In a very sudden development on the hot-button topic of 'loot boxes' and gambling in video games, the Belgium Gaming Commission has completed their investigation on the matter and have concluded that in-game 'loot boxes' are a form of gambling, and will likely be banned in Belgium. This could entail hundreds of thousands of Euros in fines towards Electronic Arts and other offending companies, as well as a ban on sales of games with loot boxes until companies acquire a gambling license or remove the feature from their games. What's more, Belgium is seeking to classify loot boxes as gambling across the entirety of Europe. Currently, the Dutch Gambling Authority has launched a similar investigation.

The Belgium Gaming Commission's statement roughly read, "The mixing of money and addiction is gambling." Belgium's Minister of Justice also chimed in, saying, "Mixing gambling and gaming, especially at a young age, is dangerous for the mental health of the child."

Following quickly after, and in a highly unexpected move, Hawaii House of Representatives rep. Chris Lee (D) held a press conference where he announced that the State of Hawaii would be introducing legislation to curb the "predatory behavior" of companies like Electronic Arts. He explicitly mentions Battlefront 2, calling it a "Star Wars-themed online casino, designed to lure kids into spending money." Highlights from that press conference can be seen here:



Lee said that new legislation in the coming year will target predatory microtransaction practices and that Hawaii would be speaking with other states to introduce similar legislation elsewhere in the United States. Parents also took the podium at the press conference to express their own concerns about loot boxes and microtransactions. Lee later wrote a Reddit post explaining the announcement, which can be read in its entirety by following this link. In the post, he calls on US citizens to contact their state legislatures and demand action against predatory microtransaction practices in the gaming industry.

The speed at which regulatory bodies are reacting to the loot box controversy is astounding. These developments come in the wake of EA's botched microtransaction scheme in Star Wars: Battlefront II that led to a Reddit post by an EA representative becoming the most downvoted comment in the website's history, prompting Disney to intervene and garnering mainstream media coverage on popular news outlets like CNN. This spells trouble not just for EA, but for all major publishers, including Activision-Blizzard, Ubisoft, 2K Games, and any other company engaging in 'loot box' practices and predatory microtransaction schemes.

Oh, how the tides turn.

Source 1
Source 2
Source 3
Source 4

 

[The_Hulkster]

It's interesting how no one mentions Rocket League.
They've been doing the loot boxes for quite a while too, although the things that can be gained from it won't boost your in game skills.

Are they subject to the new law as well?

 

[sarkwalvein]

May EA rest in pepperoni.

 

[TobiasAmaranth]

I think there's more to it than the awards themselves, it's also how they are presented. That slot-machine-esqeue reward system exists as it does for a reason, and it's a 'gambling' thing within casinos for those same reasons. There's a subtle difference in psychology between the noisy clamor of a lootbox roll versus the simple flair of opening a treasure chest or killing a monster. Well, perhaps it's not all that subtle of a difference, yet people still seem to welcome it with open arms. *sighs*

 

[The Real Jdbye]

I don't really have anything against microtransactions at their core, but they're getting out of hand. It's good that someone's finally taking action against them.
It's when microtransactions become pay to win that I have a problem with them. If they're only for cosmetic items, or items you can still get through regular gameplay relatively easily, I don't mind them.

 

[hiroakihsu]

Finally...I hope, albeit unlikely, that this will be the beginning of the downfall of EA (although I think DICE will most likely become the scapegoat for this just like Visceral did)...I'd also like to see this cleanup spread to mobile gaming too someday.

 

[SkittleDash]

I say loot boxes in Free to Play games are justified since... Well, how else would they get their money. But in games that you've pretty much spent your payroll on? Fuck that. I'm behind these people to ban this bullshit. Right now, I want to watch EA burn.

 

[ThoD]

I say loot boxes in Free to Play games are justified since... Well, how else would they get their money. But in games that you've pretty much spent your payroll on? Fuck that. I'm behind these people to ban this bullshit. Right now, I want to watch EA burn.

Even in Free to Play games I find loot boxes bad. In those games, micro-transactions are better, as you are paying for what you want, no gambling or rigged drop-tables involved.

 

[kumikochan]

Belgium saves the day

 

[gamesquest1]

honestly I think this is yet another example of greedy bastards ruining what could have been fine if they weren't used aggressively.

unfortunately these greedy people will just move onto the next scheme and people who were using these things in a not so bad way (although in all fairness 99% of lootbox schemes are bad) will be left struggling to justify themselves and jump through 101 new rules, but I'm sure the likes of EA will happily find the next way to strip down games and demand more money for what should just be included without getting caught up in the new regulations

 

[xXDungeon_CrawlerXx]

 

[RedBlueGreen]

Doesn't that also mean that most freemium games where you can pay for character and item summons would also be "gambling" or would they get away with it by making you purchase in game currency?

While I hate lazy cash grabs like Loot Boxes, I don't think that they should be classified as gambling and restricted for moral reasons. Otherwise anything that you pay for that relies on chance should be classified as gambling as well, and that would just be stupid.

As much as I despise this mechanic in gaming, this is just GTA all over again. Now instead of killing hookers, video games are "teaching" kids to gamble. Rather than there being intervention and education from the parents they just flock to these lobbyists, because it's much more convenient to go out on a witch hunt against the boogeyman instead of admitting they failed at parenting. It's absolutely disgusting that people take no responsibility for this crap. How did little Jimmy acquire the means to pay for these loot boxes? Did Mommy maybe give him her credit card? That's the game's fault, though, right?

It'll always be like that because bad parents will always be focusing more on themselves than their children and don't want to be proactive in parenting. Instead of talking to their kids about the dangers of smoking and drugs they just want to blame the tobacco companies and media. Or blame TV because their kid does something stupid instead of disciplining their child and not letting them watch certain things. Or blaming society because you're teenager acts like a shit head. Now they're just blaming games for teaching kids to gamble instead of just not letting their kids play these games or buy these items. That's the problem with western society, certain things are made so taboo that lazy parents try to dump their responsibilities on other people.

Finally...I hope, albeit unlikely, that this will be the beginning of the downfall of EA (although I think DICE will most likely become the scapegoat for this just like Visceral did)...I'd also like to see this cleanup spread to mobile gaming too someday.

Then we won't have any good free to play mobile games because there won't be any money in it. There will just be the same shitty casual games that sell things that "help" you like boosts or are just add supported. Quality games will end up being pricey because they can't make their money back without things like luck based microtransactions in certain games (anything with summoning and equipment) or the microtransactions will be small things like a level boost that people probably won't buy.

People should just take responsibility for their own actions instead of making someone the boogeyman and starting some which hunt.

 

[SkittleDash]

Even in Free to Play games I find loot boxes bad. In those games, micro-transactions are better, as you are paying for what you want, no gambling or rigged drop-tables involved.

Yeah, I guess that's true. I only know a select few Free to Play games that use gambling features. But our main focus are games that we paid for. Getting drops in Overwatch is going to get very slow. Then again, their drops doesn't give an advantage to the player.

 

[SnAQ]

Great news!

Sent from my F8331 via Tapatalk

 

[FAST6191]

I say loot boxes in Free to Play games are justified since... Well, how else would they get their money. But in games that you've pretty much spent your payroll on? Fuck that. I'm behind these people to ban this bullshit. Right now, I want to watch EA burn.

I think there needs to be a clarification on the types of such things available as there is kind of a 4 way thing.

1) Cosmetic and alternative play styles, maybe even exclusive play styles. Cosmetic is obvious. Alternative play is things like if damage per second is king someone that dropped some cash on your game maybe gets one with the same dps but faster than another but lower damage, or maybe it is truly new and allows you to play as a medic as the gun heals people where that is not an option for the basic game. Balance for this sort of thing can be hard, and that is before you consider the somewhat esoteric stuff (if I realise my opponents are a bunch of cheap bastards I know they won't have a healer and I can reduce the number of things I need to consider/guard against).
2) Pay to win. You pay, you get better stuff than is available (or reasonably available -- 300 hours or $3 for this gun sort of thing). This can also include being able to buy in game resources which send you over the top. Where the old style coin op insert to continue/pay for extra lives thing falls is tricky, especially for a single player game/only leaderboard game, but it is more this than not. Equally pay to finish the game/access final areas (various Korean mmos were noted for this), join these sub areas (I saw that on some minecraft servers once) and similar such things can also be tricky depending upon what is walled off and how (if you have a happy hour/weekend raid that all/first few hundred can join or mid week paid then that could work from where I sit).
3) No transfer. You get what you will for that account. Items might reset at the end of a play session, maybe a period if all levels are reset every few months, or be able to be lent for a round or something.
4) Item transfer available. You can trade it with others on a permanent basis and thus facilitate transactions.

Said item transfer is the main thing that gets this anywhere close to justifiably being called gambling. You transfer it to a third party bot service and then can wager it, sell it or similar.

If someone wants to spunk $1000 on skins for their character then more fool them. If for whatever reason it is really getting to be a problem (right now gambling discussion in the UK is about various machines and limiting the max bet and amount per hour) I can see a path to limiting it a bit.
At the same time I don't have a problem with mixed monetisation strategies, though I will certain judge your game accordingly if you do try layering such things on top of your full price game and encourage others to do the same.
Actually to expand on the bracketed thing I was playing battlefield 4 the other week; for levelling, using certain weapons enough to level them and so forth you get battle packs which contain skins for weapons and characters and weapon mods, said mods maybe not obtainable by any other means than the packs. You could buy said packs if you wanted, and there was also an option to unlock everything (including weapons) by paying. The timing was such that a session or two could see you unlock things, and maybe with new weapons keep it somewhat fresh (I unlocked a semi auto sniper rifle which was like a more powerful dmr but could also use real scopes, accuracy was not great and damage was less than a big boy sniper rifle but allowed me to play in a somewhat different way), and the only way someone else could use my weapons were if they killed me/found my corpse and took it.
Back to the in game resources there are ways to blur the lines a bit -- I once played a web browser based medieval city building thing (not quite a civilisation clone but you would not be far off). It had daily logins to get a certain type of resource (which was used for boosts like quick build, temporary increase food supply...), but you could also pay for it. They also did monthly contests for people to do in game challenges (find this thing we hid, do a tour of this area, surprise invasion by hostile creatures so please help wipe them out...) to maybe get some resources for either their guild or just them.

Personally you will never catch me paying for anything like this, indeed any game I can't reasonably play because of such things I would consider broken at its core, but if it is a model which some want to try then so it goes, and people do seem to like paying for and otherwise enjoying cosmetic things of limited use so eh.

 

[RedBlueGreen]

I guarantee a bunch of the people taking a moral stance against gambling have played poker (and made bets) or buy lottery tickets.

 

[kumikochan]

I guarantee a bunch of the people taking a moral stance against gambling have played poker (and made bets) or buy lottery tickets.

People are not taking a stance against gambling but gambling in a triple A game. Big difference

 

[sarkwalvein]

I guarantee a bunch of the people taking a moral stance against gambling have played poker (and made bets) or buy lottery tickets.

It's not so much about a moral stand, more about that if it is gambling you should specify it is gambling, hold the corresponding licence, pay the corresponding taxes, make your products/services unavailable/restricted for people under allowed gambling age.

PS: So yes, if it is considered gambling in Europe it will mean any game with lootboxes must be rated at least PEGI 18 (equivalent to ESRB AO), the users buying loot boxes must be above 18/21, the corresponding companies should advertise it as gambling, they should pay a lot more taxes (up to 90% tax), and acquire a licence.

 

[linuxares]

It's interesting how no one mentions Rocket League.
They've been doing the loot boxes for quite a while too, although the things that can be gained from it won't boost your in game skills.

Are they subject to the new law as well?

I got plenty of times but people for some reason for gives this game a pass like it's the next coming of Jesus. They fucked up once they locked the cars. Before it was just cosmetic.

 

[Subtle Demise]

Nintendo will now get a medal for not engaging in this, with a long speech by some high ranking politician, Secretary of Treasury or even Trump. I'm just making stuff up.

Fire Emblem Heroes has loot boxes though lol

 

[wolfmankurd]

Holy fuck, as much as I hate legislation of this nature. It is definitely needed. EA isn't even the worst.