Part of the problem is including gambling mechanisms in games that are aimed at children.
Loot Boxes - A UK call for evidence
- Thread starter sherbz
- Start date
Part of the problem is including gambling mechanisms in games that are aimed at children.
Killing this mechanic will pretty much be the end of free-to-play mmos.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Is it illegal for kids to gamble in the UK? I would assume so (but who knows). If it's illegal, then I agree that this should be regulated a lot tighter.
But even.. if so.. that just means there's two big problems there and not one. If my son ran off to the store with my CC and bought a $2,000 something or other, who's at fault there? Clearly the child, but should I have maybe been keeping a closer eye on my CC? And probably educating my child about the evils of theft and so on? If kids are able to easily just click on a button and spend real money that isn't theirs, then that's a problem. But is it a tablet/app/whatever setup issue? Or an inherent issue with the software? That's all aside from the legality of kids gambling part of it.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
Maybe. But if one wants to operate a business, they are supposed to operate the business safely. I could be a big fan of Super Can Mix, but if it ends up being the case that Super Can Mix can only sustain its business by mixing lead into its soup, it shouldn't operate at all.
I dont agree. MMOs existed before this poison was common practice. And they could exist afterwards. But instead of gating power behind gambling style mechanics they would instead have to come up with a different business model. Nothing wrong with any of the following: Subscription service, paid for DLC, paid for cosmetics, pay per game, up front one off fee, advertisements, shareware etc. All of those methods are viable. The reason more of them are not adopted is because the gambling style systems deployed are so much more lucrative. And the reason they are more lucrative is precisely because they are addictive and prey upon people who have addictive tendencies. If these games were only played by adults, id still have a problem with them, but theres less reason to do anything drastic like change the law or regulate the industry. But thats not the case - they are played by kids and adults alike. And as the industry appointed regulated bodies like PEGI point blank refuse to do anything about it its time the government got involved.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,308
I agree with sherbz on the lootbox problem. I also agree that it isn't just kids gambling that is the problem; adults can wind up in trouble with them as well, and as it's unregulated, there's no oversight. A casino has some legal obligations (however imperfectly enforced) to try to spot and intervene with problem gamblers; there's no equivalent with games with lootboxes. And one other aspect of the kids gambling problem that hasn't been touched on is that by instilling gambling habits early and in an unregulated fashion, lootboxes are arguably setting kids up for both future gambling, as well as starting off behind the 8-ball due to debts racked up when they are young.
I think Belgium's ahead of the curve here, having already banned lootboxes. Unfortunately, the trend so far by developers has been to exclude Belgium but leave it on everywhere else. The UK joining suit would probably still not be enough to turn the tide, but would help considerably. It would probably take something on the level of the entire EU banning lootboxes to cause a high number of developers to start seriously evaluating other business models.
But I also agree with sherbz that there are other viable business models. Would some developers whose games lack much appeal beyond the gambling factor go out of business? Probably. But the ones who have other compelling aspects to their games would likely find ways to adapt.
I think Belgium's ahead of the curve here, having already banned lootboxes. Unfortunately, the trend so far by developers has been to exclude Belgium but leave it on everywhere else. The UK joining suit would probably still not be enough to turn the tide, but would help considerably. It would probably take something on the level of the entire EU banning lootboxes to cause a high number of developers to start seriously evaluating other business models.
But I also agree with sherbz that there are other viable business models. Would some developers whose games lack much appeal beyond the gambling factor go out of business? Probably. But the ones who have other compelling aspects to their games would likely find ways to adapt.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
I maintain that lootboxes are dumb, but do they need to be banned?
They’re “gambling,” but you can’t make money from them and you don’t actually own anything. That doesn’t sound like gambling to me, because gambling has some kind of payoff.
Other than the random variable, is it all that much different from other paid downloadable content? In some cases I might not “own” it in a permanent sense, and there’s no guarantee I’m going to be satisfied after I pay—how many of us have been burned on a piece of software we thought would be good but turned out to be crap? Probably one hundred percent.
Again, from a personal standpoint, I think they’re pretty stupid and just cheap moneygrabs by game developers. But I don’t think they need government intervention.
They’re “gambling,” but you can’t make money from them and you don’t actually own anything. That doesn’t sound like gambling to me, because gambling has some kind of payoff.
Other than the random variable, is it all that much different from other paid downloadable content? In some cases I might not “own” it in a permanent sense, and there’s no guarantee I’m going to be satisfied after I pay—how many of us have been burned on a piece of software we thought would be good but turned out to be crap? Probably one hundred percent.
Again, from a personal standpoint, I think they’re pretty stupid and just cheap moneygrabs by game developers. But I don’t think they need government intervention.
Angst
Rambling and inconsistent
I maintain that lootboxes are dumb, but do they need to be banned?
They’re “gambling,” but you can’t make money from them and you don’t actually own anything. That doesn’t sound like gambling to me, because gambling has some kind of payoff.
Other than the random variable, is it all that much different from other paid downloadable content? In some cases I might not “own” it in a permanent sense, and there’s no guarantee I’m going to be satisfied after I pay—how many of us have been burned on a piece of software we thought would be good but turned out to be crap? Probably one hundred percent.
Again, from a personal standpoint, I think they’re pretty stupid and just cheap moneygrabs by game developers. But I don’t think they need government intervention.
Not necessarily banned. Gambling isn't banned and has its place in society. Problem is that they are gambling and should abide to gambling regulations as such. Currently, they are marketplaces where children can gamble, which is incredibly unhealthy. It doesn't need to be life ruining theft of parents' credit cards in order to be bad. Humans have are naturally prone to become addicted to gambling, which is part of the reason it's kept out of the hands of children traditionally. The laws just haven't kept up with the digital market.
Atm they're a massive cash cow so when they're regulated in countries the corps just opt out and return to regular monetization. Abiding to gambling regulations for lootboxes in the countries that enforce it would be publicly admit that they're gambling and may speed up the pace of more international regulation. The corporations know that the monetization model as it currently is has its days numbered so they're trying to squeeze out the money as long as they can.
Casinos aren't for kids either and it's not because of the drinks.
And kids are just one example of why this is such a mess.
AdamCrock
Polish Pirate
"Pay to win" mechanics explained. Thanks I am only fortified with the idea of not playing games with pay to win systems 
EnglishEdward
Deity
Now what is this. Trying to personalise an issue thread by taking a dishonest swipe at a poster?
"Pay to win" mechanics explained. Thanks I am only fortified with the idea of not playing games with pay to win systems
Indeed, if you can pay your way into winning - or if paying is required to even have a chance - this isn't really about playing a game.
EnglishEdward
Deity
That is a good point. I may lose a game because my opponent is luckier or more skillfull,
all fair enough; or because of Intenet lag, not necessarily anyone in particular's fault.
But if I lose a game because an opponent has paid to obtain an advantage in the game,
I think I should conclude that the company running the game platform is defrauding me.
AdamCrock
Polish Pirate
The game I am currently enamored with (MTG Arena) has a store that You can buy more cards than free player and copy-cat the ultimate winning mythic deck from the internet meta-data (instead of building one yourself which is more fun imho) but still
... The game itself denies winning with just a good cards ! it is what's beautiful about Magic the Gathering - You can have a several thousand dollars deck but if Your a bad player You still can loose to a better player I take a particular joy when I see my deck manages to crush this season's best Besides all that good Magic players know :"It is not about winning individual games of Magic, it's about getting better: win or loose"
-The Professor
^^
Spoiler Why magic is great and how to play it :) :
The lags and the crashes (ctd's) and the "connection lost with the server" still happens though
But I think such is the case with many (if not every) internet multiplayer games.The Netherlands has determined some loot boxes are gambling - and warned video game publishers to modify their loot boxes to remove "addiction-sensitive" elements before mid-June.
The Dutch gaming authority said it had looked into loot boxes in 10 games (it sounds like they picked the 10 most popular games on Twitch), and found four contravened its Betting and Gaming Act. It said the content of these loot boxes was determined by chance and, crucially, the prizes could be traded outside of the game. Therefore, the prizes have a market value.
"Offering this type of game of chance to Dutch players without a licence is prohibited," the Dutch gaming authority concluded.
The gaming authority did not reveal the four games it found to contravene its Betting and Gaming Act, but that didn't stop Dutch broadcaster NOS (thanks, Dutch News) from naming and shaming FIFA 18, Dota 2, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds and Rocket League.
These games are interesting in that they do not facilitate the sale of virtual goods for real world money within the games themselves, but that doesn't stop people from making money from the loot box items elsewhere. As I've reported, with FIFA, you can most definitely cash out.
FIFA 18 is one of the games singled out by the Dutch gaming authority.
So, it sounds like these four games now need a gambling licence to operate in the Netherlands. But there's a more general addiction warning about all loot boxes in video games. The gaming authority said "all of the loot boxes that were studied could be addictive".
"Loot boxes are similar to gambling games such as slot machines and roulette in terms of design and mechanisms," it said.
As a result, the gaming authority demanded publishers and developers modify loot boxes with "addiction-sensitive" elements. That is, they must remove "almost winning" effects, visual effects and the ability to keep opening loot boxes quickly one after the other. They must also implement measures to exclude vulnerable groups or demonstrate the loot boxes on offer are harmless.
How might this work? Well, most loot boxes have fancy visual effects that help make their opening exciting. So perhaps a patch to remove these effects would do the trick. And maybe developers could add a cooldown on the opening of loot boxes to prevent people opening loads quickly one after the other.
What if the companies in question do not comply? The gaming authority said from 20th June 2018, it may "instigate enforcement action against providers of games of chance with loot boxes that do not adhere to this norm". This action includes fines or a ban.
This latest dramatic development comes after a prolonged and increased scrutiny on loot boxes, and the vociferous debate about whether they should be considered gambling. Eurogamer reported on this issue last year following the Star Wars Battlefront 2 debacle. Currently, the UK does not consider loot boxes to be gambling, but it has said it is looking into the matter further.
The Dutch situation is interesting in that it has determined loot boxes can be considered gambling - and set a deadline for change. It'll be interesting to see if EA, Valve and co comply.
For its part, the Netherlands Gaming Authority sounds pretty serious.
"To date, the supervisory body has not been able to establish that providers of the games implement control measures to exclude vulnerable groups such as minors and to prevent addiction," it said.
"The Netherlands Gaming Authority puts the protection of vulnerable groups, such as minors, first."
Hurrah for the Dutch @Hrothbern
That there are no dutch computer game companies may play a role there ^_^
Not sure if there are many large euro game companies by now, at any rate. In the 90s there existed a number of those.
Ubisoft is 1 of the big 4 game companies.
Similar threads
- Sticky
