One of the biggest on-going gaming controversies of the tail-end of the decade is, without a doubt, the existence of lootboxes. They've been banned in multiple European countries, and both the United States and United Kingdom have current legal investigations as to the legality and morality of lootboxes being implemented in video games. Since November of last year, the UK Gambling Commission has been looking into lootboxes, with a recent hearing regarding the topic taking place on July 22nd. During that hearing, the Gambling Commission stated that while they have "significant concerns" about children playing games that feature lootboxes as a major gameplay component, they can't consider lootboxes as gambling, in their current form.

There are other examples of things that look and feel like gambling that legislation tells you are not - [such as] some prize competitions but because they have free play or free entry they are not gambling... but they are a lot like a lottery,

The reasoning behind this is that in order to be classified as gambling, the resulting prizes gotten from within lootboxes must either be money itself, or have an inherent monetary value. In some games, accounts that have lootbox-gained items or skins can be bought and sold, and in other cases, players can pay real money to be traded valued items, however, due to these "black market" sites not being sanctioned or officially endorsed by the gaming companies themselves, publishers cannot be held liable.

While the UK appears to be conflicted on how to proceed when it comes to lootbox legality, the Netherlands and Berlin have both determined that they classify as gambling, according to their own laws. On the other hand, companies that actively profit from lootboxes, like EA, have said that lootboxes are mere surprise mechanics, and are harmless to consumers.

Source

 

[CallmeBerto]

They are not protecting people from their own stupidity, they intend to protect people from being preyed on. Lootboxes are not just a dumb thing that people can ignore if they don't want them. The games they are in are designed to prey on compulsive and addictive gamblers, the people who do not have the ability to say no. There are people out there who have literally wasted life savings on them. And it isn't correct to say "well, they wanted to do it" as there are many many compulsive gamblers out there who have specifically said "please stop putting this in these games. I play games to get away from the addiction, not be pulled back in." Most loot boxes are intentionally predatory and incredibly unethical in design, and they need to be restricted.

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

The problem is that you're assuming they make money by people like you or me "choosing" to buy them. That's unfortunately not the case. The problem is that they are intentionally designed to get whales. Go watch the talk Torulf Jernström made called "let's go whaling" and you'll realize how absolutely heinous lootboxes are. They are not designed to make you or me spend a buck. If they were, I wouldn't have a problem with them.

Your words - "they intend to protect people from being preyed on."

Unless they take the barrel of a 12 Gauge Pump-Action Shotgun to your temple and force you to buy them, then you have a choice. As a consumer you have ALL the power. Don't like something? Don't buy it it really is that simple. The reason that they are so popular is because people want them, weather that be from lack of self control or not is irrelevant.

 

[samcambolt270]

Your words - "they intend to protect people from being preyed on."

Unless they take the barrel of a 12 Gauge Pump-Action Shotgun to your temple and force you to buy them, then you have a choice. As a consumer you have ALL the power. Don't like something? Don't buy it it really is that simple. The reason that they are so popular is because people want them, weather that be from lack of self control or not is irrelevant.

WRONG. Addiction is addiction. Compulsion is compulsion. They are intentionally designing games to prey on those who cannot choose.Its totally fine to sell addictive drugs to addicts! They CHOSE to buy it so its fiiiiine!

 

[CallmeBerto]

WRONG. Addiction is addiction. Compulsion is compulsion. They are intentionally designing games to prey on those who cannot choose.Its totally fine to sell addictive drugs to addicts! They CHOSE to buy it so its fiiiiine!

You can be addicted to anything. Video games, exercise, porn etc. Should we ban everything? If someone is really addicted to gambling then they can go get the help they need. We have the internet it would take less then 5 mins to get help. I don't like the fact that the option to buy lootboxes is taken away from me because I MIGHT be an addict.

 

[samcambolt270]

You can be addicted to anything. Video games, exercise, porn etc. Should we ban everything? If someone is really addicted to gambling then they can go get the help they need. We have the internet it would take less then 5 mins to get help. I don't like the fact that the option to buy lootboxes is taken away from me because I MIGHT be an addict.

Yes. You can be addicted to anything. Its when people intentionally seek out those addicts to squeeze their life savings when it becomes something that needs to be stopped. And no, you cannot just "get help" in five minutes and its all ok. Those people have to intentionally avoid dozens upon dozens of predatory games that do not advertise themselves as having predatory mechanics. At absolute minimum, loot boxes should be required to be advertised on the box (or any other form of advertising) so when a compulsive gambler buys a game, they at least know the risk.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

The UK... wtf is wrong with you now days?

Many stupid politicians and policy decisions.

On that note, it is a bit surprising that the UK gambling commission isn't being too hard on lootboxes when they have such an iron fist on the rest of the industry.

 

[CallmeBerto]

Yes. You can be addicted to anything. Its when people intentionally seek out those addicts to squeeze their like savings when it becomes something that needs to be stopped. And no, you cannot just "get help" in five minutes and its all ok. Those people have to intentionally avoid dozens upon dozens of predatory games that do not advertise themselves as having predatory mechanics. At absolute minimum, loot boxes should be required to be advertised on the box (or any other form of advertising) so when a compulsive gambler buys a game, they at least know the risk.

I'm ok with a label "this game has lootboxes"

It doesn't need to be stopped again with that logical guess I better no go to the store since they sell alcohol, video games etc. Can't watch TV because they sell video games. I was using an example of the 5 min thing. My point really was that if you feel that you need help, it is out there.

 

[samcambolt270]

I'm ok with a label "this game has lootboxes"

It doesn't need to be stopped again with that logical guess I better no go to the store since they sell alcohol, video games etc. Can't watch TV because they sell video games. I was using an example of the 5 min thing. My point really was that if you feel that you need help, it is out there.

You realize everything you just said is a reality for many people, right? Addiction doesn't just "go away" when you "get help". And it doesn't help when your addiction seeks you out.

 

[Jayro]

Well that fucking sucks... Now game companies can keep shitting all over us as they please. :/

 

[Foxi4]

You realize everything you just said is a reality for many people, right? Addiction doesn't just "go away" when you "get help". And it doesn't help when your addiction seeks you out.

You are 100% responsible for your own actions. The government is not your mom or your dad, they should have zero interest in how people spend their own money. You're not being "preyed on", a product is advertised to you and you may or may not decide to purchase it. Society should not be built around the idea of protecting people with poor impulse control. If some people draw enjoyment from opening loot boxes and getting random items, more power to them, it's none of anyone's business.

 

[CallmeBerto]

You realize everything you just said is a reality for many people, right? Addiction doesn't just "go away" when you "get help". And it doesn't help when your addiction seeks you out.

So? No really so? The clutch of my argument is that the government or other people shouldn't care how you spend your money. If you are an addict I don't care, go get help and let me spend my money my way.

 

[samcambolt270]

So? No really so? The clutch of my argument is that the government or other people shouldn't care how you spend your money. If you are an addict I don't care, go get help and let me spend my money my way.

So, in other words, who gives a shit about people who are going to literally ruin their lives and that there are people out there who literally intentionally set it up so that they ruin their lives for profit. I'm glad to know you don't give a shit about other peoples suffering and would prefer they suffer so that you get to keep your minor gratification. Nice to know.

 

[CallmeBerto]

So, in other words, who gives a shit about people who are going to literally ruin their lives and that there are people out there who literally intentionally set it up so that they ruin their lives for profit. I'm glad to know you don't give a shit about other peoples suffering and would prefer they suffer so that you get to keep your minor gratification. Nice to know.

You act like there is no help for these people. I've already stated they can go get the help they need but their issues shouldn't interfere with my rights. Hell I even agreed there should be a label on the game boxes for lootboxes since people should know what they are buying.

 

[samcambolt270]

You act like there is no help for these people. I've already stated they can go get the help they need but their issues shouldn't interfere with my rights. Hell I even agreed there should be a label on the game boxes for lootboxes since people should know what they are buying.

No, I act like preying on people regardless of the existence of help is bullshit and needs to stop. Making an entire business model literally designed, not to simply make a buck, but to literally drain every single dollar from people who are mentally ill, is wrong. Go watch "lets go whaling" and you'll realize that this isn't just games that "could" effect addicts, they are designed to effect them.

 

[gamesquest1]

honestly the real solution is proper education in schools and proper parenting from peoples actual parents not granny government, as others have said there is millions of things people can become addicted to, you can only go so far in protecting before you have everyone else suffer for the poor impulses of a very few people, I cant help but feel like sometimes we are headed towards idiocracy, I'm sorry it's very sad that someone has such poor impulse control that they cant just say no to some random shite on a game, but that's life and no matter how much you try ban bad influences those kinds of people can and will find a way to wager on something even if it's with some random guy in a pub about what colour jacket the next guy to walk in will be wearing

again, not saying the companies who go out of their way to get people hooked arent arseholes, they certainly are, but it ultimately falls on the end users to tell them to bloody cut it out or you wont purchase their games

 

[samcambolt270]

honestly the real solution is proper education in schools and proper parenting from peoples actual parents not granny government, as others have said there is millions of things people can become addicted to, you can only go so far in protecting before you have everyone else suffer for the poor impulses of a very few people, I cant help but feel like sometimes we are headed towards idiocracy, I'm sorry it's very sad that someone has such poor impulse control that they cant just say no to some random shite on a game, but that's life and no matter how much you try ban bad influences those kinds of people can and will find a way to wager on something even if it's with some random guy in a pub about what colour jacket the next guy to walk in will be wearing

You, as many others, are not listening. We are not trying to prevent something that could potentially cause addicted people to have problems, we are trying to prevent people from intentionally targeting those effected individuals. I will suggest to you, like I do everyone else, to go watch "let's go whaling." Companies are not simply making something that addicts find appealing, they are intentionally making it as appealing to addicts as physically possible, and designing it to take literally ALL of their money. They are literally designed to ruin lives. It may not be your life, but that doesn't mean we should just stand by and let them be targeted.

 

[gamesquest1]

You, as many others, are not listening. We are not trying to prevent something that could potentially cause addicted people to have problems, we are trying to prevent people from intentionally targeting those effected individuals. I will suggest to you, like I do everyone else, to go watch "let's go whaling." Companies are not simply making something that addicts find appealing, they are intentionally making it as appealing to addicts as physically possible, and designing it to take literally ALL of their money. They are literally designed to ruin lives. It may not be your life, but that doesn't mean we should just stand by and let them be targeted.

I did add a little extra to my post before you replied, the point is what is your solution, where is the red line? I wouldn't be totally adverse to them having a cap on total money spent before they just give you the full set of whatever you were getting loot boxes for, and mandatory sharing of odds for winning each specific item so people can get a realistic idea of just how unlikely they are to win the specific item they need, but just a big sweeping "this is banned or for over 18's only" is just too far imo

PS I have already watched that video before and I'm sure if you dug into it you would find similar seminars for pretty much every industry focusing on what colours make you product more likely to be purchased, what ingredients are more likely to get people hooked to your food etc

 

[samcambolt270]

I'm sure if you dug into it you would find similar seminars for pretty much every industry focusing on what colours make you product more likely to be purchased, what ingredients are more likely to get people hooked to your food etc

yes, there are, but people don't spend their entire life savings on pringles. Making a repeat customer using psychology or making someone want your product over others using scummy tactics is one thing, but coke doesn't try to drain your bank account. You have a limit to how much you can buy in physical goods, but loot boxes are unlimited and designed to take all of their money and leave no drop left. Theres a reason it's called "whaling" even by the industry itself. They know the wake of suffering it leaves behind and don't care.

 

[VartioArtel]

What kind of bullshit argument is that? Of course there is 'inherent monetary value': YOU PAY FOR THE DAMN THINGS

First off: They mean "Intrinsic", whoever wrote this article isn't... well... economically savvy.

If someone sells you a cup of their saliva... is that saliva suddenly worth that much money?

No.

That's the perceived monetary value, not the 'intrinsic'. Intrinsic value is decided through a fundamental analysis. Which - well, there is none for lootboxes (There'd have to be for every single one as lootboxes contents are not static) or their contents. Same way as trying to get the intrinsic value of someone's spit, saliva, etc. There's just no way to get an intrinsic value at current, ergo there is none.

This is the loophole they're saying is being abused. They realize it's a problem, and they cannot persecute under current law. As much as I hate it, they are entirely right that this is within the current word and spirit of the law, and new laws need to be made for this.

 

[Taleweaver]

First off: They mean "Intrinsic", whoever wrote this article isn't... well... economically savvy.

If someone sells you a cup of their saliva... is that saliva suddenly worth that much money?

No.

That's the perceived monetary value, not the 'intrinsic'. Intrinsic value is decided through a fundamental analysis. Which - well, there is none for lootboxes (There'd have to be for every single one as lootboxes contents are not static) or their contents. Same way as trying to get the intrinsic value of someone's spit, saliva, etc. There's just no way to get an intrinsic value at current, ergo there is none.

This is the loophole they're saying is being abused. They realize it's a problem, and they cannot persecute under current law. As much as I hate it, they are entirely right that this is within the current word and spirit of the law, and new laws need to be made for this.

Interesting.

I can't say my English/economy is good enough to see the difference between inherent and intrinsic (it doesn't help that an online dictionary mentions them as synonyms either). But I would answer that saliva question with 'it depends'. More specific: items (IMHO virtual ones as well) first and foremost gain value if it is perceived as being valuable.

Meaning : if people are willing to pay for it, then yes it 'suddenly' has value.

I don't get why an analysis would be needed. Oh, it's needed if you want to have the SPECIFIC value of a box,I'll give you that. e. g. If it's needed to check whether it's worth the paying price. But for this case, I don't see the need. The things are sold for a value greater than zero, ergo the content is worth something. Yes, even if 99% of the content is consider worthless, that one last percent drags the average above the 'there is no value in the content', argument is moot.

 

[VartioArtel]

Interesting.

I can't say my English/economy is good enough to see the difference between inherent and intrinsic (it doesn't help that an online dictionary mentions them as synonyms either). But I would answer that saliva question with 'it depends'. More specific: items (IMHO virtual ones as well) first and foremost gain value if it is perceived as being valuable.

Meaning : if people are willing to pay for it, then yes it 'suddenly' has value.

I don't get why an analysis would be needed. Oh, it's needed if you want to have the SPECIFIC value of a box,I'll give you that. e. g. If it's needed to check whether it's worth the paying price. But for this case, I don't see the need. The things are sold for a value greater than zero, ergo the content is worth something. Yes, even if 99% of the content is consider worthless, that one last percent drags the average above the 'there is no value in the content', argument is moot.

There is no 'inherent' value to an object. While I didn't look too deep into it, "intrinsic" value is something gathered by a few things and is hard to categorize. And the reason that analysis is needed is the 'value' of things change over time. There's a reason we use 'gold standard'.

Data, like "Saliva" in my example given, cannot be compared to the gold standard. Because neither are made up of things that can be compared to the gold standard. If I remember there is an intrinsic value to say TCGs, for example, but their prices are flat and it's basically acknowledge as akin to always buying 'down' (Spending for something worth less) so it isn't gambling. This amongst other things is why there is not intrinsic value on Lootboxes or their items.

Edit: Let me re-emphasize: Inherent value does NOT exist. Even the gold standard arguably changes from time to time and hence its value isn't 'inherent' if I'm correct.*