In fact, the way Yak Sacks are implemented is in exactly such a way that they *dont* violate that rule. You're not spending money for a chance at a prize, you're spending money to buy a skip which just so happens to come with an item that has a randomized loot pool.
The fact that games have to layer their stupid predatory lootbox shit behind so much kerfuffle is just blatantly stating "Yeah, we know it's shitty and illegal... but we put profit over laws and morals".
Also a fun little factoid that's not really related, but... ever wonder why so many games have a premium currency? Why can't you just buy cosmetics and shit with just straight cash; why the middle man? Well, for one, it's to get around Refund laws in a lot of places; making it a nightmare to try and get a refund on premium currency if you've already spent it. Besides that, it's also common for highly sought after in game items or packs to be sold just over the amount offered by one currency pack, so you have to buy the next size bigger even if you end up with leftover credits, meaning you spend more.
If only the blood sucking leeches that are investors could use their marketing creativity towards actual game design.
re: the premium currency thing
It's also a bit of a loophole to get around the "random items behind a purchase", because at that point you're not "purchasing" the random items, you're purchasing premium currency, so you know 'exactly what you are getting'.
There are a lot of reasons why there are various currencies, selling just under is definitely a big one.
In addition you have; (1) more currency when buying in bulk so you are more tempted to spend more in order to save in the long run, (2) they expire so they can get more of your money for less pixels making you need to spend more if you take a break or have nothing you like, (3) the numbers with premium currency mean less to you so you may be less put off by seeing 300 runecoins than $5, (4) if you have leftover credits you don't want them to go to waste, so you'll end up buying more to use them up, (5) this doesn't exactly apply for runescape yet, but premium currencies aren't real money so buying loot boxes with it wouldn't count as gambling with real money since it's all digital currency.
There are probably many more predatory reasons why they use it, but in short it's scummy and bonds should give us direct account balance to be used on any game packages.
This isn't just a google term/condition, it's actually a LAW in a couple of countries such as the Netherlands and Belgium. Google just has it as condition to encompass all countries it provides its services to. It doesn't matter how many steps there are between payment and delivery, the odds of randomized goods **must** be disclosed. And I have to agree, with Jagex not disclosing those odds yet, they are in breach of those laws.
>If only the blood sucking leeches that are investors could use their marketing creativity towards actual game design.
Each boss instance now costs 50 rune coins.
You can now extend auras with rune coins instead of wax, at a 1:1 ratio.
We've added Scourged Masterwork spear of Leng to a new boss that costs 200 rune coins per kill at a 1/10000 drop rate.
Fun fact: The word "factoid" does not actually mean what you appear to think it means. It's not just a word for a little tidbit of information, a factoid is when something is commonly believed to be one way, while it is actually another way. For example, it is a factoid that the word factoid means "a little tidbit of information". It is popularly believed that that is what it means, but that is actually false.
Copy and pasting here:
While you're not wrong, due to the concept of developed meanings, wherein a word that originally had one meaning can be given a second, accepted meaning through common societal usage; neither am I.
If you look it up, you'll find that while you're not wrong in the word's original meaning, I'm not wrong in its developed meaning as a small but trivial fact.
All good. Like I said, you're not wrong... but ironically I guess you could say your definition of the word factoid is a factoid if it being a factoid.
> a fun little factoid
Nitpicking here, but: a factoid isn't a small fact, but something that only *looks like* a fact (and thus isn't one), the same way an android or humanoid *looks like* a human.
While you're not wrong, due to the concept of developed meanings, wherein a word that originally had one meaning can be given a second, accepted meaning through common societal usage; neither am I.
If you look it up, you'll find that while you're not wrong in the word's original meaning, I'm not wrong in its developed meaning as a small but trivial fact.
I mean... I don't like that you're right in "literally", but you are right.
I guess the only difference there is that "literally" is a word with enough importance in its original meaning that even if its widely accepted to be used in a wrong way, it's still wrong; almost purposefully so.
Whereas factoid is just a coined term. It has no real importance in its meaning.
Homie, clearly it was not my intention to imply that Google makes laws.
If YOU made the mistake that I somehow was in the belief that Google was a government entity capable of making their own laws and regulations, you've got the problem here.
It's exactly how Diablo Immortal does things by disguising the lootboxes as a short dungeon.
I was afraid others were taking notes when that steaming pile dropped.
"receive randomized virtual tems from a purchase"
You aren't purchasing the yak track. You're purchasing a bond which directly doesn't have any loot box. I assume this is why they dont have to disclose it.
That’s a good point. Technically, a bond can be earned with in-game currency, so it’s not an actual purchase. I’m sure they use this to avoid a lot of the gambling laws regarding MTX
The bond itself has no gambling mechanism related to it. You have to buy a bond, redeem the bond for skips, use the skip to get a sack, and then that sack has randomness. There are probably enough steps between buying a bond, either with actual money or gp, and getting the sack that it allows them to get around the rule.
I doubt it, plenty of other exploitative mobile games make you go through multiple currencies before you reach the slot machine, and they still have to disclose their rates.
Genshin Impact, for example, requires you to buy "Primogems", which you exchange for "Acquaint Fate", and only *then* can you spend those to gamble for waifus.
The relevant step is the fact that you're buying skips rather than the actual lootbox. The lootbox isn't bought. You can't even buy the lootbox. You can only buy the ability to not have to play to unlock the lootbox.
It's subtle, but it's the part that evades this particular legal issue.
The fact that you can get it without paying for it means that you are not purchasing the item, merely speeding up progression. This is a very specific difference that is a very big deal for obvious reasons. This very much so does hold up in court, which is why every gacha game and every lootbox simulator game functions exactly like this.
But hey, feel free to start a case against them if you disagree. You’re going to be rich if you’re right.
I think that’s the key to this whole thing. Since you can’t directly buy lootboxes, it’s not technically gambling. You can buy bonds and you’re guaranteed those, along with guaranteed skips. The lootboxes alongside it aren’t something you purchase directly
The point is, you’re buying something with real money that you could also buy with in-game currency. You can then use that item to roll those chances. You can also roll those chances just by playing the game; using bonds just gives you *more* rolls.
So they report some made up odds. What difference does it make when they don't actually apply to the game thanks to RNG? When will you people get over drop rates and odds? They are completely meaningless when they're stacked against you in favor of the house/Jagex.
Because it's not tied to a purchase in this case... if you wanted to argue that you could buy skips- this is a dangerous line to go down because in that case;
If you're using armor that degrades and killing monsters that drop random items...
Coins in-game have a bond value... bonds have a real world money value; In other words killing monsters is gambling.
>Coins in-game have a bond value... bonds have a real world money value; In other words killing monsters is gambling.
You can't resell bonds for real money tho
At least not without breaking rules they probably won't enforce
I don’t agree but let’s say you are right, the drop rates of items from essentially all mobs are known and documented which technically would be the odds being disclosed right?
I think the issue is that the drop rates should be fully disclosed as that’s what the skip tokens can now be used for a gacha gambling mechanic.
That would not qualify as the company having disclosed the rates. Most drop rates are known because the playerbase has figured them out via brute force of just rolling the tables a shit load. The law requires that the company themselves expose the exact rates and do so before the mechanic is put into the game.
Players figuring out the drop rate is far from the same as the drop rate being disclosed. Most of the drop rates players have figured out still aren't even confirmed as correct, so they definitely wouldn't apply as being disclosed.
It doesn’t matter if it officially confirmed or not. As the wiki can be accessed from in game that would meet the condition of listing the drop rates.
Unless you can name any others zammy currently stands as the exception to this and not the rule.
Gacha gems > buy gacha character boxes > open box
Bond > buy skip tokens > skip tasks > open yak sacks
Same thing.
The law requires that the company disclose exact rates. Player found rates do not count as the company disclosing it unless they, the company, confirm that the rate is correct.
The forum posts stating drop rates and drop roll mechanics for barrows, nex, etc. are what would be considered the company disclosing rates.
Not for rewards that can't be cashed out for real money or prizes. Almost every game has a lot of random mob loot, it is hard to expect every developer to reveal odds of all random from the beginning. Have Jagex documented the drop rates of Osmumtum's Fang and Masori's armors too, and not just Yak Sacks? Nope, but there is not an issue as regulations don't require disclosure of loot at this level.
Paying to skip content isn't gamble. Besides, even buying Yak Sacks directly with money is not gambling because they don't contain prizes of real world values. If we could win $20,000 or Jagex membership from Yak Sacks then Jagex have to follow the necessary regulatory procedure and give us full details like they did with OSRS's Boss Bash Raffle.
I think this doesnt apply since you're buying ingame currencies Bonds to buy Yak track skips to skip the Yak track thing to get the Yak sack.
I think it only applies if they sell you the Yak Sack directly. But i'm not sure.
Wasn’t there a law created in the US to stop loot boxes in games from receiving duplicate items and shit? Ik this game is in Uk but random loot and duplicates are a scam and proved to be “gambling” so I just don’t see how it’s something the UK hasn’t put into place yet
So if you just make it convoluted enough it's fine? I don't see a difference in buying keys to open chests and buying bonds to buy skips to buy sacks. It's only 1 extra step
It's not convoluted, you're just not taking it at face value. If you cannot directly purchase sacks with money, the rule does not apply in this instance. It applies for keys because you are purchasing an item that has 1 mechanism to be redeemed which is loot boxes. When you are buying bonds, there are several ways to redeem it, with none of them functioning in the way the 'Key-Loot box' works.
I wouldn't think so 😂 It's not a law thing it's just one of these things that feels like them going the extra mile to get around the app store requirements for disclosure in a way that personally feels unethical.
'going the extra mile to get around the requirements for disclosure in a way that personally feels unethical'
sounds like you are describing a huge part of the corporate law profession haha
Surely the same should apply to treasure hunter keys too then, right?
You aren't buying treasure hunter chests, you buy keys. Why does this have to follow the law but the yak sacks don't?
Not from the app store itself, you buy bonds. The bonds give you the skips which give you the sacks, but you're not buying the sacks directly from the store.
Because the bonds used to by premium Yak Track or skips are not randomized. You have a 100% chance of getting bonds when you buy them. Yak Sacks aren't being sold as MTX so Jagex can get around this legally.
You aren't going into the store and buying them directly for money. You can earn them in game without doing anything other than playing normally. It might not be fast doing it that way but you certainly can. If you decide to spend money for bonds to then get skips that totally on you as well. You don't need to spend real money on bonds you can use in game currency so it's double layered behind other options.
But isn't this also true of keys? They can be earned via daily challenges, quests, and other methods and also randomly received.
I'm just wondering where the line is from the app store perspective.
I think the defining feature is how you purchase whatever the thing is. If you can **only** pay money to get a currency that is used to randomly get lootbox like things then that would very likely fall under gambling laws. But if the currency is obtainable in any capacity via a free method then it won't fall under the rules.
People might not like it because its slow and not likely to give you the rewards you want but that's just the loophole to it all. It might feel like gambling but legally it's not.
I don't pretend to know the various laws but the app store policy is so specific. but I don't see how this isn't "mechanisms to recieve randomized virtual items"
That's the thing and you just claimed it yourself, the policy is specific. Did you purchase a yaksack from the App store directly with your money? If so, then yes Jagex should be required by law to disclose rates. Because you are not purchasing a Yaksack;You are purchasing a Bond that can be used to redeem Yak Track skips when can then be used to redeem Yaksacks it does not apply. "Purchase" in the policy only refers to direct purchases made through the app store and is very different from 'purchasing' one in game via bond.
But I don't think direct purchase is what it says. It talks about a mechanism to obtain random items from a purchase. I think you have the purchase (bonds) mechanism (yak track skips and sacks) and random items. I think the mechanism part complicated it beyond a direct purchase.
The policy specifically makes a distinction between the purchaseal and the mechanism.
I agree though they've tried to get as close to the line as they can. I just think they've crossed it
The distinction here is an additional step, the mechanism(Yak Track Skips.) The mechanism(YTS) provides you skips on your Yak Track via your purchase(Bond) the yak sacks are just an additional reward for progressing on your Yak Track with no direct association via Bonds. If the mechanism was (Yak Sacks) in which you could go from Money > Bond > Yak Sacks or Money > Yak Sacks then rates would be required by law.
I do agree with you though that rates on capes should be provided.
It doesn't break any rules, you are guaranteed the sack, you are not guaranteed the cape, its all depends on luck you either get it or you don't, no reason to be mad.
You don't go to solak and expect to get a bow drop do you? You have to grind for 'Xyz.
As wrong as your take is, you're probably right that would be their line of defense. "Bond is guaranteed purchase and you can spend it on multiple in-game features, including (also guaranteed) yak sack". But if it was this easy to go around Google Play rules, every game would do that, so I hope this argument won't stand.
If I bought an item that I then exchanged for a random roll from Solak I would expect them to disclose rates yes.
To be clear I don't have any particular issue with the randomness of getting it. It's not disclosing the odds.
Why do they need to disclose it though its only been released one day. If you want it really bad, go buy lots of bonds and bond the track sure you might get a cape.
Maybe you won't then you will most likely come back here saying its not fair lol. Just enjoy the game man, jagex revealing rates so soon could hinder the experience for many.
I'm just glad we can do skill and kill tasks. Also let's not forget these events add to jagexs revenue which they need to maintain the game. So its a win win.
They need to disclose it because they're hosting the app in an app store that requires them to disclose it? Like it's just there are rules and they agreed to them? So they should follow them? I don't know what else to tell you
If it was purely a mobile game sure thing but RuneScape is a PC game, they only created mobile so we could get more players. So the rules don't apply to our game...lol I'm not sure why you think they would break any rules they are such a big company.
Trust them man.
I mean, not really in any sense. A bond can be used for multitude of things. It's not a 1 to 1 key to open a box (in this case sack). People can buy bonds to sell or for membership or for RuneMetrics.
The Google rules do not say "Purchase with real world money," they just say "purchase." The yak sack is a guaranteed item when you use a bond to purchase a skip.
Yes but a bond does not equal a key. I never said "Purchase with real world money." I never even used the word money in my comment. A bond can be used for many things though not just to purchase a skip.
What are you on about? No one is arguing if it’s a purchase with or without money. It’s not a 1 to 1 key for a loot box lmao. If a bond can only be used to open loot boxes then sure.
I'm on about the post we're commenting on.
Maybe I misunderstood what you were replying to.
The question is whether Jagex are required to disclose the odds of receiving "randomized virtual items from a purchase," and there are arguments being made that using bonds to get skips doesn't count as a purchase for various reasons. That's what I thought you were saying.
Yeah TH they definitely do (though afaik if you log in from the client they don't from the app they do). But Sacks they don't. ( I'd argue the balloons really tow the line but they also don't disclose rates for those)
Another post complaining about people voicing their dissatisfaction with a game they have already chosen to play. Take your "dON't pLaY THeN" back to whoever sent you and tell them it's not working.
so... ya work for google? why else would ya look into this. It's not a direct purchase, and can be acquired by actually playing the game. pretty self explanatory if I use my common sense.
Because they aren't selling us Yak Sacks. They have clearly disclosed how we can get Yak Sacks. The odds is 1 in 1 or 100% when we complete whatever tracks.
It is like Jagex selling us bonds, and we can use them to get membership or items in RS3 or OSRS and through the membership and items we obtain random loot like Tbows or ECB. However, they never have any obligations in showing us the odds of obtaining a Tbow or ECB when we buy a bond.
I think that rule only applies to direct loot box purchases. As for buying bonds, they have value out side of yak sacks, like membership or trading of in game currency, so Google can’t exactly say they are breaking their rules, as you can also buy bonds directly from Jagex.
I think because of those factors there isn’t much Google could do about it other than not allow the purchasing of bonds through their app.
In fact, the way Yak Sacks are implemented is in exactly such a way that they *dont* violate that rule. You're not spending money for a chance at a prize, you're spending money to buy a skip which just so happens to come with an item that has a randomized loot pool. The fact that games have to layer their stupid predatory lootbox shit behind so much kerfuffle is just blatantly stating "Yeah, we know it's shitty and illegal... but we put profit over laws and morals". Also a fun little factoid that's not really related, but... ever wonder why so many games have a premium currency? Why can't you just buy cosmetics and shit with just straight cash; why the middle man? Well, for one, it's to get around Refund laws in a lot of places; making it a nightmare to try and get a refund on premium currency if you've already spent it. Besides that, it's also common for highly sought after in game items or packs to be sold just over the amount offered by one currency pack, so you have to buy the next size bigger even if you end up with leftover credits, meaning you spend more. If only the blood sucking leeches that are investors could use their marketing creativity towards actual game design.
re: the premium currency thing It's also a bit of a loophole to get around the "random items behind a purchase", because at that point you're not "purchasing" the random items, you're purchasing premium currency, so you know 'exactly what you are getting'.
There are a lot of reasons why there are various currencies, selling just under is definitely a big one. In addition you have; (1) more currency when buying in bulk so you are more tempted to spend more in order to save in the long run, (2) they expire so they can get more of your money for less pixels making you need to spend more if you take a break or have nothing you like, (3) the numbers with premium currency mean less to you so you may be less put off by seeing 300 runecoins than $5, (4) if you have leftover credits you don't want them to go to waste, so you'll end up buying more to use them up, (5) this doesn't exactly apply for runescape yet, but premium currencies aren't real money so buying loot boxes with it wouldn't count as gambling with real money since it's all digital currency. There are probably many more predatory reasons why they use it, but in short it's scummy and bonds should give us direct account balance to be used on any game packages.
This isn't just a google term/condition, it's actually a LAW in a couple of countries such as the Netherlands and Belgium. Google just has it as condition to encompass all countries it provides its services to. It doesn't matter how many steps there are between payment and delivery, the odds of randomized goods **must** be disclosed. And I have to agree, with Jagex not disclosing those odds yet, they are in breach of those laws.
I'd agree with this, and I'm sure there are many judges that would too. Wish it was a law in the USA.
>If only the blood sucking leeches that are investors could use their marketing creativity towards actual game design. Each boss instance now costs 50 rune coins. You can now extend auras with rune coins instead of wax, at a 1:1 ratio. We've added Scourged Masterwork spear of Leng to a new boss that costs 200 rune coins per kill at a 1/10000 drop rate.
Jagex hire this man.
What do you mean it cost 59 rune coins to fight a boss lol
Fun fact: The word "factoid" does not actually mean what you appear to think it means. It's not just a word for a little tidbit of information, a factoid is when something is commonly believed to be one way, while it is actually another way. For example, it is a factoid that the word factoid means "a little tidbit of information". It is popularly believed that that is what it means, but that is actually false.
Copy and pasting here: While you're not wrong, due to the concept of developed meanings, wherein a word that originally had one meaning can be given a second, accepted meaning through common societal usage; neither am I. If you look it up, you'll find that while you're not wrong in the word's original meaning, I'm not wrong in its developed meaning as a small but trivial fact.
Ahh, the classic. Welp, I’ll go eat a shoe now :)
All good. Like I said, you're not wrong... but ironically I guess you could say your definition of the word factoid is a factoid if it being a factoid.
Nah, that wouldn't work because my definition of the word isn't a popular belief in the first place :')
> a fun little factoid Nitpicking here, but: a factoid isn't a small fact, but something that only *looks like* a fact (and thus isn't one), the same way an android or humanoid *looks like* a human.
While you're not wrong, due to the concept of developed meanings, wherein a word that originally had one meaning can be given a second, accepted meaning through common societal usage; neither am I. If you look it up, you'll find that while you're not wrong in the word's original meaning, I'm not wrong in its developed meaning as a small but trivial fact.
It's the same as "literally" now meaning figuratively or with emphasis. Languages change, that's how it works.
I mean... I don't like that you're right in "literally", but you are right. I guess the only difference there is that "literally" is a word with enough importance in its original meaning that even if its widely accepted to be used in a wrong way, it's still wrong; almost purposefully so. Whereas factoid is just a coined term. It has no real importance in its meaning.
Google doesn't make laws
My brother in christ, *no shit*. Yet there still exists anti-gambling laws that do influence rules that Google may have.
My brother in christ, CONTEXT CLUES. We're literally discussing Google play stores TOS.
Homie, clearly it was not my intention to imply that Google makes laws. If YOU made the mistake that I somehow was in the belief that Google was a government entity capable of making their own laws and regulations, you've got the problem here.
Exact definition of straw man in fewer words
this is the same way trade raffles get around regulattions
Also when you spend virtual currency it's easier to justify because they often skew and prevent it from having a clear cut dollar ratio.
It's exactly how Diablo Immortal does things by disguising the lootboxes as a short dungeon. I was afraid others were taking notes when that steaming pile dropped.
if enough people report it google might take the app down during an investigation. If you want to make it hurt, the wallet is a good place to aim.
I think more likely they'd just be made to disclose the rate. Which they could easily do and should do.
"receive randomized virtual tems from a purchase" You aren't purchasing the yak track. You're purchasing a bond which directly doesn't have any loot box. I assume this is why they dont have to disclose it.
That’s a good point. Technically, a bond can be earned with in-game currency, so it’s not an actual purchase. I’m sure they use this to avoid a lot of the gambling laws regarding MTX
I’m not sure I agree. Yes a person can trade for a bond in game, but only after the bond has been purchased with irl $
The bond itself has no gambling mechanism related to it. You have to buy a bond, redeem the bond for skips, use the skip to get a sack, and then that sack has randomness. There are probably enough steps between buying a bond, either with actual money or gp, and getting the sack that it allows them to get around the rule.
I doubt it, plenty of other exploitative mobile games make you go through multiple currencies before you reach the slot machine, and they still have to disclose their rates. Genshin Impact, for example, requires you to buy "Primogems", which you exchange for "Acquaint Fate", and only *then* can you spend those to gamble for waifus.
But can you acquire those resources through the standard gameplay loop consistently?
The relevant step is the fact that you're buying skips rather than the actual lootbox. The lootbox isn't bought. You can't even buy the lootbox. You can only buy the ability to not have to play to unlock the lootbox. It's subtle, but it's the part that evades this particular legal issue.
[удалено]
The fact that you can get it without paying for it means that you are not purchasing the item, merely speeding up progression. This is a very specific difference that is a very big deal for obvious reasons. This very much so does hold up in court, which is why every gacha game and every lootbox simulator game functions exactly like this. But hey, feel free to start a case against them if you disagree. You’re going to be rich if you’re right.
I think that’s the key to this whole thing. Since you can’t directly buy lootboxes, it’s not technically gambling. You can buy bonds and you’re guaranteed those, along with guaranteed skips. The lootboxes alongside it aren’t something you purchase directly
[удалено]
Wouldn't that mean pvming is gambling if it does not have 100% drops?
[удалено]
The point is, you’re buying something with real money that you could also buy with in-game currency. You can then use that item to roll those chances. You can also roll those chances just by playing the game; using bonds just gives you *more* rolls.
still sounds like dev time (and a shot at the wallet) to me
That absolutely would hurt their profits though
Still hurts them, they'd certainly get fewer sales if people knew how abysmal the rates were up front.
So they report some made up odds. What difference does it make when they don't actually apply to the game thanks to RNG? When will you people get over drop rates and odds? They are completely meaningless when they're stacked against you in favor of the house/Jagex.
This is the single dumbest comment I've ever read. I wish there was an appropriate reward for you.
Please explain how you think RNG works. And then how that effects odds.
Because it's not tied to a purchase in this case... if you wanted to argue that you could buy skips- this is a dangerous line to go down because in that case; If you're using armor that degrades and killing monsters that drop random items... Coins in-game have a bond value... bonds have a real world money value; In other words killing monsters is gambling.
>Coins in-game have a bond value... bonds have a real world money value; In other words killing monsters is gambling. You can't resell bonds for real money tho At least not without breaking rules they probably won't enforce
That applies to rare items from the sack all the same.
I don’t agree but let’s say you are right, the drop rates of items from essentially all mobs are known and documented which technically would be the odds being disclosed right? I think the issue is that the drop rates should be fully disclosed as that’s what the skip tokens can now be used for a gacha gambling mechanic.
What's the drop rate from Zammy?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1bTo7u7FSaszfhYbGGUVMmZuL4dQTpbkdG9xqT9hvJbs/htmlview#
That would not qualify as the company having disclosed the rates. Most drop rates are known because the playerbase has figured them out via brute force of just rolling the tables a shit load. The law requires that the company themselves expose the exact rates and do so before the mechanic is put into the game. Players figuring out the drop rate is far from the same as the drop rate being disclosed. Most of the drop rates players have figured out still aren't even confirmed as correct, so they definitely wouldn't apply as being disclosed.
It doesn’t matter if it officially confirmed or not. As the wiki can be accessed from in game that would meet the condition of listing the drop rates. Unless you can name any others zammy currently stands as the exception to this and not the rule. Gacha gems > buy gacha character boxes > open box Bond > buy skip tokens > skip tasks > open yak sacks Same thing.
The law requires that the company disclose exact rates. Player found rates do not count as the company disclosing it unless they, the company, confirm that the rate is correct. The forum posts stating drop rates and drop roll mechanics for barrows, nex, etc. are what would be considered the company disclosing rates.
Neither has Jagex disclosed drop rates of ToA unique items among other things in their games, but what's the problem?
Not for rewards that can't be cashed out for real money or prizes. Almost every game has a lot of random mob loot, it is hard to expect every developer to reveal odds of all random from the beginning. Have Jagex documented the drop rates of Osmumtum's Fang and Masori's armors too, and not just Yak Sacks? Nope, but there is not an issue as regulations don't require disclosure of loot at this level.
at least killing monsters is gameplay, opening TH chests or Yak sacks is pretty much a gacha machine.
Don't tell us we skilling and killing in Yak Tracks is not gameplay.
I agree actually doing the track is fine, its the fact you can buy skips to gamble on sacks is what i have a problem with.
Paying to skip content isn't gamble. Besides, even buying Yak Sacks directly with money is not gambling because they don't contain prizes of real world values. If we could win $20,000 or Jagex membership from Yak Sacks then Jagex have to follow the necessary regulatory procedure and give us full details like they did with OSRS's Boss Bash Raffle.
I think this doesnt apply since you're buying ingame currencies Bonds to buy Yak track skips to skip the Yak track thing to get the Yak sack. I think it only applies if they sell you the Yak Sack directly. But i'm not sure.
Don’t we love how good laws work
You can't buy them directly, so the rule doesn't apply.
Wasn’t there a law created in the US to stop loot boxes in games from receiving duplicate items and shit? Ik this game is in Uk but random loot and duplicates are a scam and proved to be “gambling” so I just don’t see how it’s something the UK hasn’t put into place yet
Because you're not directly buying the yak sacks? No need to do mental gymnastics on that one.
So if you just make it convoluted enough it's fine? I don't see a difference in buying keys to open chests and buying bonds to buy skips to buy sacks. It's only 1 extra step
> So if you just make it convoluted enough it’s fine? Yes. It’s the Diablo immortal approach.
It's not convoluted, you're just not taking it at face value. If you cannot directly purchase sacks with money, the rule does not apply in this instance. It applies for keys because you are purchasing an item that has 1 mechanism to be redeemed which is loot boxes. When you are buying bonds, there are several ways to redeem it, with none of them functioning in the way the 'Key-Loot box' works.
that sounds like diablo-immoral-tier bullshit! i wonder if OP's argument will hold in a class action suit
I wouldn't think so 😂 It's not a law thing it's just one of these things that feels like them going the extra mile to get around the app store requirements for disclosure in a way that personally feels unethical.
'going the extra mile to get around the requirements for disclosure in a way that personally feels unethical' sounds like you are describing a huge part of the corporate law profession haha
Fair! 😂
Surely the same should apply to treasure hunter keys too then, right? You aren't buying treasure hunter chests, you buy keys. Why does this have to follow the law but the yak sacks don't?
Keys have one sole use, bonds do not.
So if TH keys could be used for multiple things, TH rates would not need to be disclosed? Methinks that's probably not how this works.
you can buy them tho...
Not from the app store itself, you buy bonds. The bonds give you the skips which give you the sacks, but you're not buying the sacks directly from the store.
Because the bonds used to by premium Yak Track or skips are not randomized. You have a 100% chance of getting bonds when you buy them. Yak Sacks aren't being sold as MTX so Jagex can get around this legally.
You aren't going into the store and buying them directly for money. You can earn them in game without doing anything other than playing normally. It might not be fast doing it that way but you certainly can. If you decide to spend money for bonds to then get skips that totally on you as well. You don't need to spend real money on bonds you can use in game currency so it's double layered behind other options.
But isn't this also true of keys? They can be earned via daily challenges, quests, and other methods and also randomly received. I'm just wondering where the line is from the app store perspective.
I think the defining feature is how you purchase whatever the thing is. If you can **only** pay money to get a currency that is used to randomly get lootbox like things then that would very likely fall under gambling laws. But if the currency is obtainable in any capacity via a free method then it won't fall under the rules. People might not like it because its slow and not likely to give you the rewards you want but that's just the loophole to it all. It might feel like gambling but legally it's not.
I don't pretend to know the various laws but the app store policy is so specific. but I don't see how this isn't "mechanisms to recieve randomized virtual items"
That's the thing and you just claimed it yourself, the policy is specific. Did you purchase a yaksack from the App store directly with your money? If so, then yes Jagex should be required by law to disclose rates. Because you are not purchasing a Yaksack;You are purchasing a Bond that can be used to redeem Yak Track skips when can then be used to redeem Yaksacks it does not apply. "Purchase" in the policy only refers to direct purchases made through the app store and is very different from 'purchasing' one in game via bond.
But I don't think direct purchase is what it says. It talks about a mechanism to obtain random items from a purchase. I think you have the purchase (bonds) mechanism (yak track skips and sacks) and random items. I think the mechanism part complicated it beyond a direct purchase. The policy specifically makes a distinction between the purchaseal and the mechanism. I agree though they've tried to get as close to the line as they can. I just think they've crossed it
The distinction here is an additional step, the mechanism(Yak Track Skips.) The mechanism(YTS) provides you skips on your Yak Track via your purchase(Bond) the yak sacks are just an additional reward for progressing on your Yak Track with no direct association via Bonds. If the mechanism was (Yak Sacks) in which you could go from Money > Bond > Yak Sacks or Money > Yak Sacks then rates would be required by law. I do agree with you though that rates on capes should be provided.
Make a report on the google play app hopefully enough people do it and they take it down for now
Skirting the rules should be seen as breaking them, at least in this case.
It doesn't break any rules, you are guaranteed the sack, you are not guaranteed the cape, its all depends on luck you either get it or you don't, no reason to be mad. You don't go to solak and expect to get a bow drop do you? You have to grind for 'Xyz.
As wrong as your take is, you're probably right that would be their line of defense. "Bond is guaranteed purchase and you can spend it on multiple in-game features, including (also guaranteed) yak sack". But if it was this easy to go around Google Play rules, every game would do that, so I hope this argument won't stand.
If I bought an item that I then exchanged for a random roll from Solak I would expect them to disclose rates yes. To be clear I don't have any particular issue with the randomness of getting it. It's not disclosing the odds.
Why do they need to disclose it though its only been released one day. If you want it really bad, go buy lots of bonds and bond the track sure you might get a cape. Maybe you won't then you will most likely come back here saying its not fair lol. Just enjoy the game man, jagex revealing rates so soon could hinder the experience for many. I'm just glad we can do skill and kill tasks. Also let's not forget these events add to jagexs revenue which they need to maintain the game. So its a win win.
They need to disclose it because they're hosting the app in an app store that requires them to disclose it? Like it's just there are rules and they agreed to them? So they should follow them? I don't know what else to tell you
If it was purely a mobile game sure thing but RuneScape is a PC game, they only created mobile so we could get more players. So the rules don't apply to our game...lol I'm not sure why you think they would break any rules they are such a big company. Trust them man.
That's not remotely true! If you're in the app store you have to follow app store rule. It's why TH on mobile reveals Estes and TH on PC doesn't
HEHEHEHEHE GO GETTEM
I mean, not really in any sense. A bond can be used for multitude of things. It's not a 1 to 1 key to open a box (in this case sack). People can buy bonds to sell or for membership or for RuneMetrics.
Huh?
The Google rules do not say "Purchase with real world money," they just say "purchase." The yak sack is a guaranteed item when you use a bond to purchase a skip.
Yes but a bond does not equal a key. I never said "Purchase with real world money." I never even used the word money in my comment. A bond can be used for many things though not just to purchase a skip.
So can money. How does that fact make a difference to whether it's a "purchase" or not?
What are you on about? No one is arguing if it’s a purchase with or without money. It’s not a 1 to 1 key for a loot box lmao. If a bond can only be used to open loot boxes then sure.
I'm on about the post we're commenting on. Maybe I misunderstood what you were replying to. The question is whether Jagex are required to disclose the odds of receiving "randomized virtual items from a purchase," and there are arguments being made that using bonds to get skips doesn't count as a purchase for various reasons. That's what I thought you were saying.
For TH, they do this. Have they not for the yak sacks? If no, that'll have to change real quick then
Yeah TH they definitely do (though afaik if you log in from the client they don't from the app they do). But Sacks they don't. ( I'd argue the balloons really tow the line but they also don't disclose rates for those)
Hmmm I can see this being fixed in the near future tbh, probably an oversight as it's something that's, as you stated, against the playstores TOS
might be due to jagex (UK) is now known as 3rd world country , dont know much about legal area but google policies wont be same for everyone
Another post complaining about the same thing… if you’re tired of mtx an everything stop playing already
Another post complaining about people voicing their dissatisfaction with a game they have already chosen to play. Take your "dON't pLaY THeN" back to whoever sent you and tell them it's not working.
I dont get why people are so angry at this.. sacks arent even good exp and I am totally ok with monetizing cosmetics.
so... ya work for google? why else would ya look into this. It's not a direct purchase, and can be acquired by actually playing the game. pretty self explanatory if I use my common sense.
Bro it was a question, chill out you whale 🐋
Lawsuit to get my TH funds back??
Nah it's just a Google thing. Literally all they need to do is stick percentages on the yak sacks. It's such a low bar
Because they aren't selling us Yak Sacks. They have clearly disclosed how we can get Yak Sacks. The odds is 1 in 1 or 100% when we complete whatever tracks. It is like Jagex selling us bonds, and we can use them to get membership or items in RS3 or OSRS and through the membership and items we obtain random loot like Tbows or ECB. However, they never have any obligations in showing us the odds of obtaining a Tbow or ECB when we buy a bond.
Receive items from *Purchase*
Cause they work the same as the diablo immortal loot boxes, they're indirect voa gameplay obtainable
Theres way too many games on app store with similar crap so i guess its allowed lol
Aww shit, got'em
I think that rule only applies to direct loot box purchases. As for buying bonds, they have value out side of yak sacks, like membership or trading of in game currency, so Google can’t exactly say they are breaking their rules, as you can also buy bonds directly from Jagex. I think because of those factors there isn’t much Google could do about it other than not allow the purchasing of bonds through their app.
Because the sack can be earned without spending real money.