Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

UPDATE: Belgian Minister Wants EU Ban on Loot Boxes, Speaks Before Committee Ruling

123457

Comments

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,762
    Loke666 said:
    MrSyn said:
    I don't see the items leaving the cash shops any time soon... removing the lootbox just removes the RNG(gambling) side.

    I fully expect these companies to just sell the attractive items to larger sums of money directly in the cash shop and possible just make all the junk items they know people don't want, back to being earned in-game.

    Im sure they can make laws to remove the gambling from games but i don't see this escalating to forcing publishers to not be able to just sell the items directly to players that they have made the devs create unattainable outside of normal gameplay or massive grinds.
    No but people at least get what they pay for that way. Otherwise they put in a few OP items with low chanse and can sell junk for loads of cash. It still isn't good but it is better at least-

    It doesn't take the RNG cash gates out of gaming either. Removing loot crates only removes one aspect of money for RNG. Raid locks are another form. You pay x dollars per month for a weekly spin of the boss loot RNG wheel. Instead of just 4 times per month you could buy tokens that let you roll the boss loot wheel extra times.

    Even with 4 chances a month (raid locks once per week) there is still no guarantee you'll get the boss loot crate item you want. It's RNG for money. And before people play the "but you're playing the game card", that's irrelevant especially in court. It's RNG for money just like loot crates. There is a lot of RNG for money in gaming and it all should fall under this scrutiny.
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    Torval said:
    Loke666 said:
    MrSyn said:
    I don't see the items leaving the cash shops any time soon... removing the lootbox just removes the RNG(gambling) side.

    I fully expect these companies to just sell the attractive items to larger sums of money directly in the cash shop and possible just make all the junk items they know people don't want, back to being earned in-game.

    Im sure they can make laws to remove the gambling from games but i don't see this escalating to forcing publishers to not be able to just sell the items directly to players that they have made the devs create unattainable outside of normal gameplay or massive grinds.
    No but people at least get what they pay for that way. Otherwise they put in a few OP items with low chanse and can sell junk for loads of cash. It still isn't good but it is better at least-

    It doesn't take the RNG cash gates out of gaming either. Removing loot crates only removes one aspect of money for RNG. Raid locks are another form. You pay x dollars per month for a weekly spin of the boss loot RNG wheel. Instead of just 4 times per month you could buy tokens that let you roll the boss loot wheel extra times.

    Even with 4 chances a month (raid locks once per week) there is still no guarantee you'll get the boss loot crate item you want. It's RNG for money. And before people play the "but you're playing the game card", that's irrelevant especially in court. It's RNG for money just like loot crates. There is a lot of RNG for money in gaming and it all should fall under this scrutiny.
    Agreed

    The only thing I'll say is:

    The subscription method you can only be taken for $15 a month.

    The loot box method you can only be taken for ??? a month.

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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? 

    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
    ----------------

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    Torval said:
    Loke666 said:
    MrSyn said:
    I don't see the items leaving the cash shops any time soon... removing the lootbox just removes the RNG(gambling) side.

    I fully expect these companies to just sell the attractive items to larger sums of money directly in the cash shop and possible just make all the junk items they know people don't want, back to being earned in-game.

    Im sure they can make laws to remove the gambling from games but i don't see this escalating to forcing publishers to not be able to just sell the items directly to players that they have made the devs create unattainable outside of normal gameplay or massive grinds.
    No but people at least get what they pay for that way. Otherwise they put in a few OP items with low chanse and can sell junk for loads of cash. It still isn't good but it is better at least-

    It doesn't take the RNG cash gates out of gaming either. Removing loot crates only removes one aspect of money for RNG. Raid locks are another form. You pay x dollars per month for a weekly spin of the boss loot RNG wheel. Instead of just 4 times per month you could buy tokens that let you roll the boss loot wheel extra times.

    Even with 4 chances a month (raid locks once per week) there is still no guarantee you'll get the boss loot crate item you want. It's RNG for money. And before people play the "but you're playing the game card", that's irrelevant especially in court. It's RNG for money just like loot crates. There is a lot of RNG for money in gaming and it all should fall under this scrutiny.
    I've never been a fan of raid locks.  Always seemed an arbitrary system to slow progression.

    That doesn't change the underlying argument you try to dismiss though.  The idea that you pay for a set amount of time to play the game isn't the issue; an asinine raid progression throttling system is.

    image
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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.
    Gdemami

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,762
    laserit said:
    Torval said:
    Loke666 said:
    MrSyn said:
    I don't see the items leaving the cash shops any time soon... removing the lootbox just removes the RNG(gambling) side.

    I fully expect these companies to just sell the attractive items to larger sums of money directly in the cash shop and possible just make all the junk items they know people don't want, back to being earned in-game.

    Im sure they can make laws to remove the gambling from games but i don't see this escalating to forcing publishers to not be able to just sell the items directly to players that they have made the devs create unattainable outside of normal gameplay or massive grinds.
    No but people at least get what they pay for that way. Otherwise they put in a few OP items with low chanse and can sell junk for loads of cash. It still isn't good but it is better at least-

    It doesn't take the RNG cash gates out of gaming either. Removing loot crates only removes one aspect of money for RNG. Raid locks are another form. You pay x dollars per month for a weekly spin of the boss loot RNG wheel. Instead of just 4 times per month you could buy tokens that let you roll the boss loot wheel extra times.

    Even with 4 chances a month (raid locks once per week) there is still no guarantee you'll get the boss loot crate item you want. It's RNG for money. And before people play the "but you're playing the game card", that's irrelevant especially in court. It's RNG for money just like loot crates. There is a lot of RNG for money in gaming and it all should fall under this scrutiny.
    Agreed

    The only thing I'll say is:

    The subscription method you can only be taken for $15 a month.

    The loot box method you can only be taken for ??? a month.

    Kyleran has had 6 EVE accounts at one point so that can get multiplied under the right circumstances. It wasn't uncommon in older games to have 2 accounts. Six was a lot, but two not so strange.

    It doesn't matter that loot crates have no ceiling because the sub has a floor. So they combine the two like in ESO. Lock some things behind the sub so anyone playing the full game (crafting) has to pay a sub or spend a lot in the cash shop unlocking storage, but really the sub is the only way it works right with the prolific amount of "material" they have for crafting.

    This is how games like ESO, TOR, FF14, WoW and such get around sub only revenues. They leverage multiple aspects of the game through diverse monetization. So the sub is required, but so are the loot crates, and the dlc/box fees otherwise you'll fall behind the group and be irrelevant. So studios/pubs use a multipoint predatory practice to ensure minimum revenues and then offer an unlimited ceiling of spending.

    Every aspect of game design is built around this, even without loot crates. Loot crates were just a simple addition of moving boss and mob loot tables into a clicky that can be purchased in the store. It's not different than farming bosses or mobs, except it skips the gamification part.

    People might want to justify the gamification but that is actually the most predatory aspect of online gaming. A loot crate is obvious in its goal. Paying to access mobs and bosses in a "gamey" way to get the same thing just hides that slot machine mechanic and it is much easier to draw people in, especially impressionable children, with an amusement park theme ride while grabbing their monies.

    This is why I rail against progression monetization. In some ways it's always been with us since D&D and TSR selling modules. But in the eighties and nineties it was much more packaged as a whole so you were paying for a "unit of entertainment" that required no further purchases. It wasn't until Prodigy, Sierra Online, and AoL charging dollars per minute for online amusement worlds that the predatory monetization really kicked in. Before that not so much with regards to gaming and computer gaming.

    If loot crates are the only thing addressed here the root cause and point will have been missed. The only thing that will have been accomplished is the goalposts being moved. Sorry so long winded.
    laseritblueturtle13immodium
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    Torval said:
    laserit said:
    Torval said:
    Loke666 said:
    MrSyn said:
    I don't see the items leaving the cash shops any time soon... removing the lootbox just removes the RNG(gambling) side.

    I fully expect these companies to just sell the attractive items to larger sums of money directly in the cash shop and possible just make all the junk items they know people don't want, back to being earned in-game.

    Im sure they can make laws to remove the gambling from games but i don't see this escalating to forcing publishers to not be able to just sell the items directly to players that they have made the devs create unattainable outside of normal gameplay or massive grinds.
    No but people at least get what they pay for that way. Otherwise they put in a few OP items with low chanse and can sell junk for loads of cash. It still isn't good but it is better at least-

    It doesn't take the RNG cash gates out of gaming either. Removing loot crates only removes one aspect of money for RNG. Raid locks are another form. You pay x dollars per month for a weekly spin of the boss loot RNG wheel. Instead of just 4 times per month you could buy tokens that let you roll the boss loot wheel extra times.

    Even with 4 chances a month (raid locks once per week) there is still no guarantee you'll get the boss loot crate item you want. It's RNG for money. And before people play the "but you're playing the game card", that's irrelevant especially in court. It's RNG for money just like loot crates. There is a lot of RNG for money in gaming and it all should fall under this scrutiny.
    Agreed

    The only thing I'll say is:

    The subscription method you can only be taken for $15 a month.

    The loot box method you can only be taken for ??? a month.

    Kyleran has had 6 EVE accounts at one point so that can get multiplied under the right circumstances. It wasn't uncommon in older games to have 2 accounts. Six was a lot, but two not so strange.

    It doesn't matter that loot crates have no ceiling because the sub has a floor. So they combine the two like in ESO. Lock some things behind the sub so anyone playing the full game (crafting) has to pay a sub or spend a lot in the cash shop unlocking storage, but really the sub is the only way it works right with the prolific amount of "material" they have for crafting.

    This is how games like ESO, TOR, FF14, WoW and such get around sub only revenues. They leverage multiple aspects of the game through diverse monetization. So the sub is required, but so are the loot crates, and the dlc/box fees otherwise you'll fall behind the group and be irrelevant. So studios/pubs use a multipoint predatory practice to ensure minimum revenues and then offer an unlimited ceiling of spending.

    Every aspect of game design is built around this, even without loot crates. Loot crates were just a simple addition of moving boss and mob loot tables into a clicky that can be purchased in the store. It's not different than farming bosses or mobs, except it skips the gamification part.

    People might want to justify the gamification but that is actually the most predatory aspect of online gaming. A loot crate is obvious in its goal. Paying to access mobs and bosses in a "gamey" way to get the same thing just hides that slot machine mechanic and it is much easier to draw people in, especially impressionable children, with an amusement park theme ride while grabbing their monies.

    This is why I rail against progression monetization. In some ways it's always been with us since D&D and TSR selling modules. But in the eighties and nineties it was much more packaged as a whole so you were paying for a "unit of entertainment" that required no further purchases. It wasn't until Prodigy, Sierra Online, and AoL charging dollars per minute for online amusement worlds that the predatory monetization really kicked in. Before that not so much with regards to gaming and computer gaming.

    If loot crates are the only thing addressed here the root cause and point will have been missed. The only thing that will have been accomplished is the goalposts being moved. Sorry so long winded.
    And there is the Torval that I know :)

    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.


    TorvalGdemami

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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. 
    DistopiaEponyxDamor

    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
    ----------------

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,762
    I think it's not all on the fault of the publishers and studios. It's hard running a business in a volatile competitive market with rapidly shifting trends. I work for a medical consulting company and as slow as that industry moves we have a hard time keeping up with the quickly changing landscape.

    It probably is too late for the industry to correct itself and any real correction will probably cause much pain and shakeup. I don't know if governments are willing to shake up a multibillion dollar industry that deeply.

    I still think the approach @Superman0X brought up using business regulation rather than introducing gambling regulatory measures is a better way to go. We have established protocols for dealing with predatory and collusive business practices already and those can be heavily punitive when violated. That approach also drills down to the heart of the issue. Using that approach on a publisher by publisher basis could redirect the industry without blowing it up.

    It would still be regulation, but slow methodical, and established regulation as opposed to what we might be facing now with greedy governments just looking for a little revenue bump in the forms of taxes and fines and no real resolution.
    laseritGdemami
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited November 2017
    Well-written Torval, but I still take issue with the idea that you have an issue with "gamification".  The game portion is the entire point of the product: an enjoyable way to spend time.  There's a large difference between charging for access to the game (the entire point of the product) and charging for RNG that skips the game experience itself (again, the entire point of the product).  It's a significant difference, and you seem to down play it constantly.  The deliberate and direct taxing of the RNG roll while removing the entire "game experience" is the crux of the issue.  You pay for game time to play the game, not to simply roll a loot drop die at the end of the boss.  The experience of leveling and the boss fight is what you're paying for, and is apropos to the nature of the product.  Paying for a loot drop die roll directly skips the nature in the interest of enabling the producer to rapidly tax the players for each individual roll in a way that's deliberately predatory.

    No argument regarding the use of subs plus a cash shop.  It's going far beyond the taxing of game time.  Alas, the idea that you will ever force or persuade microtransactions as a whole out of the industry is really fantasy at this point.  It's an unrealistic goal.  Attempting to rail against that enemy is banging your head against a wall of adamantium.
    Gdemami

    image
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    laserit said:
    And there is the Torval that I know :)

    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. 


    laseritTorval

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • Righteous_RockRighteous_Rock Member RarePosts: 1,234
    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.
    laseritGdemami
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    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.
    Torval

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    Distopia said:
    laserit said:
    And there is the Torval that I know :)

    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.

    Reality is, that it is not always the case.
    Gdemami

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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.
    Gdemamicameltosis

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 13,039
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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.
    laseritGdemamiYashaX
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • rawfoxrawfox Member UncommonPosts: 780
    Thats some great news ^^
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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. 
    GdemamiYashaXPhry

    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
    ----------------

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 13,039
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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.

    GdemamiYashaXEponyxDamorRexKushman
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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

    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.

     




    GdemamiYashaXPhry

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 11,725
    laserit said:
    Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?

    ...can you point out the law that qualifies loot boxes as 'predatory' w/e that is supposed to be?
    IselinYashaX
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    Gdemami said:
    laserit said:
    Are you saying that the loot box monitization model isn't predatory?

    ...can you point out the law that qualifies loot boxes as 'predatory' w/e that is supposed to be?
    Laws and regulations get created as the *need* arises. Laws and regulation come into effect after the fact.

    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. 


    GdemamiMadFrenchiePhry

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 11,725
    edited November 2017
    laserit said:
    Laws and regulations get created as the *need* arises. Laws and regulation come into effect after the fact.

    Ok, you don't understand what fact is.That clears it up.
    MadFrenchielaserit
  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,157
    Gdemami said:
    laserit said:
    Laws and regulations get created as the *need* arises. Laws and regulation come into effect after the fact.

    Ok, you don't understand what fact is.That clears it up.
    Your such a one line wonder
    MadFrenchiePhrycameltosisIselin

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,140
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    CrazKanuk said:
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    laserit said:

    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.

    In Canada we like our guns too.

    Guns don't kill, people do.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime/Violent-crime


    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

    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.

     





    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.