test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

Web game extras get Office of Fair Trading scrutiny

2»

Comments

  • Options
    scrimpinionscrimpinion Member Posts: 76 Arc User
    edited April 2013
    Lockboxes are like crackerjacks: You're going to get something desirable everytime, but there might also be something really cool in there.

    From where I'm standing, that's *nothing* like a Crackerjack box. The only thing worse than that crummy caramel corn and nut failure is the "prize" they put in the box.

    :D

    To stay on-topic though:

    I just don't get the rage over lockboxen, I don't. It almost single-handedly funds STO in a way that people who have some financial or moral/ethical obstacle to paying money for the game are still able to play it.

    Rewards have been improved in them to the point that they have genuine value.

    almost every single thing they contain, especially the "important" things like ships and high value consoles/weapons/etc., can be listed on the exchange, and bought by people who never spent a dime on this game.

    If you have more money (...than sense *cough*), and you REALLY REALLY want the big deal ship, you can dump hundreds of dollars into them and statistically end up with 1-2 of em. and even if you DON'T get the one you want, you'll find yourself with sufficient lobi to buy a super-fancy ship anyhow.

    there are two underlying motivations to the people that rage about how it's "totally gambling u gais."

    1) they loathe lockboxes on some oddly specific principle. maybe a lockbox led to their grandfather dying in the war or something, I dunno. But they HATES them, and would apparently rather see STO shut its doors/be forced to pay money to play this game.

    2) They're supersad about how much it costs in the exchange to get the thing they want, and are under the impression that that same ship would totally be cheap if only there were no lockboxes. Even though according to devs, most if not all of those ships wouldn't even be MADE if they were available to anybody for the standard price, cuz CBS said so.


    the only appropriate answer to both of the statements above is: meh.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    maxvitormaxvitor Member Posts: 2,213 Arc User
    edited April 2013
    Nothing that STO sells is mandatory, everything it sells is optional, you don't need to spend money to play the game, it would be far different if it incorporated a system where you get so far in the game then a prompt requiring money to continue popped up. Even lock boxes are an optional expense, you don't need to open the boxes to be able to play the game and even though you are technically gambling to get what you want from a box when you do open them, you always get something, the boxes are never empty.
    STO is following the letter of law far better than many supposedly F2P mmos because the game is playable in it's entirety without spending money.
    An example of an F2P model that should be investigated is EA/Bioware's SW:TOR where a large portion of the game is inaccessible unless you spend money.
    Do I feel pressured to buy Zen? No I do not, I buy Zen as an expedient to get things that might interest me without grinding for it in the game but also because I recognize that although this game may be F2P, it is not a charity, it is not something to which I am entitled to as some god given right, it is a business, a game supported through micro-transactions, and even though it's possible to get anything and everything just though playing, somebody somewhere has to spend money for them to continue providing this game.
    PWE/CRyptic does not owe us this game, we are not entitled to it free gratis with no strings attached and anyone who believes otherwise needs to get their head out of the clouds, or whereever else they may be sticking it.
    If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
    Oh Hell NO to ARC
  • Options
    marcusdkanemarcusdkane Member Posts: 7,439 Arc User
    edited April 2013
    Tricky issue for sure... Does the child have the awareness of financial value to understand the implications of its actions? I think the onus lies solely with the parents to make sure that they do and to appropriately monitor their activity. A report I caught on the news last night said that one kid had run up a bill of 1000 pounds. The only thing I can say to that, is those parents deserve to be publicly identified, ridiculed, and then made to pay the bill, even if it's financially crippling, in one hit. That'll teach them (and their spoiled brat) what financial responsibility means...

    "Sorry kid, no birthday or Christmas presents for you this year, because you put us in the poor house!"

    :D:D


    Devs might very well create apps and games for the lols, but at the end of the day, they do it as their jobs, as a business, and are entitled to be paid for their work like any other career. No, I have no sympathy for those too stupid to moderate their own or their children's spending in such things...
Sign In or Register to comment.