Now Belgium declares loot boxes gambling and therefore illegal

[Daedius]

you do know they added lootboxes to LoL right?


Besides, LoL is free to play. Overwatch is not.

You can still buy whatever directly. And what's your point about OW not being F2P? Can be understandable in a F2P, but I honestly find the practise of lootboxes in a B2P rather despicable..

[Kaleredar]

I know it can be hard to understand, but I'll try and help.
Since you seem to understand gum, we'll use that as an example. When you purchase gum, you receive the value of gum. You now have the value [gum] in your hands. You can do whatever you want with that [gum]. You can create [gum] sculptures. You can hoard your [gum]. You can trade your [gum] for an equal or lesser value of other substances.
When you buy a digital item in a video game, you do not receive the value [video game item]. That [video game item] does not belong to you, but to the developer. At any point in time that [video game item] can gain or lose it's value. At some point that video game will cease to exist, and along with it [video game item]. The only real value [video game item] has is it's use in that specific video game. Yes, some digital items can be traded for real money out of game, but once again, those items are not owned by the people spending money on them. They belong to the developer who can do with them as they please.

It's not hard to see why physical and digital items should be treated differently, but if you like I can make the same case with the other tired examples often tread out by people who apparently like throwing money at nothing.We could do trading cards if you want.

The "existence" of the item into perpetuity isn't being taken into consideration here. They aren't talking about some existential "but when is real really real?" avenue here, because that's not what happens with real gambling anyway.

The point of contention here is NOT that a video game doesn't hand you a physical object when you pay for a lootbox or that someday the overwatch servers might shut down. It's that people are putting in money for an unsure result and that is being called gambling and that children are involved. Which is the same thing as what I noted with the gumball machine.

You can't say "well this is obviously gambling" but then tack on some philosophical "well because it's digital you have to take into account the ephemeral nature of the digital world, the impermanence of mankind's designs, and the inevitable passing of this civilization into the annals of history" as a qualifier.

[Orange Joe]

Exactly! I thought the gum might help. It's a scam in the form of a gamble.

Paying for the use of a specific digital item, however, is not gambling or a scam, because you are knowingly renting the use of a specific asset with an agreed upon value.

I'm glad we cleared that up.

Nah, not gonna play this stupid shit. It's not a scam as you know what you are buying before you buying. If you don't it's your fault for not looking into it.

[Endus]

Lootboxes are "gambling" in the same way that trading card packs or mystery-bags of candy or whatever are.

Which nobody has any real issue with kids buying. So this nonsense just seems like the latest way for old people to punish vidya games because they don't understand them.

If you've got serious issues with kids abusing it, provide a parental lock option where the parent has to enter a number that gets texted to their phone when their CC is used at the online store, or something.

[Jtbrig7390]

A gamble implies you can gain from said gamble.

If there is a item you want (Cash,Cosmetic's,Whatever) You spend $$$ on lootbox's that have a chance to not give you the item you want.

That is gambling and that is what lootbox's does.

[Orange Joe]

Lootboxes are "gambling" in the same way that trading card packs or mystery-bags of candy or whatever are.

Which nobody has any real issue with kids buying. So this nonsense just seems like the latest way for old people to punish vidya games because they don't understand them.

If you've got serious issues with kids abusing it, provide a parental lock option where the parent has to enter a number that gets texted to their phone when their CC is used at the online store, or something.

inb4 one has value and the other does.

Even though if it has no value it removes the "gamble"

[Kaleredar]

Blah blah blah slippery slope nonsense.

As I said, you seem to think that this system will lead to things being cheaper and easier. Why? They'll just implement a system that will tow the line as closely as possible. They wont have some soul searching: "Gee, we were so caught up in the lootboxes... we didn't stop to think of the little guy."

Banning selling loot boxes doesn't mandate that they can be earned in game nor does it necessitate companies going that route. If businesses thought they could nickle and dime everyone to death and not lose any customers, then that is exactly what most if not all of them would do.

You're inviting them to ask that question.

If letting players earn things in game, keeps people playing the game so that they will in fact see the things that go in the store or shop instead of the loot box, then that will stay. You cannot monetize people if they don't play your game - and loot boxes are simply designed to hide from people the true cost of whatever digital crap is being sold to them. If anything, companies will think more about what to sell, what to charge for it because it will be right there out in the open and if they get too greedy right out in the open it could just end up costing them customers.

In Overwatch's case the items are completely tertiary to the experience. Why not just nickle and dime people? They play the game to play the game, and cosmetics are cosmetics. Their playing of the game is not affected by the nickle and diming unless they choose it to be (just like now!) and as such things become normalized, who says people wont just accept that as the norm?

So I ask you: what's impractical about removing almost all or all free lootboxes and just putting everything behind a paywall? Why wouldn't that system work?

[Jtbrig7390]

Lootboxes are "gambling" in the same way that trading card packs or mystery-bags of candy or whatever are.

Which nobody has any real issue with kids buying. So this nonsense just seems like the latest way for old people to punish vidya games because they don't understand them.

If you've got serious issues with kids abusing it, provide a parental lock option where the parent has to enter a number that gets texted to their phone when their CC is used at the online store, or something.

You do realize there is ways to buy lootbox's without a CC right? Anything you spend $$$ on that provides a random outcome is gambling...Period.

[Endus]

If there is a item you want (Cash,Cosmetic's,Whatever) You spend $$$ on lootbox's that have a chance to not give you the item you want.

That is gambling and that is what lootbox's does.

And how is that different from buying multiple MTG card packs hoping to get the cards you need for a new deck idea you had?

[Kaleredar]

Lootboxes are "gambling" in the same way that trading card packs or mystery-bags of candy or whatever are.

Which nobody has any real issue with kids buying. So this nonsense just seems like the latest way for old people to punish vidya games because they don't understand them.

If you've got serious issues with kids abusing it, provide a parental lock option where the parent has to enter a number that gets texted to their phone when their CC is used at the online store, or something.

I think it's moreso that people didn't get the genji or hanzo skin they really super duper wanted and are steamed about it.

[Orange Joe]

If there is a item you want (Cash,Cosmetic's,Whatever) You spend $$$ on lootbox's that have a chance to not give you the item you want.

That is gambling and that is what lootbox's does.

Just making sure that you agree that kinder boxes, kracker jacks, TCG's are also gambling and should be equally regulated.


I personally have no issue with that stance, just the hypocrisy some show by saying one is gambling and the other isn't.

[Jtbrig7390]

And how is that different from buying multiple MTG card packs hoping to get the cards you need for a new deck idea you had?

It isn't and the same should apply to MTG card packs as well. Age gate them.

[Endus]

You do realize there is ways to buy lootbox's without a CC right? Anything you spend $$$ on that provides a random outcome is gambling...Period.

The only thing I'm acknowledging as a potentially serious impact is if a kid racks up hundreds of bucks on a parent's credit card before the parent catches on. If they're paying with Paypal or something out of their own allowance, there's no risk.

[Jtbrig7390]

Just making sure that you agree that kinder boxes, kracker jacks, TCG's are also gambling and should equally be regulated.


I personally have no issue with that stance, just the hypocrisy some show by saying one is gambling and the other isn't.

Random outcome = gambling. That's my stance on it.

[Endus]

I think it's moreso that people didn't get the genji or hanzo skin they really super duper wanted and are steamed about it.

Plus the nonsense of "I paid the purchase price so I get to re-invent the revenue stream for the game because I'm fucking magical" nonsense argument.

If you don't like the monetization of a game, don't buy it.

[Jtbrig7390]

The only thing I'm acknowledging as a potentially serious impact is if a kid racks up hundreds of bucks on a parent's credit card before the parent catches on. If they're paying with Paypal or something out of their own allowance, there's no risk.

The risk is losing money to not get the item you want. Lootbox's provide the same feelings as a scratch off does, We don't need 13 year old gambling addicts.

[Endus]

Random outcome = gambling. That's my stance on it.

Is a pen-and-paper D&D game "gambling", because it uses dice? Your stance is pretty silly.

- - - Updated - - -

The risk is losing money to not get the item you want. Lootbox's provide the same feelings as a scratch off does, We don't need 13 year old gambling addicts.

That's not a "risk". You were never promised the item you wanted. You don't have grounds to complain when you didn't get it fast enough for you.

And again; a kid blows their allowance or paper route money. So what? I have the entire sets of Series 1 and 2 of Marvel trading cards, a hefty early pile of MTG cards (not alpha/beta, but shortly after), and even some sports trading cards, all bought when I was under 16. I had a lot of other stupid nonsense I spent my allowance and lawn-mowing and snow-shoveling money on. Because I was a kid. It didn't hurt me, or anyone I know.

[Jtbrig7390]

Is a pen-and-paper D&D game "gambling", because it uses dice? Your stance is pretty silly.

Nope because with D&D you can force the outcome you want (If your a DM) and you can keep rolling until u get the outcome you want (If ur DM allows it).

Let me spell it out for you Mr Former Mod. If you spend $$$$ on a thing that provides a random outcome it is gambling, By definition it is gambling.

gam·ble
ˈɡambəl/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: gambling

take risky action in the hope of a desired result.

[Orange Joe]

The risk is losing money to not get the item you want. Lootbox's provide the same feelings as a scratch off does, We don't need 13 year old gambling addicts.

Just being exposed to something doesn't make an addict. Addiction is labels as a disease for a reason.

[Caolela]

Is a pen-and-paper D&D game "gambling", because it uses dice? Your stance is pretty silly.

- - - Updated - - -



That's not a "risk". You were never promised the item you wanted. You don't have grounds to complain when you didn't get it fast enough for you.

And again; a kid blows their allowance or paper route money. So what?

Surely you can see how that's gambling, whether it's small amounts from some kid's job or larger from a parent's acct.?