Jump to content

Take-Two At E3 And The Possibility Of KSP 2 Being There Discussion


 Share

Recommended Posts

Whatever you may be feeling about how others view the idea of inclusiveness, please do not mock the viewpoints which differ from your own. Some comments have been removed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take two did what amounts to an attempt at an ethics panel, while they fill their games with microtransactions and think loot boxes aren't a form of gambling for kids, on the contrary, their CEO actually said loot boxes are protected by freedom of speech and could not be legislated against.

The overwhelming response to said panel seems to indicate that they don't have the moral credibility to pull that off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, allmhuran said:

loot boxes aren't a form of gambling for kids, on the contrary, their CEO actually said loot boxes are protected by freedom of speech and could not be legislated against.

<Tinfoil hat on>

Sometimes I wander if wasn't the companies like EA and 2K themselves to have started this whole "loot boxes are gambling" thing, of all the predatory microtransaction tactics out there going specifically against a very strict definition of lootbox and comparing it to a very specific kind of gambling seems the exact thing to do if you want to keep the debate going for a decade and a half before the politics start to think about moving to do something about it, to then have the companies selling lootboxes weasel out with another decade or so of legal battles by making the very easy comparison between lootbox and TCGs booster packs and arguing that their specific flavor is not a lootbox but a booster pack.

And then, when after a couple of decades of legal battles the lootboxes gets finally nailed down, the companies will  just switch to another form of predatory microtransactions of the dozen possible and start the whole cycle again.

On a completely different note, WotC doesn't recognize the secondary market for MTG cards singles because doing so would put booster packs in the legal definition of gambling for some countries.

<Tinfoil hat off>

OTOH making a blanket "all games with microtansaction are rated 18+" (but even 16+) would basically instantly kill the whole scene, the worst offenders like FIFA and bug mobile games LOVE their parents-reassuring 3+ ratings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 11:37 PM, Master39 said:

Sometimes I wander if wasn't the companies like EA and 2K themselves to have started this whole "loot boxes are gambling" thing, of all the predatory microtransaction tactics out there going specifically against a very strict definition of lootbox and comparing it to a very specific kind of gambling seems the exact thing to do if you want to keep the debate going for a decade and a half before the politics start to think about moving to do something about it, to then have the companies selling lootboxes weasel out with another decade or so of legal battles by making the very easy comparison between lootbox and TCGs booster packs and arguing that their specific flavor is not a lootbox but a booster pack.

I can't say with certainty that EA doesn't operate on whole another level, as I have no insight into their internal marketing, but I highly doubt it. Places where I have had a good look at how the marketing is done from the inside don't operate on anywhere near that kind of forethought. Game marketing is entirely reactionary. And to be clear, this isn't a critique - at least, not in whole, They do what works, and trying to plan for the next successful strategy a decade ahead is absolutely not a thing that has been working for anyone. You invest in some number of smaller games that are trying new things, including new monetization tactics, most of which will fall flat, and then you invest the bulk of your effort into replicating what has worked before the demographic preferences change. And they'll do plenty of underhanded things, but horizon on this is measured in months, not years, unless it's something very generic that can be adapted to many different ways of marketing. You know, like match-making against pay-to-win players, because that's something you'll be able to milk no matter what you're actually selling. But loot boxes are too specific. By the time major companies went all in on the idea, the questions of ethicality and legality were already being raised. Current maneuvering reads to me like trying to suck all the profit they can from loot boxes before regulation clamps down, partially in disbelief that it hasn't happened already.

Interestingly, a lot of companies are starting to learn that chasing hype with a game that has a six year development cycle doesn't actually work. It's something you ought to have been able to predict, but there is quite a bit of tunnel vision when you've been making games for decades following the same formula. Large studios will have to adjust to build more flexibility into their development cycle. And I do wonder if this is going to propagate into how games are monetized and marketed or if it's just going to create an even larger rift between developers and marketing teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, K^2 said:

Interestingly, a lot of companies are starting to learn that chasing hype with a game that has a six year development cycle doesn't actually work.

As an outsider, it does appear that this is becoming the case. Take the unique instance of Cloud Imperium Games that has made a mint with an arguably Alpha State game for years. Allegedly they are losing traction, but from the outside it doesn't appear that way. Whatever the current reality is with this one company internally, this phenom will very likely never repeat.

 

18 minutes ago, K^2 said:

And I do wonder if this is going to propagate into how games are monetized and marketed or if it's just going to create an even larger rift between developers and marketing teams.

Maybe I am the pessimist, but I believe that, for the foreseeable future, the rift will become larger as marketing teams try to sell the ideas and not the realities. In my own field productivity means more than quality and in this field, safety in reality is paramount. It sure looks like King Greed will continue with the crown for some years to come. May I please be wrong.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a more ksp2 related note, if the devs add mod support like they have promised multiple times, due to the coding capability of ksp modders, microtransactions and other predatory tactics will almost certainly be bypassed by the modders within 2 days of release, the devs are smart enough to know this, and they also know that if they don't add mod support, very few people will buy the game, (compared to with support). So hopefully we're in the clear. 

Yes, I know my optimistic side is showing. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...