Norwegian Consumer Counsel finds leading game developers are in breach of EU consumer protection. Calls for EU ban on in-game currencies.

[TaikeeroLecoredier.8542]

So, I found this on Reddit, namely through this thread :

I originally was worried about what this meant for Guildwars 2, as the gems currency is one of the least predatory system in games I've seen (and its one of the biggest chunks of revenues for Anet without a doubt )
But then I saw a comment stating :

" This is about banning predatory market strategys and the use of premium currency which are basically only purchasable with real money.
The document differentiates between currencys that can be acquiered by playing AND by using real money and currencys that are basically ONLY available for real money."

(Document can be read here https://storage02.forbrukerradet.no/media/2024/09/getting-played-2024-compressed-komprimert-sept24-1.pdf )

So, given that you are able to grind for gold and then turn it into gems,as you are not obligated to purchase gems to obtain said gems, Anet should be fine if it ever becomes law, right ?
If I also understood correctly, this document would ask of develops more transparency when it comes to the "premium currencies" such as, being able to select the exact amount of gems a player wants to purchase, instead of having to pick between 8000,1200,4000, etc
And, unless I'm wrong, also putting the actual price in real money next to any item put up in the gemstore, for transparency's sake.

It would otherwise sucks if gems were removed altogether, unless Anet make it so you can buy gemstore items with either gold or real money instead, so people can still grind for them if they want

What are your thoughts ?

[Randulf.7614]

I mean it's the EU. In the unlikely event it were to take effect here (and I can't see that it would), we will be discussing Guild Wars 5. They need at least 30 years of committee meetings first

[TaikeeroLecoredier.8542]

Eh, I'm not so sure, depending on the topics, the EU can be annoyingly fast when it comes to bad laws, much like something totally off topic called Chat Control, in which they want to make it mandatory to have EU citizen's private messages scanned via artificial intelligence,the best way to kill encryption and violate safety/privacy imo
There's going to be a vote either September 23 or early october,if youre curious

[EDOTDOT.9265]

I hope they don't ever resort to using only real money because ANet (supposedly) can't do a thing for you if Braintree suddenly decides to stop accepting your payment method.

[starlinvf.1358]

Anet is still in trouble with gems. As Gems are only created when bought, but “traded” on the gem exchange. Unless you count the gems from early achievements. . In which case thats an easy loop hole nearly every online game is exploiting at this moment to dodge lawsuits. 

[Danikat.8537]

I think it would have a minimal effect on GW2, even if they succeed in getting 'premium' virtual currencies' (like gems) banned, it would just mean gem store items would be listed and sold for their real-money price instead. I assume if that happened Anet would keep gems as well, both for non-EU players and for people who buy gems with gold.

The one downside I could see if that happened is it might not be possible to 'mix and match' any more. I sometimes buy gems with real money and sometimes with gold and right now they all go into the same pool and I don't have to worry about where they came from. If they make it so gems can only be bought with gold and real money purchases are buying that item directly I'll have to choose just 1 method for each item I buy.

This point: "Consumer protection must be implemented by stipulating how the default settings in games and digital services should be, for example by disabling mechanisms meant to push consumers into spending money." might, if I'm reading it correctly, mean they also need to hide the gem store somehow and maybe the buttons for purchasing the Living World episodes, bag slots etc. Although I'm not sure I understand that, it's odd wording.

Personally I think adding the real-money price next to the gem price is a good idea, although it might be difficult to fit it in the UI. I always work out what a gem store item costs before buying (sometimes a rough estimate in my head if I know it won't be much, sometimes an exact price using a calculator) to make sure I actually do want it enough to spend the money on it.

[Naxos.2503]

As a EU citizen, I dont see this as worrying for Gw2, as the EU has never issued blanket bans on anything. The truth of the matter is, EU law tend to give a lot of leeway to corporations, provided they act in "good faith" and provide adequate customer protections. Arguably, a warning label isn't much of a protection, but it's the most likely outcome out of an inquiry on ingame currencies.

The EU is the queen of warning labels.

[Manasa Devi.7958]

5 hours ago, Randulf.7614 said:

I mean it's the EU. In the unlikely event it were to take effect here (and I can't see that it would), we will be discussing Guild Wars 5. They need at least 30 years of committee meetings first

 

5 hours ago, TaikeeroLecoredier.8542 said:

Eh, I'm not so sure, depending on the topics, the EU can be annoyingly fast when it comes to bad laws, much like something totally off topic called Chat Control, in which they want to make it mandatory to have EU citizen's private messages scanned via artificial intelligence,the best way to kill encryption and violate safety/privacy imo
There's going to be a vote either September 23 or early october,if youre curious

It took only 4 years to create and ratify the GDPR.

[Mistwraithe.3106]

Yeah, the EU is very bureaucratic about some things but they can move quite quickly at times too.

[TheNecrosanct.4028]

I'm not the most educated person when it comes to international relations and treaties, but I think it's important to note here that Norway is not a member of the EU. This call for a change in EU regulations comes from outside the EU. Consumer protection would fall under the purview of the European Convention on Human Rights, which Norway is a part of. But I don't know how influential a call for an EU ban from a non-EU country is going to be.

[Danikat.8537]

25 minutes ago, TheNecrosanct.4028 said:

I'm not the most educated person when it comes to international relations and treaties, but I think it's important to note here that Norway is not a member of the EU. This call for a change in EU regulations comes from outside the EU. Consumer protection would fall under the purview of the European Convention on Human Rights, which Norway is a part of. But I don't know how influential a call for an EU ban from a non-EU country is going to be.

I thought that was weird, but assumed I'd misremembered and Norway must be an EU member since they're petitioning the EU to make this change. Why do they care what the EU rules are if they're not a member?

I mean the UK has been gradually realising over the last few years that it's often more practical for non-member EU adjacent countries to follow the same rules, but in this case it seems odd that Norway doesn't just implement these changes themselves.

[Sindust.7059]

I don't think gw2 violates the law based on that description, but it would still be nice if they showed the price of the items in their real money equivalent. The very reason that in-between currencies like gems are created is to obfuscate the price to the customers so that they don't even try to think of the amount of money that they spend, thereby tricking them into spending more. So regardless of whether this gets applied to ANet, they would certainly show that they respect their customers by listing the real price anyway.

And the predetermined amounts of those in-between currencies that can be bought are another tactic where if you have a bit left over, you're more likely to buy more if there is an item you're kinda tempted by, but wouldn't be willing to pay full price on.

[Danikat.8537]

I agree that it would be helpful to show the real cost in-game, but it's not difficult to work it out. You divide how much you spent by how many gems you got, then multiply the result by the cost of the item. (If you're using gems you've already got you can just use 10 (for $ and €) or 8.5 (for £) divided by 800, because there's no discount for buying larger packs.)

So for example if I buy something for 700 gems thats:
£8.50 / 800 = 0.0106
0.0106 x 700 = £7.44

If I know it'll be close I estimate it in my head (like that one, I'd call it £8 because I know it's around that and 16p isn't enough of a difference to know about), if I'm not sure or it'll be a lot and I want it to be exact I use the Windows calculator.

[Cuks.8241]

17 minutes ago, Danikat.8537 said:

I agree that it would be helpful to show the real cost in-game, but it's not difficult to work it out. You divide how much you spent by how many gems you got, then multiply the result by the cost of the item. (If you're using gems you've already got you can just use 10 (for $ and €) or 8.5 (for £) divided by 800, because there's no discount for buying larger packs.)

So for example if I buy something for 700 gems thats:
£8.50 / 800 = 0.0106
0.0106 x 700 = £7.44

If I know it'll be close I estimate it in my head (like that one, I'd call it £8 because I know it's around that and 16p isn't enough of a difference to know about), if I'm not sure or it'll be a lot and I want it to be exact I use the Windows calculator.

It's not difficult but it is still a deliberate obfuscation. That's like going into a store and all the prices would be in "apples". "Excuse me how much does this loaf of bread cost in EUR?" "Dear Sir, you can find the price of an apple on fruit department." Oh and you can only buy a full apple. But a chocolate costs 0.5 apples. "I'm sorry sir we only exchange full apples, no change"

[Dean Calaway.9718]

20 hours ago, TaikeeroLecoredier.8542 said:

What are your thoughts ?

An authoritarian useless government that does nothing but steal your money and make your life hard and they live their lavish lives with the money they stole from you saying they're gonna ban something for your protection.... where have I heard that before.

[TheNecrosanct.4028]

5 hours ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

An authoritarian useless government that does nothing but steal your money and make your life hard and they live their lavish lives with the money they stole from you saying they're gonna ban something for your protection.... where have I heard that before.

Clearly you know nothing about Norway. Far from authoritarian and far from useless. Norway has an extensive social security system and Norwegians are among the happiest people in Europe when it comes to living. There's a reason they don't want to join the EU, because they feel they don't need to.

 

5 hours ago, Cuks.8241 said:

It's not difficult but it is still a deliberate obfuscation. That's like going into a store and all the prices would be in "apples". "Excuse me how much does this loaf of bread cost in EUR?" "Dear Sir, you can find the price of an apple on fruit department." Oh and you can only buy a full apple. But a chocolate costs 0.5 apples. "I'm sorry sir we only exchange full apples, no change"

It's called being self-sufficient. Don't count on others to take care of you. Do it yourself. Do some basic math and don't be obfuscated. It's quite something when people blame others when they've not done their own due diligence themselves.

Edited September 13 by TheNecrosanct.4028

[Cuks.8241]

53 minutes ago, TheNecrosanct.4028 said:

It's called being self-sufficient. Don't count on others to take care of you. Do it yourself. Do some basic math and don't be obfuscated. It's quite something when people blame others when they've not done their own due diligence themselves.

Oh I dont really blame anyone. I completely agree with you actually. Im quite liberal in that regard, I dont like limitations and regulations much. And I can manage myself well enough. If people want to destroy and bankrupt themselves let them as long as they dont hurt others.

Just limit it to adults only and it's a fair game.

And as far as I read the notion it's emphasis is mostly on children.

[roederich.2716]

long overdue. industry needs to get back to content delivery for fair pricing. 

[Poormany.4507]

12 hours ago, roederich.2716 said:

long overdue. industry needs to get back to content delivery for fair pricing. 

And GW2 does not do this... how? You get over a year's worth of content for like $25-30. That's less than a nice restaurant meal. I think that's very fair, especially compared to other MMOs.

Edited September 14 by Poormany.4507

[SlateSloan.3654]

17 countries involved already... 

https://www.forbrukerradet.no/report-on-virtual-currencies-in-gaming-getting-played/

Edited September 14 by SlateSloan.3654

[Ashen.2907]

On 9/13/2024 at 5:20 PM, roederich.2716 said:

long overdue. industry needs to get back to content delivery for fair pricing. 

People choosing to not buy things whose pricing they dislike would do that. As it stands people are saying that they consider current pricing models to be fair by choosing to pay them.

Edited September 16 by Ashen.2907

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

the days of chuck E cheese tokens is coming to an end

Edited September 14 by Jumpin Lumpix.6108

[TheNecrosanct.4028]

3 hours ago, SlateSloan.3654 said:

17 countries involved already... 

https://www.forbrukerradet.no/report-on-virtual-currencies-in-gaming-getting-played/

So I've actually read the report and it has a chapter on problematic examples of virtual currencies. What I've noticed is that many of these do not apply to GW2.

1. Hidden monetary costs: yes, this applies to GW2. The gemstore only shows prices in gems, not real money. Though calculating the cost in real money is not hard for GW2's gemstore due to another practice listed below that ANet does not apply, it still leaves it to the customer to figure out how much exactly they are paying.
2. Bundles sales: this is when game studios sell virtual currency in bundles with a different exchange rate to real money the higher the price of the bundle. ANet does sell bundles of gems, but in every bundle every gem is worth as much as every gem in every other bundle. You get 400 gems for $5 and you get 8,000 gems for $100: 20 times the gems for 20 times the real money. No obscure practices there.
3. Several layers of premium currency: does not apply to GW2. Gems are the only premium currency so there's no way to obfuscate the real monetary cost with different exchange rates for different premium currencies and with conversion from one premium currency to the other.
4. Paywalls and grinding: also does not apply to GW2. Progression in this game is made very easy and all through ingame means that come in ample supply. We don't have to grind 200 hours to get to the next level, there are no paywalls for better equipment or advancing in levels. Levelling in the game is not made difficult to the point that players are driven to spend real money to progress.
5. Seamless game-to-store transition: simply put, this would be the case if ANet forced the gemstore on us. Out of gems? Gemstore pops up with the option to buy more. Items to access certain content that are also available in game but with very poor drop rates. GW2's gemstore doesn't offer anything that makes you advance in the game faster. We are only made aware of something new in the gemstore by the lighting up of a tiny icon on the top of our screen, one that is easily overlooked. We are not pushed to buy gems or other items from the gemstore.
6. Pay-to-win: despite what some people sometimes try to argue on this forum, GW2 is 0,0% pay-to-win. There's nothing in the gemstore that makes you stronger, better, faster than anyone else. Convenience and aesthetics, that's all the gemstore is.
7. Inflated values: we've already established that ANet applies a very transparent gems-to-money conversion rate. It's basic arithmetic and it's been this way for as long as I can remember. 5 years ago I bought 8,000 gems for $100 and today I pay the same amount for the same amount of gems. For GW2 to inflate values they'd first have to adhere to point 2 and they don't.
8. Currencies tied to loot boxes: this point also operates on the basis of point 2, which we've already established GW2 does not adhere to. Yes, we buy keys for gems but the gem-to-money conversion rate is clear (even if we have to calculate it ourselves with basic arithmetic).
9. No refunds: this does apply to GW2, to some degree. We can get refunds of our gem purchases, but only under the condition we haven't spent the gems. The report also mentions surplus virtual currency. For instance, you buy 2,000 gems with real money so you can spend 1,600 on a gemstore item, but are then left with 400 gems you have no use for. I couldn't find anything on if ANet gives refunds for surplus gems and don't remember ever reading about it on the forum. But one thing the report calls for is that customes can decide for themselves how much virtual currency they purchase with real money, instead of the fixed bundles that are often offered.

So while some of these things apply to ANet and gems, most of them do not. I do agree it would be more transparent if they added prices in real world currency in the gemstore, and also that we should be able to choose how many gems we want to buy instead of the fixed bundles we have now. But from everything that is in the report, GW2 is hardly a big offender on these cases.

Edited September 14 by TheNecrosanct.4028

[Dean Calaway.9718]

On 9/13/2024 at 6:00 PM, TheNecrosanct.4028 said:

Don't count on others to take care of you.

Coming from the guy who just defended a government trying to impose their will on unwilling people that wanna be left alone, the irony...

[Teknomancer.4895]

On 9/12/2024 at 10:34 AM, TaikeeroLecoredier.8542 said:

If I also understood correctly, this document would ask of develops more transparency when it comes to the "premium currencies" such as, being able to select the exact amount of gems a player wants to purchase, instead of having to pick between 8000,1200,4000, etc
And, unless I'm wrong, also putting the actual price in real money next to any item put up in the gemstore, for transparency's sake.

Luckily GW2 is unaffected by that first one with its custom quantity purchase option, which is handy when you have an oddball left-over quantity in the wallet.

As for pricing, I ballpark the real-money equivalent at a penny per gem ($0.0125 USD to be precise). The gem price has been (loosely) pegged to the US penny since launch; for displaying actual cash prices in Euros they'd probably have to update it dynamically with the exchange rate.