TLDR: Points are boiled down at the bottom, but I encourage you to ready the body.
The Right to Make Money
No one is arguing against any individual or company’s right to make money. What is generally a point of contention is how that money is made. If oil was a clean, safe resource to produce, with absolutely no environmental impacts and operated in more of an open market than say, OPEC, there would be very few people who could complain about how they do business. If the market crash had not occurred due to irresponsible lending and selling of securities, no one would have an issue with how much money the banking industry makes. I am not analogizing GW2’s profit model to either the oil industry or the financial industry in terms of effects on society, merely where people tend to take issue when these industries attempt to do things that make them money. Saying that I’ve Godwin’d ArenaNet is a red herring in this regard.
What this piece attempts to do is describe how poorly these practices are for consumers (ie: you) not just in terms of yourself, but for the game as a whole, and your fellow players.
More Money than a Flat Rate?
The product could in theory be sold on the Cash Shop for a flat rate, especially if they are already being offered for a limited time. The question becomes, why not?
There are various reasons. The return on investment (ROI) of the lottery boxes is higher than that of a flat rate. The cost of a flat rate in order to equal the return that the lottery boxes provide, a flat rate would appear to be too expensive, with too large of a price tag to pay in one expense. This goes towards the wedge of individual experience, further below.
If it were a flat rate, you could determine whether you liked the product enough for it to be worth the flat rate quoted. Or you could consider the product to be worth no money at all, at which point the company has lost your sale and has to make up the difference from a user who wants the product.
The drop rates are unknown until someone bothers to invest and do the research, either by grinding a lot of boxes or buying them outright, the latter of which is a net-positive for the company. And by the time the results are recorded and posted, the company has already seen sales from consumers assuming that the drop rate cannot be that bad.
The Wedges of “Individual Experience” and “Personal Responsibility”
Divisiveness is the greatest weapon of any entity against a collective to shield from its greatest weakness. You want the populace to be split on issues because if a high percentage of the body every aligns itself against you, you will feel its effects.
The randomness of these boxes creates a variable experience. However unlikely it is, it is possible for a lucky person to get the products he needs by opening a mere ten boxes. Suddenly, his experience is “this is the best thing EVER.” For another individual, they could open box upon box upon box and spend a large amount of money without getting a single claim ticket.
Since experiences vary, its harder to reach a consensus on drop rates. There will be people satisfied with their experience and others who feel as if its unfair. Some will be accused of merely being “unlucky.” Some will engage ad hominem, attacking other consumers for buying so many boxes irresponsibly, despite that being the intent of the company. Strife ensues and its much harder to direct blame against one specific entity as the customers squabble amongst one another.
It is therefore much harder to get consensus on implementation than if the product had a flat rate.
They benefit from these wedges to keep their customer-base from coming to a consensus on anything, even as far as debate the value of the implementation instead of the value of the product being offered for the price.
