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

[dope_danny]

I haven't played a game that removed items to put them in lootboxes. Many of the items like xp boosts and such were never available in games. Those challenges you talk about still have rewards so no it isn't a scam.

Yes. Yes you have. EVERY game with lockboxes is taking things and putting them INTO the lockboxes. You arent being showered with a wealth of bonuses, they are things that in other games exist or have no reason to but now behind a paywall.

Did you never consider none lockbox games dont include 'xp boosts' because they are balanced around playing the game and not driving the player to feel they need boosts to progress?

This is the scam man, they convince you the lockboxes are some kind of bonus content, or a boon to the player. They are not. They are at best things other games include in base gameplay behind a rng paywall and at worst just charging the player money for a chance at getting around bad balance on the developers part.

[Icechaosss]

Yes. Yes you have. EVERY game with lockboxes is taking things and putting them INTO the lockboxes. You arent being showered with a wealth of bonuses, they are things that in other games exist or have no reason to but now behind a paywall.

Did you never consider none lockbox games dont include 'xp boosts' because they are balanced around playing the game and not driving the player to feel they need boosts to progress?

This is the scam man, they convince you the lockboxes are some kind of bonus content, or a boon to the player. They are not. They are at best things other games include in base gameplay behind a rng paywall and at worst just charging the player money for a chance at getting around bad balance on the developers part.

I imagine you really liked Mario Odyssey's way of this then. The whole "Collect and actually PLAY the game to unlock costumes and cool stuff" rather than paying for it?

[Saphyron]

WHAT IS GAMBLING?
The definition of “gambling,” unless changed by statute, consists of any activity with three elements: consideration, chance, and prize. If any one or more of these elements is missing, the activity is not gambling. When you use your money to buy a loot box and you open it that is called gambling since doing that meets all three requirements.

Risk is the fourth so no unless you have a chance of getting nothing its not gambling

[Xar226]

If Overwatch-style loot boxes are gambling, so are packs of baseball cards: You know what might be in there, cards have different values, you have no idea what you will get. In fact, they are more akin to gambling, because if you get something valuable you can re-sell it and make the argument that it was a gamble-cash-for-more-cash transaction. Where are the calls to regulate baseball cards?

A lot of people don't like them and they're just desperate for the government to step in and declare them illegal on their behalf. There are market solutions if you don't like lootboxes: Don't buy the fucking game.

[elaina]

This is great news. Nip this cancer in the bud before it gets out of control.

I don't think it's gambling but I'm fine with the whole loot box institution taking a shit and dying.

[dope_danny]

I imagine you really liked Mario Odyssey's way of this then. The whole "Collect and actually PLAY the game to unlock costumes and cool stuff" rather than paying for it?

But wise consumer! why play the game when for a simple $4.99 mario gets a box containing a chance at a power moon! all that time saved and what value! truly the wise consumer is the friend of the corporate giant who is really giving such great deals at cost!

[Dhrizzle]

It can because it can give off the same feeling, The difference is your not dropping $4 at a time for 5 box's and repeating it into the $1000's. When you go to kill a raid boss in wow you are doing it once weekly per character and that's it. No extra cost besides the monthly sub.

There is a such thing as video game addiction (just like drug,food,sex addiction's).

The distinction would matter if this was about consumer protection but instead the complaint seems to be more about the evil video games corrupting children (with a side order of video games influencing real life behaviour,) something a lot of politicians seem eager to get behind.

[glowzone]

Gambling or not, "AAA" gaming was taking the piss.
The backlash really should've happened MANY YEARS ago.

All I learned from this is, you do not mess with starwars nerds.
Good on you starwars guys, good on you.

The lord of the ring guys could learn a thing or two from you.

[Jtbrig7390]

The distinction would matter if this was about consumer protection but instead the complaint seems to be more about the evil video games corrupting children (with a side order of video games influencing real life behaviour,) something a lot of politicians seem eager to get behind.

You do realize it is consumer protection if you (try to) stop these game company's from turning children into gambling addicts right?

[Orange Joe]

Yes. Yes you have. EVERY game with lockboxes is taking things and putting them INTO the lockboxes. You arent being showered with a wealth of bonuses, they are things that in other games exist or have no reason to but now behind a paywall.

Did you never consider none lockbox games dont include 'xp boosts' because they are balanced around playing the game and not driving the player to feel they need boosts to progress?

This is the scam man, they convince you the lockboxes are some kind of bonus content, or a boon to the player. They are not. They are at best things other games include in base gameplay behind a rng paywall and at worst just charging the player money for a chance at getting around bad balance on the developers part.

Runescape for example is not balanced around getting xp lamps from keys. Not all games are doing what you think they are.

[Dhrizzle]

You do realize it is consumer protection if you (try to) stop these game company's from turning children into gambling addicts right?

Yes, the same way Jack Thompson was protecting consumers from becoming violent savages, because this seems a lot more like an angry knee-jerk than a researched and reasoned public health concern.

[Deleted]

Yes, the same way Jack Thompson was protecting consumers from becoming violent savages, because this seems a lot more like an angry knee-jerk than a researched and reasoned public health concern.

Yeah I mean in Belgium we've reduced gambling participation and debt rates by over 1000% within the last 16 years when the tougher legislation was introduced. Any kind of gambling systems are monitored and licensed, and any money for those licenses goes back into the system that the government funds to make sure those with severe gambling addictions can get help to get rid of it and potentially providing them with housing until they can get back to work.

I guess Americans feel fine about the fact that yearly they spend $60 billion on gambling addicts, you could do a lot with that money, for example you could provide more equipment to schools, build better shelter places for the homeless, or perhaps even help them with permanent residence and a job, so you don't have to keep importing immigrants to keep doing the dirty work instead. I mean it's a really hard decision for Americans it seems.

I think it must really suck to be American, your government does not care about you and will never care about you. Then you have European governments which have the best and most ironclad consumer protection services in the world, and it pretty much prevents any form of abuse, because in theory, that's what gambling services do, they are there to abuse you for free money.

- - - Updated - - -

If Overwatch-style loot boxes are gambling, so are packs of baseball cards: You know what might be in there, cards have different values, you have no idea what you will get. In fact, they are more akin to gambling, because if you get something valuable you can re-sell it and make the argument that it was a gamble-cash-for-more-cash transaction. Where are the calls to regulate baseball cards?

A lot of people don't like them and they're just desperate for the government to step in and declare them illegal on their behalf. There are market solutions if you don't like lootboxes: Don't buy the fucking game.

Mind you Pokemon cards and such were declared illegal in schools as well due to kids selling their cards for lunch money and then faint during the day because they had little to eat lol. I made a lot of money in schools back when I was a kid because I had a lot of good and duplicate cards )

[Jtbrig7390]

Yes, the same way Jack Thompson was protecting consumers from becoming violent savages, because this seems a lot more like an angry knee-jerk than a researched and reasoned public health concern.

Nope not the same at all.

Do you really think EA made 800million last year off of fifa BS just off the backs of responsible adults?
http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/...emented-games/

EA’s “Ultimate Team”, a feature which started out in the publisher’s FIFA games, has become one of its biggest successes, as it now generates around $800 million in annual net revenue. And it looks like the company wants to find a way to bring a similar system to the rest of its games.
Speaking at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference, EA CFO Blake Jorgensen said that the real opportunity for Ultimate Team would be finding ways to implement a similar concept to other EA games.

Totally no addicts spending a shit ton of money on virtual BS. There is proof of Video Game/Gambling addiction's there is no proof that video games cause violence.

[Nigmatar]

I don't think its gambling, but I would like them to be either heavily regulated or removed because I hate that fucking shitty business practice, same deal with DLC but that won't ever go away.
So I would lie and say they are to my representatives so they can hurt those greedy fuckers.

[Elim Garak]

Nope not the same at all.

Do you really think EA made 800million last year off of fifa BS just off the backs of responsible adults?
http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/...emented-games/


Totally no addicts spending a shit ton of money on virtual BS. There is proof of Video Game/Gambling addiction's there is no proof that video games cause violence.

Oh boy oh boy, show us the data on who what and when.

[Krastyn]

When one sees swathes of people defending paying an obscene amount of money to play "games" of far lower quality than their predecessors, one can't help but think they are so far off the deep end from being brainwashed by despicable publishers/developers.

No wonder 99% of "games" nowadays involve players paying upwards of hundreds or thousands of dollars just to "unlock" an infinitesimal part of said games' content. At least gambling in real life still involve tangible rewards if you are lucky. In "games", you unlock a few pretty pixels, what a sense of achievement right there.

A completely 100% subjective argument. You sound like an old man ranting about the music of "kids these days" and about how pure and better it was back in your day.

Not many people will agree with you that Ice Hockey for Atari was better than NHL '17.

- - - Updated - - -

Production costs for discs are far less than the cartridges, throw in the complete lack of cost for digital and that'll help balance it a bit. Plus, just because these companies chose to bloat their staff and marketing costs didn't mean they needed to. Plenty of developers make AAA quality games and don't even charge the $60.

Production costs of physical cartridges is a small fraction of the overall cost of a game. Please back up the two bold statements with with facts, please.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do people always say that rising costs of videogames means we should have seen an increase in the cost of games at launch?

Look at the movie industry

Yet DVDs, even with their extra bonuses, cost far less than tapes ever did. Back in the early 80s tapes cost so much most people had to rent them.

Look at TV, a new game of thrones episode costs $15million to produce yet a DVD boxset is EXACTLY the same as it has always been and infinitely cheaper than tapes were in the 90s. I bought the entire Buffy series on tape for £200, if I was to buy the entire game of thrones singularly at launch it would have been under £175 and the entire series 1-7 at launch cost £90, yet it is infinitely more expensive than Buffy ever would have cost to make.

So why are apologists for microtransactions so desperate to defend them, because Triple Ay costs so much, when they already have reduced manufacturing and distribution costs, DLC, expansions, deluxe editions, advertisement placement, product placement etc.

I counter your entire movie argument with this. While DVD prices have remained fairly stable, the cost of a movie ticket (and going to the movies in general) has not. DVD sales for movies are a fraction (10-25%) of the theatre revenue. TV shows make most of their money up front from advertising, not from DVD sales.

As far as the music industry, you conveniently ignore the fact that they were almost solely responsible for the rise of pirating due to their pricing model. Couple the fact that their production costs have continued to come down over the years, and it is pretty easy to see why they are around the same now. Or should you not also be railing against them for their "Deluxe", "remastered", "collector's edition", and "unlockables" behind a pay wall. Shouldn't you just get every song the band ever makes? I mean they could have included all that content originally.

- - - Updated - - -

But the companies get a hell of a lot more money than your $60. And I'm not even talking about Lootboxes in this regard:

AAA studios are making way more money than ever before right now. The whole $60 lie is just a deflection and a weak "defense" of lootboxes. Even EA told their shareholders that even with the removal of Looboxes there would be no noticeable impact on their revenue.

If you are paying $60 for a game that you enjoy and get value for, why does it matter what other revenue streams the company has? Do you know the NFL gets way revenue from sources other than your admission ticket? Do you know that movies get other revenue than your admission ticket? Do you know that airlines get other revenue than your plane ticket? Did you know that there are thousands upon thousands of companies that get revenue beyond the base cost? But fuck those video game developers! Burnt them at the stake!

If you like to buy the WoW collector's edition because it comes with some fancy cosmetic stuff, some artwork, and other miscellaneous stuff, fill your boots. If you don't, don't. But the company isn't evil for offering it.

The bolded part of your response makes your argument all the weaker. If the revenue from loot boxes is negligible, then clearly it is not the epidemic that people are making it out to be.

- - - Updated - - -

It can because it can give off the same feeling, The difference is your not dropping $4 at a time for 5 box's and repeating it into the $1000's. When you go to kill a raid boss in wow you are doing it once weekly per character and that's it. No extra cost besides the monthly sub.

Untrue, on a couple levels.

First, Blizzard sells tokens that can be converted to in game gold. In game gold can be used to buy tokens that allow you an extra roll for loot. This roll can give you something valuable, or not. Clearly gambling and should be banned.

Secondly, if you want to take it to the extreme, your monthly sub IS your purchasing of the loot boxes, into the $1000's (and someone playing wow since launch has spent well over $1000 on WoW). Each sub buys you up to 4 more entries into the raid lottery.

[StrawberryZebra]

Is rolling on the boss loot - gambling? You paid money, you spent your time and got nothing.

The big divide here is rolling on loot is a chance for additional rewards for beating an in game challenge. Without the challenge, without those game mechanics, that loot wouldn't have been availible to acquire. In game items are earned from completing in game challenges. It very explicitly requires a game for it to be a valid reward structure.

Opening a loot box you paid for skips the gameplay entirely. You're putting money in with the hopes of getting a "big win" in the same way people do when they play slot machines. The items you recieve in each one is the same as the slots paying out small amounts occasionally - Its a hook, to get you invested into winning big. There are no game play elements or mechanics tied to lootboxes, the only equation to consider is the expected pay out vs the cost of the boxes.

When you divorce the gameplay and the rewards, what we have left over with lootboxes are what I would consider to be gambling. I would be interested in hearing yours, and others, take on the matter though, since we clearly have a difference of opinion .

So far, most of this thread has devolved into quibbling over definitions and regional laws. It would be nice to have some actual discussion about this. For instance, at what point would Lootboxes become gambling to you? Is it some moral and legal line or does the fact that you're always getting something in return exclude lootboxes from being gambling all together?

I really want to hope that his 'it's a trap' was a star reference.

I am 100% sure that it was. He seems to be both aware of the Star Wars films and the meme so I doubt his choice of words was accidental.

[Krastyn]

TOpening a loot box you paid for skips the gameplay entirely. You're putting money in with the hopes of getting a "big win" in the same way people do when they play slot machines. The items you recieve in each one is the same as the slots paying out small amounts occasionally - Its a hook, to get you invested into winning big. There are no game play elements or mechanics tied to lootboxes, the only equation to consider is the expected pay out vs the cost of the boxes.

If you don't play the game, then what you get out of the loot box is meaningless.

[draykorinee]

A completely 100% subjective argument. You sound like an old man ranting about the music of "kids these days" and about how pure and better it was back in your day.

Not many people will agree with you that Ice Hockey for Atari was better than NHL '17.

- - - Updated - - -



Production costs of physical cartridges is a small fraction of the overall cost of a game. Please back up the two bold statements with with facts, please.

- - - Updated - - -



I counter your entire movie argument with this. While DVD prices have remained fairly stable, the cost of a movie ticket (and going to the movies in general) has not. DVD sales for movies are a fraction (10-25%) of the theatre revenue. TV shows make most of their money up front from advertising, not from DVD sales.

As far as the music industry, you conveniently ignore the fact that they were almost solely responsible for the rise of pirating due to their pricing model. Couple the fact that their production costs have continued to come down over the years, and it is pretty easy to see why they are around the same now. Or should you not also be railing against them for their "Deluxe", "remastered", "collector's edition", and "unlockables" behind a pay wall. Shouldn't you just get every song the band ever makes? I mean they could have included all that content originally.

- - - Updated - - -



If you are paying $60 for a game that you enjoy and get value for, why does it matter what other revenue streams the company has? Do you know the NFL gets way revenue from sources other than your admission ticket? Do you know that movies get other revenue than your admission ticket? Do you know that airlines get other revenue than your plane ticket? Did you know that there are thousands upon thousands of companies that get revenue beyond the base cost? But fuck those video game developers! Burnt them at the stake!

If you like to buy the WoW collector's edition because it comes with some fancy cosmetic stuff, some artwork, and other miscellaneous stuff, fill your boots. If you don't, don't. But the company isn't evil for offering it.

The bolded part of your response makes your argument all the weaker. If the revenue from loot boxes is negligible, then clearly it is not the epidemic that people are making it out to be.

- - - Updated - - -



Untrue, on a couple levels.

First, Blizzard sells tokens that can be converted to in game gold. In game gold can be used to buy tokens that allow you an extra roll for loot. This roll can give you something valuable, or not. Clearly gambling and should be banned.

Secondly, if you want to take it to the extreme, your monthly sub IS your purchasing of the loot boxes, into the $1000's (and someone playing wow since launch has spent well over $1000 on WoW). Each sub buys you up to 4 more entries into the raid lottery.

I'm sorry, you're in a discussion about video games, if I need to prove that there are AAA quality games being made by small teams who don't even charge full price then you shouldn't be debating here. Check out a well known game called hellblade.

N64 cartridges cost more than $20 to manufacture, even up to $30, yeah that's a small fraction of a $60-80 game, it's only a third...

As to cinema, we're talking physical media here, you can't counter an argument about physical media sales by saying cinema tickets have increased, especially when I used TV as the example...rising costs for all media and only one of them has keyboard warriors asking for the cost to go up. Nice attempt though.

Oh and tv shows are sold to networks, they don't make money from advertisement...


Finally

Home Entertainment earns $100m+ Hollywood blockbusters an average of $134.3 million per movie. The margin is higher that the theatrical window, with an average Home Ent marketing spend of $21.9 million, leaving an 84% margin after marketing. Obviously, Home Ent has higher manufacturing costs, but these are an average of $30.5 million, making Home Ent a richer vein than theatrical. Now you can see why the studios are so worried by the fall in DVD sales!

https://stephenfollows.com/how-movie...-blockbusters/

Counter my argument...pft. In a year Sony blamed falling dvd sales on falling profits I have to read this nonsense from you.

[Dhrizzle]

Yeah I mean in Belgium we've reduced gambling participation and debt rates by over 1000% within the last 16 years when the tougher legislation was introduced. Any kind of gambling systems are monitored and licensed, and any money for those licenses goes back into the system that the government funds to make sure those with severe gambling addictions can get help to get rid of it and potentially providing them with housing until they can get back to work.

I guess Americans feel fine about the fact that yearly they spend $60 billion on gambling addicts, you could do a lot with that money, for example you could provide more equipment to schools, build better shelter places for the homeless, or perhaps even help them with permanent residence and a job, so you don't have to keep importing immigrants to keep doing the dirty work instead. I mean it's a really hard decision for Americans it seems.

I think it must really suck to be American, your government does not care about you and will never care about you. Then you have European governments which have the best and most ironclad consumer protection services in the world, and it pretty much prevents any form of abuse, because in theory, that's what gambling services do, they are there to abuse you for free money.

Are you under the impression I'm an American?