"GEM EXCLUSIVE" items...BS game monetization

Elsonso

Starlock wrote: »

As I mentioned earlier - although my point was misunderstood and in fairness I could have articulated it better - game ratings would have to change. How a game is rated can and does impact sales and who it can be marketed to. This wouldn't impact a game like ESO, but it would impact several well-known sports games that are hugely profitable because of the in-game gambling that is included in them.

The topic that I was responding to (yours or someone else's) was gambling addiction. As I said at the bottom, it is the bureaucracy that stands a better chance of changing gaming, but only if the studios would lose money in the process.

MEBengalsFan2001 wrote: »

What I find interesting is that most of the items in the crate, specifically the costumes tend to come from prior crown items that were not selling. Instead of letting that dry up and not be used ZoS placed them in crates so newer players coming into the game would be like oh I want that and buy crates to try to get it. If you got lucky it isn't a problem but if you are unlucky you can spend more to get the crown to buy the item you want with Gems. It is a winning situation for ZoS because it results in more revenue.

Yes. Deliberate. I believe it was Lambert that actually said as much on stage (edit: PAX West 2016?) when they announced them. It provides them a way to re-introduce old Crown Store items. I am pretty sure I can think of another way, but whatever.

notyuu

If you want to know the real reason as to why they create gem exclusive items...well it's simple

they make them to remove gems from the economy meaning that when the next crates get pushed instead of people just up and buying the select items they want from the crates via gems instead they are more inclined to buy crates to acquire them instead due to..surprise, surprise...lacking gems.

Scion_of_Yggdrasil

Im not trying to hold everyones hand and sing around a campfire, but regardless of any legal obligations that may force crates to change, you know what WILL/CAN bring about a change?

Everyone uniting and admitting its not the direction video gaming should go (if this is just the start, imagine what crates become in the future, and what other forms of monetization may arise, if gone unchecked). The consumers/players/customers saying it needs to change... that brings about the change. All this pessimism and petty arguments get us nowhere. We can all agree its a greedy practice, plain and simple, regardless of whether its "our personal choice/only cosmetics/not anyone's fault others have addictions/not aaaactually gambling by small technicalities."

Change has been brought about before: Article about another game's loot crates. The overflow of negative feedback against their attempt to integrate gambling forced a change: another article. And it didn't stop there either. To repair their reputation, they then released a story-line, single player title, without all the gimmicks, as a sign of good faith.

Granted, everyone nipped this one in the bud because it was practically "pay to win." But as you'll see in that second article, it eludes to other companies "getting around this" by offering things that don't affect a players progression or performance. If legalities aren't enough to bring about a change, who/what then should?

Now, don't twist my words either. I am not commending, or promoting, just overall negative feedback, or entitled whining. But when something monumental, like "gamble" crates, is becoming a norm... we SHOULD speak out. Not to mention, IF there is to be any legal action that curbs this trend, it still starts with people speaking out, and working TOWARDS a change, instead of making excuses.

[Edit for spelling, because I am entirely incapable of posting anything without errors the first time]

FlopsyPrince

Some would never be happy no matter what the drop rates for the crates, but the fact they are so low probably causes far more frustration with this leading to calls for regulation and such.

ZoS probably loves it because a few compulsive people can fund a lot more than satisfying the masses.

I only got the horse in 45 crates. That is a really bad drop rate. Multiple duplicates so I do have some gems (and I never keep the consumables). Not really worth it overall especially since some things cannot be bought no matter what, even with gems.

FlopsyPrince

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

MEBengalsFan2001 wrote: »

What I find interesting is that most of the items in the crate, specifically the costumes tend to come from prior crown items that were not selling. Instead of letting that dry up and not be used ZoS placed them in crates so newer players coming into the game would be like oh I want that and buy crates to try to get it.

As far as I recall, most of the 16-40-100 gem "retread" cosmetics were removed from the Crown Store long before crates existed - they've always had a pattern of "making space in the store for new things" by removing older stuff. (Like, if they put out a particular costume in 500/700/1k simple-to-fancy versions, eventually two of them would go away.)

Those retread costumes are the main thing I spend my (free crate) gems on, because they're costumes that I missed back in the day, and the fact they reappeared in the crates gave me a second chance to get them.

I would probably spend crowns on items like that if they were more affordable, being a completionist and all. But I ignore almost all of them now. I have one that looked interesting with the current crates, but it didn't drop from 45 of them, so it is most likely not going to happen.

stewhead2ub17_ESO

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Elsonso

Scion_of_Yggdrasil wrote: »

Im not trying to hold everyones hand and sing around a campfire, but regardless of any legal obligations that may force crates to change, you know what WILL/CAN bring about a change?

Everyone uniting and admitting its not the direction video gaming should go (if this is just the start, imagine what crates become in the future, and what other forms of monetization may arise, if gone unchecked). The consumers/players/customers saying it needs to change... that brings about the change. All this pessimism and petty arguments get us nowhere. We can all agree its a greedy practice, plain and simple, regardless of whether its "our personal choice/only cosmetics/not anyone's fault others have addictions/not aaaactually gambling by small technicalities."

As far as ESO goes... Been there. Fought that battle. Battle of Serenity Valley. Did not even get a nice outfit for my troubles. It was like screaming for the incoming tide to stop.

Starlock

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

DigitalHype

If this was just about giving players with saved up gems an option, then they could also offer those same items for purchase with either gems or crowns. But, they don't do that. They want you to roll the dice on the crates.

ZoS doesn't publish any odds. So, they have complete control. They can easily manipulate things based on indiviudal players behaviors to maximize profits. They lock items behind gems so that they have more options for manipulation.

stewhead2ub17_ESO

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

Disagree. It is their company. They offer services or products. That is all. You either want them or you don't. Not for you or I to determine what is in "their customer's best interests", as it can vary from person to person.

Scion_of_Yggdrasil

Elsonso wrote: »

Scion_of_Yggdrasil wrote: »

Im not trying to hold everyones hand and sing around a campfire, but regardless of any legal obligations that may force crates to change, you know what WILL/CAN bring about a change?

Everyone uniting and admitting its not the direction video gaming should go (if this is just the start, imagine what crates become in the future, and what other forms of monetization may arise, if gone unchecked). The consumers/players/customers saying it needs to change... that brings about the change. All this pessimism and petty arguments get us nowhere. We can all agree its a greedy practice, plain and simple, regardless of whether its "our personal choice/only cosmetics/not anyone's fault others have addictions/not aaaactually gambling by small technicalities."

As far as ESO goes... Been there. Fought that battle. Battle of Serenity Valley. Did not even get a nice outfit for my troubles. It was like screaming for the incoming tide to stop.

So you tried screaming... but did you try a thu-um?

I know... its not an easy battle, but its definitely not one that should be forgotten, especially with more and more companies implementing this practice. You may not be able to stop the tide, but you can sure as heck place enough tetrapods to stop it from flooding over.

Starlock

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

Disagree. It is their company. They offer services or products. That is all. You either want them or you don't. Not for you or I to determine what is in "their customer's best interests", as it can vary from person to person.

Really?

You're going to have to explain to me how gambling is ever in the customer's best interest. Bonus points if you can explain to me how exposing children to gambling - which is known to increase their risk of gambling addiction as adults - is in their best interest.

stewhead2ub17_ESO

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

Disagree. It is their company. They offer services or products. That is all. You either want them or you don't. Not for you or I to determine what is in "their customer's best interests", as it can vary from person to person.

Really?

You're going to have to explain to me how gambling is ever in the customer's best interest. Bonus points if you can explain to me how exposing children to gambling - which is known to increase their risk of gambling addiction as adults - is in their best interest.

As I stated. Personal accountability. It's my choice if I wish to "gamble". No one is forcing you to. Be responsible for your own behavior. As for the children reference, that's just ridiculous. This game is rated "Mature" with adult themes etc.. Not for children.

Starlock

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

Disagree. It is their company. They offer services or products. That is all. You either want them or you don't. Not for you or I to determine what is in "their customer's best interests", as it can vary from person to person.

Really?

You're going to have to explain to me how gambling is ever in the customer's best interest. Bonus points if you can explain to me how exposing children to gambling - which is known to increase their risk of gambling addiction as adults - is in their best interest.

As I stated. Personal accountability. It's my choice if I wish to "gamble". No one is forcing you to. Be responsible for your own behavior. As for the children reference, that's just ridiculous. This game is rated "Mature" with adult themes etc.. Not for children.

So... individuals are accountable but corporations get a free pass.

Sorry, but no. There's a reason why consumer protection laws exist. It's because corporations do NOT get a free pass.

stewhead2ub17_ESO

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

Disagree. It is their company. They offer services or products. That is all. You either want them or you don't. Not for you or I to determine what is in "their customer's best interests", as it can vary from person to person.

Really?

You're going to have to explain to me how gambling is ever in the customer's best interest. Bonus points if you can explain to me how exposing children to gambling - which is known to increase their risk of gambling addiction as adults - is in their best interest.

As I stated. Personal accountability. It's my choice if I wish to "gamble". No one is forcing you to. Be responsible for your own behavior. As for the children reference, that's just ridiculous. This game is rated "Mature" with adult themes etc.. Not for children.

So... individuals are accountable but corporations get a free pass.

Sorry, but no. There's a reason why consumer protection laws exist. It's because corporations do NOT get a free pass.

Consumer Protection laws are a different arena. [snip]

[Edited to remove Baiting]

Starlock

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

Disagree. It is their company. They offer services or products. That is all. You either want them or you don't. Not for you or I to determine what is in "their customer's best interests", as it can vary from person to person.

Really?

You're going to have to explain to me how gambling is ever in the customer's best interest. Bonus points if you can explain to me how exposing children to gambling - which is known to increase their risk of gambling addiction as adults - is in their best interest.

As I stated. Personal accountability. It's my choice if I wish to "gamble". No one is forcing you to. Be responsible for your own behavior. As for the children reference, that's just ridiculous. This game is rated "Mature" with adult themes etc.. Not for children.

So... individuals are accountable but corporations get a free pass.

Sorry, but no. There's a reason why consumer protection laws exist. It's because corporations do NOT get a free pass.

Consumer Protection laws are a different arena. [snip]

[snip]

Like I've said before, this is not an either-or: it is NOT being suggested that customers aren't accountable. What is being suggested is that companies are also accountable. Companies need to be held accountable and be responsible for their products and services. It is not at all reasonable to demand customers shoulder all accountability and that companies are blameless in the equation, especially when companies are engaging in practices that are not in the customer's best interest. Again, that's being polite about it. To be less olite about it, including gambling with real money in any context is exploitation. It doesn't have to be exploitative, but the way these systems are set up the house always wins at the customer's expense. Game developers could easily develop gambling mechanics that are less exploitative than they currently are. They don't. And if that doesn't tell you something that is concerning to you, well...

[Edited to remove Baiting]

stewhead2ub17_ESO

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

Disagree. It is their company. They offer services or products. That is all. You either want them or you don't. Not for you or I to determine what is in "their customer's best interests", as it can vary from person to person.

Really?

You're going to have to explain to me how gambling is ever in the customer's best interest. Bonus points if you can explain to me how exposing children to gambling - which is known to increase their risk of gambling addiction as adults - is in their best interest.

As I stated. Personal accountability. It's my choice if I wish to "gamble". No one is forcing you to. Be responsible for your own behavior. As for the children reference, that's just ridiculous. This game is rated "Mature" with adult themes etc.. Not for children.

So... individuals are accountable but corporations get a free pass.

Sorry, but no. There's a reason why consumer protection laws exist. It's because corporations do NOT get a free pass.

Consumer Protection laws are a different arena. [snip]

[snip]

Like I've said before, this is not an either-or: it is NOT being suggested that customers aren't accountable. What is being suggested is that companies are also accountable. Companies need to be held accountable and be responsible for their products and services. It is not at all reasonable to demand customers shoulder all accountability and that companies are blameless in the equation, especially when companies are engaging in practices that are not in the customer's best interest. Again, that's being polite about it. To be less olite about it, including gambling with real money in any context is exploitation. It doesn't have to be exploitative, but the way these systems are set up the house always wins at the customer's expense. Game developers could easily develop gambling mechanics that are less exploitative than they currently are. They don't. And if that doesn't tell you something that is concerning to you, well...

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this point. You nor I are the arbiter of what's in a "customer's best interest". I have no problem with optional Crown Crates. I am an adult and responsible for my own choices. I don't expect the company to worry about that.

Jeffrey530

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

stewhead2ub17_ESO wrote: »

You do you & I'll do me. If you enjoy crates & gems, get them @ your leisure. If not then don't. Stop trying to impose your will on others. We all need to take personal responsibility.

Yes - and Zenimax bears responsibility too. With that responsibility, they've imposed their will on their customers in ways that do not serve their customers' best interests. And that's putting it kindly.

Let's all think about that for a moment.

Disagree. It is their company. They offer services or products. That is all. You either want them or you don't. Not for you or I to determine what is in "their customer's best interests", as it can vary from person to person.

Really?

You're going to have to explain to me how gambling is ever in the customer's best interest. Bonus points if you can explain to me how exposing children to gambling - which is known to increase their risk of gambling addiction as adults - is in their best interest.

As I stated. Personal accountability. It's my choice if I wish to "gamble". No one is forcing you to. Be responsible for your own behavior. As for the children reference, that's just ridiculous. This game is rated "Mature" with adult themes etc.. Not for children.

So... individuals are accountable but corporations get a free pass.

Sorry, but no. There's a reason why consumer protection laws exist. It's because corporations do NOT get a free pass.

Consumer Protection laws are a different arena. You're reaching. Stop finding an excuse. Be accountable.

No, they're not really a different arena and no, I'm not "reaching."

Like I've said before, this is not an either-or: it is NOT being suggested that customers aren't accountable. What is being suggested is that companies are also accountable. Companies need to be held accountable and be responsible for their products and services. It is not at all reasonable to demand customers shoulder all accountability and that companies are blameless in the equation, especially when companies are engaging in practices that are not in the customer's best interest. Again, that's being polite about it. To be less olite about it, including gambling with real money in any context is exploitation. It doesn't have to be exploitative, but the way these systems are set up the house always wins at the customer's expense. Game developers could easily develop gambling mechanics that are less exploitative than they currently are. They don't. And if that doesn't tell you something that is concerning to you, well...

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this point. You nor I are the arbiter of what's in a "customer's best interest". I have no problem with optional Crown Crates. I am an adult and responsible for my own choices. I don't expect the company to worry about that.

Completely agree, also isn't ESO on a mature rating? I would assume adults are responsible for their own actions and these crown crates are optional at best.

navystylz_ESO

SolidusPrime wrote: »

Agree 100%. I always defended crowns and crates, but the gem thing takes it too far in my opinion. It just feels extremely greedy.

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

It isn't supposed to be a "ok, I want this gem-only thing, so now I have to buy seventy-eleven crates to get them!"

Maybe it wasn't supposed to be, but it is for a lot of us and they know it.

The non-combat Watcher for 300 gems really disgusted me to be quite honest. How much would I have to spend in real money to get that much starting from 0? The problem is, is that no one can tell me because it's totally random.

I get it: I don't NEED it. I don't HAVE to buy it and I didn't. But when I step back and look at it, I don't get a "ZOS made something cool for players" vibe, I get a "ZOS is trying to get me to spend as much money as possible" vibe. Even if that IS their goal as a company, they don't have to make it so blatant. It feels disrespectful to the player base. "If you pay us $15/month, it will 'only' be 200 crowns! We really value our loyal subscribers!"

Now take that a step further and realize paying a lot of money for a crate to give you a bunch of useless drinks and poisons is worse than your disgust at how many gems a pet costs. At least by the time you get to where it's 'unacceptable' to you, you already have the gems and have to spend them on something. It's the garbage that gets you to the gems in the first place that is the real issue.

Of course those gem prices are going to be stupid. The whole point is to get you to blow more and more money on the crates. It's a disgusting practice for those who have no control, or more money than sense. Personally I would never throw away money for RNG pixels. A drink at the bar will do more for me than that crap.

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

Some would never be happy no matter what the drop rates for the crates, but the fact they are so low probably causes far more frustration with this leading to calls for regulation and such.

ZoS probably loves it because a few compulsive people can fund a lot more than satisfying the masses.

I only got the horse in 45 crates. That is a really bad drop rate. Multiple duplicates so I do have some gems (and I never keep the consumables). Not really worth it overall especially since some things cannot be bought no matter what, even with gems.

I would be happy to just be able to pay for an item i want if it appeals to me. Not give them my money to get garbage. Then give them more money to get garbage.

I will never buy crown crates because of this. I bought the Vampire Noble Costume when it became available. I wanted that since I seen it on the Ashen Lord. Don't know why it can't be enough to just pay and get exactly what you pay for with all aspects of this game. It's bad enough that so much is locked behind an extra paywall to begin with, and not earnable through playing the game.

Dzadzey

mavfin wrote: »

BRCOURTN wrote: »

So here's the problem with "if you don't want it, just don't buy it!"...

There are people in the world who suffer from gambling addiction. These people can't be near casinos or card games or even casual bets the way that serious alcoholics need to stay away from bars or other people that drink.

Its not hard to stay away from race tracks or casinos or bookies when you know you have a problem, but it might be hard to get away from things as simple as... playing their favorite video games.

There are so many games now that have loot crate transactions, and I'm not asking to take them away just like I wouldnt ask for every casino to shut down. But there needs to be more regulation to help protect the people who need it.

I disagree.

It's the responsibility of the gambler to get help if they can't control themselves. Or get friends and family to help them. It's not my problem if they have an issue with control.

I don't want the government in the middle of this. That'll be a huge mess, and will have consequences we don't want.

No addict seeks help until it's too damn late. I'm a critical care nurse and I see the results of addiction every damn day as they come in with sepsis, infective endocarditis and worse. They get thrown back into the same hell they came to us from BECAUSE there's no "government in the middle of this" to ensure they get the rehab and services they need to even get a chance at recovery.

Eifleber

I wish you could at least sell crate stuff.

Once I bought a number of them or the gems and got a load of stuff I absolute dislike.

On the other hand there's quite a number of minipets (and other stuff) I'd absolutely like to buy if people were allowed to sell them.

dhboy123

BRCOURTN wrote: »

So here's the problem with "if you don't want it, just don't buy it!"...

There are people in the world who suffer from gambling addiction. These people can't be near casinos or card games or even casual bets the way that serious alcoholics need to stay away from bars or other people that drink.

Its not hard to stay away from race tracks or casinos or bookies when you know you have a problem, but it might be hard to get away from things as simple as... playing their favorite video games.

There are so many games now that have loot crate transactions, and I'm not asking to take them away just like I wouldnt ask for every casino to shut down. But there needs to be more regulation to help protect the people who need it.

This post is the only one that actually makes sense in here.

kaisernick

I despise crates but i could always avoid them most of the time and even when i wanted something it usually wasnt much.

But these crates are starting to *** me off more and more furniture thrown in at 100 gems each with no direct method of buying them the housing community who often p[ay for those overpriced homes are getting screwed.








https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/533534/furniture-should-not-be-in-crates#latest

Tigerseye

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

The main/original purpose of "gem only" items was to serve as a gem sink, after the year that they gave away WAAAAAY too many free crates and everyone & their brother had piles of gems sitting around. (and whales who buy lots of crates still have plenty of gems anyway).

They wanted to get rid of the excess gems, so that people couldn't just skip several seasons of crates by buying things with their stash.

It isn't supposed to be a "ok, I want this gem-only thing, so now I have to buy seventy-eleven crates to get them!"

But, if most of the players who play now didn't benefit from "the year that they gave away WAAAAAY too many free crates and everyone & their brother had piles of gems sitting around.", beause that was several years ago now, all it serves to do is create a huge divide between the haves and have-nots.

I've been back for nearly 3 years now and I didn't benefit from it, so it must have been at least 4 years ago?

volkeswagon

because children play these games crown crates will be banned in the future. just a matter of the legislation being finalized and approved. in the meantime just pretend the apex stuff doesn’t exist.

TineaCruris

Greymoor exposed their business model bare for the world to see IMO. It was the last expansion for me. They are even giving away free pets now if you sign up for their marketing spam and agree to be data mined.

It makes me sad for such a great game to have fallen so far.

bluebird

Kiralyn2000 wrote: »

It isn't supposed to be a "ok, I want this gem-only thing, so now I have to buy seventy-eleven crates to get them!"

Oh, that is exactly what it's supposed to be. That's why they still have them

drkfrontiers

Its sheer unadulterated greed designed into the Crown Crates + GEM model and item's cost in relation to reward.

I vowed a long time ago to never support it even if my life depended on it.

My opinion of ESO marketing department has dropped significantly.

Just thinking about the RL cost of trying to acquire the recent 2x 400 GEM items makes me furious. Upwards of $200-400 dollars depending on your luck. I'm sorry - but you can go [..add a liberal. And I mean liberal invective ..]

Galwylin

what_the wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

When legislation catches up with gambling in video games, the gamble crates will go away. When the gamble crates go away, so will the gems.

Well, is it gambling when you are guaranteed to get an item from a crate when you open it? imo no.
It may not be an item you want or need, but you will always get a return with every single crate you open.
Vegas guarantees you absolutely nothing when you go there to play, that's gambling.

I've never followed that logic. I'm sure there might be some but I doubt very many buy a crate hoping they will get a riding lesson or crystal. The whole idea of this being a gamble is taking the shot at the item you want or if you don't have a specific item in mind something "useful". Most probably purchase them for the mounts so when you don't get the mount then being patted on the back and expected to enjoy that potion just as much as you would have the mount seems a bit suspect. If many are like me when they get some of these free crates every so often we end up selling every single thing for the gems because it might as well be garbage because I don't want it cluttering up my inventory. Not only useless to me but an actual nuisance. A bit like going to Vegas and if I don't win the jackpot they let the air out of my tires.

Really if this wasn't a pure and simple way of getting money out of players they would make it if you didn't like the items you got then you could sell the crate back for the crowns to try some other day or something. After all, if this fun and enjoyed surprised mechanic is for the benefit of the player then they should be allowed to change their mind. Unsurprisingly that's not the case because we'd know what that would mean for the bottom line. Personally I'm still shocked so many still participate in this gotcha mechanic so I'm sure that if they offered this money back promise none would take advantage of it.

Scion_of_Yggdrasil

Yay.... more crates with all the awesome stuff only available if you sacrifice your wallet... losing more and more respect each time they roll out new crates.

Maybe if they would release crate exclusive items at a later date for regular honest purchase, it would be somewhat (barely) more okay-ish.

I see more and more games resorting to these disgusting, greedy sales practices and its making a long time gamer think about giving up the hobby. Is this really what gaming is going to turn into?