Ok, and attempt to call someone ignorant because you made a statement of fact without any proof that it is indeed fact is ludicrous. Using big words and an attack doesn’t prove your point. What you did is like saying someone is a thief with no proof that they stole anything.
You enjoy your life of thinking whatever you say is true regardless of any proof. If you want the truth you have to look at all the evidence and discount any personal bias.
Did you read OP?
Did you bother to read the thread? The issue we were discussing was whether the original pricing model was predatory. (TLDR: It was) It had little to do with OP.
Clearly, you cannot or choose not to understand my assertion that the math itself is what makes the structure predatory. You can make the argument that the developers were ignorant of this, but I find that to be specious at best. The problems with these types of MTX systems are well documented, and have been for years.
Last but not least, nothing I stated was a personal attack. Pointing out when an argument contains a logical fallacy is a basic tenet of debate.
When you take personal offense to a logical argument, that’s a you problem.
“Facts don’t care about your feelings.” --Ben Shapiro
It has nothing to do with ability nor choice to understand. The term predatory has nothing to do with math, it has to do with intent.
You can say it’s specious if you want, but that doesn’t make you right. Calling them predatory without proof of intent is making assumptions and declaring yourself right without just because you say so.
It’s still a college. 
Let’s look at the discussion using an analogy:
When a person takes out a loan with a Loan Shark who is charging 20% interest per day…
– I assert that the basic structure of this math in unfair and anti-consumer (20% compound interest is BRUTAL) therefore anyone offering this type of loan has directly inferred intent and is predatory by its very nature;
– You assert that because we cannot know the actual intent of the Loan Shark, that you cannot call the Loan Shark predatory because we cannot know his mind or his feelings.
Which of these arguments do you think holds more water?
In point of fact, excessive usury is considered extortion by the law in the United States and is prosecutable as such. The fact that large corporations are allowed similar tactics just because we, in America, have the best government money can buy, is disgusting.
The EU considers lootboxes to be a form of gambling and have outlawed such MTX practices.
I will repeat myself:
We want to buy cosmetics.
We want to support EHG.
We do not want to be gouged, gamed, or treated like lemmings who cannot understand silly nonsense coin predatory price structures.
Nope, over here college is for 16-18 year olds, uni is for 18-21 (ish, plus a bit if you’re doing a 4 year degree). My eldest is going to one of the local colleges, in no way is he capable (or going to be capable) of going to uni. When you finish uni you have a degree, after college you get A-levels (or possibly BTECs) which allow you to start a degree. If you lot over there want to call your universities colleges, go nuts, but our degree-granting institutions are universities & should be referred to as such.
Cambridge college is very different to Cambridge university.
God bless the EU.
cough
Brexit boyo… 
I voted remain…
Outlawed? I thought they regulated it to the point of only being within acceptable cost for actual gambling companies?
Since when? Some EU countrys ban games with lootboxes but not the EU as a whole.
I do understand why, if they anchored (which i belive they did) dont get me wrong.
What i dont understand is why people think they did not anchor…
The new prices were up so quick like its the least important thing to evaluate for the longtivity. This indicates to me that the prices we are at now whas were they were aiming for.
Iam not mad at that. Lets be real here, in the end its a company who wants to be able to keep growing (beside loving to make and play this game ofcourse).
The MTX store has been proven to be a very effective way of doing this so it would be almost stupid to not ask for advice how to strategicly lay the store out.
Anchoring is a very common effective tactic for companies.
Is this tactic a bit dirty? Thats for you to decide.
I think its smart since most people seem to believe it as it those in many cases.
Diablo immortal thought how predatery can we be, thats a whole nother level dont get me wrong. However this example is the same story in a way smaller and honest scale in my opinion.
Are people canceling Diablo 4? It doesnt look like it.
Most people seem to forget what happened with Diablo Immortal. And if they didnt forgot they still gonna play D4 so they made a lot of money and in the end people still play there game. They can do that since they are a big established company with a great game with lore and history and love from the players. They can handle the backlash because of this since the product they have is to valuable it seems.
Back to Last Epoch. They would have been stupid in my opinion if they didnt jump on this anchoring mtx wagon as a company. Iam glad they are not predators like Diablo Immortal, but they cant either if they dont want to lose to many players. They are not established enough yet to make a move like that and get away with it. And they probably dont have the company and type of devs and employees to do something like that.
Long story short this is how busisness is done and should be done.
Iam still suprised many players dont see how the game is played anchoring wise and how those things work.
I want this game to be big and good in the end.
So i will probably support the game with some mtxes just as i did with POE which kept me interested for 3800 thousand hours. However i do expect quality MTXes for those prices.
Its not a free to play game
this… and if they lower some prices i actually buy more or have decent discount actions…
Personally I just though it premature to go with this strategy right now. Unless of course, getting MTX out there to generate revenue is something they NEED to do for financial reasons earlier than anticipated. Then it would make sense but we have no way of knowing that for sure. OR maybe they decided to test the waters in a smaller player pool and see how we’d all react and how quickly they could “restore faith” in anticipation of future price negotiations when the game launches with more players? Who knows, only EHG does.
Exactly!
But if you started a game company or i it would be stupid not to try something like this aswell right? And iam not only talking about the financial reasons they need.
Most big games have this type of system and a lot of players accepted it (i did atleast to a certain extend and price). it works so why be the 1 guy who says nah i take less money despite they know that the chances are big that they will get a lot of money out of it right?
In doing more research this is what I found:
– Lootboxes are explicitly banned in Belgium;
– Lootboxes are considered Gambling subject to an operator’s license in Finland and the Netherlands;
– Lootboxes are regulated in Germany and Italy, with pending legislation in Spain, as of Jan 1, 2023, which requires that any game with a Lootbox structure is automatically rated with a stricter rating to indicate the product is not suitable for children;
– The UK declined to pass Lootbox regulation but is not part of the EU at this time;
– Other EU members have no local regulations on Lootboxes;
– The EU Parliament has a number of pending discussions and proposals, some of which include an assessment on whether an obligation to disable in-game payments and lootboxes should be imposed to protect minors.
I stand corrected that Lootboxes are not outlawed at the EU level. My apologies.
I’ve said it a few times. I can go over it again for you
The prices are irrelevant here. The biggest change was the structure of their shop. They went from a predatory structure, with “confusing” conversation ratio and that would always leave the user with leftover points, to one that is straightforward and not at all predatory. Isn’t the idea of “anchoring” that they present something worse, so we accept something bad? There’s nothing bad about this.
This, more than the prices, is probably the biggest potential loss of profit.
sigh
I don’t know, do you think not being dicks to your customers is stupid?
There is a ever growing comitee from almost all EU countrys that want to get rid of al lootbox and P2W games. If they move on in the same pace as they do now we might see all p2w and lootboxes gone in the EU before 2030.
No need to apologies the EU is on a good way to get rid off all the P2W and lootbox crap that is plagueing the gaming industry. If this leads to less published games in the EU or to less predatory currency practices needs to be seen ^^.
HAHA wait for that german mmo where they want no money and all they ask for is to give as much money as you can/want. I’m realy looking forward if this will work out because if it works out it’ll be something nice to pay the devs and publishers what they deserve rather what they think they deserve.