6 ms·

I play a lot of Apex Legends and recently I found out that when you go purchase a loot box it explicitly tells you the chance of each item's rarity. My initial

I play a lot of Apex Legends and recently I found out that when you go purchase a loot box it explicitly tells you the chance of each item's rarity. My initial thought was that it's a step in the right direction (of banning loot boxes entirely), but it also made me wonder how anyone can be sure those numbers are actually true in their backend.

PhillyG 6y ago
In some countries, games are legally required to do state rarity of items in lootboxes, so it may just be so that they are compliant with all countries. I forget which countries, but I think they're in central europe
TeMPOraL 6y ago
It is also pretty useless. Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. If you have a list of 20 items with non-uniform chances, can you tell how long you need to play before it's likely you'll get an item you want? You and me can, by doing little math in head; most people can't (and it's another question whether one has the willpower to do such math and follow it through while tired, unwindng in front of a casual game). What would be more useful if they listed the expected number of loot boxes you need to buy to get an item. "2% chance" reads differently than "you'll need to buy about 50 loot boxes, on average, to get that item".
- wizzwizz4 6y ago
  I'd prefer “you'll need to buy about 50 more loot boxes, on average, to get that item” as wording. Bonus if there's a question mark next to it that explains probability (specifically, why the gambler's fallacy is wrong – though not necessarily mentioning the fallacy).
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    Good catch, I agree yours is better.
  - tesseract 6y ago
    "Most <evil grin> players will get the item after buying 26 more boxes"
    - pixelbro 6y ago
      While we're all patting ourselves on the back for understanding probability, the correct calculation is actually log.98(.5) = 34.3 = number of attempts required for a 50% chance of getting a 2% item.
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    Wouldn't it be easier to just ban gambling apps including ones disguised as games from app stores? You could probably get virtually everyone by simply defining it as a game with in app purchases that provide probabilistic or in game performance improvements. If they can sell levels but not swords nothing of value will be lost.
- mod 6y ago
  > Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. Yes, they would. The lottery is about giving up something of little value ($1 or $2) for some entertainment and the chance at a truly life-changing situation. I doubt anyone is unaware there's almost no chance they win, and that they're losing on every dollar they spend. Interestingly, the lottery is occasionally +EV to play. I otherwise agree, people are bad at gambling, probabilities, and understanding the long term. I play poker, and poker players are constantly furious that their 80% favorite hand doesn't win 100% of the time. 80% feels like a lock. Some people don't care. They want to gamble, and they have no regard for what they lose in the process. I think many humans are just wired this way, or perhaps it's cultural.
  - mym1990 6y ago
    I agree, playing the lottery is a little like buying insurance for something. Everyone knows that insurance is a losing proposition, but no one buys it to save 500$ on that fender bender, people buy it so that they can get through a catastrophic event like 500,000$ in medical bills.
    - telchar 6y ago
      I would hazard a guess that people who buy lottery tickets are much less likely to buy insurance than those who don't. I think some similar psychological mechanisms may be at play, but not in the way you are suggesting where they overestimate small probabilities across the board. I suspect it has more to do with discounting odds that are against them. But I wouldn't bet on it.
  - wincy 6y ago
    Well because evolutionarily, gambling must pay off sometimes, and the people who are averse to gambling might become rarer if it pays off in a big way. Ten thousand years ago doing something risky might result in you going from being a male with no prospects to having a harem with 50 wives. It makes sense that when your ancestors could have made a risky gambled (say raiding the village next door), they’d go for it, much like someone will put everything on 21 Black because the payoff could be so big.
svachalek 6y ago
I don't think you realistically can trust these as there will never be serious audits, and they exploit all kinds of psychological weaknesses. They really just need to be illegal. Sell content piecemeal, sure. But not loot boxes.
- Kaze404 6y ago
  I agree completely. I would've spent ridiculous amounts of money on that game at this point if it weren't for loot boxes, but alas it wasn't meant to be.
PoignardAzur 6y ago
I don't have any more information than you do, but my gut feeling is "80% of companies won't bother to lie on the numbers, 20% will lie, and will occasionally provoke a scandal when they get caught in the rare audit or get the whistle blown on them by a spiteful employee".

PhillyG 6y ago

In some countries, games are legally required to do state rarity of items in lootboxes, so it may just be so that they are compliant with all countries. I forget which countries, but I think they're in central europe

TeMPOraL 6y ago

It is also pretty useless. Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. If you have a list of 20 items with non-uniform chances, can you tell how long you need to play before it's likely you'll get an item you want? You and me can, by doing little math in head; most people can't (and it's another question whether one has the willpower to do such math and follow it through while tired, unwindng in front of a casual game). What would be more useful if they listed the expected number of loot boxes you need to buy to get an item. "2% chance" reads differently than "you'll need to buy about 50 loot boxes, on average, to get that item".

wizzwizz4 6y ago
I'd prefer “you'll need to buy about 50 more loot boxes, on average, to get that item” as wording. Bonus if there's a question mark next to it that explains probability (specifically, why the gambler's fallacy is wrong – though not necessarily mentioning the fallacy).
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  Good catch, I agree yours is better.
- tesseract 6y ago
  "Most <evil grin> players will get the item after buying 26 more boxes"
  - pixelbro 6y ago
    While we're all patting ourselves on the back for understanding probability, the correct calculation is actually log.98(.5) = 34.3 = number of attempts required for a 50% chance of getting a 2% item.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  Wouldn't it be easier to just ban gambling apps including ones disguised as games from app stores? You could probably get virtually everyone by simply defining it as a game with in app purchases that provide probabilistic or in game performance improvements. If they can sell levels but not swords nothing of value will be lost.
mod 6y ago
> Normal people can't parse probabilities - otherwise nobody would play in the lottery. Yes, they would. The lottery is about giving up something of little value ($1 or $2) for some entertainment and the chance at a truly life-changing situation. I doubt anyone is unaware there's almost no chance they win, and that they're losing on every dollar they spend. Interestingly, the lottery is occasionally +EV to play. I otherwise agree, people are bad at gambling, probabilities, and understanding the long term. I play poker, and poker players are constantly furious that their 80% favorite hand doesn't win 100% of the time. 80% feels like a lock. Some people don't care. They want to gamble, and they have no regard for what they lose in the process. I think many humans are just wired this way, or perhaps it's cultural.
- mym1990 6y ago
  I agree, playing the lottery is a little like buying insurance for something. Everyone knows that insurance is a losing proposition, but no one buys it to save 500$ on that fender bender, people buy it so that they can get through a catastrophic event like 500,000$ in medical bills.
  - telchar 6y ago
    I would hazard a guess that people who buy lottery tickets are much less likely to buy insurance than those who don't. I think some similar psychological mechanisms may be at play, but not in the way you are suggesting where they overestimate small probabilities across the board. I suspect it has more to do with discounting odds that are against them. But I wouldn't bet on it.
- wincy 6y ago
  Well because evolutionarily, gambling must pay off sometimes, and the people who are averse to gambling might become rarer if it pays off in a big way. Ten thousand years ago doing something risky might result in you going from being a male with no prospects to having a harem with 50 wives. It makes sense that when your ancestors could have made a risky gambled (say raiding the village next door), they’d go for it, much like someone will put everything on 21 Black because the payoff could be so big.

svachalek 6y ago

I don't think you realistically can trust these as there will never be serious audits, and they exploit all kinds of psychological weaknesses. They really just need to be illegal. Sell content piecemeal, sure. But not loot boxes.

Kaze404 6y ago
I agree completely. I would've spent ridiculous amounts of money on that game at this point if it weren't for loot boxes, but alas it wasn't meant to be.

PoignardAzur 6y ago

I don't have any more information than you do, but my gut feeling is "80% of companies won't bother to lie on the numbers, 20% will lie, and will occasionally provoke a scandal when they get caught in the rare audit or get the whistle blown on them by a spiteful employee".