Support NeoGAF

[CookTrain]

Because with DLC, whatever random stuff that happens, that kind of randomness is part of the game's experience, the buyer gets the product he wants as a one time purchase of something he's sure to get.

Lootboxes include paying money for no return guaranteed, and the most important part is that there is no limit to lootboxes, when game experiences are built around the consuming of lootboxes to get enjoyment out of an already prepaid product, and such propositions are permanent, and the potential spending path has no real limits while still maintaining its random nature, it puts the whole bussiness in charge of the publishers, with zero guarantee to a buyer who might as well spend more money that he has.

And the worst part is that children games use this system. Old ass adults can destroy their finances for all we care, but no government wants to have a big part of its children pool in risk of becoming addicts.

The driving point, is how do you turn that into concise, specific language that can be enforced?

Repeatability seems one of the keys. Real money obviously. As above, there needs to be a qualifier that distinguishes lootbox experiences from things like arcade games. It's a good conversation to be having, as it lets us drill to what the requests we have actually are, clearly.

 

[DunpealD]

I think the least that could be done is requiring odds to be told to people.

Loot Boxes in gaming are the definition of blind purchases. You have no idea what the odds are.

As was brought to light by the post talking about Loot Box coding practices... we can't even be sure they have fixed odds.

Indeed, due to lack of transparency we don't even know whether loot boxes are a rigged game or not.

 

[Audioboxer]

Because with DLC, whatever random stuff that happens, that kind of randomness is part of the game's experience, the buyer gets the product he wants as a one time purchase of something he's sure to get.

Lootboxes include paying money for no return guaranteed, and the most important part is that there is no limit to lootboxes, when game experiences are built around the consuming of lootboxes to get enjoyment out of an already prepaid product, and such propositions are permanent, and the potential spending path has no real limits while still maintaining its random nature, it puts the whole bussiness in charge of the publishers, with zero guarantee to a buyer who might as well spend more money that he has.

And the worst part is that children games use this system. Old ass adults can destroy their finances for all we care, but no government wants to have a big part of its children pool in risk of becoming addicts.

Well, the counter-argument here is you are guaranteed a return. Then the counter-argument to that is, sure, but 90%+ of the return is absolute shit, or close to shit. People are chasing what is usually a very small portion of the loot table in play. Hence, the feeling many gamble for a specific outcome. Devolved debates into the worth of the contents of the box is taking away from the end goals. People spend lots of their money on things others will look at and go that was a huge waste of the money you've worked for. Welcome to life, if someone is happy you let them be happy. To an extent, gambling to where you can't pay your bills and don't know when to stop is a registered medical condition/illness.

5 years ago the thought of government regulation on games would have had GAF in an uproar. But s business model comes along that GAF doesn't like and suddenly everyone wants the government all up in their games. It's a terrible idea and starts a horrible precedent for the industry.

We already have regulation on games so I'm unsure where this faux-concern is coming from that your games are being taken away/banned? It even exists specifically for gambling for anyone paranoid about loot boxes being classified as gambling

 

[Ahasverus]

People fearing government regulations drank that American cool aid. Most countries in the world protect their people against common sense who knew.

Granted, you must not elect an insane religious Asylum to run the place unlike the US.

Well, the counter-argument here is you are guaranteed a return. Then the counter-argument to that is, sure, but 90%+ of the return is absolute shit, or close to shit. Devolved debates into the worth of the contents of the box is taking away from the end goals. People spend lots of their money on things others will look at and go that was a huge waste of the money you've worked for. Welcome to life, if someone is happy you let them be happy. To an extent, gambling to where you can't pay your bills and don't know when to stop is a registered medical condition/illness.

Again, /children/. As some person above said, the system is similar to a Pachinko one, where whatever is sold is the illusion of getting something, while no guaranteeing such. You really really don't want kids to grow up with this stuff, because while lootboxes are not gambling itself, they're a few steps away from real gambling, which is a heavily regulated practice.

Asking for no regulation whatsoever ignores that there are predatory practices going on, made with the intention of extracting as much money from vulnerable groups. It might not be gambling, but it's no transparent business either.

 

[NEO0MJ]

http://www.mobygames.com/attribute/sheet/attributeId,426/

fill your boots.

I meant the american AO rating, not PEGI 18

 

[Stone Ocean]

Yeah, I think “finite uses” is probably the wording.

Although that then raises the questions about arcade machines that have any randomisation in the code.

^^^ heh, exactly.

Yeah. Its the difference between using a slot machine and buying a toy slot machine. The big thing about lootboxes is that they have no upper limit on how much you can spend.

Arcade machines are predatory in their own way but at the end of the day arcade games have an element of skill. You don't get better at opening lootboxes.

 

[GLAMr]

Seems like an incredibly risky bet to me. But I hope it works out as desired.

Box labeling makes a lot of sense for all parties, but it sure seems like this has the danger of going further than that.

If protection from loot boxes is deemed necessary, it’s not a huge leap for other things like violence to be deemed so, in which case you get laws like Germany and Australia.

Anyways, best of luck with the petition.

I love how these two countries so frequently get brought up as examples for excessive regulation. "Ewww, look at these countries with top-tier life expectancy, high standard of living and vanishingly rare occurrence of gun violence. We don't want to be like them!"

To the topic at hand; I agree something needs to be done about microtransations. Maybe the MT part could be walled behind an 18+ barrier while the main game gets to keep its usual rating? Sounds like an infrastructure/enforcement nightmare.

 

[Audioboxer]

People fearing government regulations drank that American cool aid. Most countries in the world protect their people against common sense who knew.

Granted, you must not elect an insane religious Asylum to run the place unlike the US.

Again, /children/. As some person above said, the system is similar to a Pachinko one, where whatever is sold is the illusion of getting something, while no guaranteeing such. You really really don't want kids to grow up with this stuff, because while lootboxes are not gambling itself, they're a few steps away from real gambling, which is a heavily regulated practice.

Asking for no regulation whatsoever ignores that there are predatory practices going on, made with the intention of extracting as much money from vulnerable groups. It might not be gambling, but it's no transparent business either.

I'm just throwing a rebuttal at you I saw coming a mile away. To be honest, it has some merit. You often get something in these gaming loot box systems. The point is being missed though not to be intellectually dishonest about what these systems aim to produce (chasing the 1% loot drops) and what gamers pay for (that 1% loot). You don't make literally hundreds of millions out of setting up these systems to favour the spender. The house is always favoured to win and you lose. Drop rate regulation at least makes this clear to anyone who thinks if they simply think positively about their £40 of Overwatch crates, they'll get what they want. Stats don't lie, but you need to know those stats/drop-rates to at least have it clear to your eyes.

The think of the children argument is a bit iffy, because if we're being pragmatic about gambling it can affect anyone. I get for the purposes of getting the attention of MPs or those outside gaming, framing it as youngsters running up bills of hundreds of £ for chances at cosmetic items gets conversations happening.

 

[Alexander DeLarge]

If they toss it over to the Gambling Commission then, assuming anything happens at all (unlikely), we get every game with lootboxes branded 18+ and lootboxes don't actually go anywhere.

Then parents are going to wonder why Rocket League is 18+. This kind of reaction would persuade publishers to move away from it, especially if legislation takes the spotlight.

 

[Ahasverus]

The think of the children argument is a bit iffy, because if we're being pragmatic about gambling it can affect anyone. I get for the purposes of getting the attention of MPs or those outside gaming, framing it as youngsters running up bills of hundreds of £ gets conversations happening.

Yeah sure it applies to everyone, that goes without saying.

But really, casinos are not promoted to children, and lootboxes are too close to them and their practices to leave them so open to that population as they are.

 

[MUnited83]

Well, the counter-argument here is you are guaranteed a return. Then the counter-argument to that is, sure, but 90%+ of the return is absolute shit, or close to shit. People are chasing what is usually a very small portion of the loot table in play. Hence, the feeling many gamble for a specific outcome. Devolved debates into the worth of the contents of the box is taking away from the end goals. People spend lots of their money on things others will look at and go that was a huge waste of the money you've worked for. Welcome to life, if someone is happy you let them be happy. To an extent, gambling to where you can't pay your bills and don't know when to stop is a registered medical condition/illness.



We already have regulation on games so I'm unsure where this faux-concern is coming from that your games are being taken away/banned? It even exists specifically for gambling for anyone paranoid about loot boxes being classified as gambling

PEGI isn't government regulation. That's the whole point of PEGI.

 

[Audioboxer]

Yeah sure it applies to everyone, that goes without saying.

But really, casinos are not promoted to children, and lootboxes are too close to them and their practices to leave them so open to that population as they are.

Well, sure, loot box promotion in games from in your face ads, pop ups with "are you sure you don't want this SUPER AWESOME COOL SPARKLY RARE SHIT?!?!?!", developer blogs, and social media spam of Ronaldo/Messi FIFA UT cards and so on is all in your face advertisement. I agree there. More youngsters than ever are online following all of this.

PEGI isn't government regulation. That's the whole point of PEGI.

The government can act against any retailers breaking laws around age ratings. Yeah sure it happens daily, but the point is they can act.

Video game ratings using the Pegi (Pan-European Game Information) system have become legally enforceable in the UK.

Retailers that sell titles with ratings of 12, 16 or 18 years to children below the age limits will be subject to prosecution.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19042908

 

[Stone Ocean]

The idea that publishers don't care about age ratings considering how often they go out of their way to avoid certain age ratings is silly. You think Disney would allow Battlefront to get a M rating?

 

[Audioboxer]

The idea that publishers don't care about age ratings considering how often they go out of their way to avoid certain age ratings is silly. You think Disney would allow Battlefront to get a M rating?

It's not exactly a 3 as it is

Sure, they'll have wanted to come in at 16 rather than 18, but it would be interesting to see if push came to shove what they'd do.

 

[CookTrain]

It's not exactly a 3 as it is

Sure, they'll have wanted to come in at 16 rather than 18, but it would be interesting to see if push came to shove what they'd do.

In the UK, an 18 is more of a formality than anything. It obviously doesn't have zero impact on sales, but there isn't a high stigma to 18 rated games like there is to M-rated or especially AO rated games in America.

 

[nekkid]

I like the idea of not allowing advertising and purchase of these transactions in the game itself. You have to purchase them outside the game from the respective store and they have to be rated 18+.

 

[Audioboxer]

In the UK, an 18 is more of a formality than anything. It obviously doesn't have zero impact on sales, but there isn't a high stigma to 18 rated games like there is to M-rated or especially AO rated games in America.

Maybe from the publishers, but sure as shit not the market/consumers.

Remember America is a bit more insane around nudity/sex than the UK, and probably still violence too. Your Jack Thompsons and other nutters were Americans.

I hope Trading Cards don't get hit in all of this ...

It seems most trading cards either by choice or law already display odds

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=252066872&postcount=124

 

[Miles X]

I hope Trading Cards don't get hit in all of this ...

 

[CookTrain]

Maybe from the publishers, but sure as shit not the market/consumers.

Remember America is a bit more insane around nudity/sex than the UK, and probably still violence too. Your Jack Thompsons and other nutters were Americans.

Huh? I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with what I said

 

[CosmicQueso]

I love how these two countries so frequently get brought up as examples for excessive regulation. "Ewww, look at these countries with top-tier life expectancy, high standard of living and vanishingly rare occurrence of gun violence. We don't want to be like them!".

Hold on.

You’re saying that there is some causation between regulation of video games and the life expectancy and standard of living in the countries that do so.

You do realize how incredibly ridiculous that is, don’t you?

If you’re okay with these restrictions spreading to other countries that’s fine, but you can at least approach it with reason and some kind of intellectual honesty rather than spout absolute nonsense like that.

I can do what ifs too: Will you be able to stop publishers when whatever they come up with next makes Battlefront 2 look like horse armor in comparison?

Sure. We as the customers can not buy those games and be vocal with criticism of the systems It’s not as if consumers don’t have power here.

Very few people criticized ultimate team, overwatch or valve crates. Up until a couple weeks ago, this was a non-issue.

Now it’s an issue. But instead of voicing concerns and not buying the things a bunch of gamers determin the govt should get involved immediately? I see this as an immense over reaction that could backfire.

You’re free to disagree of course, but I don’t think I’m being unreasonable. I can see how certain actions would benefit everyone.

 

[Audioboxer]

Huh? I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with what I said

Sorry, probably agreeing. It's just because you quoted the UK Battlefront post. Ultimately it might just come down to the UK/EU to get drop rates published so Americans can benefit. That is unless the loot boxes in America end up with different hidden drop rates than ours ¯\_(&#12484_/¯ A real concern, as who the heck knows if we even have a global system in most games right now? That would be the fair thing, as discrimination based on location would be incredibly scummy.

There has got to be some disgruntled devs in the industry somewhere to anonymously speak to press sneak fuck?!?!

 

[CookTrain]

Sorry, probably agreeing. It's just because you quoted the UK Battlefront post. Ultimately it might just come down to the UK/EU to get drop rates published so Americans can benefit from. That is unless the loot boxes in America end up with different hidden drop rates than ours ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

Ah yes, basically I was saying that if Battlefront went to an 18... I honestly doubt Disney would care too much. As you say, the buying public certainly wouldn't.

Publishing of drop rates seems the most approachable way of addressing this stuff. Again, as you say... how honest they get with that when it comes to territory is really quite the question. I'm wary of the whole system since the opaque nature of the mechanisms was brought up recently.

 

[gblues]

Something does need to be done about lootboxes but I don't think they need regulated as gambling. For example how are Overwatch loot boxes any different to buying a pack of pokemon cards? It's a product I'm buying and I know that I'll get x amount of cards and what the chances are of a rare/common/holo card are. It's just luck what specific cards you get. That isn't gambling like putting money into a slot machine in the hope you'll get money back.

Any developer selling loot boxes need to give more clarity on the chances of getting specific items. I thought Blizzard had to do this in china? I'm up for that being applied to all studios in every country.

I just don't trust the UK government. They'll jump at this and be all like well you asked! Yet when we try stand up against censorship and blocking websites and porn they just are like Nope fuck you.

The key differences between trading/CCG and loot boxes are intent and presentation.

With the cards, collecting is the entire point. The cards have intrinsic value. Duplicates can be shared; traded, or sold in a secondary market. In most cases, the only thing you can do with loot crate dupes is to get some pittance of an in-game currency. And of course, loot crates are inherently tangential to the purpose of the game.

CCGs don’t sell you packs while you’re playing. There’s no grand ceremony when you open them. TPC can’t manipulate the odds of the pack after it has been manufactured.

 

[CookTrain]

TPC can’t manipulate the odds of the pack after it has been manufactured.

Mm... this is the most insidious part of the whole process for me.

 

[Par Score]

5 years ago the thought of government regulation on games would have had GAF in an uproar. But s business model comes along that GAF doesn’t like and suddenly everyone wants the government all up in their games. It’s a terrible idea and starts a horrible precedent for the industry.

The UK has been regulating the sale of games since 1984.

Not every country suffers with America's hard on for free speech, libertarianism and laissez-faire capitalism.

PEGI isn't government regulation. That's the whole point of PEGI.

PEGI replaced the BBFC* for cost reasons. It is still a legally enforceable rating and very much subject to government regulation.

*The BBFC is still responsible for the highest R18 rating, but it doesn't come up much.

 

[Audioboxer]

The key differences between trading/CCG and loot boxes are intent and presentation.

With the cards, collecting is the entire point. The cards have intrinsic value. Duplicates can be shared; traded, or sold in a secondary market. In most cases, the only thing you can do with loot crate dupes is to get some pittance of an in-game currency. And of course, loot crates are inherently tangential to the purpose of the game.

CCGs don’t sell you packs while you’re playing. There’s no grand ceremony when you open them. TPC can’t manipulate the odds of the pack after it has been manufactured.

Not quite true in streamer land

The main point here actually being how streamers end up acting as popular gateways for genuine children to jump on board.

I need not point out how much money TmarTn and ProSyndicate probably made off of literal children. So, do keep in mind when you satirise the think of the children argument, there are some truths in it about digital goods in a seriously popular digital industry.

 

[quest]

I hope Trading Cards don't get hit in all of this ...

Considering they actually regulate themselves I think they will be fine. If the industry would done simple things like posting odds this would of not of happened. They got greedy and I hope the get regulated out of existence. It is shameful the crap the industry is pulling this fall with 60 dollar priced games and loot boxes. Should of kept them purely cosmetic with odds clearly posted with a way for players to still earn playing the game.

 

[GarthVaderUK]

I hope Trading Cards don't get hit in all of this ...

If trading cards can display the odds on the packaging, surely loot box games could at least display the odds for their users too: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=252066872&postcount=124

 

[LordRaptor]

On the one hand - good on you people against lootboxes doing something that actually means something instead of just being a dickhead on social media.

On the other..... wew lad.
I hope you enjoy your strange bedfellows in your cause, because Keith Vaz and The Daily Mail are going to back you 100%.

e:

Remember America is a bit more insane around nudity/sex than the UK, and probably still violence too. Your Jack Thompsons and other nutters were Americans.

Uhhhhh no?
Manhunt 2 was actually banned from sale in the UK

 

[Scrooged]

The key differences between trading/CCG and loot boxes are intent and presentation.

With the cards, collecting is the entire point. The cards have intrinsic value. Duplicates can be shared; traded, or sold in a secondary market. In most cases, the only thing you can do with loot crate dupes is to get some pittance of an in-game currency. And of course, loot crates are inherently tangential to the purpose of the game.

I've noticed a lot of people using this argument but it makes no sense in this debate. If anything, the fact that you have the random chance of getting a high value card that you can legally resell for money makes it much closer to gambling than lootboxes. With lootboxes you can't get any money unless you use an unsactioned third party which is always against the TOS.

So if the UK finds lootboxes to be worthy of regulation, trading cards will be included by default. And other things that we're probably not thinking about that people have traditionally not considered gambling.

CCGs don’t sell you packs while you’re playing. There’s no grand ceremony when you open them. TPC can’t manipulate the odds of the pack after it has been manufactured.

None of this matters if it isn't gambling.

 

[Stead Fast]

If trading cards can display the odds on the packaging, surely loot box games could at least display the odds for their users too: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=252066872&postcount=124

Indeed, the thankfully few notably negative reactions to this don't seem to deliver a compelling enough argument against something as easily applicable as this.

Also, a little off-topic, but of course Boogie would have to be one of those fucking search results. Topic is already one that raises my blood pressure, then he shows up...

 

[Hazanko]

Then the gaming industry can blame itself for not self regulating their abusive practices that target gambling addicts.

So true.

 

[s_mirage]

If trading cards can display the odds on the packaging, surely loot box games could at least do that too: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=252066872&postcount=124

Yes, if they're ethical. This is why I'm deeply suspicious of the intent of publishers when they're hell bent on hiding the odds. Are they changing the odds frequently? Is everyone even getting the same odds? Are odds being changed on an per-player basis depending on their spending patterns?

I'm not a fan of government regulation over self regulation, but when it's clear that regulators aren't prepared to do even the most cursory research into issues surrounding a practice that has the potential to be addictive and exploitative, probably due to the amount of money it makes for the industry, someone else needs to step in.

To make matters worse, as is shown by the Sega Casino rating, PEGI are hypocrites. Something can be given an 18 rating for depicting gambling despite no real money being involved, and therefore not technically being gambling, and yet they dismiss lootboxes as a non-issue as they don't meet the legal definition of gambling despite often being games of chance involving real money.

 

[Audioboxer]

On the one hand - good on you people against lootboxes doing something that actually means something instead of just being a dickhead on social media.

On the other..... wew lad.
I hope you enjoy your strange bedfellows in your cause, because Keith Vaz and The Daily Mail are going to back you 100%.

e:


Uhhhhh no?
Manhunt 2 was actually banned from sale in the UK

Actually, not quite in the end

The BBFC has been given "no alternative" but to issue Manhunt 2 with an 18 certificate.

The Video Appeals Committee voted by a majority of four to three to allow the long-contested game to go on sale in the UK.

Manhunt 2 was was resubmitted to the VAC in January, to be judged under "new guidelines" specified by the High Court.

The BBFC has routinely opposed the game and was not happy at the result.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/manhunt-2-will-get-uk-release

I've noticed a lot of people using this argument but it makes no sense in this debate. If anything, the fact that you have the random chance of getting a high value card that you can legally resell for money makes it much closer to gambling than lootboxes. With lootboxes you can't get any money unless you use an unsactioned third party which is always against the TOS.

So if the UK finds lootboxes to be worthy of regulation, trading cards will be included by default. And other things that we're probably not thinking about that people have traditionally not considered gambling.



None of this matters if it isn't gambling.

Not necessarily if they specify a digital-only focus. Cards already seem to self-regulate anyway. Less of a reason for a Government to go after them. On that note, I can't actually find definite information if cards are regulated by law, or simply self-regulation. Probably the later.

 

[Shiggy]

We already have regulation on games so I'm unsure where this faux-concern is coming from that your games are being taken away/banned? It even exists specifically for gambling for anyone paranoid about loot boxes being classified as gambling

The boxart is quite hilarious:
PEGI - 18
German rating right next to it - Approved without age restriction

 

[quest]

Yes, if they're ethical. This is why I'm deeply suspicious of the intent of publishers when they're hell bent on hiding the odds. Are they changing the odds frequently? Is everyone even getting the same odds? Are odds being changed on an per-player basis depending on their spending patterns?

I'm not a fan of government regulation over self regulation, but when it's clear that regulators aren't prepared to do even the most cursory research into issues surrounding a practice that has the potential to be addictive and exploitative, probably due to the amount of money it makes for the industry, someone else needs to step in.

Completely agree the publishers have something to hide if they refuse to post the odds clearly like tcg do. I would not be shocked if they did as you said reduced odds of whales to get them to spend more money. Upped the odds on first few boxes to get people hooked.

 

[Audioboxer]

The boxart is quite hilarious:
PEGI - 18
German rating right next to it - Approved without age restriction

To be honest, ratings around gambling seem to be inconsistent with PEGI. Not sure why. I wonder if actual money has to be emulated to get an 18?

 

[LordRaptor]

Actually, not quite in the end

It was appealed and eventually allowed, but I don't see where you can say "only America has the lets ban videogames nutters" when the country that actually did ban manhunt 2 is this one, and while Jack Thompson is a disbarred joke that nobody listens to, Keith Vaz is still - fuck knows how, given all the the shady shit hes been involved in along with his ongoing 'ban all videogames for being violent because of the children' crusade - an MP.

Like I say; enjoy the strange bedfellows calls for harsher regulation of videogames is going to have crawling out of the woodwork.

 

[nekkid]

To be honest, ratings around gambling seem to be inconsistent with PEGI. Not sure why. I wonder if actual money has to be emulated to get an 18?

Not necessarily. Does Casino Tycoon actually contain any user-interactive gambling in the gameplay, for example?

 

[Audioboxer]

It was appealed and eventually allowed, but I don't see where you can say "only America has the lets ban videogames nutters" when the country that actually did ban manhunt 2 is this one, and while Jack Thompson is a disbarred joke that nobody listens to, Keith Vaz is still - fuck knows how, given all the the shady shit hes been involved in along with his ongoing 'ban all videogames for being violent because of the children' crusade - an MP.

Like I say; enjoy the strange bedfellows calls for harsher regulation of videogames is going to have crawling out of the woodwork.

Well, it would help your cause if you do not add words to my post.

Remember America is a bit more insane around nudity/sex than the UK, and probably still violence too. Your Jack Thompsons and other nutters were Americans.

Clearly, I was satirising America's real insane hostility to any sort of nudity, and then invoking Jack Thompson as one of the worst examples of a lawyer gone crazy.

Your moral panic about all games getting banned can just go alongside the rest of the people saying that with no evidence. Especially as literal gambling games, for real money, are legal in the UK.

Not necessarily. Does Casino Tycoon actually contain any user-interactive gambling in the gameplay, for example?

I don't know, but the ones I'm more interested in are the games hit with "It contains: Content that teaches or encourages gambling" and get a 12. They say that for the 18 rated games as well.

 

[LordRaptor]

Clearly, I was satirising America's real insane hostility to any sort of nudity, and then invoking Jack Thompson as one of the worst examples of a lawyer gone crazy.

MP Keith Vaz is just as big a nutter as Jack Thompson regarding wanting violent videogames banned entirely though.
Not on other terms like needing an actual psychiatric report to prove to a judge that he is not actually insane, or sending a judge gay porn.

But I have zero idea where you have this idea that there is nobody in the UK who wants to see videogames heavily regulated as much as Jack Thompson does.
Our JAck Thompson is actually worse because;
1) He's a fucking MP and actually has the means to get things done
2) He's actually managed to get games banned while in govenrment, something Jack Thompson never managed.

 

[Audioboxer]

MP Keith Vaz is just as big a nutter as Jack Thompson regarding wanting violent videogames banned entirely though.
Not on other terms like needing an actual psychiatric report to prove to a judge that he is not actually insane, or sending a judge gay porn.

But I have zero idea where you have this idea that there is nobody in the UK who wants to see videogames heavily regulated as much as Jack Thompson does.
Our JAck Thompson is actually worse because;
1) He's a fucking MP and actually has the means to get things done
2) He's actually managed to get games banned while in govenrment, something Jack Thompson never managed.

I have zero idea too, as again, I never said that ¯\_(&#12484_/¯ Jack Thompson is just one of the most well-known examples.

Games aren't getting banned entirely anymore, so it's a non-starter deflection from loot boxes. From seeing some of your arguments in other topics I'm not surprised that is what you want to deflect to, as well as the panic about what the Daily Mail writes as its headline. Who cares what the DM writes? Pretty certain if this bad boy can pass in the UK with player controlled head decapitation and eye gouging we're alright

Or this bad boy with torture

Made in Scotland should I add.

Games aren't getting banned, as I showed earlier you can go on the national lottery website and play games for money. Trying to spread hysteria to move people away from discussing regulation for loot boxes/paid RNG with a "your games are going to get banned! don't let them take your games!" isn't fooling anyone. If people want to defend loot boxes as you like them. Just say that. If you want to defend against known drop rates. Just say that. If you would be distraught they were rated 18 and classed as teaching gambling. Just say that. Please don't make up fear-mongering whatsaboutisms.

It appeared CookTrain was specifically asking me to comment on

but there isn't a high stigma to 18 rated games like there is to M-rated or especially AO rated games in America.

So I did.

 

[Azusa]

PEGI isn't government regulation. That's the whole point of PEGI.

PEGI is just a rating system. In UK all games are rated by VSC Rating Board and they are backed by UK law and has legal responsibility to rate games. Its not a just industry self-regulation. Under sections 9-10 of the Video Recordings Act 1984 it is a crime to possess or supply a video game which has not been awarded a PEGI classification.

Also under section 11 of the same Video Recordings Act 1984 its a crime to supply a game to someone under the age specified on the box. Punishable by imprisonment and a fine.

 

[DrLazy]

So happy this is gaining visibility. Many of us are not comfortable where the industry is at. In some ways I may benefit from the system as I'm not a gambler. But just like letting a casino pay for schools instead of taxes, the focus on loot boxes has a corrupting influence on gamers, kids, and the product. Relying on people with impulse control issues to fund our industry is so sad and I think has bad long term ramifications.

 

[LordRaptor]

Games aren't getting banned entirely anymore, so it's a non-starter deflection from loot boxes. From seeing some of your arguments in other topics I'm not surprised that is what you want to deflect to, as well as the panic about what the Daily Mail writes as its headline. Who cares what the DM writes? Pretty certain if this bad boy can pass in the UK with player controlled head decapitation and eye gouging we're alright

Or this bad boy with torture

Made in Scotland should I add.

Games aren't getting banned, as I showed earlier you can go on the national lottery website and play games for money. Trying to spread hysteria to move people away from discussing regulation for loot boxes/paid RNG with a "your games are going to get banned! don't let them take your games!" isn't fooling anyone. If people want to defend loot boxes as you like them. Just say that. If you want to defend against known drop rates. Just say that. If you would be distraught they were rated 18 and classed as teaching gambling. Just say that. Please don't make up fear-mongering whatsaboutisms.

Jesus Christ.

I'm not "deflecting" or using "whataboutisms".

I am outright telling you -as a fact - that where existing regulations exist but you don't like them because you don't feel they go far enough you are in Political Lobbying Pressure Group territory.

The "whataboutisms" are pretending that you're not.

I am further saying, don't be fucking surprised when people with deeper more far reaching concerns about videogames in general are happy to hitch their train to that wagon and co-opt it.

Because thats what happens with pressure groups.

 

[Crayon]

Interesting.

 

[Audioboxer]

Jesus Christ.

I'm not "deflecting" or using "whataboutisms".

I am outright telling you -as a fact - that where existing regulations exist but you don't like them because you don't feel they go far enough you are in Political Lobbying Pressure Group territory.

The "whataboutisms" are pretending that you're not.

I am further saying, don't be fucking surprised when people with deeper more far reaching concerns about videogames in general are happy to hitch their train to that wagon and co-opt it.

Because thats what happens with pressure groups.

Crazy people always hitch onto things, what is more important here? Regulation, or being scared of crazy people writing Daily Mail headlines and some MPs with shit for brains?

You don't look to the crazy minority, you look to see what the majority are discussing. A vocal majority are discussing loot boxes/paid RNG right now, and while that might be seriously frustrating some, tough, it's happening. The Labour MP leading this as things stand certainly doesn't seem to be part of a crazy minority. The Government is already going to have to respond to the petition within a few days, so stop caring about the DM and other nutters. Reasonable people are discussing this. None, or very few of which are even hinting that they want games banned.

 

[LordRaptor]

Crazy people always hitch onto things, what is more important here? Regulation, or being scared of crazy people writing Daily Mail headlines and some MPs with shit for brains?

Regulation already exists though...?

And yeah, if you're not worried by what Daily Mail campaigns based on emotional rhetoric and not actual facts can do to this country, might I kindly suggest pay some fucking attention?

Like... "whats the worst thing that can happen due to a reactionary press and an ill-informed electorate>?" is an actual argument being made in snoopers charter post-brexit web history shared across all government departments encryption backdoors ISP level court mandated internet filtering Britain?

A vocal majority are discussing loot boxes/paid RNG right now

No.
Vocal, yes. Majority, no.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

What regulation exists for lootboxes outside of China?

 

[Audioboxer]

Regulation already exists though...?

And yeah, if you're not worried by what Daily Mail campaigns based on emotional rhetoric and not actual facts can do to this country, might I kindly suggest pay some fucking attention?

Like... "whats the worst thing that can happen due to a reactionary press and an ill-informed electorate>?" is an actual argument being made in snoopers charter post-brexit web history shared across all government departments encryption backdoors ISP level court mandated internet filtering Britain?




No.
Vocal, yes. Majority, no.

Regulation doesn't exist for drop rates/transparency.

We're talking about loot boxes. Who gives a shit what the DM writes about loot boxes? They probably won't even post something. Do not mistake that for ignoring what they write about far more serious issues than loot boxes.

What's your barometer? I think a petition that passes the required amount of signatures for parliament to at least acknowledge it isn't too shabby. Not to mention a MP taking reasonable questions to the Government themselves.