If all these kids would stop buying cocaine I would for sure stop selling cocaine at the school. It's been a huge boon for my bank account. I don't think being addicted to cocaine is bad if it's done right.
Actually, the proper answer is "Ah yes! Thank you for reminding me I shouldn't buy your games, ever." And they you walk away and never touch a Triple A title ever again. Well, unless it's something actually good, like say the new God of War.
Yes, but asking them not to implement them infringes on their rights! I mean, other than the rights they should not have had to implement gambling mechanics without regulations of course.
"You can always not buy them!" sounds like a confident answer from someone who believes that not everyone will pick up on that suggestion - which may as well be true, believes that the few who do pick up on that suggestion don't matter and that the whole model is too big to fail in general. In other words it's just another way of saying "Our army of addicts disagree with you! What ya gonna do about it, huh, snowflake?"
@Reyvyn Nightveil Terrible analogy. Alcohol and drugs are for the most part heavily regulated already. You can't sell booze to a minor for example, and there are strict laws regarding who and where drugs can be sold, because these are dangerous and often addictive products that need the supervision of a pharmacist and other medical professionals. Also, alcoholics shouldn't be buying alcohol, because they are prone to addiction. This is called common sense.
Yes, but they want to implement them. Do you want to buy them? If not, just don't. The real shittiness is when they implant them in a game after launch.
"If players didn't buy them, they wouldn't be added into future games". That means drugs are great right? I mean, if people didn't buy heroin, it would disapear. Do these people hear themselves?
The most morbidly funny thing is, with heavy drugs - as horrible as they are - you at least get SOME kind of 'reward' for your wasted money, as in they get you high. Lootboxes? Not even that. You just get a metaphorical extended hand asking for more money and -some virtual junk- sense of pride and accomplishment.
It's one of those things that's technically true, but the problem is people actually not buying them because the product either causes addiction or everything's been designed so as to encourage purchasing them.
@@Lady_in_Yearning Well technically you do get a "kick" from your brain with games and lootboxes. That's why gambling it's popular and regulated with laws.
well. if people ruined only their lives because of drugs, they would be legal. because adult person may ruin his own life as he wants. drugs are antisocial concept by its criminal nature, not because government cares about your addiction. it's your own life after all. and by the same reasons gambling is legal. if you gamble you money you are just broke. you wont go kill people for a doze. go try to compare drugs to roulette, not at yt, but at court, where it matters.
@@Lady_in_Yearning you get a rush from lootboxes, it's the same rush you get when you put that coin in the slot machine and pull the lever. That rush is what keeps you going and want more.
Really respect that Jim’s sticking to this. No compromise, micro transactions do not belong in these games and have been toxic since they first came about.
Same. I haven't always liked Jim's style personally, or even agreed with him on many things. However, I feel like this is something truly important and his insistence on the pressing issue has done a lot to keep other people talking about it as well. Just because things have been bad for a while and are getting worse doesn't mean we should stop demanding good.
Corporations CANNOT self-regulate. They are BY DESIGN focused solely on acquiring as much money as possible by whatever means are available. Only the threat of repercussions- of their actions being punished in some way, shape or form, and costing them money- will dissuade them.
The hilarious shit is they're more capable of self-regulating if the head of the company is hereditary rather than appointed by shareholders. Because they actually have incentive to keep long term consequences in mind and don't shit the bed because they'll be gone in 5 years time.
even then you have to make the punishment big enough, or otherwise companies will take the fines and punishments and change nothing about what they're doing because it's still a net profit (i.e. like with the pharmaceutical industry in the US)
@@ddshocktrooper5604 Quite literally this. I've heard a few stories about companies in various industries that lost their souls after becoming publicly traded. Hilariously enough, EA's one of the best examples I can think of. If you believe the stories, EA got its name because their founder believed that video games would become a new art form and EA was founded to allow devs to be proper artists. After a few bad experiences with certain dev teams, EA decided it'd be better to have in house dev studios. EA Sports was both the first EA subsidiary studio and the seed of corruption that'd eventually turn EA into, as Jim calls it, "Unicronic Arts." See, the man who was head of EA Sports was a greedy, wealth-obsessed man that did some of the earliest cutthroat publisher BS, specifically signing exclusive deals with sports organizations for the sole right to make games based around those sports. Eventually (if memory serves) when the founder left, the head of EA Sports was chosen by the board to replace him and he made the modern EA tactics the company's standard business practices.
"Eagle 1 to base, we're entering the mission area and are preparing our bombing run." "Base to Eagle 1, be advised, recon suggests the enemy has reinforced your missions area with additional triple AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-" "Eagle one to base, signal is unclear, please repeat." "-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-" "Eagle one to base, can't *BOOM* Shit! Enemy flak, Eagle 2 is down! I repeat, Eagle 2 is- *KSSSSHHHHH*"
BROKER: Sir, you could invest in corporate bonds, the return rates may vary and in general the risk varies based on the corporation's financial rating. Would you be interested in investing in corporations with a BBB+ rating or which ratings would you generally accept? ME: Triple AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
How to make microtransactions optional: Don't include them. How to make lootboxes fair: Don't include them. How to actually make money: Make good games and probably make sure they reach a large part of the population. Do games even get localized to a majority of the planet? Or would that cost money? Holy crap, that's a lotta upvotes. Of course, Free to play mechanics are fine in a free to play game (who would have guessed) if they are not free to wait anyways. But we all know the TripleAids Industry will never even consider making Free to play games, as they are forever hounded by their shareholders and their own greed.
@@thedrake5072 IMO, microtransactions are okay *in f2p games*. Warframe has the best model here - you know exactly what you're buying, it's either purely cosmetic or can also be acquired by playing the game, and you can trade with other players to earn Platinum (the pay-for currency) without having to spend a single penny yourself. Microtransactions in pay2play games can be okay if it's purely cosmetic stuff and reasonably priced (like the costume packs for Mass Effect). And to be fair, I'm only letting Bioware get away with it because a) each crew member had their fancy loyalty skin which you got by playing, and one bought skin which was more like a palette swap of their default skin, and b) they didn't advertise it in-game, you had to go to their website to find and buy them (and c) I bought the games dirt cheap with all story DLC in a Steam/Origin sale, so in the end I still paid less than the retail price). The bought skins didn't even show up in the outfit selection until you had them. If they did a remake, where all this stuff gets put into a shop on the citadel that you have to walk past every time you're there, and get spam mail from to your terminal after every other mission, then I'd say fuck them with a cactus.
It's funny that localization was mentioned. I live in a small market of the Czech Republic (10M people). A while back most triple AAA products got not only subtitles, but were even dubbed. Now, it is a common occurrence that localization is sponsored by local game eshops or crowd sourced for even large AAA titles.
Referring to high-rolling gamblers as “whales” was common in the casino industry years before the gaming industry latched onto the term. I’m surprised that Jim doesn’t call out that explicit connection.
I was legitimately shocked to see that Twitch has a Casino channel where you can watch people who own online casinos gamble and advertise their online casino deals. Seems as though it's becoming scarily normalised.
Could argue it's joining the late night casino channels or the global poker coverage rather than a "normalising" there, but I haven't heard of that before now so clearly I don't have the full picture.
Things with online casinos is that there is much stricter legislative and control by state. For example in the country Im currently in, only few of them are allowed (including sports betting sites) and document verification is needed - if you are local, which Im not, you also will be checked for unpaid taxes, fines or low salary.
I thought they stopped all of that a few years ago? Like, didn't they say only video games can be showcased? They put an end to people trying to do cooking shows and that was the reason they gave, along with all that hoopla with skin betting too... They said they were going to stop that right? I don't watch twitch anymore so...
@@JaymeSplendid I doubt you missed the "rise of the IRL streamer", but no Twitch hasn't been "games only" for a while now. As evident by the Bob Ross marathons, as well as the aforementioned people walking around getting cringe worthy moments due to the mistake of allowing TTS donations or music suggestions.
I wish Germany would regulate online (and videogame) gambling properly. Unfortunately, gambling authorities are responsibility of the federal states, with no central authority for online stuff. Which is just great, because companies will claim the state with the weakest (i.e. basically none) regulation of online gambling is responsible, and there's nothing you can do.
Agreed. That was the reason that the “coffee break” from GTA San Andreas got slapped with Adult Only because it has sex in it. You want to do something that only adults should be doing (gambling, sex is not the issue this time), then you get regulated like an adult.
As aside note: the term “Whale” comes from the gambling industry. So if video game companies are saying “ loot boxes” aren’t “gambling”, why use terms from the gambling industry to describe some players? 😉
I've had a mental break down today but since your question was rhetorical I can skip it without putting any thoughts on it... For now. But if i could make any attempt at answering it I'd say they don't care about consistency. Or ethic. Or efforts. Or anything anymore(yeah, not being feeling my best today, sheesh!)
I see someone else has been "adulting" in hardcore mode recently. True, the amount of f^@ks given by the execs at big companies in general are roughly zero. Add the fact that this business practice is bringing in metric tons of money to them, I imagine various scenes from the movie "The Wolf of Wall Street" are playing out across AAA gaming company board rooms everywhere. At any given time. Good luck with the break!
@@Aleara27 Meh, even random unpaid lootboxes are rarely done correctly. Most of the time, it just replaces balancing. Lootboxes and the like should be balanced in such a way that they change your playstyle, with no clearly superior option. In other words, lootboxes should follow the example of Binding of Isaac, FTL, Don't starve and other roguelites, but potentially without the roguelite aspect.
Jordan noell agreed. RPG games, minecraft’s randomized items you get from a randomized world (chest, mobs, etc) are FUN to grind and encourage players to play. EA’s fifa 19, encourage to pay. Let’s play indie games and board games, at least they’re not so heavy on your wallet.
Not a gambling problem but anxiety and an addictive personality. It's tough as shit to stay away from lootboxes. That's why I don't play games with lootboxes
I think I've started to realise why Jim gets so many people desperately arguing against his points all the time: It's not because people don't like him as a person, or even that people dislike his style of presentation or the topics he covers... People argue against him because _he's always right but we all wish he wasn't._ He's like the doomsday prophet on the street corner who turns out to be bang on the money! We wish everything Jim said was bollocks, that the game industry wasn't an ever-growing pile of festering maggot ridden shite. But he speaks truth, every damn video, and we hate being faced with that truth. Thank god for Jim.
I've briefly talked to Jim, he's nice. He defended my right to have an opinion against rabid Undertale fans, even though he disagreed with my opinion. Furthermore, Jim _is_ right about a lot of things. That said, I personally don't like his style of presentation at all.
@@Bacxaber I agree. He's rarely ever moderate on the situation, a lot of his opinions come down to: "Consumer good, corporation bad." without really addressing the agency of the consumer in agreeing or disagreeing in the business practice of a corporation, or otherwise sustaining it or deincentivizing it. When people are subjected to a constant stream of negative feedback, people are going to want to push back because that degree of negativity feels too unnatural to be true. I don't disagree with Jim, but the following I believe is a nuance of this issue that he consistently doesn't address or attempts to shut down. In this video he talks about "whales" as a dehumanizing term for people who either have too much money than they know what to do with or people with addictive personality traits without addressing that both of these groups of people have agency. I agree with that statement, it's some pretty nasty corporate jargon, but where I don't agree is when Jim says that pointing out that these practices wouldn't be put in if people didn't pay into them is bullshit. That's how capitalism works. Whatever makes money is the strategy of the day. If it doesn't make money, why bother? Yes, only a very small fraction of the playerbase pays for lootboxes, but wouldn't those people have the *power* to decide how profitable these practices are? I get for people with addiction problems this isn't easy and I don't really blame them for this, but for the people who have the money to just drop 1000's on loot boxes in a game, where is their responsibility in this? Apparently to Jim, they aren't responsible. Corporation bad, consumer good. This isn't a deflection of how horrid these practices are, I am of the firm belief that it's not doublethink to hold the opinions that corporations are responsible for keeping their businesses ethical while consumers are responsible for not feeding into unethical business practices to prevent incentivizing them to publishers. Both of these opinions have the space to be talked about simultaneously, it's fallacious to think that you can't put both of them into practice and ask people to vote with their wallets while you condemn the practices of the corporation, and it's *especially* fallacious to believe that anyone who makes this point is automatically a corporate shill bot because Ubisoft used the same logic and twisted it into a shitty defense. I'll add further that I believe *we*, as consumers, have the responsibility to not even buy games that have these practices in them if we want them to be gone. Again, we can hold this belief at the same time as lambasting corporate greed, that's on them, this is on us. We might not contribute to the loot box profits as much as "whales", but if we as a majority don't play these games, "whales" won't have a reason to play a dead game, either, and won't have a reason to spend money. I believe this is a good short-term solution to the loot box/microtransaction problem in multiplayer games while we wait for regulation to sweep up the gunk festering within the industry.
Since there are so many people who tell you to stop talking about this, I now feel the need to just say "keep going! Keep their feet on the fire, keep reminding people that this is not what gaming should be and that we shouldn't be accepting this! We won't stop talking about this until the gaming industry stops shoving it into our games!"
Corporations arent going to quit putting shit you dont want in games until you quit buying the game. You cant just buy the game but not buy the microtransactions, as a business guy that's exactly what we want. Game corporations want as many people who will buy the games to buy it, and as many people who are willing to spend extra money on microtransactions. Every game sold is additional revenue, every successful microtransaction is icing on the cake. You want companies to quit churning ouut shit products, then quit buying the shit and blaming the whales who buy a larger percentage of shit. I used to be anti-microtransactions but after years of watching stupid consumers continue buying shit, well at this point I am rooting for the corporations to take advantage as much as they can of morons completely incapable of self control or making an informed purchase, and some are so delusional they think corporations actually care about them. LOL fucking idiots you deserve the shit you buy.
Anecdotal, but I knew someone who spent $15,000 in Star Wars Galaxy of Heroes. When I asked him why he kept buying crystals and packs in that game, he said he was just exhausted by the grind of it and by the time he'd sunk in a decent amount of money, he figured he was in too deep to stop and wanted to keep going until he got everything. The playerbase for grindy f2p games like that even adopt the terms 'whale', 'kraken', 'dolphin', etc and wear them as a badge of honor on Reddit or official community forums. It's disgusting. Anyone who tries to play microtransactions as "optional" and "player choice" fails to mention the *fact* that these kinds of microtransactions fundamentally alter the core design of games (hence why so many games need rebalancing once they've been removed). The focus always seems to be on protecting children from exploitative gambling mechanics, which is important, sure, but it's an issue for adults, too. Exploitative practices aren't acceptable in free-to-play games, and they should definitely not be acceptable in $60+ premium games. What Jim has said time and time again stands true- if a company making and selling games can't make and sell games and make their money back, why are they in this industry?
Jim, Valve's upcoming card game Artifact has probably the scummiest monetization I've seen in a video game. Somehow this is going through without anyone talking about it , probably cause Valve isn't advertising it too much. Game costs 20$ you get 10 card packs and 5 tickets. Tickets are used and consumed for some game modes and cost 1$ per ticket, card packs can't be earned by playing and cost 2$ per card pack. Basically after the initial price most of the game is still locked behind a paywall. In Steams market place you can sell cards so Valve is actually couraging ppl to gamble giving them a place to sell their winnings.
Wattur - Sounds like any other digital/physical card game out there! Dunno how card games aren't considered gambling but I'm sure someone can come up with a damn good reason to why everyone ignores it! Trading card game... Perhaps, just maybe! You can buy individual cards on the market. Therefore eliminating the need to buy card packs over and over gain. Not saying it can't be addicting but it sure as hell isn't as predatory with that secondary option available to you!
Back when I was in high school they altered the school lunch program and the food became disgusting and everyone complained. Then one day someone started going around to classrooms and writing "dont eat school lunch" on the boards. Then others joined the cause and within 2 weeks only about half the people were eating school lunch. The school lost so much money within a month that they had to lay people off and held an assembly to beg us to eat school lunch again. Moral of the story: sometimes you just need a few to make something into a public campaign to reach a larger market and make an actual impact. I think it's about time the gaming industry had a taste of this
HEY, that's very cool! so... did they changed the menu like you wanted? But back to the video's issue: i think more than just "vote with your wallet" the real solution is to inform the casual gamer (the dolphins & whales) about why this practises are bad... we trow so much sheit over them for supporting companies, that we tend to forget they're not soaked in the gaming world, and thus, they're easily exploitable
I doubt they changed it back School food across the US became disgusting under Michelle Obama's push for "healthy choices" in school lunches turned law
@@kutsumiru Dude, school lunches tasted like trash way before that. I'm 40 and they were always shit. There's no way Michelle Obama could have made them worse unless she made them serve nothing but rice cakes and kale.
This is exactly the reason i stopped buying AAA games along with a few friends. I'd rather die replaying the Only 2 Halo's on PC alongside Skyrim then support these borderline-nazi practices big companies pull off.
...except that wouldn't change anything, and only hurt those who weren't responsible. Think about it: when people start to "vote with their wallets" and stop buying games, will it hurt the corporate heads? Hell no. They will still got their cut, on way or another, since they couldn't give less of a shit even if you sewn their assholes shut But to cut the costs, they will simply start to fire people, meaning that thousands employed in video game industry would lose their jobs. As Jim pointed out, they make an obscene amount of money already, so drop in sales wouldn't hurt them as much.
That's the problem with the logical fallacy known as "argumentum ad nauseam" : one repeats an already addressed argument (in this case that would be the "it's optional" excuse) again, and again, and again, always ignoring the rebuttal, until opposition gets sick and gives up. It can be used as a marketing strategy as much as a rhetorical one, and it's heavily dishonest either way as it's a way to appear as having a stronger and unchallenged argument without doing anything. Why do i point this out ? When faced with an ad nauseam fallacy, it's important to never give up to it. Can be tiring, but the alternative would be letting the argument win over listeners and the "it's optional" excuse win over all hearts once more.
That makes so much sense.... "It's optional" "It's just cosmetic" "It's so they don't raise game prices" and "it's chance, it's not gambling, it's the same as trading cards" are things I have heard for so long now I'm just sick of it. When I see people use these excuses now it simply enrages me. There's is no excuse for their blatant....Stupidiy? Blind loyalty? Denial? Ignorance? Am I just getting old is this what that feels like? Well I'm not sure what their logic behind defending these predatory practices is really but it's got to stop, enough is enough.
@@xj0462 It's the whole "I didn't say that! You're putting words in my mouth!" even when everyone can see on the same comment thread that they did. It's pretty common especially if you start talking to someone who has some... iffy... ideas on particular hot topics (like race/climate change etc.).
@@matthewellis6516 the blaming doesn't matter at all,what is important is what to regulate and where to stop regulating,specially when kids(that generally are dumb by default)are involved. Regarding the card thing,it wasn't the same context-wise to me at least.That type of thing was way more difficult to get without the permission of an adult and also reducted to whatever fad was in your school at the time,whereas now kids are bombarded constantly whith millions of different online multiplayer games.
@matthew ellisthank you for the bullshit whataboutism. Your post doesn't actually address nor refute the point of the argument and merely tries to deflect. What I want to know is; what Stockholm syndrome brainwashing motivates you to defend these exploitative business practices?
Oi! Have you looked at how Bethesda is trying their hardest to skirt laws to deny people their refunds for Fallout 76? Everything is automated now, every request is denied within minutes with the same message, even in countries where you are entiteled by law to get a refund if you bought a faulty product or didn't get what was advertised? They cite "company policy is not to return any digital sales", as if their company policy is above the law. Just yet another one of their shitty and shady practices that falls in line with them not giving review copies out for their games anymore. They are actively trying to keep their consumers in the dark.
@vin 950 Steam is not pretty liberal with refunds. The 2 hour window is pathetically small, and for a game like Fallout 76, not nearly enough tine to realize that the game is bullshit and you want your money back.
@@Vandragorax Well, i didn't pre-order and after a heated email where i pointed out their stance was illegal, i got a faulty product and i didn't get what was advertised i got my money back. I got my first request denied but they changed their tune pretty quickly after i pointed that out to them. I got the request accepted an hour after and two days later i got the money back in to my account. It's still horseshit and there are plenty of people who are either ignorant of what laws apply to them or think that they just have to comply with Bethesdas shitty customer support. I really hope Jim, Yong Yea and so on take note of this so the PR calamity can continue. They deserve to be hung out to dry and be made an example of at this point.
Driving a car is optional, but most of us need a car in order to get to a job (There is no public transportation in my area). Loot Boxes are optional, but we all know they tailor the game around the loot boxes to throttle back the entertainment until we inevitably give in.
@@claudiuspulcher2440 The point he is making is that in either case the system has been purposefully broken so that you'll buy the "solution" that the designer wants to sell to you. Just because you don't need a game to live doesn't mean that it isn't shitty and greedy behaviour, or that you can't complain about something you otherwise enjoy being purposefully fucked with. The consequences are less dire than the oil and automotive industries buying politicians who underfund mass transit, but the idea is the same.
@@claudiuspulcher2440 I've never heard of a store that doesn't try and sell anything. If games have stores, they will try and push you to spending money in them. That means designing the game to subtly push you towards spending money in said store. When you buy a game, it's reasonable to expect an entertaining gaming experience, not a playable commercial you just paid $60+ for.
@@AverageJoe8686 Well that was some glorious nonsense. In case you actually believe this copypasta, the ARC fusion reactor is still theoretical (nobody has actually built even a prototype yet), and "depleted uranium fusion reactors" is complete fiction. Maybe you're thinking of breeder reactors based on the description, but those are far from risk-free, and are relatively common. Also, what exactly are you trying to say with those solar calculations at the beginning? Assuming all those numbers are real, you're just showing that going 100% solar means we convert more solar energy to electricity than is being used to warm the planet. That's not even an argument for or against solar.
+AverageJoe8686 I've always wondered how mass solar or wind power would affect the planet, it's certainly not "free power" . Your comment puts into maths what I've been thinking. Green energy has other costs which no one talks about.
If gamers didn't buy loot boxes for a particular release, the publisher wouldn't stop using them, they would make them more essential to having any fun
nagchampa They'd call the game a failure because it didn't make the projected returns, then make lootboxes more essential or attractive in the next game.
See. Blizzard Entertainment in response to Destiny 2 microtransactions not making much money, their plan? "We will push the microtransactions more aggressively in the future."
I still remember stealing money for microtransactions from parents, from _other people_ when i was a teen to keep up with so called "online friends'" progress in an mmorpg game, more than a decade ago. Now a full working adult, I'm so proud to see people finally getting aware and standing up against these manipulative, these _evil_ monetization practices that's now rampant on phones, even on premium full priced games. Still took you more than a decade to realize things though.
There's one point you're raising there, that I think not enough people have talked about - peer pressure, and keeping up with other players. When I was in elementary school, Habbo Hotel was a Big Deal among a lot of kids. I never even tried it, because I was deterred by the microtransactions. But according to what I heard from a lot of other people, the community of that game had cosmetics as a major status symbol. People who didn't buy decorations, outfits, and so on were regarded as a lower class, as inferior to those who bought such items. I remember that a lot of people were telling similar stories to yours, about stealing money from family, asking parents to buy virtual currency as birthday presents, and so on, just because they didn't want to feel left out. Peer pressure alone probably resulted in more microtransaction purchases than any advertising the game itself provided. Because of this type of stuff, it's not only the corporations that need to learn to act responsibly (even though they are obviously the biggest issue). The gaming community itself also needs to straighten up, and learn to stop gatekeeping and bullying each other.
@@Cyfrik You don't even have to be actively shunned for not buying microtransactions. You just have to be present, around other people, buying said microtransactions and competing who gets the most items of the new set by _chance_ in the new lootbox. While you, not having more money cause you spent it last month, is sitting there, in your "so last season" cosmetics, left out. Remember the cod game where lootboxes fall in normandy beach? Basically what that is trying to achieve, except in mmorpgs, where skins, pets and mounts is much more important than useless gun skins. And those are just the "cosmetics" part. Exp boosts, drop boosts, the infamous _enhancement boosts,_ the staple of any p2w, is where you will really feel the pressure.
I spent most of 2018 in rehab for opiate addiction. In a completely related story, I also have spent over $6,000 on Bejeweled Blitz in my lifetime. Sober from opiates since January. Sober from Bejeweled since July. This shit IS gambling.
6000 ???? wow. Something must be off with you. Opium I understand.... but spending cash on iaps ??? stupidity i guess... Instead of iaps, spend that 6000 on cigaretts... theyre harmful to our health the same way. Dont do drugs.... but its better to do drugs than to give your money to thieving corporations. Drugs go in your own body at least, so its money well spent.... iaps money go into an unknown rich fat fuck's 4th yacht. He already has 7 ferraris and 3 yachts...why help him get another one ? ... while you drive a ... bicycle.... or a Vauxhall
Congrats on getting sober. Some of us just have an addictive personality. You'll need to find a hobby or "addiction" that is good for you. From personal experience, I'd recommend exercise or a productive hobby. In my case, screenplay writing I enjoy quite a bit, even if nothing will ever come of it. Stay safe my dude!
@The Goddamn Batman thats all true and dandy. Then the other side of the coin : she had extra 6k to waste not to mention the cash to spend on opiates. Some people with tons of money dont know how to spend it well.... while most people struggle to get by day by day... lets say with a 1000 euro salary per month. Good luck wasting loads of money in that scenario. Pure and simple, she had tons of money availeble and she fucked it up.
when mentally ill investor's/publishers with irrational greed have unsustainable expectations and fail to stop pissing off consumers, it's always been time to support indie devs i guess.
I remember when I was kid arguing with my parents to let me play games which considered violent (Doom, Half-Life, Resident Evil). I really feel sorry for kids nowadays!
These days the parents are addicted to gaming (and their phones) as much as the kids. The kids don't stand a chance when their dad's a self imposed man-child. I think we need more studies to show that this lootbox stuff impacts people of all ages so we can dismiss some preconceived notions.
Its mostly women who play mobile games, so specifically targeting fathers and calling them man-children is a way to shut people off from the conversation.
Yes thank God he is on UA-cam weekly complaining about a product we don't need for survival. To an audience of people that already agree with him. With none of the publishers watching or paying any attention to him. He is truly changing the future.
I remember the days when the most grievous offense of the gaming market was refusing refunds even if less than 10 minutes had gone by since you bought the game.
Depends on culture. Generally speaking, many very market-liberal cultures prefer no/absolut minimum regulation, as its in the spirit of the free economics. Many more socially economic countries (mostly around europe, as it originated mostly in central europe) are more open to them. Keep in mind that much of the game industry both in revenue and production is US-centered - one of the most economically liberal countries in the world. It also has a culture that makes the problems of to much regulation (lack of competition, inventivness and investment, hampering of buisnesses) seem worse than a culture of a country like France would see them: They value individual freedom and choice a lot, independence is written in their history and culture and the idea of the american dream is ingrained in the culture. Someone - I forgot whome - described it as "a country of millonaires and temporarily emberassed millonaires". So they fear that a regulation or measurement (like taxes for the rich) that might not affect them now can affect them in the future. Depending on your point of view that can be seen as naive, but also as hopefull and strong. Point is - with such a culture, a very independent market is of course desired. Finally, keep in mind that historicly they not only never really had many movements in terms of regulation, but also were far away from europe, when they spread through it. Another reason with gaming to keep in mind - as said in the video, the laws havent caught up. It is still relativly free of regulation and so not really used to it. Of course, any industry dislikes regulation (and therefore fights to ingrain that in others as well) and to much regulation might be harmfull, though in this case I dont really see that fear coming true. The lack of regulation causes far more harm in my eyes than even overregulation could do and the idea that regulation would instantly overreach is already ludicrous. But I am german, not american, so again, it depends on the culture.
@@markcobuzzi826 I'd add the major problem with over-regulation: major corporations make it work for them by gaming the system. Regulations are lobbied for and phrased in such a way as to hamper their opposition, but not themselves. Thus, they can abuse regulations to enable monopolies & cartels. E.g.: Google proposing "Net Neutrality" to hamstring their opposition's bandwidth & connection speed, while Google itself has its own separate infrastructure & has therefore effectively made it illegal to compete with them.
A lot of manipulation out there to make sure people don't vote or think in their best interests. Unions are bad. Regulations are bad. Climate change is a lie (which is literally saying you don't care about the planet you live on). Taxes on wealthy are bad. Voting rights bad. Super Pacs good. Immigration bad. Populism good. Walls good. Holding police accountable bad. Businesses are people now. Freedom of the press bad. Etc. All stuff 5 minutes with a history book would dismiss, but that's 5 minutes too many for a lot of people.
A lot of people, Americans especially have been convinced that governments are incompetent by default and any and all regulation is bad and a waste of money.
The only ones I feel bad for in the industry are the developers stuck in the middle. They want to work on a great game and earn a name in the business (not that they get proper credit anyway). But instead they're forced to work the game and "story" to work around badly implemented grinding and micro transactions. I know a few people that works/worked at Ubisoft Massive here in Sweden, and some of them actually jumped ship and joined King instead (yes, Candycrush etc) because there they at least get payed better to implement the same bullshit.
While I can see the problem with gambling, what you said has been the biggest issue for me as a customer and afficionado. The games are built around the mechanic of microtransactions which cripple the games in multiple ways. Art, immersion, fun unrepetitive gameplay all suffer under the oppression of microtransactions. By the way, when will we stop calling them micro?
@@joelnogueira7692 There's nothing inherently wrong with microtransactions though, if done right; problem is that they usually aren't. How to do it right: First develop some full priced content. Offer said content at appropriate prices. Then section off said content to sell them piecemeal to people who doesn't want the whole of said content and only parts of it, at reduced prices, but higher price than if it was sold as a whole. That way, it's actually options you're being given to buy the whole product outright, or buy each portion.
To go from Ubisoft Logic: If nobody would buy alcohol, nobody would produce it and so nobody would get addicted by it. But that is not how anything works. The whole alcohol Industry spends billions to make that stuff interessting for younger people to get them hooked. And getting people addicted is clearly their Goal. They are fine when people ruin themself for their profit.
One UA-camr, ReviewTechUSA, even brought up the idea that they keep on putting these lootboxes into games so that it gets Children to think that this kind of thing is normal and they can be used to exploit them in the future, which means that they are sort of thinking about making more money in the long term, just in a more predatory and assholish way
@JoshIsOneCoolKid Even a fool who contradicts himself can be right once in awhile, lol. Like the old saying goes, even a broken clock is right twice a day ;)
Parents should be paying attention to their kids not a game company, its not a company's fault if someones kids figures out how to plug in all the info to buy something online.
They are trying to get to max level capitalist. Where they can sell you the menu screen and you pay for everything beyond that. Kinda like Battlefield V.
Drug lord: My business is perfectly legal! If people don't want to die or have their lives ruined by my drugs, then *STOP BUYING THEM!* Triple A Industry: PREECH BROTHER PREECH!
If I ran a supermarket and gave people a "1/5 chance" of getting bread or milk on every purchase, I would have legal authorities so far up my ass I could taste the rusty scales of justice
@@SherrifOfNottingham Yeah, but see, we know the chances of pulling stuff in these card games. In Yu-Gi-Oh's case, they used to print it directly on the pack. yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Pull_ratios yugiohblog.konami.com/articles/?p=7413 What's Overwatch's chance of pulling a legendary skin? We don't know. We know what Chinese player's chances are, but those aren't necessarily the same worldwide. If you're going to compare the two, try doing some research. And Blizzard could at least be transparent about how often you get the good stuff, instead of another fucking spray. www.polygon.com/2017/5/5/15558448/overwatch-loot-box-chances-china
@@SherrifOfNottingham And due to the history of collectible card games, that industry chose to self-regulate by making the odds of getting a particular card available online or directly on the card/packaging/advertising. Players can also avoid the randomness entirely by buying the cards they want second hand. The same is true for blind bag toys, kinder surprise toys, and even some gumball machines (the last one I find a bit funny, as you can often estimate the odds by just looking inside the machine).
@@Meximagician ...Until they deceptively load the machine, which some do. But yes, this is why these things need to be transparent and available through direct-purchase means.
R6 Siege this idea is true, 8 new operators a year and 4 new maps. But that's a good example of a game as service being sold properly. Games like Assassins creed don't work for that unless they change the entire game into a different experience.
I can only guess the writing, design and programming departments within AAA are being cut meanwhile there's entire floors of office stiffs being dedicated to coming up with new crappy lootbox schemes.
Your channel gives me hope for the future. This year has been a big shock as a huge Blizzard and Bethesda fan. Once upon a time I held the argument that loot boxes had their place if done right, like in Overwatch. But even when _"done right"_ they still inherently alter the way the game would have been played if there were simply no loot boxes. Now seeing my two favorite game companies I've admired since my childhood take such a bad turn, I know there is no place for these kind of monetization methods. They pollute the game and the company in such a way that makes them unrecognizable from what they were before.
I hate watching your show. But not because I don't like you, I like you. Not because I don't like the topics, I like the topics. Not because I don't like the things you say.. But because everything you say is so undeniably true about the game industry and yet the whole industry doesn't care, its that everything you say is so true that I hate knowing how shitty this amazing industry is and yet we all can do nothing about it. So when I listen to you talk about how scummy these loot boxes are and how they're ruining peoples lives like those brothers I hate it because the game industry will fight tooth and nail to exploit people more and more and more. And even if we somehow got together and stopped buying EA games. Hypothetically ofcourse. Then it changes nothing because all we're doing is hurting people who put their heart and soul into those games yet are twisted by investors who don't even flinch at the loss of a game. If we never bought a EA game and the had to close the only people that get affected by that are the hard working people who makes the games. The investors would just move on to another studio. There is no winning and we have to rely on the government to stop them but as we're seeing. Even then they're willing to defy the law. Great show btw.
I just stopped buying or caring about most AAA game and stick to games that last thousands of hours like dota etc as my main game and putting those 60dollars into multiple genuine indie game devs that I could whole heartedly throw my money at
@@-dash. same here. I dont necessarily agree with Paradox Interactive, but they definitely are not a AAA publisher, and they make some really good games that you can get for cheap if you buy them on sale, and they can last thousands of hours. Hell, ive spent about 10,000 hours combined on EU4 and Ck2, and i got both of them for about 50 bucks for ALL the dlc. They also at least give decent updates to their games on a regular basis, and most of their games dont really need DLC to function well.
You are wrong the only way to make a real change is talk with your wallet. True it will hurt there workers in the short term but there is always a price to pay.If a large enough amount of people did not buy a publishers game and expressed there anger they would change it simple.That would probably never happen because the average consumer probably nothing about who makes the games they buy. And for all the people who cried about rockstar over a "believed" wrong doing most still got red dead.
The gaming companies aren't above blame though. You have to choose to allow a high enough % of your company to be in the hands of investors to be beholden to them in any way. At some point they made the bed where they can't just make the best game they can, and now they have to lie in it, and if they have to be run out of town then so be it.
I remember when people talked about the move to BIG AAA games, and, uh, there was this naive assumption (sometimes we were even told!) that next to the TRIPLE-AY games there'd be A and AA games, making consistent money. But, uh, that ended when Todd Howard unleashed his hordes of shitty fans onto the internet to turn-based combat obsolete and unrealistic.
To the fan, who's brother struggles with a gambling addiction, I feel for you. My own younger brother struggled with a heroin addiction. 😔 He's been clean for a few years, but still.
@pvsweetypie It's not very likely that you're going to buy a legally sanctioned and critically acclaimed piece of entertainment and accidentally get hooked on heroin. That insidiousness is not to be taken lightly.
@@pvsweetypie Addiction can lead to other mental health issues. Depression for instance. Plus, it is never a good idea to become dependant on something, and depending on the severity of addiction, draining your wallet can be an understatement.
I'm talking Dodge Roll Games (Gungeon), Greg Lobanov (Wandersong), Joakim Sandberg (Iconoclasts), Dan Fornace (Rivals of Aether), Matt Thorson & gang (Celeste), Lucas Pope (Obra Dinn) and so many more!
I get the sneaking suspicion that EA is fighting Belgium because its future as a AAA publisher depends on it. Because of their exploitative (yet lucrative) practices, EA is totally beholden to its shareholders; they've amassed so many investments and so many expenditures that should their current industry suffer change or regulation... ...EA could utterly collapse as a corporation. Hell, the legal fallout from pushing against regulation could result in further financial losses and bad PR, which would serve to put shareholders off and further expedite EA's dissolution. EA has put itself in this position; if it doesn't fight and win against regulation, they'll lose everything. Should they submit to regulation, their shares are going to plummet, and with so many of EA's assets requiring sustainable investments... ...The losses are going to hit. Hard. We may actually see EA claiming bankruptcy within the next decade if they lose the war against regulation. They grew too big on an immoral and unstable business model, and now that their business model has become a target for the ethically charged, EA could very well drown beneath their own empire of bullshit.
I somehow can't bring myself to feel bad about that. I mean, what would we lose if that were to happen? Can anyone think of the last great game EA released? Dead Space 2 maybe.
The only bad thing I could see about it is all the people who actually gave a crap about making games and not getting rich quick will lose their jobs and not have a place to go, kind of like with some of the guys back at Telltale.
@@MechaKaiser I understand your concern but the beautiful thing about an open market is that, so long as there is demand, there will always be supply. The vacuum that EA's potential downfall would leave could open the market to other entrepreneurs; allowing for a new publisher/developer race to establish a brand. The best way to establish a brand is through customer relations; good relations = good brand, bad relations = bad brand. This kind of a race could be massively beneficial to both developers & gamers alike; as it frees up the market to new IPs and business models, which would invoke competition between devs/publishers, which in turn, would provide customers with a greater variety of products to choose from. There exists a potential for something as bad or worse than EA to rise up from the ashes (and the market resurgence would undoubtedly have a bit of a rocky start), but more than anything, the industry needs a new status quo. EA, Activision-Blizzard, Ubisoft, WB Entertainment, Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft Game Studios... ...Well, I wouldn't weep to see any of them take it in the teeth, and allow for the rise of a more customer focused and stable agenda, rather than this stock value and fiscal growth obsessed culture.
Another brilliant breakdown and critique of the Triple AAA side of the gaming industry. Thank you for this Jim. :) I also giggle every time you get overwhelmed in a mask because it speaks to your level of dedication to a bit and, shouldn't you know better by now? ;)
2:04 - So according to this Ubisoft PR rep, slavery is apparently fine because people "buy" slaves on the black market. That's such a weak justification for lootboxes.
Exactly. That's exactly the point. It's optional. So exercise your option and don't buy games with lootboxes. Don't let your children buy them, and if they do, and they start to spend hundreds of dollars on lootboxes, punish them. Take away their games. Take away their consoles. Take away their phones. Take away their credit cards. They are children. They will not act responsibly by viture of being children. So teach them responsibility.
"Exactly. That's exactly the point. It's optional. So exercise your option and don't buy games with lootboxes. Don't let your children buy them, and if they do, and they start to spend hundreds of dollars on lootboxes, punish them. Take away their games. Take away their consoles." Nah, that would be logical. Much easier to blame someone else for your own lack of self control.
I mean people literally abuse medication that allows People in massive pain to live a life that's not dictated by pain, some start for that reason, to self medicate
Exactly. If the only games with lootboxes were rated 18+ (or whatever gambling laws say where you are) then it would be fine and legal. Much like getting a back injury, then claiming opiates for months and months afterwards is fine and legal.
We all do. But we do not want to ruin it's mysticism, do we? So, like a good christian, do you prayers, thank god for jim sterling and never lose hope.
It's going to lead to these kids having problems further down the line in their lives. Aiming thes gambling style games at kids is just morally wrong. They have their whole lives to be shafted left right and center. They deserve a few years before they have their wonder at the world and their spirits crushed. Don't you guys think?
While it might sound a bit conspiratorial, there's a bunch of large investment firms initiating start ups, ostensibly for "AI research", but what they really seem to be doing is bringing MTX to real life. Check out what Patrik Söderlund is doing now, post EA-- he's heading up just such a company. The idea is to pay-as-you-go through superapps; for example at a mall you might be prompted to pay for a mall-local assistant that gives you "exclusive" offers and allows billboards to show you personalized ads (ie offers)-- and looking at what's in games now you can imagine just how those special deals really work. Tiers with bonus levels; 3 for the price of two but the third is some kind of random extra with a miniscule chance to get something really expensive, pre-pay before going to the mall to get extra deals, buy for certain amounts to 'level up' and get extra access and so on. The older generations are rather unlikely to get roped in by these things, but a primed youth already used to it all will become ideal profit units-- oh, sorry , _ customers_ .
Sadly to those CEOs and shareholders on their high, high horses, kids, or us gamers in general, are nothing but cows waiting to be milked dry. Or fish and whales, to stick with the analogy given in the video. We're numbers, figures in black and white on spreadsheets, same as the employees. It makes me retch.
Not a gambling, you always win something by purchasing loot boxes. Besides why company should be accountable for parents decision that allow children to access their money to pucharse it? Pucharsing Online isn't going to the drug dealer, it is anonymous hence company have no knowledge if buying is a child , child with a premission from parent or not.
@@nagatouzumaki3492 You're essentially arguing to make everything legal on the basis of anonymity, whether you realize it or not. There can be loopholes in and justifications for just about anything and, with enough money and influence, any number of those could potentially be a matter of public policy depending on your particular area.
Actually, not really. Even if granted you this was gambling (it isn't) anonymity makes it impossible to identify who is buying lootboxes and as gambling is legal (not for children) you would have be likely stuck with one of two options if you wanted regulate it: 1.Regulate it as normal gambling and developers would have to either to: a)End loot boxes for everyone b)have some identification process, what is unlikely as it would be costly and people would dislike it as it would be seen as intrusion of privacy and giving developers personal information meaning end of anonymity in games, at least for people buying loot boxes but wouldn't be suprised if they expanded it to everyone playing game . 2.Outright prohibit it what would end loot boxes for everyone, aside from that it is unlikely option as one would have hard time justyfying it while gambling still being legal and you would need to establigh policy into the law instead just try to pass it as a gambling in already established law.
"If people didn't buy them." Yeah sure the AAA industry might take them out then... because they aren't working and they need to find another scheme to fill their pockets. It's not just a loot box problem, it's an industry problem.
"If gamers didn't buy lootboxes, we wouldn't put them in out games." Followed by: "Gamers aren't buying our games enough! We aren't making good enough first week sales! What do we do!?!?!? .... *LOOTBOXES!*" Warlock and his overseers at Ubisoft and every other triple "ey!" game publisher can go tug it. When gamers don't buy games because of microtransactions and bad shady business practises, their solution is ever more microtransactions. To then claim that they wouldn't use lootboxes if people didn't buy them, in the face of people not buying them (by not buying the games) is hysterically sad.
As someone with an addictive personality, it’s just dangerous, there’s no reason to do this other than corporate greed, but you didn’t need me to tell you that lmao. If I had any money at all to spend on loot boxes or an equivalent (Black Lion keys in Guild Wars 2 are particularly interesting to me right now) I would be buying them, “fortunately” I am an unemployed co-dependant.
When I quit Mobile games again a few months ago my brother who plays Azur Lane quite a bit said “just play the game without spending money.” I told him “I literally can not do that.” “Well I guess quitting is a good idea then.” Loot Boxes are directly targeted at me and people like me, they need to be stopped.
Exactly, like a friend of mine was saying how cosmetic are optional. Yes, they are to you and me, but to other, not really. Which is how i find all these arguments for lootboxes to be, yes they arent an issue to you, but that is just it, it isnt an issue to you doesnt mean that it isnt an issue for other, there will be people who are into the cosmetic aspect of a game which is why there are so many skins for sale.
Can someone please make a Jim Sterling soundboard application for Android and iOS? I need Jim's iconic lines such as "triple AAAAaaaa" with me at all times :D
The thing about the "it's not bad if it's done right" argument is that it only really works when there are examples of it being done right, but in the case of loot boxes... there aren't any. There literally isn't a single game that has had loot boxes implemented in them in some way and not suffered for it.
Kids would still be able to get the games one way or another. It's almost as if parents should exercise some level of responsibility over their offspring, but naaaaaah, they're too tired working themselves into early-onset cardiopathy to earn money for things they've been brainwashed into thinking they need.
And Belgium just banned them instead of changing the rating because casion is 21+ years old - legally adult and highest pegi is 18, so that would not be enough. Additionally, how would they properly look for the taxes and regulations specifics to gambling ? Hardly possible .. And then, that won't stop in anyway child to buy them - should shop don't care, command online where you could lie or just use an adult to get one for you (I mean, like 90% of COD games are below 18 years old) !
I can get behind this. I do worry that some will consider it "censorship" but honestly I dont care at this point. I dont want kids to have access to gambling PERIOD. Missing out on a good game is worth the price of not sinking into the gambling cycle.
Nice comparison to cigarettes there, especially the part where tobacco companies have made their products, deliberately, so addictive there are essentially no non-addicted smokers and only new ones. Really nice paralell, enlightening if I may say so.
If it were up to the companies, they would be marketing cigarettes to kids. And to think they said that smoking were HEALTHY once. Companies need to be kept in check,
it would be a nice comparison if people died from cancer because they opened lootboxes, but it's not. it's a poor comparison and jim's an idiot for making it. cigarettes are lethal. lootboxes are not.
@Anderson Dalmeus can't really tell if you're(a) trying to refute my point or(b) just commenting on corporate greed (but that's on me) If (a), interestingly enough nicotine absorption rate while vaping is lower than while smoking cigarettes - and I have some anecdotal evidence the high kicks in with a noticeable delay. If (b), I believe they would if only it could be pushed through the FDA EDIT: replaced 'by' with ' through the' for clarity
@@thomasjenkins7506 cigarettes are EVENTUALLY lethal(and then on the level of severely raised health risk), long term health risks of lootbox use are not adequately researched at this time(unless we assume they are comparable to other problem gambling, what were the risks of that again?)
A couple nights ago, a friend and I were having some drinks and discussing the problems in the gaming industry right now. It really makes us sad. Anyway, at some point, my friend slurred when he said "triple A" and it sounded like "cripple A". It seems fitting with how gaming companies are crippling themselves.
AAA gaming industry consciously forgot that video game industry is a creative industry. The upper echelons did not want creativity on their games, but a money-making machine. That's why Fifa & PES got released every year with borderline no changes. That's why every AAA publishers wants to add Battle Royale to their games.
THANK GOD SO THAT MAKES 3 OF US ON PLANET EARTH GETAGRIP THATS ME SEAN MALSTROM IS THE OTHER NOW WE HAVE YOU THE 3RD REAL GAMER ON EARTH WITH A MIND OF HIS OWN WELCOME TO THE SEAN MALSTROM INNER GROUP WII REMOTE IS GAMING PES WII CONTROL A TEAM NOT A MAN MP3 BEST FPS FPA CONTROLS IN EXISTENCE COD OH ITS NOW A FPS ON WII WITH FPS CONTROLS AND A WHILE COMMUNITY THAT NOW PLAY TACTICALLY AND NOT RUN AROUND SHOOTING EACH OTHER IN THE BACK THE WII REMOTE AND THE MOUSE AIM MADE EVERYONE TREAT THE GAME AS A WAR AS A TACTICAL MATCH NOT A SILLY CHADBRO ARCADE SHOOTER EVERYONE ELSE GAMBLING CUT SCENES AND QTE....FSTFORWARD FIFA IS A LOOT BOX SHALLOWFEST NO ONE IS TEAM CONTROLLING A FOOTBALL GAME LIE TEY DID IN PES WII PES WII THE FUTURE OF SPORT GAMING FIFA PES PS4 THE FUTURE IS GAMBLING
“If you don’t like it, you don’t have to buy” is actually a valid point, we can just not buy their games period. That’ll actually cost them enough profit to hurt.
If you don't buy the game you can't buy loot boxes for it either. Still amazes me that 60 DOLLAR games have microtransactions, like the original profit wasn't enough.
@@threemays On the plus side, there still exists professional games that don't have microtransactions of any kind, let alone lootboxes so, if their plan is to get the younger generation so used to it that they just accept it, they may have some trouble with that.
I think the problem is the companies arent getting the real data, if you look at the raw numbers it makes sense, but they forget about the damage they do to them in the longer term
Hopefully in a short time you'll be reporting that Andrew Wilson and the rest of EA's board of directors have been extradited to Belgium to serve time in prison for their role in defying Belgian gambling laws, and that EA has filed for bankruptcy and is selling its assets piecemeal, and that game companies have gotten scared and are no longer using lootboxes in their games. That's the ideal situation, at least.
I think at this stage, the best we can hope for is the left-wing activists picking up on things as being exploitative to children, and starting to spout out their usual shit all over social media. The Corporates' are so shit-scared of being labelled "haters" of any kind (sexist, racist, bla bla) they will have no choice but to suddenly change their stance and decry loot crates, sacking CEOs and bringing in "new management" with a sudden change of heart, stripping it all out of their business models in order to appear like they weren't just in it to exploit the population for as much money as possible, even though we all know that's exactly what it's about right now.
Sometimes it feels like the world is going crazy and all I have is a small corner for myself and other sensible people, but at the very least, we have a poglin british boy to properly convey how much bullshit the world is spewing. Thank God for Jim Sterling. Also, yes times 1000 on that climate change statement.
@@popejewish Not exactly; Gambler's Fallacy is the belief that the odds goes in the gambler's favour if they try more times. It's still true that if you lose and don't try again, you'll forever be a loser, while trying again gives you a chance (granted still equal to the low chance you had) of winning. Of course, the real "winning" strategy is to not play to begin with.
To that end SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL OR NATIONAL ADDICTION HELP FOUNDATION! Jim put up some websites or recommend some foundations/ groups to donate that helps people seeking help! Raising Awareness is good but Rasing MONEY is better.
Somewhat ironically here in Finland the government-owned-(semi-)monopoly-gambling-company "Veikkaus" has various tools alongside other support things to possible gambling-addicts. Of course it's a bit more difficult to keep track of non-Veikkaus-customers alongside the people who use coins instead of bank/credit-cards. But even in that case as long as they use the services of Veikkaus, there are some other winning third-parties also ( E.G. some other support-groups and charities etc. ). Hence their slogan: "A Finn always wins" ---
@@wojtektaracinski7977 The only "great Finnish" I could think of is the book-store "Suuri Suomalainen Kirjakauppa". So I am feeling bits of "lost-in-translation"-vibes here. (( Unless of course you were trying to make a "Make Finland Great again" or some kind of another joke like that; we did do a "Finland Second"-video a while ago though. )) There is some public general numbers how the profits are distributed in English: - 53% to the Ministry of Education and Culture for improving on sports and physical education, science, arts and youth work; - 43% to the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health for improving on health and social welfare; - 4% to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry for improving on horse racing. A source link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veikkaus --- --- ---
It occurs to me that AAA companies will not change based on pressure from us, their customers/cattle. They are only influenced by their shareholders. So instead of pressuring the companies, shouldn't we be pressuring the shareholders themselves?
They should leave the casino's alone, let the kids gamble on those fun slot machines. It's good for business and if done right they aren't a bad thing. Seriously, I'm happy more and more countries are getting this shit sorted. I sincerely hope Belgium makes an example out of EA.
@Rick Harris Most of these 'kids' are fucking teenagers that use their allowances or part-time wages. You know, like teens that use their allowance to buy addictive corn syrup-laden sodas and snacks, or buy cigarettes and drugs from assholes selling them on the down low. Or hell, some of them get so addicted they steal their parents credit cards or their credit info and the parents only find out after they look at their bank statements and credit scores. But hey, that's totally the parents faults that their teenagers don't listen to them and heed warnings that have been drilled into their heads for years. It's totally their fault that teens in general don't listen to anyone but their peers and 'cool' adults looking to exploit them. Tell me; When was the first time you did something that your parents told you not to because it was bad for your well being? And exactly how many kids have you raised? How many teens listen to what you have to say and actually heed your advice? Finally, did you actually read that article and notice that the ranges of child gambling problems where coming from the '13+' demographic or are you just spouting mindless garbage because you're some know-it-all twenty-something who totes knows everything about raising children in a world where every corporate entity is trying to exploit them?
@TheHooseNutz beef is the smallest of the problem. what really gets them is the sugar and high glucose corn syrup that really fucks your metabolism. and it is everywhere and the industry knows it is bad but still tries to keep it under wraps. if you want to read more about it i suggest that: www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lustig-john-yudkin and btw. the people are not only to blame for that. of course one can choose what to eat but there is a high negative correlation between weight and income. poor people can't choose what to buy and eat. they have to get the cheap stuff and that is most of the time processed food with lots of added shit. education plays a role as well and all that jazz. so yeah it is not that easy.
You know, I think the representative got it right when he said that if nobody bought loot boxes, AAA companies wouldn't include them in their games. Doesn't make in any less scummy or duplicitous, but I guess a broken clock is correct twice a day. And they do actually mean nobody, as in not one single person. EDIT: By the way, that was one epic rant at the end there, Jim. Nice work!
The defense of loot boxes from the games industry has a few parallels to the tobacco industry and their multiple defenses of it. Just because an item is popular does not make it good and each in case are abusing either a chemical addiction or gambling addiction.
@@biokido575 Did i say to ban them? As we can see the war on drugs was a joke and ruined many peoples lives a lot of them permanently. I simply said make them harder to get addicted to since tabacco is already disgusting to begin with.
@@Meocross No you implied you would take away the enjoyment of them from people that happen to enjoy them by making them bitter. You are still ruining a little joy somebody has.
The argument that loot boxes are in games because people buy them doesn't work. In any game with microtransactions, only a tiny percentage of the player base ever makes microtransaction purchases, which would make them failures as monetization models because few people are actually paying for them. But the gambling mechanic allows the big spenders to spend more, which is what these companies are really after. Come on regulation. Where are you? =/
Kevin Li lol they’re not forcing you to buy them, and in some games they’re completely cosmetic. Stop complaining about shit that you don’t have to buy.
@@sheriffaboubakar9720 Sure, but cosmetics were once unlockables within games that were removed and stuffed into loot boxes so that they could be sold back to you.
@@sheriffaboubakar9720 That's a dumb fucking response. He would have every right to complain that rewards like cosmetics are now only gotten by cash. That's an issue.
Yeah, he'd fit in perfectly with the other fat cats dictating to the rest of the Europe what they can and can't do, and that they cannot be trusted to make decisions for themselves.
@@presidentwoodrow We're actually a fucked-up pseudo-representative federal republic the size of wales, or half the size of the tiniest state or province in your country, with 4 official languages(Dutch, French, German, English), 3 local governments(Brussels, wallonie, flanders), 3 provincial governments (Brussels, wallonie, flanders), and a federal government ontop of that house-of-cards. Even if Jim Sterling could be nominated to run for president, he can only do so in one of those three states. Flanders people cannot vote for people in wallonie-based parties and vice-versa. This is why Belgium holds the world record for longest time without a (federal) government post-elections. 2 years iirc? :P The fact that anything works here at all is a small miracle in and of itself, with major tunnels in brussels collapsing due to no maintenance, nuclear reactors having rotten concrete and leaking problems, the ceiling of the ministry of justice collapsing, and politicans saying that we can't have proper renewable power because the subsidies needed would bankrupt the country, while cleverly ignoring the many existing loopholes and subsidies given out to nuclear, and other power sources while neighbouring countries do renewables just fine without any subsidies whatsoever.
I only watched a few minuets of the video of Yongyea and that other guy talking about the state of the game industry. Hearing the other guy talk on how the game industry is doing just fine and that "rage culture" is the real problem with video games, I exited that video, not wanting anymore of this guy talk about utter nonsense.
The fact that the corporate mouthpieces make the same excuses EVERY SINGLE TIME they're challenged over gambling mechanics, really shows how far they've dug their own financial graves.
@@andycavallera2890 Yes, you don't have to grind much (outside of events, because let's be real, those are really grindy). But the problem is that you shouldn't have to grind at all to get these skins. Also, if he spent money on lootboxes, it was probably because he didn't get what he wanted by playing the game normally, because, you know, there is no 100% guaranteed chance you will get what you want from them
@@Ignoto88 im gold portrait with one star, i have every skin and emote and so on of my favourite 3 heroes and 12000 coins in case new skins come out. never bought a lootbox. At high levels you get a lootbox every 4/5 qp games if you play with friends..is that impossible?
@@victorhugocosta1127 you can get what you want by just playing the game, save up coins that you get with duplicates and so on and get it! its really not hard. I hate lootboxes and microtransactions but to me people that buy lootboxes in overwatch are soo dumb.. like there s absoulutely no reason
My expectation is that ingame gambling will be legislated against pretty much everywhere except the US, where the law may as well state "Break whatever laws you want as long as it's in the name of profit."
@TheHooseNutz I'll answer your question with my own. Going with that narrative, I wasn't referring to pot but more like heroine or cocaine. What would you do if a family member of yours was doing it? Something known to destroy lives. Would you ignore it cause this person is doing it in his or her own home and it's non of your business? Meanwhile the person's life falls apart unable to meat monthly bills or even hold a steady job. Not your problem though right? Now rolling with that what if this person was in fact an addict and the dealer in question takes advantage of that? Which is the point right obviously or he/ she wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. These weren't purchases weren't intended for you but for the guy in question. Your fine with pot, but he or she needs meth etc. It's predatory and life ruining.
If you buy iligal drugs then you finance a local gang that make your city and a hell lots of other areas unsafe for evryone else. They in turn finance other bad parts of the world. They are called blood diamonds becuse ppl die bringing them to you, still noone else get hurt?
@@kallmannkallmann I was just trying to keep it simple, not that those aren't good points, was just trying to go along with the gambling narrative using other points as they related to a more individual perspective rather than collective.
What's also annoying, is that these predatory gambling boxes, will inherently hurt game developers of good free to play games, that have microtransactions and chests to fund the game, like Smite for example. I fucking love Smite, it's hands down the best moba style game I've ever played, and it's free to play and has been going onto the 5th year now successfully. They've constantly added content and features to the game for free, and some high quality skins you can buy for characters. They also include loot boxes for skins, but they list what you can get from a particular chest, and regardless you can buy ALL skins directly without rolling for them. The chests sometimes provide a discount, so a skin may cost 600 gems, but a chest roll with 4 potential skins including the 600 gem one, costs 400 gems. So you could technically get the skin at a discount. There's no duplicates, if you already own 2 of those 4 skins in the chest, you will only roll between the 2 remaining ones you don't have. It's probably the only game I've seen do this correctly, without it being predatory in any way. All purchases are cosmetic as well, but because of these BIG AAA companies, developers like HiRez could get hit by legal actions too, and unfairly at that.
Douglas Adams called it decades ago but instead of the Shoe Event Horizon the collapse of our civilization will be marked by an archeological layer of shitty games.
Do not stop until Fifa/Madden and all the other loot box related games are banned for children or the publishers take them out permanently (that should be the ultimate goal).
If all these kids would stop buying cocaine I would for sure stop selling cocaine at the school. It's been a huge boon for my bank account. I don't think being addicted to cocaine is bad if it's done right.
i know what you mean. i sell Cigarettes at a high school, and i make a killing.
(for those that don't understand, im being sarcastic.)
Golden comment xD
"they say crack kills, nigga my crack sells"
I miss being upset about day one dlc or season passes.
It's crazy to think that those days are something we now miss and all in just a couple of years.
i miss the days we complain about horse-armor DLC
Or Disc locked content.
I miss other people besides me being angry about post-release charges.
Same. I miss those days. :(
_''YoU cAn AlWaYs NoT bUy ThEm''_
You can always not implement them, ya gigantic arseholes!
Actually, the proper answer is "Ah yes! Thank you for reminding me I shouldn't buy your games, ever." And they you walk away and never touch a Triple A title ever again.
Well, unless it's something actually good, like say the new God of War.
Yes, but asking them not to implement them infringes on their rights! I mean, other than the rights they should not have had to implement gambling mechanics without regulations of course.
"You can always not buy them!" sounds like a confident answer from someone who believes that not everyone will pick up on that suggestion - which may as well be true, believes that the few who do pick up on that suggestion don't matter and that the whole model is too big to fail in general. In other words it's just another way of saying "Our army of addicts disagree with you! What ya gonna do about it, huh, snowflake?"
@Reyvyn Nightveil Terrible analogy. Alcohol and drugs are for the most part heavily regulated already. You can't sell booze to a minor for example, and there are strict laws regarding who and where drugs can be sold, because these are dangerous and often addictive products that need the supervision of a pharmacist and other medical professionals. Also, alcoholics shouldn't be buying alcohol, because they are prone to addiction. This is called common sense.
Yes, but they want to implement them. Do you want to buy them? If not, just don't. The real shittiness is when they implant them in a game after launch.
"If players didn't buy them, they wouldn't be added into future games". That means drugs are great right? I mean, if people didn't buy heroin, it would disapear.
Do these people hear themselves?
The most morbidly funny thing is, with heavy drugs - as horrible as they are - you at least get SOME kind of 'reward' for your wasted money, as in they get you high. Lootboxes? Not even that. You just get a metaphorical extended hand asking for more money and -some virtual junk- sense of pride and accomplishment.
It's one of those things that's technically true, but the problem is people actually not buying them because the product either causes addiction or everything's been designed so as to encourage purchasing them.
@@Lady_in_Yearning Well technically you do get a "kick" from your brain with games and lootboxes. That's why gambling it's popular and regulated with laws.
well. if people ruined only their lives because of drugs, they would be legal. because adult person may ruin his own life as he wants.
drugs are antisocial concept by its criminal nature, not because government cares about your addiction. it's your own life after all.
and by the same reasons gambling is legal. if you gamble you money you are just broke. you wont go kill people for a doze.
go try to compare drugs to roulette, not at yt, but at court, where it matters.
@@Lady_in_Yearning you get a rush from lootboxes, it's the same rush you get when you put that coin in the slot machine and pull the lever. That rush is what keeps you going and want more.
Really respect that Jim’s sticking to this. No compromise, micro transactions do not belong in these games and have been toxic since they first came about.
Same. I haven't always liked Jim's style personally, or even agreed with him on many things. However, I feel like this is something truly important and his insistence on the pressing issue has done a lot to keep other people talking about it as well. Just because things have been bad for a while and are getting worse doesn't mean we should stop demanding good.
Mr.Aptronym yeah I think it’s so important to keep this conversation going
Corporations CANNOT self-regulate. They are BY DESIGN focused solely on acquiring as much money as possible by whatever means are available. Only the threat of repercussions- of their actions being punished in some way, shape or form, and costing them money- will dissuade them.
The hilarious shit is they're more capable of self-regulating if the head of the company is hereditary rather than appointed by shareholders. Because they actually have incentive to keep long term consequences in mind and don't shit the bed because they'll be gone in 5 years time.
even then you have to make the punishment big enough, or otherwise companies will take the fines and punishments and change nothing about what they're doing because it's still a net profit (i.e. like with the pharmaceutical industry in the US)
@@ddshocktrooper5604 Quite literally this. I've heard a few stories about companies in various industries that lost their souls after becoming publicly traded. Hilariously enough, EA's one of the best examples I can think of. If you believe the stories, EA got its name because their founder believed that video games would become a new art form and EA was founded to allow devs to be proper artists. After a few bad experiences with certain dev teams, EA decided it'd be better to have in house dev studios. EA Sports was both the first EA subsidiary studio and the seed of corruption that'd eventually turn EA into, as Jim calls it, "Unicronic Arts." See, the man who was head of EA Sports was a greedy, wealth-obsessed man that did some of the earliest cutthroat publisher BS, specifically signing exclusive deals with sports organizations for the sole right to make games based around those sports. Eventually (if memory serves) when the founder left, the head of EA Sports was chosen by the board to replace him and he made the modern EA tactics the company's standard business practices.
I can't say AAA like a normal person anymore, thanks Jim.
Mom: what kind of batteries do we need
Me: Triple *AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*
"Eagle 1 to base, we're entering the mission area and are preparing our bombing run."
"Base to Eagle 1, be advised, recon suggests the enemy has reinforced your missions area with additional triple AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-"
"Eagle one to base, signal is unclear, please repeat."
"-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-"
"Eagle one to base, can't *BOOM* Shit! Enemy flak, Eagle 2 is down! I repeat, Eagle 2 is- *KSSSSHHHHH*"
The AAA games industry can't be taken seriously anymore so why should we pretend that it can be?
BROKER: Sir, you could invest in corporate bonds, the return rates may vary and in general the risk varies based on the corporation's financial rating. Would you be interested in investing in corporations with a BBB+ rating or which ratings would you generally accept?
ME: Triple AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
"Crap I have a flat tire and no spare. Better call TRIPLE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA."
How to make microtransactions optional:
Don't include them.
How to make lootboxes fair:
Don't include them.
How to actually make money:
Make good games and probably make sure they reach a large part of the population.
Do games even get localized to a majority of the planet? Or would that cost money?
Holy crap, that's a lotta upvotes.
Of course, Free to play mechanics are fine in a free to play game (who would have guessed) if they are not free to wait anyways.
But we all know the TripleAids Industry will never even consider making Free to play games, as they are forever hounded by their shareholders and their own greed.
@Adam Thompson well that technically falls under including them. Though just a little more scummy.
I dont mind the way some "Indie" f2p titles like Warframe monetise their games via microtransactions
@@thedrake5072 IMO, microtransactions are okay *in f2p games*. Warframe has the best model here - you know exactly what you're buying, it's either purely cosmetic or can also be acquired by playing the game, and you can trade with other players to earn Platinum (the pay-for currency) without having to spend a single penny yourself.
Microtransactions in pay2play games can be okay if it's purely cosmetic stuff and reasonably priced (like the costume packs for Mass Effect). And to be fair, I'm only letting Bioware get away with it because a) each crew member had their fancy loyalty skin which you got by playing, and one bought skin which was more like a palette swap of their default skin, and b) they didn't advertise it in-game, you had to go to their website to find and buy them (and c) I bought the games dirt cheap with all story DLC in a Steam/Origin sale, so in the end I still paid less than the retail price). The bought skins didn't even show up in the outfit selection until you had them. If they did a remake, where all this stuff gets put into a shop on the citadel that you have to walk past every time you're there, and get spam mail from to your terminal after every other mission, then I'd say fuck them with a cactus.
@Adam Thompson isnt Fucktivision already doing this with CoD? patching the loot boxes a bit later after the game released?
It's funny that localization was mentioned. I live in a small market of the Czech Republic (10M people). A while back most triple AAA products got not only subtitles, but were even dubbed. Now, it is a common occurrence that localization is sponsored by local game eshops or crowd sourced for even large AAA titles.
Referring to high-rolling gamblers as “whales” was common in the casino industry years before the gaming industry latched onto the term. I’m surprised that Jim doesn’t call out that explicit connection.
JosieJOK I didn’t even know that
I was legitimately shocked to see that Twitch has a Casino channel where you can watch people who own online casinos gamble and advertise their online casino deals. Seems as though it's becoming scarily normalised.
Could argue it's joining the late night casino channels or the global poker coverage rather than a "normalising" there, but I haven't heard of that before now so clearly I don't have the full picture.
Things with online casinos is that there is much stricter legislative and control by state. For example in the country Im currently in, only few of them are allowed (including sports betting sites) and document verification is needed - if you are local, which Im not, you also will be checked for unpaid taxes, fines or low salary.
I thought they stopped all of that a few years ago? Like, didn't they say only video games can be showcased? They put an end to people trying to do cooking shows and that was the reason they gave, along with all that hoopla with skin betting too... They said they were going to stop that right?
I don't watch twitch anymore so...
@@JaymeSplendid I doubt you missed the "rise of the IRL streamer", but no Twitch hasn't been "games only" for a while now. As evident by the Bob Ross marathons, as well as the aforementioned people walking around getting cringe worthy moments due to the mistake of allowing TTS donations or music suggestions.
I wish Germany would regulate online (and videogame) gambling properly. Unfortunately, gambling authorities are responsibility of the federal states, with no central authority for online stuff. Which is just great, because companies will claim the state with the weakest (i.e. basically none) regulation of online gambling is responsible, and there's nothing you can do.
Honestly, any kind of microtransaction should qualify a game for a Mature rating.
^ this
That's one way to kill Fortnite.
Agreed.
That was the reason that the “coffee break” from GTA San Andreas got slapped with Adult Only because it has sex in it.
You want to do something that only adults should be doing (gambling, sex is not the issue this time), then you get regulated like an adult.
@@damanamathos you say... like it's a bad thing?
Honestly, it needs a different rating.
50% of what's on the shelves for Xbox is already rated M. How would that make it stand out?
As aside note: the term “Whale” comes from the gambling industry.
So if video game companies are saying “ loot boxes” aren’t “gambling”, why use terms from the gambling industry to describe some players? 😉
Do you have a source for that? That'd be a pretty juicy tool in the arsenal.
I've had a mental break down today but since your question was rhetorical I can skip it without putting any thoughts on it... For now.
But if i could make any attempt at answering it I'd say they don't care about consistency. Or ethic. Or efforts. Or anything anymore(yeah, not being feeling my best today, sheesh!)
I see someone else has been "adulting" in hardcore mode recently. True, the amount of f^@ks given by the execs at big companies in general are roughly zero. Add the fact that this business practice is bringing in metric tons of money to them, I imagine various scenes from the movie "The Wolf of Wall Street" are playing out across AAA gaming company board rooms everywhere. At any given time.
Good luck with the break!
Lootboxes are done right when they aren't there.
Terraria spawns chests in the world that sometimes contain useful stuff. Those are nice.
Lootboxes aren't bad if they are a part of randomized loot system in which it is designed to be grinded for as opposed to being paid for.
@@jordannoell4222 _Paid_ loot boxes. I should've precise...
@@Aleara27 Meh, even random unpaid lootboxes are rarely done correctly. Most of the time, it just replaces balancing. Lootboxes and the like should be balanced in such a way that they change your playstyle, with no clearly superior option. In other words, lootboxes should follow the example of Binding of Isaac, FTL, Don't starve and other roguelites, but potentially without the roguelite aspect.
Jordan noell agreed. RPG games, minecraft’s randomized items you get from a randomized world (chest, mobs, etc) are FUN to grind and encourage players to play. EA’s fifa 19, encourage to pay.
Let’s play indie games and board games, at least they’re not so heavy on your wallet.
*DO YOU GUYS NOT HAVE A GAMBLING PROBLEM!?*
christop17 I do
I have a problem with gambling. Would that do?
No, but like Jim i'm worried because i have somewhat of an addictive personality.
Not a gambling problem but anxiety and an addictive personality. It's tough as shit to stay away from lootboxes. That's why I don't play games with lootboxes
People do, that's the problem. lol
Joke is still funny btw.
I think I've started to realise why Jim gets so many people desperately arguing against his points all the time: It's not because people don't like him as a person, or even that people dislike his style of presentation or the topics he covers... People argue against him because _he's always right but we all wish he wasn't._ He's like the doomsday prophet on the street corner who turns out to be bang on the money!
We wish everything Jim said was bollocks, that the game industry wasn't an ever-growing pile of festering maggot ridden shite. But he speaks truth, every damn video, and we hate being faced with that truth.
Thank god for Jim.
I thank God for Jim everyday day. Twice on Mondays.
@@metallicafan352 Does this remind you of persona 4?
@@hamzaayaz7482 maybe a bit.
I've briefly talked to Jim, he's nice. He defended my right to have an opinion against rabid Undertale fans, even though he disagreed with my opinion. Furthermore, Jim _is_ right about a lot of things. That said, I personally don't like his style of presentation at all.
@@Bacxaber I agree. He's rarely ever moderate on the situation, a lot of his opinions come down to: "Consumer good, corporation bad." without really addressing the agency of the consumer in agreeing or disagreeing in the business practice of a corporation, or otherwise sustaining it or deincentivizing it. When people are subjected to a constant stream of negative feedback, people are going to want to push back because that degree of negativity feels too unnatural to be true. I don't disagree with Jim, but the following I believe is a nuance of this issue that he consistently doesn't address or attempts to shut down.
In this video he talks about "whales" as a dehumanizing term for people who either have too much money than they know what to do with or people with addictive personality traits without addressing that both of these groups of people have agency. I agree with that statement, it's some pretty nasty corporate jargon, but where I don't agree is when Jim says that pointing out that these practices wouldn't be put in if people didn't pay into them is bullshit. That's how capitalism works. Whatever makes money is the strategy of the day. If it doesn't make money, why bother?
Yes, only a very small fraction of the playerbase pays for lootboxes, but wouldn't those people have the *power* to decide how profitable these practices are? I get for people with addiction problems this isn't easy and I don't really blame them for this, but for the people who have the money to just drop 1000's on loot boxes in a game, where is their responsibility in this? Apparently to Jim, they aren't responsible. Corporation bad, consumer good.
This isn't a deflection of how horrid these practices are, I am of the firm belief that it's not doublethink to hold the opinions that corporations are responsible for keeping their businesses ethical while consumers are responsible for not feeding into unethical business practices to prevent incentivizing them to publishers. Both of these opinions have the space to be talked about simultaneously, it's fallacious to think that you can't put both of them into practice and ask people to vote with their wallets while you condemn the practices of the corporation, and it's *especially* fallacious to believe that anyone who makes this point is automatically a corporate shill bot because Ubisoft used the same logic and twisted it into a shitty defense.
I'll add further that I believe *we*, as consumers, have the responsibility to not even buy games that have these practices in them if we want them to be gone. Again, we can hold this belief at the same time as lambasting corporate greed, that's on them, this is on us. We might not contribute to the loot box profits as much as "whales", but if we as a majority don't play these games, "whales" won't have a reason to play a dead game, either, and won't have a reason to spend money. I believe this is a good short-term solution to the loot box/microtransaction problem in multiplayer games while we wait for regulation to sweep up the gunk festering within the industry.
*Triple AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA*
They don't want 3 A's, they want 410 A's. Yes I counted.
SuperDanteF was it worth it
P'haps he was dictating?
More like Triple AaAaAaAaAaAa
triple AYY
Since there are so many people who tell you to stop talking about this, I now feel the need to just say "keep going! Keep their feet on the fire, keep reminding people that this is not what gaming should be and that we shouldn't be accepting this! We won't stop talking about this until the gaming industry stops shoving it into our games!"
Keep their feet to the fire until they're forced to stand on charred stumps
Amen
Corporations arent going to quit putting shit you dont want in games until you quit buying the game. You cant just buy the game but not buy the microtransactions, as a business guy that's exactly what we want. Game corporations want as many people who will buy the games to buy it, and as many people who are willing to spend extra money on microtransactions. Every game sold is additional revenue, every successful microtransaction is icing on the cake. You want companies to quit churning ouut shit products, then quit buying the shit and blaming the whales who buy a larger percentage of shit. I used to be anti-microtransactions but after years of watching stupid consumers continue buying shit, well at this point I am rooting for the corporations to take advantage as much as they can of morons completely incapable of self control or making an informed purchase, and some are so delusional they think corporations actually care about them. LOL fucking idiots you deserve the shit you buy.
Cheers mate
they're counting on you giving up talking.
Anecdotal, but I knew someone who spent $15,000 in Star Wars Galaxy of Heroes. When I asked him why he kept buying crystals and packs in that game, he said he was just exhausted by the grind of it and by the time he'd sunk in a decent amount of money, he figured he was in too deep to stop and wanted to keep going until he got everything. The playerbase for grindy f2p games like that even adopt the terms 'whale', 'kraken', 'dolphin', etc and wear them as a badge of honor on Reddit or official community forums. It's disgusting. Anyone who tries to play microtransactions as "optional" and "player choice" fails to mention the *fact* that these kinds of microtransactions fundamentally alter the core design of games (hence why so many games need rebalancing once they've been removed). The focus always seems to be on protecting children from exploitative gambling mechanics, which is important, sure, but it's an issue for adults, too. Exploitative practices aren't acceptable in free-to-play games, and they should definitely not be acceptable in $60+ premium games. What Jim has said time and time again stands true- if a company making and selling games can't make and sell games and make their money back, why are they in this industry?
Patrick ikr I agree
to be fair, WarnerBros asking for money to stop a kid being strangled, is one of the funniest things I've ever heard of.
it's funny and super evil at the same time.
Jim, Valve's upcoming card game Artifact has probably the scummiest monetization I've seen in a video game. Somehow this is going through without anyone talking about it , probably cause Valve isn't advertising it too much. Game costs 20$ you get 10 card packs and 5 tickets. Tickets are used and consumed for some game modes and cost 1$ per ticket, card packs can't be earned by playing and cost 2$ per card pack. Basically after the initial price most of the game is still locked behind a paywall. In Steams market place you can sell cards so Valve is actually couraging ppl to gamble giving them a place to sell their winnings.
Wattur that's really bad you should go to jim's subreddit and repost your comment
Activisions wet dream and future.
Wattur - Sounds like any other digital/physical card game out there! Dunno how card games aren't considered gambling but I'm sure someone can come up with a damn good reason to why everyone ignores it! Trading card game... Perhaps, just maybe! You can buy individual cards on the market. Therefore eliminating the need to buy card packs over and over gain. Not saying it can't be addicting but it sure as hell isn't as predatory with that secondary option available to you!
And considering this was the choice of the employees at VALVe... What were they thinking?
At least other TCG games are free.
Back when I was in high school they altered the school lunch program and the food became disgusting and everyone complained. Then one day someone started going around to classrooms and writing "dont eat school lunch" on the boards. Then others joined the cause and within 2 weeks only about half the people were eating school lunch. The school lost so much money within a month that they had to lay people off and held an assembly to beg us to eat school lunch again.
Moral of the story: sometimes you just need a few to make something into a public campaign to reach a larger market and make an actual impact. I think it's about time the gaming industry had a taste of this
HEY, that's very cool! so... did they changed the menu like you wanted?
But back to the video's issue:
i think more than just "vote with your wallet" the real solution is to inform the casual gamer (the dolphins & whales) about why this practises are bad... we trow so much sheit over them for supporting companies, that we tend to forget they're not soaked in the gaming world, and thus, they're easily exploitable
I doubt they changed it back
School food across the US became disgusting under Michelle Obama's push for "healthy choices" in school lunches turned law
@@kutsumiru Dude, school lunches tasted like trash way before that. I'm 40 and they were always shit. There's no way Michelle Obama could have made them worse unless she made them serve nothing but rice cakes and kale.
This is exactly the reason i stopped buying AAA games along with a few friends.
I'd rather die replaying the Only 2 Halo's on PC alongside Skyrim then support these borderline-nazi practices big companies pull off.
...except that wouldn't change anything, and only hurt those who weren't responsible. Think about it: when people start to "vote with their wallets" and stop buying games, will it hurt the corporate heads? Hell no. They will still got their cut, on way or another, since they couldn't give less of a shit even if you sewn their assholes shut But to cut the costs, they will simply start to fire people, meaning that thousands employed in video game industry would lose their jobs. As Jim pointed out, they make an obscene amount of money already, so drop in sales wouldn't hurt them as much.
That's the problem with the logical fallacy known as "argumentum ad nauseam" : one repeats an already addressed argument (in this case that would be the "it's optional" excuse) again, and again, and again, always ignoring the rebuttal, until opposition gets sick and gives up. It can be used as a marketing strategy as much as a rhetorical one, and it's heavily dishonest either way as it's a way to appear as having a stronger and unchallenged argument without doing anything.
Why do i point this out ? When faced with an ad nauseam fallacy, it's important to never give up to it. Can be tiring, but the alternative would be letting the argument win over listeners and the "it's optional" excuse win over all hearts once more.
@@sgtsnokeem1139 what does "gaslight" mean in the context you useing it in?
That makes so much sense.... "It's optional" "It's just cosmetic" "It's so they don't raise game prices" and "it's chance, it's not gambling, it's the same as trading cards" are things I have heard for so long now I'm just sick of it.
When I see people use these excuses now it simply enrages me. There's is no excuse for their blatant....Stupidiy? Blind loyalty? Denial? Ignorance? Am I just getting old is this what that feels like?
Well I'm not sure what their logic behind defending these predatory practices is really but it's got to stop, enough is enough.
@@xj0462
It's the whole "I didn't say that! You're putting words in my mouth!" even when everyone can see on the same comment thread that they did. It's pretty common especially if you start talking to someone who has some... iffy... ideas on particular hot topics (like race/climate change etc.).
@@matthewellis6516 the blaming doesn't matter at all,what is important is what to regulate and where to stop regulating,specially when kids(that generally are dumb by default)are involved.
Regarding the card thing,it wasn't the same context-wise to me at least.That type of thing was way more difficult to get without the permission of an adult and also reducted to whatever fad was in your school at the time,whereas now kids are bombarded constantly whith millions of different online multiplayer games.
@matthew ellisthank you for the bullshit whataboutism. Your post doesn't actually address nor refute the point of the argument and merely tries to deflect. What I want to know is; what Stockholm syndrome brainwashing motivates you to defend these exploitative business practices?
Oi! Have you looked at how Bethesda is trying their hardest to skirt laws to deny people their refunds for Fallout 76? Everything is automated now, every request is denied within minutes with the same message, even in countries where you are entiteled by law to get a refund if you bought a faulty product or didn't get what was advertised? They cite "company policy is not to return any digital sales", as if their company policy is above the law.
Just yet another one of their shitty and shady practices that falls in line with them not giving review copies out for their games anymore. They are actively trying to keep their consumers in the dark.
Probably why they didn't want it on Steam. Don't want a big company chasing you up for refunds.
And this is why we should NOT PRE-ORDER, kids.
@vin 950 Steam is not pretty liberal with refunds. The 2 hour window is pathetically small, and for a game like Fallout 76, not nearly enough tine to realize that the game is bullshit and you want your money back.
@@mjc0961 Steam will give refunds past that, the 2 hour window is really a guideline to deal with repeated return-ers.
@@Vandragorax Well, i didn't pre-order and after a heated email where i pointed out their stance was illegal, i got a faulty product and i didn't get what was advertised i got my money back. I got my first request denied but they changed their tune pretty quickly after i pointed that out to them. I got the request accepted an hour after and two days later i got the money back in to my account.
It's still horseshit and there are plenty of people who are either ignorant of what laws apply to them or think that they just have to comply with Bethesdas shitty customer support. I really hope Jim, Yong Yea and so on take note of this so the PR calamity can continue. They deserve to be hung out to dry and be made an example of at this point.
Driving a car is optional, but most of us need a car in order to get to a job (There is no public transportation in my area). Loot Boxes are optional, but we all know they tailor the game around the loot boxes to throttle back the entertainment until we inevitably give in.
Not true at all in a lot of games.
Sorry, I had something in my throat, I meant to say climate change. Thank god for Jim! I was happy to replay that part.
Except you may need a job to eat but do not need a video game to live.
@@claudiuspulcher2440 The point he is making is that in either case the system has been purposefully broken so that you'll buy the "solution" that the designer wants to sell to you. Just because you don't need a game to live doesn't mean that it isn't shitty and greedy behaviour, or that you can't complain about something you otherwise enjoy being purposefully fucked with. The consequences are less dire than the oil and automotive industries buying politicians who underfund mass transit, but the idea is the same.
@@claudiuspulcher2440 I've never heard of a store that doesn't try and sell anything. If games have stores, they will try and push you to spending money in them. That means designing the game to subtly push you towards spending money in said store.
When you buy a game, it's reasonable to expect an entertaining gaming experience, not a playable commercial you just paid $60+ for.
You know what AAA mean right ?
Avarice
Avidity
Arrogance
Better than Kurt Angle's three I's. Gets an up.
aardvarks
angina
aioli
Im trying to do a playthrough where I do not use the dictionary, what do the first two words mean?
Almonds
Antidisestablishmentarianism
And
An
Abundance of
Assholes
Unregulated greed is a hell of a thing.
@@AverageJoe8686 Well that was some glorious nonsense. In case you actually believe this copypasta, the ARC fusion reactor is still theoretical (nobody has actually built even a prototype yet), and "depleted uranium fusion reactors" is complete fiction. Maybe you're thinking of breeder reactors based on the description, but those are far from risk-free, and are relatively common. Also, what exactly are you trying to say with those solar calculations at the beginning? Assuming all those numbers are real, you're just showing that going 100% solar means we convert more solar energy to electricity than is being used to warm the planet. That's not even an argument for or against solar.
+AverageJoe8686 I've always wondered how mass solar or wind power would affect the planet, it's certainly not "free power" . Your comment puts into maths what I've been thinking. Green energy has other costs which no one talks about.
If gamers didn't buy loot boxes for a particular release, the publisher wouldn't stop using them, they would make them more essential to having any fun
nagchampa
They'd call the game a failure because it didn't make the projected returns, then make lootboxes more essential or attractive in the next game.
HA...fun.
See. Blizzard Entertainment in response to Destiny 2 microtransactions not making much money, their plan? "We will push the microtransactions more aggressively in the future."
Wtf is Jim implying? Cigarettes should be banned?
How about we ban sugar and saturated fats?
@@grubbybum3614 sugar and saturated fats are important for our bodies. Their excess is what's bad. The same can't be said for cigs.
I think I found the perfect comeback to the "It's optional" argument - give us an option to download a version without Microtransactions!
I still remember stealing money for microtransactions from parents, from _other people_ when i was a teen to keep up with so called "online friends'" progress in an mmorpg game, more than a decade ago. Now a full working adult, I'm so proud to see people finally getting aware and standing up against these manipulative, these _evil_ monetization practices that's now rampant on phones, even on premium full priced games.
Still took you more than a decade to realize things though.
There's one point you're raising there, that I think not enough people have talked about - peer pressure, and keeping up with other players.
When I was in elementary school, Habbo Hotel was a Big Deal among a lot of kids. I never even tried it, because I was deterred by the microtransactions. But according to what I heard from a lot of other people, the community of that game had cosmetics as a major status symbol. People who didn't buy decorations, outfits, and so on were regarded as a lower class, as inferior to those who bought such items. I remember that a lot of people were telling similar stories to yours, about stealing money from family, asking parents to buy virtual currency as birthday presents, and so on, just because they didn't want to feel left out. Peer pressure alone probably resulted in more microtransaction purchases than any advertising the game itself provided.
Because of this type of stuff, it's not only the corporations that need to learn to act responsibly (even though they are obviously the biggest issue). The gaming community itself also needs to straighten up, and learn to stop gatekeeping and bullying each other.
@@Cyfrik You don't even have to be actively shunned for not buying microtransactions. You just have to be present, around other people, buying said microtransactions and competing who gets the most items of the new set by _chance_ in the new lootbox. While you, not having more money cause you spent it last month, is sitting there, in your "so last season" cosmetics, left out.
Remember the cod game where lootboxes fall in normandy beach? Basically what that is trying to achieve, except in mmorpgs, where skins, pets and mounts is much more important than useless gun skins.
And those are just the "cosmetics" part. Exp boosts, drop boosts, the infamous _enhancement boosts,_ the staple of any p2w, is where you will really feel the pressure.
I spent most of 2018 in rehab for opiate addiction. In a completely related story, I also have spent over $6,000 on Bejeweled Blitz in my lifetime. Sober from opiates since January. Sober from Bejeweled since July. This shit IS gambling.
6000 ???? wow.
Something must be off with you.
Opium I understand.... but spending cash on iaps ??? stupidity i guess...
Instead of iaps, spend that 6000 on cigaretts... theyre harmful to our health the same way.
Dont do drugs.... but its better to do drugs than to give your money to thieving corporations. Drugs go in your own body at least, so its money well spent.... iaps money go into an unknown rich fat fuck's 4th yacht. He already has 7 ferraris and 3 yachts...why help him get another one ? ... while you drive a ... bicycle.... or a Vauxhall
Imagine being this dumb
Congrats on getting sober.
Congrats on getting sober. Some of us just have an addictive personality. You'll need to find a hobby or "addiction" that is good for you. From personal experience, I'd recommend exercise or a productive hobby. In my case, screenplay writing I enjoy quite a bit, even if nothing will ever come of it. Stay safe my dude!
@The Goddamn Batman thats all true and dandy.
Then the other side of the coin : she had extra 6k to waste not to mention the cash to spend on opiates.
Some people with tons of money dont know how to spend it well.... while most people struggle to get by day by day... lets say with a 1000 euro salary per month. Good luck wasting loads of money in that scenario.
Pure and simple, she had tons of money availeble and she fucked it up.
When you gotta make those corporate analysts' expectations, companies start to do anything I guess.
LATE STAGE CAPITALISM
Omnipresence
I honestly thought you're dead, Justin.
when mentally ill investor's/publishers with irrational greed have unsustainable expectations and fail to stop pissing off consumers, it's always been time to support indie devs i guess.
Jesus? Is that you?!
I remember when I was kid arguing with my parents to let me play games which considered violent (Doom, Half-Life, Resident Evil).
I really feel sorry for kids nowadays!
uhm.. why?
@@Zangelin They need to convince their parents to let them play video games that have some gambling mechanic in them!
These days the parents are addicted to gaming (and their phones) as much as the kids. The kids don't stand a chance when their dad's a self imposed man-child. I think we need more studies to show that this lootbox stuff impacts people of all ages so we can dismiss some preconceived notions.
Its mostly women who play mobile games, so specifically targeting fathers and calling them man-children is a way to shut people off from the conversation.
Unraveler Don’t feel sorry for them, those little shits other one is keeping the shit around
Jim Sterling. Thank God for him.
@Mr Judas At this point, Sterling could be Shao Khan.
Y0G0FU "god doesn't exist" jim sterling is proof god exists. *CHECKMATE ATHEIST*
Indeed. He did good work with this video.
@@Y0G0FU uh like he said, THANK GOD FOR HIM!!!
shove your beliefs elsewhere
Yes thank God he is on UA-cam weekly complaining about a product we don't need for survival. To an audience of people that already agree with him. With none of the publishers watching or paying any attention to him. He is truly changing the future.
I miss the days when the biggest way publishers were trying to screw the customer was trying to delegitimize the resale market.
Remember when players were outraged at horse armor for Oblivion?
@@FhtagnCthulhu How young and naive we where. And to think they try to sell us the chance of getting the horse armor nowadays
I remember the days when the most grievous offense of the gaming market was refusing refunds even if less than 10 minutes had gone by since you bought the game.
Or when reviews were not mainstream. But then they bought the mainstream reviews...
When did regulation become a bad word? It's meant to protect the consumer, not the business.
Depends on culture. Generally speaking, many very market-liberal cultures prefer no/absolut minimum regulation, as its in the spirit of the free economics. Many more socially economic countries (mostly around europe, as it originated mostly in central europe) are more open to them.
Keep in mind that much of the game industry both in revenue and production is US-centered - one of the most economically liberal countries in the world. It also has a culture that makes the problems of to much regulation (lack of competition, inventivness and investment, hampering of buisnesses) seem worse than a culture of a country like France would see them: They value individual freedom and choice a lot, independence is written in their history and culture and the idea of the american dream is ingrained in the culture. Someone - I forgot whome - described it as "a country of millonaires and temporarily emberassed millonaires". So they fear that a regulation or measurement (like taxes for the rich) that might not affect them now can affect them in the future.
Depending on your point of view that can be seen as naive, but also as hopefull and strong. Point is - with such a culture, a very independent market is of course desired. Finally, keep in mind that historicly they not only never really had many movements in terms of regulation, but also were far away from europe, when they spread through it.
Another reason with gaming to keep in mind - as said in the video, the laws havent caught up. It is still relativly free of regulation and so not really used to it.
Of course, any industry dislikes regulation (and therefore fights to ingrain that in others as well) and to much regulation might be harmfull, though in this case I dont really see that fear coming true. The lack of regulation causes far more harm in my eyes than even overregulation could do and the idea that regulation would instantly overreach is already ludicrous. But I am german, not american, so again, it depends on the culture.
@@markcobuzzi826 I'd add the major problem with over-regulation: major corporations make it work for them by gaming the system. Regulations are lobbied for and phrased in such a way as to hamper their opposition, but not themselves. Thus, they can abuse regulations to enable monopolies & cartels.
E.g.: Google proposing "Net Neutrality" to hamstring their opposition's bandwidth & connection speed, while Google itself has its own separate infrastructure & has therefore effectively made it illegal to compete with them.
A lot of manipulation out there to make sure people don't vote or think in their best interests. Unions are bad. Regulations are bad. Climate change is a lie (which is literally saying you don't care about the planet you live on). Taxes on wealthy are bad. Voting rights bad. Super Pacs good. Immigration bad. Populism good. Walls good. Holding police accountable bad. Businesses are people now. Freedom of the press bad. Etc. All stuff 5 minutes with a history book would dismiss, but that's 5 minutes too many for a lot of people.
A lot of people, Americans especially have been convinced that governments are incompetent by default and any and all regulation is bad and a waste of money.
It's not even that, it's that they believe, from a default, that any effort by the government to govern responsibly is evil and doomed to fail.
The only ones I feel bad for in the industry are the developers stuck in the middle. They want to work on a great game and earn a name in the business (not that they get proper credit anyway). But instead they're forced to work the game and "story" to work around badly implemented grinding and micro transactions. I know a few people that works/worked at Ubisoft Massive here in Sweden, and some of them actually jumped ship and joined King instead (yes, Candycrush etc) because there they at least get payed better to implement the same bullshit.
While I can see the problem with gambling, what you said has been the biggest issue for me as a customer and afficionado. The games are built around the mechanic of microtransactions which cripple the games in multiple ways. Art, immersion, fun unrepetitive gameplay all suffer under the oppression of microtransactions.
By the way, when will we stop calling them micro?
So... they jumped from Ubisoft to Activision Blizzard....
@@joelnogueira7692 There's nothing inherently wrong with microtransactions though, if done right; problem is that they usually aren't. How to do it right: First develop some full priced content. Offer said content at appropriate prices. Then section off said content to sell them piecemeal to people who doesn't want the whole of said content and only parts of it, at reduced prices, but higher price than if it was sold as a whole. That way, it's actually options you're being given to buy the whole product outright, or buy each portion.
@@sinteleon
Basically, a dlc.
Or an expansion pack.
@@logiju1 Yes, except split into smaller portions for people who only wants individual parts instead of the whole set.
To go from Ubisoft Logic:
If nobody would buy alcohol, nobody would produce it and so nobody would get addicted by it.
But that is not how anything works. The whole alcohol Industry spends billions to make that stuff interessting for younger people to get them hooked.
And getting people addicted is clearly their Goal. They are fine when people ruin themself for their profit.
This is an excellent point. Advertising and flourishing of product very much flies in the face of the idea that people "want" these things inherently.
So do AAA publishers, go figure...
Well said. Not the Ubisoft logic, your interpretation.
Ubisoft's logical defense can fuc-
But if people resisted addiction and stopped buying it they wouldn't be able to spend billions on getting people hooked in the first place.
Is that a problem though?
seems like a good excuse for drug cartels. drugs are good for business and you know... they are optional! you don't have to buy them.
Drug cartels like Anheuser-Busch, Heineken or Diageo use much more subtle methods. They have decades of experience in lying and killing people.
You don't have to buy 'em now, but you gotta pay up...
One UA-camr, ReviewTechUSA, even brought up the idea that they keep on putting these lootboxes into games so that it gets Children to think that this kind of thing is normal and they can be used to exploit them in the future, which means that they are sort of thinking about making more money in the long term, just in a more predatory and assholish way
We will only beat them if these sort of news make it into the actual news channels on tv.
@JoshIsOneCoolKid
Even a fool who contradicts himself can be right once in awhile, lol. Like the old saying goes, even a broken clock is right twice a day ;)
Parents should be paying attention to their kids not a game company, its not a company's fault if someones kids figures out how to plug in all the info to buy something online.
@@jozsva8064 someone's not getting the point
@@KhayJayArt yeah right all of you asking for regulations, how just being responsible for your own actions. No one forced anyone to buy a loot box/mtx
The lootbox/DLC paradox: The more you pay, the less games and content you get in the future.
That's a fact!
Just take a glance at Valve
They are trying to get to max level capitalist. Where they can sell you the menu screen and you pay for everything beyond that. Kinda like Battlefield V.
Drug lord: My business is perfectly legal! If people don't want to die or have their lives ruined by my drugs, then *STOP BUYING THEM!*
Triple A Industry: PREECH BROTHER PREECH!
If I ran a supermarket and gave people a "1/5 chance" of getting bread or milk on every purchase, I would have legal authorities so far up my ass I could taste the rusty scales of justice
Before loot boxes there were Pokemon or Yugioh cards.
@@SherrifOfNottingham Yeah, but see, we know the chances of pulling stuff in these card games. In Yu-Gi-Oh's case, they used to print it directly on the pack.
yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Pull_ratios
yugiohblog.konami.com/articles/?p=7413
What's Overwatch's chance of pulling a legendary skin? We don't know. We know what Chinese player's chances are, but those aren't necessarily the same worldwide. If you're going to compare the two, try doing some research. And Blizzard could at least be transparent about how often you get the good stuff, instead of another fucking spray.
www.polygon.com/2017/5/5/15558448/overwatch-loot-box-chances-china
@@SherrifOfNottingham And due to the history of collectible card games, that industry chose to self-regulate by making the odds of getting a particular card available online or directly on the card/packaging/advertising. Players can also avoid the randomness entirely by buying the cards they want second hand.
The same is true for blind bag toys, kinder surprise toys, and even some gumball machines (the last one I find a bit funny, as you can often estimate the odds by just looking inside the machine).
Nah you need to make sure its only a 0.0005 percent chance to get bread or milk, and a 99% to get useless shit you dont want like fucking celery
@@Meximagician ...Until they deceptively load the machine, which some do. But yes, this is why these things need to be transparent and available through direct-purchase means.
They say they're investing the money from lootboxes etc in making the games better. Then why is it that the games AREN'T getting better?
R6 Siege this idea is true, 8 new operators a year and 4 new maps.
But that's a good example of a game as service being sold properly. Games like Assassins creed don't work for that unless they change the entire game into a different experience.
In fact, they're getting worse in order to push people to buy the loot boxes/mtx.
I can only guess the writing, design and programming departments within AAA are being cut meanwhile there's entire floors of office stiffs being dedicated to coming up with new crappy lootbox schemes.
it is a mystery.
Your channel gives me hope for the future.
This year has been a big shock as a huge Blizzard and Bethesda fan.
Once upon a time I held the argument that loot boxes had their place if done right, like in Overwatch.
But even when _"done right"_ they still inherently alter the way the game would have been played if there were simply no loot boxes.
Now seeing my two favorite game companies I've admired since my childhood take such a bad turn, I know there is no place for these kind of monetization methods.
They pollute the game and the company in such a way that makes them unrecognizable from what they were before.
I hate watching your show. But not because I don't like you, I like you. Not because I don't like the topics, I like the topics. Not because I don't like the things you say.. But because everything you say is so undeniably true about the game industry and yet the whole industry doesn't care, its that everything you say is so true that I hate knowing how shitty this amazing industry is and yet we all can do nothing about it. So when I listen to you talk about how scummy these loot boxes are and how they're ruining peoples lives like those brothers I hate it because the game industry will fight tooth and nail to exploit people more and more and more. And even if we somehow got together and stopped buying EA games. Hypothetically ofcourse. Then it changes nothing because all we're doing is hurting people who put their heart and soul into those games yet are twisted by investors who don't even flinch at the loss of a game. If we never bought a EA game and the had to close the only people that get affected by that are the hard working people who makes the games. The investors would just move on to another studio. There is no winning and we have to rely on the government to stop them but as we're seeing. Even then they're willing to defy the law. Great show btw.
I just stopped buying or caring about most AAA game and stick to games that last thousands of hours like dota etc as my main game and putting those 60dollars into multiple genuine indie game devs that I could whole heartedly throw my money at
@@-dash. same here. I dont necessarily agree with Paradox Interactive, but they definitely are not a AAA publisher, and they make some really good games that you can get for cheap if you buy them on sale, and they can last thousands of hours. Hell, ive spent about 10,000 hours combined on EU4 and Ck2, and i got both of them for about 50 bucks for ALL the dlc. They also at least give decent updates to their games on a regular basis, and most of their games dont really need DLC to function well.
You are wrong the only way to make a real change is talk with your wallet. True it will hurt there workers in the short term but there is always a price to pay.If a large enough amount of people did not buy a publishers game and expressed there anger they would change it simple.That would probably never happen because the average consumer probably nothing about who makes the games they buy. And for all the people who cried about rockstar over a "believed" wrong doing most still got red dead.
The gaming companies aren't above blame though. You have to choose to allow a high enough % of your company to be in the hands of investors to be beholden to them in any way. At some point they made the bed where they can't just make the best game they can, and now they have to lie in it, and if they have to be run out of town then so be it.
I remember when people talked about the move to BIG AAA games, and, uh, there was this naive assumption (sometimes we were even told!) that next to the TRIPLE-AY games there'd be A and AA games, making consistent money. But, uh, that ended when Todd Howard unleashed his hordes of shitty fans onto the internet to turn-based combat obsolete and unrealistic.
To the fan, who's brother struggles with a gambling addiction, I feel for you. My own younger brother struggled with a heroin addiction. 😔 He's been clean for a few years, but still.
@@pvsweetypie It's both addictions, so the comparison is legit. Ruining your own credit card can also kill you...
You can still end up homeless, badly nourished and sick.
@pvsweetypie It's not very likely that you're going to buy a legally sanctioned and critically acclaimed piece of entertainment and accidentally get hooked on heroin. That insidiousness is not to be taken lightly.
Glad to hear that he's clean
@@pvsweetypie Addiction can lead to other mental health issues. Depression for instance. Plus, it is never a good idea to become dependant on something, and depending on the severity of addiction, draining your wallet can be an understatement.
Don't put these companies in cages. Put them down. All of them.
Let the workers run them
@@iron1349 I'm a huge supporter for cooperatives and unions so I second this so so much
Your parents should have put you down.
@@williamjacobs8105 thank you
Imagine how many bricks these companies would shit of developers tried to unionize
To that end, do support your favorite indie developer!
Or Nihon Falcom. Those guys are awesome.
Landfall Games, SteelRaven, and Matt Dabrowski.
Those are some great indie devs.
Support CDPR too. :P
Uhh, Paradox?
Dontnod and SuperGiant. 👍
I'm talking Dodge Roll Games (Gungeon), Greg Lobanov (Wandersong), Joakim Sandberg (Iconoclasts), Dan Fornace (Rivals of Aether), Matt Thorson & gang (Celeste), Lucas Pope (Obra Dinn) and so many more!
I get the sneaking suspicion that EA is fighting Belgium because its future as a AAA publisher depends on it. Because of their exploitative (yet lucrative) practices, EA is totally beholden to its shareholders; they've amassed so many investments and so many expenditures that should their current industry suffer change or regulation...
...EA could utterly collapse as a corporation. Hell, the legal fallout from pushing against regulation could result in further financial losses and bad PR, which would serve to put shareholders off and further expedite EA's dissolution. EA has put itself in this position; if it doesn't fight and win against regulation, they'll lose everything. Should they submit to regulation, their shares are going to plummet, and with so many of EA's assets requiring sustainable investments...
...The losses are going to hit. Hard. We may actually see EA claiming bankruptcy within the next decade if they lose the war against regulation. They grew too big on an immoral and unstable business model, and now that their business model has become a target for the ethically charged, EA could very well drown beneath their own empire of bullshit.
I somehow can't bring myself to feel bad about that. I mean, what would we lose if that were to happen? Can anyone think of the last great game EA released? Dead Space 2 maybe.
To paraphrase the really old Grumpy Cat meme : "GOOD!"
The only bad thing I could see about it is all the people who actually gave a crap about making games and not getting rich quick will lose their jobs and not have a place to go, kind of like with some of the guys back at Telltale.
At this rate, it's only a matter of time now until EA goes out of business. Good riddance!
@@MechaKaiser I understand your concern but the beautiful thing about an open market is that, so long as there is demand, there will always be supply. The vacuum that EA's potential downfall would leave could open the market to other entrepreneurs; allowing for a new publisher/developer race to establish a brand. The best way to establish a brand is through customer relations; good relations = good brand, bad relations = bad brand.
This kind of a race could be massively beneficial to both developers & gamers alike; as it frees up the market to new IPs and business models, which would invoke competition between devs/publishers, which in turn, would provide customers with a greater variety of products to choose from.
There exists a potential for something as bad or worse than EA to rise up from the ashes (and the market resurgence would undoubtedly have a bit of a rocky start), but more than anything, the industry needs a new status quo. EA, Activision-Blizzard, Ubisoft, WB Entertainment, Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft Game Studios...
...Well, I wouldn't weep to see any of them take it in the teeth, and allow for the rise of a more customer focused and stable agenda, rather than this stock value and fiscal growth obsessed culture.
Scam emails and popups wouldnt exist if people stopped clicking them. Yet those arent pretending to be anything legitimate... yet here we are.
Another brilliant breakdown and critique of the Triple AAA side of the gaming industry. Thank you for this Jim. :)
I also giggle every time you get overwhelmed in a mask because it speaks to your level of dedication to a bit and, shouldn't you know better by now? ;)
Jim Fucking Sterling, Son will die for his Craft and don't you dare doubt him!
You mean the Triple AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA side of the gaming industry.
2:04 - So according to this Ubisoft PR rep, slavery is apparently fine because people "buy" slaves on the black market. That's such a weak justification for lootboxes.
@TheHooseNutz I'm not an American, mate.
@TheHooseNutz he was using A FUCKING EXAMPLE OF HOW STUPID AND WRONG IT IS. Invest in brains please
@Agent 005 This guy gets it.
"If people quit buying illegal drugs, we'd stop selling them."
...Oh wait, wrong example xD
Well then buying a game which is play forever is closer to slavery.
"humid in the skull" is the mild mannered cousin of "insane in the membrane"
I love watching Jim rip the ‘Triple AAA’ game industry a new one.
Yep
@@thomassowellaudiobooks6441 That doesn't give them the right to act like price gouging shitbags.
@@thomassowellaudiobooks6441 they also brought us gsmes like dungeon keeper and fifa 18
You don't have to put triple AAA. When you put a triple it is already three a's
@@SuperJoesutton youre both wrong. Its spelled TRIPLE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Whenever I hear the "it's just optional" argument, I think "so is buying your shitty game"
Also, 14:08, ten hour version when?
That's one way of combating pay to win games.
Exactly. That's exactly the point. It's optional. So exercise your option and don't buy games with lootboxes. Don't let your children buy them, and if they do, and they start to spend hundreds of dollars on lootboxes, punish them. Take away their games. Take away their consoles. Take away their phones. Take away their credit cards. They are children. They will not act responsibly by viture of being children. So teach them responsibility.
"Exactly. That's exactly the point. It's optional. So exercise your
option and don't buy games with lootboxes. Don't let your children buy
them, and if they do, and they start to spend hundreds of dollars on
lootboxes, punish them. Take away their games. Take away their consoles."
Nah, that would be logical. Much easier to blame someone else for your own lack of self control.
Drugs aren't that bad if they're done right too.
I mean people literally abuse medication that allows People in massive pain to live a life that's not dictated by pain, some start for that reason, to self medicate
Coffee is a drug too, you know.
Murder and torture aren't that bad, if they're done right.
Which are good? Which are bad?
Exactly. If the only games with lootboxes were rated 18+ (or whatever gambling laws say where you are) then it would be fine and legal. Much like getting a back injury, then claiming opiates for months and months afterwards is fine and legal.
I'd like to say i miss the cornflakes homonculus
We all do. But we do not want to ruin it's mysticism, do we? So, like a good christian, do you prayers, thank god for jim sterling and never lose hope.
I'd like to say.....penis.
I hope he makes a comeback for the Game Awards
I miss Miniature Fantasy Willem Dafoe
@@GenericSoda He's always with us - in our hearts.
It's going to lead to these kids having problems further down the line in their lives. Aiming thes gambling style games at kids is just morally wrong. They have their whole lives to be shafted left right and center. They deserve a few years before they have their wonder at the world and their spirits crushed. Don't you guys think?
While it might sound a bit conspiratorial, there's a bunch of large investment firms initiating start ups, ostensibly for "AI research", but what they really seem to be doing is bringing MTX to real life. Check out what Patrik Söderlund is doing now, post EA-- he's heading up just such a company. The idea is to pay-as-you-go through superapps; for example at a mall you might be prompted to pay for a mall-local assistant that gives you "exclusive" offers and allows billboards to show you personalized ads (ie offers)-- and looking at what's in games now you can imagine just how those special deals really work. Tiers with bonus levels; 3 for the price of two but the third is some kind of random extra with a miniscule chance to get something really expensive, pre-pay before going to the mall to get extra deals, buy for certain amounts to 'level up' and get extra access and so on.
The older generations are rather unlikely to get roped in by these things, but a primed youth already used to it all will become ideal profit units-- oh, sorry , _ customers_ .
Sadly to those CEOs and shareholders on their high, high horses, kids, or us gamers in general, are nothing but cows waiting to be milked dry. Or fish and whales, to stick with the analogy given in the video. We're numbers, figures in black and white on spreadsheets, same as the employees. It makes me retch.
Not a gambling, you always win something by purchasing loot boxes. Besides why company should be accountable for parents decision that allow children to access their money to pucharse it? Pucharsing Online isn't going to the drug dealer, it is anonymous hence company have no knowledge if buying is a child , child with a premission from parent or not.
@@nagatouzumaki3492 You're essentially arguing to make everything legal on the basis of anonymity, whether you realize it or not. There can be loopholes in and justifications for just about anything and, with enough money and influence, any number of those could potentially be a matter of public policy depending on your particular area.
Actually, not really. Even if granted you this was gambling (it isn't) anonymity makes it impossible to identify who is buying lootboxes and as gambling is legal (not for children) you would have be likely stuck with one of two options if you wanted regulate it:
1.Regulate it as normal gambling and developers would have to either to:
a)End loot boxes for everyone
b)have some identification process, what is unlikely as it would be costly and people would dislike it as it would be seen as intrusion of privacy and giving developers personal information meaning end of anonymity in games, at least for people buying loot boxes but wouldn't be suprised if they expanded it to everyone playing game .
2.Outright prohibit it what would end loot boxes for everyone, aside from that it is unlikely option as one would have hard time justyfying it while gambling still being legal and you would need to establigh policy into the law instead just try to pass it as a gambling in already established law.
"If people didn't buy them." Yeah sure the AAA industry might take them out then... because they aren't working and they need to find another scheme to fill their pockets. It's not just a loot box problem, it's an industry problem.
Not buying them is the ONLY way a company will listen to you dumbass.
"If gamers didn't buy lootboxes, we wouldn't put them in out games." Followed by: "Gamers aren't buying our games enough! We aren't making good enough first week sales! What do we do!?!?!? .... *LOOTBOXES!*"
Warlock and his overseers at Ubisoft and every other triple "ey!" game publisher can go tug it. When gamers don't buy games because of microtransactions and bad shady business practises, their solution is ever more microtransactions. To then claim that they wouldn't use lootboxes if people didn't buy them, in the face of people not buying them (by not buying the games) is hysterically sad.
The star wars style text through space was a nice touch
As someone with an addictive personality, it’s just dangerous, there’s no reason to do this other than corporate greed, but you didn’t need me to tell you that lmao. If I had any money at all to spend on loot boxes or an equivalent (Black Lion keys in Guild Wars 2 are particularly interesting to me right now) I would be buying them, “fortunately” I am an unemployed co-dependant.
When I quit Mobile games again a few months ago my brother who plays Azur Lane quite a bit said “just play the game without spending money.”
I told him “I literally can not do that.”
“Well I guess quitting is a good idea then.”
Loot Boxes are directly targeted at me and people like me, they need to be stopped.
Exactly, like a friend of mine was saying how cosmetic are optional. Yes, they are to you and me, but to other, not really.
Which is how i find all these arguments for lootboxes to be, yes they arent an issue to you, but that is just it, it isnt an issue to you doesnt mean that it isnt an issue for other, there will be people who are into the cosmetic aspect of a game which is why there are so many skins for sale.
Contact your local and federal representatives. You have a legitimate story, tell it to those who can do the most about it.
Or just get some self control and stop being such a victim.
indie games my man!!
Self control dude.
Can someone please make a Jim Sterling soundboard application for Android and iOS? I need Jim's iconic lines such as "triple AAAAaaaa" with me at all times :D
I'll make it but "triple AAAAaaaa" can only be unlocked from a loot box, sorry.
"they arent a bad thing if done right"... hahahah thats something Extra Credits always say
The thing about the "it's not bad if it's done right" argument is that it only really works when there are examples of it being done right, but in the case of loot boxes... there aren't any. There literally isn't a single game that has had loot boxes implemented in them in some way and not suffered for it.
Every game with loot boxes should be rated M+, if kid aren't allowed into a real casino they shouldn't be allowed in a virtual one either
Kids would still be able to get the games one way or another. It's almost as if parents should exercise some level of responsibility over their offspring, but naaaaaah, they're too tired working themselves into early-onset cardiopathy to earn money for things they've been brainwashed into thinking they need.
And Belgium just banned them instead of changing the rating because casion is 21+ years old - legally adult and highest pegi is 18, so that would not be enough.
Additionally, how would they properly look for the taxes and regulations specifics to gambling ? Hardly possible ..
And then, that won't stop in anyway child to buy them - should shop don't care, command online where you could lie or just use an adult to get one for you (I mean, like 90% of COD games are below 18 years old) !
Wouldnt solve the problem, parents dont give a dam what there kids do so long as its not breaking the big laws
this i agree with
I can get behind this. I do worry that some will consider it "censorship" but honestly I dont care at this point. I dont want kids to have access to gambling PERIOD. Missing out on a good game is worth the price of not sinking into the gambling cycle.
Nice comparison to cigarettes there, especially the part where tobacco companies have made their products, deliberately, so addictive there are essentially no non-addicted smokers and only new ones. Really nice paralell, enlightening if I may say so.
Tobacco Companies = Legalized drug cartels
If it were up to the companies, they would be marketing cigarettes to kids. And to think they said that smoking were HEALTHY once. Companies need to be kept in check,
it would be a nice comparison if people died from cancer because they opened lootboxes, but it's not.
it's a poor comparison and jim's an idiot for making it. cigarettes are lethal. lootboxes are not.
@Anderson Dalmeus can't really tell if you're(a) trying to refute my point or(b) just commenting on corporate greed (but that's on me)
If (a), interestingly enough nicotine absorption rate while vaping is lower than while smoking cigarettes - and I have some anecdotal evidence the high kicks in with a noticeable delay.
If (b), I believe they would if only it could be pushed through the FDA
EDIT: replaced 'by' with ' through the' for clarity
@@thomasjenkins7506 cigarettes are EVENTUALLY lethal(and then on the level of severely raised health risk), long term health risks of lootbox use are not adequately researched at this time(unless we assume they are comparable to other problem gambling, what were the risks of that again?)
A couple nights ago, a friend and I were having some drinks and discussing the problems in the gaming industry right now. It really makes us sad. Anyway, at some point, my friend slurred when he said "triple A" and it sounded like "cripple A". It seems fitting with how gaming companies are crippling themselves.
Very sad and disappointed indeed my friend. I feel and hear you
AAA gaming industry consciously forgot that video game industry is a creative industry. The upper echelons did not want creativity on their games, but a money-making machine. That's why Fifa & PES got released every year with borderline no changes. That's why every AAA publishers wants to add Battle Royale to their games.
THANK GOD SO THAT MAKES 3 OF US ON PLANET EARTH GETAGRIP THATS ME SEAN MALSTROM IS THE OTHER NOW WE HAVE YOU THE 3RD REAL GAMER ON EARTH WITH A MIND OF HIS OWN WELCOME TO THE SEAN MALSTROM INNER GROUP
WII REMOTE IS GAMING PES WII CONTROL A TEAM NOT A MAN
MP3 BEST FPS FPA CONTROLS IN EXISTENCE
COD OH ITS NOW A FPS ON WII WITH FPS CONTROLS AND A WHILE COMMUNITY THAT NOW PLAY TACTICALLY AND NOT RUN AROUND SHOOTING EACH OTHER IN THE BACK THE WII REMOTE AND THE MOUSE AIM MADE EVERYONE TREAT THE GAME AS A WAR AS A TACTICAL MATCH NOT A SILLY CHADBRO ARCADE SHOOTER
EVERYONE ELSE GAMBLING CUT SCENES AND QTE....FSTFORWARD FIFA IS A LOOT BOX SHALLOWFEST NO ONE IS TEAM CONTROLLING A FOOTBALL GAME LIE TEY DID IN PES WII
PES WII THE FUTURE OF SPORT GAMING
FIFA PES PS4 THE FUTURE IS GAMBLING
“If you don’t like it, you don’t have to buy” is actually a valid point, we can just not buy their games period. That’ll actually cost them enough profit to hurt.
If you don't buy the game you can't buy loot boxes for it either. Still amazes me that 60 DOLLAR games have microtransactions, like the original profit wasn't enough.
@@threemays
On the plus side, there still exists professional games that don't have microtransactions of any kind, let alone lootboxes so, if their plan is to get the younger generation so used to it that they just accept it, they may have some trouble with that.
I think the problem is the companies arent getting the real data, if you look at the raw numbers it makes sense, but they forget about the damage they do to them in the longer term
@@PropheticShadeZ
They fail to realize the more damning long term effect of consumer trust. When consumer trust runs out, they're screwed.
Did Jim fit his sunglasses inside the skull mask in the opening bit?
Yeah lol. Brilliant!
He did.
Absolute madlad
Hopefully in a short time you'll be reporting that Andrew Wilson and the rest of EA's board of directors have been extradited to Belgium to serve time in prison for their role in defying Belgian gambling laws, and that EA has filed for bankruptcy and is selling its assets piecemeal, and that game companies have gotten scared and are no longer using lootboxes in their games.
That's the ideal situation, at least.
I think at this stage, the best we can hope for is the left-wing activists picking up on things as being exploitative to children, and starting to spout out their usual shit all over social media. The Corporates' are so shit-scared of being labelled "haters" of any kind (sexist, racist, bla bla) they will have no choice but to suddenly change their stance and decry loot crates, sacking CEOs and bringing in "new management" with a sudden change of heart, stripping it all out of their business models in order to appear like they weren't just in it to exploit the population for as much money as possible, even though we all know that's exactly what it's about right now.
Humid in the Skull is my new band name. Cheers Jim!
Sometimes it feels like the world is going crazy and all I have is a small corner for myself and other sensible people, but at the very least, we have a poglin british boy to properly convey how much bullshit the world is spewing. Thank God for Jim Sterling.
Also, yes times 1000 on that climate change statement.
The greatest threat to national security is Climate Change -The Pentagon (U.S)
"A winner is just a loser who tried one more time." - Every gambler ever, probably.
This is literally called the Gambler's Fallacy
I prefer “gambling is a tax on people who are bad at math”.
@@popejewish Not exactly; Gambler's Fallacy is the belief that the odds goes in the gambler's favour if they try more times. It's still true that if you lose and don't try again, you'll forever be a loser, while trying again gives you a chance (granted still equal to the low chance you had) of winning. Of course, the real "winning" strategy is to not play to begin with.
Jim saying "liiiiive service" is iconic. Not Ubisoft iconic, true iconic
i long for the days when "gambling in games" was the game corner in pokemon
Yeah..It's so dumb that we can't have that in Pokemon games anymore
because of German gamblnig laws, but we CAN have lootboxes in lots of games.
@@Magitek1112 Wait seriously? Ahahahahaha.
Funnily enough the Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee games removed the game corner.
I resent the idea of comparing aaa publishers to dogs. It's not fair...
to the dogs
indeed, dogs are at least honest and don't eat their own shit as much as the AAA publishers.
@@taloscal
good one
@@taloscal
Plus you can teach a dog tricks.
Taloscal AAA publishers can’t compete with that. 🤣
Dogs are our friends, and don't illicit rage and hate like the AAA Publishers do.
What does AAA stand for again? Oh that's right. All About Avarice.
Fun fact, it is a Bank Credit Rating
Can't wait for the congressional hearing and the CEOs desperately struggling to explain why it's ''not gambling''
With this government? HA that's a good joke
To that end SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL OR NATIONAL ADDICTION HELP FOUNDATION! Jim put up some websites or recommend some foundations/ groups to donate that helps people seeking help! Raising Awareness is good but Rasing MONEY is better.
Somewhat ironically here in Finland the government-owned-(semi-)monopoly-gambling-company "Veikkaus" has various tools alongside other support things to possible gambling-addicts.
Of course it's a bit more difficult to keep track of non-Veikkaus-customers alongside the people who use coins instead of bank/credit-cards.
But even in that case as long as they use the services of Veikkaus, there are some other winning third-parties also
( E.G. some other support-groups and charities etc. ).
Hence their slogan: "A Finn always wins"
---
@@PaveMentman Shouldn't they go for something like "Make your great Finnish" or something?
@@wojtektaracinski7977
The only "great Finnish" I could think of is the book-store "Suuri Suomalainen Kirjakauppa".
So I am feeling bits of "lost-in-translation"-vibes here.
(( Unless of course you were trying to make a "Make Finland Great again" or some kind of another joke like that;
we did do a "Finland Second"-video a while ago though. ))
There is some public general numbers how the profits are distributed in English:
- 53% to the Ministry of Education and Culture for improving on sports and physical education, science, arts and youth work;
- 43% to the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health for improving on health and social welfare;
- 4% to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry for improving on horse racing.
A source link:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veikkaus
---
---
---
It occurs to me that AAA companies will not change based on pressure from us, their customers/cattle. They are only influenced by their shareholders. So instead of pressuring the companies, shouldn't we be pressuring the shareholders themselves?
They should leave the casino's alone, let the kids gamble on those fun slot machines. It's good for business and if done right they aren't a bad thing.
Seriously, I'm happy more and more countries are getting this shit sorted. I sincerely hope Belgium makes an example out of EA.
@Rick Harris fuuuuuuck ooooooff.
@Rick Harris Most of these 'kids' are fucking teenagers that use their allowances or part-time wages. You know, like teens that use their allowance to buy addictive corn syrup-laden sodas and snacks, or buy cigarettes and drugs from assholes selling them on the down low. Or hell, some of them get so addicted they steal their parents credit cards or their credit info and the parents only find out after they look at their bank statements and credit scores. But hey, that's totally the parents faults that their teenagers don't listen to them and heed warnings that have been drilled into their heads for years. It's totally their fault that teens in general don't listen to anyone but their peers and 'cool' adults looking to exploit them.
Tell me; When was the first time you did something that your parents told you not to because it was bad for your well being? And exactly how many kids have you raised? How many teens listen to what you have to say and actually heed your advice? Finally, did you actually read that article and notice that the ranges of child gambling problems where coming from the '13+' demographic or are you just spouting mindless garbage because you're some know-it-all twenty-something who totes knows everything about raising children in a world where every corporate entity is trying to exploit them?
Soon in the US insulin will be so expensive that needing it will be a death sentence, so I don't have much hope for video game industry regulation.
thelaughingrouge Which is just insane to me beacuse it's not expensive in the slightest to produce
@TheHooseNutz You have no idea how diabetes works do you asshat?
TheHooseNutz you are aware type 1 diabetes is genetic and has nothing to do with what you eat right?
@TheHooseNutz your comment is moronic. Moronic.
@TheHooseNutz beef is the smallest of the problem. what really gets them is the sugar and high glucose corn syrup that really fucks your metabolism. and it is everywhere and the industry knows it is bad but still tries to keep it under wraps. if you want to read more about it i suggest that: www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lustig-john-yudkin
and btw. the people are not only to blame for that. of course one can choose what to eat but there is a high negative correlation between weight and income. poor people can't choose what to buy and eat. they have to get the cheap stuff and that is most of the time processed food with lots of added shit. education plays a role as well and all that jazz. so yeah it is not that easy.
You know, I think the representative got it right when he said that if nobody bought loot boxes, AAA companies wouldn't include them in their games.
Doesn't make in any less scummy or duplicitous, but I guess a broken clock is correct twice a day. And they do actually mean nobody, as in not one single person.
EDIT: By the way, that was one epic rant at the end there, Jim. Nice work!
The defense of loot boxes from the games industry has a few parallels to the tobacco industry and their multiple defenses of it. Just because an item is popular does not make it good and each in case are abusing either a chemical addiction or gambling addiction.
I would guarantee most smokers know the risk( How could they not) and they still choose to smoke. And that is what being free is about.
They should simply make tobacco more bitter, as it is already disgusting just make it harder to eat.
@@Meocross You know that some people like to smoke or use tobacco right? You would deprive them of a little joy in life joy?
@@biokido575 Did i say to ban them? As we can see the war on drugs was a joke and ruined many peoples lives a lot of them permanently.
I simply said make them harder to get addicted to since tabacco is already disgusting to begin with.
@@Meocross No you implied you would take away the enjoyment of them from people that happen to enjoy them by making them bitter. You are still ruining a little joy somebody has.
The argument that loot boxes are in games because people buy them doesn't work. In any game with microtransactions, only a tiny percentage of the player base ever makes microtransaction purchases, which would make them failures as monetization models because few people are actually paying for them. But the gambling mechanic allows the big spenders to spend more, which is what these companies are really after. Come on regulation. Where are you? =/
Kevin Li lol they’re not forcing you to buy them, and in some games they’re completely cosmetic. Stop complaining about shit that you don’t have to buy.
@@sheriffaboubakar9720 Sure, but cosmetics were once unlockables within games that were removed and stuffed into loot boxes so that they could be sold back to you.
@Rick Harris But they're also not claiming that many people buy Ferraris. They are claiming that many people spend on microtransactions.
Kevin Li okay? You don’t have to buy it so there’s no reason to complain about it
@@sheriffaboubakar9720 That's a dumb fucking response. He would have every right to complain that rewards like cosmetics are now only gotten by cash. That's an issue.
The way you said "disgusting" at 12:53 reminded me of John TB Bane. RIP
How has Jim Sterling not been elected the president of Belgium.
1) Belgium's a monarchy so does not have a president
2) he's a Brit living in the US
He is not enough of a sexual deviant to lead Belgium.
Yeah, he'd fit in perfectly with the other fat cats dictating to the rest of the Europe what they can and can't do, and that they cannot be trusted to make decisions for themselves.
@@presidentwoodrow We're actually a fucked-up pseudo-representative federal republic the size of wales, or half the size of the tiniest state or province in your country, with 4 official languages(Dutch, French, German, English), 3 local governments(Brussels, wallonie, flanders), 3 provincial governments (Brussels, wallonie, flanders), and a federal government ontop of that house-of-cards. Even if Jim Sterling could be nominated to run for president, he can only do so in one of those three states. Flanders people cannot vote for people in wallonie-based parties and vice-versa.
This is why Belgium holds the world record for longest time without a (federal) government post-elections. 2 years iirc? :P
The fact that anything works here at all is a small miracle in and of itself, with major tunnels in brussels collapsing due to no maintenance, nuclear reactors having rotten concrete and leaking problems, the ceiling of the ministry of justice collapsing, and politicans saying that we can't have proper renewable power because the subsidies needed would bankrupt the country, while cleverly ignoring the many existing loopholes and subsidies given out to nuclear, and other power sources while neighbouring countries do renewables just fine without any subsidies whatsoever.
Jim should be the supreme arbiter of all video games
“I wish we didn’t have this rage culture, because there are so many good games...”
About that Jason
I only watched a few minuets of the video of Yongyea and that other guy talking about the state of the game industry. Hearing the other guy talk on how the game industry is doing just fine and that "rage culture" is the real problem with video games, I exited that video, not wanting anymore of this guy talk about utter nonsense.
Publishers just want to squeeze as much money as they can before they’re forced to stop.
The fact that the corporate mouthpieces make the same excuses EVERY SINGLE TIME they're challenged over gambling mechanics, really shows how far they've dug their own financial graves.
I love the argument that it's not gambling because your reward is to shit.
After how much I spent on overwatch, I just avoid games with lootboxes now. It's not fun, it's just bullshit.
how did you buy lootboxes on overwatch??? seriously. you can get everything without paying and you dont even have to grind much... omg
You must be a low level. In higher ones, its almost impossible to level up and gain a box.
@@andycavallera2890 Yes, you don't have to grind much (outside of events, because let's be real, those are really grindy). But the problem is that you shouldn't have to grind at all to get these skins. Also, if he spent money on lootboxes, it was probably because he didn't get what he wanted by playing the game normally, because, you know, there is no 100% guaranteed chance you will get what you want from them
@@Ignoto88 im gold portrait with one star, i have every skin and emote and so on of my favourite 3 heroes and 12000 coins in case new skins come out. never bought a lootbox.
At high levels you get a lootbox every 4/5 qp games if you play with friends..is that impossible?
@@victorhugocosta1127 you can get what you want by just playing the game, save up coins that you get with duplicates and so on and get it! its really not hard.
I hate lootboxes and microtransactions but to me people that buy lootboxes in overwatch are soo dumb.. like there s absoulutely no reason
My expectation is that ingame gambling will be legislated against pretty much everywhere except the US, where the law may as well state "Break whatever laws you want as long as it's in the name of profit."
"It's humid in the skull" perfectly sums up how I feel some days.
Mood.
People buy drugs and blood diamonds as well but that doesn't make it right does it?
@TheHooseNutz I'll answer your question with my own. Going with that narrative, I wasn't referring to pot but more like heroine or cocaine. What would you do if a family member of yours was doing it? Something known to destroy lives. Would you ignore it cause this person is doing it in his or her own home and it's non of your business? Meanwhile the person's life falls apart unable to meat monthly bills or even hold a steady job. Not your problem though right? Now rolling with that what if this person was in fact an addict and the dealer in question takes advantage of that? Which is the point right obviously or he/ she wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. These weren't purchases weren't intended for you but for the guy in question. Your fine with pot, but he or she needs meth etc. It's predatory and life ruining.
If you buy iligal drugs then you finance a local gang that make your city and a hell lots of other areas unsafe for evryone else. They in turn finance other bad parts of the world. They are called blood diamonds becuse ppl die bringing them to you, still noone else get hurt?
@@kallmannkallmann I was just trying to keep it simple, not that those aren't good points, was just trying to go along with the gambling narrative using other points as they related to a more individual perspective rather than collective.
What's also annoying, is that these predatory gambling boxes, will inherently hurt game developers of good free to play games, that have microtransactions and chests to fund the game, like Smite for example.
I fucking love Smite, it's hands down the best moba style game I've ever played, and it's free to play and has been going onto the 5th year now successfully. They've constantly added content and features to the game for free, and some high quality skins you can buy for characters. They also include loot boxes for skins, but they list what you can get from a particular chest, and regardless you can buy ALL skins directly without rolling for them. The chests sometimes provide a discount, so a skin may cost 600 gems, but a chest roll with 4 potential skins including the 600 gem one, costs 400 gems. So you could technically get the skin at a discount. There's no duplicates, if you already own 2 of those 4 skins in the chest, you will only roll between the 2 remaining ones you don't have.
It's probably the only game I've seen do this correctly, without it being predatory in any way. All purchases are cosmetic as well, but because of these BIG AAA companies, developers like HiRez could get hit by legal actions too, and unfairly at that.
We are not tired of you saying the same thing again and again, Jim.
That's how you keep the voice alive.
Douglas Adams called it decades ago but instead of the Shoe Event Horizon the collapse of our civilization will be marked by an archeological layer of shitty games.
This joke is niche as hell
Do not stop until Fifa/Madden and all the other loot box related games are banned for children or the publishers take them out permanently (that should be the ultimate goal).