Support NeoGAF

[Audioboxer]

But that is not what the questions being posed in the OP are asking.
They are literally and directly equating lootboxes with illegal gambling and gambling for minors.

That is why I asked what you actually want, because government legislation based on the questions specifically asked in the OP is calls for brand new legislation, and on the assumption that digital goods have an inherent value as per the Isle Of Mans stance.

There is literally nothing there about "make drop rates visible".
If thats what you want, that is not what the person who contacted their MP wants.

Do you not see the inherent problem?

I have no problem with drop rates being more visible. But I don't believe legislating for that will be the way that happens that best suits responsible adult customers.
People didn't stop buying horse armour on moral grounds; they stopped buying low impact cosmetics because they're shit value for money, and in games like CoD have like, a 12 month shelf life.

Companies that introduce better-for-people-that-like-lootbox systems will sell more lootboxes than cokpanies that don't.
That happens after people that don't like lootboxes stop whining about it and trying to find gotchas.

I play games with lootboxes in, and find them a fairer alternative than most of the alternative additional monetisation systems out there.
If someone comes up with something better than that, I will move and play that instead.



Have you ever had a job where one customer makes you fill out a bunch of paperwork that has to be vetted by a lawyer who is a specialist in that particular field, versus one where you just do the job you usually do?

Even if this hypothetical legislation literally does only the one thing you want and touches nothing else, there will be games that just skip the jump;ing through hoops entirely, and with digital purchases that is as simple as a "This game is not available in your region" checkbox on submission.

Like.... why is there any doubt that that would happen at all?

Because a large portion of the consumers do think it is gambling, so it's being framed like that. A response from PEGI and the ESRB isn't instantly going to change everyone's minds about the real experiences they felt they were going through when paying money for a chance at something, and then feeling like they lost their money/wasted it. They wanted a legendary skin for $40, they got none. That feels like a loss for some after handing over $40, even if they have emotes, rare skins and whatever else is obtainable. You see games rated 18 for "teaching how to gamble". Again, people would make an argument here handing over real money for a loot box can be construed as teaching how to gamble. Real money going towards a CHANCE of what you want. Not real money going towards getting what you want.

That is the difference between a loot box and buying a skin directly. It is a game of betting on chances without a ceiling for expenditure that relies solely on luck/statistical chance. You could spend $100 for a legendary, your neighbour $60.

But I don't believe legislating for that will be the way that happens that best suits responsible adult customers.

Companies won't do it themselves, so adults are left pursuing all options they can. Blizzard wouldn't even just adhere to Chinese law and get on with it. Do you not see the problem here? Nothing is happening just leaving it to the companies. That seems to be what your solution comes down to, leave it alone, leave it to the industry that's showing ZERO signs of applying some basic transparent decency.

Your desire to oppose knowing the drop rates is to bring up hypotheticals based on fear, as I said to the extent of games not releasing in the UK. Or games will be banned. Or the Daily Mail is going to stop kids climbing trees. You still haven't directly given compelling argumentation for why you feel EA/Blizzard/Ubisoft/Activision/WB would be soo scared to release their drop rates they'd abandon the UK? You still haven't tied down for me who the pubs or devs you fear won't comply would be? Explain your fears better, or it just comes across strange you won't try to.

 

[staticneuron]

I've hardened my stance on this in the last couple of days when a friend told me he dropped €500 into a game.

I know he can't afford that, but he was vulnerable and exploited.

That's the equivalent of 12 full priced games. Years Worth for most people, and one game got that out of him in a couple of weeks.

Is your friend an adult? Capable of making rational choices for himself?

I don't understand why people would need protection from themselves, unless it is a behavioral or psychological issue. If it is a mental issue wouldn't your friend be better served by seeing a shrink to curb those habits?

 

[Jaguar Victory]

Sounds like your typical corporate brainwashed millenial.

This is silly namecalling. I don't think loot crates are gambling. No more than Ipsy getting random makeup for x dollars a month.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Is your friend an adult? Capable of making rational choices for himself?

I don't understand why people would need protection from themselves, unless it is a behavioral or psychological issue. If it is a mental issue wouldn't your friend be better served by seeing a shrink to curb those habits?

So are you opposed to casinos being regulated?

 

[Jaguar Victory]

So are you opposed to casinos being regulated?

Lootcrates are not Casinos. Equating the two is BS.

 

[Audioboxer]

Is your friend an adult? Capable of making rational choices for himself?

I don't understand why people would need protection from themselves, unless it is a behavioral or psychological issue. If it is a mental issue wouldn't your friend be better served by seeing a shrink to curb those habits?

Well, a lot of gambling is. I recommend reading this article

This story is being highlighted as one of Gamasutra's best stories of 2013.

"I'd use birthday money, I'd eat cheaper lunches, I'd ask my wife to pay for dinner so I'd have a spare $10-$20 to spend in the store. Which does mean, I guess, that I was thinking about it even away from the game."

Chris was in his mid-20s when he began spending a few dollars here and there on Team Fortress 2. All of his friends had recently moved out of town, and his wife was now working a nighttime job, leading him to take solace in an online TF2 community.

At first he'd simply buy some TF2 "keys", use them to open some item crates, then dish some of the contents out to players online and keep the good stuff for himself. He enjoyed the social interactions that came with these giveaways, and it seemed worth it for the money he was paying.

But soon Chris discovered his first "unusual" item, marked with a purple seal. "I had this unbeatable rush of adulation and excitement," he says. "For someone who didn't get out much I was on cloud nine. And at that point things changed -- I started chasing that high."

Addict-to-play

For around six months following this discovery, Chris found himself draining his bank account until he didn't have a spare dollar to his name -- all for a selection of pixels that would hopefully be wrapped in a purple glow.

"My savings got wiped out pretty quickly -- although it should be noted that at the time I didn't have much put away to begin with," he explains. "The real trouble wasn't that it cleaned out my bank account, but that it put me in a really delicate situation. With no savings and every dollar not spent on food, shelter, or utilities going to digital hats, any unexpected expense became a really big deal."

Chris even had a few health scares along the way, and found that he couldn't afford to pay the medical bills because his savings account had been stripped for TF2 money.

"It got so bad that at one point Steam actually blocked my credit card, thinking I was some sort of account scammer, and I had to open a support ticket to tell them, 'No, that really is me spending whatever savings I have on this stupid game with fake hats.'" he says. "And like any addicted user, my social element didn't help -- most of my outside-of-work contacts were people I just played TF2 with. At work I just wanted to be uncrating things, and when I was uncrating things I just wanted to see better results."

It was when his out-of-control spending began to have an effect on his relationship with his wife, that Chris finally realized that this needed to stop.

https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/195806/chasing_the_whale_examining_the_.php

No point in just dismissing it as it's based around F2P (TF2 did used to cost, I bought it), as these practices coming into $60 games HAVE come from the F2P market. It's 9 pages so strap in for a read, but it's worth doing some groundwork here for education on what is going on without simply downplaying anyone with issues, or the people behind the mechanics who know how to prey.

A very basic form of protection from one's self is knowing your odds. They're always a reminder at how steep it's rigged against you (a 2% chance, a 5% chance or a 20% chance, etc). It might only stop a small minority from getting addicted/being careless, but one person saved from themselves is one less person in trouble.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Lootcrates are not Casinos. Equating the two is BS.

Did you read what he said?

 

[Azusa]

So are you opposed to casinos being regulated?

How is it relevant? Casinos are regulated and people still lose all their savings there. If the friend in example mentioned above is an adult gambling regulations wont help him much.

 

[Jaguar Victory]

Did you read what he said?

Casinos are regulated for two reasons:

1 - Because communities decided they didn't like the element it attracted and didn't want them in their community.

2 - Money laundering. A big part of the reason so many used to be/are mob owned.

That's the difference between your regular ass loot crate and what Valve was doing. What Valve was doing was different because you could make actual money out of it. In game items where there is no normal common marketplace are different.

 

[WaterAstro]

Would defining loot boxes as gambling also define stuff like hearthstone card packs as gambling? I'm not really sure how you'd distinguish between the two.

Yes, Hearthstone, FIFA, League of Legends, Overwatch, Uncharted, all of these major titles will have "Gambling" in it.

I don't care what people here think of it. Loot boxes aren't gambling if you aren't getting money in return. If it stays in the game, it's pretty much like buying a DLC.

Loot boxes have addiction associated with it, similar to gambling addiction, but it should be treated as a separate addiction because real gambling addiction is very different.

Of course, this doesn't apply to games that you can actually get money out of it, like CS:GO skins where you can sell CS:GO loot box items for actual monetary value to buy other games on Steam.

 

[LordRaptor]

Okay, sound, so then why should we miss the games you're talking about under the highlighted?

If a game is only available digitally and not available in your country, then it means missing out on a game.
I'm sure there are some German Steam users on this board who will attest to getting certain games being a tedious affair involving middlemen.

Because a large portion of the consumers do think it is gambling, so it's being framed like that.

No, again, there is a vocal minority who do not like where existing legislation has landed on this issue, and want to change existing legislation to accommodate their perspective of what games "should" be.

And, again, there are other perspectives that would love to see additional legislation on a wide range of things in videogames "for the children"; things like attaching credit cards to ensure only 18+ year olds can play games. Things like mandatory maximum playtime limits. Things like greater censorship of violent content.

You are in political pressure group territory.

You still haven't directly given compelling argumentation for why you feel EA/Blizzard/Ubisoft/Activision/WB would be soo scared to release their drop rates they'd abandon the UK? You still haven't tied down for me who the pubs or devs you fear won't comply would be? Explain your fears better, or it just comes across strange you won't try to.

Why are you framing this as a thing that only exists in the AAA space, or that any legislation would only affect AAA games?
I don't give a fuck about EA/Ubisoft/WB/Activision, they have deep pockets and any such legislation would just accelerate existing consolidation and homogenisation.

I give a shit about titles like Realm Of The Mad God, or Dirty Bomb, or PUBG, or other titles that don't even exist yet who use non-traditional monetisation methods because they are working in the non-traditional videogames space.

 

[Audioboxer]

Yes, Hearthstone, FIFA, League of Legends, Overwatch, Uncharted, all of these major titles will have "Gambling" in it.

I don't care what people here think of it. Loot boxes aren't gambling if you aren't getting money in return. If it stays in the game, it's pretty much like buying a DLC.

Loot boxes have addiction associated with it, similar to gambling addiction, but it should be treated as a separate addiction because real gambling addiction is very different.

Of course, this doesn't apply to games that you can actually get money out of it, like CS:GO skins where you can sell CS:GO loot box items for actual monetary value to buy other games on Steam.

Read the gamasutra article above about someone going broke, not eating properly, not paying bills properly and having their home life wrecked and you'll see how not calling this a "real gambling addiction" is a bit disengenious.

If a game is only available digitally and not available in your country, then it means missing out on a game.
I'm sure there are some German Steam users on this board who will attest to getting certain games being a tedious affair involving middlemen.



No, again, there is a vocal minority who do not like where existing legislation has landed on this issue, and want to change existing legislation to accommodate their perspective of what games "should" be.

And, again, there are other perspectives that would love to see additional legislation on a wide range of things in videogames "for the children"; things like attaching credit cards to ensure only 18+ year olds can play games. Things like mandatory maximum playtime limits. Things like greater censorship of violent content.

You are in political pressure group territory.



Why are you framing this as a thing that only exists in the AAA space, or that any legislation would only affect AAA games?
I don't give a fuck about EA/Ubisoft/WB/Activision, they have deep pockets and any such legislation would just accelerate existing consolidation and homogenisation.

I give a shit about titles like Realm Of The Mad God, or Dirty Bomb, or PUBG, or other titles that don't even exist yet who use non-traditional monetisation methods because they are working in the non-traditional videogames space.

You talk about others wanting regulation changed for they feel should be, and then give examples of what you think should be? It's almost as if it's possible you just don't think or want drop rate regulation, personally. That's fine. Others do. The thing is, even in not wanting it you're being debated on the supposed negatives you feel will come from it. Such as complete industry abandonment. If you truly think that would happen, sure, regulation might seem scary. The thing is, even with presenting that as your reasoning for being against the Government being involved here, it seems incredibly far-fetched as a reality.

Smaller game devs like those behind Path of Exile? https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1844310 How can they survive?

Also, not every non-traditional monetization method is as healthy/respectful/legitimate as others. It is possible to monetize things in ways which can be downright scummy. Hence why there is pushback to so-called non-traditional monetization when people feel it's not healthy. Ultimately, yes, it's a free market and you can just about try and get people to give you money in any way possible. Patreon and kickstarter wouldn't have happened without experimentation. That doesn't mean you should always be able to say "but non-traditional monetization!!!" and go unchallenged no matter what you do. This right here is a challenge being raised to one form of monetization people are arguing is causing some unrest. It has been since the F2P market kept finding itself in hot water, but more people shrugged it off due to F2P. Now it's coming into paid games and it's getting more eyes less willing to put up with it, not without some sort of debate about basic transparency if the industry wants to keep going down this path.

 

[JamesHolden]

Video games without loot crates can be addictive. Should they be regulated based on how objectively addicting they are?

 

[benzopil]

Even if publishers will stop selling lootboxes for real money, you'll still see them in new games because it's the easiest way to make the game addicting. Like random loot in RPGs.

Look at Destiny 2, the game is dead for a lot of hardcore fans because they have ebery single weapon. Destiny 1 lived because of random drops. It just didn't have lootboxes, but what's the difference really.

 

[StalkerUKCG]

Without a global ban it just means Loot boxes will be disabled via a patch on UK versions of the game and users will miss out on any way to obtain the loot box loot

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Video games without loot crates can be addictive. Should they be regulated based on how objectively addicting they are?

The main issue here isnt play time, its the money being paid via expolitation.

 

[Spaced Harrier]

Is your friend an adult? Capable of making rational choices for himself?

One does not imply the other is always made.

If it was, gambling, which is inherently irrational and legally restricted to adults, wouldn't have any takers.

Adult humans act irrationally all the time

I don't understand why people would need protection from themselves.

Of course people need protection from themselves and from others, that's why society exists.

Even if we had an agreed upon total Moral framework (We don't, not in totality) we still need protection in place because people won't abide by it.

Companies, which are collections of flawed people, are amoral by Nature given they aren't an entity endowed with empathy, a conscience, and they allow the small negative elements of the management to run riot, as there is little to stop the worst of human nature taking root, except the fabled market reaction and more importantly government intervention.


There is not a single truly capitalist country in the world and there will never be, for this reason.

 

[WaterAstro]

Read the gamasutra article above about someone going broke, not eating properly, not paying bills properly and having their home life wrecked and you'll see how not calling this "real gambling addiction" is a bit disengenious.

Was that person hoping to get out of his financial situation buy buying more FUT cards?

No.

Gambling traps people into thinking that they need to spend more money to win big in order to get out of their financial situation. You cannot use anything from loot boxes to get yourself out of your situation.

It's a serious problem, but it's not the same problem.

 

[JamesHolden]

The main issue here isnt play time, its the money being paid via expolitation.

The term "exploitation" in this context is absurd

 

[Audioboxer]

Was that person hoping to get out of his financial situation buy buying more FUT cards?

No.

Gambling traps people into thinking that they need to spend more money to win big in order to get out of their financial situation. You cannot use anything from loot boxes to get yourself out of your situation.

It's a serious problem, but it's not the same problem.

I'm sure you're aware of Steam Marketplace and the growing industry of making steam credits out of selling things? Some people are betting if they can get the highest-tier loot with minimum expenditure, they can double/triple their effective winnings to go to buying games (or funding more betting/opening boxes).

It's not 1:1, but the dangers of going broke, spending too much of your wages, or constantly feeling it'll be your turn to strike it lucky will be next are very much the same. Addictions here can easily transfer over to bingo/poker/slot machines/betting, as you're looking for the RNG high.

There's a reason when writing this article it's stated as

How gambling principles and seductive animation compel players to drop cash on card packs and weapon crates.

http://www.pcgamer.com/behind-the-addictive-psychology-and-seductive-art-of-loot-boxes/

Even if people will fight tooth and nail to swat down the word "gamble" appearing anywhere near a loot box.

 

[Gator86]

Fucking great. Even the threat of regulation makes industries think twice. If there's potential future legislation or regulations, industries will shift early to try and get ahead of it.

If your industry is dependent on exploitative practices for survival, maybe it doesn't deserve to survive in its current iteration.

 

[Stead Fast]

If a game is only available digitally and not available in your country, then it means missing out on a game.
I'm sure there are some German Steam users on this board who will attest to getting certain games being a tedious affair involving middlemen.

This is literally what I was hoping you wouldn't say when I started asking for you to clarify why we should be concerned, and you repeatedly dodging a straight answer like this only compounded that. The crux of your stance is built around the hypothetical fear that you, or even the UK public at large is going to lose the chance to experience new games, regardless if said games can help stimulate obsessive spending tendencies similar to gambling. Your fear is substantial enough that you will argue against anyone who would propose any kind of change to a system, caring more for the developers and publishers and their priorities than the customers they are exploiting.

Please tell me that this isn't where your concern in all this lies, that missing out on some games warrants unchallenged methods within certain games designed to take money for A CHANCE to get loot they want.

Edit:

If your industry is dependent on exploitative practices for survival, maybe it doesn't deserve to survive in its current iteration.

This is more apt than anything I've been dancing around these past two pages.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

The term "exploitation" in this context is absurd

The same addictiction that causes mobile "whales" is the same addiction that causes people to take their paychecks to a casino.

Its natural to assume this applies to lootcrates as well.

 

[benzopil]

Read the gamasutra article above about someone going broke, not eating properly, not paying bills properly and having their home life wrecked and you'll see how not calling this a "real gambling addiction" is a bit disengenious.

Everything you mentioned could be done by simply playing the game 24/7. You spend a lot of time in Dota ot WoW, don't spend any money, but still go broke, lose your job, don't pay bills and your wife forgets about your existence. How do you regulate this?

 

[LordRaptor]

Smaller game devs like those behind Path of Exile? https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1844310

Yeah, smaller devs than the studio that has been running a highly successful game for nearly 5 years now and have the wiggle room to tweak things up now, how disingenuous are you?
That's like saying "Shit, why doesn't every indie game just sell to Microsoft for a couple of billion dollars like Minecraft did?"

Why do you keep pretending I don't want to see drop rates, when this entire fucking topic is based on asking questions in the house of commons that have literally nothing to do with published drop rates?

You want lootboxes reclassified as real world gambling. The OP says so. You've said so.
Stop quoting me with "Oh, but why don't you want the perfectly reasonable legislation that only asks for published drop rates, that exists only in my head?" questions.

e:

This is literally what I was hoping you wouldn't say when I started asking for you to clarify why we should be concerned, and you repeatedly dodging a straight answer like this only compounded that. The crux of your stance is built around the hypothetical fear that you, or even the UK public at large is going to lose the chance to experience new games

Hypothetical legislation imposed on an industry in a single market leads to that same hypothetical decrease in imports to that market

I mean... thats not fear mongering, thats basic economics. I'm not saying ALL GAMES.
I'm not dodging anything, but the weasel wording and talking past what these hypothetical legislations actually entail makes it hard to state definitives.
Any extra costs in any industry that only affect one market, will always lead to some companies skipping that market completely as not worth it

 

[Hephaestus]

One does not imply the other is always made.

If it was, gambling, which is inherently irrational and legally restricted to adults, wouldn't have any takers.

Adult humans act irrationally all the time



Of course people need protection from themselves and from others, that's why society exists.

Even if we had an agreed upon total Moral framework (We don't, not in totality) we still need protection in place because people won't abide by it.

Companies, which are collections of flawed people, are amoral by Nature given they aren't an entity endowed with empathy, a conscience, and they allow the small negative elements of the management to run riot, as there is little to stop the worst of human nature taking root, except the fabled market reaction and more importantly government intervention.


There is not a single truly capitalist country in the world and there will never be, for this reason.

I just dont understand this argument that people need to be protected from themselves with loot boxes. I can show you hundreds of cases of people losing everything playing video games. Even fucking dieing from playing to long, but nobody was demanding that governments regulate video games and put time limits on them for how long people can play.

There hasn't been one story about someone spending all their rent money, or selling their body or any negative effect from loot boxes but people are demanding legislation with the "wont someone think of the children" bullshit excuses line

If people really cared about children or people with addictive personalities they would demand that all games have time limits built into them. That services like steam will not sell you too many games so people dont have backlogs into the hundreds and thousands of games.

If you dont like loot boxes fine, but stop using other groups of people as your shield. You didm`t care that people died from playing too much. Dont pretend you care now that some "hypothetical" person may or may not have spent too much money.

 

[ChimpanzeeThat]

On one hand i would love for someone to finally step up and stop this loot crate mania that seems to be infecting every game, but on the other hand i don't trust a Theresa May government to boot up a computer, let alone come up with some competent solution to this stuff.

 

[WaterAstro]

I'm sure you're aware of Steam Marketplace and the growing industry of making steam credits out of selling things? Some people are betting if they can get the highest-tier loot with minimum expenditure, they can double/triple their effective winnings to go to buying games (or funding more betting/opening boxes).

It's not 1:1, but the dangers of going broke, spending too much of your wages, or constantly feeling it'll be your turn to strike it lucky will be next are very much the same. Addictions here can easily transfer over to bingo/poker/slot machines/betting, as you're looking for the RNG high.

There's a reason when writing this article it's stated as

Yes, that's why in my first reply, I said CS:GO crates and other Valve shit is actual gambling. I didn't look at that Gamasutra article when I replied to you, but that person in that article is gambling.

Games that doesn't do what Valve does should not be considered gambling. If the item that was bought via random card/box style stays in the game and cannot be sold for real money, it is not gambling.

 

[Stead Fast]

Yeah, smaller devs than the studio that has been running a highly successful game for nearly 5 years now and have the wiggle room to tweak things up now, how disingenuous are you?
That's like saying "Shit, why doesn't every indie game just sell to Microsoft for a couple of billion dollars like Minecraft did?"

Why do you keep pretending I don't want to see drop rates, when this entire fucking topic is based on asking questions in the house of commons that have literally nothing to do with published drop rates?

You want lootboxes reclassified as real world gambling. The OP says so. You've said so.
Stop quoting me with "Oh, but why don't you want the perfectly reasonable legislation that only asks for published drop rates, that exists only in my head?" questions.

e:


Hypothetical legislation imposed on an industry in a single market leads to that same hypothetical decrease in imports to that market

I mean... thats not fear mongering, thats basic economics. I'm not saying ALL GAMES.
I'm not dodging anything, but the weasel wording and talking past what these hypothetical legislations actually entail makes it hard to state definitives.
Any extra costs in any industry that only affect one market, will always lead to some companies skipping that market completely as not worth it

Why did you cut me off mid-point? specifcally the point where I say:

The crux of your stance is built around the hypothetical fear that you, or even the UK public at large is going to lose the chance to experience new games, regardless if said games can help stimulate obsessive spending tendencies similar to gambling.

 

[Audioboxer]

Everything you mentioned could be done by simply playing the game 24/7. You spend a lot of time in Dota ot WoW, don't spend any money, but still go broke, lose your job, don't pay bills and your wife forgets about your existence. How do you regulate this?

Just because you can find another problem people have, playing games too long, doesn't mean you can't work away here for better transparency around transactions involving money as well.

Some games introduced warnings to take breaks as a response to the real issues with people playing games too long. MMOs mostly always try and promote some sort of healthy play time message. We have somewhat decent responses from educators/addiction workers as well around treating playing addictions seriously. Find me the same hostility from people around any sort of gaming addictions regarding not being able to stop playing and do other things in life, as we are seeing loot boxes. Any sort of regulation for loot boxes/paid RNG has met some of the most hostile responses from other gamers I've witnessed for anything in a while.

Yeah, smaller devs than the studio that has been running a highly successful game for nearly 5 years now and have the wiggle room to tweak things up now, how disingenuous are you?
That's like saying "Shit, why doesn't every indie game just sell to Microsoft for a couple of billion dollars like Minecraft did?"

Why do you keep pretending I don't want to see drop rates, when this entire fucking topic is based on asking questions in the house of commons that have literally nothing to do with published drop rates?

You want lootboxes reclassified as real world gambling. The OP says so. You've said so.
Stop quoting me with "Oh, but why don't you want the perfectly reasonable legislation that only asks for published drop rates, that exists only in my head?" questions.

Look, everyone wants to see devs succeed, but if you are a small dev and you truly think the only way you can make it is to find the best ways to prey on people possible, then you're going to catch flak. Just because you can call yourself an indie dev doesn't mean your product won't be up for scrutiny. Unless you're digital homicide and you think it just to start a lawsuit for criticism against you.

The point with the Path of Exile link is they are, as a F2P dev, now releasing their drop rates for transparency. Try getting one of the big boys to do that. They won't. Hence, people are seeking methods for exerting pressure on them to change.

Yes, that's why in my first reply, I said CS:GO crates and other Valve shit is actual gambling. I didn't look at that Gamasutra article when I replied to you, but that person in that article is gambling.

Games that doesn't do what Valve does should not be considered gambling. If the item that was bought via random card/box style stays in the game and cannot be sold for real money, it is not gambling.

Okay, I follow you better.

 

[Nyoro SF]

I'm actually impressed at how quickly the UK government is stepping forward to address the loot box gambling.

Here's hoping to a clean resolution that calls a spade and spade and puts down the necessary rules.

 

[Gator86]

Is your friend an adult? Capable of making rational choices for himself?

I don't understand why people would need protection from themselves, unless it is a behavioral or psychological issue. If it is a mental issue wouldn't your friend be better served by seeing a shrink to curb those habits?

Seriously, read a book. Decades of psychology research demonstrate pretty convincingly that the "rational human" is a pretty limited thing. People behave in irriational ways constantly and are often profoundly affected by a myriad of things in their environment. It's not just "a mental issue" that causes people to behave in undesirable ways.

Also, hundreds of thousands of people work in government literally to protect people from themselves. Why do you think we regulate things or tax certain stuff more than others? Hell, why do any laws exist at all?

These posts are so weird. It's like some awkward counterfactual you hear in a freshman class or something a tobacco exec throws out to try and avoid regulation.

 

[benzopil]

Just because you can find another problem people have, playing games too long, doesn't mean you can't work away here for better transparency around transactions involving money as well.

I think "you can earn lootboxes by simply playing the game" is a good enough transparency. It's not like you start the game and it immediately asks you to pay more.

In my opinion people overestimate how many people are starving to death because they bought too many lootboxes.

 

[LordRaptor]

Why did you cut me off mid-point?

Because you are making values statements as to whether its any big loss if exploitative games don't get sold.
If you consider it exploitative, obviously not.
If I consider it not exploitative, obviously yes.

Like... thats end of conversation really.

Some games introduced warnings to take breaks as a response to the real issues with people playing games too long.

Oh, the industry addressed that by itself?

The point with the Path of Exile link is they are, as a F2P dev, now releasing their drop rates for transparency.

Oh, the industry are addressing that by themselves?

Nintendo are a fairly 'big publisher', do you want a link to one of their F2P games that explicitly provide drop rates?
Its a F2P Gacha game too, the most exploitative of all exploitative monetisation systems.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

I think "you can earn lootboxes by simply playing the game" is a good enough transparency. It's not like you start the game and it immediately asks you to pay more.

In my opinion people overestimate how many people are starving to death because they bought too many lootboxes.

If the number were small then publishers are doing themselves a disservice by not releasing that data so we can research how small of an issue this is.

 

[Azusa]

If people really cared about children or people with addictive personalities they would demand that all games have time limits built into them. That services like steam will not sell you too many games so people dont have backlogs into the hundreds and thousands of games.

China are trying to limit how long can you play the game online. Its actually a great system and can help some people who play all day and neglect themselves and others.

For example: http://www.scmp.com/news/china/soci...hildren-play-game-online-amid-addiction-fears

Tencent Holdings, China’s biggest gaming and social media firm by revenue, said it would limit play time for some young users of Honour of Kings from Tuesday, amid claims that children were getting addicted to the popular mobile game.
Users below 12 years of age will be limited to one hour of play time each day, while those aged between 12 and 18 will be limited to two hours a day, Tencent said.

But there is always a way around any regulations aimed at minors.

http://nikopartners.com/midnight-ban-china-combats-online-game-addiction/

This isn’t the first-time regulations like this have been imposed around the world. South Korea’s government passed a “shutdown law” in May 2011 that prohibits minors under the age of 16 from playing games between midnight and 6am. Whilst effective at first, the law caused underage games to steal or use their parent’s IDs in order to circumvent the ban. Many parents worry that minors in China will do the same thing here and many also worry that these regulations do not cover offline games and console games, which can be just as addictive.

 

[CannonFodder52]

Everything you mentioned could be done by simply playing the game 24/7. You spend a lot of time in Dota ot WoW, don't spend any money, but still go broke, lose your job, don't pay bills and your wife forgets about your existence. How do you regulate this?

I think I'd be concerned about this if devs were making direct revenue from each minute you sat in your chair and were placing in deceptive practices that feed off of people's weaknesses.

At the moment loot crates seem worse than what you're describing because the company is making direct money via the exploitation of peoples addictive personalities and is rewarded by making more and more grotesque loot crates mechanics.

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

Good take the charge UK

 

[Audioboxer]

I think "you can earn lootboxes by simply playing the game" is a good enough transparency. It's not like you start the game and it immediately asks you to pay more.

In my opinion people overestimate how many people are starving to death because they bought too many lootboxes.

Why wouldn't drop rates being known be a step above what you suggested for transparency? Wouldn't you like to know them? Even out of a matter of interest? We used to know drop rates for nearly all loot from official game guides, or the devs telling us in MMOs. Ask yourself why do you think all of that is stopping?

Because you are making values statements as to whether its any big loss if exploitative games don't get sold.
If you consider it exploitative, obviously not.
If I consider it not exploitative, obviously yes.

Like... thats end of conversation really.



Oh, the industry addressed that by itself?



Oh, the industry are addressing that by themselves?

Nintendo are a fairly 'big publisher', do you want a link to one of their F2P games that explicitly provide drop rates?
Its a F2P Gacha game too, the most exploitative of all exploitative monetisation systems.

The industry isn't self-regulating this in any respectful way. It's the opposite, the mass hysteria from game devs to all jump on the bandwagon, whilst one of the largest, Blizzard, do what they do in China. It leaves gamers with little hope.

That's my point. All the big devs/pubs/companies, including Nintendo, will never release this information of their own accord because they're scared their shittastic drop rates might hurt revenue. Could they? Maybe a bit, but tough, transparency matters more than you making 1.5 billion instead of 1.7 billion. People like gambling/betting no matter the odds, they'll still do it with them known. It's there for those who want to know, those who might protect themselves from themselves and as a principle of ethics.

 

[benzopil]

Why wouldn't drop rates being known be a step above what you suggested for transparency? Wouldn't you like to know them? Even out of a matter of interest? We used to know drop rates for nearly all loot from official game guides, or the devs telling us in MMOs. Ask yourself why do you think all of that is stopping?

Well if you are talking about Blizzard games, players usually know about drop rates and pity timers pretty soon. Like you will have at least one epic card in 8 packs or something like that.

In Shadow of Mordor you know that you'll get 1 legendary orc and 2 epic ones. Or 3 legendary orcs. Depends on what you'll buy.

 

[mdubs]

Video games without loot crates can be addictive. Should they be regulated based on how objectively addicting they are?

They should put a mandatory time limit on how long a person can play games in one day.

 

[Audioboxer]

Well if you are talking about Blizzard games, players usually know about drop rates and pity timers pretty soon. Like you will have at least one epic card in 8 packs or something like that.

In Shadow of Mordor you know that you'll get 1 legendary orc and 2 epic ones. Or 3 legendary orcs. Depends on what you'll buy.

Anecdotal evidence from forums/social media and people opening x amount of boxes on streams isn't the same as factual evidence. Plus yes, it would be an industry-wide standard covering all games. Even lesser played with less anecdotal feedback.

The real concern of fluctuating drop rates (potentially the house rigging its chances at will), pity timers, or any other behind the scenes changes would all need to be public as well.

This should not be a smoke and clouds part of the industry if real money can be involved. I honestly have no real understanding why fellow consumers would argue against this. It really does feel like what another poster satirised earlier in this topic, trying to get people in the tobacco industry to be okay with the tobacco industry being regulated.

 

[Stead Fast]

Because you are making values statements as to whether its any big loss if exploitative games don't get sold.
If you consider it exploitative, obviously not.
If I consider it not exploitative, obviously yes.

Like... thats end of conversation really.

Yeah, probably the only thing in this thread we agree on tbf. I'll drop it.

 

[LordRaptor]

The industry isn't self-regulating this in any respectful way.

Which is a values judgement. "Oh, okay, they are changing how they approach it, I just don;t think they respected my outcry enough"

Please.

Nintendo launched FE:H with fully transparent drop rates, because - hey! - it turns out knowing drop rates actually increases sales of blind buy items, and nobody in the mobile F2P space has a bee in their bonnet about the mere existence of RNG uncapped purchases.
Shit, the Gacha genre is straight up P2W too.

 

[Audioboxer]

Which is a values judgement. "Oh, okay, they are changing how they approach it, I just don;t think they respected my outcry enough"

Please.

Nintendo launched FE:H with fully transparent drop rates, because - hey! - it turns out knowing drop rates actually increases sales of blind buy items, and nobody in the mobile F2P space has a bee in their bonnet about the mere existence of RNG uncapped purchases.
Shit, the Gacha genre is straight up P2W too.

Life is full of values judgements, get used to it. You're making judgements in this topic along with the rest of us.

Well, tell that to anyone that doesn't launch games with full transparent drop rates. I know that about gacha games, the basis of this topic would cover all paid RNG chances, F2P or in paid games. Paying for what you get is different than paying for spinning the wheel. Lots of F2P mobile games you pay for time skippers, that is paying for what you get, no matter how scummy (Dungeon Keeper). You don't pay $4.99 for a CHANCE at saving 1hour to 24hours (completion). You pay $4.99 for completion. In most of these time skipping "masterpieces".

Fire Emblem Heroes launched with transparent drop rates because they have to in Japan. The Western version uses the same application, and servers.

It would be a whole lot more work for them to hide it in the West only.

Ah, well, there we go. Nintendo, be more dedicated, be like Blizzard.

 

[Zafir]

Which is a values judgement. "Oh, okay, they are changing how they approach it, I just don;t think they respected my outcry enough"

Please.

Nintendo launched FE:H with fully transparent drop rates, because - hey! - it turns out knowing drop rates actually increases sales of blind buy items, and nobody in the mobile F2P space has a bee in their bonnet about the mere existence of RNG uncapped purchases.
Shit, the Gacha genre is straight up P2W too.

Fire Emblem Heroes launched with transparent drop rates because they have to in Japan. The Western version uses the same application, and servers.

It would be a whole lot more work for them to hide it in the West only.

 

[Azusa]

Life is full of values judgements, get used to it. You're making judgements in this topic along with the rest of us.

Well, tell that to anyone that doesn't launch games with full transparent drop rates. I know that about gacha games, the basis of this topic would cover all paid RNG chances, F2P or in paid games.

In Japan all gacha games have drop rates and its not even mandatory by law like in China. But yeah other games haven't them like almost all f2p or paid games in the west.

 

[Audioboxer]

In Japan all gacha games have drop rates and its not even mandatory by law like in China. But yeah other games haven't them like almost all f2p or paid games in the west.

What is the difference with kompu gacha?

As widely anticipated, Japan's Consumer Affairs Agency has officially declared kompu gacha illegal. According to a report in the Yomiuri Shimbun, any developers using the controversial monetization mechanic in their games after July 1 will be subject to fines.

Kompu gacha, or ”complete gacha" is a monetization mechanic in social games that heavily incentivizes the practice of gacha — paying a small amount of money to get an item at random, similar to purchasing toys from a vending machine.

Games that use kompu gacha typically promise rare ”grand-prize" items to players who can manage to amass a set of specific items, which encourages players to spend more money on randomized gacha draws in order to complete their collections. Although extremely lucrative for Japan's social game companies — some developers see half their sales coming from gacha — the kompu gacha system had come under fire recently for encouraging gambling, particularly in children. According to industry watcher Serkan Toto, the ban does not affect gacha, just kompu gacha.

http://www.adweek.com/digital/japan...kompu-gacha-practice-illegal-in-social-games/

Amassing separate pieces to make one thing? There's probably some games in the West that do that with parts inside the loot box where you need all of them.

Last time, I wrote about the disruption and renewal manifesting itself in the mobile gaming sector. We are facing now a new instance of disruption in this sector in Japan that seems to be receiving little attention in the markets: newly self-imposed regulation by the Japan Online Game Association came into effect at the start of this month.

Gotcha, gacha!
The new rules govern the gacha mechanic in mobile games. Gacha is a monetization technique prevalent in Japan whilst remaining relatively unheard of until recently in the West.

The gacha mechanic derived from the original gashapon (ガシャポ&#12531 popular in Japan, in which vending machines would dispense capsule toys at random. The randomness of the distribution adds an element of chance which draws the obvious comparison of gacha to gambling. In mobile games, the gacha prize could be a special character, weapon, power, event-driven offer, or other rare item.

Anyway, undoubtedly in an effort to stave off more draconian government measures, the Japan Online Game Association imposed a new regulation that establishes two significant constraints on mobile games: a minimum 1% payout ratio, and a maximum 50,000 JPY billed per player. Technically, these industry ”guidelines" are not law; however, game companies have understood that failing to adhere to them may trigger stricter government intervention.

http://thebridge.jp/en/2016/04/gotcha-time-for-gacha

Seems like Japan is doing some things with regulation. Or at least devs and pubs are adhering better to self-regulation. That is not happening in the West. It's going the opposite way if anything, we're quickly moving on from "cosmetic only".

 

[LoveCake]

The issue though is where will this end, wouldn't surprise me if it didn't end up regulating games like GTA or Rainbow Six.

 

[LordRaptor]

What is the difference with kompu gacha?

In lootbox terms, that you can only get D-Vas Epic skins once you have a full collection of D-Vas Legendary skins.