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

[Orange Joe]

Legal definitions and local laws, cases, precedent, etc. That will be used.

Cards are a physical item that has a value that can be determined by a third party and is not locked to just you and the original seller. Thats a pretty big difference.

Where is this thing that if it has value and you can trade it afterwords it means it isn't gambling, coming from? If buy a ticket in a lotto and win a car, that is still gambling even though the car has value and can be sold after.

[GennGreymane]

Where is this thing that if it has value and you can trade it afterwords it means it isn't gambling, coming from? If buy a ticket in a lotto and win a car, that is still gambling even though the car has value and can be sold after.

Its the distinction between what can be compared to trading cards. There is a common comparison to trading cards, but it really does not hold up once you really piece into it.

[Orange Joe]

Its the distinction between what can be compared to trading cards. There is a common comparison to trading cards, but it really does not hold up once you really piece into it.

but if falls flat when you figure in the fact the resale has no factor on if it is gambling or not.

[GennGreymane]

but if falls flat when you figure in the fact the resale has no factor on if it is gambling or not.

It certainly plays a factor into whether its similar to cards or not.

I can buy packs to get cards, all of which have a value determinable via a third party, or I can use money as a third party to purchase individual cards I desire without use of a pack.

[Orange Joe]

It certainly plays a factor into whether its similar to cards or not.

I can buy packs to get cards, all of which have a value determinable via a third party, or I can use money as a third party to purchase individual cards I desire without use of a pack.

Just because you can sell it afterwords doesn't mean it isn't gambling in the first place.

lootboxes and card packs work on the same basic principles. You pay for a chance at getting something you want. Resale has no factor on if that is gambling or not. If lootboxes are gambling card parks are gambling.

[Heladys]

Lootboxes are not gambling and any argument to the contrary is flatly insane.

[GennGreymane]

Just because you can sell it afterwords doesn't mean it isn't gambling in the first place.

lootboxes and card packs work on the same basic principles. You pay for a chance at getting something you want. Resale has no factor on if that is gambling or not. If lootboxes are gambling card parks are gambling.

Resale is a factor in determining whether or not it can be compared to card game packs. If you want to make the argument that card games are gambling, you may do so. I personally am not making that argument. The argument I am making is that loot boxes and card packs are not the same because:

1. card packs have value that can be determined by a third party;
2. I can be a third party and buy individual cards;
3. loot boxes do not generally allow for valuation between myself and a third party;
4. In many cases, even in OW, you cannot be a third party to buy individual skins as the currency is directly linked to the loot box system as an between currency only accessible in loot boxes.

[Deleted]

The law in Portugal:


"Artigo 1.º
Jogos de fortuna ou azar
Jogos de fortuna ou azar são aqueles cujo resultado é contingente por assentar exclusiva ou fundamentalmente na sorte.
Jurisprudência
1. Ac. TRG de 2-11-2015 : O jogo de uma máquina que, não pagando directamente prémios em fichas ou dinheiro, desenvolve temas próprios de jogos de fortuna ou azar (em tudo semelhante ao modo de operação de um jogo de roleta) e apresenta como resultado pontuações (susceptíveis de serem convertidas em dinheiro) dependentes exclusiva ou fundamentalmente da sorte (sem qualquer intervenção da perícia do jogador), deve ser classificado como um jogo de fortuna ou azar, nos termos dos artigos 1º e 4º, nº1, al. g, do Decreto-Lei nº 422/89, de 2 de Dezembro."


Translating the underlined part, gambling games are those that the result is supported exclusively or fundamentaly by luck.

A machine game that, even without money or chip rewards, develop gambling games themes with pontuations dependent exclusively or fundamental from luck is a gambling game.

So, by law, lootboxes are gambling in Portugal.

- - - Updated - - -

Lootboxes are not gambling and any argument to the contrary is flatly insane.

Except they are, by law, in many countries.

[GennGreymane]

The law in Portugal:


"Artigo 1.º
Jogos de fortuna ou azar
Jogos de fortuna ou azar são aqueles cujo resultado é contingente por assentar exclusiva ou fundamentalmente na sorte.
Jurisprudência
1. Ac. TRG de 2-11-2015 : O jogo de uma máquina que, não pagando directamente prémios em fichas ou dinheiro, desenvolve temas próprios de jogos de fortuna ou azar (em tudo semelhante ao modo de operação de um jogo de roleta) e apresenta como resultado pontuações (susceptíveis de serem convertidas em dinheiro) dependentes exclusiva ou fundamentalmente da sorte (sem qualquer intervenção da perícia do jogador), deve ser classificado como um jogo de fortuna ou azar, nos termos dos artigos 1º e 4º, nº1, al. g, do Decreto-Lei nº 422/89, de 2 de Dezembro."


Translating the underlined part, a machine game that, even without money or chip rewards, develop gambling games themes with pontuations dependent exclusively or fundamental from luck is a gambling game.

So, by law, lootboxes are gambling in Portugal.

- - - Updated - - -



Except they are, by law, in many countries.

Correction

can be argued as so

Such is the issue legal debates have online. Generally with law, its not a simple yes or no, there are arguments, precedent, statutes, legislative histories, interpretations, judges, lots of things in the way of "is this okay?"

Even things that have lots of restrictions also have lots of exceptions. Exceptions exist based on circumstances. If for example, lets say the land of Cardistan says loot boxes are a system of gambling, but then has certain exceptions, then loot box systems would try to work within those exceptions.

[arandomuser]

the loot crate system is better than the mobile system, the mobile system you know what you get, free win/instacompletion for spending money, which imo is worse,

[Orange Joe]

Resale is a factor in determining whether or not it can be compared to card game packs. If you want to make the argument that card games are gambling, you may do so. I personally am not making that argument. The argument I am making is that loot boxes and card packs are not the same because:

1. card packs have value that can be determined by a third party;
2. I can be a third party and buy individual cards;
3. loot boxes do not generally allow for valuation between myself and a third party;
4. In many cases, even in OW, you cannot be a third party to buy individual skins as the currency is directly linked to the loot box system as an between currency only accessible in loot boxes.

So we come down to, it's not that you really care that it's gambling. You only care if you can sell the item you get after.

[GennGreymane]

So we come down to, it's not that you really care that it's gambling. You only care if you can sell the item you get after.

Why are you trying so hard to make me make an argument I am not making? I feel you are trying to steer me towards a conclusion you had pre made for me, while I am stating the differences I believe make card games and loot boxes different from one another, because its a cheap and lazy argument for people to make without much thought.

[VyersReaver]

Horizon Zero Dawn,Witcher 3,Bloodborn and many other $60 titles felt like a full experience to me.

Are you really saying Super Mario Oddessy doesn't provide a full experience?

"regular ass AAA titles nowadays" from that post was supposed to be the indicator that there are going to be some outliers. I agree, not EVERY SINGLE GAME made nowadays has those extra shitty practices tacked onto them. But most of them do.

[Deleted]

Correction

can be argued as so

Such is the issue legal debates have online. Generally with law, its not a simple yes or no, there are arguments, precedent, statutes, legislative histories, interpretations, judges, lots of things in the way of "is this okay?"

Law in Portugal is very direct. "Gambling games are those that the result is supported exclusively or fundamentaly by luck."

The law was created because of the surge of online gambling sites and for some years, those sites couldn't operate at all. Now they are finally reappearing because licences are being distributed, but it's still hard because the same institute that regulates the gambling market is also the gambling monopoly in Portugal (controlling bets and lotto games, with the Portuguese casinos controlling the other games).

[GennGreymane]

"regular ass AAA titles nowadays" from that post was supposed to be the indicator that there are going to be some outliers. I agree, not EVERY SINGLE GAME made nowadays has those extra shitty practices tacked onto them. But most of them do.

its the triple AAAAYYYYYY (I love this) companies with bloated budgets that want to put these extra transactions in to justify their spending.

[Orange Joe]

Why are you trying so hard to make me make an argument I am not making? I feel you are trying to steer me towards a conclusion you had pre made for me, while I am stating the differences I believe make card games and loot boxes different from one another, because its a cheap and lazy argument for people to make without much thought.

Cause if you really cared that they put gambling in games you would be just as upset about card packs as lootboxes. They both work exactly the same only difference being the resale factor afterward.

[VyersReaver]

You risk repair bills, the costs of consumables, etc.

If the problem is spending real money for an uncertain result, then look at practically any bag of mixed sweets.

Rowntree's even have one openly called "Randoms", making it abundantly clear from the name something already common in many others.
The expectations around a loot box that are not being met are not defined in any way by the developer, but by the one spending the money.



If you are going to ignore questions like that, then that just proves the point.
That repeatedly quoted definition has huge problems.
And DOES apply to many other mechanics in games, as well as many real purchases not being picked on.

It needs defined far better than "risky action".
And what is the expectation - if it is entirely down to the buyer to form that expectation, then yes it rarely will be met and therefore not the fault of the developer.
If there is a stated result not being met, then there is discussion to have.
But someone simply being upset that random does not go the way they want it to, that is something entirely different.

Except paying for the Boxes separately to get something you want you can't get otherwise (or could, but requires significantly more effort BECAUSE it has MTX) ON TOP of the games price is nowhere near the same as buying a game that has loot that drops from the boss and doesn't require additional payments, exclusively effort. There's a reason why I like SotN so much, it has random drops. It's addictive. And addiction mixed with money spending is gambling, any way you want to look at it.

[GennGreymane]

Law in Portugal is very direct. "Gambling games are those that the result is supported exclusively or fundamentaly by luck."

The law was created because of the surge of online gambling sites and for some years, those sites couldn't operate at all. Now they are finally reappearing because licences are being distributed, but it's still hard because the same institute that regulates the gambling market is also the gambling monopoly in Portugal (controlling bets and lotto games, with the Portuguese casinos controlling the other games).

I understand it is direct, but there will be the normal legal proceedings first. I just like to make that distinction from a personal standpoint mostly because on the internet we are very used to pointing to something and saying it is so, while law does not always work that way.

[Coldkil]

Market analysists are kinda failing to convince people..... "if you play for a whole year at 2 and a half hours a day...." ok wtf is this logic

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH what the hell is that guy saying - my god the insanity.

I mean - yes, videogames are a really cheap form of entertainment compared to other things - BUT THIS WORKS ONLY IF the said game is actually GOOD and KEEPS YOU PLAYING.

Example: WoW. We pay a monthly fee and since the game is (was, whatever let's not nitpick) good, people play it a lot of time and the money spent is justified by the player. That falls in line with the "if you play enough, cost drops quite a lot".

I'm not forgetting that everyone values money differently so what for me is worth may not worth the same way for another person and also the opposite happens.

But the freakin core is: THE GAME NEEDS TO BE GOOD WTF. If a game sucks and you spent 60 euros on it, you're not getting "40 cents per hour of entertainment for 2 years and a half", you have just burned your money on a sh** product.

And also assumed people play only 1 game for a year, which doesn't happen like NEVER. It's much more likely you have one game that gets most of your time aoevr a very long period (mmos, online fps or similar games) plus playing the shorter ones in the meantime.

I'm so mad my keyboard melted.

[GennGreymane]

Cause if you really cared that they put gambling in games you would be just as upset about card packs as lootboxes. They both work exactly the same only difference being the resale factor afterward.

Do they work exactly the same if I can simply not buy packs and get the exact cards I want directly with actual money rather than a fake currency for ingame purposes?