Also, you can buy or trade for specific cards, you can't do that with loot box items.
But that's only with the help of other parties because you cant get specific cards from buying a pack of cards, just like you cant get a specific item from a loot box.
As for trading, well you can't do that with almost anything digital ie. digital games or movies.
The experience you get from buying a loot box is nothing new that we haven't experienced with other things in the world, so why do some people act like these loot boxes are the worst thing ever created? lol
Appart from the psychological tricks used to make you unable to act loggicaly and act right in the hands of what they expect you to do then, yeah you're missing the point. The need they create within you with these cool skins, equipments ,weapons and the rest is there to make you feel as if you would be missing on content by not buying it. No need to hold a gun at your head when they know the intricacies of psychological and how to prey into feable minds.
And to answer the first question, yes, it is completly tolerable since it's the only way for the game to be sustainable financially, a game like COD sells itself with a prenium price tag upfront like any games on the market. No need for further monetization, specially for franchises that sell upon millions and millions of copies.
Plz, tell me. Why would you defend the immoral approach of greed ?
Here me out guys, I'm not stating anything about the game except the trashy economic systems it is utilizing to exploit it's customers at the maximum capacity it can, need I remind you, you already paid UPFRONT ! Nothing justifies the use of further monetization when you're using a prenium model, the rest is just immoral pure greed.
Bold #1: You're not missing anything if they give you free loot boxes, your chances of getting something from a free loot box is just the same as buying. The only difference is that they gave "an option" for those that dont want to put in the time to earn the free loot boxes at a price.
Bold #2: So say like Fornite makes billions and billions of dollars simply because they started out free to play, while BO4 only makes hundreds of millions, does that mean Activision should not be allowed to try and make more money to get to Fortnite's level only because people bought the game already?
Bold #3: I'm not defending anything, I'm looking at this as a business point of view. Is it really greed if ... 1) you still offer the same feature/items for free and 2) you provide an option to choose to buy them at a faster pace IF the consumer wants to. If nobody is paying for these loot boxes then it's no harm, no foul. And if Activision sees that nobody is buying then they know that nobody wants this anymore. Another thing I'm curious to see is that Fortnite and Apex Legends are doing great as a free-to-play, makes me wonder as a business point would Activition provide their Black Out mode to be free to play in the future, or maybe their next Black Out game would be free to. But if that happens then people would be ok for loot boxes?
Bold #4: Yes we did pay upfront for the game. And I was fully aware that I paid for what was said be in the game that I bought: A MP mode with 14 maps and set of guns and skins, a zombie mode with 2 maps, a battle royale mode etc. That is the 'premium'. So why do some people feel entitled to receive more for free after they bought the game? Do you expect Activision to continue to spend the time and money to keep on making new maps, skins, weapons etc just to give for free? These weren't promised and anybody that bought the game knows/should know that.
Granted just because one company may do it differently but doesn't mean all companies need to follow the same way. That's just business.Last edited by V-r0cK - on 28 February 2019