Like I said in my post, I think they're grayer than a lot of skinnerboxes, but that doesn't make them clean.
My understanding is that the vast majority of loot boxes are the sole way of acquiring the in game objects they posses. If there's a CS gun/skin/whatever in a loot box, you can't just go out and buy that thing for money. Transaction behavior is fine to me. That's one problem. Another is that you don't "own" that thing, you just have permission to use it. That's slightly different from owning a physical object.
It's an aggregate, and there are degrees of bad design patterns.
Whole game for single transaction > game with DLC > game with loot box for aesthetic features> game with loot box for core features.
I see your point that CCGs are basically the analogue version of loot boxes, and I can't entirely disagree. It's been called "cardboard crack" before, with good reason. As someone working for a tabletop gaming company who's primary product is randomized miniature figures used to play games, I also am WAY to close to this one to think objectively.
> If there's a CS gun/skin/whatever in a loot box, you can't just go out and buy that thing for money.
So, in Valve's games, this isn't true. Lootboxes are the only "first party" way to buy skins in CS: Go, but you can use the Steam marketplace to trade with other players.
I will stop using this specific game as an example. This particular dev might allow this, but many others don't which is a huge problem on the issue since these things are functioning as gambling for access to a service (the right to use a feature) instead of access to a commodity (that you can trade/sell).
I think the best example of a way to deal with acquired in game intems I can think of personally for something that didn't suck, was Diablo 3 when it first hit. If the game randomly dropped a high tier weapon, you could use it, trade it, or sell it for real money. The real money auction house was a great addition imo.
My understanding is that the vast majority of loot boxes are the sole way of acquiring the in game objects they posses. If there's a CS gun/skin/whatever in a loot box, you can't just go out and buy that thing for money. Transaction behavior is fine to me. That's one problem. Another is that you don't "own" that thing, you just have permission to use it. That's slightly different from owning a physical object.
It's an aggregate, and there are degrees of bad design patterns.
Whole game for single transaction > game with DLC > game with loot box for aesthetic features> game with loot box for core features.
I see your point that CCGs are basically the analogue version of loot boxes, and I can't entirely disagree. It's been called "cardboard crack" before, with good reason. As someone working for a tabletop gaming company who's primary product is randomized miniature figures used to play games, I also am WAY to close to this one to think objectively.