US senator calls on ESRB to take action on loot boxes, suggests FTC could get involve

[Jtbrig7390]

https://www.pcgamer.com/us-senator-c...ffer-pcgamertw

FTC commissioner nominees agreed that further investigation is warranted if the ESRB doesn't act.

A letter sent to ESRB president Patricia Vance by United States senator Maggie Hassan calls on the rating agency to take steps to analyze and curb the proliferation of loot boxes in videogames. In a separate Q&A session with FTC commissioner nominees, the senator also suggested that if the ESRB fails to take action, the government could become directly involved.

In the letter, and in her preamble to the FTC nominees, Hassan praised the ESRB for its effectiveness and value as an age rating board. But she also noted that loot boxes are a relatively new phenomenon, and that the ESRB "must work to keep pace with new gaming trends."

"Recently the World Health Organization classified 'gaming disorder' as a unique condition in its recent draft revision of the 11th International Classification of Diseases," Hassan wrote. "While there is robust debate over whether loot boxes should be considered gambling, the fact that they are both expensive habits and use similar psychological principles suggest loot boxes should be treated with extra scrutiny. At minimum, the rating system should denote when loot boxes are utilized in physical copies of electronic games."

She called on the ESRB to review its rating practices, with a specific eye toward the ethics and transparency of loot boxes, to collect and publish data on the use and prevalence of loot boxes, and to come up with a system of loot box-related "best practices" for developers to give parents more control over what their children are playing, and how.

Her questions to the FTC nominees echoed those sentiments, but concluded on what could be taken as a slightly ominous note. "Do you agree that children are being addicted to gaming and activities like loot boxes that might make them more susceptible to addiction is a problem that merits our attention?" she asked. "And depending on how the ESRB responds to my inquiry, would the FTC be willing to look at loot boxes as an issue independently?"

If legislation does move forward, it could have a dramatically greater effect on videogames than the ESRB. Ars Technica reports that Hawaii, for instance, is now considering a bill that would ban the sale of games with purchasable loot boxes to anyone under 21, essentially the equivalent of an AO rating. Such restrictions would impact games like Overwatch, Call of Duty, and Battlefront 2, to name a few obvious examples. And that bill would impose legal repercussions rather than an industry fine.

New laws could lead to uncharted territory for microtransactions in games. We talked about that in greater depth last year in our look at how loot boxes are bad, but why we're wary of legislation.

Hassan's letter can be seen in full below. I've reached out to the ESRB for comment, and will update if I receive a reply.

Dear Ms. Vance:

I write to today regarding an important gaming issue that was recently brought to my attention by a constituent.

The Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) has an important mission in both providing parents with the necessary information to make decisions about the suitability of games, and their content, for children, as well as ensuring that the industry is following responsible marketing practices.

The ESRB rating system is of great value to parents across the country, empowering parents to make informed decisions on behalf of their children. As technology advances, ESRB must work to keep pace with new gaming trends, including the in-game micro-transactions and predatory gaming tactics, particularly as they are deployed on minors.

The prevalence of in-game micro-transactions, often referred to as ‘loot boxes,’ raises several concerns surrounding the use of psychological principles and enticing mechanics that closely mirror those often found in casinos and games of chance. The potential for harm is real. Recently the World Health Organization classified “gaming disorder” as a unique condition in its recent draft revision of the 11th International Classification of Diseases. While there is robust debate over whether loot boxes should be considered gambling, the fact that they are both expensive habits and use similar psychological principles suggest loot boxes should be treated with extra scrutiny. At minimum, the rating system should denote when loot boxes are utilized in physical copies of electronic games.

To that end, I respectfully urge the ESRB to review the completeness of the board’s ratings process and policies as they relate to loot boxes, and to take into account the potential harm these types of micro-transactions may have on children. I also urge the board to examine whether the design and marketing approach to loot boxes in games geared toward children is being conducted in an ethical and transparent way that adequately protects the developing minds of young children from predatory practices.

Further, I urge the ESRB to consider working with the relevant stakeholders – including parents – to collect and publish data on how developers are using loot boxes, how widespread their use is, and how much money players spend on them.

Finally, I ask that you develop best practices for developers, such as ethical design, tools for parents to disable these mechanisms, or making them less essential to core gameplay.

So AAA company's fix your shit or it will get fixed for you.

[Deleted]

How about they fix the mass shootings of innocent children first

[Jtbrig7390]

How about they fix the mass shootings of innocent children first

How about more than one problem being fixed at a time? Because believe it or not you can deal with more then one issue at a time no matter how big or small.

Go derail a different thread.

[Coldkil]

Point is that if anything ends with a different ESRB label on games, it won't change anything. Kids already play games that are supposed to be 16+ because parenmts don't know and don't read anything, so what makes this different?

[Destinas]

I hope these people got their jimmies in a bundle over baseball cards at one point in the past, because that's very similar to loot boxes nowadays. And, that was much more targeted to children than loot boxes are now.

[Manabomb]

I hope these people got their jimmies in a bundle over baseball cards at one point in the past, because that's very similar to loot boxes nowadays. And, that was much more targeted to children than loot boxes are now.

The problem is: We have gotten our jimmies rustled over Baseball cards, pokemon cards, digimon cards. They are all forms of gambling FOR KIDS(TM) and they all should be regulated as such.

But I'm sure you're one of the guys that will use the bag of skittles logic from the game theorist video, forgetting that statistical merit has meaning in the real world. It's a moral social issue, not at all an economic or political one.

[owbu]

Well, I hope this gets publishers to get their shit together. I dont really want the goverment to get involved in this, because I somewhat doubt that they will understand the finer nuances of what to restrict, but in general all buisness models designed around "If I only throw another 10$ at this digitial pony generator, this time I might get one!" should probably just go away.

[Lahis]

Age rating won't fix anything. Nobody looks at the labels. Only one that might have an effect on this situation is Adults Only because most stores don't wanna carry those. Anything ESRB could do below that is just placebo.

How about they fix the mass shootings of innocent children first

But that is just unstoppable force of nature. Nothing can be done about that.

[Destinas]

The problem is: We have gotten our jimmies rustled over Baseball cards, pokemon cards, digimon cards. They are all forms of gambling FOR KIDS(TM) and they all should be regulated as such.

But I'm sure you're one of the guys that will use the bag of skittles logic from the game theorist video, forgetting that statistical merit has meaning in the real world. It's a moral social issue, not at all an economic or political one.

Well, you missed my point entirely. I can see why, I wasn't very clear. However, assuming something as aggressively as you did only reflects on you in the end, which I'm sure you know.

I think things should be regulated if they are specifically targeted toward children. That was my point in the post you quoted, had you noticed. However, it seems that most games for consoles and PCs that have loot box systems are not targeted toward children in the first place - most are rated, at the lowest, teen (like Overwatch), and some are rated mature (CoD: WWII). If a game, like a mobile game, has loot boxes that are specifically meant for children to play, yes, by all means regulate it and don't target children. That's not the case for most games, though, that require a certain age (or a parent) to purchase - but I do feel parents should be aware that there are loot box systems inside said game.

Now, the other part of the point I was making was that real-life "loot boxes" do exist, and target children specifically. Sure, there are baseball cards, pokémon cards, and Yu-Gi-Oh cards, but there are other much more blatant types of mystery boxes. Is it the same thing for, say, Steven Universe Mystery Mini Funko boxes? What about Frozen? How about My Little Pony Mystery Figures? Those are children's shows - should that be regulated? For reference, the Funkos have an age suggestion of 14+ on the box, even though they are children's shows, and the toys are in the toy aisles of stores like Walmart. The MLP toys have an age rating of 3+. This also happens with Monster High (age rating 6+ for a show/franchise very much for children). It could be argued that Kinder Surprise is a similar product, which as I'm sure you know has had it's own controversies in the USA, though not for the same reasons.

All of these products are designed to make the customer want to buy more for better chances of getting whatever they want. All of these products, as well as games of any kind, require parents to buy them for their children, as well. The difference (aside from physical aspects) between cards/toys and loot boxes is the fact that most toy mystery boxes show the odds of you getting what you want on the box. If the same was done for all loot boxes, regulated as such, would that make it better? What is the end goal for most parents, personally, and not politicians? What is the moral high ground in all of these cases? Of course, not everyone will have the same idea. Personally, I think it's all or nothing.

[segara82]

Age rating won't fix anything. Nobody looks at the labels. Only one that might have an effect on this situation is Adults Only because most stores don't wanna carry those. Anything ESRB could do below that is just placebo.

I disagree. As soon as a game gets rated AO most shops simply do not offer physical copies of them anymore. Retailers avoid AO rated games like the plague, since selling them to a minor and getting caught results in very high fines, too high for their tastes.

snip.

For the most part i agree, but there are very important differences between lotboxes and your products:
Re-Sale: The digital goods can nearly never be resold.
Access: If you ever anger the content-provider and he cuts you off you loose access to all your bought items.
Presentation: The often underestimated point in the whole debate. All those lootboxes, be it from OW, EA:BF2, ... all use the same psychological tricks INCLUDING sound and lighting effects like a slotmachine in order to trigger (or make the buyer more acceptable to) gambling addiction. Like casinos the game companies learned what signals would stimulate the pleasure centres of addicts the best, or heightened the chances of them becoming addicts.

Some numbers, backed by National Council on Problem Gambling: The The gambling addicts currently in the US have cost over 7 billion dollars a year but make up only 2 % of the population. http://www.ncpgambling.org/wp-conten...-2015-2018.pdf
And with tricks like lootboxes companies try to increase the number of gambling addicts since they can't get enough money.
They target kids and teens on purpose, when they are more receptible to such signals.
Which one of you is ok with companies turning even more people into gambling addicts?

[Lahis]

I disagree. As soon as a game gets rated AO most shops simply do not offer physical copies of them anymore. Retailers avoid AO rated games like the plague, since selling them to a minor and getting caught results in very high fines, too high for their tastes.

Yeah, that is the only one that would have an effect. Everything else would be useless.

[Kaleredar]

It's also a matter of ease of payment. It used to be that the kid went to an FLGS and bought those cards with cash. Which meant that realistically their purchases were always limited by cash in hand which the parents can easily control.
Lootboxes are purchased by credit. The damage you can do using a credit card is just significantly greater.

Why are kids being given unlimited access to a parent's credit card?

[segara82]

Yeah, that is the only one that would have an effect. Everything else would be useless.

According to the ESRBs homepage AO is given for ADULTS ONLY

Content suitable only for adults ages 18 and up. May include prolonged scenes of intense violence, graphic sexual content and/or gambling with real currency.
Just a slight correction and we're good to go.

[Usagi Senshi]

Well, you missed my point entirely. I can see why, I wasn't very clear. However, assuming something as aggressively as you did only reflects on you in the end, which I'm sure you know.

I think things should be regulated if they are specifically targeted toward children. That was my point in the post you quoted, had you noticed. However, it seems that most games for consoles and PCs that have loot box systems are not targeted toward children in the first place - most are rated, at the lowest, teen (like Overwatch), and some are rated mature (CoD: WWII). If a game, like a mobile game, has loot boxes that are specifically meant for children to play, yes, by all means regulate it and don't target children. That's not the case for most games, though, that require a certain age (or a parent) to purchase - but I do feel parents should be aware that there are loot box systems inside said game.

Now, the other part of the point I was making was that real-life "loot boxes" do exist, and target children specifically. Sure, there are baseball cards, pokémon cards, and Yu-Gi-Oh cards, but there are other much more blatant types of mystery boxes. Is it the same thing for, say, Steven Universe Mystery Mini Funko boxes? What about Frozen? How about My Little Pony Mystery Figures? Those are children's shows - should that be regulated? For reference, the Funkos have an age suggestion of 14+ on the box, even though they are children's shows, and the toys are in the toy aisles of stores like Walmart. The MLP toys have an age rating of 3+. This also happens with Monster High (age rating 6+ for a show/franchise very much for children). It could be argued that Kinder Surprise is a similar product, which as I'm sure you know has had it's own controversies in the USA, though not for the same reasons.

All of these products are designed to make the customer want to buy more for better chances of getting whatever they want. All of these products, as well as games of any kind, require parents to buy them for their children, as well. The difference (aside from physical aspects) between cards/toys and loot boxes is the fact that most toy mystery boxes show the odds of you getting what you want on the box. If the same was done for all loot boxes, regulated as such, would that make it better? What is the end goal for most parents, personally, and not politicians? What is the moral high ground in all of these cases? Of course, not everyone will have the same idea. Personally, I think it's all or nothing.

Big difference is that all of those aren't front-loaded with a $40-60 purchase and are also physical and trade-able/sell-able. I got all Garbage Pail Kids series 1-14 almost (cheated and used 1991 xmas money on a couple discounted boxes at Gibraltar Trade Center) purely by trading with other kids at the time.

Free to play though? Yeah, fuck off and do loot boxes all you want IMO. I mean shit, I've thrown $400 at Hearthstone since 2014.

I'm just getting tired of the assholes double (triple)-dipping on everything anymore and knowing how insidious it is.

[Lahis]

According to the ESRBs homepage AO is given for ADULTS ONLY

Content suitable only for adults ages 18 and up. May include prolonged scenes of intense violence, graphic sexual content and/or gambling with real currency.
Just a slight correction and we're good to go.

ESRB is owned by the big publishers tho. They can also correct it in a way that will make Loot boxes completely acceptable.

[oplawlz]

I hope these people got their jimmies in a bundle over baseball cards at one point in the past, because that's very similar to loot boxes nowadays. And, that was much more targeted to children than loot boxes are now.

Baseball cards end with a potentially valuable physical product. The items from lootboxes, especially those which cannot be resold, have literally no value. They are guaranteed to one day cease existing.
It's preying on the same psychology with even more nefarious ends.

[segara82]

Until legislation has had enough of it and steps in. Like, maybe, right now in several US states and countries around the world.
Senator Hassan is just polite enough to inform both the ESRB and the FTC to get their shit straightened out or someone else will.
Like Rep. Chris Lee did a few months ago, now he has introcued 4 different bills to regulate lootboxes.
If the game companies don't change soon they will have no more say in such things.

[Lahis]

Until legislation has had enough of it and steps in. Like, maybe, right now in several US states and countries around the world.
Senator Hassan is just polite enough to inform both the ESRB and the FTC to get their shit straightened out or someone else will.
Like Rep. Chris Lee did a few months ago, now he has introcued 4 different bills to regulate lootboxes.
If the game companies don't change soon they will have no more say in such things.

Time to start lobbying against legistlation. Works for other industries, I see no reason it would fail here.

[Graeham]

Hopefully it ends up with loot boxes being banned in the UK as well. I loathe them and I say this as someone who spends a lot of money on cosmetics. Let me buy the cosmetics I desire directly. I have no interest in 'maybe' getting the item I seek through RNG when factoring in real money. It's an awful, dubious model that needs to be wiped out and replaced with a fairer system.

[sabe]

They should ban DLC's too. Its not any different.