The fruit machine, which associates a repeatable trivial action with getting a random reward, exploits a drug-like loophole in human motivation. This gambling high is so powerful that it has historically been considered a vice and strongly regulated.
The distinction between video games and fruit machines goes back to the genesis of the medium. During early moral panics, video games vehemently and deliberately differentiated themselves from fruit machines and reassured parents and government regulators they were "games of skill, not chance" precisely because gambling regulators would just ban video games as fruit machines. Coin-operated games like Asteroids and Pac-Man, though difficult, rewarded skilled play with extended playtime.
Unfortunately, decades from the original moral panics about coin-op games in the 80s, the fragile new artform is being degenerated and crushed back into fruit machine land. The distinction has been lost, and we are increasingly seeing video games first adopt fruit machine characteristics and then be completely swallowed by their gambling qualities.
The stimulus provided by random reward is so intensely powerful and prone to dominate all other aspects of design that video games should perhaps be explicitly restricted to deterministic forms based on skill and player agency.
Pulling a lever to get a prize like a wireheaded rat is not defensible as an "artform," and prohibiting fruit machine mechanisms in gameplay gave rise to the video game as a new interactive experience.
BAN FRUIT MACHINE FAGGOTRY
Jack Murphy
...
Brody Thomas
I would also like to see the end of these mechanisms, but the defense will crop up that a game with these mechanics will be games of skill. What can be said to that?
For example: DOTA 2, Team Fortress, CSGO, Overwatch, Quake Champions are competitive games with their fanbases that will proclaim that are games of skill, but do contain fruit machine aspects e.g lootboxes.
Aiden Bell
There are two different origination points of the skinner box in video games. RPGs and gambling devices like pachinko, slot machines and so on. You can't defend RPGs and be against skinner boxes.
Brayden Smith
i'd argue that's it's less of a problem for games that just hand out drops randomly like those you listed, which isn't to say it's not a problem. we have kids (and adults) turning into junkies over phone games which are simply pay or wait to open this next thing which could be something great. at the very least it should be regulated for minors.
Easton Cooper
I'd like to see the end of them because it seems to me like it tells devs that it's completely alright to charge for cosmetic shit even though you've already paid for the fucking game. I wouldn't even mind cosmetics that much if they didn't sell for anything over 10 cents, and if they respect the orginal artstyle of the game, but hey special snowflake faggots have to stand out with a shitton of particle effects and garbage, right? Wish I could turn that shit off.
Daniel Evans
That's easy to differentiate. You are paying real money for these loot boxes in the hopes you will get something that be worth more than what you paid for the loot box. Considering that you can get store credit for it, that is more or less gambling.
Sure you can, if the rpg is a one time purchase then the skinner box shit is a time waster, but if it has a cash shop with loot boxes then it's gambling.
Sebastian Price
Still a fucking skinner box. RPGs are objectively the worst genre of video games.
Evan Lopez
I thought that was visual novels and walking simulators.
Eli Robinson
Not video games. RPGs are quite close to being visual novels and walking simulators to be honest.
