(Loot Box's) Number of child gamblers quadruples in just two years....

[Krastyn]

Actually it does solve it.

After putting a 18+ rating on the box, The fault is 100% on the parents. Same as if they bought them GTAV and didn't know there was a sex scene two hours in.

Label the game as Adults Only and anything beyond that is on the parents.

So is your concern with kids gambling, or with game companies being responsible for it? Because your solution implies the later.

[Dhrizzle]

Actually it does solve it.

After putting a 18+ rating on the box, The fault is 100% on the parents. Same as if they bought them GTAV and didn't know there was a sex scene two hours in.

Label the game as Adults Only and anything beyond that is on the parents.

You mean every game with any form of microtransaction or in-app purchase?

- - - Updated - - -

Hidden Artifacts is a game that has an age rating of 4+ on iOS.

Why does a game rated for 4+ even have £3,160's worth of micro-transactions in it?

Age rating is for the content of the game not its pricing model.

[Paraka]

Its Both the parents and the company's fault.

Just because a parent doesn't watch their kid 24/7 that doesn't give a company the right to exploit said kid.

Fifa is a game rated E, A parent isn't going to think it has gambling in it and therefore the ESRB and other rating systems need to label it as such.

Edit: Also most stores will stop a kid from using a credit card...

So card is not okay, but would a kid with a wad of cash be turned down?

Basically that's the way it is of digital media. I don't agree with the gambling in games to begin with, but playing parental victim ain't doing favors for anyone. Cause that kid with the same card who gets rejected from gambling may not get that pushback if they're just buying products en masse, such as skins.

Are we seriously saying it's definitely not a responsible parenting to keep closer tabs on their child because somehow, someway, the kid outclasses the parent, buuuut it is up to the company's to react accordingly 24/7 in lieu of it?

That is like blaming Sonic and GI Joe for not teaching kids to do less drugs in the 90s.

[Jtbrig7390]

You mean every game with any form of microtransaction or in-app purchase?

Sure add those to the list as well.

- - - Updated - - -

So card is not okay, but would a kid with a wad of cash be turned down?

Show me a kid doing this with a wad of cash.

Hell show me a kid going into a store in general that has a wad of cash and not a parent with them.

Protip: Your talking to someone who works in retail and not once have I seen a kid come into the store with a wad of cash.

You have clearly never raised a child...

[qwerty123456]

I think it is perfectly moral. Keeping up with the Jones's in a video game is no different than keeping up with the Jones's in life.

My question to you would be, what is your solution, that will hold up in court?

We could do like cigarettes or any other dangerous yet legal product and place a warning label like anytime you log in that would say something like: " This game contains sinister game mechanics specifically designed to make people spend much more money then they normally would. Studies have shown certain features in this game have been proven to target people with impulse control problems as well as children who don't know any better and can lead to an increased risk in gambling. Play this game at your own risk."

Also keeping up with the Jones's in a video game is a bit different than real life. When you wanna buy a BMW because your neighbor does you don't have to buy 700 lootboxes of chevy's before you finally get one.

[Krastyn]

We could do like cigarettes or any other dangerous yet legal product and place a warning label like anytime you log in that would say something like: " This game contains sinister game mechanics specifically designed to make people spend much more money then they normally would. Studies have shown certain features in this game have been proven to target people with impulse control problems as well as children who don't know any better and can lead to an increased risk in gambling. Play this game at your own risk."

And that has stopped children / people from smoking? The problem children are going to be problem children.

To the bold, that is the description of almost every product on the market.

[qwerty123456]

And that has stopped children / people from smoking? The problem children are going to be problem children.

To the bold, that is the description of almost every product on the market.

So we should get rid of all laws then? Murderers are just going to keep murdering anyways....

Laws and warning help prevent more people from doing X.

And no most products are designed to make money but not 1000 times by having "surprise mechanics".

A warning like what I said would keep several people away from a game and would put all the blame on the parents. Why don't you want a warning label?

[M1r4g3]

I'd just ban microtransactions in general for b2p games, ban xpack costs for sub based games, and allow non rng based microtransactions for f2p games.

[Onikaroshi]

A warning like what I said would keep several people away from a game and would put all the blame on the parents. Why don't you want a warning label?

Funny thing is, on the Play Store at least, there is a warning "This APP has in APP purchases"

[Krastyn]

I'd just ban microtransactions in general for b2p games, ban xpack costs for sub based games, and allow non rng based microtransactions for f2p games.

Except there is no legal precedence to allow that. Any kind of law like that would be instantly challenged, and would lose.

[qwerty123456]

Funny thing is, on the Play Store at least, there is a warning "This APP has in APP purchases"

I wouldn't really call that a warning . If it was a big ass warning with info on why its bad everytime you open the game it would be good.

[Onikaroshi]

I wouldn't really call that a warning . If it was a big ass warning with info on why its bad everytime you open the game it would be good.

But technically it's not "bad" it's just something that parents need to be aware of /shrug.

[Socialhealer]

That's just it, the parents are slavering for convenience, but then don't take steps to protect their children.

They want it to be as easy as possible for them to just yell, "ALEXA, ORDER MORE DORITOS!!!" and have them appear at the door, but then act shocked and appalled when their children can spend money just as easily when there's no protections at all in place.

You've a lot of replies about how to parent here, but have you actually raised a child? if the answer is no, i won't even bother talking to you about this topic, just like i don't talk to virgins about their sex life.

I mean it's pretty bad you blame parents but defend billion dollar companies legally paying fuck all tax because they're "based" in some island in the middle of no-fucking-where while they prey on children and addicts with shitty app games.

[Socialhealer]

Yes, lets play the, "YOU DON'T KNOW THE STRUGGLE" card like lazy parents always do when shirking responsibility.

Yeah, it's not your fault that your kid has your credit card. It's someone elses' fault. It's not your fault they have access to your accounts that have funding attached. That's someone elses' fault. It's not your fault that they're not monitored or controlled online. It's someone elses' fault.

Sure thing.

so the answer is no, you're clueless but you talk a lot of shit, ok we're done.

Just to let everyone else here know you have zero experience and your word carries no weight whatsoever, just another "internet expert" keep defending the billionaires though they need your help!

(btw you're on ignore so i won't get your reply cya)

[Krastyn]

So we should get rid of all laws then? Murderers are just going to keep murdering anyways....

I said absolutely nothing of the sort. Don't try to strawman.

Laws and warning help prevent more people from doing X.

Sometimes. Not always. And laws can also have unintended consequences. You also need to establish what your end goal is.

And no most products are designed to make money but not 1000 times by having "surprise mechanics".

Extended warranties are designed to make gobs of money compared to what they cost. Many "features" and "upgrades" on products are designed to up overall margin. Hell, even upsizing your drink at McDonald's does the same. Should we ban all those too? You need to realize the problem isn't just "surprise mechanics".

A warning like what I said would keep several people away from a game and would put all the blame on the parents. Why don't you want a warning label?

A warning label already exists on every single app in Google Play right now. If you read the stories in the recently linked article, some were the kids themselves downloading, installing and playing the game.

Are you also going to tell me that it's a good thing all games have their ToS that people need to agree to because everyone thoroughly reads through them and understands them.

A 12 year old who spends thousands of dollars on a game is not going to choose not to play the game because of a warning label.

@Dhrizzle is on the right track. More needs to be done to regulate the appeal and marketing of them. Or add in safeguards.

To the bold, this is entirely the wrong focus. Simply making it so you can blame the parents doesn't solve the problem. It just passes the buck. If you are truly concerned for the children then your focus should be on how to protect them, not who to blame.

[stellvia]

But technically it's not "bad" it's just something that parents need to be aware of /shrug.

I think it's bad for children, a not great temptation for adults, and their inclusion generally negatively impacts the overall game for everyone to feed the 3% of addicts out there.

I dare you to look at the menus/UI and presentation for the latest COD game compared to 10+ years ago and tell me they haven't negatively impacted the game.

[Coldkil]

Should the parents do better? Maybe. But it's only started being a big problem in the last 2-3 years, and the general populace who doesn't keep up with video game news are only starting to hear about this problem NOW. The companies who make these are entirely aware of what they're doing and why it's wrong, but they obviously either don't care, or do care, and know it's a great way to make a TON of money off of vulnerable people.
Someone linked Jim Sterling's video, he's previously done a video about grown-ups with addiction problems coming forward and saying that gaming is no longer safe due to all the same stimuli being present in games now. The parents aren't to blame in those cases, the companies willingly exploiting vulnerable people are.

We're saying the same thing, only in different ways.

Parents are DEFINITELY to blame. It's their responsibility to watch their kids and what they do with their phones/pc/consoles.

Game companies are EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE of exploting a social phenomenon which is clear in the eyes of everyone to make millions over vulnerable subjects, and they need to be stopped and regulated as fast as possible.

My point is that i agree with you, but stopping companies from doing this is only one side of the issue.

- - - Updated - - -

Its Both the parents and the company's fault.

Just because a parent doesn't watch their kid 24/7 that doesn't give a company the right to exploit said kid.

Fifa is a game rated E, A parent isn't going to think it has gambling in it and therefore the ESRB and other rating systems need to label it as such.

Edit: Also most stores will stop a kid from using a credit card...

Exactly my point. Though ESRB in the specific doesn't mean nothing since stuff like GTA is consistently bought by parents to their 10yo children.

[Charge me Doctor]

They are irresponsible by exploiting kids....

Parents not keeping a eye on their kid 24/7 doesn't give company's the right to exploit them. You clearly have never taken care of a kid.

Imagine buying a kirby toy for your kid, and realizing that said kirby toy talks your kid into giving it money, so it can transfer it back to its company of origin

[Rotted]

Honestly at this point it's ridiculous.

Some loot boxes are gambling yes, others aren't. If you can't tell the difference between the two then you're just idiotic is all. Which seems to be the case with more and more governments.

Simple solution. Slap an age rating of 18 of any game which has loot boxes and keep the loot box system how they are for each game. Then leave it to the parents to actual parent.

[Temp name]

Honestly at this point it's ridiculous.

Some loot boxes are gambling yes, others aren't. If you can't tell the difference between the two then you're just idiotic is all. Which seems to be the case with more and more governments.

Simple solution. Slap an age rating of 18 of any game which has loot boxes and keep the loot box system how they are for each game. Then leave it to the parents to actual parent.

The problem is that PEGI and the ESRB haven't done that. And even if they did, most free to play games on mobile don't go through those certifications, so you'd also need app stores to slap the same warning on them