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

[prwraith]

The bill doesn't have a chance in hell of passing, but I wish it did :/

[Krastyn]

wild exaggerations and ludicrious non-comparisons arent going to take this discussion anywhere good.

So if you spend $15 for four chances at a prize once a week of varying value, it is wildly different than spending $5 on one chance? Sorry, they are way more similar than what you are leading on.

Edit: Furthermore, Seals of Wartorn Fate are identical to loot boxes in the vast majority of games that have loot boxes.

[oplawlz]

wild exaggerations and ludicrious non-comparisons arent going to take this discussion anywhere good.

I mean it's the only place the pro-gambling people can go. Whatabout-isms are the defacto stance. To anyone with a functioning brain the differences are clear, but there's no reasoning with someone who thinks this is a convincing argument to begin with.

[Krastyn]

I mean it's the only place the pro-gambling people can go. Whatabout-isms are the defacto stance. To anyone with a functioning brain the differences are clear, but there's no reasoning with someone who thinks this is a convincing argument to begin with.

And blanket dismissals are the tool of authoritarians. See how that works?

Logically explain how Seals of Wartorn Fate are different from Loot boxes.

Logically explain how paying a fee for a set number of chances at a reward are different from gambling.

Please. Enlighten me.

[oplawlz]

And blanket dismissals are the tool of authoritarians. See how that works?

Logically explain how Seals of Wartorn Fate are different from Loot boxes.

Logically explain how paying a fee for a set number of chances at a reward are different from gambling.

Please. Enlighten me.

Whatabout-isms. No one needs to explain how one thing is ok and this isn't, they are different things.

Your questions are deflecting from the problem that this one thing is causing rather than recognizing the issue and suggesting alternative solutions.

[Krastyn]

Whatabout-isms. No one needs to explain how one thing is ok and this isn't, they are different things.

Your questions are deflecting from the problem that this one thing is causing rather than recognizing the issue and suggesting alternative solutions.

And you're cherry picking. You're selectively ignoring things that are literally identical.

The insanity of your stance is further compounded by the fact that your inability to explain the difference blinds you to how incredibly simple it will be to get around any proposed law. You call it deflecting from the problem. I see it as your failure to actually understand the scope of the problem. Take off the blinders.

[oplawlz]

And you're cherry picking. You're selectively ignoring things that are literally identical.

The insanity of your stance is further compounded by the fact that your inability to explain the difference blinds you to how incredibly simple it will be to get around any proposed law. You call it deflecting from the problem. I see it as your failure to actually understand the scope of the problem. Take off the blinders.

What "you see" is your inability to win an argument with people unwilling to engage in your rhetorical parlor tricks. I'm sure all the hand waving seems very impressive in your mind, but in the meantime the rest of the world is going to actively pursue whatever means are necessary to keep greedy publishers from exploiting their customers with unregulated gambling.

[Krastyn]

What "you see" is your inability to win an argument with people unwilling to engage in your rhetorical parlor tricks. I'm sure all the hand waving seems very impressive in your mind, but in the meantime the rest of the world is going to actively pursue whatever means are necessary to keep greedy publishers from exploiting their customers with unregulated gambling.

No, the rest of the world is going to try and fail what they want to accomplish because they are unwilling to have an actual discussion on the matter and are instead going to try and ram through a poorly thought out idea that even a child that they are trying to "protect" can find a way around.

It's hilariously hypocritical how you post. You can't even define what it is you're trying to ban, but anything someone says otherwise is hand waving. It's literally what you are doing.

Edit: You want to end a problem, but don't want to define the problem, or the scope of your solution. Why would anyone be on board with that?

[Dhrizzle]

And blanket dismissals are the tool of authoritarians. See how that works?

Logically explain how Seals of Wartorn Fate are different from Loot boxes.

Logically explain how paying a fee for a set number of chances at a reward are different from gambling.

Please. Enlighten me.

The biggest difference is Seals require you to complete a non-trivial activity before the random prize is determined, it lacks the chance for instant-gratification that typical loot-boxes have. There's also less chance and incentive to use real money on Seals which lessens the damage they can do.

[Pooti]

Not comparing anything. Just saying that if you broadcast gambling, nothing is surprising. it's logical outcome.

- - - Updated - - -



Loot boxes are not gambling. You are not winning anything. You are PURCHASING a randomly selected loot WHICH YOU DO GET. It's not like throwing a dice in order to WIN or LOSE nothing else than money. And if you lack knowledge, gambling word is 99.999999% used for money gambling.

Gambling does not always mean money.

Dictionary.com-
the activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes.

[Jtbrig7390]

Loot boxes are not gambling.

By definition yes they are.

You are spending money on something that gives you a random outcome (Aka Game of Chance). that is in fact gambling and it does not matter if you like it or not.

[Krastyn]

The biggest difference is Seals require you to complete a non-trivial activity before the random prize is determined,

So to unpack the this first part, it creates several layers of problems. How do you determine what a non-trivial activity is? How do you measure it? Are you going to require the government to set up an agency to oversee every single game? For an activity like LFR, it is objectively trivial. Furthermore, trade chat is constantly filled with people offering carries through content making it exactly trivial.

it lacks the chance for instant-gratification that typical loot-boxes have.

So if they make you watch a two minute video before you can open a loot-box, does that no longer make it a loot box? If a poker dealer deals really slow, and each player has to take a full minute before deciding on what to do, does it cease to become gambling? If the law wants to be taken seriously, it needs to be consistent.

There's also less chance and incentive to use real money on Seals which lessens the damage they can do.

Really? Based on what exactly? Hopes and feelings? There is objectively no information or reason why this would be the case. The rolls even follow the mechanics and simulation of a slot machine.

[Dhrizzle]

By definition yes they are.

You are spending money on something that gives you a random outcome (Aka Game of Chance). that is in fact gambling and it does not matter if you like it or not.

In Belgian law gambling is defined by a game of chance that gives prizes of varying value, even if that value is personal and not objective, that distinction is important as virtual items are all basically worthless but a certain item may hold value either in the game or to a particular person for its aesthetics etc. Under Belgian law lootboxes fall under gambling laws as was confirmed recently.

In UK law gambling is defined as a game of chance that gives prizes of money or that can be readily exchanged for money. Whilst there are concerns about predatory marketing strategies and whether they target children lootboxes do not fall under gambling laws.

- - - Updated - - -

First up you seem to be shifting goal-posts radically, you started out with "how are Seals different to lootboxes?" and now you're muddling in gambling laws etc. as if it was part of your origninal question. I'll answer as best I can but it would help if you were a bit more consistent.

So to unpack the this first part, it creates several layers of problems. How do you determine what a non-trivial activity is? How do you measure it? Are you going to require the government to set up an agency to oversee every single game? For an activity like LFR, it is objectively trivial. Furthermore, trade chat is constantly filled with people offering carries through content making it exactly trivial.

No raiding - even LFR or being carried - is not a trivial activity as it still takes some level of time commitment and performing activities, even if those activities are not particularly taxing.

Jumping over to gambling now, many countries do actually have gambling/gaming commisions that oversee these things and it is up to them to determine what would be a trivial or non-trivial activity.

So if they make you watch a two minute video before you can open a loot-box, does that no longer make it a loot box?

If it's a box that you buy that contains some random loot then it will still be a loot-box, the 2 minute wait might serve to lessen its appeal but it would still be a box containing loot.

If a poker dealer deals really slow, and each player has to take a full minute before deciding on what to do, does it cease to become gambling?

No.

If the law wants to be taken seriously, it needs to be consistent.

Correct.

Really? Based on what exactly? Hopes and feelings? There is objectively no information or reason why this would be the case. The rolls even follow the mechanics and simulation of a slot machine.

With lootboxes you buy a box, within a minute it is opened and you can decide whether or not to buy another. This process can repeat indefinitely. Typically the currency needed is only available with real money, or is given out so sporadically in gameplay that real money is the only practical way to have a chance of winning the item you want.

With Seals you are limited to 2 per week per character and they are easily earned through normal gameplay, even if you play extremely casually. Once you have your Seals you then have to go to the dungeon/raid you want the rewards from at least until you down the boss that has the item you want. Then you're waiting a week until you can do it again.

[Krastyn]

First up you seem to be shifting goal-posts radically, you started out with "how are Seals different to lootboxes?" and now you're muddling in gambling laws etc. as if it was part of your origninal question. I'll answer as best I can but it would help if you were a bit more consistent.

A loot box isn't defined by whether you can purchase it with real life currency. It is defined by its mechanics. While they typically have an option for real life currency, that is not their core. Mechanically Seals are literally identical to loot boxes. You pay a fee with either in game currency or out of game currency for a random chance at prize of varying value. There is no goal post moving because this entire thread is about loot boxes being classified as gambling.

So if:
Loot boxes = gambling
Seals = Loot boxes
Seals = gambling.

No raiding - even LFR or being carried - is not a trivial activity as it still takes some level of time commitment and performing activities, even if those activities are not particularly taxing.

This is an incredibly easy thing to get around though. Take a game like FIFA. Instead of letting players buy cards at any time, just make it so they can only buy them after winning a game. Poof. It's now a non-trivial activity. Are they no longer loot boxes?

Jumping over to gambling now, many countries do actually have gambling/gaming commisions that oversee these things and it is up to them to determine what would be a trivial or non-trivial activity.

Bingo is a trivial activity and classified as gambling (In Canada, at least). Killing a world boss is both easier, and a shorter time requirement than a game of bingo. You can literally afk and get a chance to use a seal.

If it's a box that you buy that contains some random loot then it will still be a loot-box, the 2 minute wait might serve to lessen its appeal but it would still be a box containing loot.

So then Seals are still loot boxes. They are a box containing loot.

With lootboxes you buy a box, within a minute it is opened and you can decide whether or not to buy another. This process can repeat indefinitely. Typically the currency needed is only available with real money, or is given out so sporadically in gameplay that real money is the only practical way to have a chance of winning the item you want.

The frequency with which you can make the transaction has no impact on whether something is considered a loot box or gambling. To quote the question and answer above:

If a poker dealer deals really slow, and each player has to take a full minute before deciding on what to do, does it cease to become gambling?
No.

Furthermore, if they cap it at X loot boxes a week they do not suddenly stop being loot boxes.

With Seals you are limited to 2 per week per character and they are easily earned through normal gameplay, even if you play extremely casually. Once you have your Seals you then have to go to the dungeon/raid you want the rewards from at least until you down the boss that has the item you want. Then you're waiting a week until you can do it again.

See above. The frequency at which you can obtain a loot box has no bearing on whether it is in fact a loot box, or whether it is gambling. It doesn't even matter if you can "easily" earn them in game. The option exists. At the very minimum Blizzard would either have to stop selling gold, or stop allowing Seals to be bought with gold.

Apply the same logic to how a casino could operate. Here at Bob's Casino, you pay a $15 / month membership fee. With that you get four free pulls on our slot machine. If you hang out in the casino for a couple hours each week, then you can have two extra pulls! Or if you don't have the time you can purchase a few extra pulls! Would that still be gambling?

Again using FIFA as an example, they could remove the ability to directly purchase loot boxes, and instead require any online play to require a FIFA monthly pass, for $10/month. With this pass you can play on the EA FIFA server (otherwise the game is local only). With this pass you'll get the opportunity to play the weekly challenge team. Win and you'll get a player pack. You can also spend a golden ball for a chance at a second pack. Golden balls can be earned in game or for a small fee. Does that now stop them from being loot boxes or gambling? (The answer should be no, since you have already stated above that time gating does not stop things from either being loot boxes, or gambling).

If you strip it down to its core, any game with RNG drops are loot box games and should be classified as gambling under Belgium laws.

[Dhrizzle]

A loot box isn't defined by whether you can purchase it with real life currency. It is defined by its mechanics. While they typically have an option for real life currency, that is not their core. Mechanically Seals are literally identical to loot boxes. You pay a fee with either in game currency or out of game currency for a random chance at prize of varying value. There is no goal post moving because this entire thread is about loot boxes being classified as gambling.

They are not mechanically literally identical. With loot-boxes you buy the box and then you open the box and see what you get. To use Seals you have to complete an aspect of the game that gives you a loot drop then use the seal to get a second chance.

So if:
Loot boxes = gambling
Seals = Loot boxes
Seals = gambling.

I disagree with every step of that "logic."

This is an incredibly easy thing to get around though. Take a game like FIFA. Instead of letting players buy cards at any time, just make it so they can only buy them after winning a game. Poof. It's now a non-trivial activity. Are they no longer loot boxes?

If what you're talking about is giving randomly selected prizes as a reward for winning a match in FIFA then no, they would not be loot-boxes as you see in games like Overwatch.

Bingo is a trivial activity and classified as gambling (In Canada, at least). Killing a world boss is both easier, and a shorter time requirement than a game of bingo. You can literally afk and get a chance to use a seal.

It doesn't count if you have to get other people to carry you, essentially those people are part of your team and carrying out the non-trivial activity.

So then Seals are still loot boxes. They are a box containing loot.

Congratulations on completely missing out on what people are talking about when they discuss loot-boxes being a problem in video games. The discussion is about micro-transactions that reward a player with a random reward from a pool of prizes, often these prizes will vary in their value (either in-game value or perceived value by the player.) The discussion does not include literally anything in a video game that could be considered a container with loot inside.

The frequency with which you can make the transaction has no impact on whether something is considered a loot box or gambling. To quote the question and answer above:

The frequency with which the boxes can be accessed does have a bearing on the problems around loot-boxes such as overspending and encouraging gambling-like behaviours.

Furthermore, if they cap it at X loot boxes a week they do not suddenly stop being loot boxes.

Correct, but it does mitigate some of the problems associated with loot-boxes.

See above. The frequency at which you can obtain a loot box has no bearing on whether it is in fact a loot box, or whether it is gambling. It doesn't even matter if you can "easily" earn them in game. The option exists. At the very minimum Blizzard would either have to stop selling gold, or stop allowing Seals to be bought with gold.

No because seals are not loot-boxes.

Apply the same logic to how a casino could operate. Here at Bob's Casino, you pay a $15 / month membership fee. With that you get four free pulls on our slot machine. If you hang out in the casino for a couple hours each week, then you can have two extra pulls! Or if you don't have the time you can purchase a few extra pulls! Would that still be gambling?

Are slot machines in casinos gambling? Yes absolutely.

Again using FIFA as an example, they could remove the ability to directly purchase loot boxes, and instead require any online play to require a FIFA monthly pass, for $10/month. With this pass you can play on the EA FIFA server (otherwise the game is local only). With this pass you'll get the opportunity to play the weekly challenge team. Win and you'll get a player pack. You can also spend a golden ball for a chance at a second pack. Golden balls can be earned in game or for a small fee. Does that now stop them from being loot boxes or gambling? (The answer should be no, since you have already stated above that time gating does not stop things from either being loot boxes, or gambling).

I just need to check I'm getting what you are saying...
FIFA becomes a subscription online game.
Subscribers get to play a weekly challenge.
The challenge has a chance to drop loot (players.)
You can also spend a currency to have a second chance of loot drop.
The currency can be earned in game or you can pay real money.
If that is all correct then...
First part no, the fact the ball gives a second chance of loot from an in-game activity means it wouldn't be considered a loot-box the same as FIFA has now, depending on the cost of the ball and how difficult it is to get through playing the game players may be critical of it as a MTX.
I'm not an expert on Belgian law, but I suspect the fact you are having to complete a non-trivial activity would be similar to UK law so it would not be gambling.

If you strip it down to its core, any game with RNG drops are loot box games and should be classified as gambling under Belgium laws.

Nope, although if you are one of the "think of the children" brigade you could argue that RNG drops use gambling-like mechanics to trigger dopamine releases and may cause addictive behaviours.

[The Stormbringer]

I look forward to more mental gymnastics bingo from addicts afraid their dopamine minibuy rush is being taken away like a junkie getting blacklisted by their nearest dealer again.

Which will be first this time, the "b-b-but trading cards!" line, the "so then people shouldn't be allowed to eat junk food" line or the risky power play of "fucking commie zoomers are anti capitalist!" with an increasing mania behind it?

What's your argument against the trading cards defense? I'm curious, beyond the fact that most digital items aren't trade-able. Got someone who thinks it's comparable to that but I disagree, I don't think it's the same.

[Kuja]

Games would be so much more fun if there were only free ways to obtain loot boxes. And fun means lots more players. Surely devs can make money other ways too than selling loot boxes.

[Vash The Stampede]

Games would be so much more fun if there were only free ways to obtain loot boxes. And fun means lots more players. Surely devs can make money other ways too than selling loot boxes.

They could just make better games.

Loot boxes are not gambling. You are not winning anything. You are PURCHASING a randomly selected loot WHICH YOU DO GET. It's not like throwing a dice in order to WIN or LOSE nothing else than money. And if you lack knowledge, gambling word is 99.999999% used for money gambling.

Even if you win anything in a loot box, the items you receive are intrinsically worthless. You own a digital item in a game that you don't own, on a server you don't own. It's gambling++ in that winning is still like losing. Not only is it gambling but it's the next stage in gambling, in that you don't win anything when you win. Either way this practice is awful and should be stopped.

[sarahtasher]

That will surprise people, but I find lottery stupid, and lottery for virtual items stupider. That said, people do what they want with their money.

(Or their parents credit card-horror story of toddlers that buy for 5000 $ of smurfberries on the Smurf Village game are not very hard to prevent)

The caveat is however that lottery usually have some sort of state oversight about the winning chances….What prevent ''EVIL GAME COMPANY'' to advertise a 1 in 1000 drop rate and it's far lower ?

[RobertoCarlos]

I can sleep easier at night knowing JT is looking out for the children.

Those pesky immoral video game companys have no shame! Somebody please think of the children! (Other than Jt of course)