Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

Belgium wants to ban loot boxes...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by zombiegorilla, Nov 22, 2017.

  1. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    The reason this is becoming less and less of a viable counter argument is because of the increasingly vast sums of money that people are willing to put into virtual items.

    Although you are restricted in most games from ever paying your rent, some people will happily spend their rent on virtual items.

    Here's an example, a Saudi prince spent a million dollars on clash of clans: http://www.businessinsider.com/saudi-player-spends-1-million-in-clash-of-clans-2015-10
    (although he claims to have only spent $16,000)

    This isn't just fun and games lunch money anymore. Plus, it doesn't make sense to me at all how not allowing players to win back their money ever somehow makes it more moral... crazy.
     
  2. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    People vast amounts of money on coffee as well, way more than ever before.
     
    angrypenguin likes this.
  3. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    But they aren't putting their money into a virtual slot machine that pays out in imaginary items...
     
  4. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    The bottom line for me personally is that value is subjective. If a person is willing to spend $500 on a sword, then that sword has monetary value to them. Once we're dealing in hundreds and thousands of dollars, we're talking about real money, real value.

    If people treat those virtual items as if they were real, and really valuable, then the only real difference between gambling and lootboxes is the current legal definition (and those do change over time).

    Again, I don't have a problem with lootboxes. I just really wish people would stop pretending that lootboxes are ok, but slot machines are bad... simply because slot machines allow you to occasionally walk away having won more than you put in.
     
  5. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    It’s not imaginary, it may not be physical, but neither are games or movies or memories from a theme park. You are paying for an experience.
     
  6. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    All value is subjective. But if you buy a virtual sword, and it is in closed system (can’t be traded or sold) it has no monetary value. You are paying for the experience.

    If you are pumping money into a real life slot machine, you are playing to get money, not purely for entertainment. People getting financial trouble, trying to gamble their way out of debt as a solution. There is no such expectation in games, you put money in to affect the game experience, it is all fictional. Whether it is fictional games of chance, fictionally killing people or fictionally matching candy or fictionally running a restaurant. It is purely entertainment.
     
  7. nat42

    nat42

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2017
    Posts:
    353
    A game item may no realworld monetary value (but I find that hard to say when you have to pay to acquire it or grind for many many hours). I vaguely recall a documentary on a service were you'd pay people in lesser economies to grind your RPG character for you.

    Money is just arbitrary physical or virtual tokens we exchange for goods and or services. And most gamblers don't gamble with the expectation of solving their financial debts, I think, there are many other reasons for problem gambling than this.
     
  8. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,617
    There's a difference between handing your kid a credit card and handing them your iPad... which Apple super strongly encouraged you to put your credit card's details on.

    Also, as I mentioned before, keep in mind that we're well versed in this stuff by default. The average parent with an iPad may have no experience or exposure to this stuff until it bites them for the first time.

    That said...
    Good point.
     
  9. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    Gold farming and/or selling virtual items on eBay or whatever certainly have monetary value, that is different than what lootcases (games of chance). That is why most games that have economies have multiple economies. The design is intentional and specific. It isn't the same as gambling (not chance), and it is actually happening in secondary market. If you could trade chance items from a loot and/or only obtain them via chance crates that were only purchased via real money, that would be a legal problem.

    Gambling laws are part consumer protection, part tariff/tax issues. The bulk of the legislation is around tax/commerce/liability laws, though the central core is consumer protection. I worked with online gambling via games for about 5 years, the rules and regulations are generally pretty clear (what is and is not gambling), but to actually function within the system it is massively complex due to interoperability of locales and regional laws. (almost all regarding taxes/insurance/liability/etc). The trade laws surrounding gambling are always, always in flux. The definitions almost never change.
     
    angrypenguin likes this.
  10. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,617
    That's the Sunk Cost Fallacy.

    It's not about the amount of money they put in. It's about the possibility of money coming back out as a result of a game of chance.

    People spending lots of money on games is nothing new. Nor is incentivising it with potential monetary rewards. The point of contention right now is that the line is being blurred by loot boxes, because it's a lot like gambling while skirting the legal definition.
     
    zombiegorilla likes this.
  11. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    I don't remember having any parental controls thrown in my face on steam, if they have them, then your point about the non-technical/informed parents is a strong one. I do know that on the nintendo store, virtually every step has warning/notifications about it. (even for free stuff). Maybe more so because the younger demographic for nintendo, but there is no reason they shouldn't be stronger on other platforms. While I still feel it is the parent's responsibility, the stores/markets should make every effort inform (in simple terms) what is going on. I guess though, if they just hand them a credit card... well, there is only so much that can be done. (or if the kid takes the card without asking).
     
  12. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    First off, absolutely nothing I said is anything regarding sunk cost fallacy. Sunk Cost Fallacy is throwing good money after bad. The idea behind sunk cost is that you should make decisions about your future actions from the present, not looking backward over losses.

    The reason I bring up dollar values is that there's a difference once you pass a certain threshold of value. Larger and larger sums of money demand different levels of scrutiny. This is why Grand Larceny is a different crime from Petty Theft, because different amounts of money warrant different treatment.


    As for this - I understand why you may see it that was - as you're a developer. Your focus is on the experience as a whole and it makes sense that you see it this way.

    Great art in all forms always manipulates the audience. A great movie can make you laugh or cry, a great book can change your opinion, and a great game can convince you that the world you're interacting with matters, that your actions in that world matter.

    There's a hearthstone dev who gave a GDC talk where he talks about the design and how they came to the physicality. He repeatedly emphasizes that a goal was for the player to feel like their cards were valuable. That the physicality of the ui design was chosen, in part, because it allowed the player to feel like their cards were real, and had real value. To be clear, I'm not saying he's malicious and I'm not saying he's evil. He's a talented guy who does good work and wants to make a good game, but he's also weaving together a narrative for the player to experience and buy into, and that experience revolves around making the player feel like their cards really have value.

    When that player is sitting there thinking about buying a loot box they aren't saying "I want to heighten my game play experience" -- they're saying "man, I hope I get that legendary assault rifle".

    They're paying for a chance to spin the wheel and win a prize.

    There's nothing wrong with that, except a lack of honesty and transparency.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2017
  13. snacktime

    snacktime

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2013
    Posts:
    3,356
    The legal definition of gambling is arbitrary, and it really only differs from the broader logical version by degree not form once you remove artificial constructs like monetary value.

    Lootboxes are rather benign when you look at all of the things we waste/risk/gamble our money on. We spend billions on products that have no or tiny chances of ever working. From health related to get rich quick schemes. Plus we spend billions on entertainment, and who is to decide what kind of entertainment you should spend your money on?

    Hey why not ban crowd funding? Talk about no transparency and questionable honesty in many cases.

    The good thing is that for all of the talk, nothing will happen other then superficial stuff that makes some politician look good.. If they define this as gambling, it opens so many doors it's not even funny.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2017
    frosted likes this.
  14. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    In all honesty, people gamble all the time. The line between "investing" and "gambling" is way thinner than most people like to think, and many people have lost their life savings because they mistook one for the other.
     
    zombiegorilla likes this.
  15. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    From my perspective, I don't think is about lines being blurred (at least not now). I have personally worked on games that have used this exact same mechanic for over a decade, and there were certainly others before that. I even (sadly) worked on a game that was... very unfair to the player with regards to a premium loot spinner.

    What I see the big difference now is two main things, 1) is a huge, popular, anticipated game. When a no-name game does this type of thing, they simply fail and no one cares. And 2) it was done so very badly, they forked it up completely. It wasn't just the lootcases, it was also how the progression worked. It was bad design. These lead to a massive PR fail (also how they handled it), which ultimately impacted sales, which forced changes.

    I see the whole thing as a huge win for players and consumers. It's unlikely laws/regulations will change (certainly not any time soon), but the whole thing changed almost instantly at the publisher level. And certainly it will impact how they not only deal with it in the future, but also how other games deal with it. Consumer pushback is ultimate market effector.
     
    angrypenguin and frosted like this.
  16. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    Anyway, fun argument. I gotta go play some Gwent, I need to get one more legendary to finish my deck. Man, I hope that next pack I open has one ;)
     
    zombiegorilla likes this.
  17. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    It's not about perception. The term monetary value is specific. While everything has generic value on some level, virtual items in the context of this discussion/issue, literally and legally have no monetary value. That is a specific differentiation when it comes to virtual items and the context of gambling.
     
    angrypenguin likes this.
  18. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    The problem I think, arises not from the law, which is clear, but from the fact that it still causes the same lights to switch on in the brain as gambling does. But then, so does World of Warcraft.
     
  19. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    There usually is monetary value, it's just that the player normally doesn't actually own their items or accounts and is usually restricted by terms of service from cashing out.

    For example, here is a site that allows people to sell their hearthstone accounts, and here's a guy trying to sell his beta account for $3,400: https://www.playerauctions.com/hearthstone-account/135397820a!na-eu-asia-hearthstone-beta-account/

    People buy and sell accounts or items on black market third party sites all the time, it's just that these are often shady and almost always against terms of service (so very risky). Because of shadiness and risk, it also reduces the price people are willing to pay (since account wipes are possible if they're caught).

    If someone is willing to spend $500 to buy a sword, there's a good chance that someone would be willing to buy that sword "used" for at least $300. They just can't legally sell it because they don't legally own it.

    If capitalism has taught us anything, it's that "something is worth what someone will pay" and people will happily pay hundreds of dollars for in game items. There is monetary value there, it's just a matter of legality and ownership.
     
    FMark92 and Ryiah like this.
  20. chingwa

    chingwa

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2009
    Posts:
    3,789
    I don't agree with lootboxes in general. I don't see the appeal from a player perspective at all. I see them as simply and only a revenue driving device.

    However I strongly disagree with government getting involved in this issue. It opens up Pandora's box and can only see bad things coming of this down the line.

    This lootbox fiasco is not going unnoticed by game developers and publishers. If people keep the heat on then the industry will obviously change for the better.
     
    FMark92 likes this.
  21. Tzan

    Tzan

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Posts:
    733
    Pandora's Loot Box ??
     
    chingwa likes this.
  22. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    that loot box garbage has always been gambling marketed to kids,
    ITS ABOUT DAMN TIME!!
    it should be illegal

    ive been saying it for years
    stop trying to defend it you criminal scum (not sarcastic or joking)
    whatever happened to HONESTY??

    it is DISHONEST .. pure and simple.. dishonest is scum, scum is illegal.
    case closed. period.

    i see all the garbage monetization attempts with these scumbag games, and it makes me sick,
    it makes me sick that .. what? in order to make good money in this world i have to be a scumbag??
    i guess so.... honest people are incompatible with money... i might as well die...

    i think some of you are out of touch with what HONESTY means..
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 28, 2017
  23. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    20,965
    It's somewhat dependent on the game. Some games hide relatively unimportant content behind them while others hide extremely powerful boosts that make a character go from barely handling content to breezing through it. I have known games where enough of the player base possessed the item that it became a requirement to find groups and take part in events. Especially for player versus player content.
     
  24. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    i got totally addicted with Paladins loot stuff.. thank god it doesnt have duplicates..

    screw that... it makes me even second guess being a gamedev at all,
    bringing people into a hellish addiction....
    i gotta use that to make educational or artistic games with a purpose.... not masturbatory fantasy games... but also i see the value in that aswell, for someone with a crappy life, can escape...

    and i mean like... i played 120 hours of that crap for 2 weeks recently..
    its a HELLISH ADDICTION that i dont wish on my worse enemy...
    and its just PLAYING the game... not to mention the burning addictive desire to have all the skins....

    ive been hellishly addicted to video games for years.. iam 29 and seriously its like iam 17 cause the whole time iam on the computer with video games, the "real world" as i call it seems entirely alien to me..
    i have like 2 friends, and my phone has been dead for 3 weeks and it doesnt matter cause its a useless object to me... i dont call anyone.. dont have a smart phone, smart phone waste of money i dont even use my flip phone... .. lol sucks the websites that require a sms tho :p stupid sites lol....
    i could say ALOT ALOT more and you can probably guess a part of it LUL but ill leave at this...

    people legit get PAINFULLY SERIOUSLY addicted to that loot box garbage...
    iam not even one... iam addicted to video games in general, but i totally see people suffering in pain because of this
    GARBAGE THAT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL

    [mod edit: keep it civil]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 28, 2017
    Teila likes this.
  25. Teila

    Teila

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Posts:
    6,932
    They will not get involved unless it is classified as gambling. In that case, the rules and regs are already in place. This is most likely true in every country, not just mine. :) If it is classified as gambling, then maybe it really IS gambling.
     
  26. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    the thing is.. some of you are like "i dont see a problem with it"

    lootboxes are not designed FOR YOU

    lootboxes are designed for people with mental problems, and people that dont know how to control themselves
    looboxes are designed to EXPLOIT people with PROBLEMS that they SUFFER from.

    /dropsmic
     
  27. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,182
    Purposely doing rare collectibles via cards, Willie Wonka's Golden Tickets, Magic the Gathering cards, baseball cards, lootboxes and all such promotions is gambling but many of the governments of the world are on poor moral grounds to ban them with their own government lotteries to entice people into spending their money on government pork barrels projects earmarked for their cronies.

    Most types of games of chance in most US jurisdictions require that no purchase be necessary to participate in the game of chance, after all once you are spending money on it, it is no longer a game of chance is it? And the motive to make the probability infinitesimal is massive and commonplace. Just look at the odds of winning in the current government lotteries in the USA compared to the earlier lotteries. Those are ponsai schemes now, those lotteries with most of the money going to cronies of the associated governments. When the Texas Lottery 1st started in the 90s a fellow like Ross Perot could do some simple mathematics and go out and buy every combination of lottery numbers he needed to win the lottery if he wanted. And with that you see the motive of businesses enticing people to spend their money on pseudo-random games of chance.
     
  28. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    Everything is hypocritical w/ regards gambling. Bingo nights are held in churches where they teach that gambling is immoral. I really never got that one. Apparently its ok if the money goes to charity...

    Same thing with state lottos (since money is supposed to go to education or whatever - although this is largely accounting fiction). Lotto is really weird. One of the only states that bans lotto is nevada, so one of the only places where you can't buy state lotto tickets is Vegas.
     
    zombiegorilla likes this.
  29. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    I just did a little research on why church bingo is legal, and there's basically a church Bingo exception written into most state laws so it's legal for churches to run bingo games.

    Source: http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Charitable-Gaming/

    This also covers charity raffles and the like. It's funny though, a lot are very specific and limited to Bingo.
     
    Teila likes this.
  30. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    That, however, isn't a logical correlation. The items have no monetary value, they cannot be transferred or sold separate from the account. Moreover selling accounts is not legal, and while it may happen, it is rare (and there are far more people trying to sell, than those actually buying), and those accounts get shut down in bulk all the time. For it to be gambling, the goods being won need to be able to be sold or exchanged for money. Not only is this not legally possible, there are laws/contracts/systems in place to actively prevent this.

    Creating legislation for that case is completely unnecessary and redundant. It would be like creating a law requiring a license to own a chair, because someone once beat someone with a chair. Or banning football because illegal betting occurs. The real solution has already happened, the market rejected bad game design and forced the hand of the developer.
     
  31. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    The point though is that the only reason you can't transfer the monetary value of the account sales is because of legal constraints in ToS... There is "value", which is why there are so many blackmarket sites which provide account sales services.

    It's just that the act of selling the account is illegal and otherwise risky.

    Let's say that I had a local plant that was banned for export (something rare). There are buyers out there who would pay money for it, so it has value. I just can't actually sell it to them legally, because of the legal terms of my residence / citizenship.

    Banning the sale of something doesn't strip that thing of monetary value, it just prevents you from legally selling it. This is why blackmarkets exist. Those account sales sites are essentially black markets for game accounts.
     
  32. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    Indeed. Stock markets, investment funds, etc...

    State lottos are a mess of nonsense. The oregon lotto was supposed to fund education, but the reality is almost all the revenue goes to running the lottery, and state sponsored programs to help people with gambling problems are in place because of state sponsored gambling. Getting rid of state sponsored gambling (here anyway) would save money and harm less people. Go figure.
     
    frosted likes this.
  33. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    Sure, but that is completely separate from the made up gambling issue. That existed before lootboxes and on games that don't have those things. The argument that lootboxes should be gambling/regulated, because blackmarkets exist and people break the law, is an abstraction.

    Also, in Oregon, you can buy/sell/grow that stuff completely legally. ;) .
     
  34. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    Hah! I was thinking more along the lines of a rare plant like a Black Lotus or something ;) But it's good seeing some states making other plants legal too.

    I guess the argument just goes that from my side, if people will spend money on an item (virtual or not) that's how much the item is worth. So if you pay money to spin a wheel and win something that someone would spend $500 to acquire, then you just gambled up $500 worth of virtual goodness. Where exactly the ToS stands on the "monetary value" or lack of it doesn't matter except in pure legal terms.

    As a side note, I really prefer games that have a straight up secondary market instead of loot boxes. Like with MTG, you could just buy the card you wanted without having to gamble for it. I think that system is much fairer and more honest to the consumer. It's a shame that Diablo 3 really killed a lot of that with their disastrous auction house.
     
  35. Teila

    Teila

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Posts:
    6,932
    True, but it will not be up to any of us to decide how lootboxes are defined. I think we will just have to wait and see. I agree with Hippo that the market took care of this problem. My guess is a big part of that, however, was Disney protecting their IP. Attaching exploitation to a Disney brand did not please them.

    Ironic, since living in Florida, I see the how Disney exploits every day. lol
     
    frosted likes this.
  36. EternalAmbiguity

    EternalAmbiguity

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Posts:
    3,144
    How do you feel about Star Citizen?

    I'm not talking about lootboxes, but the idea of monetary value for virtual items.
     
  37. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    Yes and no. Lootboxes (and similar metaphors) aren't gambling (as described in the BF issue), at least not in the UK/US, by either legislation or case law. The lines are pretty clear, and tested. And in general (legit) developers stay away from that line, because crossing that line can lead to potential legislation around game mechanics, which no one wants. For that line to be moved, or gambling redefined to include game (video, not 'gaming') mechanics it would require significant case law (major suit) and changes to legislation. While difficult, it can be changed, through lobbying and/voting for legislators that favor getting their paws on games. A developer with a significant game who crosses that line, can effectively challenge that (though probably not to their benefit). So, it can be re-defined by 'us' through political movement or through significant case law via suit, or being sued. Prior to being at Disney, the company I worked for partnered with a couple of large casinos and managed to changes passed to several laws allowing for online gambling. (though the laws were all related to interstate banking regulations).

    <off-topic>
    When I was at Disney/Lucasfilm, with our games/studio branding and quality were always the guiding principles. SW visuals and fiction were very seriously vetted to ensure the highest quality and adhered to the SW story team. I spent months getting holograms and lightsabers right. Then I would walk into 7-11 and see crappy official r2d2's with red lightsaber lollypops. Our studio was treated very well, and things like crunch were capped. Yet sister studios under the same org, were treated poorly and constantly in crunch. Putting it very nicely, disney is extremely inconsistent when it comes to brand and how it treats its guests. They can do awesome things and questionable things practically in the same breath. ;) . While they "stepped in" and resolved the issue, they also signed off on it in the first place.
    </off-topic>
     
    Teila and frosted like this.
  38. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    Indifferent. I have never played a game with secondary market, or rather never participated in ones that had one. I'm indifferent to loot cases as well. Mostly, for me, it's all about design. I'll buy decent loot cases (or any IAP for that matter), and won't buy crappy ones. From a developer standpoint its the same. My current game uses loot cases a lot and it is our primary revenue stream. But, with going into specifcs, our loot cases are designed to always be a positive experience. But that is a design choice, and there are several games that do it the same way. Like everything in games, it is about the design.
     
  39. tswalk

    tswalk

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Posts:
    1,109
    fixed.
     
  40. EternalAmbiguity

    EternalAmbiguity

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Posts:
    3,144
    Poor question on my part. I mean, do you consider those items to have monetary value since they're bought and traded independent of the game?
     
  41. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    Sure, they definitely do. There are several games that have secondary markets. There Facebook flash games back in the day that did to.
     
  42. EternalAmbiguity

    EternalAmbiguity

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Posts:
    3,144
    Got it, thanks. Was just wondering where the line was for that type of thing.
     
  43. Antony-Blackett

    Antony-Blackett

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Posts:
    1,778
    If i can't specifically pay for a loot-box, but instead have to earn a loot-box and can only open one or speed a timers with cash, is that the same thing?

    If I pay to play a round of a game like Diablo where enemies drop random loot, is that not also a well skinned loot box?

    If I pay to play a round (energy) of a match three where the level may or may not randomise in a way to allow me to win, is that not just the same as a well skinned loot-box?

    I think we need to ban all random chance and hidden information from games! (sarcasm).

    Ratings and warnings are all that's needed... but personally, I think as long as you're not winning something that can be exchanged for cash, and if you cannot explicitly buy a loot-box directly with IAP (you need to earn it to some degree) then I don't see a problem.


    The thing that get's me most about this is there are a lot of games out there that have roulette wheels and slot machines as a mechanic to give you rewards, these games are also not considered as gambling games and aren't rated as such and yet far more closely resemble casino games.
     
    zombiegorilla likes this.
  44. FMark92

    FMark92

    Joined:
    May 18, 2017
    Posts:
    1,243
    Koen Geens's move should be taken for what it is. A publicity stunt in the wake of EA's lootbox controversy. You need only look at who benefits.

    @BuckyLuis Am I to understand everyone needs to have their agency taken because you and a handful of people have addiction problems?

    Why do you think free market can't fix this problem?
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2017
  45. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    Hahah! That kind of thing would drive me nuts. They didn't even get the color right!

    Dude, relax. At most, by hypothetically classifying lootboxes as gambling, all they'd be doing is restricting it to adults. Unless you're in favor of removing all age limits from everything and legalizing everything (so companies can sell heroin to children like Bayer once did). Free markets don't fix problems, they just enable trade. In this case, it's companies that are restricting trade via contract law in ToS.
     
    zombiegorilla likes this.
  46. FMark92

    FMark92

    Joined:
    May 18, 2017
    Posts:
    1,243
    I wanted to paste a "keep cam and surrrender freedoms" poster but I'm pressed for time. Sorry.:(

    CONTEXT. I am replying to a preson who is calling for ban of all lootcrates. I'm pretty sure it's not a child, even if they may write like one.

    No, I can't make an argument for that. I'm not armed enough to go down that hole yet. In my view state should only intervene to reinforce the social contract but I'm not ready to fully defend that stance.

    I'm glad it became a perscription-only drug (as most dangerous substances are), but making it completely illegal just made it more valuable and riskier to obtain. There are now massive criminal organizations dealing with it and it's still costing lives. I can't really see that as a huge step-up. Public awareness and scrutiny are important, state intervention, however, doesn't always improve the situation.
    I'm all for making controversial goods harder to obtain (but still easier than doing so illegaly). Outright banning will lead everyone who stil wants to obtain those goods, to do so illegaly.

    Again, context.
     
  47. Hikiko66

    Hikiko66

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    1,304
    Randomization and duplication is infuriating..

    Just give me the option to buy the thing I want directly at a decent price so I don't have to spend more than I spent on the initial game just to get a few items. K thx

    Bought a lot of packs in Hearthstone back when I played, and I got loads of duplicates just trying to get the few cards I needed to complete a deck. Those duplicates get turned into dust and crafted into cards, but you're throwing away a lot of what was supposed to be "value" for something that should cost a lot less.

    Rocket League is only aesthetic, but their loot boxes are also very annoying. Get so many duplicates, and they auto-trade for very little, and that trading is also randomized.. And that usually results in even more duplicates or things you don't want.

    They have a player to player trade which is ok, except that your crappy duplicates that you accumulate are rarely worth anything, and the thing that you want that you spent lots of money trying to randomly get is still £20 to buy straight up.. because everybody has the same problem that you do.

    "Party Time" is cool, but it's not worth £20.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2017
    FMark92 likes this.
  48. zombiegorilla

    zombiegorilla

    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Posts:
    9,042
    My assumption would be that if that were to happen EA (and others) would simply drop them or significantly rework it to not fall under gaming regulations. Gaming laws are a huge pain in the ass. The vary widely from state to state and between countries, mostly over taxes/tarrifs. You practically need more lawyers and accountants than developers. It is not fun or cost effective. (Unless you are a casino)
     
    FMark92 and frosted like this.
  49. frosted

    frosted

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    4,044
    Exactly.

    I'm really getting tired of all the political extremism friggin everywhere you look these days.

    Lootboxes might be labeled gambling => They're banning lootboxes => The state is taking away our rights => We need more guns to protect ourselves!

    lolwut!?

    People really need to calm down and think s**t out a little more.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2017
  50. Antony-Blackett

    Antony-Blackett

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Posts:
    1,778
    frosted is in on it! He's paid by the government! The earth is flat!
     
    frosted likes this.