After becoming the subject of controversy last week, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) is attempting to win back favor with the industry with the announcement of a new regulation policy that will affect all games on all three major console platforms. Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft will now be required to disclose the odds of paid microtransaction lootbox drops for future games releasing on their systems. Other publishers have also agreed to the new policy, such as Activision Blizzard, Bandai Namco, Bethesda, Bungie, Electronic Arts, Take-Two, Ubisoft, W.B. Interactive, and Wizards of the Coast. All of the aforementioned companies must adhere to disclosing the probability of all their lootboxes by the end of 2020. Any new game, or any update that adds in-game purchases will now have to allow for players to see the percentage of rare item drops when opening a lootbox with real-world currency.

In addition, several of ESA’s publisher members already disclose the relative rarity or probability of obtaining in-game virtual items from purchased loot boxes, and other major publishers have agreed to do so no later than the end of 2020. Together, these publishers include Activision Blizzard, BANDAI NAMCO Entertainment, Bethesda, Bungie, Electronic Arts, Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony Interactive Entertainment, Take-Two Interactive, Ubisoft, Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment, and Wizards of the Coast. Many other ESA members are considering a disclosure. The disclosure will apply to all new games and updates to games that add such in-game purchases and will be presented in a manner that is understandable and easily accessed.In addition, several of ESA’s publisher members already disclose the relative rarity or probability of obtaining in-game virtual items from purchased loot boxes, and other major publishers have agreed to do so no later than the end of 2020. Together, these publishers include Activision Blizzard, BANDAI NAMCO Entertainment, Bethesda, Bungie, Electronic Arts, Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony Interactive Entertainment, Take-Two Interactive, Ubisoft, Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment, and Wizards of the Coast. Many other ESA members are considering a disclosure. The disclosure will apply to all new games and updates to games that add such in-game purchases and will be presented in a manner that is understandable and easily accessed.

Source

 

[DJPlace]

maybe i'll be able to get back in FE:H cause of this...

 

[Deleted User]

What the big three doxxed someone?

No, they surprise exposed people.

 

[Foxi4]

Not surprising, the same thing happened in the past to the movie industry and the game industry in regards to age ratings. It is far better for companies to self-regulate than it is to allow the government to regulate them instead. It's almost as if the free market was a self-regulating force that, most times, doesn't need government intervention. I suspect PC storefronts like Steam, Epic and Origin will sign on soon enough, it only makes sense to do so.

 

[FAST6191]

Not surprising, the same thing happened in the past to the movie industry and the game industry in regards to age ratings. It is far better for companies to self-regulate than it is to allow the government to regulate them instead. It's almost as if the free market was a self-regulating force that, most times, doesn't need government intervention. I suspect PC storefronts like Steam, Epic and Origin will sign on soon enough, it only makes sense to do so.

and comics and music and tv and radio.

That said I have never been all that happy with the lines drawn up in such ratings systems, even if I compare them to standards of the times, especially if such a field is still finding its feet as a mainstream medium. Granted here we have "is it gambling?" rather than narrative themes, content that would see ladies drop and monocles come over all unnecessary, and all be underpinned by feelings rather than reason and logic. Granted here it is some percentage* that presumably nobody will understand, nor care much about, rather than something which might impact a game from a narrative perspective.

*I await the means they will pick of masking its actual results to those that don't know stats much like APR on loans vs total cost (save for those payday loan creeps which will avoid APR as it is effectively in the thousands of percent rather than 5-25 of most), miles per gallon vs gallons per mile, spoonfuls of sugar vs grams in a country that tries its best to avoid such systems and so forth. First guess would be a percentage of tiered items, rather than tiered item you care about (5% chance of gold tier item, but if there 100 items all in then it is rather less that you will get one for your currently favoured say weapon).

Well "authorities" deepstate.. and if you believe in independent institutions and journalists...*Shruggs*

If you can't trust your authorities for such a banal matter as this you have bigger problems.

As for journalists then yeah I would not trust most of the current crop to be able to design and execute this sort of experiment. We will do the thought exercise though

So if it is nominally 5% but you expect 3% and each transaction is $5 you can get stunning results from a thousand tests (depending upon your certainty desired, see something called sigma or just standard deviation if you prefer to recall high school maths, you can do well with a lot less**). I can't imagine a week at E3 is less than that cost wise, and being cheap you could probably get your users to pitch in their data and win rates. Assuming you are not going the straight user data path you would presumably want to distribute it a best lest the game companies know your IP and adjust accordingly (aka pull a VW), or if it is coming from one account then there might be some kind of whalebait setup going on (whales is a gambling term for big spenders, one adopted by game devs when they took on this microtransaction lark, in this case if your big spender gets better results you tip it to encourage more spending. Don't know if whalebait is a term they use but it amused me so I coined it).

**classic example would be flipping a fair coin. Flip it twice and having them both the same is nothing special. Flipping it 50 times and having them all the same is something else entirely, despite being a technically possible outcome from a fair coin. Or if you prefer for this 5% rate then out of a 1000 tests you would expect around 50 winners. 45-55 is within reason but having 30 though is statistically very unlikely and thus you can reasonably make the case that something is wrong.

 

[Foxi4]

and comics and music and tv and radio.

That said I have never been all that happy with the lines drawn up in such ratings systems, even if I compare them to standards of the times, especially if such a field is still finding its feet as a mainstream medium. Granted here we have "is it gambling?" rather than narrative themes, content that would see ladies drop and monocles come over all unnecessary, and all be underpinned by feelings rather than reason and logic. Granted here it is some percentage* that presumably nobody will understand, nor care much about, rather than something which might impact a game from a narrative perspective.

*I await the means they will pick of masking its actual results to those that don't know stats much like APR on loans vs total cost (save for those payday loan creeps which will avoid APR as it is effectively in the thousands of percent rather than 5-25 of most), miles per gallon vs gallons per mile, spoonfuls of sugar vs grams in a country that tries its best to avoid such systems and so forth. First guess would be a percentage of tiered items, rather than tiered item you care about (5% chance of gold tier item, but if there 100 items all in then it is rather less that you will get one for your currently favoured say weapon).


If you can't trust your authorities for such a banal matter as this you have bigger problems.

As for journalists then yeah I would not trust most of the current crop to be able to design and execute this sort of experiment. We will do the thought exercise though

So if it is nominally 5% but you expect 3% and each transaction is $5 you can get stunning results from a thousand tests (depending upon your certainty desired, see something called sigma or just standard deviation if you prefer to recall high school maths, you can do well with a lot less**). I can't imagine a week at E3 is less than that cost wise, and being cheap you could probably get your users to pitch in their data and win rates. Assuming you are not going the straight user data path you would presumably want to distribute it a best lest the game companies know your IP and adjust accordingly (aka pull a VW), or if it is coming from one account then there might be some kind of whalebait setup going on (whales is a gambling term for big spenders, one adopted by game devs when they took on this microtransaction lark, in this case if your big spender gets better results you tip it to encourage more spending. Don't know if whalebait is a term they use but it amused me so I coined it).

**classic example would be flipping a fair coin. Flip it twice and having them both the same is nothing special. Flipping it 50 times and having them all the same is something else entirely, despite being a technically possible outcome from a fair coin. Or if you prefer for this 5% rate then out of a 1000 tests you would expect around 50 winners. 45-55 is within reason but having 30 though is statistically very unlikely and thus you can reasonably make the case that something is wrong.

As far as I'm concerned, creative media should not be regulated for content at all, they're artistic forms of expression by definition and fall directly under Freedom of Speech. If anyone is upset by what they're seeing in a movie, hearing in a song or playing in a video game, they should stop for a moment and consider their options. Perhaps the reaction they're experiencing was the intended one? A lot of times art crosses social boundaries specifically to make an important point, and even when it's pointless and only adds to the shock value of the product, it's still all fictional. In any case, they can either get over it or just stop consuming the content - nobody is forcing them to consume it.

 

[stanleyopar2000]

Can't wait to see the bullshit odds in every Call of Duty post-Advanced Warfare

As far as I'm concerned, creative media should not be regulated for content at all, they're artistic forms of expression by definition and fall directly under Freedom of Speech. If anyone is upset by what they're seeing in a movie, hearing in a song or playing in a video game, they should stop for a moment and consider their options. Perhaps the reaction they're experiencing was the intended one? A lot of times art crosses social boundaries specifically to make an important point, and even when it's pointless and only adds to the shock value of the product, it's still all fictional. In any case, they can either get over it or just stop consuming the content - nobody is forcing them to consume it.

That's the problem. These publishers aren't making hand over fist on users who who know that it's optional.. They're making millions by purposely and aggressively monetizing hard on whales people with self destructive gambling tendances who for them is mentally nearly impossible to "stop consuming the content."

 

[CallmeBerto]

Can't wait to see the bullshit odds in every Call of Duty post-Advanced Warfare



That's the problem. These publishers aren't making hand over fist on users who who know that it's optional.. They're making millions by purposely and aggressively monetizing hard on whales people with self destructive gambling tendances who for them is mentally nearly impossible to "stop consuming the content."

They know its optional. Unless these guys are holding their pet goldfish hostage it is optional. If they have an gambling issue they should put the video game down and go get some help. That is what they are there for.

 

[DarthDub]

Nintendo needs to make Monolith Soft change the crap gacha in Xenoblade Chronicles 2. It's so bad.

 

[cashboxz01]

The key word here is "LOOT" which means to steal. They're literally looting you with these.

 

[warweeny]

So you're saying every game from them had lootbox odds disclosed?

As far as i am aware sony/microsoft/nintendo do not even have lootboxes in their games.
3rd party like EA/activision/Square-enix etc. already had odds disclosed since 2018, the law said they needed to do that.
Same with mobile games these days, they all have % when you look at the details (uncommon 10% rare 3% for example)

 

[codezer0]

As far as i am aware sony/microsoft/nintendo do not even have lootboxes in their games.
3rd party like EA/activision/Square-enix etc. already had odds disclosed since 2018, the law said they needed to do that.
Same with mobile games these days, they all have % when you look at the details (uncommon 10% rare 3% for example)

Nintendo:

• Dr. Mario World has lootboxes. Can't really speak of any other phone game besides Super Mario Run, but this is just the last one that comes to mind
• badge arcade for the 3DS was also loot boxy, as was that Rusty's game that they bothered to make a street pass puzzle for

Sony:

• ?

Microsoft:

• Sea of Thieves definitely has lootboxes

These were just the ones to come to mind when thinking if any of the primary parties had lootboxes on their stuff.

 

[Captain_N]

the only reason loot boxes exist is because the noobs buy them. if no one would buy them, then they would not exist. the wii u failed because no one bought it, the ouya failed because no one bought it. See if you dont buy them then they are gone. so STOP buying the shit.

 

[Pipistrele]

E.A. motto is "Loot boxes are just surprise mechanics"


My motto is almost the same "its not piracy why i pirate EA games, its surprise ownership"

"It's not an overdone joke, it's a surprise classic comedy"

 

[Foxi4]

Can't wait to see the bullshit odds in every Call of Duty post-Advanced Warfare

That's the problem. These publishers aren't making hand over fist on users who who know that it's optional.. They're making millions by purposely and aggressively monetizing hard on whales people with self destructive gambling tendances who for them is mentally nearly impossible to "stop consuming the content."

Your argument is basically "These people over there can't control their own urges, therefore nobody gets to have a little bit of fun!", it's ridiculous and it rejects the notion of personal responsibility. By the same token you should ban half of the fast food joints out there simply because we have an obesity epidemic and many people can't "control themselves" around a Big Mac. No, other people don't get to tell me what I can or can't eat - I'm going to have my Whopper, it's not my fault that they're fat, nor is it my problem.

 

[Taleweaver]

Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft will now be required to disclose the odds of paid microtransaction lootbox drops for future games releasing on their systems.

I read and I reread that, but somehow, I don't think that it means what I read there.

If I'm reading it correctly (meaning: probably not), I can foresee conversations like this cropping up in a not all too distant feature:

Child: oooh...the reboot of call of warfare 23 ultimate game of the year reboot is coming out in early pre-order this week! Can I have it, dad? Can I? Can I? Can I?
Me: hang on, little one. Do you see that "now with 87% chance of containing ubermicro-DLC with surprise elements" label there?
Child: erm...yes? What does that mean?
Me: that means there's only 13% chance I'll let you near that game.
Child: awwww....

(Man...I can't wait until my child's going to hate me over something video game related )

The F*** is a lootbox?

I am envious of your blissful ignorance.

I'll explain, but beware...you probably don't want to wake from your happy little life. And you can't unread the following...

Spoiler

Lootboxes originated in a boardroom somewhere in the sixth seal of hell. One of the EA upper echelon demons held a brainstorm there, titled "how can we squeeze more dollars from our paying customers?".

One demon called Asaroth noticed that microtransactions could be coupled with a surprise element in order to feed upon the addiction habit of mankind. This was coupled with a decision from an earlier meeting: pushing microtransactions in people's faces rather than setting up a DLC shop in a separated part of the game (e.g. the main menu).

The result was basically slot machines in your games. The idea is that people are happy to pay to have fun in a game, and that this 'fun' can be broken down in parts that could be monetized at any given moment rather than "just" on the purchase price.

The long term goal is in the area of refilling virtual guns with actual money, paying not to run around naked in the game and stronger (virtual) muscles for those who can't afford it. Currently humanity won't stand for it yet, so we're eased into this by a step in that direction: lootboxes.

As the name suggests, these are closed boxes (or ziplock bags, vaults or something similar...the 'closed' is the important part) that you receive in the game at certain times. Usually upon a victory, when your spirits are up and older games do rewards (like extra heart containers in Zelda). You can't open them, though, as this would require actual payments. And as said earlier: the content is random. You don't pay for stuff you might want, but rather for the CHANCE you might get something you want.

Explained rationally, there is no reason to want the contents of a lootbox (or even a game containing them, for that matter). But those demons know damn well we're not rational beings but emotional ones. Lootboxes work because they rely on group pressure ("oooh...HE got a Tyrannosaurus as pet. I've gotta open boxes until I can match his coolness!"), on our curiosity ("it's...a box. And I DO NOT KNOW what is inside. But...I WANT to know!!") and our inability to do statistics (("hmm...those last twenty boxes were garbage. So surely the twenty-first one will hold the grand prize that'll make all this purchases worth it!").

 

[DjoeN]

Nintendo:

• Dr. Mario World has lootboxes. Can't really speak of any other phone game besides Super Mario Run, but this is just the last one that comes to mind
• badge arcade for the 3DS was also loot boxy, as was that Rusty's game that they bothered to make a street pass puzzle for

...
These were just the ones to come to mind when thinking if any of the primary parties had lootboxes on their stuff.

Animal Crossing Mobile (leafs)
Fire Emblem Heroes (orbs)

That's the reason Nintendo is pulling FE Heroes and AC Mobile 27 of August from the play/ios stores in Belgium (Falls under gambling and is not allowed by law here)

That's also the reason Dr. Mario is not available in Belgium in the stores, even if you install the apk, you can play till lvl3 and then it stops, cause it checks from where you play (VPN is the solution to play any further)

 

[Deleted User]

I am envious of your blissful ignorance.

I'll explain, but beware...you probably don't want to wake from your happy little life. And you can't unread the following...

Spoiler

Lootboxes originated in a boardroom somewhere in the sixth seal of hell. One of the EA upper echelon demons held a brainstorm there, titled "how can we squeeze more dollars from our paying customers?".

One demon called Asaroth noticed that microtransactions could be coupled with a surprise element in order to feed upon the addiction habit of mankind. This was coupled with a decision from an earlier meeting: pushing microtransactions in people's faces rather than setting up a DLC shop in a separated part of the game (e.g. the main menu).

The result was basically slot machines in your games. The idea is that people are happy to pay to have fun in a game, and that this 'fun' can be broken down in parts that could be monetized at any given moment rather than "just" on the purchase price.

The long term goal is in the area of refilling virtual guns with actual money, paying not to run around naked in the game and stronger (virtual) muscles for those who can't afford it. Currently humanity won't stand for it yet, so we're eased into this by a step in that direction: lootboxes.

As the name suggests, these are closed boxes (or ziplock bags, vaults or something similar...the 'closed' is the important part) that you receive in the game at certain times. Usually upon a victory, when your spirits are up and older games do rewards (like extra heart containers in Zelda). You can't open them, though, as this would require actual payments. And as said earlier: the content is random. You don't pay for stuff you might want, but rather for the CHANCE you might get something you want.

Explained rationally, there is no reason to want the contents of a lootbox (or even a game containing them, for that matter). But those demons know damn well we're not rational beings but emotional ones. Lootboxes work because they rely on group pressure ("oooh...HE got a Tyrannosaurus as pet. I've gotta open boxes until I can match his coolness!"), on our curiosity ("it's...a box. And I DO NOT KNOW what is inside. But...I WANT to know!!") and our inability to do statistics (("hmm...those last twenty boxes were garbage. So surely the twenty-first one will hold the grand prize that'll make all this purchases worth it!").

Why...that's actual gambling, only dumber.

 

[nightweb]

E.A. motto is "Loot boxes are just surprise mechanics"
My motto is almost the same "its not piracy why i pirate EA games, its surprise ownership"

This genuinely made me laugh,

 

[Deleted User]

Nintendo:

• Dr. Mario World has lootboxes. Can't really speak of any other phone game besides Super Mario Run, but this is just the last one that comes to mind
• badge arcade for the 3DS was also loot boxy, as was that Rusty's game that they bothered to make a street pass puzzle for

Sony:

• ?

Microsoft:

• Sea of Thieves definitely has lootboxes

These were just the ones to come to mind when thinking if any of the primary parties had lootboxes on their stuff.

Halo 5 also had loot boxes. With p2w gear too

 

[Kubas_inko]

As long as the lootboxes dont give you any benefits, I don't see why anyone should ban them.