The quality of the games has not matched the ever increasing price tag. Adding loot boxes and cash shops actually automatically diminishes the quality of the game to a state in which the games are no longer attractive to the consumer. Furthermore a game should not be permitted to switch business models without offering full refunds for those whom spent money on a game prior to knowledge of a business model change. Bait and switch is illegal too.
I agree with the spirit of your point.
The problem is, that you accepted their terms when you hit yes on the ToS.
Gaming is a very powerful medium. Whether we want to accept it or not, it does have addictive attributes.
Gaming companies are unable or unwilling to regulate themselves.
Now it I believe it's too late for them to do so.
Anything that effects the brain in such a way can be addictive, that said, there's a difference between a gaming addiction and a chemical dependency. Both gaming and gambling addictions are far more a matter of self control, more so anyway than what people typically view as real substance based addictions (drugs).
Especially in the case of gaming. Hence myself having a real lack of empathy for those with such problems. These people let their "wants" guide them, whether it's a want for a cool pictured item, or a big payout. That or just wanting to escape into a virtual medium and live there...
While I have no problem with the idea of such practices being outlawed, I wouldn't miss them. Still the idea of the slippery slope is very real when regulation and legislature come in. Where does it stop, once it starts? Inviting the political world in is pretty much akin to inviting the Vampire inside your home.
As with everything, there needs to be a balance.
I always hope for people or companies to control/regulate themselves.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
The industry has no desire to restrict minors because these models work best on them. Children are not collateral damage of a business practice aimed at adults, they are the target.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So is that what this is about? About completionists and 4000 hours? Could have sworn the whole thing was about paying vs. grinding to win. I must have misread all those reviews and reddit posts in the SWBF2 reddit.
No I think he got his facts right and that you are desperately trying to change the narrative to make it about completionists.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
So you're saying that government regulations aren't needed, we just need regulations on these games that the producers in the industry have already proven they aren't willing to implement themselves?
Or is it the word "regulation" itself a trigger? Because what you just said doesn't really jive with itself.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
"safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed"
I agree on that point. As the safeguard exists today, do you believe that entering your birth date is sufficient.
Sad reality is, you always have to light a fire under someone's ass to get meaningful change.
entering the age does not work. More like a password system that is separate from the original login password. While not perfect once again parents have to step up. If you are giving them your credit card to enter into a game then maybe you should look at what your kid is doing. Amazon and other online store should also think about a feature that requires a second password option before paying.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
Sadly, there are. While games might have age ratings on them, parents seem to 'ignore' them for the most part or treat them as being 'rough guidelines' that only really apply to 'other people' anyone who thinks children don't play these games should just listen to the multiplayer chat of BF or COD etc. Even CS:GO casual games are full of children and by children i mean under 15's. It would be great if government regulation wasn't needed, but as recent events have clearly demonstrated, the industry iteslf is not willing to, it may well be that EA/Dice have spoiled it for everyone, but they are not by any means the only offenders in that regard though they do seem to exemplify immoral and predatory practices that at the very least could be viewed as an attempt to normalise gambling, where money is spent gambling on acquiring beneficial items for use in the game.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
Sadly, there are. While games might have age ratings on them, parents seem to 'ignore' them for the most part or treat them as being 'rough guidelines' that only really apply to 'other people' anyone who thinks children don't play these games should just listen to the multiplayer chat of BF or COD etc. Even CS:GO casual games are full of children and by children i mean under 15's. It would be great if government regulation wasn't needed, but as recent events have clearly demonstrated, the industry iteslf is not willing to, it may well be that EA/Dice have spoiled it for everyone, but they are not by any means the only offenders in that regard though they do seem to exemplify immoral and predatory practices that at the very least could be viewed as an attempt to normalise gambling, where money is spent gambling on acquiring beneficial items for use in the game.
Some countries have taken the step to create online Id's for their population. I will use Korea for an example, they have an online ID system that allows games to limit access based on age. It also makes circumventing this both more difficult, and easily punishable, as it requires identify theft to get a new id. Systems like this could easily be implemented by governments to protect their populations... but only if they had the support of the people.
What you guys need to do, is figure out why you all want to kill each other and then make the change.
What people need to do is accept that gun controls don't work, in so called 'gun free zones' you are more likely to be killed by someone using a gun than in those places where there aren't restrictions, this is a fact, gun controls don't affect criminals it only affects those who abide by the law and it takes away peoples ability to defend themselves. And as for the comment about figuring out why people want to kill each other and making a change based on that, well, since most people of colour are shot dead by other people of colour, are you suggesting that people of colour should not be allowed to own guns? but of course, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
What I meant, is that there are reasons for the high rate of violence. Try to figure out what the causes are and make the changes to help improve the situation.
I'll pile onto you post here and say that there are differences between Canada and the US. One of these differences is guns like assault rifles. I still haven't heard a great explanation from people in favor of these things. Generally speaking people are correct, people do kill people, but with certain types of weapons, the government helps people be waaaaaay too efficient at doing that. Please! Tell me how you need an assault rifle to defend yourself. I didn't know that the US was in civil war... yet.
Did I say that you needed an assault rifle to defend yourself?
No, so why are they needed? So let's get rid of those. Anything semi-automatic or full-auto should be outlawed and the price for violation is death. So the cost is severe enough to outweigh the benefit of even criminals possessing it. I mean we need to think about the children, right?
Your goddamn right we need to think about the children.
So the sentence for an assault rifle = death
And the sentence for pedophilia = ?
I had a conversation with my 19 year old son this morning about loot boxes and Battlefront 2. The first thing that came out of his mouth was the gambling and all the kids that play these games.
When they make laws where the death penalty is enforced for both assault rifle possession and also pedophilia, then I'll support regulating loot boxes. Right now, though, it's a waste of resources. I know zero children with credit cards, so the problem is limited based on their access to funds to actually have that problem manifest itself.
Fact is millions of children play these games. Fact is the business models for many of these games are predatory.
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
Sadly, there are. While games might have age ratings on them, parents seem to 'ignore' them for the most part or treat them as being 'rough guidelines' that only really apply to 'other people' anyone who thinks children don't play these games should just listen to the multiplayer chat of BF or COD etc. Even CS:GO casual games are full of children and by children i mean under 15's. It would be great if government regulation wasn't needed, but as recent events have clearly demonstrated, the industry iteslf is not willing to, it may well be that EA/Dice have spoiled it for everyone, but they are not by any means the only offenders in that regard though they do seem to exemplify immoral and predatory practices that at the very least could be viewed as an attempt to normalise gambling, where money is spent gambling on acquiring beneficial items for use in the game.
I would rather the government butt in as little as ever possible and I personally believe jumping first to government banning for this should be the last step not the first. Customers should reject games with it. If they do not then they accept the practice. If the government wants to create some standards for paying safeguards online I would be for that because that effect more than just gaming.
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
Sadly, there are. While games might have age ratings on them, parents seem to 'ignore' them for the most part or treat them as being 'rough guidelines' that only really apply to 'other people' anyone who thinks children don't play these games should just listen to the multiplayer chat of BF or COD etc. Even CS:GO casual games are full of children and by children i mean under 15's. It would be great if government regulation wasn't needed, but as recent events have clearly demonstrated, the industry iteslf is not willing to, it may well be that EA/Dice have spoiled it for everyone, but they are not by any means the only offenders in that regard though they do seem to exemplify immoral and predatory practices that at the very least could be viewed as an attempt to normalise gambling, where money is spent gambling on acquiring beneficial items for use in the game.
I would rather the government butt in as little as ever possible and I personally believe jumping first to government banning for this should be the last step not the first. Customers should reject games with it. If they do not then they accept the practice. If the government wants to create some standards for paying safeguards online I would be for that because that effect more than just gaming.
The government stepping in now certainly isn't the first step. It probably isn't the last step, but definitely not the first.
We already have gambling regulations - gaming companies are exploiting the loophole that says gambling only requires regulation if the reward is monetary.
We already have various consumer protection laws that are supposed to protect us from predatory business practices - gaming companies are exploiting the inherent difficulty in proving something is predatory, especially when these mechanics can be shown as optional.
We already have age ratings on products - but gaming companies don't often care about this because hardly anyone pays any attention to them and they are so easy to get around in this era of digital distribution.
We have already had community pressure - in the MMO community, we've been complaining for years, but the wider western community has been complaining as well for the last few years. Again, this has mostly been dismissed as a "vocal minority" issue, and can be further dismissed as a cultural issue as whilst westerners, on average, dislike these mechanics, Asian gamers expect these mechanics and complain when they aren't present.
I do wish the government wouldn't have to step in, but nothing else has worked so far. I also think it is an entirely unreasonable expectation for us to rely solely on player responsibility. These sorts of mechanics are not broadly advertised, so a prospective customer has to do quite a lot of research to find out whether lootboxes / microtransactions etc are even in a game, then even more research and understanding to figure out whether they are entirely avoidable or not, whether it will impact their enjoyment or not.
By the time you've done that much research, you already know the game extremely well which would then hurt your enjoyment of the game itself. You'll have probably discovered a load of spoilers, read loads of stuff about builds and optimisation etc.
Even if you don't do the research and just buy the game, it can be hours / days / weeks before you actually notice the impact of lootboxes / microtransactions. By that point, you'll have lost your ability to get a refund and the publisher already has your box money, so even if you are against the mechanics the publisher doesn't know and doesn't care, they just assume you're fine with it.
(For the record, I do personally do all that research whenever I'm thinking of buying a game which is how I've pretty much always avoided lootboxes and f2p games. but, I'm passionate about gaming and have the time to spare. A parent buying a present for their kid probably doesn't, they probably don't even know about the issue at all unless they are gamers themselves).
I would rather the government butt in as little as ever possible and I personally believe jumping first to government banning for this should be the last step not the first. Customers should reject games with it. If they do not then they accept the practice.
Most customers don't have the time required to do research on whether they should reject a game. They've got to do their job, their household chores, and take care of their kids. What little free time they've got after all their obligations is too precious to be wasted on research about game monetization practices.
Oftentimes government regulation is the only way to go because other solutions would take too much people's time.
Comments
The problem is, that you accepted their terms when you hit yes on the ToS.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I always hope for people or companies to control/regulate themselves.
Reality is, that it is not always the case.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Can the industry reliably restrict minors from these predatory business practices?
If the answer is no, say hello to government regulation.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Fact is I don't think you know what fact means. Unless fact means subjective, which I don't think it does. I do have a problem with BF2, but it's with the progression. This game is viewed as predatory because of ridiculous times for completionists, leaving them with an option to buy their way to complete instead of spending 4000 hours on a game. It's possible that this might be the first time I've heard someone complain about a game taking too long. maybe you aren't meant to own everything. Maybe this will be therapeutic for those who feel they need to collect everything in a game.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
No I think he got his facts right and that you are desperately trying to change the narrative to make it about completionists.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
So are you saying that millions of kids don't play video games? Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?
64 million children play video games in the U.S. alone
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/91-percent-of-kids-play-video-games-says-study/
Maybe it's you that doesn't know what a fact is.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Or are you so naive to believe that governments pre-regulate.
You're seeing the beginning of process right now.
Who knows.... you might even learn something.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Are millions of kids playing games that are rated Mature? Just calling something "predatory" does not cut it. Government regulation is not what is needed. Information about products, parents that give a crap, and safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed.
Or is it the word "regulation" itself a trigger? Because what you just said doesn't really jive with itself.
Extrapolate what you like from that.
"safe guards in games that keep kids from spending mommy and daddy's cash with out permission are needed"
I agree on that point. As the safeguard exists today, do you believe that entering your birth date is sufficient.
Sad reality is, you always have to light a fire under someone's ass to get meaningful change.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
entering the age does not work. More like a password system that is separate from the original login password. While not perfect once again parents have to step up. If you are giving them your credit card to enter into a game then maybe you should look at what your kid is doing. Amazon and other online store should also think about a feature that requires a second password option before paying.
It would be great if government regulation wasn't needed, but as recent events have clearly demonstrated, the industry iteslf is not willing to, it may well be that EA/Dice have spoiled it for everyone, but they are not by any means the only offenders in that regard though they do seem to exemplify immoral and predatory practices that at the very least could be viewed as an attempt to normalise gambling, where money is spent gambling on acquiring beneficial items for use in the game.
I would rather the government butt in as little as ever possible and I personally believe jumping first to government banning for this should be the last step not the first. Customers should reject games with it. If they do not then they accept the practice. If the government wants to create some standards for paying safeguards online I would be for that because that effect more than just gaming.
People don't follow the guidelines and dare to make a choice of their own!? But we will make them obey, that will teach them!
The government stepping in now certainly isn't the first step. It probably isn't the last step, but definitely not the first.
We already have gambling regulations - gaming companies are exploiting the loophole that says gambling only requires regulation if the reward is monetary.
We already have various consumer protection laws that are supposed to protect us from predatory business practices - gaming companies are exploiting the inherent difficulty in proving something is predatory, especially when these mechanics can be shown as optional.
We already have age ratings on products - but gaming companies don't often care about this because hardly anyone pays any attention to them and they are so easy to get around in this era of digital distribution.
We have already had community pressure - in the MMO community, we've been complaining for years, but the wider western community has been complaining as well for the last few years. Again, this has mostly been dismissed as a "vocal minority" issue, and can be further dismissed as a cultural issue as whilst westerners, on average, dislike these mechanics, Asian gamers expect these mechanics and complain when they aren't present.
I do wish the government wouldn't have to step in, but nothing else has worked so far. I also think it is an entirely unreasonable expectation for us to rely solely on player responsibility. These sorts of mechanics are not broadly advertised, so a prospective customer has to do quite a lot of research to find out whether lootboxes / microtransactions etc are even in a game, then even more research and understanding to figure out whether they are entirely avoidable or not, whether it will impact their enjoyment or not.
By the time you've done that much research, you already know the game extremely well which would then hurt your enjoyment of the game itself. You'll have probably discovered a load of spoilers, read loads of stuff about builds and optimisation etc.
Even if you don't do the research and just buy the game, it can be hours / days / weeks before you actually notice the impact of lootboxes / microtransactions. By that point, you'll have lost your ability to get a refund and the publisher already has your box money, so even if you are against the mechanics the publisher doesn't know and doesn't care, they just assume you're fine with it.
(For the record, I do personally do all that research whenever I'm thinking of buying a game which is how I've pretty much always avoided lootboxes and f2p games. but, I'm passionate about gaming and have the time to spare. A parent buying a present for their kid probably doesn't, they probably don't even know about the issue at all unless they are gamers themselves).
Oftentimes government regulation is the only way to go because other solutions would take too much people's time.