Literatel

Hence why I agree with Overwatch's loot box system. If you had to play the game to earn in-game currency/items which you could then use to open loot boxes to acquire cosmetic items, that would be ethical.

One could also make the argument that games are a lot more expensive to make than what they used to. In other words, they need the funds in order to survive. As for the last part of your sentence, I am not surprised. When loot boxes were much more heavily featured in Star Wars: Battlefront II (are they still?), you had to grind for thousands of hours or something like that just to unlock Luke Skywalker or - not and; or - Darth Vader. When the consumer made a riot about it, they cut down the time in half, trying to pull off the "good guy EA" bullsh*t. If you know the Diablo franchise, there is a rumor going around the Diablo IV will not have the option to play single player. Again, they (Blizzard) want to mimic Fortnite's Battle Royale system. A bunch of video games wish to do just that, actually. There is even rumors that 7 Days to Die may one day be a Battle Royale game, and that's it. Same thing for Path of Exile. There is a reason why we are seeing a decline in single player games. 1) Multiplayer games have become increasingly more popular over the years. 2) The gaming companies want even more opportunities to introduce loot boxes, microtransactions, and pay-to-win mechanics in their games.

I have never heard of this game. I'll have to check it out. ^^ As for the last thing you said, the CEO of Blizzard (or was it EA?) recently said, "We will continue to support the practice of direct out-of-game/in-game purchases [aka lootboxes, etc.] because they are making us money." In other words, he does not give an actual f*ck about the playerbase, as long as they are buying.

And on and on... and on and on... and on and on and on... and on and on and on... and on and on... (That's what you say when trying to explain this to a CEO of a gaming company. Every time they try to speak, you know what to do.) They are watching us. We already have, to a tiny extent. If you read into the Star Wars: Battlefront II scandal, you'll know what I am talking about. Yes, we took that bait, but they were hanging a donut at the end of the fishing line. How could we resist? We thought it was genius... for a short while. Or at least, some of us did.

Anyway, regardless, it is still a terrible thing. But nonetheless - and I am not siding with this guy - but the CEO of Blizzard said, "Kids buy packs full of a random assortment of trading cards. If you are so concerned about gambling, then try focusing on every demographic." Now, I personally don't play any games that feature microtransactions. Okay, forget that. That's a lie. But I never play games that require you to use said methods to win the game/get more content. My prediction: microtransactions, loot boxes, etc. will (possibly) be banned within the next decade or two.

And it's just not video games. I am also a member on a medieval RPing site, and you only start off with 10 characters slots. As a writer, that is pretty restrictive. Do you want more character slots (temporarily)? Pay $5.00 per character slot. Don't like your username? Pay over twenty bucks to change it. The site is amazing, but I am beginning to wonder if microtransactions will become as interwoven in our society as taxes are.

This is true. Now, I do not want to sound like the next Ms. Depressinator (copyright) here; I am just quite upset at the current model in which video games are based off of. But I think we can all agree that video games are not what they used to be - even 10 years ago, most were quite a bit different than what they are today. Locking content from the game (unless you pay for it) is a scumbag practice. I am not talking about DLCs, since they are supposed to be expansions. But when I open up a game for the first time that I have spent possibly nearly a hundred dollars on, and I have heard only but good to great reviews about it, and then realizing that half of the content is under lock and key... I get pissed. I almost bought... I forgot the name of it, but they added in loot boxes two hours before the game's launch. Two hours. They knew that if they advertised loot crates earlier, the game would have lost a lot of the initial fan base before release, and its hype would have gone down. Half of the game's weapons were locked, half of the armor was locked, the list goes on. The PVP part of the game was a sh*thole. You had these level one players with level one weapons facing level one players with level 50 weapons. It was disgusting. I know it doesn't, but it's the best I had at the time. They are both toxic (fossil fuels and gambling in-game), and although people can see the solution, but nevertheless, little changes.

While I do agree with your statement, it just isn't going to happen by random. Like I said earlier, the following scenario would be impossible: everyone walks out of their gas-burning cars and orders electric vehicles. They know that gasoline-powered vehicles are harmful, but nonetheless, they continue to use them. Unless the governments step in (for the 40th time it seems like) and are not met with loophole after loophole, I don't see a (sudden) impact happening. Does our voice matter? Yes. But we are just anchovies to the companies. The whales (yes, that is what the gaming companies call them), or the people who buy sh*t tons of stuff from them, will be enough to continue to supply them. To quote the chairman of EA, "We will continue to support the practice of direct out-of-game/in-game purchases [aka lootboxes, etc.] because they are making us money." And what if the gaming companies find another loophole again and offer the governments a portion of the salaries that they earn? They might as well be home free at that point.

So if your solution is to get every gamer who has purchased and ever will purchase these "corrupted games" to either throw them away or refuse to buy them altogether, then with all due respect, but good luck on that one... ._. That would be like asking everyone to ditch their fossil fuel powered vehicles and only buy electric cars just like that *snaps*. I assume this is what you meant?

The gambling addiction? The "need" to buy it because everyone else has it? (In other words, it is quite sad.) " Just wait until people will come up with MTX in movies. You buy a movie, but it only has few scenes with specific actors. You gotta purchase MTX worth 30 times more than a normal price for a full movie nowadays to unlock all the actors and see the full story. Yeah, wait, that's brilliant, I'm a genius! " No you are not. You have doomed us all. XD You are an evil genius and nothing less. XD

As all of us gamers (and many non-gamers) know quite well, microtransactions, loot-boxes, and pay-to-win mechanics have infested many video games over the past several years; especially those that are geared towards multiplayer. In case you do not know what the hay I am talking about, read the following: - Microtransactions are a business model where the consumers (or in this case, players) can purchase items that were not originally available in-game (or even if they were, they would be a pain in the rump to grind for), for a small price. Cosmetic items (skins, etc.), weapons, characters, etc. fall under this category. As far as I am aware, all microtransactions share a common trait: you know what you are paying for. However, the game can be unbalanced using this mechanic. (For example, imagine if you are level 80 in a game and you need to acquire a level 90 weapon in order to progress further. However, you later learn that said weapon(s) can only be obtained through purchase, either direct or indirect. And thus, I move onto loot boxes.) - Loot boxes - or loot crates, mystery crates, whatever you like to call them - are consumable virtual items which can be redeemed for a select number of random items per purchase. These loot boxes can be earned by playing the game, spending in-game currency, or, most commonly, by paying with actual money. Each loot box usually contains three items, and each time you open on, you have no idea what you are getting. The goal behind them is to open loot box after loot box until you (hopefully) acquire what you want, such as a weapon, cosmetic items, or an upgrade to your character, for example. And thus leads me onto the third and final unethical money-grabbing mechanic in this list: - Pay-to-win. What does this mean? I know little about pay to win (compared to microtransactions and loot crates), but imagine the following scenario as an example: You have two options: farm for tens or even hundreds of hours for this one weapon or character in-game (which can and typically does get excessively boring), or you can just pay x amount of dollars on-line for it to get it early. Or maybe you need this one weapon to progress further in the game, but you need to pay to have said weapon in your game. (Note: If I left anything out, please notify me. :)) In my opinion, all of these methods used by money-hungry companies are absolutely disgusting. Not only that, but gambling is an illegal practice to those that are under a certain age. And yet, many (if not most) gaming companies continue to include loot boxes, MTX, or pay-to-win in the majority of their games. Why, you might ask? Because they want the dough. Many governments across the world have cracked down on the gaming companies who are utilizing these money-making, scumbag tactics, but the gaming companies always find a loophole around the law. Most recently, many gaming companies who own games that have loot boxes within them have began utilizing this new, weasel-like, clever loophole around the laws surrounding gambling. You know how I said how loot boxes work, right? That you pay for a loot box, you open it, you have a chance of getting what you want (and you most likely will not), and you just keep on gambling? Well, many of these companies have changed this system. How many loot boxes function are now like this: You pay for a loot box, and you know exactly what you are getting. However, you cannot buy another loot box until you accept the purchase of your previous loot crate. How is this bad? I forgot the chemical name that is released by your brain when you gamble, but it is still being released in this scenario. Instead of people wondering what they will get in the loot box they have purchased now (and will continue to do so), you will be curious what loot you will get in the same loot box. It is basically the same system, only this method is, for now, totally legal. And concerning the opinion of many that microtransactions and the like should only cover cosmetic items, I have a counter-argument. Imagine if in a game, your character is dressed in light brown rags. Then you turn to your left or your right, and you spot another player that is wearing an extremely fancy piece of attire that can only be obtained through direct purchase of real-life money. In this instance, the player in the much less fashionable clothing will almost always think, "Gee, I wish I had that skin or pet or whatever." And thus, they will be tempted to purchase said skin... and then the next one... and the next fifty skins. Sure, paying for cosmetic items that do not affect the core gameplay mechanics in any way are infinitely better than pay-to-win, but they are still a "sin" in gaming. But what are your thoughts on microtransactions, loot crates, and pay-to-win? Are they necessary, or are they not so? Are they a genius concept and/or a scumbag move by game developers? Do you ever see them disappearing, or have they permanently redefined gaming as a whole? EDIT: No one can argue that microtransactions and loot boxes are genius moves and the most successful decision gaming companies have ever made. Don't expect this trend to go away. If anything, expect their use to continue to grow for decades to come, whether people like it or not.

Thank goodness you said "damp", and not "moist".

I'm not saying that what we see in Ready Player One is impossible, nor am I saying that it could not happen in 40-50 years. All I am saying is, "Don't get your hopes up. It could happen. But don't put all your eggs in one basket." Personally, I would love to live in a virtual world as a fantasy-looking character. That is probably my biggest dream. I only fear that by the time the technology gets to the point that that is possible, I could be dead, or I would be too old and fragile to walk or anything. And in case you didn't know... VR is on its last legs already. :/ The evidence supports this. And Valve is one of the biggest companies behind the development of VR. But at the same time, they are a high unethical company. (Which company is ethical? I mean, really? Money is a necessary evil that affects us all.) *Coughs* Microtransactions *Coughs*

One of the Back to the Future installments predicted that in the year 2015, we would have flying cars, hoverboards, etc. Obviously, we don't have neither, and especially not the former. Just because something is predicted to occur in x amount of time, doesn't mean you should not take it with a pinch of salt. In terms of VR, anything can happen in 50 years. It might advance quickly enough to be accurate to the movie/book. Or it could evolve much slower. Who knows? Perhaps VR could be abandoned in a decade?

Don't expect that kind of technology to arrive within our lifetimes.

Having made too many posts on the Equestria Girls forums in quick succession. (Current issue. )

I don't either. O.o

I am thinking about what to put here. Give me a sec.

I do this a lot. I start reading an article and then I realize later on that I was reading it for over an hour. Once, I was on the toilet while reading a news article while eating breakfast while waiting for the shower water to warm up. You can say that I am the master of multitasking.

Religion, sexuality, and small talk.

Pretty bad. Santa comes to my neighborhood every year and sneaks into our homes. At least he only comes once a year; for the rest of the year, he is in prison for breaking and entering.