Howdy, Stranger!

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

Lootboxes are gambling (Official Statement)

11415161820

Comments

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,667
    Eldurian said:
    Again. The minors issue is a red herring. It in all likelihood accounts to an infinitesimally small amount of loot box purchases and I think all involved had agreed to a solution that would fix it (Raise the ESRB rating on games with gambling and restrict the purchase of game cards by ESRB rating).

    So the real issue here is that "Consenting adults shouldn't be able to gamble cause it hurts muh society!"

    Yes, I think current gambling laws, and all other laws which prohibit the ability of consenting adults to take part in transactions to which they both agree based on the idea that others find that transaction offensive are archaic authoritarian bullcrap and need to go the same way as prohibition and anti-gay marriage laws, and the marijuana laws are currently going. Straight into the dumpster.

    And in that regard, we can agree that gambling laws need to be updated to 2018.
    Nope.  I think kids shouldn't have gambling mixed into their games.  It's as simple as that.  And once it becomes properly classified that will be rectified because we have actually laws that prevent that.   We have just allowed companies to hide the fact that it's gambling so they escape those laws.

    I couldn't care less what an informed adult does with their money.   I have plenty of disposable income.  We play the lottery, bet on the ponies (I grew up next to Aqueduct Racetrack in NY) and used to visit Atlantic City all the time.  Heck my wife and I made more money there than we did working one year. Ever get a thrill from winning a $25k jackpot on a slot?  I have.  Ever get a thrill from putting $100 coins into a machine and pulling the lever? I have. (That part ended when we had kids and suddenly got much more responsible and of course moved down to Florida). So no.  I'm not anti-gambling...

    I personally think lootboxes in games is the dumbest idea ever, but if someone wants to plow their money into it (after being properly informed on the odds) then why would I care other than that the mechanism probably ruined a good game.  But should people (informed adults) be able to gamble?  Of course.  It just needs to be pulled out of the wild west like it exists now.

    But kids... NOPE.  Not flexible on that.  At all.  Luckily, neither is the law.

    Asm0deus

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 3,116
    edited May 2018
    Eldurian said:
    Again. The minors issue is a red herring. It in all likelihood accounts to an infinitesimally small amount of loot box purchases and I think all involved had agreed to a solution that would fix it (Raise the ESRB rating on games with gambling and restrict the purchase of game cards by ESRB rating).

    So the real issue here is that "Consenting adults shouldn't be able to gamble cause it hurts muh society!"

    Yes, I think current gambling laws, and all other laws which prohibit the ability of consenting adults to take part in transactions to which they both agree based on the idea that others find that transaction offensive are archaic authoritarian bullcrap and need to go the same way as prohibition and anti-gay marriage laws, and the marijuana laws are currently going. Straight into the dumpster.

    And in that regard, we can agree that gambling laws need to be updated to 2018.

    And in that regard I can agree

    "We can do better
    We WILL do better"
    More fallacious BS....lol

    The real red herring is you trying to downplay the amount of minors playing video games.

    This fallacious argument here, "So the real issue here is that "Consenting adults shouldn't be able to gamble cause it hurts muh society!"" is irrelevant because no one is saying adults shouldn't be allowed to gamble.

    What society is saying is that it should only be done in certain places under certain conditions, I am not saying that, society as a whole is though I will admit I happen to agree but that's really besides the point.

    If you don't like gambling laws go and try to get them changed...ranting fallacies at me certainly wont help and your "muh fweedoms" rote wont either!

    Last but not least I don't think the changes coming into effect will be what you seem to think will happen...lol

    Good luck and keep riding that merry go round!

    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited May 2018
    Asm0deus said:

    The real red herring is you trying to downplay the amount of minors playing video games.

    I'm not saying minors aren't playing video games. I'm saying Minecraft doesn't have lootboxes and if there were, they wouldn't have the money to spend on them. I remember growing up, I was playing Runescape on Free to Play servers because my parents wouldn't let me pay for a subscription. I was playing Guild Wars 1 and Freelancer because I could buy them at Fred Meyer and then play them forever, and I had the money to afford them.

    Now when I was an adult working 4 days straight (As in 96 hour shifts that required me to sleep at work) every week then I was buying multi-hundred dollar Star Citizen ships.

    Thats their target market. People with money, which isn't teenagers as hard as that may be to believe. 
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,667
    edited May 2018
    Eldurian said:
    Asm0deus said:

    The real red herring is you trying to downplay the amount of minors playing video games.

    I'm not saying minors aren't playing video games. I'm saying Minecraft doesn't have lootboxes and if there were, they wouldn't have the money to spend on them. I remember growing up, I was playing Runescape on Free to Play servers because my parents wouldn't let me pay for a subscription. I was playing Guild Wars 1 and Freelancer because I could buy them at Fred Meyer and I had the money to afford them.

    Now when I was an adult working 4 days straight (As in 96 hour shifts that required me to sleep at work) every week then I was buying multi-hundred dollar Star Citizen ships.

    Thats their target market. People with money, which isn't teenagers as hard as that may be to believe. 
    Irrelevant.  It’s like saying that teenagers aren’t the target audience of the bar.  True or not.  It doesn’t matter. It’s their responsibility to insure teenagers or anyone under 21 isn’t served. 

    Once the online sports betting is implemented it will be a blueprint to be followed.  If it’s IDs or some other screening method, there will be one. 
    Asm0deus

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited May 2018
    I've never done online gambling but when have you ever completely verified your identity online? I can't think of a single instance in which I have done something online in which someone who I allowed to use my information couldn't do the same thing.

    Kid's aren't allowed to look at porn. Do you know how many "Yes I am 18" buttons I clicked before turning 18?

    I'm not sure why you would think they would use bars as the standard of measure when there are existing sites restricted to users of a certain age we can use as the measurement stick.

    Not saying I am against making them click a "Yes I am 18" but I really doubt you will see much better than that, and it certainly isn't going to stop me from letting my kid play a game that has lootboxes with me if I tell them they can.
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,667
    Eldurian said:
    I've never done online gambling but when have you ever completely verified your identity online? I can't think of a single instance in which I have done something online in which someone who I allowed to use my information couldn't do the same thing.

    Kid's aren't allowed to look at porn. Do you know how many "Yes I am 18" buttons I clicked before turning 18?

    Not saying I am against making them click a "Yes I am 18" but I really doubt you will see much better than that, and it certainly isn't going to stop me from letting my kid play a game that has lootboxes with me if I tell them they can.
    I’ve never done online gambling.  When I open up an online brokerage account I had to send my ID. If you want to open a Crypto account at Coinbase you have to submit an ID,  

    Whatever verification eventually is used for online sports betting should be mirrored for gambling in games.  I’m sure it will be more than self certification.


    Asm0deus

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 3,413
    Eldurian said:
    Like most of your other posts... wrong.

    Its OK though.

    Change is coming
    We can do better
    We WILL do better.
    Yet you have yet to bring any stats to this argument, your positions are just based on throwing out random assertions most of which I've shut down using sourced data at this point, and then throwing out a made up political slogan.

    I guess it's frustrating you won't be honest and admit your argument as been absolutely torn to shreds, but this is such a great illustration of the typical leftist argument tactic. When the facts don't line up with your feelings, resort to chanting catch phrases.

    This is the kind of crap that angered right wing reactionaries enough to show up to the primaries and the general en masse and hand us our current president.
    No.  But I finally understand the disconnect.  You seem to believe that there is a distinction between "supervised children" and unsupervised ones as far as this topic.   I think that explains why you have such a strange take on it.  So I will try to explain reality for you:

    If lootboxes are acknowledged as gambling devices there is NO DISTINCTION.  It will not be allowed to have "supervised" gambling and more than "supervised" alcohol for minors.  A parent can't just tell the company "It's OK to sell Johnny lootboxes" any more than a parent can bring a 16 year old into a bar, sit next to them and tell the staff it's OK to serve them.

    It will be ILLEGAL to sell them to children*.  That is where the case ends.  There is no wiggle room.  It doesn't matter what an EULA says.  It doesn't matter what date a kid types into a self-certification site.  It will be the company's responsibility to insure they don't sell them to kids just like it's the bar/restaurant/store's responsibility to insure they don't sell alcohol to minors.  It doesn't matter if it's 2%, 20% or 100% children.  After they become classified as gambling the number has to become ZERO.

    Those are the FACTS.  Not some silly 14 year old site on player demographics. Not some survey you find with 1000 participants that you use absurd math to extrapolate from.   Pure, hard reality.  Once lootboxes are classified as gambling devices... this automatically happens.  Your only hope is to try and keep pulling the wool over people's eyes and claim that they aren't gambling (which everyone can plainly see they are).  Once they are properly classified, everything else falls into place.  You don't like those laws.  Tough. Go try to change them.  But that's REALITY.

    Change is coming.
    We can do better.
    We WILL do better.


    * The legal age varies by state.  Most are 18 or 21. Some allow certain types of gambling at 16 or 17. http://www.usagamblinglaws.com/underage-gambling-laws.html  Some states do not allow certain types of gambling at any age. One state (Utah) apparently does not allow ANY gambling at all.   I'd watch the way the Online Sports Betting works itself out as a pilot for how online lootbox games would look.





    All this would do is make it so that an MMO company required a a CC/Debit card to create an account with them.. which is great for all the people that have been black listed or get banned.. you won't be able to make semi-anonymous throw-away accounts anymore.

    Oh yah, and the added boon that it would stop responsible parents from playing a fun MMO with their children.

    This is why no one wants the whiners that cry to politicians begging a bunch of bureaucrats to run their life to win.

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,667
    Ungood said:
    Eldurian said:
    Like most of your other posts... wrong.

    Its OK though.

    Change is coming
    We can do better
    We WILL do better.
    Yet you have yet to bring any stats to this argument, your positions are just based on throwing out random assertions most of which I've shut down using sourced data at this point, and then throwing out a made up political slogan.

    I guess it's frustrating you won't be honest and admit your argument as been absolutely torn to shreds, but this is such a great illustration of the typical leftist argument tactic. When the facts don't line up with your feelings, resort to chanting catch phrases.

    This is the kind of crap that angered right wing reactionaries enough to show up to the primaries and the general en masse and hand us our current president.
    No.  But I finally understand the disconnect.  You seem to believe that there is a distinction between "supervised children" and unsupervised ones as far as this topic.   I think that explains why you have such a strange take on it.  So I will try to explain reality for you:

    If lootboxes are acknowledged as gambling devices there is NO DISTINCTION.  It will not be allowed to have "supervised" gambling and more than "supervised" alcohol for minors.  A parent can't just tell the company "It's OK to sell Johnny lootboxes" any more than a parent can bring a 16 year old into a bar, sit next to them and tell the staff it's OK to serve them.

    It will be ILLEGAL to sell them to children*.  That is where the case ends.  There is no wiggle room.  It doesn't matter what an EULA says.  It doesn't matter what date a kid types into a self-certification site.  It will be the company's responsibility to insure they don't sell them to kids just like it's the bar/restaurant/store's responsibility to insure they don't sell alcohol to minors.  It doesn't matter if it's 2%, 20% or 100% children.  After they become classified as gambling the number has to become ZERO.

    Those are the FACTS.  Not some silly 14 year old site on player demographics. Not some survey you find with 1000 participants that you use absurd math to extrapolate from.   Pure, hard reality.  Once lootboxes are classified as gambling devices... this automatically happens.  Your only hope is to try and keep pulling the wool over people's eyes and claim that they aren't gambling (which everyone can plainly see they are).  Once they are properly classified, everything else falls into place.  You don't like those laws.  Tough. Go try to change them.  But that's REALITY.

    Change is coming.
    We can do better.
    We WILL do better.


    * The legal age varies by state.  Most are 18 or 21. Some allow certain types of gambling at 16 or 17. http://www.usagamblinglaws.com/underage-gambling-laws.html  Some states do not allow certain types of gambling at any age. One state (Utah) apparently does not allow ANY gambling at all.   I'd watch the way the Online Sports Betting works itself out as a pilot for how online lootbox games would look.





    All this would do is make it so that an MMO company required a a CC/Debit card to create an account with them.. which is great for all the people that have been black listed or get banned.. you won't be able to make semi-anonymous throw-away accounts anymore.

    Oh yah, and the added boon that it would stop responsible parents from playing a fun MMO with their children.

    This is why no one wants the whiners that cry to politicians begging a bunch of bureaucrats to run their life to win.

    Sorry you don't like it. (not really)
    I do not think simply having a credit card is going to cut it as you can possess a card and be a minor.   We shall see...


    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,161
    Ungood said:
    Eldurian said:
    Like most of your other posts... wrong.

    Its OK though.

    Change is coming
    We can do better
    We WILL do better.
    Yet you have yet to bring any stats to this argument, your positions are just based on throwing out random assertions most of which I've shut down using sourced data at this point, and then throwing out a made up political slogan.

    I guess it's frustrating you won't be honest and admit your argument as been absolutely torn to shreds, but this is such a great illustration of the typical leftist argument tactic. When the facts don't line up with your feelings, resort to chanting catch phrases.

    This is the kind of crap that angered right wing reactionaries enough to show up to the primaries and the general en masse and hand us our current president.
    No.  But I finally understand the disconnect.  You seem to believe that there is a distinction between "supervised children" and unsupervised ones as far as this topic.   I think that explains why you have such a strange take on it.  So I will try to explain reality for you:

    If lootboxes are acknowledged as gambling devices there is NO DISTINCTION.  It will not be allowed to have "supervised" gambling and more than "supervised" alcohol for minors.  A parent can't just tell the company "It's OK to sell Johnny lootboxes" any more than a parent can bring a 16 year old into a bar, sit next to them and tell the staff it's OK to serve them.

    It will be ILLEGAL to sell them to children*.  That is where the case ends.  There is no wiggle room.  It doesn't matter what an EULA says.  It doesn't matter what date a kid types into a self-certification site.  It will be the company's responsibility to insure they don't sell them to kids just like it's the bar/restaurant/store's responsibility to insure they don't sell alcohol to minors.  It doesn't matter if it's 2%, 20% or 100% children.  After they become classified as gambling the number has to become ZERO.

    Those are the FACTS.  Not some silly 14 year old site on player demographics. Not some survey you find with 1000 participants that you use absurd math to extrapolate from.   Pure, hard reality.  Once lootboxes are classified as gambling devices... this automatically happens.  Your only hope is to try and keep pulling the wool over people's eyes and claim that they aren't gambling (which everyone can plainly see they are).  Once they are properly classified, everything else falls into place.  You don't like those laws.  Tough. Go try to change them.  But that's REALITY.

    Change is coming.
    We can do better.
    We WILL do better.


    * The legal age varies by state.  Most are 18 or 21. Some allow certain types of gambling at 16 or 17. http://www.usagamblinglaws.com/underage-gambling-laws.html  Some states do not allow certain types of gambling at any age. One state (Utah) apparently does not allow ANY gambling at all.   I'd watch the way the Online Sports Betting works itself out as a pilot for how online lootbox games would look.





    All this would do is make it so that an MMO company required a a CC/Debit card to create an account with them.. which is great for all the people that have been black listed or get banned.. you won't be able to make semi-anonymous throw-away accounts anymore.

    Oh yah, and the added boon that it would stop responsible parents from playing a fun MMO with their children.

    This is why no one wants the whiners that cry to politicians begging a bunch of bureaucrats to run their life to win.

    Sorry you don't like it. (not really)
    I do not think simply having a credit card is going to cut it as you can possess a card and be a minor.   We shall see...



    you can have a CC if it is co-signed by someone over 18.
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 3,413
    Ungood said:
    Eldurian said:
    Like most of your other posts... wrong.

    Its OK though.

    Change is coming
    We can do better
    We WILL do better.
    Yet you have yet to bring any stats to this argument, your positions are just based on throwing out random assertions most of which I've shut down using sourced data at this point, and then throwing out a made up political slogan.

    I guess it's frustrating you won't be honest and admit your argument as been absolutely torn to shreds, but this is such a great illustration of the typical leftist argument tactic. When the facts don't line up with your feelings, resort to chanting catch phrases.

    This is the kind of crap that angered right wing reactionaries enough to show up to the primaries and the general en masse and hand us our current president.
    No.  But I finally understand the disconnect.  You seem to believe that there is a distinction between "supervised children" and unsupervised ones as far as this topic.   I think that explains why you have such a strange take on it.  So I will try to explain reality for you:

    If lootboxes are acknowledged as gambling devices there is NO DISTINCTION.  It will not be allowed to have "supervised" gambling and more than "supervised" alcohol for minors.  A parent can't just tell the company "It's OK to sell Johnny lootboxes" any more than a parent can bring a 16 year old into a bar, sit next to them and tell the staff it's OK to serve them.

    It will be ILLEGAL to sell them to children*.  That is where the case ends.  There is no wiggle room.  It doesn't matter what an EULA says.  It doesn't matter what date a kid types into a self-certification site.  It will be the company's responsibility to insure they don't sell them to kids just like it's the bar/restaurant/store's responsibility to insure they don't sell alcohol to minors.  It doesn't matter if it's 2%, 20% or 100% children.  After they become classified as gambling the number has to become ZERO.

    Those are the FACTS.  Not some silly 14 year old site on player demographics. Not some survey you find with 1000 participants that you use absurd math to extrapolate from.   Pure, hard reality.  Once lootboxes are classified as gambling devices... this automatically happens.  Your only hope is to try and keep pulling the wool over people's eyes and claim that they aren't gambling (which everyone can plainly see they are).  Once they are properly classified, everything else falls into place.  You don't like those laws.  Tough. Go try to change them.  But that's REALITY.

    Change is coming.
    We can do better.
    We WILL do better.


    * The legal age varies by state.  Most are 18 or 21. Some allow certain types of gambling at 16 or 17. http://www.usagamblinglaws.com/underage-gambling-laws.html  Some states do not allow certain types of gambling at any age. One state (Utah) apparently does not allow ANY gambling at all.   I'd watch the way the Online Sports Betting works itself out as a pilot for how online lootbox games would look.





    All this would do is make it so that an MMO company required a a CC/Debit card to create an account with them.. which is great for all the people that have been black listed or get banned.. you won't be able to make semi-anonymous throw-away accounts anymore.

    Oh yah, and the added boon that it would stop responsible parents from playing a fun MMO with their children.

    This is why no one wants the whiners that cry to politicians begging a bunch of bureaucrats to run their life to win.

    Sorry you don't like it. (not really)
    I do not think simply having a credit card is going to cut it as you can possess a card and be a minor.   We shall see...

    Not like I care if you don't like loot-boxes, I don't like them either, but I will never comprehend how anyone could want the government to tell them how live, I guess some people are in fact that inept, and need to coddled and told how they must live their life. 

    Meh.. you still won't walk away ahead.

    Eldurian
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    Some people need the leash around their neck. It's a comfort to them that they would be lost without. Thankfully I don't think it's something our politicians care about enough to address at the moment, and currently we're in a climate of lowering restrictions on vices. Legal marijuana is sweeping from state to state as it should, online gambling restrictions are being lifted, and realization the war on drugs has been a failure is growing.

    People like Slapshot aren't our future. They're our past.
    Ungood
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Eldurian said:
    Some people need the leash around their neck. It's a comfort to them that they would be lost without. Thankfully I don't think it's something our politicians care about enough to address at the moment, and currently we're in a climate of lowering restrictions on vices. Legal marijuana is sweeping from state to state as it should, online gambling restrictions are being lifted, and realization the war on drugs has been a failure is growing.

    People like Slapshot aren't our future. They're our past.
    Doubtful, while some vices are being decriminalised there is also the age factor, loot boxes being legally classed as gambling is a good thing, it doesn't mean they will disappear, it just means that games having them in will have to be appropriately labelled, if such games come with a 21 age restriction then great, adults should be capable of deciding for themselves what they do with their money, this also applies to narcotics frankly, though i think that they should be classed the same as alcohol in that if you drink, you should not drive and the penalties for doing so should involve a custodial sentence, likewise if you turn up for work 'drunk' that is often a sackable offence, just because something is decriminalised doesn't mean its something that should not come with its own restrictions and consequences for breaching them, same with gambling mechanics, if a game has them then there should be restrictions on who is allowed to access them, particularly as it relates to the maturity of the person having access to them, you would not for instance leave a loaded pistol in a childrens playground and not expect there to be dire consequences, there is no reason to treat gambling differently.
    It is the job of adults after all to protect the young from the consequences of their actions, most of which they are unable to comprehend due to their lack of maturity, that is why age ratings exist, you don't for isntance let a child stick their hand in a fire to find out that it will burn them for themselves, instead you tell them why they cannot do it and leave it for them to understand why when they grow old enough to comprehend that fire burns. ;)
  • HeraseHerase Member RarePosts: 992
    Ungood said:

    Not like I care if you don't like loot-boxes, I don't like them either, but I will never comprehend how anyone could want the government to tell them how live, I guess some people are in fact that inept, and need to coddled and told how they must live their life. 

    Meh.. you still won't walk away ahead.

    The thing is, I think most of us don't want government involvement, but that's the only solution we have as the gaming industry can't be bothered or won't self contain the problem.

    People got pissed and they just sat back, gamers asked are you going to do anything? They were meet with silence or a few who said, "we're on the case" just for them to sit down, so business continued as usual.

    The out cries had an impact, but the problem with lootboxes is it only takes a handful of people to pay out the nose for companies to not want to give it up, people in the industry need to meet us half way.

    They're not a need, but a want. I'm fine with people spending money on whatever they like, but when companies start slowly trying to find ways manipulate people who have no interest into using them. Then there's a problem, example again the EA patent also look up "turning players into payers" 

    Again, do I wish for this to be handled by the government? No, but due to how far I can see companies like EA going with it and how games are being broken for the sake of it, I would rather something happen than nothing. For me, the positives out way the negatives.



    PhryMadFrenchieAsm0deus
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,667
    Eldurian said:
    Some people need the leash around their neck. It's a comfort to them that they would be lost without. Thankfully I don't think it's something our politicians care about enough to address at the moment, and currently we're in a climate of lowering restrictions on vices. Legal marijuana is sweeping from state to state as it should, online gambling restrictions are being lifted, and realization the war on drugs has been a failure is growing.

    People like Slapshot aren't our future. They're our past.
    Again you confuse restrictions on adults and minors.  No matter how many times you repeat it, it will not change.  You continue to ignore plain statements that I don’t care what informed adults do.  

    If you think the future is allowing unrestricted gambling, drugs, alcohol to our children along with adult/child sex you are very mistaken.  And if you actually WANT such a future there is something wrong with you.  

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • cheyanecheyane Member EpicPosts: 6,718
    As  a mother I'm with @Slapshot1188 on this.
    Slapshot1188
    image
  • TalulaRoseTalulaRose Member RarePosts: 1,247
    If we got rid of all social programs for addiction and those addicted had to take care of themselves then more power to them.

    But we all know the reality is they will be addicted, ask for taxes in handouts just to go gamble more.

    I'm in the we have too many people who have no personal accountability who have become a burden on society due to their own choices......so no loot boxes for you.

  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 3,413
    Herase said:
    Ungood said:

    Not like I care if you don't like loot-boxes, I don't like them either, but I will never comprehend how anyone could want the government to tell them how live, I guess some people are in fact that inept, and need to coddled and told how they must live their life. 

    Meh.. you still won't walk away ahead.

    The thing is, I think most of us don't want government involvement, but that's the only solution we have as the gaming industry can't be bothered or won't self contain the problem.

    People got pissed and they just sat back, gamers asked are you going to do anything? They were meet with silence or a few who said, "we're on the case" just for them to sit down, so business continued as usual.

    The out cries had an impact, but the problem with lootboxes is it only takes a handful of people to pay out the nose for companies to not want to give it up, people in the industry need to meet us half way.

    They're not a need, but a want. I'm fine with people spending money on whatever they like, but when companies start slowly trying to find ways manipulate people who have no interest into using them. Then there's a problem, example again the EA patent also look up "turning players into payers" 

    Again, do I wish for this to be handled by the government? No, but due to how far I can see companies like EA going with it and how games are being broken for the sake of it, I would rather something happen than nothing. For me, the positives out way the negatives.



    Lets start off:

    Every Company is out to make Money.  Expecting a game to be a charity and provide their product for free is foolish. These games cost sometimes in the millions to make, and they all have an upkeep cost to them.

    As such, a Game Company will do what they can to make money, and the only way that will happen is by making their players feel they need to spend it.

    Accept that as the Ultimate Truth, and there is nothing anyone will do to change this. Nothing.

    As far as Lootboxes go, they are used, because as you so clearly put, they are effective in getting people to spend money they otherwise would not spend.

    That is why they exist. They are effective at making money, just like P2W worked, just like paying to bypass massive grinds worked for a bit,. in the end, a game company will do what it has to do to make money and be profitable. That will always take the form of getting players to spend money they otherwise would not want to spend.

    Now see that is the problem. People are not spending enough money, they have ti, as lootboxes bring it out of them, but, they need to be cohered to spend it,  So, that is the problem from the get-go.


    As such, If you want change, you need to take initiative and spend money on the payment systems you want to see happen and make them profitable.

    Sitting down doing nothing, or trying to get something for free is not going to work.

    A Company will follow the cash, if you want them to do something other then loot boxes, you need to make those other things as profitable as lootboxes.

    As long as lootboxes are effective at getting players to spend money they otherwise would not spend, they will always be in the game.

    Even if they get labeled as gambling, they won't go away, it will become an operating expense to licence them, and they will demand some form of real ID to make an account, which, might not be a bad thing, as it might cut down on the Anonymous throw-away accounts, but right now, B2P seems to be doing a pretty good job of that, as if they sell online, they get the CC number right from the start.


  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 3,413
    Eldurian said:
    Some people need the leash around their neck. It's a comfort to them that they would be lost without. Thankfully I don't think it's something our politicians care about enough to address at the moment, and currently we're in a climate of lowering restrictions on vices. Legal marijuana is sweeping from state to state as it should, online gambling restrictions are being lifted, and realization the war on drugs has been a failure is growing.

    People like Slapshot aren't our future. They're our past.
    Again you confuse restrictions on adults and minors.  No matter how many times you repeat it, it will not change.  You continue to ignore plain statements that I don’t care what informed adults do.  

    If you think the future is allowing unrestricted gambling, drugs, alcohol to our children along with adult/child sex you are very mistaken.  And if you actually WANT such a future there is something wrong with you.  
    Umm.. no they are not mistaken. In fact that seems to be the way things are going, at least as far as children getting involved in vices, after all, today, Minors have CC, Cell Phones, and with laws that allow minors to buy contraceptives without their parents approval has also cut down on teen pregnancy. Truth is, we are learning.. once again.. that not trying to put Minors in a little bubble to keep them sanitized and safe, is in fact good for the development.

    So.. no.. asking and beseeching the government to rule and control our lives for "The sake of the Children" is in fact a dinosaur of the past, and one better left buried. More laws are coming up that give minors more freedoms them before, but the price of freedom is being responsible with what you do with it.
    Slapshot1188JamesGoblin
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,667
    Ungood said:
    Eldurian said:
    Some people need the leash around their neck. It's a comfort to them that they would be lost without. Thankfully I don't think it's something our politicians care about enough to address at the moment, and currently we're in a climate of lowering restrictions on vices. Legal marijuana is sweeping from state to state as it should, online gambling restrictions are being lifted, and realization the war on drugs has been a failure is growing.

    People like Slapshot aren't our future. They're our past.
    Again you confuse restrictions on adults and minors.  No matter how many times you repeat it, it will not change.  You continue to ignore plain statements that I don’t care what informed adults do.  

    If you think the future is allowing unrestricted gambling, drugs, alcohol to our children along with adult/child sex you are very mistaken.  And if you actually WANT such a future there is something wrong with you.  
    Umm.. no they are not mistaken. In fact that seems to be the way things are going, at least as far as children getting involved in vices, after all, today, Minors have CC, Cell Phones, and with laws that allow minors to buy contraceptives without their parents approval has also cut down on teen pregnancy. Truth is, we are learning.. once again.. that not trying to put Minors in a little bubble to keep them sanitized and safe, is in fact good for the development.

    So.. no.. asking and beseeching the government to rule and control our lives for "The sake of the Children" is in fact a dinosaur of the past, and one better left buried. More laws are coming up that give minors more freedoms them before, but the price of freedom is being responsible with what you do with it.
    I said: If you think the future is allowing unrestricted gambling, drugs, alcohol to our children along with adult/child sex you are very mistaken.  

    You said: Umm.. no they are not mistaken. In fact that seems to be the way things are going,(etc... and ) is in fact good for the development.

    I'm just gonna flat out say that is a fucked up view.  If you think allowing unrestricted gambling, drugs, alcohol for kids and allowing adult/child sex are "good for development" there is no basis for mutual discussion going forward.

    I find the thought repugnant. And the idea that someone would support that even more repugnant.  

    We are done with this discussion as I won't allow you the opportunity to push such a sick concept any more.

    But I will say I am glad it's out and able to be plainly seen by every reader to make their own judgement about your philosophy.
     

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • cheyanecheyane Member EpicPosts: 6,718
    This is how arguments like this become sanitized.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26352378



    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited May 2018
    Eldurian said:
    laserit said:
    Eldurian said:
    Nope.  Or I should say only partially correct.  But rather than just repeating everything I said that you refuse to believe I’ll just re-emphasize that: As soon as lootboxes become gambling this self-certification is no protection for a company.  It’s is exactly like asking someone entering a bar if they are legal and just taking their word.  That’s meaningless.

    As I said, Eldutians figures show 28% are minors.  Even if it’s a fraction of that... it means a company should know kids are using their service.  Self identification is not a valid way of restricting access.

    Its OK.  Change is coming.  As soon as lootboxes are acknowledged as gambling you will see dramatic changes.

    We can do better. We will do better.
    Again. That is 28% of all gamers of all games. Here is another stat:



    So:

    A. It is a pretty safe assumption that when excluding offline games, that you also exclude many younger players.

    B. 91% of parents are present when their kid is purchasing any game / 95% are monitoring the games they play. These stats likely are higher when it comes to online purchases which are most conveniently made with a credit or debit card.

    So even if you reject A, and B and assume the 95% of parents monitoring what their kids play wouldn't know if their kids had a loot box addiction

    28*.09= 2.52%

    So worst case scenario, 2.52% of online gamers are children who do not have adult supervision when making purchases. Again, this is highly unlikely, and likely a very inflated number... but it's 2.52%.

    Now of the 2.52% or less of online gamers who are children making unsupervised purchases. Care to wager what percentage of them would be able to spend a significant quantity of money on these purchases without alerting their parents to the fact a bunch of money is suddenly missing?

    Something tells me the at maximum 2.52% who are kids making unsupervised purchases and at maximum 1.4% who kids who's parents aren't monitoring what they play overwhelmingly fall into the high quantity of free to play gamers who don't pay into the games they play. Probably not even so much from responsibility as lack of resources.

    I'll let you in on a little secret.

    THESE DEVELOPERS ARE TARGETING PEOPLE WITH MONEY!!!

    That's not unsupervised kids. 

    @Eldurian ;

    Got a source for your jpeg?

    I find the "95% of parents pay attention to the content of the games their children play" dubious at best.

    I sincerely hope that, that kind of percentage of parents pay that amount of attention to their children's education but I highly doubt it.
    https://www.scribd.com/document/351277603/ESA-EF-2014#fullscreen&from_embed

    While I'm sure you guys will continue to attack any data I provide that disagrees with your biases, I would yet again challenge you, if you don't like my data, please provide your own data which supports your point of view.
    http://www.pewinternet.org/2008/09/16/part-1-4-parents-and-games/

    "Fully 63% of parents of 12- to 14-year-old teens say they always know what games their children are playing, compared with 48% of parents of 15- to 17-year-olds."

    EDIT- also: https://www.google.com/amp/s/kotaku.com/5901395/two-thirds-of-parents-admit-they-dont-bother-checking-video-game-age-ratings/amp

    Parents don't always know what their kids are playing, and don't always check the ESRB of the games they do know their kids are playing.
    laserit

    image
  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,161
    just wait for the other shoe to drop.  When the new addiction we have to protect people from is playing video games.  
    Eldurian
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited May 2018
    Ungood said:
    Herase said:
    Ungood said:

    Not like I care if you don't like loot-boxes, I don't like them either, but I will never comprehend how anyone could want the government to tell them how live, I guess some people are in fact that inept, and need to coddled and told how they must live their life. 

    Meh.. you still won't walk away ahead.

    The thing is, I think most of us don't want government involvement, but that's the only solution we have as the gaming industry can't be bothered or won't self contain the problem.

    People got pissed and they just sat back, gamers asked are you going to do anything? They were meet with silence or a few who said, "we're on the case" just for them to sit down, so business continued as usual.

    The out cries had an impact, but the problem with lootboxes is it only takes a handful of people to pay out the nose for companies to not want to give it up, people in the industry need to meet us half way.

    They're not a need, but a want. I'm fine with people spending money on whatever they like, but when companies start slowly trying to find ways manipulate people who have no interest into using them. Then there's a problem, example again the EA patent also look up "turning players into payers" 

    Again, do I wish for this to be handled by the government? No, but due to how far I can see companies like EA going with it and how games are being broken for the sake of it, I would rather something happen than nothing. For me, the positives out way the negatives.



    Lets start off:

    Every Company is out to make Money.  Expecting a game to be a charity and provide their product for free is foolish. These games cost sometimes in the millions to make, and they all have an upkeep cost to them.

    As such, a Game Company will do what they can to make money, and the only way that will happen is by making their players feel they need to spend it.

    Accept that as the Ultimate Truth, and there is nothing anyone will do to change this. Nothing.

    As far as Lootboxes go, they are used, because as you so clearly put, they are effective in getting people to spend money they otherwise would not spend.

    That is why they exist. They are effective at making money, just like P2W worked, just like paying to bypass massive grinds worked for a bit,. in the end, a game company will do what it has to do to make money and be profitable. That will always take the form of getting players to spend money they otherwise would not want to spend.

    Now see that is the problem. People are not spending enough money, they have ti, as lootboxes bring it out of them, but, they need to be cohered to spend it,  So, that is the problem from the get-go.


    As such, If you want change, you need to take initiative and spend money on the payment systems you want to see happen and make them profitable.

    Sitting down doing nothing, or trying to get something for free is not going to work.

    A Company will follow the cash, if you want them to do something other then loot boxes, you need to make those other things as profitable as lootboxes.

    As long as lootboxes are effective at getting players to spend money they otherwise would not spend, they will always be in the game.

    Even if they get labeled as gambling, they won't go away, it will become an operating expense to licence them, and they will demand some form of real ID to make an account, which, might not be a bad thing, as it might cut down on the Anonymous throw-away accounts, but right now, B2P seems to be doing a pretty good job of that, as if they sell online, they get the CC number right from the start.


    You completely ignored the reason lootboxes will continue to be used even if most gamers hate them: you don't need them to be popular.  You just need to entice the whales to spend.

    You're essentially telling folks "hey, if you want lootboxes to go away, take put 50 subs to the game to show them you want that more than lootboxes!" because one $15/sub will not make up what a whale is willing to spend in a month on lootboxes to get that one shiny.

    Maintaining a lootbox presence costs devs almost nothing.  This idea that purchasing a sub or buying items outright will "signal" they should stop using them holds no weight.
    Asm0deus

    image
  • OracleOfTheUnknownOracleOfTheUnknown Member CommonPosts: 15
    While they are gambling most aren't againts the law , because you can't make real money from them .
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 12,664
    Eldurian said:
    Nope.  Or I should say only partially correct.  But rather than just repeating everything I said that you refuse to believe I’ll just re-emphasize that: As soon as lootboxes become gambling this self-certification is no protection for a company.  It’s is exactly like asking someone entering a bar if they are legal and just taking their word.  That’s meaningless.

    As I said, Eldutians figures show 28% are minors.  Even if it’s a fraction of that... it means a company should know kids are using their service.  Self identification is not a valid way of restricting access.

    Its OK.  Change is coming.  As soon as lootboxes are acknowledged as gambling you will see dramatic changes.

    We can do better. We will do better.
    Again. That is 28% of all gamers of all games. Here is another stat:



    So:

    A. It is a pretty safe assumption that when excluding offline games, that you also exclude many younger players.

    B. 91% of parents are present when their kid is purchasing any game / 95% are monitoring the games they play. These stats likely are higher when it comes to online purchases which are most conveniently made with a credit or debit card.

    So even if you reject A, and B and assume the 95% of parents monitoring what their kids play wouldn't know if their kids had a loot box addiction

    28*.09= 2.52%

    So worst case scenario, 2.52% of online gamers are children who do not have adult supervision when making purchases. Again, this is highly unlikely, and likely a very inflated number... but it's 2.52%.

    Now of the 2.52% or less of online gamers who are children making unsupervised purchases. Care to wager what percentage of them would be able to spend a significant quantity of money on these purchases without alerting their parents to the fact a bunch of money is suddenly missing?

    Something tells me the at maximum 2.52% who are kids making unsupervised purchases and at maximum 1.4% who kids who's parents aren't monitoring what they play overwhelmingly fall into the high quantity of free to play gamers who don't pay into the games they play. Probably not even so much from responsibility as lack of resources.

    I'll let you in on a little secret.

    THESE DEVELOPERS ARE TARGETING PEOPLE WITH MONEY!!!

    That's not unsupervised kids. 

    Have a check on You tube and twitch to see all the kids with no one supervising them. Then come back and lets hear what you have to say.

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

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

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

This discussion has been closed.