The ESRB now has a new rating label for games that feature loot boxes

9w2zJHU.png

Upcoming games will soon feature a label on the back of their boxes, thanks to a new measure that the ESRB has introduced. It's an "interactive element", or put simply, a note under the familiar E, E10+, T, and M label ratings that show whether or not a game has loot boxes that can be purchased with real-world money. This umbrella term of "in-game purchases (includes random items)" covers games with loot boxes that have randomized content drops, gacha games, video games that offer randomized card packs, and other similar elements. This is the second time the ESRB has added a label to game boxes to help better inform consumers, with the first instance being in 2018 where the original "in-game purchases" warning was added, for games that have any extras such as DLC for purchase.

Why Not Say “Loot Boxes”?
“Loot box” is a term that doesn’t encompass all types of randomized in-game purchase mechanics. We want to ensure that the new label covers all transactions with randomized elements. In-Game Purchases (Includes Random Items) accounts for loot boxes and all similar mechanics that offer random items in exchange for real-world currency or in-game currency that can be purchased with real money.

Moreover, we want to avoid confusing consumers who may not be familiar with what a loot box is. Recent research shows that less than a third of parents have both heard of a loot box and know what it is. “Loot box” is a widely understood phrase in and around the video game industry and among dedicated gamers, but most people less familiar with games do not understand it. While this new label is primarily in response to feedback from game enthusiasts, it is still essential that all consumers, especially parents, have a clear understanding of the rating information we provide.

:arrow: Source
 

Axido

Maker of TRASLApp
Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
1,295
Trophies
2
Age
32
XP
4,236
Country
Germany
why pay for a game that makes money off you, it should just be fee...

What an ignorant way to put it.

You see, there are some games that are considered "gifts that keep on giving". You pay for what you can expect and get even more later on without asking for it.

Then there's the abominations that this new label is made for. Those are charges that keep on charging. There's only a limited amount of financial value that should be charged for a certain feature or asset in a game. And most of those games clearly overshoot that value.

Elements in games don't have a steady real world price assigned to them, because they are digital and therefore not used up when bought. But if one game gives you a certain asset for free and the other one wants you to pay to spin a wheel to potentially get it, I really wish you could regulate those prices somehow.

That being said it's not like people aren't allowed to buy crap like this, but at least they should be informed that indeed it is crap, which is not the best solution to this problem, but at least it is one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted User

Essasetic

General Spectator
Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2018
Messages
1,573
Trophies
1
XP
3,304
Country
United Kingdom
I get what they're trying to do. But games that include lootboxes shouldn't be made available to children in the first place. Simple as that.

Also, couldn't companies like EA & Activision find a loophole around this (like patching them in after a month or so after release)?
 

jumpman17

He's a semi-aquatic egg laying mammal of action!
Former Staff
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
9,109
Trophies
2
Age
37
Website
Visit site
XP
3,484
Country
United States
Wouldn't most games have this label? Wouldn't season pass, virtual coins, costumes, dlc, etc, all count as in game purchases? If every game has the label, what's the point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarkCoffe64

Hells Malice

Are you a bully?
Member
GBAtemp Patron
Joined
Apr 9, 2009
Messages
7,122
Trophies
3
Age
32
XP
9,256
Country
Canada
Thank god the world is saved, the ESRB shoulders all of our hopes and dreams

rofl

Loot boxes are whatever. You either buy them or you don't. As long as they're cosmetic they don't remotely matter. Time for people to grow up and realize we're responsible for our own actions and don't need to be coddled, it's our fault not anyone elses if we fall for clear gambling. Or parents fault for giving their child money for a videogame.

Idiots crying waah it's predatory, welcome to literally all of marketing. That's the fucking point. Companies spend billions to know how your brain works better than you do.
The new strat companies are adopting are revolving storefronts with timed exclusive items at absurd prices because they know kids will beg and plead for those items cuz they're so rare and cool and won't ever come back. Same shit, different pile. Only this time, there's no technicality you can hit them on so it's even worse. It's just a storefront as far as the law cares.
 
Last edited by Hells Malice,

FAST6191

Techromancer
Editorial Team
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
36,798
Trophies
3
XP
28,284
Country
United Kingdom
Basically, ESRB did nothing.

If ESRB actually care, they should give AO rating to any games that have loot boxes which can be purchase directly or indirectly (ie. buy premium currency to buy loot boxes) with real money, or just ban loot boxes all together.
The ESRB is an industry board, not any kind of official or governmental board (which gets tricky in the US with that first amendment lark). They fall under the ESA which is just a big lobby group really for the big publishers and developers in games.
Such things are traditionally established so industries can ward off governmental censorship by creating their own censorship. Governments don't have to fund a new department, don't have to crack down on an industry but can also go back to their constituents (only old people vote and all that) saying the scary thing our bought and paid for news coverage says is scary have agreed to tone it down and let you know to "make an informed consumer decision".

They also get to define their own terms so they can handwave utter bollocks like the parents just don't understand the term and pretend they are doing something. It is functionally no different to the sugar industries protesting that they would be required to say how many spoons of sugar is in their product rather than grams or whatever that few people have a mental concept for.
 

xdarkx

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
737
Trophies
1
XP
2,715
Country
Canada
The ESRB is an industry board, not any kind of official or governmental board (which gets tricky in the US with that first amendment lark). They fall under the ESA which is just a big lobby group really for the big publishers and developers in games.
Such things are traditionally established so industries can ward off governmental censorship by creating their own censorship. Governments don't have to fund a new department, don't have to crack down on an industry but can also go back to their constituents (only old people vote and all that) saying the scary thing our bought and paid for news coverage says is scary have agreed to tone it down and let you know to "make an informed consumer decision".

They also get to define their own terms so they can handwave utter bollocks like the parents just don't understand the term and pretend they are doing something. It is functionally no different to the sugar industries protesting that they would be required to say how many spoons of sugar is in their product rather than grams or whatever that few people have a mental concept for.

I know all those. My point is the new label does nothing as it doesn't tell us much on what the label means. Not everyone is well informed or bother doing research in terms on in-game purchase such as loot boxes when they buying games. Maybe in an ideal world.

At least with AO rating, this would give buyers a reason to be wary of what they are getting into. And if they are interested into buying a game, they can do research before deciding if it's worth the purchase.

Of course, I would much rather not see loot boxes in any games outside of mobile. They can stay there.
 

raxadian

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2018
Messages
4,284
Trophies
1
Age
41
XP
4,452
Country
Argentina
[Upcoming games will soon feature a label on the back of their boxes]

But a lot of games don't come in boxes anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sono

shadow1w2

Still here.
Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2004
Messages
1,712
Trophies
2
XP
1,787
Country
United States
Vague and tiny.
No this kind of junk needs at least its own icon next to the age rating and should effect the age rating.
I mean its pretty clear they are still trying to hide it.
 

julianuf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
128
Trophies
0
Age
34
XP
1,787
Country
United States
...just a label under the game's rating?!
What the actual FUCK?!

Since when is gambling allowed for anything 17 and under?
Automatically, EVERY game that has this kind of shit should be labelled under either M (for Mature 17+) or straight out A (for Adults 18+) rating.

I find it completely fucking stupid that they will just add a stupid label, even for games rated E and E+, even T.
That's completely idiotic.
Agreed 100%. This is not enough, and doesn't actually accomplish anything.
 
D

Deleted User

Guest
...just a label under the game's rating?!
What the actual FUCK?!

Since when is gambling allowed for anything 17 and under?
Automatically, EVERY game that has this kind of shit should be labelled under either M (for Mature 17+) or straight out A (for Adults 18+) rating.

I find it completely fucking stupid that they will just add a stupid label, even for games rated E and E+, even T.
That's completely idiotic.
In my opinion, there should only be 3 ratings: T, M, and AO. People under 13 should not play video games at all-especially with the nature of recent so-called "games".
Disclaimer: I am 22 and am not a parent.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • ZeroT21 @ ZeroT21:
    it wasn't a question, it was fact
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    He said he had 3 different doctors apt this week, so he prob there. Something about gerbal extraction, I don't know.
    +1
  • ZeroT21 @ ZeroT21:
    bored, guess i'll spread more democracy
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    @K3Nv2 one more time you say such bs to @BakerMan and I'll smack you across the whole planet
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Make sure you smack my booty daddy
    +1
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    telling him that my partner is luke...does he look like someone with such big ne
    eds?
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    do you really think I could stand living with someone like luke?
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    I suppose luke has "special needs" but he's not my partner, did you just say that to piss me off again?
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    besides I had bigger worries today
  • LeoTCK @ LeoTCK:
    but what do you know about that, you won't believe me anyways
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    @BigOnYa can answer that
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    BigOnYa already left the chat
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Biginya
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Auto correct got me, I'm on my tablet, i need to turn that shit off
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    With other tabs open you perv
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    I'm actually in my shed, bout to cut 2-3 acres of grass, my back yard.
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    I use to have a guy for that thanks richard
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    I use my tablet to stream to a bluetooth speaker when in shed. iHeartRadio, FlyNation
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    While the victims are being buried
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Grave shovel
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Nuh those goto the edge of the property (maybe just on the other side of)
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    On the neighbors side
    +1
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Yup, by the weird smelly green bushy looking plants.
    K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2: https://www.the-sun.com/news/10907833/self-checkout-complaints-new-target-dollar-general-policies...