# EA defends lootboxes by calling them ethical surprise mechanics, and comparing them to Kinder Eggs



## the_randomizer (Jun 21, 2019)

This is a joke right? Trying to subvert the issue and the fact governments are banning them. Oh, EA, you are some piece of work.


----------



## Chary (Jun 21, 2019)

I'm just amused at how EA tried to compare lootboxes to Kinder Eggs, by using something that people in Britain would recognize.

"How do you do, fellow kids Englishmen?"


----------



## Rabbid4240 (Jun 21, 2019)

Aren't kinder eggs illegal in the U.S?


----------



## Xzi (Jun 21, 2019)

Not surprising to see the two worst companies in gaming defending this garbage.  EA relies on profits from people getting addicted to the gambling mechanics in FIFA, and Epic relies on profits from kids stealing their parents' credit cards to get Fortnite cosmetics.


----------



## Hoppy (Jun 21, 2019)

SexySpai said:


> Aren't kinder eggs illegal in the U.S?


I see them all the time at my local grocery store, so I don't think so. Unless they're pulling off some sneaky tactic to sell em' there...


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jun 21, 2019)

EA is really killing my vibe for gaming, here. These publishers with their toxic attitudes toward consumers has to stop.


----------



## raxadian (Jun 21, 2019)

EA, the guys who bought games rights only to fill them with pay to win and are only good at sports games.  And whose sports games are so similar you better skip a few years between each ones so at least the newest one looks better. 

Also, how many Kinder Eggs can you buy with what one of EA loot boxes cost?


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 21, 2019)

I bet there are still EA shills who will defend them and their games ad infinitum. These are the people who enable them and think they can do no harm.


----------



## bowser (Jun 21, 2019)

*EA's Vice President of Legal Affairs, Kerry Hopkins, made a few comments in the defense of lootboxes in video games, saying, "We don't call them lootboxes. They are instead referred to as surprise mechanics." *

Oh, really? Dare you to make them free then.


----------



## Greymane (Jun 21, 2019)

SexySpai said:


> Aren't kinder eggs illegal in the U.S?


Not so much kinder eggs themselfs, but food that entirely envelops a non edible substance.
From what i remember reading of that law.


----------



## Sonic Angel Knight (Jun 21, 2019)

Fifa has lootboxes? A game, that is SOCCER (or FUTBAL for the european friends) have "SURPRISE MECHANICS"


----------



## gamemasteru03 (Jun 21, 2019)

SexySpai said:


> Aren't kinder eggs illegal in the U.S?


They are illegal because there is a toy inside the egg which you could choke on if you dont open the egg and take the toy out. There are kinder eggs in america which are worse versions which separate the toy from the choclate. The only reason I know this is because I go to the uk every summer and smuggle kinder eggs back to the us to eat .


----------



## Deleted User (Jun 21, 2019)

What about Fire Emblem: Heroes? You earn orbs through gameplay which you use to summon heroes. The hero you get and their star rating is random. You also have the option to buy more orbs using real money.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jun 21, 2019)

leafeon34 said:


> What about Fire Emblem: Heroes? You earn orbs through gameplay which you use to summon heroes. The hero you get and their star rating is random. You also have the option to buy more orbs using real money.


Loot boxes are loot boxes. No matter how you advertise em.


----------



## supergamer368 (Jun 21, 2019)

yeah and just like how you can choke on a kinder egg and die, your wallet can choke on the insane prices of these lootbo- ahem, _surprise mechanics_, and die.


----------



## Xzi (Jun 21, 2019)

Memoir said:


> Loot boxes are loot boxes. No matter how you advertise em.


Yep, and even though I'd love to see them banned outright, I'd also see it as a win if they were limited only to smartphone games.


----------



## wormdood (Jun 21, 2019)

I am glad they included Hatchimals in that quote because to directly compare a randomly selected digital item to food just because it includes a randomly selected item is stupid ... is the chocolate just trash then?


----------



## Treeko (Jun 21, 2019)

Honestly EA/Activision/Epic games need to stop with the bullshit, why is it that the majority of US based publishers have the most scummiest lootboxes in the industry, I am not against dlc but micro transactions are the worst thing to happen to gaming since mobile gaming.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 21, 2019)

EA, challenge nothing


----------



## sonicvssilver22 (Jun 21, 2019)

Sonic Angel Knight said:


> Fifa has lootboxes? A game, that is SOCCER (or FUTBAL for the european friends) have "SURPRISE MECHANICS"



In Fifa you can buy "card packs" (aka, loot boxes) that give you player cards for the Ultimate Team mode, which you then use to fill out your team's roster in that mode. As far as I can tell, it's basically a gacha-type game mode where the best players are locked as the rarest cards with no guarantee that you'll get them.


----------



## Sonic Angel Knight (Jun 21, 2019)

sonicvssilver22 said:


> In Fifa you can buy "card packs" (aka, loot boxes) that give you player cards for the Ultimate Team mode, which you then use to fill out your team's roster in that mode. As far as I can tell, it's basically a gacha-type game mode where the best players are locked as the rarest cards with no guarantee that you'll get them.


I never ever actually played or owned a fifa game, but i didn't think any of them would actually have lootbox material 

Also never heard of Kinder eggs.


----------



## sonicvssilver22 (Jun 21, 2019)

Sonic Angel Knight said:


> I never ever actually played or owned a fifa game, but i didn't think any of them would actually have lootbox material



Neither have I honestly, just knowledge I picked up working at GameStop a few years back. But EA will shove lootboxes into anything, just look at the Battlefront II debacle.


----------



## MiiJack (Jun 21, 2019)

Chary, you forgot to mention they also compared it to LOL Surprise.


----------



## DANTENDO (Jun 21, 2019)

Kerry Hopkins I'd rather change my name by deed poll to Dan the kinder egg than buy a fkin loot box


----------



## Willgheminass (Jun 21, 2019)

I would have loved to hand Hopkins a live feed footage of herself when she said this and see inside herself what her place was in all this. Oh wait, she can't.


----------



## anhminh (Jun 21, 2019)

They mean surprise as in "surprise motherfucker!"


----------



## DANTENDO (Jun 21, 2019)

Sonic Angel Knight said:


> Also never heard of Kinder eggs.


I'm surprised at tht


----------



## SG854 (Jun 21, 2019)

I don’t see how it’s the companies fault that kids steal their parents credit cards. 

That’s the parents responsibility to raise their kids. What the hell are the parents doing letting their kids fuck them over and do nothing about it.

There is Federal Law that protects from unauthorized purchases, The Truth Lending Act and they are only responsible for $50 in purchases made to their accounts.


There is protections beyond Federal Law in Zero Liability Policies many card companies have and they’ll let you off the hook for the entire amount.


Under Federal Protection FTC ordered Apple to pay $32.5 million to reimburse parents for unauthorized app purchases made by their kids.


Even with these protections it’s still not the companies fault that you have poorly raised kids and you do nothing to stop them, or teach them life lessons. 



But instead people are going to make excuses and say they got our kids addicted so it’s not out fault. You don’t understand psychology and addictions and the teenage mind. My kids wanted to be cool with all those Fortnite skins, he’s a victim. They are susceptible to addictions can’t you see! The Science let’s me off the hook. It’s never our fault, it’s that rap music and violent video games that makes them do bad. Had nothing to do with me. But let me rush to take all the credit when they get good grades and win competitions, that was all me and my parenting.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 21, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I don’t see how it’s the companies fault that kids steal their parents credit cards.
> 
> That’s the parents responsibility to raise their kids. What the hell are the parents doing letting their kids fuck them over and do nothing about it.
> 
> ...



Maybe companies should learn to include their games all the fucking content instead of milking it out with bullshit lootboxes.


----------



## Xzi (Jun 21, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I don’t see how it’s the companies fault that kids steal their parents credit cards.


It's not.  It is their fault for targeting children with gambling mechanics in an attempt to get them hooked young, however.


----------



## Localhorst86 (Jun 21, 2019)

Goddamnit, If EA and Epic were real persons, I'd punch them in the face.
Sorry, I meant "incentivice different behavioural reactions by applying a dexteral force towards their facial features via an ethical surprise mechanic"


----------



## jeffyTheHomebrewer (Jun 21, 2019)

SexySpai said:


> Aren't kinder eggs illegal in the U.S?


Not anymore, I'm pretty sure. everytime I'm near a walmart checkout there's always at least two.
(Also, iirc last month I saw a TV commercial for the peppa pig ones. Eugh!)


----------



## Localhorst86 (Jun 21, 2019)

jeffyTheHomebrewer said:


> Not anymore, I'm pretty sure. everytime I'm near a walmart checkout there's always at least two.
> (Also, iirc last month I saw a TV commercial for the peppa pig ones. Eugh!)


Are you sure that's Kinder eggs? AFAIK they are still banned in the US. However, "Kinder Joy" is not. Its also in the shape of an egg, but the egg is split into two plastic shells, one containing a toy, the other containing a chocolate-milk cream that you use a spoon to eat


----------



## Veho (Jun 21, 2019)

"No your honor, I didn't beat my wife. It was just a string of surprise high fives."


----------



## Localhorst86 (Jun 21, 2019)

Veho said:


> "No your honor, I didn't beat my wife. It was just a string of surprise high fives."


"with a chair?"


----------



## jeffyTheHomebrewer (Jun 21, 2019)

Localhorst86 said:


> Are you sure that's Kinder eggs? AFAIK they are still banned in the US. However, "Kinder Joy" is not. Its also in the shape of an egg, but the egg is split into two plastic shells, one containing a toy, the other containing a chocolate-milk cream that you use a spoon to eat


Oh, I thought they were the same thing.


----------



## DarkCoffe64 (Jun 21, 2019)

Scraping the bottom of the barrel


----------



## MarkDarkness (Jun 21, 2019)

Epic and EA can walk hand in hand for their dishonest scummy behavior...


----------



## Bimmel (Jun 21, 2019)

Sonic Angel Knight said:


> Also never heard of Kinder eggs.


You what? How can this be?

I remember shaking those eggs in public when I was little. Good times.


----------



## J-Machine (Jun 21, 2019)

kinder eggs are made differently in usa to make them circumvent the law now.


----------



## Localhorst86 (Jun 21, 2019)

Bimmel said:


> You what? How can this be?
> 
> I remember shaking those eggs in public when I was little. Good times.


Maybe they are legal where you are from (Gambia), but in the US the Kinder eggs we know are banned because the toy is fully encased in chocolate. That's why Ferrero introduced the Kinder joy. Here, toy and chocolate are separate. BTW, have you recently opened a Kinder egg? The toys have become really shitty. 

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



J-Machine said:


> kinder eggs are made differently in usa to make them circumvent the law now.


They're not "made differently", they are different products all together. Kinder Joy is available in markets alongside Kinder eggs where they are not illegal. The toys are different and they taste vastly different to each other. Kinder eggs are a hard, chocolate shell lined on the inside with milk cream. Kinder joy is a soft chocolate cream layered on top of milk cream.


----------



## Ritsuki (Jun 21, 2019)

Remember when you were a kid and stole your parents credit cards to buy your local store stash of kinder to get your rare drop of the golden car? Because I don't. And pretty sure that the drop rates of kinder toys are a tad bit higher, but ok.

But more seriously, the thing is that loot boxes work like gambling. Unlike kinder (or trading card games), each time you buy one, the probability of getting the other items doesn't increase, and you can't resell the items you don't need most of the time.


----------



## osaka35 (Jun 21, 2019)

Yeah, no. Kinder eggs all have equal value. The chocolate is #1, with the addition of a random thing of equal value to everything else, none of them particularly valuable.

Loot crated have variable value, and some have little to no inherent value (especially duplicates).

Most definitely not like kinder eggs.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jun 21, 2019)

Chary said:


> EA's Vice President of Legal Affairs, Kerry Hopkins, made a few comments in the defense of lootboxes in video games, saying, "We don't call them lootboxes. They are instead referred to as surprise mechanics."


Nice sugar coating. But ey...let's meet them half way. Rather than judging "downright make lootboxes illegal", I can live with a judgment that says "retire these specific surprise mechanics in order to make the overall game get along better with local laws protecting children."




Chary said:


> In attempts to further explain EA's stance on preventing lootboxes from being considered gambling, especially towards minors, Hopkins then said "People enjoy surprises, it's been a part of toys for years, like in Kinder Eggs or Hatchimals. [...] Lootboxes are actually quite ethical and quite fun, quite enjoyable to people".


Wow. Just...wow. This gives a pretty perverse meaning to their "challenge everything" slogan.

If EA would be the one distributing these chocolate eggs, you wouldn't find a surprise in it but a note saying "to purchase a random surprise, please pay us a small amount of extra cash".


----------



## SG854 (Jun 21, 2019)

Veho said:


> "No your honor, I didn't beat my wife. It was just a string of surprise high fives."


It’s not much of a surprise when you have to enter your credit card information and click purchase. It’s self inflicted beatings.

“No your honor I didn’t pay anyone out of my own choice to beat me senselessly because I find it kinky.”


----------



## Bladexdsl (Jun 21, 2019)

bwa hahahahah how fucking desperate and pathetic is EA!


----------



## SG854 (Jun 21, 2019)

the_randomizer said:


> Maybe companies should learn to include their games all the fucking content instead of milking it out with bullshit lootboxes.


I have never bought a single loot box in my life. I think they are stupid. They ain’t gunna milk anything out of me.


----------



## kuwanger (Jun 21, 2019)

"People enjoy surprises, it's been a part of food for years, like opium in your cough syrup or lottery tickets in your Crack Jack. [...] Lootboxes are actually quite ethical and quite fun, quite enjoyable to people".

And as others have said, the comparison to Kinder Joy which had to specifically be made to not be a choke hazard because of the risk to people...  Because people don't like the "surprise" of choking on a plastic egg.


----------



## smilodon (Jun 21, 2019)

This looks like a fake news to discredit EA. One of the worst PR move ever if it is true.


----------



## YamiZee (Jun 21, 2019)

A kinder egg is eaten because it tastes good, and the toys are a small inconsequential bonus. Maybe if the boxes always gave you 20k currency, and gave you one random item as a bonus, it would be fine. But when the point is that bonus, and the bonus is so varying in quality, it becomes gambling.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 21, 2019)

They're not wrong.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Jun 21, 2019)

osaka35 said:


> Yeah, no. Kinder eggs all have equal value. The chocolate is #1, with the addition of a random thing of equal value to everything else, none of them particularly valuable.
> 
> Loot crated have variable value, and some have little to no inherent value (especially duplicates).
> 
> Most definitely not like kinder eggs.





YamiZee said:


> A kinder egg is eaten because it tastes good, and the toys are a small inconsequential bonus. Maybe if the boxes always gave you 20k currency, and gave you one random item as a bonus, it would be fine. But when the point is that bonus, and the bonus is so varying in quality, it becomes gambling.


If people want to try and make justifications about lootboxes, this is the most damning point of all.  Where all these industries started was giving a bonus pack on the back of a known purchase.  When baseball cards were introduced into bubblegum, they almost certainly had an equal chance of holding any given card.  There were 52 cards, mimicking a deck of cards.  This slowly got twisted into trading cards with booster packs and randomness and then lootboxes.  In any case, with Kinder, toy meals at a restaurant, and bubblegum cards, you aren't selling the trinket inside, you are selling the product first and foremost.  Now, whether these should be re-examined should also be up for debate, but there is still a drastic contrast between them and lootboxes selling randomness as a primary good.

I for one, think this is all come due.  EA is going to be taking the rest of the industries down with them.  They've woken people up, and people are tired of it.  Now the people are telling their governments to deal with it.  Democracy truly in action.


----------



## gamesquest1 (Jun 21, 2019)

lol they are basically trying to throw other people under the bus to protect themselves, and in all fairness they aren't too far wrong, my daughter uses the same addictive "buy more to find the thing you actually want" mentality that loot boxes take advantage of with LOL dolls, i would say i was subjected to the same thing with pokemon cards too.....one more pack and i will get a charizard, one more pack and i get a charizard

i think this case does touch on a more fundamental issue with not knowing what your buying, especially with products aimed at children, things like L.O.L dolls where you are supposed to collect all these dolls, and off certain dolls are "ultra rare" meaning kids end up buying multiple of the same item in the hopes of finding the thing they want, while i have fond memories of opening packs of pokemon cards and see the appeal of them i can also see how i was compelled to buy lots of junk in the search for good cards, no different than loot boxes

as a parent i can now see how annoying it must have been for my father knowing he would be nagged and nagged for more cards for me to get my dopamine fix for getting a shiny, and imho even kids toys have gone overboard with this "surprise mechanic" in shops at this point there are more toys that are "lucky dips" than those that you can just say "ahhh my daughter wants the sea shell character i will buy that one for her"

i would say these things have their place, but i would also prefer it if they were forced to offer a one off purchase of specific items without the gamble mechanic, even if it was £15 for the charizrd card, it would be better than paying £70 for a ton of packs of pokemon cards and still never receiving one, at least with physical items the secondary market takes care of that and i can if i want to just buy the item from someone for a certain price


----------



## Dinomite (Jun 21, 2019)

They can't even come up with a passable excuse anymore. Kinder Eggs? Really? Pathetic statement from a pathetic company. Anyone who purchases lootboxes from EA is simply a fool.


----------



## xxNathanxx (Jun 21, 2019)

The phrasing "Belgium and the Netherlands having outlawed lootboxes" suggests that new laws were created to ban lootboxes, but in fact the relevant authorities were simply asked whether lootboxes (paid for with real money) could be considered to fall under the already existing laws of gambling, which is illegal to offer to anyone under 18. Technically they just confirmed that yes, lootboxes are indeed gambling under a different name.

Nintendo, EA, etc could also simply abide by the law by changing the ratings for all of their games with lootboxes to 18+, but then they would essentially be forced to explain to parents why on earth the cutesy Animal Crossing or the latest FIFA is only available for adults, and admit that they try to saddle impressionable kids with a gambling addiction in order to get as much money as possible from them. Much easier to pretend that those games don't exist.


----------



## CTR640 (Jun 21, 2019)

EA calls them "ethical surprise mechanics" I call them digital cancer. EA HAD to pull shit like to make the government hop in. Seriously, WTF is wrong with you, EA, really, WTF? This is the Greed to the next-level, they simply knows no limit when it comes to greed. EA = Electronic Assholes.


----------



## yoyoyo69 (Jun 21, 2019)

raxadian said:


> EA, the guys who bought games rights only to fill them with pay to win and are only good at sports games.  And whose sports games are so similar you better skip a few years between each ones so at least the newest one looks better.
> 
> *Also, how many Kinder Eggs can you buy with what one of EA loot boxes cost?*



Ans received a PHYSICAL item in return (several as mention)

EA and others want to charge many times the cost for pixels. They know fine well the implications thee loot boxes have on grown adults. They also know VERY well how damaging they are to children, they should really face criminal charges for negligence, intentionally targeting the vulnerable (I'm aware others may see this differently, but addiction is real) in the name on continued profit.

It's not like they don't already make unrealistic profits, for trash games. Their progress seems to have been toward, less work and quality and more cheap filler to bump costs.


----------



## Hielkenator2 (Jun 21, 2019)

Chary said:


> View attachment 170692​
> In the latest scrutiny over the biggest modern gaming controversy, lootboxes, the United Kingdom's Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport Committee has called both Epic Games and Electronic Arts into Parliament in order to discern whether lootboxes should be outlawed. With both companies publishing some of the largest video game franchises that include lootboxes as a major mechanic--Fortnite and FIFA, respectively--the Committee has begun an investigation into whether lootboxes are harming consumers. During the meeting, which was held on June 19th, Scotland's National Party MP claimed that studies and evidence showed that lootboxes have a close link to gambling. In response, EA's Vice President of Legal Affairs, Kerry Hopkins, made a few comments in the defense of lootboxes in video games, saying, "We don't call them lootboxes. They are instead referred to as surprise mechanics."
> 
> Hopkins continued her statement by stating the following, "We do agree with the UK gambling commission, the Australian gambling commission, and many other gambling commissions that they aren’t gambling, and we also disagree that there’s evidence that shows it leads to gambling. Instead, we think it’s like many other products that people enjoy in a healthy way, and like the element of surprise."
> ...



--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Just  ban any game involving lootboxes for yourself and your kids. It is what I do. Think of the future.
Games by themselves are addictive, kinder eggs are by definition NOT.


----------



## Panzerfaust (Jun 21, 2019)

Burn it with fire!!!1


----------



## SushiKing (Jun 21, 2019)

Sure, I enjoy opening Loot boxes... Not when they are $199 a box...


----------



## Stwert (Jun 21, 2019)

An ethical surprise mechanic?

Now I’m not the person to know this, never have and never will purchase loot boxes.

So perhaps someone else can answer this and I may change my mind, when you buy them, do they say, a tree has been planted in your name, a donation has been made to the Red Cross, and so on.

If that’s the case, I may actually purchase some of these ethical products.


----------



## Rabbid4240 (Jun 21, 2019)

Hoppy said:


> I see them all the time at my local grocery store, so I don't think so. Unless they're pulling off some sneaky tactic to sell em' there...





Greymane said:


> Not so much kinder eggs themselfs, but food that entirely envelops a non edible substance.
> From what i remember reading of that law.





gamemasteru03 said:


> They are illegal because there is a toy inside the egg which you could choke on if you dont open the egg and take the toy out. There are kinder eggs in america which are worse versions which separate the toy from the choclate. The only reason I know this is because I go to the uk every summer and smuggle kinder eggs back to the us to eat .


I just thought it was funny that EA was comparing loot boxes to something I thought was illegal.


----------



## fringle (Jun 21, 2019)

Oh boy!  If I buy one are they going to send me the chocolate coating in the mail?


----------



## Bladexdsl (Jun 21, 2019)

fuck off ea just fuck off. the day ea goes out of business will be a glorious day indeed!


----------



## SkittleDash (Jun 21, 2019)

...Did they... Just... You can't compare lootboxes with Kinder Eggs! I don't recall anytime where we were allowed to eat the case after taking the contents out. And it's not even fucking chocolate.


----------



## Owenge (Jun 21, 2019)

SexySpai said:


> Aren't kinder eggs illegal in the U.S?


Ironic


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Jun 21, 2019)

Hielkenator2 said:


> Just  ban any game involving lootboxes for yourself and your kids. It is what I do. Think of the future.
> Games by themselves are addictive, kinder eggs are by definition NOT.


Games by themselves don't have to be addictive.  That's misrepresenting.  Many games are designed to be addictive, but they are not by definition.  There are psychological tendencies you can exploit with certain mechanics, such as the classical skinner-box: Overwatch has infinite leveling and every level gives you a lootbox; League of Legends had a level 30 cap, but they removed it and added infinite leveling as well as crate/key unlocks for challenges; all to keep you playing far longer than you would normally enjoy playing the game.  

Games don't need to be addictive, they should however be compelling.  Civilization is a near perfect example of this exact trait of gaming.  It employs nearly no abusive game mechanics that are designed to keep you playing longer than you would normally be having fun, but "One more turn" syndrome is a thing many people experience.  Why? Because the game compels people to keep playing, to see how the game plays out, how their story wins or ends.  There is something to be said about how this abuses gestalt and cognative biases for completing tasks, however, it is far less of an issue and doesn't train the brain in the same way that a task-reward system like lootboxes or gambling do.  

You say that kinder eggs by definition aren't addictive, but I question that notion.  It works on the same fundamentals as classical conditioning and task-reward systems: open the egg, get the toy.  I propose an alternative: Disney Kinder Eggs: all your favorite princesses are behind the chocolate.  Now you need to buy 100 of them to get your child their Elsa.  Yes, kinder eggs are indeed addictive, they just don't have enough of a reward to develop the conditioning.


----------



## Sonic Angel Knight (Jun 21, 2019)

Bimmel said:


> You what? How can this be?
> 
> I remember shaking those eggs in public when I was little. Good times.


There is just certain places that don't get certain products. For example, I never saw the item on the right, I always knew the item on the left. That's just how it is for me at least. It's just like that sometimes.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jun 21, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I don’t see how it’s the companies fault that kids steal their parents credit cards.
> 
> That’s the parents responsibility to raise their kids. What the hell are the parents doing letting their kids fuck them over and do nothing about it.
> 
> ...


My daughter is addicted to the "black bag" toys. Always wanting one. Always asking for them. Yes, it is the parents responsibility to teach their children the difference of want and need. However, we can not 100% control their actions. No matter how hard we try. 

I was a good kid, outside of the fact that I still "borrowed" my moms debit card to purchase things. Protections be damned, you should have to verify you are the name on the card and that you are legally allowed to make this purchase. The unfortunate truth is that this is not feasible.

So, EA needs to take responsibility in their egregious actions. Also, it's not just children. It's an unethical practice for gamers of all kinds to be subjected to. Remember Battlefront 2? You either had to put an unrealistic amount of time into the game, or spend some coin to get what you want. It's underhanded, sleazy and downright wrong.

I agree that parents need a better grip on certain aspects, but I do point the blame at EA and the like as well.


----------



## l13f4k3 (Jun 21, 2019)

Here in my country, kinder eggs are banned  
No company can offer "gifts" packed with unhealthy food nor they can advertise their products ussing cartoon characters. as an example happy meal includes apple, sugar free juice, cherry tomato, and the most basic of burgers just to fill the law and being able to keep offering toys.


----------



## Dax_Fame (Jun 21, 2019)

Get em out of here! I'll be sure to add this to my checklist of reasons I want to move to the UK.

Seems the banning of loot boxes is picking up steam... this excites me. I look forward to this crap ending for good, everywhere.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Jun 21, 2019)

Hoppy said:


> I see them all the time at my local grocery store, so I don't think so. Unless they're pulling off some sneaky tactic to sell em' there...



The ones you're seeing are called Kinder Joy Eggs & do not have a toy inside. Kinder Surprise Eggs are illegal in the US.


----------



## Haloman800 (Jun 21, 2019)

F the government. If person A wants to sell a digital item & person B wants to buy it, they should have zero involvement. This is all about the government controlling what you can and can't do.


----------



## 71r3n (Jun 21, 2019)

Wow.
Seriously, i absolutely dislike EAs policis, but they said something realy true i never even bothered to think about.
Lootboxes are definitly gambling. But arent those Kindereggs also?

Just thinking back, standing infront of the Kinderegg tower, shaking one after another to be sure (as sure as a kid could be ) that i get what i wanted.
Now thinking back, and cant argue against the statement of it beeing the same as Kindereggs.

New Slogan:
EA KILLED MY CHILDHOOD!!!111


----------



## DANTENDO (Jun 21, 2019)

Haloman800 said:


> F the government. If person A wants to sell a digital item & person B wants to buy it, they should have zero involvement. This is all about the government controlling what you can and can't do.


So if you had a daughter and she spent most of her wages on lootboxes youd be fine with tht-as others been saying these digital items should be earnt in the fkin game and thts it-thers no other way anyone can defend lootboxes


----------



## KazoWAR (Jun 21, 2019)

ban happy meals


----------



## Jacklack3 (Jun 21, 2019)

People use the argument that it's not gambling since you can't lose.

So if I opened a casino and just made it so the minimum was 0.25 cents (meaning you can't lose) can I open up my casino to kids?


----------



## eriol33 (Jun 21, 2019)

I don't know one which one I hate more, EA or the gamers who made this business model "sustainable"


----------



## julianuf (Jun 21, 2019)

Disgusting. Shame on EA.



AbyssalMonkey said:


> Games by themselves don't have to be addictive.  That's misrepresenting.  Many games are designed to be addictive, but they are not by definition.  There are psychological tendencies you can exploit with certain mechanics, such as the classical skinner-box: Overwatch has infinite leveling and every level gives you a lootbox; League of Legends had a level 30 cap, but they removed it and added infinite leveling as well as crate/key unlocks for challenges; all to keep you playing far longer than you would normally enjoy playing the game.
> 
> Games don't need to be addictive, they should however be compelling.  Civilization is a near perfect example of this exact trait of gaming.  It employs nearly no abusive game mechanics that are designed to keep you playing longer than you would normally be having fun, but "One more turn" syndrome is a thing many people experience.  Why? Because the game compels people to keep playing, to see how the game plays out, how their story wins or ends.  There is something to be said about how this abuses gestalt and cognative biases for completing tasks, however, it is far less of an issue and doesn't train the brain in the same way that a task-reward system like lootboxes or gambling do.
> 
> You say that kinder eggs by definition aren't addictive, but I question that notion.  It works on the same fundamentals as classical conditioning and task-reward systems: open the egg, get the toy.  I propose an alternative: Disney Kinder Eggs: all your favorite princesses are behind the chocolate.  Now you need to buy 100 of them to get your child their Elsa.  Yes, kinder eggs are indeed addictive, they just don't have enough of a reward to develop the conditioning.



Agree 100%. I wish that we could do away with that kind of randomness at all levels, but I'll be happy with just seeing it gone from games.

At least with physical items, you are able to actually do stuff with them... Trade, give away, sell, or skip the randomness and buy one off eBay.


----------



## Dimensional (Jun 21, 2019)

Watched this in a Youtube blog, and the comments were a little hilarious though some were dark. "I didn't T-Bone you. It was a Surprise Reflex Examine, which you failed." "I didn't rob the bank. It was a Surprise Withdrawal." And the like.

What else functions where you pay for a Surprise Mechanic? Slot Machines. So EA is really just digging a bigger hole for themselves by unknowingly associating their loot boxes more with gambling now.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



julianuf said:


> Disgusting. Shame on EA.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The only RNG I want in my video games is the one that maliciously ruins my Speed Runs.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Jun 21, 2019)

ea are panicking now if they lose their precious loot boxes no one will buy their shitty games anymore. hope it happens too


----------



## Dimensional (Jun 21, 2019)

Bladexdsl said:


> ea are panicking now if they lose their precious loot boxes no one will buy their shitty games anymore. hope it happens too


I think it's more they will be forced to remove their currently only way of making a profit, forcing them to rethink their marketing strategy and actually make good games. Right now that's one of the reasons their games aren't doing so well. They don't care about actual game development, hence why we had failures like ME:A and Anthem. They would rather spend $100 to make a crappy game with loot boxes that could net them $100,000,000 in a month than spend $100,000 on a Triple A game that would net them $100 Billion in a year.

Their whole strategy is no longer about making great games people want to play, it's about using names to try and sell you a gold plated canvas nylon bag and then have you spend more to upgrade it and keep it upgraded. The biggest, most vocal opponents to this bill are the ones who no longer care about making something great, but are more akin to scam artists, taking your money and running off before you have a chance to realize you've been cheated. To them, the gaming industry is less about making something fun, and more about making money off of the player. It's sad it went this way, as I still remember back when gaming was fun and exciting, where you bought a game and it was actually fun.


----------



## Lumince (Jun 21, 2019)

Keep digging yourself a bigger hole EA. The more you say BS like this, the worse you look... No one wants to hear your BS excuse for having pay to win.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Jun 21, 2019)

Haloman800 said:


> F the government. If person A wants to sell a digital item & person B wants to buy it, they should have zero involvement. This is all about the government controlling what you can and can't do.



Seeing your signature, I think someone forgot to tell you it's long past 2016. I also find it pretty damn amusing that a person who is most likely a Republican is complaining about government control. I think you're on the wrong side of the fence my friend.


----------



## Dimensional (Jun 21, 2019)

D34DL1N3R said:


> Seeing your signature, I think someone forgot to tell you it's long past 2016. I also find it pretty damn amusing that a person who is most likely a Republican is complaining about government control. I think you're on the wrong side of the fence my friend.


I personally believe the government shouldn't have to consider a bill like this, but I'm not against it out right. If the industry is refusing to return to its root by making good quality games instead of Quick Cash Grabs strategies, then they will have to be regulated. The last time there was a threat of regulation, we got the ESA. But now even the ESA has gotten complacent with how broken the gaming industry has become, so it seems if the ESA won't wake up, they will become pointless and worthless.

So the ESA has 3 choices: Back down and get companies like EA to stop with their Malicious Money Making Market, or continue to fight the government until they either lose royally or they pay off enough politicians to win. It's hard to tell which will happen, because with how the strategy is, it seems they are less willing to pay off politicians than years past, since it means less money they have in the short run, which goes against their current business model of "Money Now"


----------



## Lumince (Jun 21, 2019)

Haloman800 said:


> F the government. If person A wants to sell a digital item & person B wants to buy it, they should have zero involvement. This is all about the government controlling what you can and can't do.


Id rather someone not be able to pay to literally advance in the game/win and basically cheat at a game. Pay to win is garbage and so is EA.


----------



## CTR640 (Jun 21, 2019)

I'll just leave it here:


----------



## Spider_Man (Jun 21, 2019)

kinder eggs are a childs treat, loot boxes are premium content that would normally be unlocked in a game, but your charged to get access to it.

ea do talk shit


----------



## Dimensional (Jun 21, 2019)

CTR640 said:


> I'll just leave it here:


Next Temp Tantrum should have an EA representative argue that players will only enjoy their poorly made games more if they spend more money purchasing ingame loot, like a stick with a string, bucket of air, Headlight Fluid, and Novelty Canvas Nylon bags.


----------



## SonowRaevius (Jun 21, 2019)

EA knows they would tank if their whales couldn't dump hundreds of thousands of dollars into the game because their product is actually shit.

But that's how almost all AAA/Older companies are getting these days: Why make a quality product when you can make a mediocre one and then nickel and dime your players for every little thing?

Either that or make pachinko machines I guess.


----------



## SG854 (Jun 21, 2019)

Memoir said:


> My daughter is addicted to the "black bag" toys. Always wanting one. Always asking for them. Yes, it is the parents responsibility to teach their children the difference of want and need. However, we can not 100% control their actions. No matter how hard we try.
> 
> I was a good kid, outside of the fact that I still "borrowed" my moms debit card to purchase things. Protections be damned, you should have to verify you are the name on the card and that you are legally allowed to make this purchase. The unfortunate truth is that this is not feasible.
> 
> ...


1st hand experience since I was a kid like we all were. If I stole money from my parents they would beat my ass. So I didn’t do it. Even money lying around on their dresser drawer.



There is gambling everywhere it’s unavoidable if your a kid. I bet you a million dollars I can jump over that. Super Mario 64 DS had poker. Pokémon cards is randomized. Video Games even without Loot Boxes has gambling aspects in them, and I don’t think people would want to walk the line of ban video games because kids might get addicted to them and it’ll affect their grades.


It’s everywhere it’s unavoidable. So it has to be the parents to set limitations on game playing time and money use. Yes kids find ways to disobey like I did, sneaking game playing when my parents wasn’t looking. But it was out of fear getting caught so I didn’t do it often.


You can see exactly all the purchase made on your card so you’ll know. And you can set password online so they can’t make anymore purchases on your card. Sony and Nintendo has a password prompt.


----------



## Calebcass1 (Jun 21, 2019)

Lol, that's actually a pretty creative spin, still b.s. but I applaud the effort


----------



## odeon (Jun 22, 2019)

The biggest issue with comparing digital loot boxes to physical surprises is that physical items have physical value. If you open 20 packs of Pokémon cards to find a single card, the rest can be sold and traded. Loot boxes are inherently worthless beyond the initial excitement of opening it, you can literally spend hundreds of dollars on absolutely nothing.


----------



## nightshadowon (Jun 22, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I don’t see how it’s the companies fault that kids steal their parents credit cards.
> 
> That’s the parents responsibility to raise their kids. What the hell are the parents doing letting their kids fuck them over and do nothing about it.
> 
> ...



That is true only for credit cards.  If your kid or you steal a debit card there is $0 protection, unless your bank adds it separately in the contract.

But yes, I agree there should be some parents responsibility.  I have tried to lockdown all the devices and accounts my kids have access too, but it is not 100% perfect.  I accidentally bought something through an Amazon tablet trying to test their "lockdown".  I had to chat with them to have it removed, and now use an empty gift card for my default payment method on Amazon (movies, apps, music, and all their stuff).

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

You know what I miss?  Joe the Camel*

*I don't know in other countries, but in US he was a cartoon camel that advertised cigarettes to ki** adults.


----------



## BlusterBong (Jun 22, 2019)

but seriously though, whats next? the money Holocaust of 2020


----------



## cots (Jun 22, 2019)

After this is outlawed possibly they will address games being sold in a buggy beta state - that's also a recent negative move by the video gaming industry.


----------



## Pluupy (Jun 22, 2019)

Kinder eggs were banned in the United States until they figured out a way for people not to choke on them a few years ago... 

I find it disgusting they're comparing them to Hatchimals and similar surprise bags, which are also a part of the problem with encouraging gambling in children and ALWAYS HAVE.


----------



## LucasM3 (Jun 22, 2019)

Hoppy said:


> I see them all the time at my local grocery store, so I don't think so. Unless they're pulling off some sneaky tactic to sell em' there...



They were banned until recently. It had something to do with not being allowed to mix food and non edibles inside them.


----------



## DarkKaine (Jun 22, 2019)

BlusterBong said:


> but seriously though, whats next? the money Holocaust of 2020


What's next is game streaming with the same microtransaction bullshit and then they'll compare themselves to netflix.


----------



## ChibiMofo (Jun 22, 2019)

Chary said:


> In response, EA's Vice President of Legal Affairs, Kerry Hopkins, made a few comments in the defense of lootboxes in video games, saying, "We don't call them lootboxes. They are instead referred to as surprise mechanics."



That's like when the NRA representative took issue with a House committee member calling an assault riffle an "assault riffle" and said that they preferred to refer to them as "revenue generators".


----------



## auntnadia (Jun 22, 2019)

I remember kinder eggs. They’re the massively overpriced chocolate that houses a crappy plastic toy. They had limited edition runs which would always have a rare one, so you’d need to keep purchasing the same thing over and over to complete the collection.


----------



## NekoMichi (Jun 22, 2019)

They're not "loot boxes", but "ethical surprise mechanics"?
Okay sure why not. I'm also not boycotting EA, I'm just taking an ethical surprise permanent break.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Jun 22, 2019)

hope they get permanently banned that'll teach ea for unleashing these cancerous fucking things into the gaming world!


----------



## Haloman800 (Jun 22, 2019)

DANTENDO said:


> So if you had a daughter and she spent most of her wages on lootboxes youd be fine with tht-as others been saying these digital items should be earnt in the fkin game and thts it-thers no other way anyone can defend lootboxes


If my daughter is an adult, that's her decision (and I've probably failed as a parent). Why you care what other consenting adults spend their money on?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Biff627 said:


> Id rather someone not be able to pay to literally advance in the game/win and basically cheat at a game. Pay to win is garbage and so is EA.


Then don't play "pay to win" games.


----------



## DarkKaine (Jun 22, 2019)

> Then don't play "pay to win" games.


That holds up until it infests a franchise you really like.


----------



## DANTENDO (Jun 22, 2019)

Haloman800 said:


> If my daughter is an adult, that's her decision (and I've probably failed as a parent). Why you care what other consenting adults spend their money on?


Because ther getting CONNED as I've said so many times when you purchase a game the amount you pay thts it finito you don't fkin pay for any weapons armour stat improvements etc etc they should be made available in game for achieving things


----------



## Haloman800 (Jun 22, 2019)

DANTENDO said:


> Because ther getting CONNED as I've said so many times when you purchase a game the amount you pay thts it finito you don't fkin pay for any weapons armour stat improvements etc etc they should be made available in game for achieving things


The government isn't your daddy who's supposed to protect you from bad purchase decisions.


----------



## Burorī (Jun 22, 2019)

Since Kinder Eggs are illegal in the U.S I guess it'll give them another reason to ban lootboxes


----------



## eyeliner (Jun 22, 2019)

Burorī said:


> Since Kinder Eggs are illegal in the U.S I guess it'll give them another reason to ban lootboxes


But are they in the UK? So that point means nothing, yo. American law means jack squat in other countries, you know.


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 22, 2019)

eyeliner said:


> But are they in the UK? So that point means nothing, yo. American law means jack squat in other countries, you know.



Obviously. No, they're not banned in the UK, the reason they're banned in the US is because of the potential of a choking hazard, they don't want a lawsuit. And you know the US, everyone is lawsuit happy


----------



## KuroTheBang (Jun 22, 2019)

Sadly due to lobbyism they wont get banned.

Here in EU Belgium started banning lootboxes but got flamed by other countrys why they did so. Yea, lobbyism.


----------



## raxadian (Jun 22, 2019)

They even added Lootbootes to their FIFA games, those games are always recicled content and code, they basically just upgrade the graphical engine every few years and change players names and looks, that's it. And it was an already paid game series, not free to play.


----------



## Axido (Jun 22, 2019)

Wow, can't wait to find actual chocolate within those costly piles of bytes. Or physical toys...

When will EA finally learn that people aren't _that_ gullible?


----------



## EmulateLife (Jun 22, 2019)

Good news everyone, I'm selling my own Ethical Surprise Mechanics!

https://gbatemp.net/threads/im-selling-ethical-surprise-mechanics.541527/


----------



## the_randomizer (Jun 22, 2019)

Axido said:


> Wow, can't wait to find actual chocolate within those costly piles of bytes. Or physical toys...
> 
> When will EA finally learn that people aren't _that_ gullible?



Well, the people who keep buying EA games, thinking them to be infallible, are the ones who are gullible.


----------



## Deleted_413010 (Jun 23, 2019)

You got an achievement!

Achievement: "Being dumber than Sony"


----------



## DANTENDO (Jun 23, 2019)

TheTechWiz25 said:


> You got an achievement!
> 
> Achievement: "Being dumber than Sony"


Sony though are nowhere near dumb


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 23, 2019)

It's almost as if consumers had the option not to play games that contain lootboxes or spend their money on microtransactions, making the entire procedure a consensual exchange of money for goods that the government shouldn't be involved in in any way. The market self-regulates, lootboxes exist because there is a market for them. If you're all so principled and don't want to see them implemented, here's a hint - stop spending money on them. What you guys really want is to have the cake and eat it - you want the content, but you want to get it for free, that's all there is to it. The pearl clutching going on around the issue is completely laughable. Lootboxes are an exact digital analogy of gacha capsules or blind bags, except when you get a duplicate item in-game, at least you get refunded with in-game credit - in real life you just get stuck with a figurine you didn't want. Some of you don't like lootboxes - I get it, but don't expect the rest of the world to adjust to your standard of how digital content distribution should work.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Jun 23, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> It's almost as if consumers had the option not to play games that contain lootboxes or spend their money on microtransactions, making the entire procedure a consensual exchange of money for goods that the government shouldn't be involved in in any way. The market self-regulates, lootboxes exist because there is a market for them. If you're all so principled and don't want to see them implemented, here's a hint - stop spending money on them. What you guys really want is to have the cake and eat it - you want the content, but you want to get it for free, that's all there is to it. The pearl clutching going on around the issue is completely laughable. Lootboxes are an exact digital analogy of gacha capsules or blind bags, except when you get a duplicate item in-game, at least you get refunded with in-game credit - in real life you just get stuck with a figurine you didn't want. Some of you don't like lootboxes - I get it, but don't expect the rest of the world to adjust to your standard of how digital content distribution should work.


It's almost as if consumer abuse should be regulated and any practice that actively abuses it's consumers is destined to be regulated.  Humans aren't perfect machines and are susceptible to abuse and governments are there to protect the people against them.

This has nothing to do with free market interference and everything do to with consumer protection.


----------



## xxNathanxx (Jun 23, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> The market self-regulates


Come on dude, the market for hard drugs also 'self-regulates'. Should they also be sold to children because "their parents should be the ones to tell them getting addicted isn't healthy" or "those kids should be more disciplined"?

Nature itself even 'self-regulates', might as well let big companies pollute rivers and air as much as they want because the planet itself fundamentally doesn't care.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 23, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> It's almost as if consumer abuse should be regulated and any practice that actively abuses it's consumers is destined to be regulated.  Humans aren't perfect machines and are susceptible to abuse and governments are there to protect the people against them.
> 
> This has nothing to do with free market interference and everything do to with consumer protection.


I already have a mom and dad, I don't need another one in the form of the government. The only instance where the government should step in is when goods and services are sold under false pretenses or there is a breach of contract to deal with, anything else is fair play. If you pay someone to punch you in the gut, you can't press charges for assault - you requested to be punched with full presence of mind, you got exactly what you wanted.


AbyssalMonkey said:


> It's almost as if consumer abuse should be regulated and any practice that actively abuses it's consumers is destined to be regulated.  Humans aren't perfect machines and are susceptible to abuse and governments are there to protect the people against them.
> 
> This has nothing to do with free market interference and everything do to with consumer protection.


Who gives the children money to purchase their lootboxes with? They don't make any income, someone pays for them - who? Is it grown adults, as in the legal guardians? Then it's their fault. This is an instance of governments protecting people from themselves - we have a word for that, it's called nannying. You expect the government to fulfil the duties of the parents instead of expecting the parents to actually do some parenting for a change.

The comparison to hard drugs is completely ridiculous, I won't even address it, it's so over the top that I don't have a ladder tall enough to reach. Just the health implications of drug use alone should tell you that this is a terrible analogy, and you're making fun of EA for comparing lootboxes to Kinder eggs, which is actually apt in the sense that you always get "a treat" (the chocolate is your digital credit) and you can find a random "surprise" inside (the toy, or a random item), except there are less disappointments involved.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Jun 23, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> The comparison to hard drugs is completely ridiculous, I won't even address it, it's so over the top that I don't have a ladder tall enough to reach. Just the health implications of drug use alone should tell you that this is a terrible analogy, and you're making fun of EA for comparing lootboxes to Kinder eggs, which is actually apt in the sense that you always get "a treat" (the chocolate is your digital credit) and you can find a random "surprise" inside (the toy, or a random item), except there are less disappointments involved.



Comparing digital goods to physical is just as asinine. It's not the same thing, maybe in a shallow definition of the principle. That's stretching it pretty damn far, as well. Especially when bringing kids into the matter. Kids don't steal credit cards to go to their local convenience store or Walmart to buy Kinder eggs/surprise toys. They DO however rack up an absurd amount of debt for a plethora of excuses. While we're on the subject, it also does build the basis for a gambling problem. THAT is the responsibility of the parents. Not the companies targeting kids with irrational logic. We're not buying plastic toys at $1 a pop. We're talking about wholly rigged digital chests that require (Yes, REQUIRE) you to dump some obscene amount to get what you're after in a game. 

EA and the rest should hold some accountability when it comes to minors. Drugs, liquor, tobacco. It's the same effect. Whether you agree or not is your problem.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 23, 2019)

Memoir said:


> Comparing digital goods to physical is just as asinine. It's not the same thing, maybe in a shallow definition of the principle. That's stretching it pretty damn far, as well. Especially when bringing kids into the matter. Kids don't steal credit cards to go to their local convenience store or Walmart to buy Kinder eggs/surprise toys. They DO however rack up an absurd amount of debt for a plethora of excuses. While we're on the subject, it also does build the basis for a gambling problem. THAT is the responsibility of the parents. Not the companies targeting kids with irrational logic. We're not buying plastic toys at $1 a pop. We're talking about wholly rigged digital chests that require (Yes, REQUIRE) you to dump some obscene amount to get what you're after in a game.
> 
> EA and the rest should hold some accountability when it comes to minors. Drugs, liquor, tobacco. It's the same effect. Whether you agree or not is your problem.


Clearly you've never met any otakus sinking their life's savings into blind bags hoping to nab that one rare figurine they're missing in their cabinet, or TGC addicts compulsively buying stacks of boosters to get a "perfect deck" when in reality they should be buying soap and deodorant. All jokes aside, that's just my opinion - you don't have to agree with me, it's just the way I see it. I'd rather if people focused more on the fact that parents aren't doing a whole lot of parenting and hand over their credit cards to their children instead of pointing fingers and video game companies. The companies make a product, and if the product sells, it's their obligation and sole raison d'etre to provide it to their customers.


----------



## xxNathanxx (Jun 23, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> Just the health implications of drug use alone should tell you that this is a terrible analogy


Are you trying to suggest:
- that gambling addictions are not real, or
- that they're not very addictive, or
- that children are not susceptible to addictions, or
- that gambling addictions are not as bad as drug addictions? 

What are you trying to say? Why would you completely disregard all scientific research that's been done on the subject all in order to make some hazy point about "da gubmint"?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Foxi4 said:


> I'd rather if people focused more on the fact that parents aren't doing a whole lot of parenting and hand over their credit cards to their children instead of pointing fingers and video game companies. The companies make a product, and if the product sells, it's their obligation and sole raison d'etre to provide it to their customers.


Good luck being a kid born to shitty parents, as according to your reasoning that kid's just doomed to be an addict, nothing to do about it. Poor companies, they're just trying to take advantage of the undeveloped brains of children, nothing bad about that, it's all their parents' fault if the children fall into the companies' traps.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 23, 2019)

xxNathanxx said:


> Are you trying to suggest:
> - that gambling addictions are not real, or
> - that they're not very addictive, or
> - that children are not susceptible to addictions, or
> ...


Lootboxes are not gambling, that's what I'm saying, and I've explored it in other threads so extensively that repeating myself for the n-th time seems redundant to me. Lootboxes are a product, you are given precisely what it says on the tin. Gambling differs from lootbox mechanics in the sense that there are no winning and losing conditions - every lootbox contains something, and if the item is a duplicate, you are refunded in currency which can be spent on other items. There is no way to "lose" at lootboxes, which by extension means that you're not gambling since there are no stakes. This is basic game theory stuff, that's the short version of it, that's how I see it. I'm sorry that some kids have shitty parents, but that's not EA's fault, it's not my fault, and I'm not planning to support adjusting the law that binds the many to cater to the few.

As for the analogy and why it's poor, besides their addictive nature, hard drugs have a negative impact on the physical well-being of the user. Taking hard drugs leads directly to physically harming the user, which includes the very real possibility of death, either from overdose, overuse over a long period of time or accidental death under influence. Lootboxes are not associated with that kind of danger, that's why your analogy doesn't work. The only thing a lootbox might harm is your wallet, and only due to your own lack of restraint.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Jun 23, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> I already have a mom and dad, I don't need another one in the form of the government. The only instance where the government should step in is when goods and services are sold under false pretenses or there is a breach of contract to deal with, anything else is fair play. If you pay someone to punch you in the gut, you can't press charges for assault - you requested to be punched with full presence of mind, you got exactly what you wanted.


Turning this conflict into a matter of free market is completely out of touch.  You are seemingly more out of touch than even EA is in this regard.  They used the word "ethical" for a reason.  They realize that this is a matter of consumer protection, and not a free market problem.  They did not use wordings such as "unfair", they used "ethical".  Pivoting the conversation isn't going to save them from the storm of complaints about the protections people are demanding the government to reconsider.



> "The only instance where the government should step in is when goods and services are sold under false pretenses".


You even stated it yourself.  This is exactly what people are having the government do.  People are demanding the government look into whether their products have been sold under the false pretense of "not gambling", knowing full well that gambling has psychological impacts coming with the trade.  You can claim that the people bought it so it's their own fault, but under false pretenses the blame is now shifted towards the producer, not the consumer.

You can tout free market regulation as much as you want, but a fundamental assumption that all marketable goods have unless otherwise stated is the ideal that they should be safe.  Cigarettes have warnings on them, medicine has warnings on them, even casinos have warnings on them.  Things have gone on long enough, and enough damage has been dealt and enough shit has been stirred that people are now looking at the industry, looking at gambling, and demand from the government an answer to whether or not they have been mislead about the safety of the products that they have been told by the companies were "safe".

Please stop blindly trying to divert the conversation away from the issue and do try and see where the current issue of conversation is truly.  The people may be using this as a stick to whack companies over the head with, but the way their complaints are being leveled does not make them any less valid.  To dismiss the complaint because of false pretenses is truly fallacious.


----------



## pasc (Jun 23, 2019)

Mhmmmm a nice fresh cup of capitalism. yum.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 23, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> Turning this conflict into a matter of free market is completely out of touch.  You are seemingly more out of touch than even EA is in this regard.  They used the word "ethical" for a reason.  They realize that this is a matter of consumer protection, and not a free market problem.  They did not use wordings such as "unfair", they used "ethical".  Pivoting the conversation isn't going to save them from the storm of complaints about the protections people are demanding the government to reconsider.
> 
> 
> You even stated it yourself.  This is exactly what people are having the government do.  People are demanding the government look into whether their products have been sold under the false pretense of "not gambling", knowing full well that gambling has psychological impacts coming with the trade.  You can claim that the people bought it so it's their own fault, but under false pretenses the blame is now shifted towards the producer, not the consumer.
> ...


I'm not diverting the conversation, I'm offering an opposing, contrasting opinion in a hugbox. Would you prefer if everyone just nodded? That doesn't seem like a fun conversation to me. From where I'm sitting, microtransactions and lootboxes enabled the development of games that wouldn't exist otherwise, including two of my favourites - Rainbow Six Siege from Ubisoft and Apex Legends from Respawn/EA. As a side note, I have never purchased a lootbox in my life because I have impulse control. I'm sorry if some people don't, but that's not my problem. Looking at the evidence, I don't think the government should restrict lootboxes in any way, self-regulation is perfectly sufficient here.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Jun 23, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> I'm not diverting the conversation, I'm offering an opposing, contrasting opinion in a hugbox. Would you prefer if everyone just nodded? That doesn't seem like a fun conversation to me. From where I'm sitting, microtransactions and lootboxes enabled the development of games that wouldn't exist otherwise, including two of my favourites - Rainbow Six Siege from Ubisoft and Apex Legends from Respawn/EA. As a side note, I have never purchased a lootbox in my life because I have impulse control. I'm sorry if some people don't, but that's not my problem. Looking at the evidence, I don't think the government should restrict lootboxes in any way, self-regulation is perfectly sufficient here.


Your insistence that the free market will self regulate itself suggests that you don't, in fact, understand how the current allegations against lootboxes are being levied.  If you did, you wouldn't have brought up self regulation in the first place as it is a term that applies only to the free market and not consumer protections.

Personally, I don't care how this plays out.  Like you, I've never bought one, nor will I ever let my children play a game with one.  Lootboxes are a tool game designers should be allowed to use, however, enough damage has been caused that they need to be re-examined in full diligence, which is what the government is doing.

Against my better judgement, I'm gonna put on my prophet hat and make a prediction:  if this fails, and lootboxes or similar mechanics go into games unchecked as they currently are, someone is going to take one of these companies to court.  Once this happens, it's not in the hands of politicians or companies anymore, it's in the hands of the court.  The court is an entirely different ball game and things will then have the very real possibility of changing.


----------



## xxNathanxx (Jun 23, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> only due to your own lack of restraint.


Well, there you have it, you don't consider gambling to be addictive, thereby completely disregarding all scientific research that proves that it is pretty damn addictive. There is nothing to discuss on what you see if you refuse to look because you've already made up your mind. Belief truly is the death of intelligence.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 23, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> Your insistence that the free market will self regulate itself suggests that you don't, in fact, understand how the current allegations against lootboxes are being levied.  If you did, you wouldn't have brought up self regulation in the first place as it is a term that applies only to the free market and not consumer protections.
> 
> Personally, I don't care how this plays out.  Like you, I've never bought one, nor will I ever let my children play a game with one.  Lootboxes are a tool game designers should be allowed to use, however, enough damage has been caused that they need to be re-examined in full diligence, which is what the government is doing.
> 
> Against my better judgement, I'm gonna put on my prophet hat and make a prediction:  if this fails, and lootboxes or similar mechanics go into games unchecked as they currently are, someone is going to take one of these companies to court.  Once this happens, it's not in the hands of politicians or companies anymore, it's in the hands of the court.  The court is an entirely different ball game and things will then have the very real possibility of changing.


I'm very familiar with the controversy and I've addressed all the criticism levied against lootboxes. I know how those "inquiries" look like and I put zero trust in the government making an accurate assessment regarding the "safety" of these mechanics. To be fair though, I put very little trust in the government in general, so it's not unusual for me. Opposing any form of limitations of the free market or restricting the access of consumers to goods comes pre-packaged with my ideology. I am instantaneously suspicious of any attempts to restrict people's ability to spend their own money, including in manners that are self-destructive.



xxNathanxx said:


> Well, there you have it, you don't consider gambling to be addictive, thereby completely disregarding all scientific research that proves that it is pretty damn addictive. There is nothing to discuss on what you see if you refuse to look because you've already made up your mind. Belief truly is the death of intelligence.


You should scroll back up and read the post again, I don't think you read it quite right. Try again. I never said anything of the sort.

Hint: I specifically said that lootbox mechanics do not constitute gambling and explained why. You would know that if you actually read what I wrote instead of skimming through the post.

*Edit:* Let's use our "intelligence" instead of "belief" and supplement what we know with a handy definition from Wikipedia:


> "Gambling is the wagering of money or something of value (referred to as "*the stakes*") on an event with an *uncertain outcome*, with the primary intent of winning *money or material goods*. Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: *consideration* (an amount wagered), *risk* (chance), and a *prize*."


So, as I said earlier, lootboxes do not qualify as there is no monetary or material gain to be had, there is no risk as every lootbox contains a reward (making the outcome certain - you get a random reward every time) and there is no wager. Only the "prize" itself is random (if you can even call it a "prize" since you're not "winning" at a game of chance) but it's always there. Lootboxes may be addictive in an out of themselves, but they do not fulfil the game theory model of gambling, not even close. Not every action with a random reward or outcome can be considered gambling - you need to have something to win and something to lose. If you can't lose, you're not taking a risk. If you can't lose, you also can't win - you de facto get the "prize", you're only uncertain of what it is. Don't accuse others of ignorance when you yourself ignored everything they've said. As it stands, a lootbox is exactly what it says on the tin - it's a digital "container" with a randomised item. Calling it "gambling" is muddying the waters. We can discuss whether it's an addictive and habit-forming activity, but that's a different discussion.


----------



## tranceology3 (Jun 23, 2019)

I mean where is the line crossed. Many toys, card games, collectibles are basically gambling when they have a "rare" surprise inside. How does it feel when you and buddy each buys a Magic the Gathering Booster pack for $4, to find out your pack is worth 10 cents in cards, and his is worth $30 cause he got an ultra rare card.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Jun 23, 2019)

Does this mean Fortnite's gonna die?


----------



## Tiger21820 (Jun 24, 2019)

I would consider getting ANY duplicate of ANYTHING from lootboxes as losing. Fire Emblem Heroes as an example: You pay 5 orbs to start a summoning session. You pay 4 for 4 more heroes each. The 5th one costs 3. If you get nothing but duplicates, you lost big time! You do not get refunded 25 orbs and there is practically no benefit to getting duplicate heroes. So with these things considered, this would be considered losing lootboxes! Oh, and you can purchase orbs too. Purchasing orbs DOES NOT increase your chances of getting a 5 star hero and DOES NOT REDUCE your chances of getting a duplicate! So you spend real money on at least 25 orbs. You do a full summoning session. ALL OF THEM ARE FREAKIN' DUPLICATES! YOU ARE NOT REFUNDED THOSE 25 ORBS!! YOU JUST WASTED YOUR MONEY!!! Is anyone going to defend this horribly broken "lootbox" system? Don't blame yourself for wasting your money, blame Nintendo for implementing this system so poorly!


----------



## skullskullskull (Jun 24, 2019)

Tiger21820 said:


> Don't blame yourself for wasting your money, blame Nintendo for implementing this system so poorly!



It's absolutely your fault for playing a crooked game in the first place. Don't play games with lootboxes if you don't like them.


----------



## medoli900 (Jun 24, 2019)

gamemasteru03 said:


> They are illegal because there is a toy inside the egg which you could choke on if you dont open the egg and take the toy out. There are kinder eggs in america which are worse versions which separate the toy from the choclate. The only reason I know this is because I go to the uk every summer and smuggle kinder eggs back to the us to eat .


You could also get them in Canada. Would probably cost you less in travel 

Comparing loot boxes to kinder surprise (or kinder eggs, as called in UK), is so dumb. You have the chocolate, the toy is a plus. In a lootbox, you don't even have the chocolate, you just have the "surprise".

(Now I want Chocoloot. Lootboxes sold inside chocolate... *Drool*)


----------



## gamemasteru03 (Jun 24, 2019)

medoli900 said:


> You could also get them in Canada. Would probably cost you less in travel
> 
> Comparing loot boxes to kinder surprise (or kinder eggs, as called in UK), is so dumb. You have the chocolate, the toy is a plus. In a lootbox, you don't even have the chocolate, you just have the "surprise".
> 
> (Now I want Chocoloot. Lootboxes sold inside chocolate... *Drool*)


I go to england rather than Canada since I have family to visit there.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Jun 24, 2019)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Does this mean Fortnite's gonna die?


we can only hope


----------



## DarkWork0 (Jun 24, 2019)

It's like saying "I didn't shoot him, I just thought he would like the surprise mechanic."


----------



## SG854 (Jun 24, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> I'm very familiar with the controversy and I've addressed all the criticism levied against lootboxes. I know how those "inquiries" look like and I put zero trust in the government making an accurate assessment regarding the "safety" of these mechanics. To be fair though, I put very little trust in the government in general, so it's not unusual for me. Opposing any form of limitations of the free market or restricting the access of consumers to goods comes pre-packaged with my ideology. I am instantaneously suspicious of any attempts to restrict people's ability to spend their own money, including in manners that are self-destructive.
> 
> You should scroll back up and read the post again, I don't think you read it quite right. Try again. I never said anything of the sort.
> 
> ...


If people really care about the kids being addicted then they would ban video games.

They are making Video Game addiction a mental disorder. Not everyone who gambles becomes addicted to gambling, not everyone who plays video games becomes addicted, but ban them to protect the people that do.

How many people you think really care enough about protecting kids that they would ban video games to stop them from having a chance of becoming addicted so that it won’t interfere with school and life.




People talk about the science, what about the psychology of game addiction. Spend 13 or more hrs a week your brain releases dopamine that triggers the reward part of the brain. Sparingly gambling and video games aren’t bad, but ban them so that kids won’t have a chance to over do it and become addicted, we need to protect them. Kids have high addictive personalities right? Or is it up to the parents to limit loot box purchases (made on their cards) and limit video game playing time.

How many people you think will be consistent and fight and protest to ban games? They care about the kids right? That’s what they’re screaming about all the time. No but not my games. I’m willing to sacrifice the kids so that you won’t take away my video games. Do they even care about protecting the kids? Or are they just using kids for themselves and their own wants, especially people that don’t have any to ban something that is totally avoidable by not purchasing.


----------



## Megadriver94 (Jun 24, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Not surprising to see the two worst companies in gaming defending this garbage.  EA relies on profits from people getting addicted to the gambling mechanics in FIFA, and Epic relies on profits from kids stealing their parents' credit cards to get Fortnite cosmetics.


I agree on EA. Not sure as to whether post-2007 Activision or current-year Epic games is the other worse one though...


----------



## Megadriver94 (Jun 24, 2019)

SG854 said:


> If people really care about the kids being addicted then they would ban video games.
> 
> They are making Video Game addiction a mental disorder. Not everyone who gambles becomes addicted to gambling, not everyone who plays video games becomes addicted, but ban them to protect the people that do.
> 
> ...


>Muh KIDS!
OH PLEASE,  SOD OFF with your boneheaded mentality of "ban video games and gambling because kids could get hooked" Kids indeed are quite impressionable more than both adults and teenagers, but why should their safety and security be a higher priority than free speech and expression? Lootboxes are indeed a predatory thing, You sound like either a bottom of the barrel Republican who wants to ban games that contain content that offends them and their personal beliefs, or a hard line Democrat who believes that national gun control laws will solve crime rates. WRONG! Criminals will still be able to murder and stick up people either via getting guns from under the table aka illegally from the black market, or using knifes and clubs instead. Plus, A number of Islamic countries, as well as states in both Pakistan and India have already banned games such as PUBG, their respective gov'ts thinking that it will solve what they see as being inherently bad.    SG854, its time for you to sit in the dummy corner. 
Also, The WHO is corrupt in a number of areas just as the EU is


----------



## SG854 (Jun 24, 2019)

Megadriver94 said:


> >Muh KIDS!
> OH PLEASE,  SOD OFF with your boneheaded mentality of "ban video games and gambling because kids could get hooked" Kids indeed are quite impressionable more than both adults and teenagers, but why should their safety and security be a higher priority than free speech and expression? Lootboxes are indeed a predatory thing, You sound like either a bottom of the barrel Republican who wants to ban games that contain content that offends them and their personal beliefs, or a hard line Democrat who believes that national gun control laws will solve crime rates. WRONG! Criminals will still be able to murder and stick up people either via getting guns from under the table aka illegally from the black market, or using knifes and clubs instead. Plus, A number of Islamic countries, as well as states in both Pakistan and India have already banned games such as PUBG, their respective gov'ts thinking that it will solve what they see as being inherently bad.    SG854, its time for you to sit in the dummy corner.
> Also, The WHO is corrupt in a number of areas just as the EU is


I was pointing out inconsistencies in people arguments. My post is not what I think what should happen to Loot Boxes. It’s saying either if you want to ban loot boxes then also fight to ban Video Games. Or don’t ban either and it should be up to the parents to limit these things and not government, and people should have freedom to purchase what they want.


My last paragraph is asking if they actually care about the kids or if they are just using them as part of the argument to try to ban loot boxes because they themselves don’t like loot boxes. Basically hiding behind muh kidz for their own wants, supposedly wanting to protect them from things that can be addicting, but at the same time not ban video games. So if they ban one thing and not the other do they actually want to protect them or are they just using Kids as a tool for their arguments against loot boxes.


----------



## Foxi4 (Jun 25, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I was pointing out inconsistencies in people arguments. My post is not what I think what should happen to Loot Boxes. It’s saying either if you want to ban loot boxes then also fight to ban Video Games. Or don’t ban either and it should be up to the parents to limit these things and not government, and people should have freedom to purchase what they want.
> 
> 
> My last paragraph is asking if they actually care about the kids or if they are just using them as part of the argument to try to ban loot boxes because they themselves don’t like loot boxes. Basically hiding behind muh kidz for their own wants, supposedly wanting to protect them from things that can be addicting, but at the same time not ban video games. So if they ban one thing and not the other do they actually want to protect them or are they just using Kids as a tool for their arguments against loot boxes.


As far as I'm concerned, it's an argument that's effectively based on greed. Nobody argues about the use of RNG loot in games, the random nature of the rewards is not the issue, it's been an industry staple since the likes of Diablo entered the scene. These crates cost money, so they're automatically "bad". The other aspect of it is the conflation of Pay2Win schemes and cosmetics, the former being something we should vehemently protest, the latter being something that's effectively inconsequential. I don't think I can treat supposed worries regarding addiction seriously when they come from people who see nothing wrong with clocking triple-digits in their favourite video games. I can understand the sentiment, we don't want other people to grab that RNG lever and pull at it all day long at their own peril, but I also don't think it's any of our business if that's what they want to do with their lives and money. Ultimately lootboxes are optional and the best way to protest them is to stop buying games that include them - that's a principled stance. Using the long arm of the government to restrict a mechanic someone doesn't like while still buying the game is hypocritical. If you truly don't want to see lootboxes in video games, stop buying them, and stop buying games that feature them, it's that simple. Video game publishers take note of that, and all the evidence I need is the Battlefront 2 fiasco which resulted in a temporary removal of in-game purchases altogether, followed shortly by a rework of the store to only include cosmetic upgrades. Complaining about sonething on the Internet is good, but voting with your wallet is better. You will never fully eliminate this sort of thing, but you can make it better without affecting smaller productions that rely on microtransactions in order to even exist, especially in the F2P/Mobile sector. Hitting the drum too hard can only result in publishers withdrawing from the affected markets, just like Nintendo did recently.


----------



## SG854 (Jun 25, 2019)

Foxi4 said:


> These crates cost money, so they're automatically "bad". The other aspect of it is the conflation of Pay2Win schemes and cosmetics, the former being something we should vehemently protest, the latter being something that's effectively inconsequential. I don't think I can treat supposed worries regarding addiction seriously when they come from people who see nothing wrong with clocking triple-digits in their favourite video games. I can understand the sentiment, we don't want other people to grab that RNG lever and pull at it all day long at their own peril, but I also don't think it's any of our business if that's what they want to do with their lives and money.


Then that would make it a money issue and not a I’m worried about kids getting addicted issue they keep huffing and puffing about. Because there’s no consistency.

Apparently letting kids engage in these things will increase chances of them becoming addicted. So ban it to protect them from addiction ever happening is the argument being presented right. Letting them scratch a lotto ticket, or playing poker even with cents instead of dollars, or even making bets on sports teams or whatever. We must protect them from ever being exposed should also apply to video games too right?

When the parents money is involved, aw hell no. They ain’t gunna waste my money. But when RNGing (RPG’s are filled with them), Randomized elements, brain dopamine, and possible addiction to video games (now considered a mental health disorder), screw the kids they ain’t gunna take away my video games. You can ban addictive loot boxes but not my addictive video games. The psychology right? Do you not understand addiction?


Makes it really seem like kids are just their tools for political manipulation for themselves to sway the argument in their favor. Will someone please think of the children! They did the same thing when they tried to ban violent video games. I just don’t feel the need to fight to change law personally because it’s just never been a problem for me since I never bought a single loot box ever. I think they are stupid and a waste of money.


----------



## Tiger21820 (Jun 26, 2019)

skullskullskull said:


> It's absolutely your fault for playing a crooked game in the first place. Don't play games with lootboxes if you don't like them.


I retract my last statement.


----------

