Jump to content


"Suprise Mechanics"

Surprise Mechanics Loot Boxes EA Parliament MPs

  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

onderschepper #1 Posted 23 June 2019 - 01:45 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

I shall not link a video for this as I am certain that everyone's preferred flavour of Youtube Commentator has created a video on this subject by now.

 

The Vice President of Law and Politics at EA has formally announced in a Parliamentary Select Committee that EA does not offer Loot Boxes, but rather Surprise Mechanics which are akin to obtaining a toy inside of a Kinder Egg. :teethhappy:

 

This is becoming a growing sensation within the online realm with many of the recent posts on EA's official Twitter page devolving into reworks of this concept - my personal favourite being: "It's not piracy, it's a surprise modification".

 

Naturally this has caused outrage within the gaming community, particularly in light of quotes from EA in which they specifically referred to the mechanic as "Loot Boxes", but when giving evidence to legislators and policy makers they deny their own involvement by trying to be clever through the use of different terminology.

 

What are everyone else's thoughts and opinions on this matter?



VonniVidiVici #2 Posted 23 June 2019 - 04:20 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 38759 battles
  • 12,521
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013
It's yet another example of the triple Ayyy gaming industry being scumbags. It only really stands out because of how ridiculously transparent it is, which goes to show what kind of opinion EA has of its customers.

jack_timber #3 Posted 23 June 2019 - 09:41 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 40914 battles
  • 3,317
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-26-2014

The definition that surprised me was "In the UK, loot boxes are not considered gambling if items found in them can also be unlocked by players through playing the game".

Now hang on I am sure that some of the items that are/were offered could only be bought for money, premium tanks for instance.

Anyways there is a full report at.. 

https://www.bbc.co.u...wsbeat-48701962



Bordhaw #4 Posted 23 June 2019 - 11:24 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 15106 battles
  • 5,066
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View Postonderschepper, on 23 June 2019 - 12:45 AM, said:

Naturally this has caused outrage within the gaming community

 

Really I see no difference, "the gaming community" wouldnt know a good game it came up to them and slapped them in the face. The "gaming community" continue to pay for **** and that's what they get in return. 

Nethraniel #5 Posted 23 June 2019 - 12:38 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 14545 battles
  • 2,571
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012
Well this is what you get with stock market listed publishers and how 'investment' in the industry works nowadays. I start to prefer indy studios. 

KoenigsMarder #6 Posted 23 June 2019 - 01:25 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 2343 battles
  • 7
  • Member since:
    11-28-2012
If you commit murder... and call it de-living mechanic... it's legal.

XxKuzkina_MatxX #7 Posted 23 June 2019 - 01:46 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 53231 battles
  • 5,615
  • Member since:
    04-02-2016
So it's just "quantitative easing" not printing money!

onderschepper #8 Posted 23 June 2019 - 02:56 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 2168 battles
  • 698
  • Member since:
    05-17-2019

View PostBordhaw, on 23 June 2019 - 11:24 AM, said:

 

Really I see no difference, "the gaming community" wouldnt know a good game it came up to them and slapped them in the face. The "gaming community" continue to pay for **** and that's what they get in return. 

 

The concept of appealing to the lowest common denominator, plus with the largest demographic of gamers being those who only know stories of the NES, SNES, N64, PS1 and PS2 era where games were forced to provide content all in one - and had to be released in a functional state. Thus the situation is not likely to improve from the perspective of anyone over 30.

 

That being said, the definition of a good game is entirely personal and subjective - I consider mobile games undeserving of being called games, but I am certain there are millions/ billions of people who would disagree.

 

Whilst I like the Indie concept I do find that many of their titles are copy and pastes of games I played in the nineties.

 

I have only just returned to gaming after a five year hiatus, and given what I have seen that hiatus shall recommence in September (especially having seen the slim offerings at E3 this year).



Balc0ra #9 Posted 24 June 2019 - 09:34 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 73460 battles
  • 20,920
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postonderschepper, on 23 June 2019 - 01:45 AM, said:

What are everyone else's thoughts and opinions on this matter?

 

This "trick" might work vs a 65 year old politician asking about it. But as you can see it had a rather opposite effect on the gamers. If they use that name to explain loot boxes on their next game. I'm willing to bet the backlash will make SWBF II look rather small. As that game is why the politicians got pulled into it in the first place. 

 

View PostBordhaw, on 23 June 2019 - 11:24 AM, said:

 

Really I see no difference, "the gaming community" wouldnt know a good game it came up to them and slapped them in the face. The "gaming community" continue to pay for **** and that's what they get in return. 

 

There are two sides to it. You have those that is more or less the reason why we keep seeing them. As if they did not work and no one bought them. We would not have that discussion. But they do. And people do buy them. But that's not the same group that hates them. And don't buy games that have them until they are at 50% sale etc. Good game or not. It's like SPG's here. You don't see to many of the people that play them make topics about them. Only those that don't play them and get's hit by em.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users