Like I said in my post, I think they're grayer than a lot of skinnerboxes, but that doesn't make them clean.

My understanding is that the vast majority of loot boxes are the sole way of acquiring the in game objects they posses. If there's a CS gun/skin/whatever in a loot box, you can't just go out and buy that thing for money. Transaction behavior is fine to me. That's one problem. Another is that you don't "own" that thing, you just have permission to use it. That's slightly different from owning a physical object.

It's an aggregate, and there are degrees of bad design patterns.

Whole game for single transaction > game with DLC > game with loot box for aesthetic features> game with loot box for core features.

I see your point that CCGs are basically the analogue version of loot boxes, and I can't entirely disagree. It's been called "cardboard crack" before, with good reason. As someone working for a tabletop gaming company who's primary product is randomized miniature figures used to play games, I also am WAY to close to this one to think objectively.

> If there's a CS gun/skin/whatever in a loot box, you can't just go out and buy that thing for money.

So, in Valve's games, this isn't true. Lootboxes are the only "first party" way to buy skins in CS: Go, but you can use the Steam marketplace to trade with other players.

I will stop using this specific game as an example. This particular dev might allow this, but many others don't which is a huge problem on the issue since these things are functioning as gambling for access to a service (the right to use a feature) instead of access to a commodity (that you can trade/sell).

I think the best example of a way to deal with acquired in game intems I can think of personally for something that didn't suck, was Diablo 3 when it first hit. If the game randomly dropped a high tier weapon, you could use it, trade it, or sell it for real money. The real money auction house was a great addition imo.

There are definite parallels between something like MtG and lootboxes, but I think the barrier for purchase is much lower with lootboxes. A physical product like MtG cards must be purchased at a store, which will have limited quantities. It requires effort and occasionally timing to actually obtain the items. Even in our modern world of online shopping, there is typically a wait time between the impulse to buy and the reward of receiving the items of at least 24 hours, often more.

With lootboxes, the payoff is immediate. The barrier between the impulse of someone with an addiction and the payoff is virtually non-existent. I think that makes a difference in the potential for addictive behavior that shouldn't be overlooked.

While I agree with you that loot machines are worse because they're always available and hyper-immediate, we know that gambling addiction is a thing, and CCG cards fit the pattern. I mean to play a slot machine, people used to have to travel all the way to casinos, convert their money to coins, and then play the slots. The addicts still did it.

The problem exists in all of them, we're just talking about the speed of delivery and how it makes somethings worse-bad instead of just bad.