IAAW

My general consensus on Special Upgrades are that, outside of specific circumstances (e.g., Beginner weapons), all that matters is getting the Normal Upgrades and the Gem Upgrade. Granted, I haven't done this on my own Great Mallet, so I don't know if this is true. What I do know is that you can Erg Upgrade the Great Mallet, despite the wiki saying otherwise. It's basically the one thing that wants me to see if I might be able to Special Upgrade the Great Mallet; I just haven't gotten around to it, yet. Proficiency and such.

If for whatever reason you can't Special Upgrade the Great Mallet, I would like to see that be changed since that would basically destroy the viability of a Great Mallet in terms of upgrades. And I like my Great Mallet.

The daily quest completions are cumulative; you actually only need to complete the daily quest five times per reward tier. In other words, in order to receive all the quest-related rewards from this event you need to complete the daily quest 20 times, so there's enough time (a little over a week's worth of leeway) to get all the quest rewards.

It's just that the quest doesn't count how many dailies you've done, but it does count.

I think my most favorite seasonal event (if you can call it that) was Samhain; it was like playing through a Generation, complete with a questline, characters and an overarching plot. It's something that I've actually wanted to play through another time even though I've played through it before, although that's a suggestion for a different thread.

The difference is in tangible goods versus digital goods.

Tangible goods like trading cards are something that can actually be held in your hand. It can be collected, traded, stored, shown off and traded among other people who may be interested. Or you can sell it. Digital goods like lootboxes aren't tangible, and because of this despite the rewards often being collectible, able to be traded and shown off, their very existence is dependent on a server that is also dependent on a company operating those servers. Because let's face it, the moment Nexon closes Mabinogi's servers down all of the pets and gacha-specific items that players have spent millions of real dollars on will be gone in an instant. Tangible goods, while more than capable of being destroyed for one reason or another (disaster, theft, poor build quality, etc.), tangible goods are at the very least items that can be cherished, maintained for years, and even displayed in a museum and potentially becoming a part of our history. Digital goods don't have this property, and are directly dependent on servers and a company maintaining those servers for those digital goods to continue to exist. At least, that is how I see it.

As for gambling in and of itself, there are serious concerns related to lootboxes and similar lootbox-based systems, and a recent study that came out just a couple of days ago confirmed this, the end result from the study alone being one of two scenarios; either lootboxes allow for the potential for problem gambling to develop among players who are exposed to them, or lootboxes allow for the exploitation of players who already deal with problem gambling. Either scenario is enough to raise some red flags in regards to lootboxes. And while it's easy to suggest that it's "not anyone's fault" if someone becomes a problem gambler, at the same time it can be argued that there is a responsibility in ensuring that people who have problems gambling receive help or are at the very least not exploited.

In regards to receiving nothing or receiving something, strictly speaking either or can be treated as a fail state; either you receive nothing for your money spent, or you receive something you didn't want for your money spent. Either way, the draw is to continue spending, either to receive something for your money spent, or to receive the item you wanted for your money spent. Either scenario has a similar fail state and a similar outcome; draw consumers to spend more money on the same product. Not to mention that following the "lootboxes are gambling" scenario, the company managing those lootboxes can be seen as the "house". And as the saying goes, "The house always wins". In other words, just like the house of a casino would control the odds of winning at their tables, a company implementing lootboxes controls the odds of winning at their lootboxes; in this instance, receiving a rare item. And not only that, but a company implementing lootboxes also controls other aspects of the game they manage, and it's all too easy for a company to control rates in such a way that players are actively encouraged to spend money in order to progress more easily. EA's Star Wars: Battlefront II is both an extremely good example of what happens when implementing lootboxes can also result in the game itself being turned into one giant grindfest with the obvious incentive being to spend money to open lootboxes to actually progress. Or I guess you could say to feel that sense of pride and accomplishment.

As for gachapon not being lootboxes, they are exactly the same as the premise is exactly the same; a box-like virtual object containing a set of items often containing what is deemed a set of rare items that must be purchased with real money in order to be opened. They are the same, just not in name.

I will at least say this, however; Nexon has every right to have microtransactions in their games. Their games are free-to-play, after all; they need to make their money somewhere. It is simply that there are concerns in respect to lootboxes and there is enough evidence to suggest that these concerns are legitimate, and that depending on how the lootbox controversy goes Nexon and other companies may need to review how they handle microtransactions. And in respect to that you know how often players have begged for Nexon to sell their gachapons as direct purchases rather than locking them behind an RNG paywall, even if it cost more.

Maia wrote: »

Hellkaizer wrote: »

GTCvActium wrote: »

Guys guys the math for this is simple: Someone else will get it. That is all.

No it's 50/50, you either get it or you don't.

100% chance someone already got it.

99.9% chance that person isn't you.