
    zaria
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    AlMcFly wrote: »
    Nestor wrote: »
    As long as we succumb to our addictions, companies will exploit our addictions.

    Just wait until the whole face recognition systems come online. Then advertisers will target you based on the stores you went to yesterday. Just like in Minority Report.

    We are all just Sheeple for the Corporate Wolves to feast upon.

    So I'll get targeted ads from gyms, coffee shops and gaming stores? Sweet...

    It's when I get ads and junk mail over things I have no interest in that I get annoyed. I'm fine with getting a large selection to evaluate.

    Minority Report is tame. I'm far more concerned by what occurred in Series 1 Episode 2 of the show Black Mirror. In that, the protagonist was constantly bombarded with ads, ad nauseum (lol) interrupting his viewing of a show to the point where he would spend actual money just to quickly remove the ads. It's only a matter of time before internet commercials allow you to pay for commercials to be skipped, versus watching 5 minutes of crap. Sounds absurd right? What happens when those "unskippable" commercials become 10, 15, 20 minutes long? Personally, I would just stop watching TV or internet shows altogether if this is the case. Or seek illegal options. Plenty of people though would pay that money.
    Remember being asked by some marketing poll lady about an add inside an gas station.
    My answer was that I did not remember any adds inside the gas station.
    Somehow my real life add filter is better than the online one. Probably as I have only been exposed to online adds half my life.
    Its also better at getting relevant information like all hotdogs for half price :)

    Think we rater get PVR software for youtube who download an channel for offline viewing.
    Yes youtube grabbing software exist but is pretty pointless for causual viewing, if adds become an more serious issue it will become more standard.
    Grinding just make you go in circles.
    Asking ZoS for nerfs is as stupid as asking for close air support from the death star.
  • Tavore1138
    Tavore1138
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    AlMcFly wrote: »
    Tavore1138 wrote: »
    Arthg wrote: »
    No surprise the strong support a system that crushes the weak and leave the strong unharmed - comforting them in their knowledge of their strength.

    There used to be a time when you could do business without preying on the weak and flattering the lowest instincts.
    Just making decent, honest $$.

    Now it's all about turning people into addicts, preferably from a young age onwards.
    To endorse such predatory behaviour - shame, really.

    People turn themselves into gaming addicts by not thinking things through. Your line of thinking absolves anyone from any sort of personal responsibility. Just blame someone else or an "evil corporation" when you make unwise choices.

    There's a pretty large body of study that supports addiction not being something that can be simply or easily controlled by those who are most susceptible to it.

    Levels of "susceptibility" shouldn't be under question. It's irrefutable that there are those more susceptible to addiction than others, simply due to their biology.

    The real question is who gets the blame. Corporations utilizing these tactics, in my opinion, are not to blame. Corporations would not use these tactics if their efficacy did not already exist. Attacking corporate tactics is just applying a bandaide on a gaping wound.

    Society as a whole may be to blame a little. Honestly though, I put full blame on Parents, and the modern family, for not properly shielding and preparing their children for these influences in the world. The modern parent constantly seeks to shirk their parenting duties onto society and big business. If you want strong children, you need to ensure your children are raised to be strong. Being an absentee parent, then blaming society for their failure offspring, is terribly common practice today.

    I suppose then we are into the whole nature vs. nurture question - is that addictive personality something that good parenting can cure or are some people just born with a disposition towards certain behaviour?

    FWIW I suspect the truth is that both play a part - so good teaching can get you so far but someone born with a certain makeup will always be more vulnerable than someone without ti.

    Which is why societies need to have rules that balance the right for people to do as they choose while also offering some protection to those who are vulnerable.... and why wherever that balance is found the majority will feel it needs to be moved in whatever direction they feel is correct :)
    GM - Malazan
    Raid Leader - Hungry Wolves
    Legio Mortuum
  • Inarre
    Inarre
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Axoinus wrote: »
    Inarre wrote: »
    Worst offenders is games like arch age, pwi and other free mmos with massive pay walls or pay to win aspects.

    Zos isnt innocent but not the worst ive ever seen. Not by a long shot. Whales in pwi spend thousands (no exaggeration) every month for pvp gear. Games like that need gambling laws to step in, unfortunately anything international online is like living in international waters and only the most basic limits are set in place to protect players from gambling addiction.

    Will not happen. There is a big difference. Gambling to obtain currency is a lot different than gambling to obtain access to program code. Long long way to go before gambling laws can cross that line.

    I agree but doesnt make it any less unfortunate for people who have or develop a true problem. The cyber world we have is great in that we have 99% freedom to do what we want, but that is also a consequence of the same.
  • iiYuki
    iiYuki
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    It'll not go away since its legal and makes easy money.
    Must admit i'm part of the problem being pretty addicted to them and most other forms of loot boxes, especially when I keep getting duplicates or garbage, I tell myself i'm wasting money unless I get something good, problem is I eventually get something good and try my luck again.
    "Play how you want... unless its not how we intended you to play in which case we'll nerf it".
    - ZO$

    - The ZO$ Theme Song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmUJWP_ebsQ
  • akl77
    akl77
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Didn't we play games to be addicted? Any game that's not addictive I'm out fast enough.
    Pc na
  • Slick_007
    Slick_007
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    and i bet these same people who complain about zenimax prices are the ones putting stuff like primal motif on auction for 6000 gold (yes, its really there for that much)

    and you fools calling this addictive, you obviously were not around in the days when civilization came out. oh, the amount of times my friends and i were not seen for a full 24hrs.

    oh, its morning. already?
    i'll be back in a few hours. 3 days later....(yes, the benefits of not having to work)
    wanna get some food? what is it, breakfast?

    ESO doesnt hold a candle to how bad civ was in this regard.
  • AlMcFly
    AlMcFly
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Tavore1138 wrote: »
    AlMcFly wrote: »
    Tavore1138 wrote: »
    Arthg wrote: »
    No surprise the strong support a system that crushes the weak and leave the strong unharmed - comforting them in their knowledge of their strength.

    There used to be a time when you could do business without preying on the weak and flattering the lowest instincts.
    Just making decent, honest $$.

    Now it's all about turning people into addicts, preferably from a young age onwards.
    To endorse such predatory behaviour - shame, really.

    People turn themselves into gaming addicts by not thinking things through. Your line of thinking absolves anyone from any sort of personal responsibility. Just blame someone else or an "evil corporation" when you make unwise choices.

    There's a pretty large body of study that supports addiction not being something that can be simply or easily controlled by those who are most susceptible to it.

    Levels of "susceptibility" shouldn't be under question. It's irrefutable that there are those more susceptible to addiction than others, simply due to their biology.

    The real question is who gets the blame. Corporations utilizing these tactics, in my opinion, are not to blame. Corporations would not use these tactics if their efficacy did not already exist. Attacking corporate tactics is just applying a bandaide on a gaping wound.

    Society as a whole may be to blame a little. Honestly though, I put full blame on Parents, and the modern family, for not properly shielding and preparing their children for these influences in the world. The modern parent constantly seeks to shirk their parenting duties onto society and big business. If you want strong children, you need to ensure your children are raised to be strong. Being an absentee parent, then blaming society for their failure offspring, is terribly common practice today.

    I suppose then we are into the whole nature vs. nurture question - is that addictive personality something that good parenting can cure or are some people just born with a disposition towards certain behaviour?

    FWIW I suspect the truth is that both play a part - so good teaching can get you so far but someone born with a certain makeup will always be more vulnerable than someone without ti.

    Which is why societies need to have rules that balance the right for people to do as they choose while also offering some protection to those who are vulnerable.... and why wherever that balance is found the majority will feel it needs to be moved in whatever direction they feel is correct :)

    I only slightly agree with nature vs nurture statement, but you immediately went off the rails with the rest of it. It's not society's responsibility to ensure an individual person is protected against the harms of the world. That's bordering on the concept of a welfare/nanny state mentality. Western society has accepted the burden of upholding western laws. Take the concept of the police force for example. It is NOT the responsibility of the police to ensure you are protected at all times from harm. That is an incredibly wrong interpretation of the law, and has been proven false Constitutionally by a recent Supreme Court Case:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

    Police are responsible for upholding the laws of the state, not to be your personal bodyguard. Likewise, society is not responsible for being your personal bodyguard against physical and mental dangers of the world. They are only responsible for upholding the laws of the land, ie: maintaining peace, punishing violence, ect.

    The idea that society needs to put in place protections for the individual person, to ensure they can't harm themselves by engaging in legal acts so much as to cause themselves an extreme detriment? That's juvenile, and a ridiculously fascist view of what a western state should be in control of.

    Edited by AlMcFly on September 14, 2017 11:34PM
  • Hanokihs
    Hanokihs
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Has anyone actually ruined their financial situation over this game? Or are all the complainers just getting twisted on behalf of those who don't exist?

    "Kids" shouldn't be playing this game. If they do, and they get suckered, they need better parents.

    Anyone supporting the crates does it grudgingly at best, and nobody buying into them is unaware of their gimmicky, uncertain nature. I'm one of them. I'm a big girl; I can weigh my options and assess values just like any other grown-up on the planet. I know how much I care about aesthetics, and I know how much they cost, even the drop-only items. Many would argue that I spend "too much," but those arguments are pointless because the people making them aren't me.

    This is such a frustrating topic. People try so hard to get away from media babysitters and moral guardians, then here these folks come, trying to force game companies to hold their players' hands like little toddlers. It's sickening. And condescending.
    "I haven't really played much yet, but lemme tell you all about how the game should include X and be a lot more like Y!" - Half the posters on this forum.
    "I've been here for years, and lemme tell you all about how they should never change or evolve Z, because then the game would be ruined forever." - The other half of posters on this forum.
  • SoLooney
    SoLooney
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Humans have addictive personalities. Several of you guys may never cave in and buy crowns or make large purchases, but there are a lot of people who spend a lot of money. as long as they see net profit, theyre not gonna stop
  • idk
    idk
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Synfaer wrote: »
    I have just read an interesting article and thought I'd share...
    Looks like ZOS is just following the trends in the gaming industry when it comes to separating us from our hard earned dollars.

    abc.net.au/news/2017-09-13/video-game-addiction-how-the-industry-is-learning-from-casinos/8941114

    The cash shop and the crates have been in MMOs for years before ESO launched. Very popular and very lucrative. They will be around for awhile as long as people pony up the cash.
  • Wreuntzylla
    Wreuntzylla
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Synfaer wrote: »
    I have just read an interesting article and thought I'd share...
    Looks like ZOS is just following the trends in the gaming industry when it comes to separating us from our hard earned dollars.

    abc.net.au/news/2017-09-13/video-game-addiction-how-the-industry-is-learning-from-casinos/8941114

    This has been discussed ad nauseam on this forum. It's despicable and will ultimately become regulated in the same way as casinos.

    Why? Because the game industry now outpaces music and video revenue, and cash shops make so much money that game companies can't help but to step over the line.
  • Dracofyre
    Dracofyre
    ✭✭✭✭
    that why i left Neverwinter, it was becoming more casino than rpg, no one like that kind of "RNG" luck.

    event the cellphone games get micromanaagment for real cash to buy things to advance to next stages, if you dont pay you get stuck not finding things in game for weeks unless you pay and unlock.
  • Nemesis7884
    Nemesis7884
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I am against unecessary regulation but i do think that

    companies should be required to disclose loot tables / drop rates so people can calculate the estimated cost of things.

    Where i do think additional regulation is necessary is where kids are involved - e.g. games that specifically target children.
  • rotaugen454
    rotaugen454
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Slick_007 wrote: »
    and i bet these same people who complain about zenimax prices are the ones putting stuff like primal motif on auction for 6000 gold (yes, its really there for that much)

    and you fools calling this addictive, you obviously were not around in the days when civilization came out. oh, the amount of times my friends and i were not seen for a full 24hrs.

    oh, its morning. already?
    i'll be back in a few hours. 3 days later....(yes, the benefits of not having to work)
    wanna get some food? what is it, breakfast?

    ESO doesnt hold a candle to how bad civ was in this regard.

    I played original Civilization for four days straight, other than potty breaks and falling asleep in my computer chair for a couple hours. I really like ESO but never did this.
    "Get off my lawn!"
  • CapnPhoton
    CapnPhoton
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I've never had an addiction so I don't really have an insider's view. But I would think that a combination of real life goals, responsibility, and energy would be key in avoiding it. I think a person has to truly believe that they can have so much more away from the screen. Some people use it to escape, but what is it from? If you are using it to escape, it will not change that which you are escaping from and it will still remain unsolved, or in some cases in the hands of others.

    The fantasy world will be there when you want to take a break from a life that you can make great if you really want to. Everyone needs to stop and take a breath or break once in a while.

    Take those that are in a job that they don't like and when they are on a 15 minute break they are happy to be there, but are groaning when it is over and they have to get back to the grind. They perhaps need a different path. I can see this with gaming where life is difficult in that since there is no one looking over their shoulder, their 'breaks' into a fantasy world get longer and longer and it turns into the only place they are happy.

    I don't know if I entirely believe game makers are using an addiction model, but each person is an individual with the strength to turn off the screen when they need to.
    Xbox One NA Aldmeri Dominion
  • Feanor
    Feanor
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Slick_007 wrote: »
    and i bet these same people who complain about zenimax prices are the ones putting stuff like primal motif on auction for 6000 gold (yes, its really there for that much)

    and you fools calling this addictive, you obviously were not around in the days when civilization came out. oh, the amount of times my friends and i were not seen for a full 24hrs.

    oh, its morning. already?
    i'll be back in a few hours. 3 days later....(yes, the benefits of not having to work)
    wanna get some food? what is it, breakfast?

    ESO doesnt hold a candle to how bad civ was in this regard.

    Ooooooh. The memories that brought up. Just one more turn. To me ESO is on the level of Civ addictiveness though. I'm actually glad I bought the 5,500 crown crate package once. I only got trash and that told me not to buy them ever again. Second illuminating crown store moment was buying the original Sabre Tiger. I was hit with a huge surge of buyers remorse after a few hours.

    Now I just get stuff from the crown store if I really really really want it. I agree though that gambling is probably like being an alcoholic. Some individuals can't control it even if they want to.
    Edited by Feanor on September 15, 2017 7:22AM
    Main characters: Feanor the Believer - AD Altmer mSorc - AR 46 - Flawless Conqueror (PC EU)Idril Arnanor - AD Altmer mSorc - CP 217 - Stormproof (PC NA)Other characters:
    Necrophilius Killgood - DC Imperial NecromancerFearscales - AD Argonian Templar - Stormproof (healer)Draco Imperialis - AD Imperial DK (tank)Cabed Naearamarth - AD Dunmer mDKValirion Willowthorne - AD Bosmer stamBladeTuruna - AD Altmer magBladeKheled Zaram - AD Redguard stamDKKibil Nala - AD Redguard stamSorc - StormproofYavanna Kémentárí - AD Breton magWardenAzog gro-Ghâsh - EP Orc stamWardenVidar Drakenblød - DC Nord mDKMarquis de Peyrac - DC Breton mSorc - StormproofRawlith Khaj'ra - AD Khajiit stamWardenTu'waccah - AD Redguard Stamplar
    All chars 50 @ CP 1700+. Playing and enjoying PvP with RdK mostly on PC EU.
  • FoolishHuman
    FoolishHuman
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    AlMcFly wrote: »
    Tavore1138 wrote: »
    AlMcFly wrote: »
    Tavore1138 wrote: »
    Arthg wrote: »
    No surprise the strong support a system that crushes the weak and leave the strong unharmed - comforting them in their knowledge of their strength.

    There used to be a time when you could do business without preying on the weak and flattering the lowest instincts.
    Just making decent, honest $$.

    Now it's all about turning people into addicts, preferably from a young age onwards.
    To endorse such predatory behaviour - shame, really.

    People turn themselves into gaming addicts by not thinking things through. Your line of thinking absolves anyone from any sort of personal responsibility. Just blame someone else or an "evil corporation" when you make unwise choices.

    There's a pretty large body of study that supports addiction not being something that can be simply or easily controlled by those who are most susceptible to it.

    Levels of "susceptibility" shouldn't be under question. It's irrefutable that there are those more susceptible to addiction than others, simply due to their biology.

    The real question is who gets the blame. Corporations utilizing these tactics, in my opinion, are not to blame. Corporations would not use these tactics if their efficacy did not already exist. Attacking corporate tactics is just applying a bandaide on a gaping wound.

    Society as a whole may be to blame a little. Honestly though, I put full blame on Parents, and the modern family, for not properly shielding and preparing their children for these influences in the world. The modern parent constantly seeks to shirk their parenting duties onto society and big business. If you want strong children, you need to ensure your children are raised to be strong. Being an absentee parent, then blaming society for their failure offspring, is terribly common practice today.

    I suppose then we are into the whole nature vs. nurture question - is that addictive personality something that good parenting can cure or are some people just born with a disposition towards certain behaviour?

    FWIW I suspect the truth is that both play a part - so good teaching can get you so far but someone born with a certain makeup will always be more vulnerable than someone without ti.

    Which is why societies need to have rules that balance the right for people to do as they choose while also offering some protection to those who are vulnerable.... and why wherever that balance is found the majority will feel it needs to be moved in whatever direction they feel is correct :)

    I only slightly agree with nature vs nurture statement, but you immediately went off the rails with the rest of it. It's not society's responsibility to ensure an individual person is protected against the harms of the world. That's bordering on the concept of a welfare/nanny state mentality. Western society has accepted the burden of upholding western laws. Take the concept of the police force for example. It is NOT the responsibility of the police to ensure you are protected at all times from harm. That is an incredibly wrong interpretation of the law, and has been proven false Constitutionally by a recent Supreme Court Case:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

    Police are responsible for upholding the laws of the state, not to be your personal bodyguard. Likewise, society is not responsible for being your personal bodyguard against physical and mental dangers of the world. They are only responsible for upholding the laws of the land, ie: maintaining peace, punishing violence, ect.

    The idea that society needs to put in place protections for the individual person, to ensure they can't harm themselves by engaging in legal acts so much as to cause themselves an extreme detriment? That's juvenile, and a ridiculously fascist view of what a western state should be in control of.

    You americans don't even know what the word fascist means anymore. 40 years ago where I live people would be taken away and never seen again because they said something wrong. I know people who were watched by the secret police daily. You are talking about some costumer protection laws. This is silly.
    Also please accept that different people have different views on what society should look out for. This is an ongoing discussion in democracies and a highly political, not at all objective thing like you are portraying it here. Humans have always prevailed because they were looking out for each other. There are reasons for example why drugs are regulated and it's not because we live in a fascist society.
    In my country gambling institutions have to state the odds of winning and give a warning that it is addictive. Everything else is up to the customers. I find that more than fair for both the people and the companies and would wish it for all the online gaming gambling content as well.
  • Tavore1138
    Tavore1138
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    AlMcFly wrote: »
    Tavore1138 wrote: »
    AlMcFly wrote: »
    Tavore1138 wrote: »
    Arthg wrote: »
    No surprise the strong support a system that crushes the weak and leave the strong unharmed - comforting them in their knowledge of their strength.

    There used to be a time when you could do business without preying on the weak and flattering the lowest instincts.
    Just making decent, honest $$.

    Now it's all about turning people into addicts, preferably from a young age onwards.
    To endorse such predatory behaviour - shame, really.

    People turn themselves into gaming addicts by not thinking things through. Your line of thinking absolves anyone from any sort of personal responsibility. Just blame someone else or an "evil corporation" when you make unwise choices.

    There's a pretty large body of study that supports addiction not being something that can be simply or easily controlled by those who are most susceptible to it.

    Levels of "susceptibility" shouldn't be under question. It's irrefutable that there are those more susceptible to addiction than others, simply due to their biology.

    The real question is who gets the blame. Corporations utilizing these tactics, in my opinion, are not to blame. Corporations would not use these tactics if their efficacy did not already exist. Attacking corporate tactics is just applying a bandaide on a gaping wound.

    Society as a whole may be to blame a little. Honestly though, I put full blame on Parents, and the modern family, for not properly shielding and preparing their children for these influences in the world. The modern parent constantly seeks to shirk their parenting duties onto society and big business. If you want strong children, you need to ensure your children are raised to be strong. Being an absentee parent, then blaming society for their failure offspring, is terribly common practice today.

    I suppose then we are into the whole nature vs. nurture question - is that addictive personality something that good parenting can cure or are some people just born with a disposition towards certain behaviour?

    FWIW I suspect the truth is that both play a part - so good teaching can get you so far but someone born with a certain makeup will always be more vulnerable than someone without ti.

    Which is why societies need to have rules that balance the right for people to do as they choose while also offering some protection to those who are vulnerable.... and why wherever that balance is found the majority will feel it needs to be moved in whatever direction they feel is correct :)

    I only slightly agree with nature vs nurture statement, but you immediately went off the rails with the rest of it. It's not society's responsibility to ensure an individual person is protected against the harms of the world. That's bordering on the concept of a welfare/nanny state mentality. Western society has accepted the burden of upholding western laws. Take the concept of the police force for example. It is NOT the responsibility of the police to ensure you are protected at all times from harm. That is an incredibly wrong interpretation of the law, and has been proven false Constitutionally by a recent Supreme Court Case:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

    Police are responsible for upholding the laws of the state, not to be your personal bodyguard. Likewise, society is not responsible for being your personal bodyguard against physical and mental dangers of the world. They are only responsible for upholding the laws of the land, ie: maintaining peace, punishing violence, ect.

    The idea that society needs to put in place protections for the individual person, to ensure they can't harm themselves by engaging in legal acts so much as to cause themselves an extreme detriment? That's juvenile, and a ridiculously fascist view of what a western state should be in control of.

    I have a horrible feeling we're veering into moderator territory but hopefully if we stay polite... anyway wall of text incoming.

    I suspect what we have here is a differing between the US view and a more Euro view of society although really they are much the same - but surely the whole point of a society is to facilitate an environment in which we can all live our lives with maximum freedom to do as we would like but also with sufficient rules/laws so that your pursuit of your desires does not trespass too far into my ability to pursue mine and vice versa. This is why rules are always going to make someone unhappy that they are being prevented from doing something even if that something is pretty horrible by accepted standards.

    Basically society very much does try to protect me from things, some of them I may not want to be protected from but it does anyway because society has deemed these things are harmful to society as a whole (not necessarily to me specifically). Society very specifically doesn't want me (or you) to be murdered not as individuals but because generally people being freely killed on a whim does not make for a stable and wealthy society - so we have a law that says 'don't murder' and severe penalties if you do it.

    Sure I don't have police guarding me night and day, thankfully we don't have that sort of state, but there is the deterrent effect of the possible punishment - so if you kill me you stand a fair chance of being caught and punished which hopefully will deter you from being enraged by this post, flying over here and doing the deed. Of course you are probably not the sort of person who would do that anyway because you have been raised in a society where it is generally accepted that murder is a criminal act.

    Not all the rules are about such clear cut things as murder obviously but the principles remain the same - laws get created because sufficient desire exists among the people or other powerful influence groups to convince law makers to write a law whether it bans murder or specific types of commercial behaviour like gamble crates - that's not fascism that's democracy.

    And just taking issue on the fascist thing because it's really quite important right now - without getting lost in specifics your nation has had some very good examples of what fascists look like recently and there ain't no two sides to it, we over here in Europe still remember that even if you don't.

    If anything you probably meant socialist which I am probably not. In Euro terms I'm probably a liberal (which does not have the weird negative connotations you guys have with the word) with a dash of fiscal conservatism.
    GM - Malazan
    Raid Leader - Hungry Wolves
    Legio Mortuum
  • vestahls
    vestahls
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Feanor wrote: »
    Runefang wrote: »
    If humans were content with what they need instead of what they want we'd still be hunting animals with sticks and living in caves.

    The question is though: Wouldn't we be happier?

    I was just gonna say...

    We'd be happier, healthier, and less whiny.
    “He is even worse than a n'wah. He is - may Vivec forgive me for uttering this word - a Hlaalu.”
    luv Abnur
    luv Rigurt
    luv Stibbons

    'ate Ayrenn
    'ate Razum-dar
    'ate Khamira

    simple as
  • tunepunk
    tunepunk
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I have nothing against gambling per say, but I don't think it fit in a game like this. Although, it's the same kind of useless RNG mechanic as everything else in game.

    Want dropped gear, invest time, and you have a "chance" to get the item you want.

    Want a crown crate item, invest money... and you have a chance to get it.

    What I don't like is that crown crate items ONLY can be obtained by joining the money lottery... I wouldn't mind wasting my time for some of the items, or even buy it directly from crown store if i had some leftover coins, but they sure not gonna get any money from me the lottery way.

    Edited by tunepunk on September 15, 2017 12:26PM
  • Inarre
    Inarre
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hanokihs wrote: »
    Has anyone actually ruined their financial situation over this game? Or are all the complainers just getting twisted on behalf of those who don't exist?

    "Kids" shouldn't be playing this game. If they do, and they get suckered, they need better parents.

    I don't personally know anyone who ruined their financial situation in THIS game, but I do know many who ruined their finances in other games. Forgive my generalization but i figure theoretical guidelines and laws would affect all games and all society so Im taking it in that direction.

    I am literally, no exaggeration, talking life savings levels of spending, 10s, sometimes 100s of thousands. I have seen the results and the spending records.

    For the average person youre totally correct, we dont need babysitting, and that level of big brother can be insulting... But you and I, so I assume, don't have gambling addiction. There ARE members of our society who can, will, and do ruin their lives by gambling and spending on games. And for that few I think it's reasonable to contemplate a solution.

    Maybe they did need better parents, that could very well be it, but guidelines, laws or limits wont hurt us, we dont spend in that realm. A spending cap for instance, we would never touch, but it would help those who for whatever reason (illness, disease, addiction, poor upbringing) cant control themselves.

    Think of it like a bartender cutting you off when you've had enough. The human race, in their best moments, look out for each other rather than criticise or condemn.

    The problem here is the games are DESIGNED to prey on people with weak self control to make a profit. It's really very sick.
  • Balamoor
    Balamoor
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ZoS is a odd company.

    Accuse them of promoting gambling addiction, create a protest group that has shamed people out of the game for saying positive things about Crown Crates.

    Get made community ambassador.

    /Boggle
  • Doctordarkspawn
    Doctordarkspawn
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Balamoor wrote: »
    ZoS is a odd company.

    Accuse them of promoting gambling addiction, create a protest group that has shamed people out of the game for saying positive things about Crown Crates.

    Get made community ambassador.

    /Boggle

    A protest group that anyone could join, had no rules or regulation, and whom the leader is in no way responsible for the actions of.

    And yet you choose to constantly bring the subject up whenever you have the ability.

    Seriously, just because people are opposed to a thing, and alot of them disagree with you, does not mean there is a conspiracy man.
    Edited by Doctordarkspawn on September 15, 2017 2:30PM
  • theamazingx
    theamazingx
    ✭✭✭✭
    I just can't believe people get this worked up over cosmetics. I understand the disdain for these systems in cardgames and shooters and the like, where you're actually gambling in-game items with an impact on gameplay, but these are small artistic flairs we're talking about here. Is there some segment of the playerbase that just sits around and looks at eachother's outfits from the perch of their crown mounts?
  • MornaBaine
    MornaBaine
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Think of it this way. That 4000 crown spider that was for sale recently had graphic assets that were already in game. The data for it was already in the game folder on your hard drive. You could see it in the game but people charged their money via a plastic card to crowns to be able to ride it themselves. Seems pretty asinine doesn't it?

    Think about the homes they sell and how much they charge. Think about the white knights who defend the behavior of buying or selling it. They have been mentally conditioned to accept the behavior.

    When you sit back and think on all of it, the way games used to be back in the 90s to what they have become, it all starts to seem sad and rather silly.

    100% with you here. I've been literally appalled by what ZOS charges for things. It's not a matter of wheter or not you can afford it. It's a matter of being ripped off for digital goods that literally cost them nothing or next to nothing in most cases. Very little of what they offer is actually unique and when it is.... the price is even more through the roof. I wonder what their artists get paid?
    PAWS (Positively Against Wrip-off Stuff) - Say No to Crown Crates!

  • parkham
    parkham
    ✭✭✭
    We're this and we love it:

    morpheus-battery2.jpg
    Edited by parkham on September 15, 2017 2:52PM

    PC-NA-EST

    - All's Faire Guild
    - Divine Crusade Guild
    - Greybeards & Gals Guild
    - Dead Citizens Guild
Sign In or Register to comment.