See ya later crown crates!

Zelos

Good fuckk crown crates and lootbox crapp. Maybe now zos will try fixing the game and not spending all resources in the crown store:)

Jayman1000

Glurin wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

AlboMalefica wrote: »

I do understand how everyone has varied opinions regarding crown crates. I also do agree it is gambling but for a game that’s rated 18 (for Europe which is also the legal age for gambling) & anything worth while in the crate is purely cosmetic, would someone be kind enough to explain what’s exactly wrong with Zos crown crates?

I do get how the odds are not great for the best things but are we not all adults with a good understanding on how these things work so no one should be shocked to the low odds

You are basically asking "what's so wrong about gambling?". Well, you may have heard of gambling addicts and being addicted to gambling and the causes... so there's a problem right there. I hope you agree with this premise at least.

The premise that gambling addicts exist, sure. But to put it bluntly, that's not my problem and it's not the government's either. That's something that is 100% an individual responsibility. The possibility that someone might get psychologically addicted to something is no reason to ban whatever it is.

The problem with loot boxes is not the loot boxes or the fact that companies make money from them. ("Lootboxes are a 50 billion dollar industry!" So? Profits are not a bad thing.) The problem is when they go from being an optional side bonus to P2W.

I don't know why some people around here get so worked up about crown crates. Crown crates are NOT what this whole kerfuffle is about. Or at least, what it should be about. I think people have a tendency to forget that this all blew up because EA went a step too far in their well known practice of locking progress behind loot box paywalls. Not that there weren't other companies pulling similar shenanigans of course, but EA is at the heart of it all and Battlefront 2 was the catalyst.

There's also the issue of what loot boxes will be replaced with if the zealots manage to get them banned outright. I can easily see them all cheering their victory right up until they realize there is now a whole lot of required $20+ monthly subscriptions out there and a 100% increase in price on everything in the in game stores. Not to mention an increase in the initial purchase prices.

I kinda feared we would reach the point where the discussion would morph into: is gambling a problem in society? Clearly you don't think, or you don't care cause it does not affect you. So if we cannot agree on the premise that gambling is problematic, then this whole crown crate lootbox gambling debate is pointless, so there is no reason to continue it here. Here we should really separate the discussion and take that part about gambling in general to a completely different forum that concerns itself about gambling in general and whether it is harmful or not, and whether the society should implement laws to regulate it. The premise of this thread is that gambling laws exists (and for a good reason), that gaming companies are circumventing them, and that now regulators are beginning to close in on the problem because the industry can't figure out how to regulate themselves (benjamin franklin often has that effect on business people...).




Also finally, Im not advocating outright banning lootboxes. I think they need to be re-invented in a smarter and MUCH less gambly way. I have mentioned my suggestion for that twice in this thread.

Jayman1000

Sylvermynx wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

AlboMalefica wrote: »

I do understand how everyone has varied opinions regarding crown crates. I also do agree it is gambling but for a game that’s rated 18 (for Europe which is also the legal age for gambling) & anything worth while in the crate is purely cosmetic, would someone be kind enough to explain what’s exactly wrong with Zos crown crates?

I do get how the odds are not great for the best things but are we not all adults with a good understanding on how these things work so no one should be shocked to the low odds

You are basically asking "what's so wrong about gambling?". Well, you may have heard of gambling addicts and being addicted to gambling and the causes... so there's a problem right there. I hope you agree with this premise at least.

The premise that gambling addicts exist, sure. But to put it bluntly, that's not my problem and it's not the government's either. That's something that is 100% an individual responsibility. The possibility that someone might get psychologically addicted to something is no reason to ban whatever it is.

The problem with loot boxes is not the loot boxes or the fact that companies make money from them. ("Lootboxes are a 50 billion dollar industry!" So? Profits are not a bad thing.) The problem is when they go from being an optional side bonus to P2W.

I don't know why some people around here get so worked up about crown crates. Crown crates are NOT what this whole kerfuffle is about. Or at least, what it should be about. I think people have a tendency to forget that this all blew up because EA went a step too far in their well known practice of locking progress behind loot box paywalls. Not that there weren't other companies pulling similar shenanigans of course, but EA is at the heart of it all and Battlefront 2 was the catalyst.

There's also the issue of what loot boxes will be replaced with if the zealots manage to get them banned outright. I can easily see them all cheering their victory right up until they realize there is now a whole lot of required $20+ monthly subscriptions out there and a 100% increase in price on everything in the in game stores. Not to mention an increase in the initial purchase prices.

My guess is that those who are worked up over it are borderline if not outright addicts. As in - they KNOW they have a problem, but as long as it's just "crown crates" they think they're fine.

*shrug* Don't know, don't care. It's up to each person to decide whether to buy or not.

As for P2W landing.... I'd be gone right then. I don't do it. I won't do it. It's not fun. It's actually really ugly. As far as subs.... well, I've paid my way in all the games I've played so far: WoW, RIFT, ESO. That's not going to change - unless the servers go dark.

As you say that is just a guess, I think you are far from the truth though. Also just a guess of course. Personally I find the discussion very interesting and Im against gaming companies implementing these quite clearly gambling mechanics for real cash in their games. Im not addicted to gambling though, I dont even gamble ever, mainly because I don't find it very interesting. Perhaps because that is because I know how silly low the chances usually are and how much cash the people behind are raking in on it (which of course is something that is closely tied to the low chances). I think I bought a lottery ticket a year ago with my kids so we could have some fun out of that.

Duukar

The FTC specifically mentions, in 00:31-00:43 of the video I posted, exactly what Crown Crates are.

"Real currency spent for surprise winnings"

Watch the 00:31-00:43 of the video and weep!

It doesnt matter what the rules WERE.. They are about to change.

I for one welcome the change! Crown Crates were gross when they released them and they continue to be gross today..

I love getting one or two free ones a month and marvel at how garbage most of the rewards i get are.. Then i got a nice bear mount.... Ohhhhhhh

Elsonso

Duukar wrote: »

It doesnt matter what the rules WERE.. They are about to change.

Maybe. As it is, I doubt it will quite go that far.

Iselin

As much as I would love to see loot boxes disappear from gaming, this is the US trade commission we're talking about here. I'm 99% sure the outcome, if there's ever an outcome, will be some "new and improved" label for games with loot boxes.

Jayman1000

Iselin wrote: »

As much as I would love to see loot boxes disappear from gaming, this is the US trade commission we're talking about here. I'm 99% sure the outcome, if there's ever an outcome, will be some "new and improved" label for games with loot boxes.

Meanwhile in Europe... https://nordic.businessinsider.com/loot-boxes-european-regulation-2018-9?r=US&IR=T

Iselin

Jayman1000 wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

As much as I would love to see loot boxes disappear from gaming, this is the US trade commission we're talking about here. I'm 99% sure the outcome, if there's ever an outcome, will be some "new and improved" label for games with loot boxes.

Meanwhile in Europe... https://nordic.businessinsider.com/loot-boxes-european-regulation-2018-9?r=US&IR=T

Yeah I know. A lot of those countries also have free health care and prescriptions. The US is... different

Glurin

Iselin wrote: »

As much as I would love to see loot boxes disappear from gaming, this is the US trade commission we're talking about here. I'm 99% sure the outcome, if there's ever an outcome, will be some "new and improved" label for games with loot boxes.

Or this will just end with a new tax on loot boxes. Which translates to an increase in crown crate prices, but otherwise no effect on any loot boxes whether they are exploitative or not.

Glurin

This might be of interest to some of you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTLFNlu2N_M

jircris11

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

I buy crown crates, I'm 100% against shaming people who do buy crates, but that being said I'd rather see lootboxes removed. They are gambling and thus gambling laws should apply to them.

I think microtransactions from the crown store are the best way for ZOS to keep this game profitable and thus running. Loot boxes are unnecessary.

I rather the old day where your just paid for the item you want, not some mystery box lol

Glurin

jircris11 wrote: »

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

I buy crown crates, I'm 100% against shaming people who do buy crates, but that being said I'd rather see lootboxes removed. They are gambling and thus gambling laws should apply to them.

I think microtransactions from the crown store are the best way for ZOS to keep this game profitable and thus running. Loot boxes are unnecessary.

I rather the old day where your just paid for the item you want, not some mystery box lol

And there's nothing particularly wrong with that, but there's also nothing wrong with the concept of mystery boxes either. In many ways, they're kind of like getting a random thank you prize for donating to a company you like in order to fund a product you enjoy. Even if you don't like mystery boxes, they are at least tolerable in this function.

Where you run into problems is when these random prizes start having a real, objective impact on the player's ability to play and enjoy the game.

magikarper

Acrolas wrote: »

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

The problem is that you are using the argument of authority which only works if every party accepts said authority.

I sure as hell don't accept the ESA as an authority...

The ESA statement is based upon established legislature. To legally be gambling it has to utilize real monetary value and there has to be an element of risk. Crowns have no monetary value. The itemized crown values of the rewards always exceeds the 400 crowns spent.

As far as, "receive something that enhances their experience" most non-consumables in the crates are not only collectibles, but they have included text that supports or references lore. Whether you like the item is subjective. The item exists as an extension of the game world you're already demonstrating an interest in.

And Bethesda is an ESA member, so what the ESA says is the attitude this game is going to adopt. You're effectively rejecting Bethesda by rejecting the ESA.

Laws change as society evolves. I look forward to the day when loot boxes (e.g., Crown Crates) are made illegal.

Glurin

magikarper wrote: »

Acrolas wrote: »

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

The problem is that you are using the argument of authority which only works if every party accepts said authority.

I sure as hell don't accept the ESA as an authority...

The ESA statement is based upon established legislature. To legally be gambling it has to utilize real monetary value and there has to be an element of risk. Crowns have no monetary value. The itemized crown values of the rewards always exceeds the 400 crowns spent.

As far as, "receive something that enhances their experience" most non-consumables in the crates are not only collectibles, but they have included text that supports or references lore. Whether you like the item is subjective. The item exists as an extension of the game world you're already demonstrating an interest in.

And Bethesda is an ESA member, so what the ESA says is the attitude this game is going to adopt. You're effectively rejecting Bethesda by rejecting the ESA.

Laws change as society evolves.

And more often than people are willing to admit, not for the better.

Sylvermynx

The actual divide here is those who have had a very positive result with crates (me) versus those who have had the opposite at least in their minds.

Glurin wrote: »

jircris11 wrote: »

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

I buy crown crates, I'm 100% against shaming people who do buy crates, but that being said I'd rather see lootboxes removed. They are gambling and thus gambling laws should apply to them.

I think microtransactions from the crown store are the best way for ZOS to keep this game profitable and thus running. Loot boxes are unnecessary.

I rather the old day where your just paid for the item you want, not some mystery box lol

And there's nothing particularly wrong with that, but there's also nothing wrong with the concept of mystery boxes either. In many ways, they're kind of like getting a random thank you prize for donating to a company you like in order to fund a product you enjoy. Even if you don't like mystery boxes, they are at least tolerable in this function.

Where you run into problems is when these random prizes start having a real, objective impact on the player's ability to play and enjoy the game.

You don't have that unless it turns into P2W merchandise.

Hvzeda

Juju_beans wrote: »

Duukar wrote: »

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

I buy crown crates, I'm 100% against shaming people who do buy crates, but that being said I'd rather see lootboxes removed. They are gambling and thus gambling laws should apply to them.

I think microtransactions from the crown store are the best way for ZOS to keep this game profitable and thus running. Loot boxes are unnecessary.

You do understand that Crown Crates are loot boxes right??

No one is shaming you, and adult, for doing what you want with your money. However, gambling for those under age is illegal.

Every time you buy a Crown Crate you are gambling. 100% no debate.

ESO is rated M..17+

FWIW many US states have no min age to buy a lottery ticket.
How come folks aren't outraged at that...the state allowing under age to gamble with lottery tickets.

Only 8 states have no minimal age to buy a lottery ticket. One state has the age at 19 and three at 21. The rest (including DC, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Island) has 18 the minimal age.

kargen27

Jayman1000 wrote: »

tactx wrote: »

Crown crates aren't gambling. You're always getting something for your money. Costumes, gems, exp scrolls, etc. It's only gambling if you're trying to win the lottery with a radiant mount instead of treating it as a bonus chance.

I often use crown crates to get what I'm after cheaper than buying the item directly from the store so I really like having them.... Oh and bring back storm atronach crates. Thanks!

It is gambling when you pay a set amount of cash don't know what you get. Gambling is not just defined by the possibly of not winning, but you seem to think that this is the case. It is not.

Gambling is usually legally defined as staking something of value upon the outcome of a competition, contest or chance that is not under his or her influence (it does NOT need to be like a lottery where you have a risk of winning nothing). Crown crates sure as hell seems like it falls under this definition. You are staking crowns bought for real money to get an chance controlled random outcome and you have no control or influence over said outcome. That is gambling. The way companies like Zenimax Online get around this is by claiming that virtual currencies, like crowns, does not hold real lfe value (thus players are technically not "staking something of (real life/actual) value") as it is a virtual currency as opposed to real life cash. So legally they seem to have found a loophole to circumvent gambling laws, but there is no doubt that crown crates is indeed gambling. They just found a loophole that seemingly makes them circumvent the gambling laws.

Gotta disagree. You can get gum packs with baseball cards in them. You know you will get a certain number of cards but not what cards. Same with crown crates. You are purchasing four (sometimes five) items when you purchase a crown crate. Stores (retail and online) have mystery boxes you can buy. Again you know you are getting something just don't know exactly what. Auctions that have you bidding on lots work the same way. You can see some containers but don't know what is inside. None of those examples are considered gambling under current laws and if you change the laws for one you gotta change it across the board.

I'm not a fan of crown crates because I do believe they take advantage of human nature but they are not gambling. Maybe addictive though. There was a study done a few years back that showed people preferred playing slot machines that had lots of blinking lights, bells and whistles rather than slot machines with no commotion and larger more frequent payouts. Games especially ones like Candy Crush are designed around this behavior. If different colored fireworks shot off behind Pacrooti each time you click on a card they would probably sell a lot more crates.

Alpheu5

kargen27 wrote: »

If different colored fireworks shot off behind Pacrooti each time you click on a card they would probably sell a lot more crates.

Don't give them ideas.

Jayman1000

kargen27 wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

tactx wrote: »

Crown crates aren't gambling. You're always getting something for your money. Costumes, gems, exp scrolls, etc. It's only gambling if you're trying to win the lottery with a radiant mount instead of treating it as a bonus chance.

I often use crown crates to get what I'm after cheaper than buying the item directly from the store so I really like having them.... Oh and bring back storm atronach crates. Thanks!

It is gambling when you pay a set amount of cash don't know what you get. Gambling is not just defined by the possibly of not winning, but you seem to think that this is the case. It is not.

Gambling is usually legally defined as staking something of value upon the outcome of a competition, contest or chance that is not under his or her influence (it does NOT need to be like a lottery where you have a risk of winning nothing). Crown crates sure as hell seems like it falls under this definition. You are staking crowns bought for real money to get an chance controlled random outcome and you have no control or influence over said outcome. That is gambling. The way companies like Zenimax Online get around this is by claiming that virtual currencies, like crowns, does not hold real lfe value (thus players are technically not "staking something of (real life/actual) value") as it is a virtual currency as opposed to real life cash. So legally they seem to have found a loophole to circumvent gambling laws, but there is no doubt that crown crates is indeed gambling. They just found a loophole that seemingly makes them circumvent the gambling laws.

Gotta disagree. You can get gum packs with baseball cards in them. You know you will get a certain number of cards but not what cards. Same with crown crates. You are purchasing four (sometimes five) items when you purchase a crown crate. Stores (retail and online) have mystery boxes you can buy. Again you know you are getting something just don't know exactly what. Auctions that have you bidding on lots work the same way. You can see some containers but don't know what is inside. None of those examples are considered gambling under current laws and if you change the laws for one you gotta change it across the board.

I'm not a fan of crown crates because I do believe they take advantage of human nature but they are not gambling. Maybe addictive though. There was a study done a few years back that showed people preferred playing slot machines that had lots of blinking lights, bells and whistles rather than slot machines with no commotion and larger more frequent payouts. Games especially ones like Candy Crush are designed around this behavior. If different colored fireworks shot off behind Pacrooti each time you click on a card they would probably sell a lot more crates.

I didn't quite get what you are disagreeing with me on? Those gumpacks sounds, from your description, that they are indeed also gambling. Especially if the baseball cards are what purchasers are really going after. Kinda like those pokemon cards where you buy a bunch and you don't know what they contain. That's gambling too. Some kids get obsessed to the point of actual addiction and spend a lot of cash on it.... I don't like that. And I do agree with you, such types of gambling should also be regulated under gambling laws but for some reason they are not (or at least not in my country which is a shame because at one point it became a problem in the school. but that is several years ago we saw that). Imo that's just another example on how screwd businessmen see ways to circumvent laws for easy profit (gambling exploitation of children for example).

Now I don't know how popular these gum-baseball packs are anymore anyway. Maybe they are not popular now so no one really cares?

I still don't understand what you disagreeing with me on? sounds to me like you actually agree with my argument and sentiment.

Ertosi

Gambling: gam·ble; verb; play games of chance for money; bet.

You cannot win real money so it does not fit the definition of gambling in any way, shape or form. You are choosing to pay money for a random grab bag of valueless prizes, and that's exactly what you get.

If you don't want them, don't buy them. But peeps need to stop trying to reframe them as gambling just because they have a personal axe to grind.

Jayman1000

Ertosi wrote: »

Gambling: gam·ble; verb; play games of chance for money; bet.

You cannot win real money so it does not fit the definition of gambling in any way, shape or form. You are choosing to pay money for a random grab bag of valueless prizes, and that's exactly what you get.

If you don't want them, don't buy them. But peeps need to stop trying to reframe them as gambling just because they have a personal axe to grind.

Don't know where you got that definition, but it seems incomplete to me. I think gambling is pretty much any game where you stake something of value upon an outcome (valueless or not) that you do not have any influence on. Maybe im technically wrong about the prize not having to be of value. But I think a so called "valueless" prize just make it even worse. To the people gambling the prize is not considered valueless, they actually consider the prize as holding a value. So I don't really buy that "valueless" price argument, seems like yet another attempt at circumventing laws through technicalities.

Sylvermynx

Seriously people.... just say no if you think there's an issue. No one's forcing you to buy crates.

Ertosi

Glurin wrote: »

Iselin wrote: »

As much as I would love to see loot boxes disappear from gaming, this is the US trade commission we're talking about here. I'm 99% sure the outcome, if there's ever an outcome, will be some "new and improved" label for games with loot boxes.

Or this will just end with a new tax on loot boxes. Which translates to an increase in crown crate prices, but otherwise no effect on any loot boxes whether they are exploitative or not.

And this is what the real issue is about. Various Gambling Commissions everywhere see someone (gaming companies) making money in a novel, effective, and legal way, so they are trying to change the definition of gambling so they can then regulate it and get an unearned dip in someone else's revenue.

Duukar wrote: »

The FTC specifically mentions, in 00:31-00:43 of the video I posted, exactly what Crown Crates are.

"Real currency spent for surprise winnings"

… for example. That is not the real definition of gambling. That is a purposely reframed definition for the sole purpose of trying to cash in on the revenue of gaming companies.

Meanwhile, misguided gamers who just don't like the idea of Loot Boxes jump on the bandwagon cause they love it when anyone "sticks it" to their favorite game companies. Why is it misguided? Mainly, because see above - the whole premise is false. Also because such a ban would cut into the revenue of said companies which decreases the long term health of their games. You want them to make money because they're not going to put more work into something that isn't giving them a return on their investment.

Ertosi

Jayman1000 wrote: »

Don't know where you got that definition

Jayman1000

Ertosi wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

Don't know where you got that definition

(large image of generic dictionary)

which one? There's not just one holy dictionary to rule them all... many dictionaries does not confine the price to be money but add the word "other stakes" too. This applies to either what you pay and or what you could win. Not necessarily both.

therift

Ertosi wrote: »

Gambling: gam·ble; verb; play games of chance for money; bet.

You cannot win real money so it does not fit the definition of gambling in any way, shape or form. You are choosing to pay money for a random grab bag of valueless prizes, and that's exactly what you get.

If you don't want them, don't buy them. But peeps need to stop trying to reframe them as gambling just because they have a personal axe to grind.

Fwiw, Florida does not use the dictionary.com definition. It defines gambling as a game of chance, with consideration, to win 'something of value.'

You would be better served to rely on statutory definitions rather than Google.

Ertosi

Jayman1000 wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

Don't know where you got that definition

(large image of generic dictionary)

which one? There's not just one holy dictionary to rule them all... many dictionaries does not confine the price to be money but add the word "other stakes" too. This applies to either what you pay and or what you could win. Not necessarily both.

One? No, try all. Merriam-Webster, MacMillan Dictionary, Oxford English, take your pick. (And kindly stop asking others to look stuff up for you... LTG: learn to Google)

therift

Ertosi wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

Don't know where you got that definition

(large image of generic dictionary)

which one? There's not just one holy dictionary to rule them all... many dictionaries does not confine the price to be money but add the word "other stakes" too. This applies to either what you pay and or what you could win. Not necessarily both.

One? No, try all. Merriam-Webster, MacMillan Dictionary, Oxford English, take your pick. (And kindly stop asking others to look stuff up for you... LTG: learn to Google)

If I was unclear a few moments ago... dictionary definitions are not statutory definitions.

In other worlds, the definition you cited is useless.

Ertosi

therift wrote: »

Florida does not use the dictionary.com definition. It defines gambling as a game of chance, with consideration, to win 'something of value.'

Contrary to what you think, that actually supports my statements. The legal definition for gambling has always traditionally being paying money for chance to win money. While many dictionary definitions has alternative definitions that include games of change, that has never been the traditional definition for legally-defined gambling. Gambling Commissions have always been trying to move the legal line to include games of chance to broaden their domain, and their cut of others' money.

And don't knock Google. Its literally a link to everything you could ever want to find. Don't just stop at the first article you see that supports your view point (that's called Confirmation Bias); take the time to look at all view points so you can see the whole issue.

Look at other games of chance:
Baseball Cards
Collectible Card Games
Claw Grab Games

Like Loot Boxes, all of these have been targeted by Gambling Commissions as well recently, yet none of these involve a chance to win money. Seriously, Google "Collectible Card Game Gambling" and you'll see numerous articles indicating they're the next target after Loot Boxes. None of these are gambling, but they are all indicators that those with an agenda have been trying to move the line of where the legal definition lies.

DirkRavenclaw

Well, i just hope they do then what was before this, namely, make the Game with a monthly Subscription. I for one like crowncrates and dont see them as Lootboxes, also, some American states outlawed Lootboxes and ZOS can still offer Crowncratesm so, Im not worried.