Created a Petition on the White House Website to stop targeted in-game gambling (loot boxes)

[BjornP]

You know, there's also the fourth option of shooting the Catalyst in the face. I sorta liked that ending.

But yeah, all three games leads up to a final showdown with the reapers, and they offer up the choices that the bad guy in the first game advocated and bad guy in the third game advocates. Should only have had a destruct option. Other choices felt like a betrayal, somehow...

...another thing TC should petition the federal government to fix.

[Speaker to Animals]

Then there is the endless SJW propaganda that crept in. At first it was pretty low-key and easily ignored. By the end there was a homosexual on the ship you couldn't get rid of. Fortunately you could keep him locked down in the hangar and never see or speak to him, but I suspect they caught on to that trick and their fourth title probably has inescapable sodomy.

I mean.. just give me the pay-to-remove-homosexual option. Is that like 19.99 to get rid of them or what?

[Speaker to Animals]

I mean.. notice how all the characters can be killed off eventually except the degenerates. Lost revenue stream in not offering a DLC that allows you to kill them off early in the game without any dialog.

[heydaralon]

Im going to create a counter petition to the WH to keep the current Loot Crate system in effect. I like micro transactions. I cant imagine gaming without them. Hopefully my new petition will spawn a law saying that all new video games use the Loot Crate gambling setup.

[The Conservative]

You know, there's also the fourth option of shooting the Catalyst in the face. I sorta liked that ending.

But yeah, all three games leads up to a final showdown with the reapers, and they offer up the choices that the bad guy in the first game advocated and bad guy in the third game advocates. Should only have had a destruct option. Other choices felt like a betrayal, somehow...

...another thing TC should petition the federal government to fix.

Shit like that I don't care about, but the fact is that you need to pay to play, after buying the game outright is not a system that should be allowed to grow any further than it has. If anything, the gaming industry has become less due to it.

They demand money to get what should be obtainable in the game outright, and because of that people are forced to spend more money on a game.

People are already starting to get annoyed at this practice, the sad thing is that this has gotten more attention in the UK than the US... and that should say something.

[K@th]

They demand money to get what should be obtainable in the game outright, and because of that people are forced to spend more money on a game.

Forced? The gaming company sent Guido to your house with a gun and forced you to do micro transactions?

[The Conservative]

They demand money to get what should be obtainable in the game outright, and because of that people are forced to spend more money on a game.

Forced? The gaming company sent Guido to your house with a gun and forced you to do micro transactions?

So, to get the premium equipment that can't be found in-game, you need to purchase it through a box of chance. There is no way to get it otherwise, you can't find it in game, you need to buy a chest that may or may not get you said equipment.

That is what I am talking about, why do you think gamers are starting to walk away from companies like EA and their latest games? It's because of bad writing, but also their attempts to grab more money from players after they spent $70+ on a game now.

And the thing I proposed was to keep microtransactions from children mainly. Also, what about those with gambling addictions? If they aren't allowed to gamble, that is exactly what this is, gambling with a more "gentle" name...

[K@th]

So you go to the pizza place and a basic cheese pizza is $12. You want toppings - they are called extras and they only get added to your pizza if you pay the extra fee.

You don't HAVE to buy the extras. Face it, you WANT the extras, you don't NEED the extras.

The kid plays a ton of games on PS - he doesn't need those extras and the game works just fine.

[Speaker to Animals]

It will work out on its own.

If enough people want games without gambling and other forms of microtransactions, demand will be high for such games and somebody will make them.

Fact is, lots of people like those games. That's why these games proliferate. Some people don't see it as exploitation. They spend a few dollars per month to get some cool loot and they enjoy the game until their next loot crate.

You frankly come across almost like a feminist here. If people enjoy these games, then who are you to tell them it's now illegal?

Gamers are walking away from big publishers mostly because big publishers publish total shit these days. I haven't seen a good game in over a year, man. It isn't because of loot boxing, though I probably wouldn't pay for a loot box game.

To my mind, a good loot box-based game is downloaded for free. It can be played for free. But to get a decent chance of collecting the very rare items, characters, etc., a player can purchase a loot box. You can play the game for free to see if you enjoy it as it is. If you are willing to buy a loot box every now and again, then that's your choice.

What causes people to walk away from games altogether is the shameless hobbling of a game you paid full-price for. For instance, the trophy winner for shittiness was Mass Effect 3, where the game shipped DAY ONE with a DLC you had to pay more money for that was actually critical to make sense of the main storyline of the core game. That's fucking reprehensible. Just sell the game for $100 because that's essentially what they did in a roundabout way. But they knew their game was shit when they shipped it.

Give me a completely awesome game that I can download for free but, if I so choose, can spend like 10-20 per month on loot boxes and I will not complain. Is the game good? Do I feel like I got my money's worth? That's all the matters. If the answers to those questions are no, then they won't get my money no matter what they do.

[BjornP]

Then there is the endless SJW propaganda that crept in. At first it was pretty low-key and easily ignored. By the end there was a homosexual on the ship you couldn't get rid of. Fortunately you could keep him locked down in the hangar and never see or speak to him, but I suspect they caught on to that trick and their fourth title probably has inescapable sodomy.

I mean.. just give me the pay-to-remove-homosexual option. Is that like 19.99 to get rid of them or what?

"Inescapable sodomy".

I thought all the ME titles (dunno the fourth, though) had enough anti-SJW jokes and references that they don't warrant the SJW label. There's a turian in ME2 that makes accusations of racism, clearly depicted as being ridiculous. You get to punch a Arab woman MSM reporter. Military is portrayed as the only ones who can "get shit done", whereas all politicians are either corrupt, inept, or "waste time" by making all their decisions by commitee. Turians are practically Heinleinian ideal soldier-citizens, and they get portrayed as the best of the ME3 allies, whereas the brainiac Salarians generally get depicted as weak and deceitful.

But aside from that. Tolerating or even accepting homosexuals in your society isn't SJW. And while you can't space the gay shuttle pilot in ME3, you can make sure he gets killed at the end.