'Valve does not get anywhere near enough criticism': DayZ creator Dean Hall says the 'gambling mechanics' of Valve's monetization strategy 'have absolutely no place' in videogames
-
Selling is the problem, it makes it actual gambling.
No, being able to find items for free and sell them is not the problem or what makes it gambling
-
Cause Gaben. He’s your cool buddy uncle guy that’s into video games, hunting and sous dive and not another billionaire. He’s a cool good billionaire! His yacht is a cool yacht!
This is half true at least. It’s not just insane nonsense.
-
Someone get ja rule on the phone
-
Oh, I thought this was going to be about the trading cards they implemented in steam. Those are so lame and cheap I wasn’t bothered by this.
For any non-readers-of-articles, this is about a loot box mechanic added to counterstrike (which is fair criticism imho)
Counterstrike has had loot boxes for many years, they weren’t recently added. What was recently added was a mechanic that allows 5 lower value items (certain gun skins) to be exchanged for a random higher value item (glove or knife skins). It’s acting to level the market. If anything, this change serves to inhibit loot box gambling by cutting the possibility of hitting a real money jackpot.
-
Yes I don’t know why they don’t get more hate over this.
They do.
-
Flack? Giving someone some slack is giving them a break. Giving someone flack is giving them a hard time. If something’s outside someone’s control, giving them slack about it is a kind thing but giving them flack would be unfair.
Flak. If you think the spelling is weird, it’s someone’s name.
-
This post did not contain any content.
This guy will get tons of flak and maybe even death treats for criticizing Valve. For whatever reason there is a rabid cult like following for Valve and Gabe Newell. I remember several years ago I said something like “Valve is still a company that’s out to make money at the end of the day” and several of my gaming friends instantly were no longer friends. It’s quite hilarious for me to just think about that even today.
-
This post did not contain any content.
FIX YOUR GAME DEAN!.. sorry old habits
-
This post did not contain any content.
Valve, however, has managed to neatly skirt regulatory efforts by charging players not for directly purchasing loot crates, which can be earned during gameplay, but for the keys required to open them.
Wow, that’s fucking scummy
Hall said that even he is frustrated by the “Paradox model” of paid expansion and DLC packs his studio RocketWerkz chose for its survival game Icarus after moving away from a free-to-play scheme.
For Paradox games, it’s mostly nickel and diming since they know they’re working in a niche market. For Icarus, it’s a problem of wanting the game to stay relevant, paying for servers and not knowing when to say “ok, we’re done”.
-
Flak. If you think the spelling is weird, it’s someone’s name.
Thank you!
-
From my perspective its because they’re still somehow not even among the worst. Their only way of advertising their gambling is by giving the player a crate. This crate can be opened for $2.50, or sold on the marketplace to someone else who wants to open it. This money can be spent on buying real games.
In cod, you get full screen advertisements on the regular for $10+ skin bundles. In almost every game as a service you get progress in a battle pass that ALWAYS directly contrasts your usually untradeable rewards with what you could be getting if you paid this month’s subscription fee.
Valve does have a scummy system, but they make it less annoying and if you choose to not participate you usually benefit with real funds to use on steam. Its hard to hate that over the aggressive advertising of its competitors.
All IMO, though. I’m no psychologist.
I agree.
But it’s important to note that just because it flies under the radar of most people, doesn’t mean it isn’t an absolutely deplorable system that exploits the difficult to control tendencies of vulnerable people.
It’s evil, and while it’s “only a little bit of evil” compared to most similar system, there is no amount of evil that is ok.
-
Counterstrike has had loot boxes for many years, they weren’t recently added. What was recently added was a mechanic that allows 5 lower value items (certain gun skins) to be exchanged for a random higher value item (glove or knife skins). It’s acting to level the market. If anything, this change serves to inhibit loot box gambling by cutting the possibility of hitting a real money jackpot.
If anything, this change serves to inhibit loot box gambling by cutting the possibility of hitting a real money jackpot.
Oh, I didn’t think of that. With the smaller difference betwen the most expensive and least expensive items, gambling gets less random in terms of return.
That’s an improvement, though I still think the whole systems should be taken out.
That there is a “counter strike skins investment ‘industry’” is utterly insane.
-
Yes I don’t know why they don’t get more hate over this.
Advertising and marketing, and a lot of it. There’s always a few puff pieces per week.
Steam makes so much fucking money and Gaben is enjoying the soft monopoly he has just as much as Microsoft and Nintendo. Gabens mega yatchs cost an estimated 100 to 150 million just in yearly maintenance. He has 8 of them (worth 1 billion in total).
-
Valve, however, has managed to neatly skirt regulatory efforts by charging players not for directly purchasing loot crates, which can be earned during gameplay, but for the keys required to open them.
Wow, that’s fucking scummy
Hall said that even he is frustrated by the “Paradox model” of paid expansion and DLC packs his studio RocketWerkz chose for its survival game Icarus after moving away from a free-to-play scheme.
For Paradox games, it’s mostly nickel and diming since they know they’re working in a niche market. For Icarus, it’s a problem of wanting the game to stay relevant, paying for servers and not knowing when to say “ok, we’re done”.
Valve loot boxes have always worked that way. They didn’t change them to skirt regulations. I don’t really find it very scummy at all. Nothing in the loot boxes can give you an advantage in the game. Most of the games that include this feature are free to play. This is how they make money from their game. The vast majority of people don’t pay very much at all. You can play the games and have tons of fun and never interact with the loot box system. It’s an optional thing for people who like the game so much that they want to pay. It’s basically donate to valve and have a chance to unlock a cosmetic item in game.
-
Valve loot boxes have always worked that way. They didn’t change them to skirt regulations. I don’t really find it very scummy at all. Nothing in the loot boxes can give you an advantage in the game. Most of the games that include this feature are free to play. This is how they make money from their game. The vast majority of people don’t pay very much at all. You can play the games and have tons of fun and never interact with the loot box system. It’s an optional thing for people who like the game so much that they want to pay. It’s basically donate to valve and have a chance to unlock a cosmetic item in game.
Some good points. I can’t remember where I saw this, but a game recently made their loot boxes randomly generate loot which was then shown to the player who had the choice of whether or not to open a box. This is much better than blindly opening boxes where you won’t know whether or not you will want the item inside.
-
Valve, however, has managed to neatly skirt regulatory efforts by charging players not for directly purchasing loot crates, which can be earned during gameplay, but for the keys required to open them.
Wow, that’s fucking scummy
Hall said that even he is frustrated by the “Paradox model” of paid expansion and DLC packs his studio RocketWerkz chose for its survival game Icarus after moving away from a free-to-play scheme.
For Paradox games, it’s mostly nickel and diming since they know they’re working in a niche market. For Icarus, it’s a problem of wanting the game to stay relevant, paying for servers and not knowing when to say “ok, we’re done”.
Hall said that even he is frustrated by the “Paradox model” of paid expansion and DLC packs his studio RocketWerkz chose for its survival game Icarus after moving away from a free-to-play scheme.
That pretty rich given how many DLCs Icarus has. He’s not wrong, but also shut the fuck up Dean, you’ve managed to ruin every game you built through incessant content updates no one wanted.
-
FIX YOUR GAME DEAN!.. sorry old habits
Icarus is solid and Kitten Space Agency appears to be coming along nicely.
-
Valve loot boxes have always worked that way. They didn’t change them to skirt regulations. I don’t really find it very scummy at all. Nothing in the loot boxes can give you an advantage in the game. Most of the games that include this feature are free to play. This is how they make money from their game. The vast majority of people don’t pay very much at all. You can play the games and have tons of fun and never interact with the loot box system. It’s an optional thing for people who like the game so much that they want to pay. It’s basically donate to valve and have a chance to unlock a cosmetic item in game.
Ok so morning outrage clicks for naught?
-
This post did not contain any content.
No, but the rest of the industry is so incredibly scummy that they look good by comparison.
-
No, being able to find items for free and sell them is not the problem or what makes it gambling
What do you think they’re buying it for?
