Red Dead Redemption 2 Publisher Argues Loot Boxes are Not Gambling

4.3
During a presentation for investors at the Credit Suisse 21st Annual Technology conference on Scottsdale, Arizona, Take-two President Karl Slatoff was asked to comment on the controversy regarding loot boxes and microtransactions.

Slatoff stated that Take-Two does not see that sort of thing as gambling, and their view is aligned to that of the ESA. That being said, it’s worth mentioning that Slatoff did not mention one way or the other any intention of using the feature in future games.

In terms of the reaction from consumers, Slatoff explained that for him the issue is all about content, and about “overdelivering” on it and on making sure that the focus is on engagement. He also added that “as long as you keep your eyes on that ball you’re gonna be ok, because the consumer is going to be really happy with what they get.” We also hear that Slatoff feels that companies can’t force consumers to buy something, but they can try do their best to create the best experience they possibly can to drive engagement, and driving engagement creates value in entertainment franchises, “that’s how it’s been and how it always will be.”

Earlier in the presentation, Slatoff was asked to talk about the situation of unlocking the opportunity of recurring consumer spending. He stressed the importance of delivering the best possible experience to the consumer, with the goal being driving deeper engagement with the games for a very long period of time. Overdelivering on the initial release is key to achieve that, followed by providing the additional content that the consumer really wants.

This isn’t a new concept for Take-Two, as they have done this with expansion packs for Civilization in the nineties. That being said, Slatoff mentioned that they’re still in an early exploratory phase with recurring revenues because the publisher is still “getting to know the consumer,” which changes every year. Now there are analytical tools that allow to do that in real time and to deliver the experience that consumers want.

Slatoff concluded that the publisher is getting better at that, but there is still a lot that they can learn.

Posted:
Related Forum: Gaming Discussion

Source: https://www.dualshockers.com/take-two-loot-boxes-gambling/

Comments

"Red Dead Redemption 2 Publisher Argues Loot Boxes are Not Gambling" :: Login/Create an Account :: 4 comments

If you would like to post a comment please signin to your account or register for an account.

SilkyPosted:

I tend to disagree that it is classed as a type of gambling as similary with gambling let's say scratch cards, you are putting money into something that you don't know the outcome of.

TOXICPosted:

No its not gambling at all lol.

So excited for the realise for this game, got mine pre ordered all ready lol.

AnhurPosted:

i agree, loot boxes are not gambling, but putting cosmetics you want behind a paywall crammed with other junk you don't want can become a "gamble". what ever happened to the straightfoward buying the thing that you wanted instead of putting it with useless stuff you don't want? the only game thats come out that's done it right was overwatch. yes they're in loot boxes, yes they're behind a paywall, but they don't have dlc/characters to buy. and once you get a certain thing out of a loot box, they make sure to not give you a dupe of it until your very close to having everything finished. i'm level 813 (meaning 813 loot boxes+ the extra 3 you get for doing your weekly arcade games, so around 950) and i have almost everything. and the dupes i get goes towards gold that i can use to buy the other stuff i don't have.

CHUBBYninjaPosted:

There is a difference with loot boxes containing game changing items and cosmetic items. Rare game changing items along with common cosmetics in lookboxes i believe is gambling. If everything is cosmetic then it's just added content for the people who want it.