Gamespot interviews a psychology professor and psychologist, took the time to watch this one all the way through. It brings up a lot of interesting points.
Both the professor and psychologist agreed that the mechanic of loot boxes utilize the exact same psychological "tricks" to get folks to act contrary to prudence. The psychologist that disagreed it was gambling in the same manner as casinos distinguished loot boxes from things like physical trading cards or blind toyboxes because those systems don't use predatory tactics (i.e. Battlefront 2's upgrade system) to get the consumer to purchase.
It also expounds upon how video games use social proof. For example, games that show you the guns or upgrades being used by a player that kills you to attempt to entice you into buying when you get killed by someone with a purchased item.
It also mentions the "scarcity principle," popularized in Overwatch as seasonal event skins/emotes/etc. Rigio (psychology professor) immediately recognized these events as qualifying for the scarcity principle, and he further explains how such principles can trick consumers into acting against their own best judgement (the ole "Act now, while supplies last!" shtick).
The professor (Madigan), who apparently has done multiple studies on the psychology of video games, made the comparison and also the contrast to the physical trading cards and blind toyboxes. He's the one who explains that those industries don't use the same kind of predatory methods as video games to entice their consumers into buying. He explains how games can leverage situations (such as losing a match) to time their lootbox offerings to attempt to persuade the gamer to buy out of frustration and the feeling that they cannot be successful or keep up without purchasing. This seems akin to the aforementioned showing of Star Cards when you're killed in Battlefront 2 or behind the scenes throttling of XP, for all-too-real instances.
Both psychologists urged caution and a close eye on these practices to ensure they don't progress further down the path of predatory marketing schemes, and Rigio indicated that the practices seemed to him to be more akin to casino gambling than things such as blind toyboxes.
The video seemed apropos to the current spirit of the forums, considering there's been ample discussion around the loot box issue. Madigan makes an important distinction between other "blind reward" industries and video games. Rigio explains the psychological tricks that publishers use to pressure players into spending more money. Neither of these things are basic or apparent in any realistic manner to the consumer, of course, much less those who are minors.
An interesting watch.