What’s your point? …
I don’t see how that’s disturbing. So if a bunch of engineers reported that building ships a certain way may lead to it sinking, you would find it disturbing if a ship building company hires engineers?
Or when doctors and nutritionists tell you certain things aren’t good to eat, you would find it disturbing if a food company hires those kinds of people, assuming that they’ll only use them as a way to put as much of the poisonous and bad stuff into the food they make?
Would you prefer Bliz hire those with no knowledge of the subject matter to be in charge of making sure they won’t implement loot boxes? In the same vein, would you trust someone with no engineering knowledge to be in charged of keeping your ship afloat, and those with no medical knowledge to be in charge of your health, etc?
Alright, let’s see what Dr. Close, who you cited above actually has to say about loot boxes and gambling. From the study’s abstract (emphasis mine):
Results: The combined open-access data comprised 7,767 loot box purchasers (5,933 with self-report earnings). Secondary analysis of this self-report data confirmed that disproportionate revenue appears to be generated from high-level spenders: the top 5% of spenders (> $100/month) represent half of loot box revenue. Previously reported correlations between problem gambling and loot box expenditure were confirmed, with an aggregate correlation of ρ = 0.34, p < .001. In contrast, there was no significant correlation between loot box spend and earnings ρ = 0.02, p = .10.
Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33578105/
The studies are correlational. There is zero evidence here that says loot box purchases lead to problem gambling. Your claim implies the relationship between the two has a specific direction of causality:
But peer reviewed studies don’t show that. They show there’s a relationship, but the relationship just as easily could be that people with a predisposition for problem gambling are the ones most likely to buy loot boxes. Which is still an issue because you’re basically taking money from people with a psychological inclination to overspend on loot box-like things. But that does not mean loot boxes cause gambling addiction.
Not at all, we can all agree ships not sinking is a good thing.
But many studies are increasingly showing the link between loot boxes and problem gambling, harmful to human health and the well-being of players.
Using psychologists to implement mechanics that lead to problem gambling and hurts the well-being of customers, is incredibly disturbing to me.
And may I remind people, it is not just psychologists, but increasingly governments who see the dangers to society. Overwatch loot boxes were banned in Belgium not too long ago.
1 Like
You actually research hs more then play it LOL
I am sure all doctors , whether or not a psychologist or primary care take an Oath when they become practicing physicians.
Part of that sacred Oath is “To treat a a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person’s family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick. I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.”
That being said they could be used for research purposes and collect data and in turn whatever the employer does with the data from that point forward isn’t the doctors responsibility.
I doubt any psychologist would purposely help develop a game that would cause disease, like addiction.
It is an interesting topic, but I think this may be something that has been researched and done for many years.
Has anyone does any psychological or psychiatric research into “tilt” and the effects on habitual players? Its something I wonder about a lot.
1 Like
Has anyone does any psychological or psychiatric research into “tilt” and the effects on habitual players? Its something I wonder about a lot.
To get to a state of addiction, consecutive losing streaks are an important factor.
This is imo, why people who are addicted, to casinos or loot boxes, are generally not happy about it, and tend to dislike the game.
To make people psychologically addicted to slot machines or loot boxes, involves “hurting” the player, with financial losses.
Effects of sequential winning vs. losing on subsequent gambling behavior.
Japan; Department of Psychiatry, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine
The models note that the experiences of losses also contribute to the continuation of gambling behavior, especially problem gambling.
The participants tended to bet more money after losing than after winning when the streak length was lower. Second, although to a lesser extent than after sequential winning, the betting amount increased after sequential losing, despite the decreased proportions of multiple bets. These effects can be interpreted as chasing behavior – risking larger stakes to try to recoup losses. Chasing typically refers to the act of returning to gamble on another day to recoup previous losses (Lesieur, [1977]), that is, between-session chasing, but it also refers to the tendency to gamble too long within a particular session, that is, within-session chasing (Breen & Zuckerman, [1999]. The effects observed here can therefore be interpreted as within-session chasing, but we do not know whether the present findings generalize to changes in betting behavior across sessions. We leave this question as a topic for future research.
3 Likes
That doesn’t answer my question.
You can also use psychologists to prevent your game from crossing that line.
In the same way engineers know how to sink your ship also know how to prevent your ship from sinking.
So again, how is it disturbing that companies are hiring people who are best equipped to help prevent their games from becoming harmful?
I wouldn’t call losing “tilt” necessarily but it appears the conclusions are similar.
I’ve only ever seen tilt studied on poker (I am sure there is more research) but players who display signs of tilt tended to do the following:
- Take larger risks than they normally do
- Tend to focus more on “gut” over mathematical probability
- Players on tilt tend to play more aggressively (more hands, lower quality of hands, etc.)
I have never seen a study on tilt when it comes to CCGs
2 Likes
Just commenting to the conclusion here:
From my experience (both personally and observing others) I don’t think tilt tends to carry over as long as people are gambling within their means (ie… don’t have a house payment on the line).
Just my observation from poker.
Sure, if gaming companies were ethical they could hire the psychologists who speak out against loot boxes and gaming addiction, and try to make their game as harmless as possible.
But that’s not what is going on is it, the psychologists they hire are there to increase loot box sales, to increase addiction (disguised as “engagement”, “player retention”, “reward mechanics” during hiring).
1 Like
Ok companies are evil we already knew that so what else is new?
I can agree on loot boxes becoming way too much of a thing in gaming but the latter two examples I would caution against being a negative.
Elements that a lot of people enjoy in games are also designed with what you’re deeming addiction (player engagement, etc.). Good video games designed to be played constantly over time usually need a great engagement model to also function as a long-term game.
I’ll go back 20 years and show D2 as a good example of how to have a player engagement system be both rewarding and that reward feeds “addiction” (really loose term here. Going less old I’d point to Grim Dawn (another ARPG) that does this well.
1 Like
It would be interesting, since both have popular f2f and digital iterations that would serve to allow one to understand whether removing the social component is important. My guess is the perceived arbitrariness is heightened, but what does that do to the “tilt” dynamics, amplify them?
I’m including the sense of “rigging” as a manifestation of “tilt”, which may be a separate phenomenon, but, at least for me, is related.
The “chasing behavior”, namely risking larger stakes to try to recoup losses, which is described at length in gambling studies, is imo what Hearthstone does with ranks.
One could ask why Hearhtstone or other games, have ranks to begin with. Why are all these successful games online, why do they involve ranks, why do people chase these ranks.
If you lose 2 or 3 times in a row on Hearthstone, do you feel like you need to recoup those losses?
2 Likes
Probably yes I think is the answer here.
I don’t though view a ranking system as bad per se as it gives a goal to focus on. Since online CCGs lack the social aspects of playing cards in person they need something to act as the focus point and competition just tends to be an easy focus point as many people value competition.
Since I can’t tell if my opponent is tilting or not it is hard to say even anecdotally. I will say from when I played (soon playing hopefully) paper Magic usually when tilt began to occur players would swap decks to either gimmicky decks that could just force a win through an inconsistent but powerful interaction (look up Tibalt’s Trickery if you want as an example) or would tend to lean more into aggro style decks likely because forcing answers from your opponent feels less “can I draw the right card” than being the control decks that needs the answers.
1 Like
Do you not get tilted?
If I start feeling tilt I’ll walk away.
I’ve spent enough time when I was in college playing poker with people that I’ve learned the warning signs when I am getting tilted and will simply back away when I am getting to that point.
In Paper Magic I don’t really as I am there for the social aspects and not to win or lose. I know that going in so my focus isn’t on winning but just having a good time and, as such, my caring isn’t there to get me to a tilt.
Edit:
Don’t get me wrong on the above. I do tilt but I just don’t continue to play when I reach tilt status because I know that my decision making is worse and I’ve just become aware of my own tilt through playing so much poker. In digital games it just becomes easy to walk away because I have a few games I am actively playing at any time so I just disengage.
Is this supposed to be some kind of shocking revelation? From the people who hand out packs, make you open each one individually, set off little fireworks when you open them, and an excited voice shouts out when you randomly hit a legendary?
2 Likes