Opinionated Conjecture: Lootboxes and You

Lootboxes and You

Lootboxes; love 'em or hate 'em, they now play a major role in a significant number of video games that permeate throughout independent, mobile, and AAA video games. Their saturation has mostly been a slow creep up onto most forms of play, but within this last year, since the success of Blizzard's Overwatch (2016), they have spiked in popularity, given the game's model of their use.

In short, lootboxes work as a miniature lottery that allow players to gain any possible number of items or in-game content. As such, the addictive nature they have of a potentially rare piece of content popping out of them has created problems amongst many players, critics and developers alike. This problem has gone as far as inciting a charge in the court of law and may even be given. The main problem that has been argued in regards to lootboxes is whether or not they are considered a form of gambling.

Often times, to acquire a lootbox in games is to, besides performing a certain task or mission, is to pay actual financial currency for any number or collection of the shiny treasure chests. With no guarantee on what a player could receive or if their financial input will achieve their wanted output, lootboxes ride a dangerous line on possibly acting like a demented slot machine that doesn't even come with a free buffet line in the lobby. 

The ESRB has ruled out these tendencies as being an actual form of gambling, but the fire still burns as people hate the implications that they carry with them.

As far as how this relates to public relations, the over/under of the situation is that they are impossible to defend. In the current market, they are hated and just overall make for a bad market that could, in some cases, make for a 'pay-to-win' environment that most people can't get past. They can create interesting number markets, but overall it is just a bad time.

Comments