dans Overwatch tu peux craft ta skin ^^ (je parle pour un jeu cité que je connais, sans doute d’autres le permettent aussi)
C’est vrai, par contre je me demande si ils comptent pas sur les calculs du genre “si j’ai de la chance, ça reviendra moins cher d’acheter un paquet” pour vendre un max.
Mais si on regarde Magic ou un de ses clones, on arrive à quelque chose de limite. Si tu veux avoir la carte qui va bien pour faire le deck qui tue, faut acheter des paquets sans garantie de trouver ce que tu cherches. Si on veut pas jouer à la loterie, faut chercher sur le marché de l’occasion, alimenté par les types qui ont acheté plein de paquets (et qui a son lot de contrefaçons en prime)…
Il y a des microtransactions dans Mass Effect 3 ? Dans le dernier Canard PC, j’ai lu qu’un ancien employé de EA expliquait que certains joueurs pouvaient claquer jusqu’à 15.000 dollars dans le jeu !
2 « J'aime »
En multi pour acheter des coffres, mais en coop c’est juste du gâchis.
1 « J'aime »
The Psychology of Loot Boxes and Micro Transactions.
2 « J'aime »
Et voilà, pour Battlefront 2, c’est Disney qui a pas trop apprécié la mauvaise pub faite par EA…
Et comme beaucoup l’ont souligné, c’est un peu rigolo vu que ce sont des champions pour les micro transactions dans leurs jeux pour gosses (et dont certains usent de la chance)
Ouais mais là, je pense que Disney pense avant tout à la sortie de Star Wars 8 dans moins d’un mois, et qu’il ne faut donc pas mettre Star Wars au centre d’une polémique maintenant…
Du coup, y a des chances que les lootboxes reviennent après la sortie du film 
1 « J'aime »
Yep, j’en suis même prêt à faire le pari
Ca va grandement dépendre des ventes en fait. Les review sont pas bonnes, ça peut très bien être un gros four, et du coup obliger EA a revoir complètement sa politique.
Le fils de jack black a depensé 3000 dollars dans un jeu
https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/7dsngb/jack_black_talks_about_how_his_son_racked_up_a/
et une tres bonne explication du systeme et des mecanismes psychologiques crades du dernier star war
Unfortunately the gaming community often tends to be poor in articulating the real insidious nature of these microtransaction schemes, which has lead to the media not understanding what the actual issue is. People outside the community see this as gamers being upset at EA (once again for the 500th time) over specific heroes or guns or how long you must play to become Darth Vader in a game…but that’s not what the core issue is.
The actual issue we have to communicate is that the entire game is created to be just a lure to get you into a virtual gambling Skinner Box.
The science of addiction and compulsive behavior was well studied since the 1950s, in what is known as an « Operant conditioning chamber », now frequently referred to as a « Skinner Box » in honor of its creator. It has an « operandum » (also called « response lever » in rat based experiments) that when activated feeds some reward for performing the action, conditioning the organism to continually activate the operandum. In various ways you can teach subjects to nearly automatically react in a desired way by offering them strategic hits of dopamine.
Operant conditioning chamber - Wikipedia
Just like in the famous Skinner Box experiments, you can be manipulated into doing the digital equivalent of hitting a response lever by feeding money into the microtransaction store, exploiting human psychological quirks with positive and negative reinforcement tricks that are built into the progression system.
And the entire game was designed around this concept:
1.) Battlefront II exploits an automatic addiction response by using randomized rewards with its loot boxes.
Its well known within the field of psychology that the most effective form of positive feedback is unpredictable positive feedback. Back in the 1950s the behavioral psychologist B.F. Skinner discovered the addictive effectiveness of the « variable schedule of rewards » phenomenon. Skinner observed that lab mice trained to press a lever responded most voraciously to random rewards, and in the most compulsive manner. Casinos and other gambling establishments have known this for a while, and have created random reward schemes to exploit this.
This is exactly what Battlefront II does, turning it into a gambling proposition by putting the gameplay features people want behind a randomized reward lootbox scheme.
2) The game was designed to be tedious and to make progression not tied to skill, but how many lootboxes you get
It was worked out that a player would need to grind for 4,528 hours in order to unlock everything. The progression system is purposefully set to push people towards buying lootboxes as its not skill based: It doesn’t truly matter if you get 1 kill or 50 kills, you’re getting roughly the same low amount of credits. The scrap that you can collect is designed to be an impractical way to progress, as I would need to grind for hours just to get 600 scrap gun. With each match earning only about 200-300 credits, it would take many hours to get one single Trooper Crate to roll the dice with the hopes of getting something worthwhile. Even worse there are limits in terms of how many credits one can get in Arcade mode per day. In other EA games like Battlefield, more experienced players can unlock a variety of weapons, items, and perks, but generally, they add gameplay styles, not mathematical advantages. But every single Star Card and every bump in a Star Card’s tier only adds boosts to each class’ default loadout, with only a few of these fairer « mathematically equivalent » unlockables. As if that wasn’t enough, your ability to unlock two extra card slots in the game is based around reaching a certain card level, only achievable by obtaining more cards. Battlefront II seems adamant to disregard the value of players’ time, demanding a huge amount of commitment for rewards that feel wholly insignificant for the investment required to earn them.
3) The game was designed to highlight the benefits of gambling on the loot box rewards.
With each death on the battlefield, players see which cards their opponent is using - a design choice that is meant to plant the idea within the gamer of how “I need to get those cards.” The high level cards change the game so much that playing against them makes it hard to to level up, earn crates, and craft better gear. I was continually dominated by better geared players. The game goes out of its way to show you that players who bought better gear are the successful ones.
4) The game places arbitrary limits and complexity on progression in order to incentivize lootbox purchases
Rather than narrow all of this down to a single currency or unlock model, EA has already created this complex schism of multiple currencies and progressions and what each can and cannot do. For example you also have a card level, which is meant to limit your ability to craft high powered cards. But the card level is determined by the number of cards you have. I can’t imagine any reason this was done but to confuse the casual player, and further steer them towards the easy solution of buying lootboxes.
This game is like a slot machine, except you don’t win money.
And a massive amount of parents will rush out to buy it for their children without realizing what they are buying.
C’est tellement violent tout ça c’en est effrayant. Du coup j’espère vraiment que c’est régulable par la loi.
South Park, saison 18, épisode 6 : « Freemium isn’t free ». A revoir 
Apres mon explication du bousin c’est que l on est programmé pour etre accroc.
En gros avoir un rush de plaisir quand on fait un truc aléatoire et que l’on a un bon resultat , c’est ce qui nous pousse a inventer et a tenter des choses. Ce qui est un avantage evolutif. (Theorie perso et selon moi).
La oite de skinner et ces jeux c’est juste une perversion du systeme.
justement je me demandais, reddit, ici etc, c’est des joueurs, mais SW, le nom, le logo etc, c’est aussi pas mal de « casu » qui vont jouer et qui ne lisent pas les 50 articles a chargent, c’est aussi la tante qui achete la valeur sure pour son neveu : il y a l’ourson de l’espace choupika je lui prends …
certes la pub est mauvaise et le jeu sans doute (pas joué) mais est ce que ca sera un four ? (moins bon que prévu certes mais a perte pour autant ?)
Oui évidement qu’avec la licence SW dans la poche EA est quasi assuré d’en vendre au moins un carton. Mais les dégats causés par ce retour de baton vont eux aussi se chiffrer, et plus que les chiffres de vente c’est peut être eux qui vont vont décider si oui ou non cette experimentation sur les dérives des lootboxes était une bonne idée.
vu qu il y a eut des réactions politique, ca a dépassé notre cercle, le grand public en a entendu parler cette fois