A compromise in the crate gambling debate

Elsonso

Easily_Lost wrote: »

I have been reading all of the posts. I have figured out many things from what I have read, it seems that the "anti Crown Crate" people want one of two things to happen 1) the government to step it and take them away or 2) ZOS to stop using them. If it is making ZOS money they will continue to have them.

Why can't people be responsible for there own actions or choices. If your talking about the kids then the parents should be responsible for there child's action.

Since you lumped me into the "anti Crown Crate people", I feel compelled to correct you. I want number 2, and am interested only in number 1 as far as it goes to raise awareness and get studios to stop counting money long enough to take a look around. I am sure there are other ways to make money, perhaps ways that are not exploiting behavioral science quite to the degree that Crown Crates are. I would like non-exploitive ways that are closer to the game that they are associated with and that work with the game to make the game a better game.

That's all I really want. I want ZOS and Bethesda to make boatloads of money, but I want it done in a way that clearly benefits ZOS, ESO, and the players much more equitably. Crown Crates are a step further removed from the game. They are essentially a game unto themselves, and they are really not an obvious path to making ESO a better game. I want ESO to become the best damn MMORPG out there, and for it to continue to be that game. Crown Crates show no promise in accomplishing that.

ChaosWotan

@Easily_Lost

Why can't people be responsible for there own actions or choices

If you study psychology and neuroscience you will not ask a naive question like that. Kahneman, for example, got the Nobel Prize after proving that economists were wrong when assuming that human beings are rational actors when doing business.

MercyKilling

No compromise. No crates. Ever.

Easily_Lost

ChaosWotan wrote: »

@Easily_Lost

Why can't people be responsible for there own actions or choices

If you study psychology and neuroscience you will not ask a naive question like that. Kahneman, for example, got the Nobel Prize after proving that economists were wrong when assuming that human beings are rational actors when doing business.

So you are telling me what ever I do I am not responsible for my actions on choices. I am so glad to hear that.

ChaosWotan

@Easily_Lost

I'm saying that it's very easy to manipulate people, as scientifically proven by experiments done by Asch, Milgram and Zimbardo for example. Billions of people on Earth have a more or less weak prefrontal cortex, correlated with insufficient impulse control. This is old news, and it has been exploited by those who use propaganda or commercials to get power or money. It's a myth that human beings are primarily rational. Study science and you will see that, unless your own ideology makes you blind to scientific evidence.

Elsonso

Easily_Lost wrote: »

ChaosWotan wrote: »

@Easily_Lost

Why can't people be responsible for there own actions or choices

If you study psychology and neuroscience you will not ask a naive question like that. Kahneman, for example, got the Nobel Prize after proving that economists were wrong when assuming that human beings are rational actors when doing business.

So you are telling me what ever I do I am not responsible for my actions on choices. I am so glad to hear that.

Let me translate for ChaosWotan: Everything you do is because you are a puppet of Sheogorath, and you are powerless to stop it.

In all seriousness... is "what ever you do" a choice that you are not responsible for? No. However, not everything you do is because you have thought it out rationally.

This last point is simply proven by watching teenagers on YouTube.

Balamoor

ChaosWotan wrote: »

@Easily_Lost

The radiant gambling system is catering to rich people (and gambling addicts). Rich people are usually very focused on status, but it's not status in a mmorpg to buy items that are inaccessible to over 99 percent of the gaming community. So why spend hundreds of dollars on radiant items that will increase the risk of making you disliked by other people in the game? That is not even in the self-interest of narcissists.

@ChaosWotan
And thank you for proving my earlier point.

You are basically saying:"I can't afford this nice thing...so I am going to go into a rage, blame an entire class of people, and campaign to get that thing taken away because I want to be spiteful, and perpetuate that buying crates will get you disliked and harassed, in the hopes that it will deter people from participating in the business model"

You can dress it up however you want....but that is what it is, and in my opinion it's is a very myopic and ignorant viewpoint, further, it shows ZoS that yes they actually do have a issue with a organized group of people that wants to play Bully to honest folks who just want to buy a few crates....and if that goes to far it is going to bite them in the rear big time.

Look at what is going on today with the new conversations we are having about harassment and how it is majorly affecting corporations and individuals....I can promise you at some point soon this industry is going to have to look at it, and they are much more likely to drop doors on Bully's, than people who just support their business model.

Honestly @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_MattFiror why isn't this being looked into?

ChaosWotan

@Balamoor

Bullying is personal attacks, which is different from passively ostracizing individuals who deliberately act in a way that has a negative effect on the rest of a community. All communities have social codes and moral rules. If you break them, you will get a negative reaction.

For example, if you are a soldier arriving at a new military base in a Lamborghini and flash your super-expensive personal items, don't expect that all people will like you. Or if you violate the net etiquette of the ESO forum, expect censorship and eventual expulsion from the discussion forum, like you, for instance, asking Gina to react now because you feel "bullied". Or @Slick_007 ignoring my replies to him in this thread. You and him are free to do that, and that is totally fine, but freedom goes both ways. If I don't like the behaviour of somebody, for example a noob in a vet dungeon that keeps writing vulgar stuff in group chat instead of fighting, then I am free to leave the group. Similarly, if somebody don't like me in a group, they can kick me. That's just the way it is when a group or a community is divided by a conflict. Shame on ESO for having created this conflict in the first place.

The jealousy argument is a straw man and a cliche often used by rich people to conviently dismiss criticism. If I want to, I can get myself a radiant mount, but I'm principally opposed to any mmorpg that forces people to spend $200 or more if they want to aqcuire the coolest rpg items in the game. It excludes 99 percent of the gaming community. Secondly, I'm in principle opposed to any game that makes progress in the game dependent on ouside factors that are not game-related, like your skin colour or economic status for instance.

Raideen

Slick_007 wrote: »

i never suggested otherwise. what i suggested is there would be different teams to work on different projects, therefore the people working on crown crates may have absolutely nothing to do with expansions, therefore no resources would be missing from those projects. Unless ZOS chimes in here, we will never know. but its possible.

Actually that is exactly what you suggested when you said "this is laughable. loot crates would be extremely easy to maintain and update and would take so few resources away from doing other things, if any. ".
I don't think you have any knowledge of how design works, or how companies are structured based on your commentary.

Slick_007 wrote: »

there are a number of items in there which are identical except for colour. People on these forums have noted it too. Sure, there is effort required in changing those, and creating new items, but the overall difficulty compared to bringing out a new expansion is nowhere near on the same scale. Therefore it is relatively easy compared to the other jobs. These people do a great job, and im sure with greater difficulty comes greater resources too.

The point is that ZoS has a fixed amount of resources, all companies do. Using resources to work on loot crates is resources taken away from other projects. Any money spent on loot crates can be diverted to content, bugs and cranking stuff out faster. That is not debatable.

Slick_007 wrote: »

because vegas cant add cards to the deck. if eso were using a deck of cards and could simple add a card, you might have a point. but you're comparing two totally different systems and trying to claim they are the same, but one system owner is cheating. you cant do that.

The "system" is irrelevant in the argument of gambling. All that needs to be understood is that the "ethical" systems can not be doctored to further favor the house, the "unethical" systems are the ones that CAN be doctored, like the loot crate drop chance.

Slick_007 wrote: »

lets make this absolutely clear: IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SUB IN ORDER TO CRAFT. No matter how you wanna spin this, it is not necessary. no way, no how. the only way you can make a claim that it is, is to lie.

Not subbing to craft is like saying I can get to new York from los angeles by walking. Possible yes, practical...absolutely not.

Lets make this absolutely clear: IT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO SUB IN ORDER TO CRAFT. No matter how you want to spin this, it is absolutely necessary. The only way you can make your claim is to have zero understanding of how crafting works in game.
CAN a player PHSYICALLY craft in game without a sub? Yes.
CAN a player have all crafting professions in the game and be able to manage the 300+ crafting materials on character. No, its physically impossible. The bag space does not exist in game for a player to hold all crafting mats, various treasure maps collected daily, food, potions, gear, trash loot and regular loot from daily activities.

The infinite bag slot is NECESSARY for any player who wants to play the game to its fullest. That is not debatable, and in FACT the number one cited reason for people saying why one should sub, is for the crafting bag slot.

Slick_007 wrote: »

you are the one accusing them of being cheats. Produce your evidence.

I am not accusing them, it's a fact based on the player collected data that is accessible on these very forums.
Facts are not accusations, facts are facts.

Slick_007 wrote: »

It is a phrase meaning show your evidence, or be quiet and stop making claims you cant back up. That is not harassment. Unless of course you mean your claims against ZOS.

No, its flame bait and harassment. You reported me for saying less. Hypocrite much?

Slick_007 wrote: »

its not upto me to research your argument for you. Its upto you to back up your claims. which you seem unwilling to do. My guess is you cant. You know, I cant back it up with empirical evidence.

I never decided to collect the data over the past 5 years so that I could prove my observation. It does not mean that what I have observed is untrue. In fact, when the SHTF and companies are going to have to start revealing numbers in a court of law, I will be sure to come back here and post that information to prove my point. Every MMORPG that has gone the loot crate route has lost the large player base they once had. This is observable through servers being merged/shut down. Though friends lists going dry all while at the same time the companies focus more and more on loot boxes as a cash grab before the whales dry up. There are not enough whales to keep MMORPG's alive, and when their friends list is empty, and end game raiding guilds become nonexistent and the whales have no one to show off to, they too will leave the game and then BAM its lights out.

Slick_007 wrote: »

You made a false statement, knowing its false. Subs are not required to be able to craft. You even said so in the same post. See further down where i quote that part.
dictionary.com: Lie: to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly

I did not make a false statement, not in the big picture (how people ACTUALLY play the game). FACT is, one must have the sub in order to craft efficiently on one character who crafts with all crafts. The craft bag is also the number one cited reason for people to get ESO+. Most conversations I see in zone chat about people asking about ESO+ starts with the crafting bag.

Slick_007 wrote: »

200 bag space +240 bank space, unsubbed = 440. you say you have "over" 270. that leaves you with upto 170 bag spaces for other items.

Very few people have bags maxed out, ZoS themselves said this. Why? The cost. The cost to expand the bank and player inventory with in game gold is prohibitive until a player reaches max level and end game content. THEN they make enough gold to purchase these things, and even then they do not. So the max about of bag space is a pointless argument when the bag space itself is tied to the cash shop.

Slick_007 wrote: »

So, your point is that you CAN craft without a sub, its just more convenient with a sub. Which is what i said. Here you are saying i was right all along, in the same post that you claim im not.

Starter players who focus on all crafting, who have no reached end game (and therefore do not have the gold for bag space), who are still searching for a crafting guild that has a kiosk in a place that actually sells, must absolutely sub just to get the free crafting bag slots. They will have to throw out inventory, or crafting materials. They can not possibly hold all of it.
That is a fact.

Slick_007 wrote: »

but it was perfectly fine before loot crates. Pay for it again? you havent paid the first time for whats in the crates. Like many current games, you pay for the base game, and if you want stuff like season passes, dlc, special items, you gotta buy em. They are not included in the base game. By your argument, morrowind should be free. That isnt how ESO is setup, nor many other games. even your beloved world of warcraft which you played for 13yrs and somehow still didnt realise this.

I did not play before loot crates. I have played the game for about 7 weeks (roughly).
World of Warcraft required an initial purchase and 15 dollars a month to access 99/9999999999% of the content (they have a very very small amount of cash shop items). To play a new expansion which is a whole new, large continent cost an expansion purchase and the current monthly sub. The expansions all offer a minimum of three LARGE content updates that in and of themselves are larger than many of the ZOS "expansions". Blizzard simply offers a LOT more for the money than ZoS. That is not even slightly debatable.
In Wow, 99.9999999% of outfits, of mounts, of in game pets are all had within the game.
The average cost to play wow over the course over 1.5 years is about $320.00. A person can spend that in 1 month in ESO trying to get an in game mount. A similar tier mount in wow will be had by farming a dungeon or pvp, or raid for the price of the monthly sub.

I am sorry you missed all of that.

Slick_007 wrote: »

what? what? i swear you arent even taking this seriously anymore. tripled charged?
ESO is not any other game. Apparently you were quite happy with it before crates. You can still enjoy the game that way that you were apparently so happy with. standards set over 15yrs ago? Times change buddy. Learn to deal with it. This is the new standard, and hell, ESO wasnt even the first to do it this way.
im a long term sub on ESO, and i dont even think we should get this access that you demand.

I have played esp for about 8 weeks, loot crates have always been a part of this game for as long as I have played it. And in that very very very short period of time I have seen people complain about the practice in game, on the forums, on game websites, with people I have talked to IRL who ONCE played eso.

As far as times changing and loot boxes being the new standard. I don't think so, the consumer will win in the end.

Raideen

Balamoor wrote: »

ChaosWotan wrote: »

@Easily_Lost

The radiant gambling system is catering to rich people (and gambling addicts). Rich people are usually very focused on status, but it's not status in a mmorpg to buy items that are inaccessible to over 99 percent of the gaming community. So why spend hundreds of dollars on radiant items that will increase the risk of making you disliked by other people in the game? That is not even in the self-interest of narcissists.

@ChaosWotan
And thank you for proving my earlier point.

You are basically saying:"I can't afford this nice thing...so I am going to go into a rage, blame an entire class of people, and campaign to get that thing taken away because I want to be spiteful, and perpetuate that buying crates will get you disliked and harassed, in the hopes that it will deter people from participating in the business model"

You can dress it up however you want....but that is what it is, and in my opinion it's is a very myopic and ignorant viewpoint, further, it shows ZoS that yes they actually do have a issue with a organized group of people that wants to play Bully to honest folks who just want to buy a few crates....and if that goes to far it is going to bite them in the rear big time.

Look at what is going on today with the new conversations we are having about harassment and how it is majorly affecting corporations and individuals....I can promise you at some point soon this industry is going to have to look at it, and they are much more likely to drop doors on Bully's, than people who just support their business model.

Honestly @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_MattFiror why isn't this being looked into?

The fact that you think this is all about people crying because they cant get what "the rich" can, just shows how little you actually comprehend about this debate.

Secondly, who actually cares about your opinion. You self expressed that you are a game dev. That shows blatant bias in favor of loot crates for your own benefit. The thing is, your opinions don't matter. Only the opinions of the customer who pays your salary matter. And we will make sure this unethical practice is put to rest.

ChaosWotan

@Raideen

Balamoor's background and personal identity are actually irrelevant, because arguments stand or fall on their own. Ad hominem arguments are not scientific, and will only confirm @Balamoor's fear and perception of us being "bullies".

There is no need to escalate this "storm in a tea cup". The pro- and anti-gambling groups should just go our separate ways and play ESO independently of each other. Because if anyone does anything active to harass him or his friends, I will automatically take his side against the bullies, since mobbing an individual is obviously more unethical than supporting a shady gambling system. One unethical act doesn't justify behaviour that is even worse.

After learning more about how gaming conflicts can get out of control, I recognize that Balamoor has a point, in this regard, so let's keep it civilized and fair, respecting the dignity of an opponent despite strongly disagreeing with his or her arguments.

Cadbury

I find that alot of the issues brought up regarding ESO on the forums become lost to the void once everyone starts pointing fingers at each other. Those in the middle can only shake their heads in aghast as both sides attempt to standoff against the other. In the end, nobody wins. Of course, this is not an isolated occurrence and is more of an example of human nature at work. But It still personally intrigues me to watch it happen.

ChaosWotan

@Raideen

Everyone is biased. A common bias is to think that one is less biased than other people, cf. research done by Keith Stanovich and Philip Tetlock for instance. So we can claim that @Balamoor is biased because he seems connected to the rich, but it's equally easy for him to claim that we are biased since it appears like we are connected to the non-rich. Bias accusations can in some cases be scientifically relevant, but usually it leads nowhere, except endless mud throwing, which seems to be a hobby cherised by many people in online discussion forums.

@Cadbury

Basically nobody can win debates like the one we have here. Unlike genocide, slavery and torture, as defined by international law, there is no universal agreement between almost all modern cultures that gambling is unethical. Consequently, a supporter of libertarian ethics will just laugh at us in the anti-gambling group.

A real scientist will actually be an agnostic in all debates about ethics, while trying to accurately describe different moral perspectives supported by different people. Scientifically one must always be willing to change one's mind if facts and the better arguments demand it. And not dismiss a viewpoint just because one doesn't like it initially. Libertarian philosophers or anarcho-capitalists, like Robert Nozick and David Friedman for example, argue on a sophisticated and often fascinating level. And even if one dislikes the super-rich one should keep in mind that self-made millionaires are usually very smart (combined with luck), and smart people often have good arguments too.

Back to our main topic, here is a new aspect of the conflict not discussed (clearly) so far: in our world today, especially in the US, it might actually be a safety issue when selling gambling products to a gaming community where it is known that some people struggle with serious psychiatric and financial problems. @Balamoor has already hinted at this issue in his earlier posts, it seems. If one has reason to believe that this is a real concern, one may question whether it is responsible to make gambling products easily accessible to unstable individuals.

Balamoor

I think I have made my points.....the fact that I was once a dev has nothing to do with it, what we are witnessing here is the ostracizing of people based on class and buying habits,(which is just as bad as any other form of harassment) justification of bullying even with the caveat of it being passive (how can you gauge what is deemed passiveness? It's ludicrous ) and the pledge to continue the behavior.


I think that is all any reasonable game developer needs to alter their forum and in game policies, I have shown this thread to friends I have at Polygon and Massively and despite both of them being anti loot crate they can't believe the bold faced bias and harassment that is occurring...one said that the CM's must be asleep at the switch and the other is thinking about a article on the dark side of being against these types of transactions.

Things like this is why our community has a terrible reputation, and that won't change unless the CM's takes steps to change it.

[Edit to remove bait]

ChaosWotan

Amusing read, Balamoor. Btw, did you see my thread "Unrealistic to stop increasing monetization" in the general section of this forum?

Pops_ND_Irish

I think crates are fun.
Havent bought any in a while, but havent chose too.
No gambling involved, just choice

Raideen

MoTeets wrote: »

I think crates are fun.
Havent bought any in a while, but havent chose too.
No gambling involved, just choice

Did you choose to get the item in the crate? I can answer that. No. Its gambling and thankfully people are moving forward to have the government look into this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WxcGYvvgJo

Balamoor

Raideen wrote: »

MoTeets wrote: »

I think crates are fun.
Havent bought any in a while, but havent chose too.
No gambling involved, just choice

Did you choose to get the item in the crate? I can answer that. No. Its gambling and thankfully people are moving forward to have the government look into this.

That really is opinion,nothing more and looking into a thing and changing a thing are light years apart....even if they do drastic changes you are looking at five to ten years after all the appeals, a lot of crates can be purchased in that time, heck by the time these governments achieve their moral imperative......it just may not matter any more.

Malakor

I have no issue with Crates, one way or the other; I buy one or two every now and then just for the heck of it. Things I don't use, I will trade in for Gems, to use when I have enough to purchase something that interests me, which will not be a mount; even if they were only 2 gems; I seldom use the mounts I have and when I do, it's the Imperial Horse I got for buying the game when it first came out, or the black with white mane that I got from somewhere (might have even been a crate, don't remember).

I have a camel as well, but as with real life camels, watching the bloody thing run hurts my head. At least these don't try to bite you or spit at you.

The only thing that I personally wish they would change, and I mention this because obviously the Mods are reading the thread; is that things like costumes, tattoos and the like would be able to be traded in. I have two or three lovely dresses; but all of my characters are male and they just don't fit in a way I find flattering

Raideen

Balamoor wrote: »

That really is opinion, nothing more

Incorrect. If someone does not have a choice with the loot obtained from a crate, its gambling.
"GAMBLE - take risky action in the hope of a desired result"

Balamoor wrote: »

and looking into a thing and changing a thing are light years apart....even if they do drastic changes you are looking at five to ten years after all the appeals, a lot of crates can be purchased in that time, heck by the time these governments achieve their moral imperative......it just may not matter any more.

It wont take that long, I don't think you understand how many people are against this. EVEN if you are right and it takes the government this long, it will not take long for parents to start restricting their children from playing these games. The gaming industry would be wise to start making changes today, at least the smart ones will.

Balamoor

Raideen wrote: »

Balamoor wrote: »

That really is opinion, nothing more

Incorrect. If someone does not have a choice with the loot obtained from a crate, its gambling.
"GAMBLE - take risky action in the hope of a desired result"

Balamoor wrote: »

and looking into a thing and changing a thing are light years apart....even if they do drastic changes you are looking at five to ten years after all the appeals, a lot of crates can be purchased in that time, heck by the time these governments achieve their moral imperative......it just may not matter any more.

It wont take that long, I don't think you understand how many people are against this. EVEN if you are right and it takes the government this long, it will not take long for parents to start restricting their children from playing these games. The gaming industry would be wise to start making changes today, at least the smart ones will.

That is just one interpretation of Gambling my sig has another....what will the courts decide? No one knows yet.

And honestly....parents should restrict their kids, this game doesn't have a E or even a T rating it has a M rating, so parents please be parents and not let Jr buy that Crown Crate... also many people are against a lot of things that has been in the courts for decades.....the number of people that wants something sadly means jack, ask any occupied nation what they would like and if they have gotten it if you don't believe me.

Like it or not a metric crap ton of crates are going to be sold between now and whatever happens.....and it seems that more and more people are getting less tolerant of the moral crusade, So I want to wish you good luck with the revolution, and I do mean that sincerely as I just don't see much coming form all this angst.

Now if you'll excuse me it's raid night and my guildies want to open some crates afterwards

Raideen

Balamoor wrote: »

That is just one interpretation of Gambling my sig has another....what will the courts decide? No one knows yet.

One version or thirty versions, it's still a definition of gambling and it fits to a "T".

Balamoor wrote: »

Like it or not a metric crap ton of crates are going to be sold between now and whatever happens.....and it seems that more and more people are getting less tolerant of the moral crusade.

So good luck with the revolution, and I mean that sincerely as I don't see much coming form all this angst.

1. Its not angst, its concern for people and the industry as a whole. Loot crates are short lived, mark my words. You misrepresent our intent every. single. time. you post. You are incorrect, again.
2. I have no focus on how many loot crates are going to be sold, frankly the more the merrier because the more people get ripped off, the more they will get upset and P.O'd, which only accelerates this movement.

Pops_ND_Irish

Raideen wrote: »

MoTeets wrote: »

I think crates are fun.
Havent bought any in a while, but havent chose too.
No gambling involved, just choice

Did you choose to get the item in the crate? I can answer that. No. Its gambling and thankfully people are moving forward to have the government look into this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WxcGYvvgJo

Hehe misquided ! Nobody is forcing you to buy !

Hokiewa

Raideen wrote: »

Balamoor wrote: »

That is just one interpretation of Gambling my sig has another....what will the courts decide? No one knows yet.

One version or thirty versions, it's still a definition of gambling and it fits to a "T".

Balamoor wrote: »

Like it or not a metric crap ton of crates are going to be sold between now and whatever happens.....and it seems that more and more people are getting less tolerant of the moral crusade.

So good luck with the revolution, and I mean that sincerely as I don't see much coming form all this angst.

1. Its not angst, its concern for people and the industry as a whole. Loot crates are short lived, mark my words. You misrepresent our intent every. single. time. you post. You are incorrect, again.
2. I have no focus on how many loot crates are going to be sold, frankly the more the merrier because the more people get ripped off, the more they will get upset and P.O'd, which only accelerates this movement.

I would bet you on the "short lived" part but you don't gamble.........Every country that has previously outlawed loot boxes, bags, crates whatever you want to call them, has had them replaced with a virtually identical system. So no, it's not remotely a guarantee that it will happen.

It's amusing when you keep talking about absolutes when again, it's just your opinion and your own personal feelings.

coop500

Someone close this thread please

Raideen

Hokiewa wrote: »

Raideen wrote: »

Balamoor wrote: »

That is just one interpretation of Gambling my sig has another....what will the courts decide? No one knows yet.

One version or thirty versions, it's still a definition of gambling and it fits to a "T".

Balamoor wrote: »

Like it or not a metric crap ton of crates are going to be sold between now and whatever happens.....and it seems that more and more people are getting less tolerant of the moral crusade.

So good luck with the revolution, and I mean that sincerely as I don't see much coming form all this angst.

1. Its not angst, its concern for people and the industry as a whole. Loot crates are short lived, mark my words. You misrepresent our intent every. single. time. you post. You are incorrect, again.
2. I have no focus on how many loot crates are going to be sold, frankly the more the merrier because the more people get ripped off, the more they will get upset and P.O'd, which only accelerates this movement.

I would bet you on the "short lived" part but you don't gamble.........Every country that has previously outlawed loot boxes, bags, crates whatever you want to call them, has had them replaced with a virtually identical system. So no, it's not remotely a guarantee that it will happen.

It's amusing when you keep talking about absolutes when again, it's just your opinion and your own personal feelings.

Gambling under the definition I posted IS an absolute, there is no debating that. You are not authorized to rewrite the definition of a word.

Raideen

MoTeets wrote: »

Raideen wrote: »

MoTeets wrote: »

I think crates are fun.
Havent bought any in a while, but havent chose too.
No gambling involved, just choice

Did you choose to get the item in the crate? I can answer that. No. Its gambling and thankfully people are moving forward to have the government look into this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WxcGYvvgJo

Hehe misquided ! Nobody is forcing you to buy !

Thank you for the bump!

Hokiewa

Raideen wrote: »

Hokiewa wrote: »

Raideen wrote: »

Balamoor wrote: »

That is just one interpretation of Gambling my sig has another....what will the courts decide? No one knows yet.

One version or thirty versions, it's still a definition of gambling and it fits to a "T".

Balamoor wrote: »

Like it or not a metric crap ton of crates are going to be sold between now and whatever happens.....and it seems that more and more people are getting less tolerant of the moral crusade.

So good luck with the revolution, and I mean that sincerely as I don't see much coming form all this angst.

1. Its not angst, its concern for people and the industry as a whole. Loot crates are short lived, mark my words. You misrepresent our intent every. single. time. you post. You are incorrect, again.
2. I have no focus on how many loot crates are going to be sold, frankly the more the merrier because the more people get ripped off, the more they will get upset and P.O'd, which only accelerates this movement.

I would bet you on the "short lived" part but you don't gamble.........Every country that has previously outlawed loot boxes, bags, crates whatever you want to call them, has had them replaced with a virtually identical system. So no, it's not remotely a guarantee that it will happen.

It's amusing when you keep talking about absolutes when again, it's just your opinion and your own personal feelings.

Gambling under the definition I posted IS an absolute, there is no debating that. You are not authorized to rewrite the definition of a word.

The absolutes I'm referring to were referenced in my rebuttal. I'm sorry you didn't understand that. To spell it out, you speak in absolutes about "crown crates being short lived, mark my words" is not based upon any existing facts. It is again, your opinion, not an absolute. I suggest a little more time thinking and actually reading what others say instead of the instant internet rage/flash of red you've seemingly become accustomed to. Paws....cute...but irrelevant.