Are lootboxes gambling & should games be regulated. BF2 and OW under investigation

[Radaney]

Besides the $$$$ you spent to buy them, Or do you get that back?

You always get something out of a lootbox. Gambling you can win nothing and lose all your money. That's the difference.

[dejec1989]

I understand that, but it's their choice to buy it. So why are you bothering with it? Maybe they want to buy more chances at skins. Point is, it's their business, not yours. So why are you trying to stick your nose in it? I don't even play Overwatch much, so I don't buy them.

I just don't like governments sticking their noses in places that they have no business in. They never stop regulating once they start.

Because someone CAN'T stop them self from buying that shit I have to suffer, not the other way around.... get that straight... everything you stated should be in the game just bam there you go no need to use more of your money for a fake gambling machine.

[Wondercrab]

No, if people have the freedom to make choices, they should take responsibility for them. But people like you always find someone else to blame, and want the government to make MORE laws to 'protect' people from themselves in a GAME.

You seem to live in a world devoid of compulsive personalities, mental illness, and children who don't know any better.
Vulnerable people exist. Every scam in existence is predicated upon this fact. Your line of reasoning seems to be completely okay with these people being taken advantage of, because it's their own individual freedom to set themselves up for it, right?

Like it or not, different people's brains work differently than yours, and some of them aren't very good at taking care of themselves. This is why we have laws to protect these people from predatory behaviour.

[Yunru]

Game should come out as a original and power should be locked behind a player rank.

Lets say game has 30 lvls:
Lvl 1-5 can only use rank 1 cards
Lvl 6-10 can use rank 2 cards
Lvl 11-15 can use rank 3 cards
Lvl 16-20 can use rank 4 cards
Lvl 21-25 can use rank 5 cards
Lvl 26-30 can use legendary cards

Lvl 1-5 players can only met players at lvl 6-10 Max. They wont be in battle with players that have rank 3 cards ever.
And to make it fair, the lvling would be very slow.

Similar ranking like this:
http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Ba...2_online_ranks

All credits in game will be removed (and lootboxes) and cards need to be auto-unlocked. Heroes wont be avaible till you hit at least a rank 11. (since they are way stronger than a starting player)

[dejec1989]

So you want government intervention into game design? That's basically what you want. I completely disagree.

I want government intervention into a predatory system masquerading as something innocent to fool children, people and the government in to taking more money than deserved and I don't care that you disagree, you are the problem here, defending idiotic practices like a sheep.

[Wondercrab]

A) if parents don't watch their children, that's the parent's fault
B) if the parents are taken in, that's on them
C) people need to take responsibility for their own actions, and stop trying to blame it on someone else. Fine, if they have a mental health condition, that's one thing, and that can be treated, etc. If they just can't say no, that's again, their own problem they need to fix, and not pass that off as something to blame on someone else.

If you want rid of these practices in games, get the rest of the game audience to stop paying for the boxes or the keys or whatever. If they weren't making money from them, they wouldn't put them in the game. Instead, you want government involved in game design? Hell no. F-ing hell no. It's not the government's fault that people are stupid.

Again, you seem to be fine with bad things happening to vulnerable people because "it's their own fault". A kid's parents don't pay enough attention so they end up developing an addiction to games of chance? Wow, sucks to be you, kid! Guess you should've had better parents!
We're not living in the wild west any more. Governments exist to protect their citizens, and putting safeguards between predatory business practices and consumers is a very good thing.

One of the biggest problems with these methods of monetisation (and the reason why everyone seems to hate them, yet publishers keep making them worse) is that most of the playerbase don't buy these microtransactions. The entire business model is based upon the existence of "whales" -- individual consumers who spend so much money that they generate profits in excess of what hundreds, or even thousands of regular players would provide. You can't "get people to stop buying them" because they're specifically targeted at a small minority rather than the playerbase as a whole. This is all very well documented and it's been going on in the mobile marketspace for years.

[Lucetia]

Why the f are you defending buying stuff that would have otherwise been in the game??

Because it varies on the game you play. Some games probably wouldn't have that stuff because it's seen as a waste of time so it's never implemented. Some guys would still do what they do now, but without a cash option so people would get upset they can't speed up the process.

If a game has it implemented where you can buy the exact same thing and earn the exact same thing in game then that is fine. Basically you are paying to speed up the process for yourself such as games like Overwatch.

If a game puts in boxes you can buy that you can't earn in game at all or similar to that then that's just being greedy by the company and of course taking advantage of others.

Doesn't necessarily mean either are gambling. The first example many are alright with because they can still get things they want, just at a slower pace and all you are doing is paying to "speed it up". The second example is the one people have issues with. It's not gambling, but it's practices that basically take advantage of you saying "Want this? Well only way is to fork over some more cash for it because your initial purchase wasn't enough". The two get grouped together though by everyone who wants to voice against it because they all are "lootboxes" and don't care how they operate. It's just easier to lump them together and burn them to the ground for most.

I would rather games have the first example in there because you are given a choice of "I can keep on earning them at the rate I'm getting or if I want to speed up the process a little bit I can pay for some." I'd rather games not have the second example because if it's content they added to the game I feel it should be made available to those who want by playing the game in some fashion.

[Tech614]

If lootboxes are gambling, shouldn't killing a boss in WoW be the same? You kill the boss and hope your item drop, in most cases it doesn't. Same as with lootboxes, you level up or w/e gives a lootbox, you open it and hope you get the item you want, but you don't.

I don't pay $5 each for the right to kill each raid boss in WoW.

[dejec1989]

A) if parents don't watch their children, that's the parent's fault
B) if the parents are taken in, that's on them
C) people need to take responsibility for their own actions, and stop trying to blame it on someone else. Fine, if they have a mental health condition, that's one thing, and that can be treated, etc. If they just can't say no, that's again, their own problem they need to fix, and not pass that off as something to blame on someone else.

If you want rid of these practices in games, get the rest of the game audience to stop paying for the boxes or the keys or whatever. If they weren't making money from them, they wouldn't put them in the game. Instead, you want government involved in game design? Hell no. F-ing hell no. It's not the government's fault that people are stupid.

I never said it was the governments fault, the government is here to protect people, whats the point in having them other wise, sort out your argument and make sense, for points A), B) and C) and? if the option wasn't there to begin with there would be nothing to watch out for. Keep bleating.

[Gadzooks]

I'm curious as to why Overwatch is part of it while something like Hearthstone isn't. Does being a TCG vs FPS make the difference?

*Note: Not bashing Hearthstone or any TCG, because I know that's how you get cards. (I play MTG)

Overwatch is part of it, because the tax income from Overwatch is considerably more than Hearthstone. They're trying to make the case with the biggest games, to get the taxes imposed on them - then they'll umbrella all of the games, including Hearthstone, under it. They're wrapping it up in the fictional cloth of "protecting players", when this is about imposing gambling licenses on them - which leads to taxing gambling wins.

They (politicians) have been trying to tax video games for a long time now, this is nothing new.

[Halicia]

So long as you can't "cash out", I don't see the gambling issue here. Although you've got countries that dictate how many hours you can play online games and such too, so whatever.

[Flarelaine]

Enjoy the lootbox shit while you can because more and more country's are going to crackdown on it and rule it for what it is... Gambling.

My daughter enjoys the lootbox shit, so I hope them Belgians don't ruin it for us.

- - - Updated - - -

Its not sorta gambling its 100% gambling.

What risk do you find in playing Overwatch?

- - - Updated - - -

Instead, he's now spending upwards of £600 a month on Overwatch and PUBG lootboxes to get the same rush.

600 pounds is still more than 600 euros, but even 600 euros spent in total will get you more than 10.000 cosmetics in Overwatch.... while it has less than 2500 unlockables (around 2200-2300). There is no rush to get got once you spend that much money.

- - - Updated - - -

Its gambling and I hope the ruling is in the favor of gamers. In the comparison to cards, in card games, I can get a card someone wants and receive any property they want to give in exchange, like a cookie. I cannot do that with overwatch skins, its just between me and blizz and its all random.

"In favor of gamers" means, in my books, that gamers like my daughter and I will be left alone to play Overwatch as we used to.

[vindicatorx]

Fifa should definitely be on the list with their damn ultimate cards.

you mean pretty much any EA game should be on the list

[DesoPL]

I heard Overwatch might be on excuse list, because from loot boxes you got only cosmetic items like sprays etc. Funny that HOTS is not on excusive list.... Did skins in HOTS are P2W? Or did i missed something?

[Flarelaine]

I don't pay $5 each for the right to kill each raid boss in WoW.

Overwatch gives you free loot boxes every couple of matches. You only invest time, but that is the same for raid bosses.

[Vespian]

Because it varies on the game you play. Some games probably wouldn't have that stuff because it's seen as a waste of time so it's never implemented. Some guys would still do what they do now, but without a cash option so people would get upset they can't speed up the process.

If a game has it implemented where you can buy the exact same thing and earn the exact same thing in game then that is fine. Basically you are paying to speed up the process for yourself such as games like Overwatch.

If a game puts in boxes you can buy that you can't earn in game at all or similar to that then that's just being greedy by the company and of course taking advantage of others.

Doesn't necessarily mean either are gambling. The first example many are alright with because they can still get things they want, just at a slower pace and all you are doing is paying to "speed it up". The second example is the one people have issues with. It's not gambling, but it's practices that basically take advantage of you saying "Want this? Well only way is to fork over some more cash for it because your initial purchase wasn't enough". The two get grouped together though by everyone who wants to voice against it because they all are "lootboxes" and don't care how they operate. It's just easier to lump them together and burn them to the ground for most.

I would rather games have the first example in there because you are given a choice of "I can keep on earning them at the rate I'm getting or if I want to speed up the process a little bit I can pay for some." I'd rather games not have the second example because if it's content they added to the game I feel it should be made available to those who want by playing the game in some fashion.

We wouldn't have them in the first fucking place if this would be illegal, which it should be. And yeah, I agree that it's limited to P2W models (Or pay for randomized functional changes, if you will), but why are we letting developers get away with these slotmachine constructs?? How can you morally agree with this..

[Lucetia]

We wouldn't have them in the first fucking place if this would be illegal, which it should be. And yeah, I agree that it's limited to P2W models (Or pay for randomized functional changes, if you will), but why are we letting developers get away with these slotmachine constructs?? How can you morally agree with this..

Because not everyone sees it as an evil thing? I don't mind lootboxes in say Overwatch because it gives me something to look forward to each level along with playing the game. I don't have to buy the boxes to get anything extra, but it's an option.

Something like EA's where there are things in there that help you win and you can't unlock normally then yeah I'm against it.

It's not about morals or anything. It's about facing facts here. Which one is going to cause more harm in games? EA's method.

[Tenjen]

If the average value of the OW lootbox results of each quantity based category matches the amount spent, it should be fine.

[dejec1989]

I'm no sheep. You're the one trying to abdicate responsibility for things to the government. I'm the one wanting people to take responsibility for themselves, because I don't trust the government at all.

But, you already have your mind made up that anything that happens, there's someone to be found to blame it on and take responsibility for, because normal people can't be at fault for anything.

You have a nice day.

I find it very interesting that you fail to see were the road you are on leads, but hey one day when you get fucked over by a corporation feel free to write about it on MMO-C so I can have a good laugh, you shouldn't trust corporations so easily, they only answer to shareholders, not the cattle they feed shit too.

Governments are inherently slow, large corporations are inherently greedy, I know which one I prefer.

[Zylos]

I don't understand the mentality of "I don't like this, therefore it should be illegal" because let's face it that's all this argument is about. People happy that there is some possible legal out to something they don't like.

Look I don't like lootboxes either, soooooooooooooo... I don't buy them. Not sure how that is hard to understand? I also would not start playing a game which offered power increases inside said lootboxes for that same reason, it's not fun and I can spend money on something I will enjoy more.