Same people here saying they are not obligated to list individual odds for each increment are the ones who said Kabam chose to start releasing drop rates out of the goodness of their hearts and was done independently of the apple app store's policy. I question the ethics of their decision here, even if they are legally in the right to make it and it clearly is against what the purpose of the policy was in the first place.
It's always been a pretty lame way of fulfilling the bare minimum disclosure requirements for their loot crates.
Same people here saying they are not obligated to list individual odds for each increment are the ones who said Kabam chose to start releasing drop rates out of the goodness of their hearts and was done independently of the apple app store's policy. I question the ethics of their decision here, even if they are legally in the right to make it and it clearly is against what the purpose of the policy was in the first place. I should say "same person" because there's only one I remember distinctly from that thread back then. Other one will probably turn up on this thread sooner than later I never said that if you are talking about me. When the whole Apple thing came about, I was "wait and see" what happens. I've always said if they are legally supposed to do it they will. The Gold crystals are the same thing but no one's complaining about them. They list 100% chance at gold because that's what they are. This is a T5CC FRAGMENT CRYSTAL. You have 100% chance to pull fragments from the crystal. Kabam sells 6*'s during major holidays like 4th of July and Cyber weekend. Guess what, you have a 100% chance to get a 6* and each champion isn't listed. How is that any different than the T5CC frag crystal? It's not. People just want something to be mad at.
Same people here saying they are not obligated to list individual odds for each increment are the ones who said Kabam chose to start releasing drop rates out of the goodness of their hearts and was done independently of the apple app store's policy. I question the ethics of their decision here, even if they are legally in the right to make it and it clearly is against what the purpose of the policy was in the first place. I should say "same person" because there's only one I remember distinctly from that thread back then. Other one will probably turn up on this thread sooner than later
https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/10355942?hl=enAre the odds of the randomized portion of the offer, clearly identified? Nope, just the odds of the one item, T5CC... Not the odds for the amount available between 5 and 25%. I absolutely agree, Kabam are adhering to the letter of the regulations but not to the spirit. As they stand, the word item counts as one item and not randomised quantities of said item. The spirit of it is to stop loot box gambling systems. I believe the spirit of it should cover randomised quantities of items, in order to stick to the spirit of why lootboxes have been regulated in the first place- which is to stop mainly young persons from spending money on these gambling loot boxes without the information
https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/10355942?hl=enAre the odds of the randomized portion of the offer, clearly identified? Nope, just the odds of the one item, T5CC... Not the odds for the amount available between 5 and 25%.