Imagine Europe consists of more than 3 countries...

[Ashen.2907]

8 hours ago, Miss Lana.5276 said:

Unfortunately this is much easier said than done. Personally, I'm not a politician, and there's only so much lobbying can do.

Not just lobbying. Organize. Make your vote desirable to those passing the laws.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

If you, as citizens, can't change the laws, I'm guessing ArenaNet has even less chance to do so.  🤷‍♂️

[cobbah.3102]

On 2/16/2022 at 10:19 PM, xDumplinx.7983 said:

I’m in New Zealand and we aren’t even included in this in any way. Pretty crap how they will allow us to buy the game but exclude us from its prizes

But rememeber we are not on the world map , they do not teach real geography in usa schools

[yann.1946]

On 2/20/2022 at 12:58 PM, Teratus.2859 said:

Indeed, more so when you're part of something like the EU and you have no real voice to change anything there.

It's very very difficult and complicated.. so just "changing" things isn't always possible.

Even in my homeland we don't "elect" our leader, we only vote for the party that leads, and the party decides who leads it which is just.. uhhh stupid.
This is how we end up with so many idiots in power lol

The problem is moreso that gambling laws are not that of an hot topic atm and there was an active push to the opposite of what people want here. (against lootboxes, stronger gambling laws etc.) 

 

[Teratus.2859]

3 hours ago, yann.1946 said:

The problem is moreso that gambling laws are not that of an hot topic atm and there was an active push to the opposite of what people want here. (against lootboxes, stronger gambling laws etc.) 

 

My problem with those laws is they are far too single minded and they blame the tool rather than the abuser which is always the wrong way to go imo.

A blanket ban on the tool (in this case lootboxes) is completely unfair to companies that don't abuse them, especially when the ones that do are so big and greedy that they can afford that extra loss in revenue while smaller and more decent companies are far more reliant on that extra revenue.

Laws like this only screw the little guy who did nothing wrong and do not serve as any real punishment to the big companies that are the main reason for the laws in the first place.
I would much rather see governments do the right thing and stop blaming the tool that is being abused and instead go after the malevolent companies that are abusing them.

Ban the tool and eventually there will just be a new one that will just get abused again.. go after the abuser though and that solution is far more permanent and it's attacking the real problem.

That is pretty much why there was pushback against these kinds of laws, people understood that it was just a bandaid if you will that wasn't going to fix the real problem that there are just some bad companies out there that need a good butt kicking.
What I would have done is threatened those companies specifically with removing their ability to sell their products in my territory until they changed their ways.
If enough countries did that those companies would have no choice but to comply.

Edited February 22, 2022 by Teratus.2859

[yann.1946]

2 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

My problem with those laws is they are far too single minded and they blame the tool rather than the abuser which is always the wrong way to go imo.

A blanket ban on the tool (in this case lootboxes) is completely unfair to companies that don't abuse them, especially when the ones that do are so big and greedy that they can afford that extra loss in revenue while smaller and more decent companies are far more reliant on that extra revenue.

Laws like this only screw the little guy who did nothing wrong and do not serve as any real punishment to the big companies that are the main reason for the laws in the first place.
I would much rather see governments do the right thing and stop blaming the tool that is being abused and instead go after the malevolent companies that are abusing them.

Ban the tool and eventually there will just be a new one that will just get abused again.. go after the abuser though and that solution is far more permanent and it's attacking the real problem.

That is pretty much why there was pushback against these kinds of laws, people understood that it was just a bandaid if you will that wasn't going to fix the real problem that there are just some bad companies out there that need a good butt kicking.
What I would have done is threatened those companies specifically with removing their ability to sell their products in my territory until they changed their ways.
If enough countries did that those companies would have no choice but to comply.

You have spend not enough time on the internet then. 😛

In a lot of the conversations oround lootboxes their was a demand for blanket bans. Lottboxes are inherent evil etc. This is just a consequence of democracy in this case.

I personally do not really like it, but what can you do if the majority decides.

[Teratus.2859]

2 hours ago, yann.1946 said:

You have spend not enough time on the internet then. 😛

In a lot of the conversations oround lootboxes their was a demand for blanket bans. Lottboxes are inherent evil etc. This is just a consequence of democracy in this case.

I personally do not really like it, but what can you do if the majority decides.

Yeah there was sadly, too many people choose the easiest solution rather than the most efficient one imo XD

[Gibson.4036]

I'm curious where the line is between ethical lootboxes and abusive lootboxes.

[robertthebard.8150]

On 2/22/2022 at 11:09 AM, Gibson.4036 said:

I'm curious where the line is between ethical lootboxes and abusive lootboxes.

Buy a mount skin loot box, where you're guaranteed to get one you don't have, just maybe not the one you're looking for.  It clearly states this on the purchase page, so you're guaranteed a unique item, and yet, you can't buy it in Belgium.  There was a thread about that on these forums a while back.

What I'm really curious about is when is it "too much government in one's daily life".  I took the thread title's advice, and imagined there were more than 3 countries in Europe, and realized, as I did so, that that means that there are reams of laws that must be abided by covering this kind of thing, some of which exist because "all loot boxes are evil, and it's the government's job to protect us from ourselves".  Local laws are on local governments, and especially when it's out of a publisher's country, it's not their responsibility to get them changed.  Given this attitude of "Please Government, save me from myself", they may not be welcome to try to change those laws.  That is, of course, until something like this comes up, or the aforementioned mount skins, and then it's "Please game devs/publishers, save us from our government"...

[Ashen.2907]

57 minutes ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

realized, as I did so, that that means that there are reams of laws that must be abided by covering this kind of thing,

BIngo.

 

Almost invariably when a region or country is excluded from a giveaway or contest it is because local laws are such that an outside entity faces significant financial or legal barriers, with even more significant penalties in case of error, to implement.

Want sweepstakes, contests, and giveaways added to your region? Remove the barriers. As someone above said, if you cannot remove them, how do you expect a small company outside of your country to do so?

[yann.1946]

1 hour ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

Buy a mount skin loot box, where you're guaranteed to get one you don't have, just maybe not the one you're looking for.  It clearly states this on the purchase page, so you're guaranteed a unique item, and yet, you can't buy it in Belgium.  There was a thread about that on these forums a while back.

What I'm really curious about is when is it "too much government in one's daily life".  I took the thread title's advice, and imagined there were more than 3 countries in Europe, and realized, as I did so, that that means that there are reams of laws that must be abided by covering this kind of thing, some of which exist because "all loot boxes are evil, and it's the government's job to protect us from ourselves".  Local laws are on local governments, and especially when it's out of a publisher's country, it's not their responsibility to get them changed.  Given this attitude of "Please Government, save me from myself", they may not be welcome to try to change those laws.  That is, of course, until something like this comes up, or the aforementioned mount skins, and then it's "Please game devs/publishers, save us from our government"...

The "how much government is to much government" is the most uninteresting part of the question. There is not to much or to little government in that regard, the question just is how a specific problem should be solved. 

[robertthebard.8150]

14 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

The "how much government is to much government" is the most uninteresting part of the question. There is not to much or to little government in that regard, the question just is how a specific problem should be solved. 

My point was, there should be no government.  As we can see, these laws have unintended side effects, the Belgium situation, and this thread in particular.  I don't like loot boxes because I like to know what I'm getting when I buy something, so, I don't buy loot boxes, or even keys here.  Too much is unknown.  I didn't need my government to step in and prevent the sale of them, I just made a decision not to buy them.  Every time I see "there ought to be a law", or "the government needs to step in and take care of this", I remember how long it takes when I have to physically go to the DMV for tags on my car, and think "Oh Gods no!".

[Rogue.8235]

On 2/21/2022 at 2:26 AM, cobbah.3102 said:

But rememeber we are not on the world map , they do not teach real geography in usa schools

 What??? Of course you are!  You're right over.... oh...  It's just a picture of a kangaroo and the words "there be dragons"

Well, if you get rid of the kangaroo-dragons (dragaroos?) we'll be inclined to learn about your country place thingy here at the American Public Education System™.

Wait, hold on, I got another map.  Let's se........ oh... I think it's a map of Middle Earth, not New Zealand.  Wait, they're the same thing because American Cinema®.  So, you are on the map in the American Public Education System™.  Here, in 'Murca©®™ , we learn about relevant and interesting stuff not facts and truth.

Applying my American Public Education System™ , Earth consists of two things.  America and Not America.  New Zealand doesn't sound the same as America, so it must be Not America.  That means you're in the other part.  We didn't learn much about the other part.  

 

Edited February 24, 2022 by Rogue.8235
The confused reactions seem to indicate the inability to understand satire, and probably are the product of the American Public Education System

[yann.1946]

On 2/23/2022 at 9:45 PM, robertthebard.8150 said:

My point was, there should be no government.  As we can see, these laws have unintended side effects, the Belgium situation, and this thread in particular.  I don't like loot boxes because I like to know what I'm getting when I buy something, so, I don't buy loot boxes, or even keys here.  Too much is unknown.  I didn't need my government to step in and prevent the sale of them, I just made a decision not to buy them.  Every time I see "there ought to be a law", or "the government needs to step in and take care of this", I remember how long it takes when I have to physically go to the DMV for tags on my car, and think "Oh Gods no!".

So you are projecting your bad experiences to all the things a government does. That is quite silly no? 

 

While I disagree with some of the regulations and there are interesting questions to be had how these things should be dealt with. Just saying no government seems problematic to me. Are there any situations where you would think government can be used appropriately here? 

[robertthebard.8150]

8 hours ago, yann.1946 said:

So you are projecting your bad experiences to all the things a government does. That is quite silly no? 

 

While I disagree with some of the regulations and there are interesting questions to be had how these things should be dealt with. Just saying no government seems problematic to me. Are there any situations where you would think government can be used appropriately here? 

Um, no?  The thread about what happened in Belgium is a very real thing, and so is this one.  Projection, I don't think it means what you think it means?

If you believe you need the government to step in and save you from the evils of loot boxes, congratulations, you got what you wanted.  It has it's unintended side effect of barring anything that could be considered online gambling, but it's what you wanted, and "but it's gambling" is the main argument for banning loot boxes.  The only "interesting discussion" to be had here is "how does it feel to get what you wanted"?

[yann.1946]

8 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

Um, no?  The thread about what happened in Belgium is a very real thing, and so is this one.  Projection, I don't think it means what you think it means?

Oh it absolutely means what i think it means. You specificly talked about how every time goverment gets involved you think about the bad experience of the DMV.  Which implies to me that you considere everything goverment does as problematic.

8 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

If you believe you need the government to step in and save you from the evils of loot boxes, congratulations, you got what you wanted. 

Have you ever considered that people asked these rules not for themselves but for others? Serious question, do you consider any restriction on gambling a problem? for example age limits in casinos etc? 

8 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

It has it's unintended side effect of barring anything that could be considered online gambling,

But it does not have to, thats the point. Depending on how the regulations are written.

8 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

but it's what you wanted,

Did you ignore, that i was not in favour of the regulation? 

8 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said:

and "but it's gambling" is the main argument for banning loot boxes.  The only "interesting discussion" to be had here is "how does it feel to get what you wanted"?

So you just have no grasp on what the actual discussion is about. The actual interesting discussions in this regard are:

"What forms of games of chance generate problems?"

"What forms of games of chance should be considered gambling?"

"How do we deal as a society with gambling addiction?"

etc.

[robertthebard.8150]

2 hours ago, yann.1946 said:

Oh it absolutely means what i think it means. You specificly talked about how every time goverment gets involved you think about the bad experience of the DMV.  Which implies to me that you considere everything goverment does as problematic.

Have you ever considered that people asked these rules not for themselves but for others? Serious question, do you consider any restriction on gambling a problem? for example age limits in casinos etc? 

But it does not have to, thats the point. Depending on how the regulations are written.

Did you ignore, that i was not in favour of the regulation? 

So you just have no grasp on what the actual discussion is about. The actual interesting discussions in this regard are:

"What forms of games of chance generate problems?"

"What forms of games of chance should be considered gambling?"

"How do we deal as a society with gambling addiction?"

etc.

We don't.  It's not my problem that someone has a gambling addiction, any more than it's my problem if someone has a drug or sex addiction.  Unless they are a family member, or friend, in which case, I should, and would, try to get them help.  That help does not come from the government.  The problem being, they won't get help until they think they need it, no matter how many laws get passed in the meantime.  All passing laws does is adversely affect people that don't have the problem.  See this thread for proof of that.

Any game of chance can be considered gambling.  Belgium has included loot boxes that guarantee you a skin that you don't have, because it may not be the skin you were specifically looking for.  The basic mechanic is the same, you buy something that you don't know what the exact outcome will be, so you are gambling on that result.  The skin boxes are a win, no matter what, but because there's that element of chance, it's gambling, and hence, it's illegal in Belgium.  When one says "we need to get the government involved, because someone is addicted to gambling, and can't/won't get help", this is what we get.

BTW, I'm not basing this on one experience with the DMV, but every experience with the DMV.  It's the same when I go to get my license renewed, or when I have to deal with my disability, or the programs associated with it.  So, Big Brother creates a bunch of red tape to get through to allow a sweepstake situation, or loot boxes, and a company doesn't want to mess with that, and we get threads like this, but it's "projection"...  OKay...

The problem with your assessment here is "IF".  I'll let you peruse the post you quoted here to find out where that may be problematic for "but I don't like all the laws", or "but I don't like all the consequences of those laws" despite very obviously being in favor of the government intervening in your gaming.  What makes me say that?  All of your "but what do we do about ..." scenarios.  Full circle to my first statement in this post, WE don't do anything, that's for the family and friends of the affected to deal with.  It's certainly not the role of the government, or, rather, it shouldn't be.  But some people require a "Nanny State", and so, we get to deal with this. 

As I said earlier, I have no problem not dealing with loot boxes, I like to know what I'm getting when I buy something, so I don't buy them.  However, I don't need some busybody from the UK, or Argentina, stepping in to "protect" me.  Just a couple of random areas there, I'm not singling out anyone in particular.  I don't need my own government's "help" either.  At some point, people need to learn to take responsibility for their own actions, instead of looking to someone else to do it for them.  If they're struggling with an addiction, then they need the people closest to them to step up and help.  We'd have a lot less problems like the one in this thread, and countless others like it across a dizzying array of MMOs if that would happen instead of "but there ought to be a law".

Edited February 26, 2022 by robertthebard.8150
Spelling is hard.

[Goettel.4389]

Pretty dumb PR action to be sure.

[StarPT.7431]

On 2/18/2022 at 12:48 AM, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

For some of those left out of that promotion/sweepstakes, you (some of Australia, Sweden, Norway, Denmark) might be eligible for this one:  https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/enter-to-win-a-guild-wars-2-end-of-dragons-alienware-pc-and-dxracer-gaming-chair/

Nope, as portuguese, not available either.

[Gibson.4036]

You two should probably take this to private message.