Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Questions submitted to UK government about loot boxes and gambling
Dragnelus
Member EpicPosts: 3,503
A UK member of parliament is asking the government about loot boxes and gambling, as conversation about the controversial practice continues to grow.
Daniel Zeichner MP of the Labour Party has submitted questions regarding protecting the young and vulnerable from gambling and loot boxes in games, as well as asking specifically if tougher law practiced in the Isle of Man might be implemented across the UK.
The questions submitted by Zeichner are:
https://www.vg247.com/2017/10/16/questions-asked-to-uk-government-about-loot-boxes-and-gambling/
Comments
How does the company providing the service determine if an online customer falls into the "young or vulnerable" category ? Should they ask them ?
Besides, the driver behind these gambling systems is "normal" players, who generate the vast majority of revenue.
Short of banning lootbox-mechanisms outright, nothing's really going to change.
Publishing the "drop-chance" of box contents has been required in some asian countries for a while now, but I've not seen any news that indicates it had any noticeable impact on revenues. Players simply ignore the fine print, they want the goodies in those boxes, after all.
There's a vast array of tricks and technical workarounds that can be used to avoid being classified as a "gambling system". Changes in legislation take years, implementing a work-around in the game takes days at most.
For example games like "Smite", require you to purchase Gems for example $100 = 8000 Gems, those gems are delivered therefore making sure you receieved your currency and then that currency which is said under the EULA / TOS to hold no RL value is used to gamble on RNG Boxes / gacha / lootbox IMO all games should have a gambling warning on them to inform people that it could be addictive, but lots of games don't including kids apps on Google Play.
Laws should change that allow this warning to be put on games.
The thing is that gambling by adults is one thing and it is another thing if a game aims it at kids, they havn't got the cynicism you need to not buy too much in game crap. You should have a 15 years+ label on games like that. Then again, you should probably have that on any F2P game.
And yes, the drop chance should be published as well.
Personally I don't like loot boxes at all but I am not a tequila fan either and that is no reason to actually forbid tequila, just like no one forces me to buy stuff I don't like no one forces me to buy games with features I don't like.
Then there'll probably be 5 years of legal battles to determine the "appropriate" size and placement of the warning text...
But it will change nothing, of course.
For instance, if you receive some low value item with every "purchase", and then are given the option of also "spinning the wheel of chance", is that still classified as gambling ?
The loopholes are endless.
Knowing the odds of winning beforehand has never stopped anyone. The existence of lotteries is testament to that.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Games and movies always had age categories on them. That never stopped me, or any of my friends, from playing and watching 18+ games/movies when we were in our early teens.
Lootboxes and forced micro-transactions are probably the most dangerous form of gambling. If you have to walk over to a casino to spend your paycheck, there is a fairly tangible and visible commitment you have to make. Playing online casino games from your computer is a lot more accessible. Games are one tier higher, as the whole process of gambling is masked and wrapped inside of an innocent looking game.
In fact, with mobile games, you don't even have to leave your bed.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against tiered financial contributions to a game. Especially small indie games can benefit from big donators a lot - if someone genuinely wants to give you $1000 to make a game better (and it doesn't mess up the balance completely), then why not. But coercing a 12 year old kid, or a stay-at-home mum to spend $1000 on lootboxes is unethical in my opinion.
Didn't stop them of course, always that friend's house whose parents have a full library of R rated films but still let my children understand where my values were.
Coercing isn't the correct word as it involves force, enticing is more accurate and the reality is most 12 yr old and stay at home mom's don't spend $1K on loot boxes, outside of occasional abberations which are widely reported despite their actual rarity.
Sure you may consider it unethical, but some consider marketing to children in any form to be unethical, where exactly is the line drawn?
I recall my children's mania for buying Pokemon cards, unethical sure, but we bought them anyway.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
It gets into a very messy situation. It would require a lot more hoops to jump through and I doubt companies would be willing to deal with that. But maybe that's a push in the right direction to getting loot boxes removed in general. But then we would get a hell of a lot more micro transaction DLC. I honestly like the loot box system in some games if it's entirely cosmetic because it allows them to release content free. Like Overwatch.
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
----------------
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Just as a point of reference.
Second Life Casino Owner Left Scrambling After Gambling Ban
The Second Life entrepreneur complains that Linden Lab was happy to take his money for months after the U.S. banned Internet gambling. And then Linden Lab shut the casinos down abruptly Wednesday.
Like many other casino owners in Second Life, Anthony Smith was struggling on Thursday to figure out what future, if any, he had on the 3-D social network.
Linden Lab, which develops and operates Second Life, announced a ban on gambling Wednesday. Until then, gambling had been one of the most popular activities in Second Life.
Smith, of Brighton, U.K., feels Linden Lab dealt with him unfairly. He notes that U.S. law banning Internet gambling went into effect in October.
"If this law was made in October, 2006, I think it is wrong of Linden Lab to take my money," said Smith, a mortgage broker in real life. He noted that the name of the business -- Casino World -- made it obvious what kind of business he was running.
Smith, 34, who goes by the name "Anthonymark Alcott" in Second Life, operates a full server on Second Life -- known in SL jargon as a "sim."
We interviewed Smith in-world Thursday. He teleported in with his avatar still wearing signs and a mask from a protest that he'd been attending immediately prior to the interview.
He said he spent 1 million Linden Dollars -- about US$3,800 -- on the sim and virtual gambling equipment and furnishings, since launching in February.
And that's not counting staff or his own sweat equity -- he said he's been working 12-14 hours per day on building Casino World. He said he invested all revenues from the clubs back into the business, to pay for new equipment and entertainment.
Smith had planned, starting next month, to buy one sim per month and lease it out for residential and commercial business. But those plans are on hold.
"This will be the start of the end for Second Life, just as the U.S. government wants," Smith said in an interview conducted over text IM. We edited his comments lightly for language and spelling.
He said he believes the U.S. government is threatened by Second Life, because they can't control SL or tax it. Also, he said, real-life casinos want Internet gambling shut down to avoid competition.
"They grease the US government's hand," he said. "For a country where you are supposed to be free, it sure is a contradiction."
Shutting down gambling will stop Second Life growth, because gambling represents a significant portion of Second Life transactions, Smith said.
He also said he believes Linden Lab's abrupt implementation of the new policy is unfair.
https://www.informationweek.com/second-life-casino-owner-left-scrambling-after-gambling-ban/d/d-id/1057513
FBI investigates gambling in Second Life
By Mike_Jackson April 06, 2007News
In-game casinos checked in the midst of confusion over virtual gambling legalities
The virtual online PC life simulator, Second Life, which is often compared to Sony's upcoming PS3 Home network, is under investigation by the FBI on the legality of its virtual gambling features.
Virtual casinos within Second Life allow gamers to gamble using the game's currency, the Linden Dollar, which is exchanged for real-life US dollars.
Linden Labs, the creators of Second Life, have invited FBI agents to poke around these virtual casinos, seeking legal guidance after heavy restrictions on internet gambling were introduced in the US last year.
Most lawyers deem that gambling with Linden Dollars in Second Life violates US anti-gambling laws, reports news.com.
Speaking of said laws,a New York lawyer, who studied the issues of gambling in virtual worlds, said: "What they did was go after the processors, and made it a crime to process payments that relate to online gambling sites. Linden could potentially be held as the same sort of processor."
"It's not always clear to us whether a 3D simulation of a casino is the same thing as a casino, legally speaking, and it's not clear to the law enforcement authorities we have asked," said Linden Lab's vice president of business affairs, Ginsu Yoon.
April 5, 2007
http://www.gamesradar.com/fbi-investigates-gambling-in-second-life/
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
@CrazKanuk
You both make fair points. I was under the impression that many people spend large amounts of money on F2P games - if that is not the reality, then it might not be a pressing issue. It's a shame I don't have a detailed breakdown of the numbers, as I'd love to see what exactly is going on.
My gripe is mainly with the marketing strategy.
I studied Psychology and am now finishing a Ph.D. in Psychological Research - basically learning how best get accurate data from people. There is a detailed ethical approval behind every data collection I do. I have to submit a 4-page document for each small study I do. A series of people have to assess it, try to point out possible flaws and ultimately approve it. For something bigger, I'd have to meet in person and be interviewed about the design. This is because people are very easily influenced - it's fairly easy to "trick" people into doing/feeling something, even unknowingly by poor design. The large majority of studies in the University settings won't try to exploit people, so all of this happens due to a concern that I might be unethical on accident.
Now imagine how critical this is in settings where people are exploited on purpose. What scares me, is the fact that there are no ethics frameworks when it comes to F2P games - why would there be, it's not in the best interest of the company. I know many of the games are designed with maximising spending in mind. The developer has access to fine-grained data on human behavior, knowing when and how people spend, in what contexts, in what social settings, how they respond to different kinds of artworks, game systems, etc. They use this to design an experience where people are mathematically most likely to spend the most money.
I often hear the notion that people are not "forced" to spend, and that any payment is optional. If someone wrecks their paycheck on a F2P game, it's their stupidity and their fault. I don't think that's true. If the system is designed in a certain way, people will play along. For example, in countries where organ donation after death is opt-out (it happens by default), the large majority of people do it and are happy with it. If it is opt-in (it doesn't happen by default), almost no one agrees to it. This opt-out tactic has been proven to work in many different environments - it's just a simple way of phrasing something differently and suddenly you make the majority of people behave the opposite.
In F2P games, they use many tactics like these at once. And they tailor everything based on specific data. I think a person is not really a master of their own fate anymore.
I don't have a good solution to it - and I'm not sure it's a legal problem. It's just something that's been on my mind lately, and I'm not too comfortable with the idea of it. If you download my free game and I then use maths to tell the game to treat you in a specific way, making you spend with a high probability, is that ethical?
Again, based on that last sentence, are you're assuming that developers customize gameplay to me specifically? Again, I think this is creating a massive generalization. In the vast majority of games people CAN feel forced to spend money. However, forced is also a very subjective term. I feel like in most games I am FORCED to spend money on things like bag slots, auction house access, etc. However, in the MAJORITY of games, loot boxes don't impact my ability to perform at the end game. I will acknowledge that I have played games where this is the case, but they are the 1% (not verified but based on what I've played I'd say it's close). Games like ROM where you pretty much have to spend money in order to upgrade your gear to a point where you are viable at the highest level. Like I said, though, that's a HUGE exception to the norm. In fact, in the majority of cases you can get rid of any pay walls simply by subscribing. This would indicate that the publisher would be UBER happy if you were to give them $180 a year.
That's the point, too, you say you don't know what the solution is, but we've had the solution all along... subscriptions! Problem is that, again, the vast majority of people DON'T and WON'T pay a subscription, so we get this model.
However, to sit there and make assumptions that there are no ethics models in place, or to even sit on a high horse and talk about ethics when retail has been gouging people to the tune of 1000% mark-ups for YEARS is, honestly, hilarious. Why do ethics apply here when we accept less everywhere else?
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
----------------
For God sake, is it too much to ask a parent to..idk...parent?
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
I think they DO have economic value but its interesting to see the culture come to terms with that.
So for example, gambling is considered to be the exchange of money, for the chance of getting more money, or other material goods that have monetary attachment to them. You dont have gambling in which its a trade for money for the chance of being complemented to feel good (for example) so this is interesting to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me