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

[Jtbrig7390]

How do you stop them? I think loot boxes are fine combined with direct purchases and they can just do this with any other item. If a kid steals a parents credit card how is that the games fault.

By making the games require you to be 18+ to buy them due to them having gambling in them.

You act like kids stealing parents credit cards is the only way they can buy these things, They can also just buy currency cards at any local store. Go to the source, Label the games M or AO. The ESRB needs to do their job and if they won't then sadly government needs to step in and make them.

[arandomuser]

feels weird seeing gamers use old timey boomer arguments of "what about the children"

[Jtbrig7390]

feels weird seeing gamers use old timey boomer arguments of "what about the children"

The difference being there is proof that loot box's is gambling and gambling can be harmful. Company's like EA use the exact same tactic's that casino's use to get people hooked.

There is ZERO proof that games cause violence.

The ESRB had one job to do and they are doing piss poor and now Government's is stepping in. Many people have been saying it for years now, these company's just keep pushing and seeing how far they can go shit is going to get worse.

[Dhrizzle]

They're not disconnected from reality, it's accountants and lawyers hired by these companies trying to outfox the authorities to make it appear as if they earn less money than they really are.

I don't think it takes accountants and lawyers to show that free-2-play games don't make money just from people playing them.

- - - Updated - - -

The difference being there is proof that loot box's is gambling and gambling can be harmful. Company's like EA use the exact same tactic's that casino's use to get people hooked.

There is ZERO proof that games cause violence.

The ESRB had one job to do and they are doing piss poor and now Government's is stepping in. Many people have been saying it for years now, these company's just keep pushing and seeing how far they can go shit is going to get worse.

Is there proof that loot-boxes in games like FIFA and Fortnite lead to gambling problems? The commission saw evidence that watching e-sports and 3rd-party sites like the ones Valve allowed are risks for young people starting to gamble.

[Malikath]

I'm gonna enjoy watching them crash and burn.
in no small amount either, I'm legit gonna pour a glass of wine when EA goes down for the last time.

props to the dwarf for staying on point.

[stellvia]

feels weird seeing gamers use old timey boomer arguments of "what about the children"

Because it's a useful tool towards actually getting what we want: Beyond just not preying on children which is obviously good, also getting back to games not having mechanics and gameplay compromised by MTX/lootboxes that don't add anything worthwhile to the experience. "Think of the children" is just an effective way to get politicians to actually step in since it's an easy political win for them.

[Keeper Stalladris]

Funny how people are keen on involving the government just to get rid of something in video games that they hate. No one here can possibly believe that lootboxes are like gambling. They are more like TCG packs, only that the content are purely cosmetic even in some cases. The lootboxes in Overwatch are much less of a problem than for example the packs in Hearthstone, but games need a model that determines how it will generate money. You've just made things unnecessarily complicated and no one will win anything out of it. All because you hate game designers.

[Dhrizzle]

Because it's a useful tool towards actually getting what we want: Beyond just not preying on children which is obviously good, also getting back to games not having mechanics and gameplay compromised by MTX/lootboxes that don't add anything worthwhile to the experience. "Think of the children" is just an effective way to get politicians to actually step in since it's an easy political win for them.

And I'm sure that convincing politicians that video games have harmful addictive qualities and can affect how people behave in real life won't bite us in the arse at any point in the future. Nothing to worry about when lawmakers start asking gaming companies what systems they have in place to make sure people don't play too much, or bring up calls to ban games that keep people in front of a screen too long.

[Hyrican]

Funny how people are keen on involving the government just to get rid of something in video games that they hate. No one here can possibly believe that lootboxes are like gambling. They are more like TCG packs, only that the content are purely cosmetic even in some cases. The lootboxes in Overwatch are much less of a problem than for example the packs in Hearthstone, but games need a model that determines how it will generate money. You've just made things unnecessarily complicated and no one will win anything out of it. All because you hate game designers.

Gambling is the wagering of money or something of value (referred to as "the stakes") on an event with an uncertain outcome, with the primary intent of winning money or material goods. Gambling thus requires three elements to be present:consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize.

You wager your money or your ingame currency or both (something of value even if only a lot of your time) to buy a loot box where you do not know before what you will get... (risk/chance). The prizes are definitely not all equal of value to you (think of a "new" spray or a legendary skin on your favorite stuff that was the reason you spent your currency).

Publishers can decide to offer games, game content, visuals or in game enhancements for money or virtual currency without opting for a gambling system: By letting you buy stuff you want directly. But this is much harder because you only need to add stuff people want to buy and at a harder to determining price point.

Gambling/Loot boxes is the easy way out... but also pushes a lot of the more considerate player base out by not putting money in this bottomless pit.

[cozzri]

Look at the loot boxes in dota2; some of the skins are so rare people sell them for hundreds, even thousands of dollars to other users in the steam marketplace. The loot boxes in that game are insane! It's very addicting, especially if you are a completionist. The loot boxes in dota2 are far worse than anything EA has come up with. And there's literally over a hundred different boxes with varying rewards. When you look at it; its like staring at a line of slot machines.

Honestly I think physical gambling is less addictive than loot boxes which I see as the same thing as video poker; at least in a casino you can physically hold on to your money/chips whereas video gambling, its a different feeling, like oh well just keep going until the card is empty/maxed out.

[DesoPL]

If someone is dumb enough to believe what EA say about it, is his problem not mine.

[Chinese Bootlickers]

Funny how people are keen on involving the government just to get rid of something in video games that they hate. No one here can possibly believe that lootboxes are like gambling. They are more like TCG packs, only that the content are purely cosmetic even in some cases. The lootboxes in Overwatch are much less of a problem than for example the packs in Hearthstone, but games need a model that determines how it will generate money. You've just made things unnecessarily complicated and no one will win anything out of it. All because you hate game designers.

Do you have to shell out $40-$60 before you can purchase some Pokemon cards or Kinder eggs?

[Keeper Stalladris]

Do you have to shell out $40-$60 before you can purchase some Pokemon cards or Kinder eggs?

So you're against microtransactions for a game that you had to pay for in order to play it. See it has nothing to do with whether loot boxes are gambling or not, you just use that as an excuse because you hate microtransactions.

[Chinese Bootlickers]

So you're against microtransactions for a game that you had to pay for in order to play it. See it has nothing to do with whether loot boxes are gambling or not, you just use that as an excuse because you hate microtransactions.

I have little against microtransactions, but I am vehemently against RNG boxes surprise features. There's a difference between paying $6 for Joker and spending god knows how much hoping to you get that rare pull from a lootbox surprise feature.

[Keeper Stalladris]

I have little against microtransactions, but I am vehemently against RNG boxes surprise features.

So then what does it matter whether you paid 40-60 bucks for the game? It would just be as much of a problem with TCGs, real life or digital. You are not consistent in your logic.

[Tenjen]

NerfNow made a rather smart update this week. Based on an old french artists work

[Pony Soldier]

feels weird seeing gamers use old timey boomer arguments of "what about the children"

I kinda have the same feeling. Like for me I don't care if children are gambling away their money playing Fortnite and FIFA it's the whole RNG loot box idea that I can't fucking stand. If children is what we have to use to get loot boxes out of our games then fine I'm all for it. We expressed our feelings toward loots boxes to companies like EA over and over and nothing came out of it. So we have no choice but to have the government help us out.

Oh wait that's right they're called "surprise mechanics" now.

[Onikaroshi]

You wager your money or your ingame currency or both (something of value even if only a lot of your time) to buy a loot box where you do not know before what you will get... (risk/chance). The prizes are definitely not all equal of value to you (think of a "new" spray or a legendary skin on your favorite stuff that was the reason you spent your currency).

Publishers can decide to offer games, game content, visuals or in game enhancements for money or virtual currency without opting for a gambling system: By letting you buy stuff you want directly. But this is much harder because you only need to add stuff people want to buy and at a harder to determining price point.

Gambling/Loot boxes is the easy way out... but also pushes a lot of the more considerate player base out by not putting money in this bottomless pit.

By that definition things like Pokemon and other TCGs are gambling and would be at risk for being banned....

[Onikaroshi]

I don’t think Fortnite has loot-boxes, does it?

But, yes, recent studies link loot boxes to gambling, however, we also need to remember that loot boxes are a fairly recent thing, and just now is garnering some real attention from the public, thus in-depth studies about the long-term effect on the players should still take a little.

Also, a lot of people seem focused on arguing if they are actually or not gambling, when I don’t really think that’s even the point… it’s not about if they are or not, but if they should be considered as gambling or not, which countries such as Belgium already decided on.

Fortnite doesn't, and honestly I personally don't care whether people think they are gambling or not.... I just don't want the government involved, they tend to be very heavy handed. Which the industry would just wake up and realize they're in for a world of pain if the gov't does take action.

[Dhrizzle]

I don’t think Overwatch has loot-boxes, does it?

Whoops, substitute Overwatch in there.

But, yes, recent studies link loot boxes to gambling, however, we also need to remember that loot boxes are a fairly recent thing, and just now is garnering some real attention from the public, thus in-depth studies about the long-term effect on the players should still take a little.

Has there been one showing that the lootboxes are causing the problems or is it a matter of problem gamblers being more likely to spend money on loot-boxes, it's a similar case as to whether violent games cause people to act violently or if violent people are more likely to play violent games.

Also, a lot of people seem focused on arguing if they are actually or not gambling, when I don’t really think that’s even the point… it’s not about if they are or not, but if they should be considered as gambling or not, which countries such as Belgium already decided on.

I still think the problem here is opening the definition of "gambling" so wide, I can see where things like blind-buy toys and TCG packs could be opened to the same regulations and it might even stretch as far as random loot drops in games being prohibited if they are shown to create a similar dopamine that could become addictive. That said the WHO has recently decided video game addiction is a recognised disorder so maybe the "think of the children" campaign is having the desired effects. Heck, maybe video games in general are harmful and addictive and I just don't want them regulating because I'm a long-time user, maybe this is how cigarette smokers felt when the first studies suggesting links with cancer were released.