And the exodus from the RNG loot box marketplace continues:
I don’t really think BL3 will have microtransactions. I think BL3 will sell very well, especially on a new engine and if Gearbox continues to release content for the game and can be kept alive for a very long time. Not to mention that Gearbox has other projects down the line that will also aid in filling any holes in their budget. I have faith that they will keep lootboxes and such out of BL3. If they did, it would seriously run the risk of alienating the fanbase and eventually it could turn the games into a shallow, hollow, shell of itself. Also, if they even did it would be extremely hard to implement them without changing the core of the game by getting rid of the aspect of farming if you could just whip out your credit card and get the new legendaries. I don’t see much cause for concern, BL3 should be safe
More loot box news:
Specifically, the Netherlands Gaming Authority has addressed games in which there is a real market value to items in loot boxes, and that the specific item found is subject to random chance. Relevant quote:
That’s actually a helpful distinction to make for many reasons, and reflects quite a few of the points raised in the discussions up-thread.
I think we’re in good shape now, even if gearbox or 2K planned loot boxes or some ■■■■■■ version of micro transactions to be in BL3 it’s too toxic a subject to even approach now.
We have EA’s greed to thank for the regress of loot boxes and that’s s good feeling.
I think borderlands 3 will have something though.
Borderlands 2 kinda did, but it was basically mini Dlc heads/skins.
I think we’ll see that again but more streamlined as a micro transaction.
Personally, I’d like to see them have one micro transaction in borderlands 3.
You pay 0.99$ and Torgue will play you a random sick ass guitar solo.
I literally want that just to take the piss outa micro transactions, though maybe some would consider it basically a donation box lol.
The Dutch have given us a life line, one possible future. It is now up to the federation of international gamers to unite, fight, and cry to mommy if all goes wrong.
Thank you Holland.
Bl3 will absolutely have microtransactions. And they almost certainly be skin packs. Just like bl2.
I’d second this. Personally i think this is a more respected practice as you have a choice for cosmetics, and nothing that effects game play. Having said that, there were things in the WWII loot packs that were cosmetics for guns, even though you got more xp from the top end, they still charged for these and they were random drops.
So at least with buying a cosmetic pack you ‘know’ exactly what your getting. I bought a few. I know that RandyP has his eye on the loot pack situation as he tweeted on the Dutch law that just passed. So it’s pretty much in the bag we’ll get a fair deal.
Ok. That IS encouraging. Loot chests through the course of the game with no extra real world money and “Is Borderlands cool?”
This is also encouraging for upcoming releases like 1v1. I have concerns there that the final form will be PTW cards and card packs. I’m glad they’re monitoring the backlash to EA and taking it seriously.
I’ve no doubt the entire gaming industry has just had one big fork stuck it’s ar*e
The ‘gamers’ have been ranting on about this for some time, seeing it spiral out of control. I hope this is gonna spread world wide, but Activision make so much from micro transactions it’s possible they’ll start WW3… Interesting to see how this pans out.
Well, I’ll say this, I love Battleborn in spite of its flaws.
One of the flaws that helped kill the player base, though, was the microtransactions and the introduction of platinum. They really towed the line with it too and it walked very close to the edge of pay to win.
Thankfully it didn’t hit PTW in my book, and they eased back and made platinum available in game and Magnus Packs available with credits.
But the point is… it’s like they were feeling out how far they could go with it, and I know a chunk of the community left when it was introduced.
And now the Belgians have stepped in and defined “the line” for loot boxes:
So, real $ + random chance + impact seem to be the criteria. Loot boxes with a fixed, known outcome are fine. I would imagine a system like Battleborn, where you get a refund for use in game should RNG roll a skin or taunt you already have, would also be fine since items can’t be bought/sold/swapped. And an element of chance where the items received offered no advantage or penalty within the game might also be fine. Pay for a chance to win, however, is dead.
Most importantly: Pretty much every country seems to make money the deciding factor of loot boxes when it comes to the “is it legal?”-discussion. So, games like Borderlands, where there is no money involved in opening loot chests, will be fine. Just keep your fingers out of your costumer’s wallets and your game can be as loot-heavy as you want.
Yes. I want it ALL!!!
I’m gonna play devil’s advocate for a sec and say that they are not in our wallets as much as we are giving them our wallets. I disagree with sluffing off responsibility for personal choices. Wherever Microtransactions become predatory against children with too much access to mommy and daddy’s wallet I would agree, because you’re creating a chemical imbalance in children but adults don’t get an excuse. Buy the product or wisely abstain and refuse further patronage.
The problem is not limited to children though. It’s gambling with real money. Yes, you can wisely abstain, but when the game does not advertise that it’s gambling and they craft the mechanics to be psychologically desirable and addictive, it’s not just a problem for children. Adults with adictive personalities can be easily drawn into gambling and develop a gambling addiction for mechanics that are not acknowledged as (but clearly are demonstrably) gambling.
I agree to an extent but adults should be responsible for their choices. Marketed as gambling or not, an addict or not, YOU are responsible for YOU. I wholly disagree with the viewpoint of “I’m just a victim of my circumstances.” We don’t need Governments or corporations telling us what we should already be cognitive enough to recognize and make the decision best for ourself; whether it’s alcohol, narcotics, porn, or loot boxes.
steps off soapbox
I don’t disagree with the assessment that people are responsible for their actions. My point was more: it’s unethical to encourage this type of addictive behavior and hide it under the guise of a game. Yes, people who engage in addictive behaviors are responsible for their actions, but it raises moral and ethical questions when an institution encourages this behavior under the guise of fun with no disclaimers or warnings, even going so far as to research and implement ways of manipulating people to engage in the behavior. Yes, they are responsible for their actions, but it’s not right for developers to encourage and base a marketing strategy on this behavior.
I agree. More responsibility for everyone.