So why don't you take one of those people to a place that sells lottery tickets and watch what happens if you try that stupid argument after Mr. "Incapable of being responsible for his actions" buys a bunch of scratch off tickets and demands his money back because he didn't win anything.
And after you both get thrown out and try to get the cops to get his money back you can complain about how it's immoral and unethical that the cops refused to make the business refund Mr. "Incapable of being responsible for his actions" money.
First, can you do me a favor and tone it down a notch? We're just having a friendly discussion here. No need to resort to calling my arguments "stupid" because you disagree with them. Sheesh.
Second, I'm not entirely sure you understand the moral and ethical angle of the situation. I understand that the law provides for legal gambling (scratch tickets) and gives companies like Cryptic/PWE some wiggle room to get away with what amounts to slot machines for minors. I'm saying that despite what the law says, I find the practices unethical and morally reprehensible.
Third, the convenience store doesn't hide behind loopholes to sell their scratch tickets. There's no mistaking that they're gambling. Loot crates and lockboxes exist because the law hasn't caught up to modern F2P models--though it does appear that things are being investigated in the EU. Finally.
Well, they may flag all UK accounts so they can't buy or use lock box keys, while letting everyone else still use them. Or...
They may decide that in order to comply with the UK law it's cheaper to just stop providing services to the UK accounts.
Sound unlikely? Maybe, but nobody playing CoH expected the way that game got blindsided with their shutdown notice.
I have yet to see anyone argue gambling be made illegal. If, however, the EU would adopt Law that would cause Cryptic to admit lockboxes are indeed gambling, worst that could happen, really, is that they'd be forced to publicize the odds.
And underaged kids might be locked out from buying lockboxes.
They're responsible if I spent the same amount of money trying to win "that 80" flatscreen, and 7.1 surround home theatre, and that brand new couch set with tables, and that brand new refrigerator, and microwave, and the new washer/dryer set, and that new lawnmower, weedeater, trimmer, hedger, chainsaw, 10 pack of movies, 5 burner BBQ grille, etc." out of a grab bag--even if the grab bag included a consolation prize of paper plates.
No that would be your own stupidity at work, and not their responsibility.
I should have seen it coming, that you would go so far as to try and undermine this order, just to avoid having to concede that lockbox ships are generally considered the best.
And Scim best overall ship?! You must be joking. Just hit lv. 50 on my Rom the other weekend. First thing I did was get me a Fleet Ark'if. And probably not even gonna touch Scim. But even it it were the 'best' ship, for argument's sake, you do know the exception confirms the rule, right?
Oh, didn't know you worked for Cryptic and had all the metric data...
what's that, you don't?
That is YOUR SUBJECTIVE OPINION.
Currently the Federation Fleet yards has 20 open topics on the main page, 3 are lockbox ships. Klingon Fleetyards, 20 topics with no lockbox ships (3 on B'rel / raider flanking)
Romulan Fleet yards 20 open topics, 1 on lockbox ships (all as of 10:12 21st March GMT)
1 lock box ship in Builds/Powers section
So in 80 threads (page 1 in their sections) only 5 threads jump out as lock box ship based, how does that stack up with your crystal ball metric data?
If you are going to try an debunk me, at least attempt some form of data collection first.
Again, in your opinion, lock box ships are the best, obviously not everyone agrees or there would be more open threads in each section of the forums.
I have yet to see anyone argue gambling be made illegal. If, however, the EU would adopt Law that would cause Cryptic to admit lockboxes are indeed gambling, worst that could happen, really, is that they'd be forced to publicize the odds.
Something I mentioned pages back, but people are allergic to more information being added it would seem, as the past 15 pages I've been involved proves - very few want to know, very few want warnings / more information.
Ignorance must be as blissful as the saying goes, as so many are arguing to keep hold of it around here.
So no actual attempt to prevent wrong doing, just CYA if wrong doing is done.
There really isn't a way PWE/Cryptic can "police" it - but by adding the warnings I've asked for - and been defending, for 15 darn pages.... it would cover them as laws are changed, as definitions expand.
For example;
In the UK, silent (or heavy breathing) phone calls (otherwise known as "nuisance" calls) have now been included under Section 39 Common Assault. Cases have gone to court and been backed.
The definition of "Assault" was updated to include "fear of harm" which then encompassed these type of phone calls.
10 years ago, no one would have said a phone call was reason to fear harm or take someone to court - but social attitudes change, as technology marches on so does how a society views things.
Sooner or later, part of society will connect "hard core gambling" addiction to "light gambling elements" in online games, heck if I've thought of it others must have, I'm not the brightest bulb in the box.
Look at the storm there was for years about "violence in video games" - that still pops up from time to time, but companies slapped a "warning : violence" label on the boxes and they are legally covered, what is wrong with PWE/Cryptic getting a jump start on a "warning : gambling elements" ?
(And as someone is bound to bring it up - no I do not believe violence in video games or cartoons makes people go out and steal cars / commit murder etc.. but some do and governments listen, just like they will listen if enough people scream loud enough about gambling in games / cartoons)
Oh, didn't know you worked for Cryptic and had all the metric data...
what's that, you don't?
That is YOUR SUBJECTIVE OPINION.
That mantra is getting old. As is your overly belligerent tone throughout this thread.
1 lock box ship in Builds/Powers section
So in 80 threads (page 1 in their sections) only 5 threads jump out as lock box ship based, how does that stack up with your crystal ball metric data?
That stacks up to me as someone desperately trying to grasp at straws, and making a fool of himself in the process. With your logic, the widely driven Nissan Micra must be a much better car than a Ferrari, as you're seeing so much more of the former!
Give it a rest already. In an interview with Massively, about possible ramifications of lockboxes, and the potential loss of revenue from losing certain countries, should STO become unplayable there, @borticus replied that probably less revenue would be lost from losing a country than abandoning lock boxes. (Sic!)
That mantra is getting old. As is your overly belligerent tone throughout this thread.
That stacks up to me as someone desperately trying to grasp at straws, and making a fool of himself in the process. With your logic, the widely driven Nissan Micra must be a much better car than a Ferrari, as you're seeing so much more of the former!
Give it a rest already. In an interview with Massively, about possible ramifications of lockboxes, and the potential loss of revenue from losing certain countries, should STO become unplayable there, @borticus replied that probably less revenue would be lost from losing a country than abandoning lock boxes. (Sic!)
That should tell you something.
Why don't you go back and read the thread again, as you've not understood a single word I've typed.
I've not asked for lockboxes to be changed or removed.
I've not asked for any game mechanic to be changed.
All I've asked for, is a bit of information to help raise awareness of what this product contains (a gambling element) - which, if done. in the long run could help PWE/Cryptic prove to be a socially responsible company.
Yet you come here, accuse me of being belligerent yet refuse to stay on topic and start talking about YOUR opinion on lockbox ships as if it is a fact - offer no proof, support or evidence - then get mardy when I do offer some to counter you. Plus the tiny bit of your post that is on topic - again, links? direct quotes?, a screenshot?
Your baseless off topic trolling shows who is out for an argument here.
Why don't you go back and read the thread again, as you've not understood a single word I've typed.
I've not asked for lockboxes to be changed or removed.
I've not asked for any game mechanic to be changed.
All I've asked for, is a bit of information to help raise awareness of what this product contains (a gambling element) - which, if done. in the long run could help PWE/Cryptic prove to be a socially responsible company.
Um, no. I came in when you made the hopelessly flawed argument that ppl could just as easily get a C-Store 'toy.' And, most relevant to the discussion, I then pointed out the lockbox toys are generally considered the best, and cannot be gotten elsewhere (nor reasonable alternatives; and if it weren't so, ppl would not spend way more money on lockbox ships than they do on C-Store ships). You then tried to counter this with 'everything is SUBJECTIVE' trickery. You *are* a slick one, I'll give you that.
Plus the tiny bit of your post that is on topic - again, links? direct quotes?, a screenshot?
Borticus' words blew you out of the water, right? I thought they would.
I probably shouldn't carry your fight-picking any further, though.
How is Cryptic supposed to know the person actually buying lock box keys is underage?
The same way websites 'verify' you're not underaged before entering their content: simply by asking you. You can then choose to lie, but that's squarely on the one doing so, and could have repercussions (like being banned, and/or losing your account, afterwards). Like lying on your visa application, or your resume.
Until such time we have chips implanted in our foreheads, immediately letting the company know, thru a scan of the webcam, what your true age is, ppl are simply on the honor system.
Um, no. I came in when you made the hopelessly flawed argument that ppl could just as easily get a C-Store 'toy.' And, most relevant to the discussion, I then pointed out the lockbox toys are generally considered the best, and cannot be gotten elsewhere (nor reasonable alternatives; and if it weren't so, ppl would not spend way more money on lockbox ships than they do on C-Store ships). You then tried to counter this with 'everything is SUBJECTIVE' trickery. You *are* a slick one, I'll give you that.
Flawed argument - so, you cannot buy all C-Store items for free, by grinding and converting Dil for Zen?
Someone better bug report that the Dil exchange is broken then :P
And remember, you are the one spouting your opinion on lock boxes as if it is a fact - without proof or supporting information. Just acknowledge it's your opinion and stop trying to convince people it is anything more than that.
Just because PWE/Cryptic dangle a carrot on a stick and people jump for it - it does not make it the best or biggest carrot around :P
Borticus' words blew you out of the water, right? I thought they would.
I probably shouldn't carry your fight-picking any further, though.
I don't follow or read Massively - hence I said "links?"
As you like generalised statements so much, here is one for you, if you are going to quote an external site, it is generally considered polite to link your source for others to read it and verify your information.
And again, nothing wrong with PWE/Cryptic ( <- I've got to macro that, so fed up typing it) throwing a warning sticker down the bottom of the website, with all the other stickers there (has anyone looked? can you name them without having to scroll down?).
Nothing will change, nothing will be broken, but those who wish to look at the warnings for the game will see the information and can make a more informed choice than they currently can.
(I've been called a lot of things in my time - "Slick" is a first, and I used to a be a door to door salesperson :P)
Just because PWE/Cryptic dangle a carrot on a stick and people jump for it - it does not make it the best or biggest carrot around :P
That only holds true for a brief moment: if lockbox ships really weren't as good as their reputation, ppl would soon stop buying them. Which is *precisely* why Cryptic makes lockbox ships even better than C-Store ships: so you'll have an incentive to buy them over their C-Store ships (the latter can be gotten for $25 flat; lockbox ships, with all their trimmies, can cost you as much as $300).
I don't follow or read Massively - hence I said "links?"
As you like generalised statements so much, here is one for you, if you are going to quote an external site, it is generally considered polite to link your source for others to read it and verify your information.
I thought Borticus' infamous words were common knowledge by now; but hey, why not?
And again, nothing wrong with PWE/Cryptic ( <- I've got to macro that, so fed up typing it) throwing a warning sticker down the bottom of the website, with all the other stickers there (has anyone looked? can you name them without having to scroll down?).
Nothing will change, nothing will be broken, but those who wish to look at the warnings for the game will see the information and can make a more informed choice than they currently can.
Actually, I got nothing against such a warning. In fact, I've always argued (here, and elsewhere) that lockboxes are gambling, despite what Cryptic's Lawyers made of it. And that I frown upon such practices. My only point has ever been that you cannot get past the lockboxes if you want the good stuff.
That only holds true for a brief moment: if lockbox ships really weren't as good as their reputation, ppl would soon stop buying them. Which is *precisely* why Cryptic makes lockbox ships even better than C-Store ships: so you'll have an incentive to buy them over their C-Store ships (the latter can be gotten for $25 flat; lockbox ships, with all their trimmies, can cost you as much as $300).
My only point has ever been that you cannot get past the lockboxes if you want the good stuff.
Again, it is personal opinion as to what is better - so far, there has been only 1 ship in game I've not been able to kill in my B'rel - I've splatted bugs, galors and so on, the only exception is the temporal ship (wells class??). Every time I try, it just seems to move like it's possessed, with massive crit numbers - even if I evasive, EptE 3, impulse burn, Deuterium burn and leave a Barrier Field (one after another, not at the same time) - they keep up with me somehow and shove my torp boat up my backside
Do I think it is "OP"? - nope,
Do I think it is better than my vet token free B'rel, nope
I just need to learn about it and learn to counter it, but as it is 1 ship out of many I encounter in Kerrat or PvP, I'm really not that fussed about it.
My "subjective" opinion is : If it can be killed by a B'rel, it really is not "all powerful" :P (and so far, only 1 ship I've not killed - yet !)
I have no lock box ships, I use free ships and C-Store ships (with 1 Fleet T'vario on my Engi Rom)
In PvE a free ship can do it all, for the purpose of PvE, there is no right or wrong ship. Any ship with a DPS of around 5k (I think that was the last estimate) can complete any and all content in the game.
I PvP in my B'rel, Fleet T'vario, Scim and my Oddy - again, only 1 ship I ever had problems with and I tend not to see that many of them (plus my Oddy can tank 1 until they become bored and leave me alone). My Kill / Death ratio is fine in PvP.
Actually, I got nothing against such a warning. In fact, I've always argued (here, and elsewhere) that lockboxes are gambling, despite what Cryptic's Lawyers made of it. And that I frown upon such practices.
Thank you - this is what I've been trying to get across (badly it seems)
Again, I'm going to ask people to dial back on the way they're responding to people.
If we can't have this discussion calmly and without violating forum rules, I'm going to have to close it down.
For your reference:
Flaming and/or Trolling
You may not post content which contains insults to other users or Perfect World Entertainment Staff, are specifically made to create undue discontent on the forums, disturbances in forum threads, pick fights or otherwise promote unfriendly conversation.
Please recognize that while you may have a strong opinion one way or the other, others may not share your convictions and do not deserve to be the target of a personal attack on that basis, or any basis.
I would also like to point out that calling other people trolls is itself against the rule about trolling. Don't do it.
And finally, this Public Service Announcement:
Reporting Violations
If you believe that someone has violated our Rules and Policies or you have spotted content that may otherwise require attention, you may submit a 'Forums and Website' Ticket here with a brief description of what you believe is wrong. Notification is voluntary and anonymous, but in no situation should a user respond to an issue personally, thereby aggravating the situation further.
Report violations, do not quote them or reply to them. Responding to a violation in an inflammatory manner is a violation in itself and will result in appropriate action. It is also important to not abuse the Ticket system by excessively reporting posts, sending false alarms, or nonsensical messages. Abuse of the Ticket system can result in an infraction for spamming.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
You do understand, you can play Star Trek Online, in full, from start to finish - without spending a single penny in the game.
You do also understand, everything in the C-Store, can be bought, for free, if you are willing to work for it.
At no point are you forced to spend money in Star Trek Online, even this so called "uber bug ship" can be gained with either EC or Dill converted to Zen.
Other games make you buy missions, mounts, items with actual money - in Star Trek Online, using real world money for anything - is optional.
Despite the game's obvious flaws, I agree with you. I quickly gave up on TOR because it wanted your money too badly. STO is very F2P friendly and that can only be a good thing. Stop complaining about that people.
If a game is too greedy it achieves the opposite of what they want with me. I quit on TOR and actually spent real money on STO, so there.
Tyr shall give me strength! For the glory of Tempus! I am the hands of Shar! Flames of Kossuth, protect me! Oghma, grant me knowledge! Lolth commands, and I obey!
Did not know any of that - cheers for the link. I did read the follow up here
The way is was "reported" and the way it was "intended" seem to be 2 different things - depends on who you want to believe really.
The few Massively articles I've read before (by following links) all seemed to be inflammatory to me, that is why I do not bother with it.
Thank you - this is what I've been trying to get across (badly it seems)
Personally, I think Borticus' statement was a bit of a clumsy way of saying they're making a lot of money off of lockboxes. He was also, afterwards, rather p*ssed off at Massively for making it sound like he had spoken in an official Cryptic capacity as to what their (legal) response would be, in case lockboxes were ever considered gambling.
In fact, if you think about it, cutting off an entire country would, in light of his own lockbox comment, be rather silly, as he'd also be cutting off all revenue from... lockboxes (!) from said country.
As for the gambling aspect, I'd rather wish Cryptic were more upfront about lockboxes, indeed, being gambling. For one, they'd have to tell us the odds, by Law; and gamblers and minors could more easily -- either thru self-regulation, or parents -- be excludsed from participating in such a scheme.
Personally, I think Borticus' statement was a bit of a clumsy way of saying they're making a lot of money off of lockboxes. He was also, afterwards, rather p*ssed off at Massively for making it sound like he had spoken in an official Cryptic capacity as to what their (legal) response would be, in case lockboxes were ever considered gambling.
In fact, if you think about it, cutting off an entire country would, in light of his own lockbox comment, be rather silly, as he'd also be cutting off all revenue from... lockboxes (!) from said country
I believe the intent of his statement was to say that blocking Denmark would not have a major financial impact on the game as compared to keeping Lockboxes. Denmark is probably not a big-money market for STO - with probably far less then 1% of STO's player-base coming from there.
Of course that was nearly 2 years ago and we have since seen that Lockboxes are still here, as is Denmark.
STO is about my Liberated Borg Federation Captain with his Breen 1st Officer, Jem'Hadar Tactical Officer, Liberated Borg Engineering Officer, Android Ops Officer, Photonic Science Officer, Gorn Science Officer, and Reman Medical Officer jumping into their Jem'Hadar Carrier and flying off to do missions for the new Romulan Empire. But for some players allowing a T5 Connie to be used breaks the canon in the game.
Personally, I think Borticus' statement was a bit of a clumsy way of saying they're making a lot of money off of lockboxes. He was also, afterwards, rather p*ssed off at Massively for making it sound like he had spoken in an official Cryptic capacity as to what their (legal) response would be, in case lockboxes were ever considered gambling.
Yea, to be fair, I get quite riled up when my words are taken out of context (lol, flick back a few pages here for examples) so I understand his reaction (though, granted it's better than mine would have been).
In fact, if you think about it, cutting off an entire country would, in light of his own lockbox comment, be rather silly, as he'd also be cutting off all revenue from... lockboxes (!) from said country.
LOL, exactly ! This is why companies spend so much on researching local and international legal loopholes and word play.
I would love to know the breakdown of hourly / daily / weekly and monthly key sales in relation to promos and none promo time frames - I bet for some (me included) they'd make a fantastic read and insight into human mind (and wallet)
As for the gambling aspect, I'd rather wish Cryptic were more upfront about lockboxes, indeed, being gambling. For one, they'd have to tell us the odds, by Law; and gamblers and minors could more easily -- either thru self-regulation, or parents -- be excludsed from participating in such a scheme.
See, I'd love for PWE/Cryptic to be more transparent regarding the in game gambling, for reasons I have listed and out of basic decency. People will still buy them, no matter what information is about.
The flip side is, society is like a pendulum, what it approves of and disapproves of constantly changes, swinging back and forth - I'd hate for that pendulum to swing to a major anti gambling stance and PWE / Cryptic getting caught out.
I can see the headlines in my mind - Online game banned, it's responsible for gambling and poverty (This would be "The Daily Mail" route for sure, if not something much worse lol**).
Heck David Cameron was in the news for trying to ban adult material in the UK and people having to contact ISPs for private access (despite how serious this was, I almost wet myself laughing when I read that news), plus look at the back lash on some of Rockstar games products and violence. Won't be too long before gambling in games is looked at.
[** = (for non UK people) The Daily Mail is a well known "doom and gloom" news paper, where it blames all of the world problems on "liberals", "homosexuals", and "the poor". They quite recently ran a column stating police officers in London ( a major city) should not have police cars because it made them lazy, along with the rest of their equipment - and they were not joking either, they want police officers to run to emergencies all over the city :eek: - some of us refer to it as "The Daily Fail")
You can buy the ship on the exchange for EC; no gambling required. Sure, it might cost a lot, but that just means you'll have to grind like you would in any other MMO to get a high end item.
They quite recently ran a column stating police officers in London ( a major city) should not have police cars because it made them lazy, along with the rest of their equipment - and they were not joking either
Here in Poland there was a running joke long time ago, in the form of excerpt from police report:
"And I again have to stress the fact that no matter how fit officers are, a foot patrol is unable to chase down a running vehicle".
You can buy the ship on the exchange for EC; no gambling required. Sure, it might cost a lot, but that just means you'll have to grind like you would in any other MMO to get a high end item.
Said ship is on the exchange only because someone pulled it out from a lockbox. Somehow lots of people making this argument seem to not notice this. Thus gambling IS required.
May 2013, automatic permanent ban for mentioning gold-seller sites pwebranflakes: this system is currently in place and working the way it should. moradum: I got banned for saying "I started my day with cutting off 3 MM off of the bottom of my cabinet"
Said ship is on the exchange only because someone pulled it out from a lockbox. Somehow lots of people making this argument seem to not notice this. Thus gambling IS required.
Yes and no. That statement assumes that the person who acquired the ship prior to selling it bought the packs specifically for this purpose.
Again this goes back to the breakfast cereal analogy I made earlier. You buy the cereal while they're doing a promo and you get the cereal AND a comic book(or whatever the promo is, another example that I've seen is plastic Minion figures). Sane people don't buy the box for the toy prize and throw away the cereal.
Sane people don't buy the box for the toy prize and throw away the cereal.
I've been doing it wrong? I can haz Lucky Charms?
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Yes and no. That statement assumes that the person who acquired the ship prior to selling it bought the packs specifically for this purpose.
Again this goes back to the breakfast cereal analogy I made earlier. You buy the cereal while they're doing a promo and you get the cereal AND a comic book(or whatever the promo is, another example that I've seen is plastic Minion figures). Sane people don't buy the box for the toy prize and throw away the cereal.
It's still a horrible analogy.
Do you think people who buy lottery scratchers are buying them solely for the chance to get little silver-grey flecks over everything?
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
Said ship is on the exchange only because someone pulled it out from a lockbox. Somehow lots of people making this argument seem to not notice this. Thus gambling IS required.
I meant that YOU(the reader) do not personally have to gamble to get it. What other people do with their money is, quite frankly, absolutely none of your business. But the fact is that if you do not want to gamble, you can buy the ship directly off the exchange for a set price. If that isnt good enough for you, nothing ever will be.
I believe the intent of his statement was to say that blocking Denmark would not have a major financial impact on the game as compared to keeping Lockboxes.
However, wasn't this reported on FOX news as "US GAMES DEVELOPER DECLARES WAR ON DENMARK: OBAMA TO BLAME"?
Well this debate is kind of mute since PWE unless am incorrect hold all the cards when it comes to marketing/selling of certain promotional products like the doff pack with Jem Attack ship possibly being won.
The fact is you can decide with lockboxes whether or not will you participate I have and no I didn't get a ship but hey I got some lobi crystals and the extra ones am gonna hold onto and sell on the exchange for a significant profit which I can use to buy the attack ship on the exchange , which by the way is the best way to ensure you will get the desired lockbox ship without all the random chance.
Thats how I got my Wells temporal and mobius destroyer for my two of toons .
You can buy the ship on the exchange for EC; no gambling required. Sure, it might cost a lot, but that just means you'll have to grind like you would in any other MMO to get a high end item.
It's actually a far safer, predictable method. You know what you have to save up for to get the ship. The doff pack game is pure, miniscule luck and it can quickly suck away your resources and still not be successful.
Do you think people who buy lottery scratchers are buying them solely for the chance to get little silver-grey flecks over everything?
Lockboxes are nothing at all like lottery tickets, unless you are ONLY interested in the grand prize ship. Boxes all have a minimum assured return, for example. If you feel like that minimum return is worth the price of a key, then it doesn't matter if you don't get a ship, you still win, just not by as much. If you don't think the minimum return is worth it, then just sell the keys on the exchange and raise the ec to buy exactly what you want.
Do you think people who buy lottery scratchers are buying them solely for the chance to get little silver-grey flecks over everything?
If I were a Judge, presiding over a case like this, I'd be asking myself whether the sales of item X are materially impacted by the presence of (the gambling aspect of) toy Y.
In case of a Doff pack, I'd be inclined to go with bluegeek's reasoning, that you buy such a pack primarily for the Doffs (and then welcome what little extra it comes with on a promo).
In case of a lockbox, however, I'd ask myself the question: "Would people still buy the lockbox if it didn't come with a chance to win a major ship?" Like, would peeps just buy it for the 4 Lobi?
I'd probably conclude that, in case of a lockbox, sales *are* materially impacted by the gambling aspect. And that lockboxes thus constitute gambling.
And that's the point of my question. To make people think how an idea like blocking children can be accomplished.
Because of the anonymous nature of the internet there's no way Cryptic can stop a minor from lying about being an adult. The only effective way to block children is at the source, with parental involvement, and only then if the parents have access to the computer being used.
Are you saying people can lie about their age on the internet? I thought those "Click to Enter Only If You're 18 or Up" was nothing short of foolproof!
Then again, I remember seeing a news article, "12-Year-Old Spends $1400 on Facebook Game", when Facebook has an age limit of 13 and up.
Comments
First, can you do me a favor and tone it down a notch? We're just having a friendly discussion here. No need to resort to calling my arguments "stupid" because you disagree with them. Sheesh.
Second, I'm not entirely sure you understand the moral and ethical angle of the situation. I understand that the law provides for legal gambling (scratch tickets) and gives companies like Cryptic/PWE some wiggle room to get away with what amounts to slot machines for minors. I'm saying that despite what the law says, I find the practices unethical and morally reprehensible.
Third, the convenience store doesn't hide behind loopholes to sell their scratch tickets. There's no mistaking that they're gambling. Loot crates and lockboxes exist because the law hasn't caught up to modern F2P models--though it does appear that things are being investigated in the EU. Finally.
I have yet to see anyone argue gambling be made illegal. If, however, the EU would adopt Law that would cause Cryptic to admit lockboxes are indeed gambling, worst that could happen, really, is that they'd be forced to publicize the odds.
And underaged kids might be locked out from buying lockboxes.
By simply adding an acknowledgement of age upon login. If you lie, they're still covered.
No that would be your own stupidity at work, and not their responsibility.
Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!
Oh, didn't know you worked for Cryptic and had all the metric data...
what's that, you don't?
That is YOUR SUBJECTIVE OPINION.
Currently the Federation Fleet yards has 20 open topics on the main page, 3 are lockbox ships. Klingon Fleetyards, 20 topics with no lockbox ships (3 on B'rel / raider flanking)
Romulan Fleet yards 20 open topics, 1 on lockbox ships (all as of 10:12 21st March GMT)
1 lock box ship in Builds/Powers section
So in 80 threads (page 1 in their sections) only 5 threads jump out as lock box ship based, how does that stack up with your crystal ball metric data?
If you are going to try an debunk me, at least attempt some form of data collection first.
Again, in your opinion, lock box ships are the best, obviously not everyone agrees or there would be more open threads in each section of the forums.
Something I mentioned pages back, but people are allergic to more information being added it would seem, as the past 15 pages I've been involved proves - very few want to know, very few want warnings / more information.
Ignorance must be as blissful as the saying goes, as so many are arguing to keep hold of it around here.
There really isn't a way PWE/Cryptic can "police" it - but by adding the warnings I've asked for - and been defending, for 15 darn pages.... it would cover them as laws are changed, as definitions expand.
For example;
In the UK, silent (or heavy breathing) phone calls (otherwise known as "nuisance" calls) have now been included under Section 39 Common Assault. Cases have gone to court and been backed.
The definition of "Assault" was updated to include "fear of harm" which then encompassed these type of phone calls.
10 years ago, no one would have said a phone call was reason to fear harm or take someone to court - but social attitudes change, as technology marches on so does how a society views things.
Sooner or later, part of society will connect "hard core gambling" addiction to "light gambling elements" in online games, heck if I've thought of it others must have, I'm not the brightest bulb in the box.
Look at the storm there was for years about "violence in video games" - that still pops up from time to time, but companies slapped a "warning : violence" label on the boxes and they are legally covered, what is wrong with PWE/Cryptic getting a jump start on a "warning : gambling elements" ?
(And as someone is bound to bring it up - no I do not believe violence in video games or cartoons makes people go out and steal cars / commit murder etc.. but some do and governments listen, just like they will listen if enough people scream loud enough about gambling in games / cartoons)
That mantra is getting old. As is your overly belligerent tone throughout this thread.
That stacks up to me as someone desperately trying to grasp at straws, and making a fool of himself in the process. With your logic, the widely driven Nissan Micra must be a much better car than a Ferrari, as you're seeing so much more of the former!
Give it a rest already. In an interview with Massively, about possible ramifications of lockboxes, and the potential loss of revenue from losing certain countries, should STO become unplayable there, @borticus replied that probably less revenue would be lost from losing a country than abandoning lock boxes. (Sic!)
That should tell you something.
Why don't you go back and read the thread again, as you've not understood a single word I've typed.
I've not asked for lockboxes to be changed or removed.
I've not asked for any game mechanic to be changed.
All I've asked for, is a bit of information to help raise awareness of what this product contains (a gambling element) - which, if done. in the long run could help PWE/Cryptic prove to be a socially responsible company.
Yet you come here, accuse me of being belligerent yet refuse to stay on topic and start talking about YOUR opinion on lockbox ships as if it is a fact - offer no proof, support or evidence - then get mardy when I do offer some to counter you. Plus the tiny bit of your post that is on topic - again, links? direct quotes?, a screenshot?
Your baseless off topic trolling shows who is out for an argument here.
Um, no. I came in when you made the hopelessly flawed argument that ppl could just as easily get a C-Store 'toy.' And, most relevant to the discussion, I then pointed out the lockbox toys are generally considered the best, and cannot be gotten elsewhere (nor reasonable alternatives; and if it weren't so, ppl would not spend way more money on lockbox ships than they do on C-Store ships). You then tried to counter this with 'everything is SUBJECTIVE' trickery. You *are* a slick one, I'll give you that.
Borticus' words blew you out of the water, right? I thought they would.
I probably shouldn't carry your fight-picking any further, though.
The same way websites 'verify' you're not underaged before entering their content: simply by asking you. You can then choose to lie, but that's squarely on the one doing so, and could have repercussions (like being banned, and/or losing your account, afterwards). Like lying on your visa application, or your resume.
Until such time we have chips implanted in our foreheads, immediately letting the company know, thru a scan of the webcam, what your true age is, ppl are simply on the honor system.
Flawed argument - so, you cannot buy all C-Store items for free, by grinding and converting Dil for Zen?
Someone better bug report that the Dil exchange is broken then :P
And remember, you are the one spouting your opinion on lock boxes as if it is a fact - without proof or supporting information. Just acknowledge it's your opinion and stop trying to convince people it is anything more than that.
Just because PWE/Cryptic dangle a carrot on a stick and people jump for it - it does not make it the best or biggest carrot around :P
I don't follow or read Massively - hence I said "links?"
As you like generalised statements so much, here is one for you, if you are going to quote an external site, it is generally considered polite to link your source for others to read it and verify your information.
And again, nothing wrong with PWE/Cryptic ( <- I've got to macro that, so fed up typing it) throwing a warning sticker down the bottom of the website, with all the other stickers there (has anyone looked? can you name them without having to scroll down?).
Nothing will change, nothing will be broken, but those who wish to look at the warnings for the game will see the information and can make a more informed choice than they currently can.
(I've been called a lot of things in my time - "Slick" is a first, and I used to a be a door to door salesperson :P)
That only holds true for a brief moment: if lockbox ships really weren't as good as their reputation, ppl would soon stop buying them. Which is *precisely* why Cryptic makes lockbox ships even better than C-Store ships: so you'll have an incentive to buy them over their C-Store ships (the latter can be gotten for $25 flat; lockbox ships, with all their trimmies, can cost you as much as $300).
I thought Borticus' infamous words were common knowledge by now; but hey, why not?
http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/05/15/star-trek-online-dev-not-concerned-with-losing-global-playabilit/
Actually, I got nothing against such a warning. In fact, I've always argued (here, and elsewhere) that lockboxes are gambling, despite what Cryptic's Lawyers made of it. And that I frown upon such practices. My only point has ever been that you cannot get past the lockboxes if you want the good stuff.
Again, it is personal opinion as to what is better - so far, there has been only 1 ship in game I've not been able to kill in my B'rel - I've splatted bugs, galors and so on, the only exception is the temporal ship (wells class??). Every time I try, it just seems to move like it's possessed, with massive crit numbers - even if I evasive, EptE 3, impulse burn, Deuterium burn and leave a Barrier Field (one after another, not at the same time) - they keep up with me somehow and shove my torp boat up my backside
Do I think it is "OP"? - nope,
Do I think it is better than my vet token free B'rel, nope
I just need to learn about it and learn to counter it, but as it is 1 ship out of many I encounter in Kerrat or PvP, I'm really not that fussed about it.
My "subjective" opinion is : If it can be killed by a B'rel, it really is not "all powerful" :P (and so far, only 1 ship I've not killed - yet !)
I have no lock box ships, I use free ships and C-Store ships (with 1 Fleet T'vario on my Engi Rom)
In PvE a free ship can do it all, for the purpose of PvE, there is no right or wrong ship. Any ship with a DPS of around 5k (I think that was the last estimate) can complete any and all content in the game.
I PvP in my B'rel, Fleet T'vario, Scim and my Oddy - again, only 1 ship I ever had problems with and I tend not to see that many of them (plus my Oddy can tank 1 until they become bored and leave me alone). My Kill / Death ratio is fine in PvP.
Did not know any of that - cheers for the link. I did read the follow up here
The way is was "reported" and the way it was "intended" seem to be 2 different things - depends on who you want to believe really.
The few Massively articles I've read before (by following links) all seemed to be inflammatory to me, that is why I do not bother with it.
Thank you - this is what I've been trying to get across (badly it seems)
If we can't have this discussion calmly and without violating forum rules, I'm going to have to close it down.
For your reference:
Please recognize that while you may have a strong opinion one way or the other, others may not share your convictions and do not deserve to be the target of a personal attack on that basis, or any basis.
I would also like to point out that calling other people trolls is itself against the rule about trolling. Don't do it.
And finally, this Public Service Announcement:
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Despite the game's obvious flaws, I agree with you. I quickly gave up on TOR because it wanted your money too badly. STO is very F2P friendly and that can only be a good thing. Stop complaining about that people.
If a game is too greedy it achieves the opposite of what they want with me. I quit on TOR and actually spent real money on STO, so there.
For the glory of Tempus!
I am the hands of Shar!
Flames of Kossuth, protect me!
Oghma, grant me knowledge!
Lolth commands, and I obey!
Personally, I think Borticus' statement was a bit of a clumsy way of saying they're making a lot of money off of lockboxes. He was also, afterwards, rather p*ssed off at Massively for making it sound like he had spoken in an official Cryptic capacity as to what their (legal) response would be, in case lockboxes were ever considered gambling.
In fact, if you think about it, cutting off an entire country would, in light of his own lockbox comment, be rather silly, as he'd also be cutting off all revenue from... lockboxes (!) from said country.
As for the gambling aspect, I'd rather wish Cryptic were more upfront about lockboxes, indeed, being gambling. For one, they'd have to tell us the odds, by Law; and gamblers and minors could more easily -- either thru self-regulation, or parents -- be excludsed from participating in such a scheme.
Of course that was nearly 2 years ago and we have since seen that Lockboxes are still here, as is Denmark.
Yea, to be fair, I get quite riled up when my words are taken out of context (lol, flick back a few pages here for examples) so I understand his reaction (though, granted it's better than mine would have been).
LOL, exactly ! This is why companies spend so much on researching local and international legal loopholes and word play.
I would love to know the breakdown of hourly / daily / weekly and monthly key sales in relation to promos and none promo time frames - I bet for some (me included) they'd make a fantastic read and insight into human mind (and wallet)
See, I'd love for PWE/Cryptic to be more transparent regarding the in game gambling, for reasons I have listed and out of basic decency. People will still buy them, no matter what information is about.
The flip side is, society is like a pendulum, what it approves of and disapproves of constantly changes, swinging back and forth - I'd hate for that pendulum to swing to a major anti gambling stance and PWE / Cryptic getting caught out.
I can see the headlines in my mind - Online game banned, it's responsible for gambling and poverty (This would be "The Daily Mail" route for sure, if not something much worse lol**).
Heck David Cameron was in the news for trying to ban adult material in the UK and people having to contact ISPs for private access (despite how serious this was, I almost wet myself laughing when I read that news), plus look at the back lash on some of Rockstar games products and violence. Won't be too long before gambling in games is looked at.
[** = (for non UK people) The Daily Mail is a well known "doom and gloom" news paper, where it blames all of the world problems on "liberals", "homosexuals", and "the poor". They quite recently ran a column stating police officers in London ( a major city) should not have police cars because it made them lazy, along with the rest of their equipment - and they were not joking either, they want police officers to run to emergencies all over the city :eek: - some of us refer to it as "The Daily Fail")
Here in Poland there was a running joke long time ago, in the form of excerpt from police report:
"And I again have to stress the fact that no matter how fit officers are, a foot patrol is unable to chase down a running vehicle".
Said ship is on the exchange only because someone pulled it out from a lockbox. Somehow lots of people making this argument seem to not notice this. Thus gambling IS required.
pwebranflakes: this system is currently in place and working the way it should.
moradum: I got banned for saying "I started my day with cutting off 3 MM off of the bottom of my cabinet"
Again this goes back to the breakfast cereal analogy I made earlier. You buy the cereal while they're doing a promo and you get the cereal AND a comic book(or whatever the promo is, another example that I've seen is plastic Minion figures). Sane people don't buy the box for the toy prize and throw away the cereal.
My character Tsin'xing
I've been doing it wrong? I can haz Lucky Charms?
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
It's still a horrible analogy.
Do you think people who buy lottery scratchers are buying them solely for the chance to get little silver-grey flecks over everything?
I meant that YOU(the reader) do not personally have to gamble to get it. What other people do with their money is, quite frankly, absolutely none of your business. But the fact is that if you do not want to gamble, you can buy the ship directly off the exchange for a set price. If that isnt good enough for you, nothing ever will be.
However, wasn't this reported on FOX news as "US GAMES DEVELOPER DECLARES WAR ON DENMARK: OBAMA TO BLAME"?
Well this debate is kind of mute since PWE unless am incorrect hold all the cards when it comes to marketing/selling of certain promotional products like the doff pack with Jem Attack ship possibly being won.
The fact is you can decide with lockboxes whether or not will you participate I have and no I didn't get a ship but hey I got some lobi crystals and the extra ones am gonna hold onto and sell on the exchange for a significant profit which I can use to buy the attack ship on the exchange
Thats how I got my Wells temporal and mobius destroyer for my two of toons
It's actually a far safer, predictable method. You know what you have to save up for to get the ship. The doff pack game is pure, miniscule luck and it can quickly suck away your resources and still not be successful.
Lockboxes are nothing at all like lottery tickets, unless you are ONLY interested in the grand prize ship. Boxes all have a minimum assured return, for example. If you feel like that minimum return is worth the price of a key, then it doesn't matter if you don't get a ship, you still win, just not by as much. If you don't think the minimum return is worth it, then just sell the keys on the exchange and raise the ec to buy exactly what you want.
If I were a Judge, presiding over a case like this, I'd be asking myself whether the sales of item X are materially impacted by the presence of (the gambling aspect of) toy Y.
In case of a Doff pack, I'd be inclined to go with bluegeek's reasoning, that you buy such a pack primarily for the Doffs (and then welcome what little extra it comes with on a promo).
In case of a lockbox, however, I'd ask myself the question: "Would people still buy the lockbox if it didn't come with a chance to win a major ship?" Like, would peeps just buy it for the 4 Lobi?
I'd probably conclude that, in case of a lockbox, sales *are* materially impacted by the gambling aspect. And that lockboxes thus constitute gambling.
Are you saying people can lie about their age on the internet? I thought those "Click to Enter Only If You're 18 or Up" was nothing short of foolproof!
Then again, I remember seeing a news article, "12-Year-Old Spends $1400 on Facebook Game", when Facebook has an age limit of 13 and up.