It's good that this is getting traction, but as people have mentioned it's a little worrying putting this in the government's hands since we don't know exactly how they'll handle it. I'm sure it's not going to be the complete extreme (AKA completely banning games with loot boxes since there'd be hell on) but I have a feeling they'll make things too restrictive or sensitive in regards to any regulations.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
British Labour MP has asked the UK government to regulate loot boxes
- Thread starter Audioboxer
- Start date
There's some decent debate about trading cards here, including this comment
https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/73eitw/arent_things_like_magic_the_gatherings_booster/
As I mentioned above as well, what's soo terrible that if digital games have some transparency applied to them (drop rates), if physical cards get caught up in that regulation passing in the UK?
Why would a game have to be banned? If you mean individual countries ban gambling, that is on them. The rest of the nations do not need to bend the knee because of some countries who take prohibition too far. IIRC Germany used to ban really violent video games (it still bans Nazi imagery in games I believe). Australia once didn't have an 18/M equivalent rating for games.
The UK is coming out of the EU anyway... So this specific topic seems more like the UK doing it's own thing, like China has.
In some countries online gambling is banned, video games would fall under that. In some countries gambling is generally banned, hopefully, it has a big enough impact to make publishers reconsider loot boxes.
Spaced Harrier
Member
If you don't want to be regulated as a bookie, don't take money and set odds.
JonnyDBrit
Member
There's some decent debate about trading cards here, including this comment
https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/73eitw/arent_things_like_magic_the_gatherings_booster/
As I mentioned above as well, what's soo terrible that if digital games have some transparency applied to them (drop rates), if physical cards get caught up in that regulation passing in the UK?
Why would a game have to be banned? If you mean individual countries ban gambling, that is on them.
I think another point of difference would be that within the card game instance, you're also at least nominally guaranteed something resembling what you were actually after - same with character based gacha games like Fire Emblem Heroes for that matter. Sure, it may not be precisely the cards you were after, but they can still have function and use to you within the context of the game.
Video game lootboxes are often much more diverse in terms of in-game items, which makes it even easier to lure people in while giving nothing resembling what they were after. You might be after a new skin but get audio, a spray, and a pose instead.
Roberto Larcos
Member
One other thing worth mentioning, laws don't need to be consistent in their application. In fact, they very rarely are. Exceptions are carved out for all sorts of things it's absolutely possible to have lootboxes in videogames regulated, with various exemptions made for Pokémon cards, Happy Meal toys, LEGO minifigures etc..
That said, all of the above are anti-consumer. Just because they already exist, it doesn't mean they shouldn't be regulated also.
That said, all of the above are anti-consumer. Just because they already exist, it doesn't mean they shouldn't be regulated also.
Audioboxer
Member
Unfortunately, that just comes down to those countries arguably overstepping the mark. Prohibition never really works, it just pushes things underground. Gambling doesn't need to be banned anywhere (unless you're talking specific types of gambling, like animal fighting), it just needs regulation and for people to arguably know what odds they're throwing their money at.
They will probably just consider it flat out gambling and games get rated 18, publishers need gambling license etc. I don't think they will go as extreme as banning games when they can just flat out consider it gambling and make it follow regular gambling laws already in place
Which you could argue won't do much as kids get GTA and cod still but it'd be a pretty big blow to publishers I think
Edit: online gambling is too huge here to be banned that won't happen. That would be opening a shit storm that doesn't need to be opened. No government would risk that
With Pokémon cards though, you know what you're getting in a pack
1 Energy card
5 Common cards
3 Uncommon cards
1 Reverse card of any rarity
1 Rare or higher card
In a box of 36 you typically get 8 higher than rare cards, 5 standard GX, 3 fullarts/gold/rainbow.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Lots of things can be ignored, Casino's for instance can be ignored. It doesn't mean the government cant (and shouldn't) regulate them.
Drugs can be ignored so why does the government bother making them illegal? Let all the cocaine and heroine run wild, people can just ignore it if they don't want it
Audioboxer
Member
That's true as well. Even if it doesn't say explicitly on the pack, all packs are made equal. Meaning the community knows the odds very easily.
Loot boxes are purely digital and the winnings odds are all server side. So not only is it hard to anecdotally get the odds, as I mentioned earlier the pubs and devs can change them on the fly with no one knowing. No physical packs are made, so you can literally "flick a switch" and the odds of the whole game change like that.
You can literally scale loot boxes as and when you want to drive more revenue. I personally find that "almost rigging" of the system far more worrying in a purely digital realm than packs of cards that can sit unopened on shelves for months. They can't be retroactively changed.
With the industry we're in I bet, har har, that some scummy pub/dev has nuked their loot box drop rates over Christmas/Holidays before to get more people spending money. Run a temporary loot box, such as a Christmas/Halloween one, drop the rates 1% to hit people with a timed box with lower odds. Profit.
Why else was Blizzard scrambling to hide the odds again in China? Just saying. Blizzard timed Halloween boxes? Hmmm.
Don't ask questions because you might not get an answer you want. That's not quite how it works.
Don't ask questions you don't get an answer. People should care more about asking questions to get answers, even if the answer isn't what they want.
Delusibeta
Banned
ITT: people fundamentally misunderstanding the importance of written questions to Government and the likelihood they would result in legislation (slim to none). Hell, this is far more likely to result in a formal "lootboxes are not gambling, because the Gambling Commission previously said so" than it is in any legislation restricting lootboxes (which, in turn, probably won't actually do anything if it's just in the UK, see Blizzard ignoring China's lootbox laws with Overwatch).
This is another good point
Also with digital hundred of things get added which constantly lowers the odds of each specific item which isn't true in card packs (new cards typically come with a new packaging etc so the odds of getting that specific card remains the same)
At the bare minimum with TCG's they are physical and you can trade with a friend, sell them on eBay or Amazon you can have a degree of control of getting exactly what you want because the cards you get doesn't disintegrate into paper when you get a duplicate, it's why my stance on Fifa Ultimate Team is lighter in this regard, but it would be nice to at least see the probability of getting a Messi card, the digital equivalent becomes obsolete when a new shiny sequel comes out as well where everything resets to 0.
JonnyDBrit
Member
To add to this, generally speaking, even while TCGs may have thousands of cards, they are often further arranged into specific ranges so if you want a specific card, you can buy packs solely of that range to better your odds. Lootboxes often cover everything in a game.
Linkstrikesback
Member
This was also true of yugioh packs. Back in the day you got 8 commons+ 1 rare or higher. The rates at which you got rares were printed on the pack (something like 1:6 super rare, 1:12 ultra rare). Now, apparently you get 7 commons, 1 rare and 1 super rare or higher, with the rates printed again.
I'd be surprised if magic wasn't similar clear about card rates.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Blizzard.....literally ignores China's regulations?
Audioboxer
Member
Well, there we go. I apologise as I didn't know this. Last time I had card packs was football stickers when I was really young.
Is this a pokemon thing though, or for all card packs?
Blizzard.....literally ignores China's regulations?
They didn't ignore it. Temporarily complied - https://www.polygon.com/2017/5/5/15558448/overwatch-loot-box-chances-china
Then got their lawyers to find a workaround that required reworking Overwatch's system - http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...nas-loot-box-laws-by-selling-in-game-currency
More journalists should go to them for question as to why they felt it necessary to do that.
If the EU gets involved, you would see a regulation 1st and not straight up a ban. The regulation would probably be that games/apps with lootboxes will always get a 18+/Adult Only rating. A straight up ban would go against their own competition laws, which all EU countries have to abide by law.
There was already a good example in 2014, when they regulated a couple things about in-app purchases and didn't straight up ban them:
KimonoNoNo
Member
This government has got a much bigger problem on it's hands than videogame loot boxes.
And I'm not convinced the pubs would tell the truth anyway (they can rig it at any moment and who's to know).
And I'm not convinced the pubs would tell the truth anyway (they can rig it at any moment and who's to know).
Audioboxer
Member
Magic the gathering seems to do card odds as well
Add that to Pokemon
And other random trading card packs
So much for everyone using the trading cards defence argument around loot box odds.
Add that to Pokemon
And other random trading card packs
So much for everyone using the trading cards defence argument around loot box odds.
Of course, not expecting a full on commons debate in the house of Lords but to at least starting a discussion is a step somewhere.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
Governments are large entities, with multiple agencies capable of tackling more than 1 issue at a time.
I wonder if it's even possible to do a loot box version of this.
You know the ease of payment and delivery impacts those who are more susceptible to this.
Go to the store and buy boosterpack/order online
Get home/booster pack is delivered and open it
Get undesired result
How many people will physically go back to the store or reorder online to try and "beat" it, repeating until necessary
compared to
Buy loot box
Immediately open
Get undesired result
Immediately buy another booster pack seconds later to try and "beat" it, repeating until necessary
You know the ease of payment and delivery impacts those who are more susceptible to this.
Go to the store and buy boosterpack/order online
Get home/booster pack is delivered and open it
Get undesired result
How many people will physically go back to the store or reorder online to try and "beat" it, repeating until necessary
compared to
Buy loot box
Immediately open
Get undesired result
Immediately buy another booster pack seconds later to try and "beat" it, repeating until necessary
Stone Ocean
Member
It doesn't matter what the odds are. Just seeing the odds can make them not as desirable. You're way more likely to buy something blind than you are if you know it only has a #% chance to drop. It helps keeping addictive personalities in check.
King Gilga
Member
I don't trust our government regulating anything.
Audioboxer
Member
Add to that
"2 week* Halloween loot box, act quickly to get your skins now!" Physical packs can go out of season, but you tend to get large enough quantities of them made and many sit on shelves way longer than 2 weeks.
*I'm not 100% sure how long Overwatch Halloween drops run for, but it's time-gated anyway from what I've read
This is pretty facetious, you're comparing small, random toys whose value are inherent in and of themselves. You can't hold a skin or a boost. You can't sell one and the physical barrier of buying them dissolves online.
A kid ain't walking into a newsagents with their parent's credit card but they can use one on their PS4.
Make the loot boxes finite then.
Corbyn should bang this in the next manifesto, shore up the Youth vote even more.
This might have some relevance in "Nazis deserve free speech too" America, but this is about the UK.
We already have strict regulations on the sale of games in the UK, including legally enforceable age ratings, just as we do on other media. Because we're not living in a Libertarian hellscape. Yet.
Same.
Hopefully him being a bigwig might give this a little extra traction. People should certainly be @ing him about it.
The ๖ۜBronx;252063950 said:
This might have some relevance in "Nazis deserve free speech too" America, but this is about the UK.
We already have strict regulations on the sale of games in the UK, including legally enforceable age ratings, just as we do on other media. Because we're not living in a Libertarian hellscape. Yet.
Same.
Hopefully him being a bigwig might give this a little extra traction. People should certainly be @ing him about it.
I don't think I've ever seen anyone say loot boxes shouldn't disclose their drop rates like trading cards do.
I'm not sure if they legally have to reveal those drop rates or not though. I haven't been able to find anything online if that's required by law or not.
Audioboxer
Member
Well, there was some decent amounts of celebrating for them not getting called gambling.
At worst gambling regulation would just be rated 18 with drop rates known. So if people weren't opposed to drop rates being displayed, was it simply a game they like being rated 18? I'm simply trying to fish to understand why there has been soo much hostility from gamers for anything to be done about loot boxes and RNG based cash purchases? We're still seeing many "don't like it don't buy it" posts. What is it that is getting bees in people's bonnets around loot boxes and paid for spin the wheel opportunities being criticised/regulated better?
If trading cards do not have a legal requirement, they're at least taking better care of their own house. Instead, gamers have companies like Blizzard that hostile to transparency they rework their whole game in China. I've found one dev, who is ironically F2P, who display their odds - https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1844310
People primarily roll the dice for legendary skins, not rare. The trading cards display their odds for the actual rarest drops because that is primarily what people want to know. Rare isn't the rarest for Overwatch, it's legendary. I don't think I've really seen one person spend $20+ on Overwatch and finish with "fuck yes, I got a rare, some emotes and dupes". Blizzard wants the legendary drop rates hidden, as that is what everyone is chasing when they spend money.
Quite honestly Blizzards actions in China should not only have more journalists approaching them for comment, but gamers thinking twice about rewarding a company behaving like that with $20/40/60/100+ transactions. It's ultimately your money, do as you please, but if this industry never proceeds further than self-regulation, reward the devs like the Path of Exile guys and gals. At least bring them up in conversation with positive words about what they're doing if you have no desire to play their game/spend money on it. They're leading by example by self-regulating transparency. Blizzard is looking for ways to dodge actual transparency laws. I do not expect to see the above image on a Blizzard blog anytime soon, or EA, or MS, or Ubisoft, or Sony, or WB/etc.
stargateheaven
Member
That's not the argument.
It is if they should be classed as gambling or not.
having the odds displayed is good for everyone.
Games like overwatchalready has a kinda system, at least. you're guaranteed at least one rare item or above in a box.
CosmicRomancer
Member
I've avoided posting on this topic until now because I've been conflicted as to which side I belong on. But I think I've found some ground to stand on now.
I do believe that loot boxes are a form of gambling. I don't agree with the black and white viewpoints of some that it's not gambling since you get something back in return for your money. I think this is a grey area mainly because we need to consider multiple factors that aren't present in things like Pokemon cards or those toy dispensers. Video games nowadays (especially online multiplayer games) are designed to be extremely addictive. They make you want to come back day after day, and if you add in the fact that video games are a very social platform, the pressure to compete and belong is intensified (not mentioning that the loot box system is an addictive game in itself). You can also counter the trading card comparisons by suggesting that parents are present and provide the children the money to purchase them. You also have to travel down to the store which makes it much more less attractive -- it's a much more distant, controlled and vigilant system in general. Whereas the very nature of home consoles/games is that they're very easy to access and hide inside.
The sticking point for me was not whether loot boxes is gambling or not, but rather whether or not the gambling/addiction itself is a problem I should take seriously. Initially, I found it hard to sympathise and easy to say to take some responsibility. Now though, I've seen it classed as a mental illness which I take very seriously. I'm sure depression and anxiety seemed like an incomprehensible thing way back when also.
Personally, I find loot boxes fun and if they fund for things like map packs, then even better. But it's obvious now that the very least we can do is make some compromises even if we don't class it as gambling -- there's no point in being obstinate on issues people suffer over whether you treat their problem as serious or not.
For one, I believe the publishers should be made to make the loot box system much more transparent. It's way too shady as it is. Make the probabilities known. Secondly, I believe they should implement the option to purchase the item you want in some form or another. Whether it's simply to add the option to buy the item outright or at the very least have 2 forms of items in loot boxes: 1 is the original item with higher odds of obtaining it, 2 is the item locked behind a price but with a much higher chance of obtaining it.
Those are just 2 conservative suggestions. I just think it's good to open a discourse to help those who feel vulnerable. At the very least we can make voices heard which is evidently happening now.
I do believe that loot boxes are a form of gambling. I don't agree with the black and white viewpoints of some that it's not gambling since you get something back in return for your money. I think this is a grey area mainly because we need to consider multiple factors that aren't present in things like Pokemon cards or those toy dispensers. Video games nowadays (especially online multiplayer games) are designed to be extremely addictive. They make you want to come back day after day, and if you add in the fact that video games are a very social platform, the pressure to compete and belong is intensified (not mentioning that the loot box system is an addictive game in itself). You can also counter the trading card comparisons by suggesting that parents are present and provide the children the money to purchase them. You also have to travel down to the store which makes it much more less attractive -- it's a much more distant, controlled and vigilant system in general. Whereas the very nature of home consoles/games is that they're very easy to access and hide inside.
The sticking point for me was not whether loot boxes is gambling or not, but rather whether or not the gambling/addiction itself is a problem I should take seriously. Initially, I found it hard to sympathise and easy to say to take some responsibility. Now though, I've seen it classed as a mental illness which I take very seriously. I'm sure depression and anxiety seemed like an incomprehensible thing way back when also.
Personally, I find loot boxes fun and if they fund for things like map packs, then even better. But it's obvious now that the very least we can do is make some compromises even if we don't class it as gambling -- there's no point in being obstinate on issues people suffer over whether you treat their problem as serious or not.
For one, I believe the publishers should be made to make the loot box system much more transparent. It's way too shady as it is. Make the probabilities known. Secondly, I believe they should implement the option to purchase the item you want in some form or another. Whether it's simply to add the option to buy the item outright or at the very least have 2 forms of items in loot boxes: 1 is the original item with higher odds of obtaining it, 2 is the item locked behind a price but with a much higher chance of obtaining it.
Those are just 2 conservative suggestions. I just think it's good to open a discourse to help those who feel vulnerable. At the very least we can make voices heard which is evidently happening now.
TwiztidElf
Member
Although the intent is sound, I can't help but feel this has backfire written all over it.
Government have a long history of completely missing the point on the intricacies of matters like this (particularly technology concerns).
Like quoted in the OP, a response can potentially be "Just ban them all - problem solved!"
Government have a long history of completely missing the point on the intricacies of matters like this (particularly technology concerns).
Like quoted in the OP, a response can potentially be "Just ban them all - problem solved!"
toddhunter
Member
Both are gambling.
However trading cards have fixed odds. They make the pack, you buy it, nothing can change. You either keep, sell or trade the goods.
With a loot crate? The odds can be literally changed at any time. This can even happen after you have purchased the loot crate and you have no way of knowing. You may or may not be able to sell/trade the items you get from it. This transaction is also completely out of your control.
This is why loot crates are a more problematic form of gambling and this is why it needs more regulation that a physical product sitting on a shelf.
That would be fine.
However trading cards have fixed odds. They make the pack, you buy it, nothing can change. You either keep, sell or trade the goods.
With a loot crate? The odds can be literally changed at any time. This can even happen after you have purchased the loot crate and you have no way of knowing. You may or may not be able to sell/trade the items you get from it. This transaction is also completely out of your control.
This is why loot crates are a more problematic form of gambling and this is why it needs more regulation that a physical product sitting on a shelf.
That would be fine.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
If the government treated non-convertible funds the same as money for legal purposes (such as gambling) you'd have to include Final Fantasy gil on your tax forms. An overly broad law would be worse than no law at all.
toddhunter
Member
That same argument can be used against say gun control, I don't feel it is a strong one and it is often used by people resisting change.
Make the law, try to fix the problem. If it doesn't fix it, review and adjust the law. Doing nothing is never a good solution when there is an actual problem.
That's a lousy system. Offer alternatives like the ability to purchase the item people actually want is not difficult.
Audioboxer
Member
I think Overwatch does allow you to buy some legendary skins, but it's obviously time-gated (probably old skins no one is chasing anymore) and I have no idea if things like the timed-legendary Halloween/Christmas/Event drops ever end up purchasable.
Although apparently in China you can buy skins outright now
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2017/06/...-buy-overwatch-skins-with-real-money-in-china
but for event skins
lol
800 fucking dollars for a skin. Someone defend $800, please. I dare you.
ArkhamFantasy
Member
The ESRB and PEGI apparently.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
All theyve said is that it doesnt fall under the category of gambling. Which it doesnt. They havent said theyre not looking at implementing something else.