Kotaku Insists Pokemon Eggs aren't Loot Boxes And It Completely Backfires

[killamch89]

Whether you want to call it Pokemon Eggs, Surprise Mechanics or anything else in between, lootboxes will always be lootboxes. What are your thoughts on this?

 

[m76]

Maybe kotaku forgot the disclaimer: "This article was commissioned by ninetndo"

[Withywarlock]

The reason why lootboxes are dangerously close to - if not worse than - gambling is because of the flashy lights and sound effects that encourage habitual behaviour exhibited in (perhaps to a greater effect than) slot machines, moreso than their financial cost (which in this game's case is nothing). Pokémon GO eggs are lootboxes because they have those exact same problems. There's a slow build up, chimes, a flash of light and the contents are revealed, just like any loot box ever made for the chemical rush. Compare this to the trading card game (TCG) where contents didn't change in the packet [no tampering from the manufacturers' end, and there's a papertrail to prove it], and simply rustled in tightly packed sellophane.

This is like arguing Mann Co. crates (GO's eggs) aren't lootboxes because you purchase the keys (GO's incubators) to unlock the crates you get free, which before 'lootbox' entered the lexicon was an argument.

I'm aghast that the editor didn't look at this and think "nope" unless it's to cash in on the upcoming game's hype. But then, they also approved this.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Withywarlock

[killamch89]

6 hours ago, m76 said:

Maybe kotaku forgot the disclaimer: "This article was commissioned by ninetndo"

As gamergate proved years ago, most of these gaming industry outlets are in bed with the major gaming companies - both figuratively and literally.

4 hours ago, Withywarlock said:

The reason why lootboxes are dangerously close to - if not worse than - gambling is because of the flashy lights and sound effects that encourage habitual behaviour exhibited in (perhaps to a greater effect than) slot machines, moreso than their financial cost (which in this game's case is nothing). Pokémon GO eggs are lootboxes because they have those exact same problems. There's a slow build up, chimes, a flash of light and the contents are revealed, just like any loot box ever made for the chemical rush. Compare this to the trading card game (TCG) where contents didn't change in the packet [no tampering from the manufacturers' end, and there's a papertrail to prove it], and simply rustled in tightly packed sellophane.

This is like arguing Mann Co. crates (GO's eggs) aren't lootboxes because you purchase the keys (GO's incubators) to unlock the crates you get free, which before 'lootbox' entered the lexicon was an argument.

I'm aghast that the editor didn't look at this and think "nope" unless it's to cash in on the upcoming game's hype. But then, they also approved this.

From day one, I've always said that lootboxes are supposed to be held to the same standards as other gambling types. The target of lootboxes are primarily the young, naive children that are easily manipulated and develop a gambling habit because of this same mechanic. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point this turns out to be the case - most of these gaming companies are that scummy.

[skyfire]

In game there is no such thing as fun and presents. It's either microtransaction or loot boxes to loot the consumers. 

[Empire]

Even back when Schreier still worked there, he was defending Ubisoft's microtransactions and lootboxes. Kotaku has always been bad. I've always been disappointed when you use them as a source more than needed. One of the best examples of someone writing a piece and having absolutely no idea and understanding of what they are talking about. It happens.

[killamch89]

On 3/19/2021 at 3:05 PM, skyfire said:

In game there is no such thing as fun and presents. It's either microtransaction or loot boxes to loot the consumers. 

Presents are items received without any expectation of anything in return which these Pokemon Eggs aren't. I've always said that gaming media seems to defend certain companies all the time because they have something to gain from it.

13 hours ago, Empire said:

Even back when Schreier still worked there, he was defending Ubisoft's microtransactions and lootboxes. Kotaku has always been bad. I've always been disappointed when you use them as a source more than needed. One of the best examples of someone writing a piece and having absolutely no idea and understanding of what they are talking about. It happens.

I can't disagree because Schreier and Kotaku are always shilling for major companies for a good while now. Certain companies like Nintendo hardly face any criticism on their platforms while lesser companies are the constant target of their articles.