Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Another Revelation from "Surprise Mechanics"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Another Revelation from "Surprise Mechanics"

    Don't know if this should be posted here or in off-topic.

    There's a certain crime in the UK (and most countries with a Parliament System) called "Contempt of Parliament". The tldr of it is that it is illegal to interfere with/obstruct Parliamentary Privilege or the Conduct of Parliament Business. (A similar law exists in the US applicable to all three branches of Government - Executive, Legislative and Judiciary). While EA's ability to obstruct Parliamentary Privilege without breaking dozens of other laws in questionable, other such obstruction can include:
    Of those points, EA (or at least its representative at the recent inquiry) is guilty of "Lying to a committee" with her affirmation that EA does not refer to Loot Boxes as "Loot Boxes" but instead as "Surprise Mechanics". For this statement to be objectively true, EA must not only have avoided using the phrase "Loot Box(es)" to describe a specific type of Microtransaction but must also have exclusively used the phrase "Surprise Mechanic(s)" to describe that type of Microtransaction.

    And as anyone with knowledge of Social Media or the Wayback Machine would know, EA has indeed used the phrase "Loot Boxes" to describe a specific type of Microtransaction (specifically in their advertisement of Battlefield V, Anthem and Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order). And, around E3 this year, Andrew Wilson did manage to avoid using "Loot Box(es)" to describe a type of Microtransaction (though he did identify that is what the Microtransaction is identified as by the community at large), he failed to use the phrase "Surprise Mechanic(s)" and instead used the phrase "Mystery Boxes".

    tldr: In EA's half-baked attempt to defend Loot Boxes, they have blatantly violated the Law of the UK.

  • #2
    "Don't know if this should be posted here or in off-topic."

    As long it's related to gaming you can post it here (EA = Bad Gaming company. Still gaming).

    Off-topic is only for things not related to gaming at all.


    And as I already mention in another post, EA is nothing more than a joke at this point, the "surprised mechanics" just make me laugh hard.
    ( ´・ω・`)_且~ Would you care to join me for a cup of tea?
    Sips Tea Majeeeeestically!

    Comment


    • #3
      Lootbox has become a term for a broad spectrum of those kind of mechanics. Not sure where you want to go with that.
      Celebrating over 1000 contributions of the highest quality! ?

      Comment


      • #4
        Yong Yea did this great YT Video where he defined "Murder" as a "Surprise funeral" lol! Quality troll. haha!
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSyUgTCIkA0

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Animusisters View Post
          Lootbox has become a term for a broad spectrum of those kind of mechanics. Not sure where you want to go with that.
          That she literally stated that they do not use that terminology to refer to this kind of mechanic, despite already having used that term in their marketing material.
          Namely, bringing up the lack of loot boxes as a core feature in two of their upcoming games, branding them as such in promotional footage.
          Google Stadia - "Shortly after launch"

          Comment


          • #6
            First I am not saying EA isn't being shady as hell here, and this whole 'surprise mechanic' thing is stupid, and isn't going to work. Though it isn't illegal calling it that.

            EA must not only have avoided using the phrase "Loot Box(es)" to describe a specific type of Microtransaction but must also have exclusively used the phrase "Surprise Mechanic(s)" to describe that type of Microtransaction.
            No.. this is wrong as names change all the time. Micro-transaction becomes Loot Box become surprise mechanics. It could be considered the evolution of a service so it is not a lie when they say they don't have Loot Boxes. You would have an extreme difficulty proving this is not a grammatical argument but a lie.

            And as anyone with knowledge of Social Media or the Wayback Machine would know, EA has indeed used the phrase "Loot Boxes" to describe a specific type of Microtransaction (specifically in their advertisement of Battlefield V, Anthem and Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order). And, around E3 this year, Andrew Wilson did manage to avoid using "Loot Box(es)" to describe a type of Microtransaction (though he did identify that is what the Microtransaction is identified as by the community at large), he failed to use the phrase "Surprise Mechanic(s)" and instead used the phrase "Mystery Boxes".

            tldr: In EA's half-baked attempt to defend Loot Boxes, they have blatantly violated the Law of the UK.
            They could say they were using the term that others had accepted for the name of their 'surprise mechanic', they can say it was mistaken that they later corrected whoever posted it, or they could even say that back then they were thinking about changing it to Loot Boxes and decided not to... All of these things are possibilities, and while they maybe guilty of many things... This is just silly'

            Edit: They actually have real lawyers, and while they may sound dumb because of the BS that EA forces them to go with they actually have real knowledge of how the law works, if they could not get away with it they would not of done it.

            tl;dr: EA is being an idiot again, but not breaking the law.
            Last edited by RunningInCircles; 06-26-2019, 09:54 AM.

            Comment

            Working...
            X