Yeah, my first post was a little dense, but I did state that having the additional super power needed to be more than just a bonus power up. For instance–what would be considered normal for powered people in the main character’s world? One special ability at most, two if born under a rare lucky star?
Having that additional power should mean more than the ability to select an option the player couldn’t pick the first time around. Flavor text would be what works toward making this bonus a point of interest for the story. It would certainly be an interesting feature that I haven’t seen tried for these games so far.
It’s a gamble and it shouldn’t be. I think if this ever happens, I’ll find a way to return at least my portion of the proceeds to anyone who feels cheated or lied to. It seems pretty unconscionable to take money from someone and not deliver something that they’re happy with.
So you buy underwear put it a day and then ask for a refund?
Do you eat half a burger and ask for a refund?
Oh, I lived in this hotel room for two days I will ask for a refund?
You read something you don’t like it bad luck. The world doesn’t work like Oh, I have used this twelve months but I decide I don’t like it now. REFOUND ME
If not no single business will be open. People will asking for refunds for everything and use the stuff for free.
Only if in-game currency which is used for buying a lootboxe can’t be bought with real life currency. And even then its iffy as the mechanic in itself is abusing one.
Well why doesn’t it? lots of businesses in lots of countries operate this way, and don’t seem to be closing down anytime soon. There’s no reason why the world can’t work like this. If you want to be that type of person, then you can be that type of person.
“In spite of everything I still believe that people are really good at heart. I simply can’t build up my hopes on a foundation consisting of confusion, misery, and death."
You are streching the meaning of the word gamble so far beyond its meaning that it is basically meaningless at this point.
I do not ask Rowling to give me a refund from all seven harry potter books just because the last two books managed to destroy the whole series for me. I was dissapointed, but that is just how it goes. I do not ask bioware for a refund even if I personally find DA:I rephrensible.
I just… you know, consider if I want to buy the next dragon age game. And wait until there is a let’s play out so I can see if I want to play it.
Art are subjective and author cannot predict if the consumer are going to like their art. If you don’t want to be dissapointed then get somebody whose taste you trust to read/play it first and then decide if it is for you.
Yes. YES they should. ANd you know why. Because nobody can predict what you like. But your friends, unlike a random author, knows you and can give you recommendation according to your taste.
Rowling is not morally responsible for me not liking her last two books. I mean I can talk writers fatique, I can talk about her skill level and write long eassy about everything wrong with Harry Potter. I fact I did that recently when a friend asked about gender roles.
BUT ROWLING IS STILL NOT MORALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ME BEING DISAPPOINTED.
She did nowhere promise “All right dreaming games, here is a story for you and only for you.” That would have been insane to expect.
No I’m saying that if you paid for it, and you don’t like it, I’m going to try and fix the issue failing which, I’m going to return your payment. I don’t really care how the world works or doesn’t work, this is what I’m going to do.
Well then I would sent a “I want X,Y, Z and aboslutely not T” list to the creator and as long as they kept inside the frames from that, I could not really complain.
Not quite I think most posts have been pretty on topic as it mostly has been about loot boxes. My super hero power thing was just a concept an attempt at making a “lootbox” type system that people didn’t feel negative about and wondered if it was even possible. I hope gambling gets banned and loot boxes vanish but considering how much money they make developers I cant see them giving up without a fight.
It’s all theoretical and the responses have been expected and interesting to read.
I admit this topic got to me thinking about ‘luck’ as just a mechanic used in a game, and how far should it be allowed and how it should be implemented.
The problem then becomes to what extent does it become regulated? The case of real life gambling, as well as online versions like loot boxes is pretty straightforward. Hell, companies are on record for hiring psychologists to play into mind sets (there is a reason casinos are designed the way they are). Something else to bear in mind is that loot boxes, etc…all those odds can be changed with a few simple keystrokes…real life casinos actually have to have their slot machines, etc. submitted on testing on a regular basis to keep the odds from being rigged even further in the house’s odds, but you don’t get that online.
But what about other games where luck is a big component? Would this mean even board games get regulated then? I know some people who were the sort to ‘flip the board’ if they lost…and we all chalked it up to them being sore losers. Maybe there was also an addictive part that lurked there which helped lead to such a reaction…
I know that some people has talent into rolling a dice , whether 6 sided or 20 sided dices into their desired number, mostly number 6 or 20…Lol…
Even in poker game , one can memorise the number of card that already being drawn , so that they roughly guess what will be the remaining cards should be :-)
It is it has been proven that luck games and board games can be addictive. They were the origin of Casinos after all. And since humanity create cities gamble in games of chance has been part of it. Pompeii had casinos had places to play luck games.
However, loot boxes are more potent as designed for causing addiction also aren’t regulated while Casinos. Bingos etc. are
I think we are agreed, and everyone else who posted here, that loot boxes certainly should be regulated, as well as any other games of chance which can also take real world money.
I would certainly include those who also try to sidestep the issue with stupid gimmicks as well. I believe in Japan physical gambling is illegal, but you get a ‘prize’ which you could redeem in some other fashion.
I also think it is reasonable to outlaw ads, etc. which could draw people in. There is a reason tobacco ads were made illegal on TV and magazines in the US. That NBA 2K trailer still makes my blood boil.
Oh agreed…pretty much any activity could be addictive. However, I think we also know that pretty much any place isn’t going to outlaw say Monopoly (though there are some religious communities that tried to outlaw dice). Great, and now I can’t help but think how some company would consider ‘roulette’ a board game. After all, it has a spinning wheel…much like the Game of Life does, though with admittedly much more numbers. Heh, I promise to leave board games out of this from this point on…
It doesn’t help that any time, any time certain criteria are established, companies will certainly weasel their way out of it. After all, in England, one reason ‘loot boxes’ weren’t considered gambling is because the player couldn’t cash out for physical goods.
Hell, this doesn’t even contend with the idea whether digital goods are considered property or not. This is especially relevant if you have bought goods like music, books, games, etc. and then a service went down.
Several companies at the beginning internet defended was no property, however, it has been debunked as all electronic market is based on the concept property and right to lend access.
If there is not property can’t be copyrighted so the market couldn’t have evolved as it did.
Loot boxes will end up with casino legislation it just needs the young generation reach power as actual generation has never seen a video game.
Cinema industry. had a similar experience until a generation that grows up with that technology reaches power
