To be honest, I can’t understand how a virtual loot box can create an ethical problem and being considered gambling. It’s been a while that I see those kinds of clickbait articles going on and I am clearly lost, there’s probably an obscure force that tries to make the game developers being evil.
I mean how much a virtual loot box is different than a collector’s card pack?
Is it because people that are doing research are not able to give a real value to virtual goods?
How much does a Pokemon collector should spend to acquire the entire collection?
Well, forced to admit that there are some people that value virtual goods and this is only the beginning.
I can’t understand how do people see loot boxes as an evil gambling mechanic more than collector’s card pack, they are the same and better than, at least, most of the games company will clearly indicate to you the % of chances that you have to gain every loot part, collector’s card pack don’t!
Don’t hesitate to comment I want to hear you opinion about that topic.
This is a really interesting article from Page Laubherimer about a methodology called jobs to be done that focus on users’ problems and needs for creating a persona that can be used as a reference when creating a new game or a new service.
I personally use the personas technique in some of the games that we have produced over the past few years and I am sold to it. Every time we have to use it, we have seen benefits in our design decision making, a better understanding of what we should do to please our target audience and each time the game works well in terms of KPI.
In fact, I have seen multiple video games company investing millions of dollars without having any idea what was their target audience. I always find it surprising to do so but!
I know that the personas technique isn’t unanimous to everyone one but I always think that this is better than nothing!