Ka-pi96 said:
fatslob-:O said:
"Predatory" in what way exactly ? As far as I'm concerned it's a corporations job to convince consumers that there exists value in the services or goods that they provide. Loot boxes are not any different from the other methods in reaching the same ultimate goal of a corporation selling to it's customers. If the customers don't like it that doesn't mean the corporation has to bend over and provide their customers free content. Quite a few of the EU's social democrat influenced laws are indeed backwards towards a few vital industries. EU is not one bit competitive in the semiconductor industry like we see with tiny East Asian countries such as South Korea or Taiwan due to it's ultra pro-union labour laws and price controls on drugs are not sustainable for bio-pharmaceutical industry development when Eroom's law is in place. There are only 2 capitally intensive industries left relevant to world trade that Europe is actually competitive in such as passenger airline technology (Airbus) and various biopharmaceutical companies ...
Much less of a grip how ? Corporate interests will always be baked in a republic so long as humans keep participating in massive industries. South Korea and Samsung are the most extreme example of both being in political lockstep with each other since that one conglomerate massively accounts for the nation's economy so it's pretty much impossible for any European country with large companies to not somehow distort it's political system ...
Actually, Ubisoft does have loot boxes (it uses real life currency too) in Ghost Recon: Wildlands and Rainbow Six: Siege ...
If EA can't have the so called FIFA "Ultimate Team" (loot boxes) since the EU banned them then there's not much reason to pay a pretty penny anymore for the FIFA license, right ? (If it becomes lawfully undesirable to profit then it becomes undesirable to acquire the said license as well without a price cut)
EU banning loot boxes altogether is counterproductive for EA since it accounts for 60% of it's net profits like you said so losing that isn't an option but what other realistic options are there when they're forced to opt out regardless ?
|
That's not loot boxes. That's FIFA. No doubt the FIFA packs account for a chunk of that, but considering they recently announced FIFA 18 had sold 24 million copies... they don't need to sell packs to make money on FIFA.
It's not like they didn't pay for the FIFA licence (and make a load of money from it) before they started selling packs... oh wait, they did. It was already a hugely successful game without them. And EA are a business, not a petulent child, they aren't just going to throw their toys out of the pram and refuse to sell FIFA games anymore just because they're not as profitable as they once were. They'd still rake in a shit tonne of money. 24m sales for the last one, that's nearly Call of Duty level, any publisher in the world would love a game that sold 20m+ copies every single year and they're certainly not going to give it up just because they can't sell packs in it anymore.
|
Fifa stands at over 5 Billion income for this year alone (source here, but you'd need to pay to see it). Considering most sales of Fifa having been done last year already, most of that sum must be lootboxes. Even just counting 24M times 60$ would not be enough to cover more than a quarter of the income Fifa generated for EA this year alone
