›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Open Critic Review Site Now Flags Games with Loot Boxes - MMORPG.com News

SBFordSBFord Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
edited February 2019 in News & Features Discussion

imageOpen Critic Review Site Now Flags Games with Loot Boxes - MMORPG.com News

Open Critic, a games review aggregate site, has posted a new blog to let its community know that games with loot box mechanics in them will now be flagged. The blog goes into detail about the site's promise to include the function, now fulfilled. "The OpenCritic team believes that loot boxes are a net-negative for the video game industry. Loot boxes prey on human's generally poor ability to accurately understand and internalize probabilities, especially at the extremes."

Read the full story here



¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 


Gdemami

Comments

  • SBFordSBFord Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.
    tweedledumb99BlueThunderBearPanther2103Margrave[Deleted User]FoncldoomexAmathe[Deleted User]Gdemamiand 12 others.


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 


  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061
    Open critic has been trying to set itself apart as a more customer centric alternative to metacritic for a while, and this is a great step in that direction.
    tweedledumb99SBFordPanther2103BlueThunderBearFonclGdemamiAsm0deusLeiHngWeinatpickHidekiNomuraand 3 others.
  • BlueThunderBearBlueThunderBear Member RarePosts: 228
    Not all heroes wear capes (because RNG isnt in their favor and capes only drop from loot crates that cost $14.99 each)
    Aeander[Deleted User]Foncl3domAsm0deusGazimoffLeiHngWeiVezlinZalgotaswingoodand 4 others.
  • Panther2103Panther2103 Member EpicPosts: 5,779
    I like OpenCritic and I wish that it was used more than MetaCritic, it gives a way better idea about things.
  • TamanousTamanous Member RarePosts: 3,030
    edited February 2019

    SBFord said:

    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.



    Indeed. However, it just means we need more independent review sites again instead of the paid shills (I don't mean paid advertisements) who only say what the Distributor wants them to say. Most game sites are trash because of this and the same in other media like movies where Rottentomatoes is nothing more than a paid shill media site these days.

    The explosion of extreme professional and public review differences is the telling tale. When a game or movie is 90% positive and user reviews are 20% (or reversed) ... there is a underlying influence here outside of just reviewing entertainment media.
    Gdemamigastovski1

    You stay sassy!

  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061
    Tamanous said:

    SBFord said:

    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.



    Indeed. However, it just means we need more independent review sites again instead of the paid shills (I don't mean paid advertisements) who only say what the Distributor wants them to say. Most game sites are trash because of this and the same in other media like movies where Rottentomatoes is nothing more than a paid shill media site these days.
    Thing is, with any media review site, the reviews of various, disparate writers with different opinions are by necessity lumped together.

    If Jim Sterling, Angry Joe, Sid Alpha, Yong Yea, the late Totalbiscuit, and others, had to work together, their image would be different. Imagine if everything each of them said reflected on each of the others. Not only would there be an inherent pressure on each of them to be more positive to not reflect poorly on the others, every little mistake made by each of them would accumulate on their shared platform as a whole.
    SBFord[Deleted User]GdemamiCazrielnatpickwingoodSovrath
  • SBFordSBFord Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
    edited February 2019
    Aeander said:Tamanous said:
    SBFord said:

    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.
    Indeed. However, it just means we need more independent review sites again instead of the paid shills (I don't mean paid advertisements) who only say what the Distributor wants them to say. Most game sites are trash because of this and the same in other media like movies where Rottentomatoes is nothing more than a paid shill media site these days.
    Thing is, with any media review site, the reviews of various, disparate writers with different opinions are by necessity lumped together.

    If Jim Sterling, Angry Joe, Sid Alpha, Yong Yea, the late Totalbiscuit, and others, had to work together, their image would be different. Imagine if everything each of them said reflected on each of the others. Not only would there be an inherent pressure on each of them to be more positive to not reflect poorly on the others, every little mistake made by each of them would accumulate on their shared platform as a whole.
    It's why aggregate sites like OC are needed -- to gather all those disparate voices and put them in one place with links so consumers are informed and can access a wide array of thoughts on any given title.
    [Deleted User]GdemamiCazrielHidekiNomuraVezlinwingoodinfomatz


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 


  • MargraveMargrave Member RarePosts: 1,371
    This is a really good thing!!!
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited February 2019
    Tamanous said:

    SBFord said:

    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.



    Indeed. However, it just means we need more independent review sites again instead of the paid shills (I don't mean paid advertisements) who only say what the Distributor wants them to say. Most game sites are trash because of this and the same in other media like movies where Rottentomatoes is nothing more than a paid shill media site these days.

    The explosion of extreme professional and public review differences is the telling tale. When a game or movie is 90% positive and user reviews are 20% (or reversed) ... there is a underlying influence here outside of just reviewing entertainment media.
    Movie reviewers aren't as bad as video game reviewers (speaking on the whole).  However, the average all-time for movie review outlets on Metacritic still hovers well above what "absolute average" is on a 10-point scale (logically, 5).

    I guess you could make the case for a more relative definition of "average" that would move that score from 5 in one direction, but that seems unnecessarily confusing.
    Gdemami

    image
  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061
    SBFord said:
    Aeander said:Tamanous said:
    SBFord said:

    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.
    Indeed. However, it just means we need more independent review sites again instead of the paid shills (I don't mean paid advertisements) who only say what the Distributor wants them to say. Most game sites are trash because of this and the same in other media like movies where Rottentomatoes is nothing more than a paid shill media site these days.
    Thing is, with any media review site, the reviews of various, disparate writers with different opinions are by necessity lumped together.

    If Jim Sterling, Angry Joe, Sid Alpha, Yong Yea, the late Totalbiscuit, and others, had to work together, their image would be different. Imagine if everything each of them said reflected on each of the others. Not only would there be an inherent pressure on each of them to be more positive to not reflect poorly on the others, every little mistake made by each of them would accumulate on their shared platform as a whole.
    It's why aggregate sites like OC are needed -- to gather all those disparate voices and put them in one place with links so consumers are informed and can access a wide array of thoughts on any given title.
    That helps for independent critics. Not so much organized critics like IGN or even this very site.

    It's just kind of an oddity for the video game industry that its critics are seen more as organizations than individuals.
  • FonclFoncl Member UncommonPosts: 347
    Honestly I had never heard of opencritic before. I know of metacritic but almost never use it.

    It sounds like a great move, I'll check out the site :)
    infomatz
  • Panther2103Panther2103 Member EpicPosts: 5,779
    Aeander said:
    SBFord said:
    Aeander said:Tamanous said:
    SBFord said:

    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.
    Indeed. However, it just means we need more independent review sites again instead of the paid shills (I don't mean paid advertisements) who only say what the Distributor wants them to say. Most game sites are trash because of this and the same in other media like movies where Rottentomatoes is nothing more than a paid shill media site these days.
    Thing is, with any media review site, the reviews of various, disparate writers with different opinions are by necessity lumped together.

    If Jim Sterling, Angry Joe, Sid Alpha, Yong Yea, the late Totalbiscuit, and others, had to work together, their image would be different. Imagine if everything each of them said reflected on each of the others. Not only would there be an inherent pressure on each of them to be more positive to not reflect poorly on the others, every little mistake made by each of them would accumulate on their shared platform as a whole.
    It's why aggregate sites like OC are needed -- to gather all those disparate voices and put them in one place with links so consumers are informed and can access a wide array of thoughts on any given title.
    That helps for independent critics. Not so much organized critics like IGN or even this very site.

    It's just kind of an oddity for the video game industry that its critics are seen more as organizations than individuals.
    I think a lot of outlets in media are looked at that way not just the video game industry. Pitchfork will always be seen in a certain light, rolling stone, plenty of others. I'm not sure it's the same in movies as I don't really read movie reviews. But in music I definitely see a similar trend of treating a site like a site and not individual reviewers. 

    I think any time organized critics of media get together, and share a certain viewpoint, whether the articles written or videos made reflect those all the time, they will always be seen that way. Look at Kotaku / Polygon and political views and how a lot of people see that. Look at IGN with paid reviews. It's just what happens when an organization shares views, or is known for certain views. I don't know if I've ever known a reviewer by name in any media other than games, and that's because a lot of reviewers broke off from their original media outlet (or got fired for a review like Jeff Gerstmann). 

    In this day and age you need aggregate sites, and obviously people want to see them as people tend to flock to Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic any time something new comes out. On a lot of forums I go on there are Metacritic threads for every single big new game. 
    SBFord[Deleted User]
  • TamanousTamanous Member RarePosts: 3,030
    edited February 2019
    Tamanous said:

    SBFord said:

    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.



    Indeed. However, it just means we need more independent review sites again instead of the paid shills (I don't mean paid advertisements) who only say what the Distributor wants them to say. Most game sites are trash because of this and the same in other media like movies where Rottentomatoes is nothing more than a paid shill media site these days.

    The explosion of extreme professional and public review differences is the telling tale. When a game or movie is 90% positive and user reviews are 20% (or reversed) ... there is a underlying influence here outside of just reviewing entertainment media.
    Movie reviewers aren't as bad as video game reviewers (speaking on the whole).  However, the average all-time for movie review outlets on Metacritic still hovers well above what "absolute average" is on a 10-point scale (logically, 5).

    I guess you could make the case for a more relative definition of "average" that would move that score from 5 in one direction, but that seems unnecessarily confusing.
    I refer to the abuse and manipulation of the review systems. Professional critics pandering for site clicks and you NEVER get an actual real review. Hundreds of false reviews dumped into user review sections trying to raise or lower review averages depending on business or political reasons which has reduced most of the biggest influential review platform.

    I refer to the VAST majority of website reviews being hosted on web platforms owned by the very companies that make the product being reviewed. I suggest people research how many mainstream entertainment websites that have clickbait ads plastered over all major media sites, are owned by companies such as Disney.

    And you think you are getting accurate and independent reviews over most mainstream media? Hell no you aren't. This is part of the conflict today. This is why major corporations are insulting their own paying fanbase. They are frustrated that the old infrastructure that they took decades trying to manipulate, is losing influence to other independent platforms and customer retaliation. Control over media and distribution is the greatest asset of large corporations and they are losing this grip.

    This is all just another chapter to the internet revolution. It is too fast changing for old business and social structures to adapt to and we will be struggling with this for decades.
    MadFrenchieGdemami

    You stay sassy!

  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,630

    SBFord said:

    This is a good, consumer-friendly decision.



    And disclosing the use of loot boxes is a diplomatic alternative to saying "This game sucks." (which probably came in second in the focus group on this issue).
    EponyxDamorGdemamiWhiteLantern[Deleted User]

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • TamanousTamanous Member RarePosts: 3,030
    Foncl said:
    Honestly I had never heard of opencritic before. I know of metacritic but almost never use it.

    It sounds like a great move, I'll check out the site :)
    I never use Metacritic either. Any review average that includes reviews like "Worst thing eva! Literally threw up seeing the cover art." completely invalidates it's existence. A review is meaningless if you cannot learn the level of education and interests of the reviewer, and Metacritic rarely provides sophisticated enough reviews.

    "But you know, really, if you think about it Roger and I and all critics really have one absolute essential part of our credentials and that is that you believe that that is actually what we think."
    Gene Siskel

    Reviews are meaningless from someone who has not secured their integrity.


    Gdemami

    You stay sassy!

  • foppoteefoppotee Member RarePosts: 537
    I think this is a good move & a move in the right direction regarding "gambling" in games. Some of the games being released, & even some games have converted, are more casinos with a little gaming as a theme instead of an actual game anyways.
  • GruugGruug Member RarePosts: 1,794
    +100

    Let's party like it is 1863!

  • BlacklabelcaliBlacklabelcali Member UncommonPosts: 24
    Or just be fiscally responsible
    Gdemami
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    Good first step. A better next step is to reflect it in the almighty final score with an automatic minus 10% or 20% for having them.
    Gdemami
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061
    Iselin said:
    Good first step. A better next step is to reflect it in the almighty final score with an automatic minus 10% or 20% for having them.
    Open critic is a review aggregator, not a review outlet. 
  • BitterClingerBitterClinger Member UncommonPosts: 439
    Missing a lot of flags on that site. Guild Wars 2, no flag. Neverwinter, no flag. Tera, no flag. All of them have loot boxes, not just RNG reward mechanics, cash shop loot boxes. I mean, I appreciate all the johnnie-come-latelies finally catching on to the loot box issue, but I don't understand why MMORPGs get a pass on their loot boxes.
    Coolit
    Classic WoW: Back to the Future
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,429
    Any chance of MMORPG.com doing the same? Though in the case of a MMO site it might be easier to flag those MMOs which do not have loot boxes as they are everywhere!
    Coolit
  • SBFordSBFord Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
    The chances of the Games List adding a loot boxes / no loot boxes option are pretty small. Frankly, in my personal opinion, it's up to the player to do due diligence in that regard. :)


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 


  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,429
    SBFord said:
    The chances of the Games List adding a loot boxes / no loot boxes option are pretty small. Frankly, in my personal opinion, it's up to the player to do due diligence in that regard. :)
    Fair enough I know the budget is a bit tight for that sort of thing, what with having to get in all of Tim's fat cigars and whiskeys. :)
    SBFord[Deleted User]
Sign In or Register to comment.