Jump to content
  • Sign Up

UK Officials Say Loot Boxes Are Gambling


Shadowmoon.7986

Recommended Posts

Yeah it is gambling. At its core its a digital slot machine. You pump in money hoping to win something specific. So with that in mind so is mount licenses and dye kits. Big name game companies did it to themselves by being so greedy, cough.... EA, cough..... Fifa. Lets just do the rng thing for ingame rewards not the cash shop. Or you can make the game adult only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone ever seen posts like: "I bought 25 keys and didn't get the shiny new exclusive outfit." or: "It took me 40 keys before I got the shiny new exclusive outfit."? I have, and I wonder how people would describe (in a general term) the activity these quoted fellows undertook in their quest to obtain this shiny new exclusive outfit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make it sound as if government trying to protect their citizens from the excesses of unregulated capitalism is a bad thing.

Although i do find it funny, that in this case it's the communist china that is more progressive than US that are apparently still those 70 years behind and haven't even noticed we live in computer era yet, and some laws might need to be adjusted due to the advancements of the technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Zaklex.6308 said:We have two choices, the world can go the route of COMMUNIST China and make the companies show the percent chance of getting items...or we can let people/parents be responsible for themselves/their children and keep the status quo. I prefer the second option, and if someone has an addiction problem...it's not my problem or your problem, it's that person problem. This is 2019, almost 2020, do we really want to turn it back 70+ years and become a nanny state?

Because having visible rates is something only a communist state could possibly fathom to do. That's what Engels wrote about, revolution of the proletariat, property abolition and...visible lootbox rates. This thread is golden, really.

By the way, Japan, capitalist country and birthplace of gacha, has the same law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"

It's pretty funny how everyone is ok with every type of rng, but not specific rng, even though all other forms of rng in the game can pretty much be directly enhanced or straight up bought by cash purchases.

But for some reason the lootbox is the target.

It's even more funny that the vice that everyone focuses on is "gambling addiction," but I guess gaming addiction is one that we let slide? I mean I guess it's fine If someone plays for 12 hrs a day, loses their job, gets divorced, dumps thousands into the cash shop. Because that's an addiction that requires no regulation or laws, but GAMBLING!! Oh noo role out the laws.

I mean, is the argument that, gaming addiction require self moderation, and parental supervision, but gambling addiction needs laws and regulations and restrictions? The hypocrisy is amazing.

And if you think gaming addiction needs laws and regulations too, then why play a game with so much vice in it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"

Legal definitions can and have been changed.

Then again, there is no need for this to change in the states. The US is not the only, nor is it biggest market for videp games. If enough of the global market shifts, game companies will be forced to adapt. What this means for the states? Who knows, either players there will be stuck with lootboxes while in other countries players get alternate means to acquire rewards or lootboxes get removed entirely.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:It's pretty funny how everyone is ok with every type of rng, but not specific rng, even though all other forms of rng in the game can pretty much be directly enhanced or straight up bought by cash purchases.

You are assiming. You are the only person in this tread who keeps mentioning he is fine with rng. Most people haven't put forth their stance nor is this relevant. There is a severe difference between simulating random events and directly linking monetization to them.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:But for some reason the lootbox is the target.

It's even more funny that the vice that everyone focuses on is "gambling addiction," but I guess gaming addiction is one that we let slide? I mean I guess it's fine If someone plays for 12 hrs a day, loses their job, gets divorced, dumps thousands into the cash shop. Because that's an addiction that requires no regulation or laws, but GAMBLING!! Oh noo role out the laws.

I already mentioned this. Two weongs to bot make a right. Gaming addiction is a serious issue and has its own challenges and needs its own attention.

What I find funny is how you keep repeating the same points over and over, get some reponses, go silent only to then return and repeat what you've stated in the past. Almost like a broke taperecorder hoping people who listend have moved on.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:I mean, is the argument that, gaming addiction require self moderation, and parental supervision, but gambling addiction needs laws and regulations and restrictions? The hypocrisy is amazing.

Again, both need addressing. Gambling addiction and gambling already have precedent in that they are deemed regulation necessary.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:And if you think gaming addiction needs laws and regulations too, then why play a game with so much vice in it?

Because a big part of these games playerbase, not GW2 but cellphone games for example, have no idea or concept of what game they are getting into? When was the ladt time you saw a 5 or 6 year old read about lootboxes in their cellphone game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"

Legal definitions can and have been changed.

Then again, there is no need for this to change in the states. The US is not the only, nor is it biggest market for videp games. If enough of the global market shifts, game companies will be forced to adapt. What this means for the states? Who knows, either players there will be stuck with lootboxes while in other countries players get alternate means to acquire rewards or lootboxes get removed entirely.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:It's pretty funny how everyone is ok with every type of rng, but not specific rng, even though all other forms of rng in the game can pretty much be directly enhanced or straight up bought by cash purchases.

You are assiming. You are the only person in this tread who keeps mentioning he is fine with rng. Most people haven't put forth their stance nor is this relevant. There is a severe difference between simulating random events and directly linking monetization to them.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:But for some reason the lootbox is the target.

It's even more funny that the vice that everyone focuses on is "gambling addiction," but I guess gaming addiction is one that we let slide? I mean I guess it's fine If someone plays for 12 hrs a day, loses their job, gets divorced, dumps thousands into the cash shop. Because that's an addiction that requires no regulation or laws, but GAMBLING!! Oh noo role out the laws.

I already mentioned this. Two weongs to bot make a right. Gaming addiction is a serious issue and has its own challenges and needs its own attention.

What I find funny is how you keep repeating the same points over and over, get some reponses, go silent only to then return and repeat what you've stated in the past. Almost like a broke taperecorder hoping people who listend have moved on.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:I mean, is the argument that, gaming addiction require self moderation, and parental supervision, but gambling addiction needs laws and regulations and restrictions? The hypocrisy is amazing.

Again, both need addressing. Gambling addiction and gambling already have precedent in that they are deemed regulation necessary.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:And if you think gaming addiction needs laws and regulations too, then why play a game with so much vice in it?

Because a big part of these games playerbase, not GW2 but cellphone games for example, have no idea or concept of what game they are getting into? When was the ladt time you saw a 5 or 6 year old read about lootboxes in their cellphone game?

A small nitpick, but their have been different acceptances of RNG in the tread.

Everyone I saw was okay with unid gear

Some where for some where against ectogambling.

More then the previous where against keys.

To me the more interesting talking point was whether it would be okay if we removed keys from the gemstore. But made a vendor which sold them for gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"

Legal definitions can and have been changed.

Then again, there is no need for this to change in the states. The US is not the only, nor is it biggest market for videp games. If enough of the global market shifts, game companies will be forced to adapt. What this means for the states? Who knows, either players there will be stuck with lootboxes while in other countries players get alternate means to acquire rewards or lootboxes get removed entirely.

That's their fear actually. They know the current political climate in the US is unfavorable to any change threatening the corporate overlords. That's why they keep repeating the mantra about the "lEgaL deFiniTion of GambLinG". They know any type of change to that there is facing an uphill struggle.

But they fear change elsewhere. Because they know the more countries decide to regulate, the bigger the financial hit for the studios becomes. Especially with a market like UK. And that might force the industry to change their ways including the US, and take away their favourite "poison". Not from regulation but because it's not as profitable anymore to justify the horrible PR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Zaklex.6308 said:We have two choices, the world can go the route of COMMUNIST China and make the companies show the percent chance of getting items...or we can let people/parents be responsible for themselves/their children and keep the status quo. I prefer the second option, and if someone has an addiction problem...it's not my problem or your problem, it's that person problem. This is 2019, almost 2020, do we really want to turn it back 70+ years and become a nanny state?

You know what communist china also has laws agains? Murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"AlexxxDelta.1806" said:Yet another recent story illustrating how innocent and totally not exploitative "surprise mechanics" are. It originates in the same report from the OP.

https://kotaku.com/player-spends-62-000-in-runescape-reigniting-communit-1838227818

To be fair, this is more a problem of bad parenting. People shouldn't make the parents blamefree because lootboxes are involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@yann.1946 said:

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"

Legal definitions can and have been changed.

Then again, there is no need for this to change in the states. The US is not the only, nor is it biggest market for videp games. If enough of the global market shifts, game companies will be forced to adapt. What this means for the states? Who knows, either players there will be stuck with lootboxes while in other countries players get alternate means to acquire rewards or lootboxes get removed entirely.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:It's pretty funny how everyone is ok with every type of rng, but not specific rng, even though all other forms of rng in the game can pretty much be directly enhanced or straight up bought by cash purchases.

You are assiming. You are the only person in this tread who keeps mentioning he is fine with rng. Most people haven't put forth their stance nor is this relevant. There is a severe difference between simulating random events and directly linking monetization to them.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:But for some reason the lootbox is the target.

It's even more funny that the vice that everyone focuses on is "gambling addiction," but I guess gaming addiction is one that we let slide? I mean I guess it's fine If someone plays for 12 hrs a day, loses their job, gets divorced, dumps thousands into the cash shop. Because that's an addiction that requires no regulation or laws, but GAMBLING!! Oh noo role out the laws.

I already mentioned this. Two weongs to bot make a right. Gaming addiction is a serious issue and has its own challenges and needs its own attention.

What I find funny is how you keep repeating the same points over and over, get some reponses, go silent only to then return and repeat what you've stated in the past. Almost like a broke taperecorder hoping people who listend have moved on.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:I mean, is the argument that, gaming addiction require self moderation, and parental supervision, but gambling addiction needs laws and regulations and restrictions? The hypocrisy is amazing.

Again, both need addressing. Gambling addiction and gambling already have precedent in that they are deemed regulation necessary.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:And if you think gaming addiction needs laws and regulations too, then why play a game with so much vice in it?

Because a big part of these games playerbase, not GW2 but cellphone games for example, have no idea or concept of what game they are getting into? When was the ladt time you saw a 5 or 6 year old read about lootboxes in their cellphone game?

A small nitpick, but their have been different acceptances of RNG in the tread.

Everyone I saw was okay with unid gear

Some where for some where against ectogambling.

More then the previous where against keys.

To me the more interesting talking point was whether it would be okay if we removed keys from the gemstore. But made a vendor which sold them for gold.

True, but again, I personally do not see GW2 as one of the main or even bad lootbox cases. The game gets funded by a small minority of its playerbase. I'm okay with being one of the players who spends money regularly on the game (though I am sure not a whale, I'm close to where I spend as much as I did on WoW) while others get to enjoy it for nearly no cost.

If there was a shift in regulation, there would be some tremours and shifts in how games get made and monetized, that is pretty sure. Still some of the most exploitative practices of this industry habe gone to far.

I would love to see more developer resources be devoted to content in GW2. Even content which is accessible via BLC keys which are purchasable with gold (I'm not sure a lot of people are aware how this would affect the market and gold value though since practically, keys are available via gold by exchanging it to gems). That would require other methods of monetization, say a subscription fee.

Ectogambling is an interesting case actually. It definately prays on people with gambling addictions while at the same time being rather hidden and in no way required for regular play. It is a mostly selfcontained mechanic within the game which is not promoted nor pushed in players faces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Zaklex.6308" said:We have two choices, the world can go the route of COMMUNIST China and make the companies show the percent chance of getting items...or we can let people/parents be responsible for themselves/their children and keep the status quo. I prefer the second option, and if someone has an addiction problem...it's not my problem or your problem, it's that person problem. This is 2019, almost 2020, do we really want to turn it back 70+ years and become a nanny state?

Those definitely aren't the only two choices. If lootboxes do get classified as gambling in the UK, it's more likely that they will be subject to the same regulations as other forms of online gambling. As far as I know gambling websites in the UK are not required to show the probabilities of each possible outcome, so there's no reason to expect that companies selling lootboxes will be subject to that requirement. The recommendations from the Commons select committee report - one of the things that prompted this thread - don't mention showing probabilities either. And to be honest, that probably wouldn't be effective as a form of regulation, since most people are poor at interpreting probabilities and have a weak understanding of probability theory.

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:But for some reason the lootbox is the target.

It's even more funny that the vice that everyone focuses on is "gambling addiction," but I guess gaming addiction is one that we let slide? I mean I guess it's fine If someone plays for 12 hrs a day, loses their job, gets divorced, dumps thousands into the cash shop. Because that's an addiction that requires no regulation or laws, but GAMBLING!! Oh noo role out the laws.

I already mentioned this. Two weongs to bot make a right. Gaming addiction is a serious issue and has its own challenges and needs its own attention.

In fact, gaming addiction is also addressed by the select committee report, which (amongst other things) "calls upon games companies to accept responsibility for addictive gaming disorders, protect their players from potential harms due to excessive play-time" - so claiming that "everyone" in this debate is ignoring the gaming addiction is nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"Of course. The idea is to change the law, exactly because the lootboxes do not fit the legal definition of gambling at the moment.

And if you think gaming addiction needs laws and regulations too, then why play a game with so much vice in it?Are you saying that people that think alcohol needs to be regulated don't drink themselves? Again, regulation is not the same as ban. But of course, you already know this - we've been telling you so in this thread dozens of times already.

You live in a world of regulations. Most of them are so natural to you, you don't even see them anymore - even if at the time they were introduced they might have been a cause of controversy (kitten, one of them even caused a civil war in US). You probably can't even imagine how bad the world without those "controversial" regulations would be. Even if many people that lived in that time considered the situation to be quite natural and not requiring any changes.

My hope is that sometimes in the future, people will not even be able to imagine how bad the world we live now was. And that they will never stop improving it - one step at a time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@yann.1946 said:

@"AlexxxDelta.1806" said:Yet another recent story illustrating how innocent and totally not exploitative "surprise mechanics" are. It originates in the same report from the OP.

To be fair, this is more a problem of bad parenting. People shouldn't make the parents blamefree because lootboxes are involved.

I would have thought it obvious already but on the slim chance this not an attempt to the same tired strawman, I will repeat it. Nobody is saying parents are blame free. But under the same logic other addictive activities should be left unregulated too. Kids buying alcohol and drugs under their parents nose. Should we let them do it? There is only one sane answer to this.

And should we turn a blind eye to an obviously exploitative, unethical and manipulative practice because some parents don't have their kids on a tight leash? I refuse to let the thief off the hook because the home owner left the door unlocked. The main problem is the thief, not the unlocked door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

@AlexxxDelta.1806 said:Yet another recent story illustrating how innocent and totally not exploitative "surprise mechanics" are. It originates in the same report from the OP.

To be fair, this is more a problem of bad parenting. People shouldn't make the parents blamefree because lootboxes are involved.

I would have thought it obvious already but on the slim chance this not an attempt to the same tired strawman, I will repeat it. Nobody is saying parents are blame free. But under the same logic other addictive activities should be left unregulated too. Kids buying alcohol and drugs under their parents nose. Should we let them do it? There is only one sane answer to this.

And should we turn a blind eye to an obviously exploitative, unethical and manipulative practice because some parents don't have their kids on a tight leash? I refuse to let the thief off the hook because the home owner left the door unlocked. The main problem is the thief, not the unlocked door.

I'm merely saying that you're example is badly chosen because it is almost entirely a parenting problem in this case.

We heard stories of children overspending before lootboxes were a thing. Buying all the emotes etc.

Their is little in what I read that suggested that if their were no lootboxes in that cash shop that he wouldn't have overspend.

The article under Alex's post was a much better example of the problems of gambling addiction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@yann.1946 said:

@AlexxxDelta.1806 said:Yet another recent story illustrating how innocent and totally not exploitative "surprise mechanics" are. It originates in the same report from the OP.

To be fair, this is more a problem of bad parenting. People shouldn't make the parents blamefree because lootboxes are involved.

I would have thought it obvious already but on the slim chance this not an attempt to the same tired strawman, I will repeat it. Nobody is saying parents are blame free. But under the same logic other addictive activities should be left unregulated too. Kids buying alcohol and drugs under their parents nose. Should we let them do it? There is only one sane answer to this.

And should we turn a blind eye to an obviously exploitative, unethical and manipulative practice because some parents don't have their kids on a tight leash? I refuse to let the thief off the hook because the home owner left the door unlocked. The main problem is the thief, not the unlocked door.

I'm merely saying that you're example is badly chosen because it is almost entirely a parenting problem in this case.

We heard stories of children overspending before lootboxes were a thing. Buying all the emotes etc.

Their is little in what I read that suggested that if their were no lootboxes in that cash shop that he wouldn't have overspend.

The article under Alex's post was a much better example of the problems of gambling addiction.

Even if it hasn't been proven that lootboxes "encourage" spending more than regular microtransactions, one could have easily surmised that by how popular they have become within the industry. If that wasn't the case, we wouldn't be having this discussion or this thread at all.

So yes, we heard stories of kids overspending before. But never to that extent and frequency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@yann.1946 said:

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"

Legal definitions can and have been changed.

Then again, there is no need for this to change in the states. The US is not the only, nor is it biggest market for videp games. If enough of the global market shifts, game companies will be forced to adapt. What this means for the states? Who knows, either players there will be stuck with lootboxes while in other countries players get alternate means to acquire rewards or lootboxes get removed entirely.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:It's pretty funny how everyone is ok with every type of rng, but not specific rng, even though all other forms of rng in the game can pretty much be directly enhanced or straight up bought by cash purchases.

You are assiming. You are the only person in this tread who keeps mentioning he is fine with rng. Most people haven't put forth their stance nor is this relevant. There is a severe difference between simulating random events and directly linking monetization to them.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:But for some reason the lootbox is the target.

It's even more funny that the vice that everyone focuses on is "gambling addiction," but I guess gaming addiction is one that we let slide? I mean I guess it's fine If someone plays for 12 hrs a day, loses their job, gets divorced, dumps thousands into the cash shop. Because that's an addiction that requires no regulation or laws, but GAMBLING!! Oh noo role out the laws.

I already mentioned this. Two weongs to bot make a right. Gaming addiction is a serious issue and has its own challenges and needs its own attention.

What I find funny is how you keep repeating the same points over and over, get some reponses, go silent only to then return and repeat what you've stated in the past. Almost like a broke taperecorder hoping people who listend have moved on.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:I mean, is the argument that, gaming addiction require self moderation, and parental supervision, but gambling addiction needs laws and regulations and restrictions? The hypocrisy is amazing.

Again, both need addressing. Gambling addiction and gambling already have precedent in that they are deemed regulation necessary.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:And if you think gaming addiction needs laws and regulations too, then why play a game with so much vice in it?

Because a big part of these games playerbase, not GW2 but cellphone games for example, have no idea or concept of what game they are getting into? When was the ladt time you saw a 5 or 6 year old read about lootboxes in their cellphone game?

A small nitpick, but their have been different acceptances of RNG in the tread.

Everyone I saw was okay with unid gear

Some where for some where against ectogambling.

More then the previous where against keys.

To me the more interesting talking point was whether it would be okay if we removed keys from the gemstore. But made a vendor which sold them for gold.

They already are obtainable with gold. This shows how little people are aware. Everyone in this thread says, you can only buy keys with cash, that rng is not ok!

Here let me help

Farm gold > convert to gems > buy keys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"

Legal definitions can and have been changed.

Then again, there is no need for this to change in the states. The US is not the only, nor is it biggest market for videp games. If enough of the global market shifts, game companies will be forced to adapt. What this means for the states? Who knows, either players there will be stuck with lootboxes while in other countries players get alternate means to acquire rewards or lootboxes get removed entirely.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:It's pretty funny how everyone is ok with every type of rng, but not specific rng, even though all other forms of rng in the game can pretty much be directly enhanced or straight up bought by cash purchases.

You are assiming. You are the only person in this tread who keeps mentioning he is fine with rng. Most people haven't put forth their stance nor is this relevant. There is a severe difference between simulating random events and directly linking monetization to them.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:But for some reason the lootbox is the target.

It's even more funny that the vice that everyone focuses on is "gambling addiction," but I guess gaming addiction is one that we let slide? I mean I guess it's fine If someone plays for 12 hrs a day, loses their job, gets divorced, dumps thousands into the cash shop. Because that's an addiction that requires no regulation or laws, but GAMBLING!! Oh noo role out the laws.

I already mentioned this. Two weongs to bot make a right. Gaming addiction is a serious issue and has its own challenges and needs its own attention.

What I find funny is how you keep repeating the same points over and over, get some reponses, go silent only to then return and repeat what you've stated in the past. Almost like a broke taperecorder hoping people who listend have moved on.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:I mean, is the argument that, gaming addiction require self moderation, and parental supervision, but gambling addiction needs laws and regulations and restrictions? The hypocrisy is amazing.

Again, both need addressing. Gambling addiction and gambling already have precedent in that they are deemed regulation necessary.

@Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said:And if you think gaming addiction needs laws and regulations too, then why play a game with so much vice in it?

Because a big part of these games playerbase, not GW2 but cellphone games for example, have no idea or concept of what game they are getting into? When was the ladt time you saw a 5 or 6 year old read about lootboxes in their cellphone game?

A small nitpick, but their have been different acceptances of RNG in the tread.

Everyone I saw was okay with unid gear

Some where for some where against ectogambling.

More then the previous where against keys.

To me the more interesting talking point was whether it would be okay if we removed keys from the gemstore. But made a vendor which sold them for gold.

True, but again, I personally do not see GW2 as one of the main or even bad lootbox cases. The game gets funded by a small minority of its playerbase. I'm okay with being one of the players who spends money regularly on the game (though I am sure not a whale, I'm close to where I spend as much as I did on WoW) while others get to enjoy it for nearly no cost.

If there was a shift in regulation, there would be some tremours and shifts in how games get made and monetized, that is pretty sure. Still some of the most exploitative practices of this industry habe gone to far.

I would love to see more developer resources be devoted to content in GW2. Even content which is accessible via BLC keys which are purchasable with gold (I'm not sure a lot of people are aware how this would affect the market and gold value though since practically, keys are available via gold by exchanging it to gems). That would require other methods of monetization, say a subscription fee.

Ectogambling is an interesting case actually. It definately prays on people with gambling addictions while at the same time being rather hidden and in no way required for regular play. It is a mostly selfcontained mechanic within the game which is not promoted nor pushed in players faces.

It's only hidden from people who dont play the game. You're also forgetting dye kits and mount liscences, and the mystic forge which everyone is ok with, not aware of because they dont play.

Also everything in a black lion chest can be obtained off the TP or with black lion statues. So none of it is even exclusive to black lion chests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"Of course. The idea is to change the law,
exactly
because the lootboxes do not fit the legal definition of gambling at the moment.

And if you think gaming addiction needs laws and regulations too, then why play a game with so much vice in it?Are you saying that people that think alcohol needs to be regulated don't drink themselves? Again, regulation is
not
the same as ban. But of course, you already know this - we've been telling you so in this thread dozens of times already.

You live in a world of regulations. Most of them are so natural to you, you don't even see them anymore - even if at the time they were introduced they might have been a cause of controversy (kitten, one of them even caused a
civil war
in US). You probably can't even imagine how bad the world without those "controversial" regulations would be. Even if many people that lived in that time considered the situation to be quite natural and not requiring any changes.

My hope is that sometimes in the future, people will not even be able to imagine how bad the world we live now was. And that they will never stop improving it - one step at a time.

They never will fit the definition, because you are not gambling for equal or higher value. Not in the us either way, and people like me will continue to disagree with it.

Its entertainment, its no different then paying for a Netflix subscription and hoping that the movies you like will show up in rotation. Why is that not gambling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

@"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:The good news, is these laws will most likely never come to the states, as they arent anywhere near close to what is legally considered "gambling"

Legal definitions can and have been changed.

Then again, there is no need for this to change in the states. The US is not the only, nor is it biggest market for videp games. If enough of the global market shifts, game companies will be forced to adapt. What this means for the states? Who knows, either players there will be stuck with lootboxes while in other countries players get alternate means to acquire rewards or lootboxes get removed entirely.

That's their fear actually. They know the current political climate in the US is unfavorable to any change threatening the corporate overlords. That's why they keep repeating the mantra about the "lEgaL deFiniTion of GambLinG". They know any type of change to that there is facing an uphill struggle.

But they fear change elsewhere. Because they know the more countries decide to regulate, the bigger the financial hit for the studios becomes. Especially with a market like UK. And that might force the industry to change their ways including the US, and take away their favourite "poison". Not from regulation but because it's not as profitable anymore to justify the horrible PR.

Funny that you think you're fighting the good fight, when you're advocating taking games and entertainment away from millions. Even more hypocritical, a game you play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...