I find the sentence "Loot boxes derive from both booster packs of collectible trading cards,[20] which originated in 1886 as promotional items inside packs of cigarettes,[21] and randomised loot drop systems from earlier video games." problematic in terms of sourcing. It has a lot of WP:SYNTH going on. No source directly supports this claim -- that loot boxes derive from booster packs or that loot boxes derive from earlier video game drop systems, or that booster packs are specifically from CCGs or that trading cards originated from cigarette packs. Even the first part is a fairly big leap from "think of this system as like trading card booster packs," to "Loot boxes derive from both booster packs". They probably have close ties, but it's up to a reliable source to say this directly and draw any sort of conclusions. At best, we could say "Loot boxes can be thought of as trading card booster packs" from the first source. And there's nothing we can say from the second without WP:SYNTH, because it says nothing about video games, loot boxes or booster packs. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 13:19, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
We now have the unreliable sources template without any unreliable sources flagged. -- Tom Edwards ( talk) 12:21, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
A couple points. First, per WP:LEDE, the lede does not need citations if all the points are sourced in the body of the article, which they are. Second, the point about some Asian countries regulating loot boxes is true and sourced: China requires loot box distribution stats to be public (a type of regulation), Japan bans the use of "collect commons to put together a rare", and the other two countries mention tie in loot boxes and other issues into whether these game systems overall are types of gambling. Its not saying loot boxes are illegal, just that video game companies in those countries have to conform to certain laws. The other parts of the lede are also sourced to the body via the criticism section. -- MASEM ( t) 13:41, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
I think this section has problems.
Where it talks about Overwatch it reads like a puff piece for Blizzard. The quote from Mike Morhaime is worth keeping but the rest of it should go in my opinion. This is an article about loot boxes, not the items they give out or how any one specific company responded to customer complaints.
Where it talks about Battlefront it digresses into a discussion of pay-to-win before becoming a chronology which belongs in the History section. The debacle is definitely worth documenting, but only from the perspective of the loot boxes themselves and the responses to them from European governments. Tom Edwards ( talk) 18:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
[1] has some useful quotes re: OW's system czar 14:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
I've created Category:Gacha games, and then found out we have Category:Video games containing loot boxes. I am not sure if those should or shouldn't be merged, and whether gacha games and loot box articles should be mrged as well. Thoughts? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:24, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
If they're considered different enough to not merge, why is the language in the article "also known as gacha"? There are similarities, but they're most definitely not synonyms. Desirsar ( talk) 18:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
“gacha” isn’t just any loot - it emphasizes collectibles; completing a collection. Loot boxes are a broader concept. And as mentioned, different histories. Not appropriate to merge. ToolmakerSteve ( talk) 18:42, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
The entire section praises the system, yet two of the first sources directly criticize the system for still being a form of gambling and still possibly taking away the joy of the game. It might still be one of the better ones, but "is considered a harmless use of loot boxes" is far too generous given two sources used for the first sentence criticize it. Prinsgezinde ( talk) 13:09, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Regarding
hyphenation. "Loot box" is a term, it doesn't form a compound adjective, so it shouldn't be hyphenated in cases like "loot box system". That's like hyphenating "video game" in "video game development". Unless I am misunderstanding something here? —
HELLKNOWZ ▎
TALK
19:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
@ Masem:. What's this "video game microtransaction" article you're referring to in your revert? I see no such page linked to in the article body or the lead.
I'm also confused as to what you mean by too many "micro-" aspects. There isn't a single word with "micro" in it in the lead.
IMO it's essential to mention microtransactions in the lead, since loot boxes are often considered to be a major subclass of them, and understanding the concept is central to what a loot box is. The article body should probably also do a better job of explaining the connection.
If the wording was not ideal, it should be fixed instead of the whole thing being reverted. -- Veikk0.ma 06:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
The article which is cited and attributed to the statement: " The first appearances of loot boxes in these regions was with Team Fortress 2 in September 2010, when Valve added the ability to earn random "crates" to be opened with purchased keys." is attributed to the source [2] which only seems to mention team fortress in the context: "The list of "games with loot boxes" is painfully long—and gets longer if we get into the history of the practice, which would have to include Team Fortress 2, huge Eastern MMOs, and Japan's wave of "Gacha" smartphone games." And that's it. It doesn't seem to support a single claim in that sentence and EA already had Ultimate team, which is more or less a loot box (it's not in box form) rolling for like 3 years at that point.-- 222.109.164.154 ( talk) 03:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
I find the sentence "Loot boxes derive from both booster packs of collectible trading cards,[20] which originated in 1886 as promotional items inside packs of cigarettes,[21] and randomised loot drop systems from earlier video games." problematic in terms of sourcing. It has a lot of WP:SYNTH going on. No source directly supports this claim -- that loot boxes derive from booster packs or that loot boxes derive from earlier video game drop systems, or that booster packs are specifically from CCGs or that trading cards originated from cigarette packs. Even the first part is a fairly big leap from "think of this system as like trading card booster packs," to "Loot boxes derive from both booster packs". They probably have close ties, but it's up to a reliable source to say this directly and draw any sort of conclusions. At best, we could say "Loot boxes can be thought of as trading card booster packs" from the first source. And there's nothing we can say from the second without WP:SYNTH, because it says nothing about video games, loot boxes or booster packs. — HELLKNOWZ ▎ TALK 13:19, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
We now have the unreliable sources template without any unreliable sources flagged. -- Tom Edwards ( talk) 12:21, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
A couple points. First, per WP:LEDE, the lede does not need citations if all the points are sourced in the body of the article, which they are. Second, the point about some Asian countries regulating loot boxes is true and sourced: China requires loot box distribution stats to be public (a type of regulation), Japan bans the use of "collect commons to put together a rare", and the other two countries mention tie in loot boxes and other issues into whether these game systems overall are types of gambling. Its not saying loot boxes are illegal, just that video game companies in those countries have to conform to certain laws. The other parts of the lede are also sourced to the body via the criticism section. -- MASEM ( t) 13:41, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
I think this section has problems.
Where it talks about Overwatch it reads like a puff piece for Blizzard. The quote from Mike Morhaime is worth keeping but the rest of it should go in my opinion. This is an article about loot boxes, not the items they give out or how any one specific company responded to customer complaints.
Where it talks about Battlefront it digresses into a discussion of pay-to-win before becoming a chronology which belongs in the History section. The debacle is definitely worth documenting, but only from the perspective of the loot boxes themselves and the responses to them from European governments. Tom Edwards ( talk) 18:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
[1] has some useful quotes re: OW's system czar 14:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
I've created Category:Gacha games, and then found out we have Category:Video games containing loot boxes. I am not sure if those should or shouldn't be merged, and whether gacha games and loot box articles should be mrged as well. Thoughts? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:24, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
If they're considered different enough to not merge, why is the language in the article "also known as gacha"? There are similarities, but they're most definitely not synonyms. Desirsar ( talk) 18:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
“gacha” isn’t just any loot - it emphasizes collectibles; completing a collection. Loot boxes are a broader concept. And as mentioned, different histories. Not appropriate to merge. ToolmakerSteve ( talk) 18:42, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
The entire section praises the system, yet two of the first sources directly criticize the system for still being a form of gambling and still possibly taking away the joy of the game. It might still be one of the better ones, but "is considered a harmless use of loot boxes" is far too generous given two sources used for the first sentence criticize it. Prinsgezinde ( talk) 13:09, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Regarding
hyphenation. "Loot box" is a term, it doesn't form a compound adjective, so it shouldn't be hyphenated in cases like "loot box system". That's like hyphenating "video game" in "video game development". Unless I am misunderstanding something here? —
HELLKNOWZ ▎
TALK
19:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
@ Masem:. What's this "video game microtransaction" article you're referring to in your revert? I see no such page linked to in the article body or the lead.
I'm also confused as to what you mean by too many "micro-" aspects. There isn't a single word with "micro" in it in the lead.
IMO it's essential to mention microtransactions in the lead, since loot boxes are often considered to be a major subclass of them, and understanding the concept is central to what a loot box is. The article body should probably also do a better job of explaining the connection.
If the wording was not ideal, it should be fixed instead of the whole thing being reverted. -- Veikk0.ma 06:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
The article which is cited and attributed to the statement: " The first appearances of loot boxes in these regions was with Team Fortress 2 in September 2010, when Valve added the ability to earn random "crates" to be opened with purchased keys." is attributed to the source [2] which only seems to mention team fortress in the context: "The list of "games with loot boxes" is painfully long—and gets longer if we get into the history of the practice, which would have to include Team Fortress 2, huge Eastern MMOs, and Japan's wave of "Gacha" smartphone games." And that's it. It doesn't seem to support a single claim in that sentence and EA already had Ultimate team, which is more or less a loot box (it's not in box form) rolling for like 3 years at that point.-- 222.109.164.154 ( talk) 03:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)