Ubisoft admits the truth behind lootboxes

https://www.dsogaming.com/news/ubiso…ed-into-games/

in the next paragraph, Ubisoft’s support went as honest as it could get, revealing that the loot boxes are so profitable for the company that it makes no sense – business-wise – to not include them in its games.
…
"it means that some players end up spending more on our games than others and that does result in increased profits for us. It also helps us to put more money into new titles and to understand what players look for in their games. If players simply didn’t buy these crates, they would not be added into games in future."

In times of past, if you couldn't stand a government's amateurism that deteriorate or stagnate a society, you'd pack your bags and move to another country.
Okay today too in war affected areas and natural disasters, but those are exceptions.

Internet crosses boundaries and ignores your alergia, you may move anywhere you want and will still be bombarded with all sorts of malware. Lootboxes are exactly that. A malware that needs to be extinct. And you, alone, can't possibly do anything about it. Except moving to only two countries that banned those which, when it's only two, is kinda complicated.

For not bullshiting like other companies who preach lootboxes are "player's choice" and other idiocies, Ubisoft deserved my respect.

There are two remedies. One: Never buy a lootbox. Two:Never buy a game with lootboxes. I've definitely never done one, and whether I've done two, I can't say, as I tend to ignore any store/dlc content in games. But I have the luxury of not having played a MMO for over 10 years now. That won't change either.

Yup, I put loot box games right up there with Origin and Ubijunk platforms: I don't buy them. Ever. If you purchase them, you are supporting that style of game even if you don't buy the extra stuff. And agreed, the worst offenders these days seem to be online games/mmo's, at the moment I'm involved in one that's been testing for quite some time, and if they do loot box garbage, I will not be playing it upon release. I'll just sell my package or give it to a friend instead.

Originally Posted by forgottenlor
There are two remedies. One: Never buy a lootbox. Two:Never buy a game with lootboxes. I've definitely never done one, and whether I've done two, I can't say, as I tend to ignore any store/dlc content in games.

I had an interesting discussion with someone about whether it was sensible to purchase a game that contained loot boxes. By buying said game, are you subsequently supporting the idea of loot boxes? In an attempt to send a message that "it's not ok", is it worth the risk of having a beloved game series become a financial failure and thus hurt its future?

In my mind, no. My thinking is that they don't benefit from someone who doesn't drop a dime on loot boxes; correlation does not imply causation. At the same time, purchasing a title with loot boxes mean you may unintentionally support the practice of games featuring them. In that instance, what do you do?

I've been content with purchasing titles that contain them in the past. It means I want the game to succeed and am confident enough in the product that I'll spend money on it. Still, I worry that developers might not see the intended message, and I want them to understand that I'm supporting the game rather than the predatory practices they are subject to.

That said, if it does contain loot boxes, me going out of my way to buy one is an impossibility. Additionally, my days with MMOs are a thing of the past.

Personally, I don't buy games with loot boxes and microtransactions. My concern is that games will be designed differently to encourage those purchases, which I think is a bad thing. If everyone buys the game, and then some people purchase the microtransactions and others don't, they've gained something and lost nothing, so have every incentive to continue down that path.

Every modern Ubisoft game has some type of loot boxes or the option to buy them. I never paid a single cent as it's easier to download, or make your own cheat trainer.

So yes congrats go to the employee for speaking the truth.

It’s not about choice, it’s about profitability!

Originally Posted by Ripper
Personally, I don't buy games with loot boxes and microtransactions. My concern is that games will be designed differently to encourage those purchases, which I think is a bad thing. If everyone buys the game, and then some people purchase the microtransactions and others don't, they've gained something and lost nothing, so have every incentive to continue down that path.

Yep, this is what I'm concerned about. Simply containing loot boxes means someone somewhere will buy into them, and that's still a form of profit.

Also, in an industry that is constantly growing, the limited number of people that protest against loot boxes (and avoid buying into them) will be countered by the number of copies sold. It's a shame, because even if a dedicated group of people want to send a message, if it's a game with a cemented history and/or it's well received by critics, it will either make a tiny dent or no dent at all. And in that case, you'd make a bigger impact by simply not buying the game, putting it at risk of financial failure and giving it a bleak future. Tough situation there.

Maybe that's not a bad thing though. I do love new IPs. The added risk of uncertainty combined with new ideas is really, really exciting to me.

What a revelation. A buyable feature is meant to be bought.

What next… buyable features in free to p(l)ay products are meant to be bought.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
What a revelation. A buyable feature is meant to be bought.

What next… buyable features in free to p(l)ay products are meant to be bought.

There's no revelation here, only a welcome surprise to see a company be open about reasons their games contain loot boxes, rather than a company trying to convince their audience it's for "for the players".

I buy games with loot boxes and MT and will continue to. I’ve never purchased a loot box or MT and can’t really see myself doing so. Yes, boo me now.

I’ve yet to play a game that I felt was made in a way to get me to buy the LB or MT’s so I don’t really see that as an issue currently. Will it in the future? Don’t know.

I guess I don’t care enough to skip a title I want to play just to avoid the possibly of being seen as supporting the practice of LB’s and MT’s.

To me just buying the game is not supporting LB’s and MT’s. I can assure you that companies track game sales and LB, MT sales separately and if there comes a point where LB’s and MT’s don’t make enough money to warrant including them then they won’t be included.

I won't boo you - it's a perfectly reasonable opinion. What I would say is that I think, over time, we'll see more and more major games that become more obviously diminished by this trend. It's a slippery slope argument, which is by no means conclusive, but my (probably hopeless) protest is just a vain attempt to nip it in the bud.

Originally Posted by Ripper
I won't boo you - it's a perfectly reasonable opinion. What I would say is that I think, over time, we'll see more and more major games that become more obviously diminished by this trend. It's a slippery slope argument, which is by no means conclusive, but my (probably hopeless) protest is just a vain attempt to nip it in the bud.

Loot boxes most obviously work and are unbalancing in multiplayer, since players are in direct competition with each other. I don't play that way anymore, so I'm not affected by that trend. In many single player games, most things are in essence cosmetic, or give you some overpowered items you really don't need, since you can change the difficulty, or even finish in hard mode without the items. I would never play a game though where purchasing anything extra would be required or would even be tempting to me.
I'm constantly astounded by the things people will buy. Like a special hat or something. That's so foreign to me as for me gameplay is the most important element of any game.

I agree, but I think part of the negative impact on AAA games going forward is that, because online games can be much more effectively leveraged in that way, all the focus will go to producing those types of games.

I play ESO at times and it has loot boxes, but I don't buy them or anything else which costs real money. They sometimes give them away for FREE if you log in regularly and I'm fine with that as a loyalty reward. I'll always take free stuff!!

Borderland has loot boxes !! You get them for free via entering codes for golden keys !!

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
What a revelation. A buyable feature is meant to be bought.

"Games as a service".
Well, at least board games are not affected by this mind set so far.

Originally Posted by Ragnaris
There's no revelation here, only a welcome surprise to see a company be open about reasons their games contain loot boxes, rather than a company trying to convince their audience it's for "for the players".

The loot boxes are for players. Players who do not want to play a game, who do not want to spend time on playing a game.

Of course there is a demand for this kind of stuff or the devs would not even bother thinking about it.

The rejection came as players felt constrained: playing vid products is something cultural for them, to belong to a group so this stuff felt like a tax on them.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
The loot boxes are for players.

No.
Lootboxes are for:
1. imbecilles
2. gambling addicts

A player can be an imbecillic addict, but not every addicted imbecille is a player.