While heated debates over the lawfulness of pay-to-win microtransactions and lootboxes continue, a United States Senator has taken the first step to introduce his bill to the Senate. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) hopes to make changes to the current landscape of gaming by regulating certain microtransactions and sales of lootboxes in video games. The bill, which has two supporters--Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)--intends to outlaw physical and digital games that are both targeted to minors and allow the use of elements that could be considered similar to gambling.

In regards to his proposed law, which is titled The Protecting Children from Abusive Games Act, Hawley commented the following:

Only the addiction economy could produce a business model that relies on placing a casino in the hands of every child in America with the goal of getting them desperately hooked. I’m proud to introduce this landmark, bipartisan legislation to end these exploitative practices.

The full document, which is available for the public to read, clearly defines what is and isn't a predatory lootbox; anything cosmetic is entirely fine, but if the contents within a lootbox contain advantages for a player that would put them ahead of those who do not pay extra, then they are considered unlawful. Additionally, paying money for "cheats" or the ability to not have to wait for things to unlock would also be illegal. Should a publisher make use of such practices, they would be fined, as well as the online storefront. So, if EA theoretically included a pay-to-win microtransaction for a console game on Xbox One and PlayStation 4, Sony, Microsoft, and Electronic Arts would be held liable. Or, if Ubisoft let players buy items that would let them skip segments of a game, and it was on PC, then both Steam/Epic and Ubisoft would be charged; the latter for adding it, and the former for allowing it to be sold. One-time purchase DLC that offers extra story, levels, or non-competitive items would be unaffected, like cosmetics.

This bill faces political opposition, and is a long way from being anywhere close to approved, but it could be the first step for the United States government to ban titles with microtransactions, which could result in a similar outcome like with what happened in Belgium. The next process for The Protecting Children from Abusive Games Act would be for it to go before a committee, where it can then be debated upon by other senators.

Source

 

[Kigiru]

I'm not a big fan of lootboxes myself and i would be happy if they dissapear but the only argument against them is "BUT THINK ABOUT CHILDREN!" then... i don't want this kind of anti-lootboxes law because it can be used as predecessor to censorship of basicaly everything, and censorship is any form and shape is way bigger threat than the most expensive and cancerous lootboxes.
It's parents' goddamn job and duty to keep their children safe and teach them basics of how world works, not gaming companies or any other group of people. This law in a shape and form that is presented right now simply cannot exist because it can be abused as gateway for way bigger, more idiotic regulations.

 

[SG854]

I'm not a big fan of lootboxes myself and i would be happy if they dissapear but the only argument against them is "BUT THINK ABOUT CHILDREN!" then... i don't want this kind of anti-lootboxes law because it can be used as predecessor to censorship of basicaly everything, and censorship is any form and shape is way bigger threat than the most expensive and cancerous lootboxes.
It's parents' goddamn job and duty to keep their children safe and teach them basics of how world works, not gaming companies or any other group of people. This law in a shape and form that is presented right now simply cannot exist because it can be abused as gateway for way bigger, more idiotic regulations.

They always hide behind the Children. It’s emotional manipulation.

I blame the people for supporting loot boxes. Don’t support it and it’ll go away. This legislation is because people have no self control, so lets regulate businesses for our failure, for supporting something we complain about. In reality how many people are addicted and wasting hundreds, to what percentage of the population. It’s a minority. The majority who are not addicted are also supporting this.

 

[VartioArtel]

They always hide behind the Children. It’s emotional manipulation.

I blame the people for supporting loot boxes. Don’t support it and it’ll go away. This legislation is because people have no self control.

You... don't get how gambling works do you? How it ropes you in? How it manipulates your needs, your desires?

 

[Jayro]

I hope it passes, this kind of crap should be illegal. Micro-transactions can fuck right off with loot boxes too.

 

[SG854]

You... don't get how gambling works do you? How it ropes you in? How it manipulates your needs, your desires?

A small percent of the population is addicted to gambling. Companies can’t do much on a small percentage of the population.

This is the fault of the majority that isn’t addicted but continue to buy lootboxes. It all adds up even if someone buy’s it sometimes.

 

[AbyssalMonkey]

They always hide behind the Children. It’s emotional manipulation.

I blame the people for supporting loot boxes. Don’t support it and it’ll go away. This legislation is because people have no self control, so lets regulate businesses for our failure, for supporting something we complain about. In reality how many people are addicted and wasting hundreds, to what percentage of the population. It’s a minority. The majority who are not addicted are also supporting this.

You know, I've never gotten this argument. "This legislation is because people have no self control, so lets regulate businesses for our failure, for supporting something we complain about."

This is literally what democracies, and even autocracies, do. Quite literally why they exist. We regulate gambling, we regulate sex, we regulate murder, we regulate theft, we regulate medicine, we regulate car emissions, we regulate monopolies, we regulate insurance, etc.

We regulate everything.

To blame the people for supporting this is pointless sophistry. If enough people don't want something, and traditional methods of achieving it do not work, we involve the government to intervene on our behalf. This is how government works. This is how society evolves.

This instance of legislation is nothing new. I could draw on how this has parallels to unionization, anti-trust laws, and even the progression of LGBT in the past two decades. All of these have been progressed by sidelined methods and not direct petitioning.

 

[DANTENDO]

Should make a fkin bill called bootbox meaning booted out forever

 

[SG854]

You know, I've never gotten this argument. "This legislation is because people have no self control, so lets regulate businesses for our failure, for supporting something we complain about."

This is literally what democracies do. Quite literally why they exist. We regulate gambling, we regulate sex, we regulate murder, we regulate theft, we regulate medicine, we regulate car emissions, we regulate monopolies, we regulate insurance, etc.

We regulate everything.

To blame the people for supporting this is pointless sophistry. If enough people don't want something, and traditional methods of achieving it do not work, we involve the government to intervene on our behalf. This is how government works. This is how society evolves.

This instance of legislation is nothing new. I could draw on how this has parallels to unionization, anti-trust laws, and even the progression of LGBT in the past two decades. All of these have been progressed by sidelined methods and not direct petitioning.

It is their fault no? For supporting something they don’t want.

If enough people don’t want something then why do lootboxes still exist? So they want it or no? If there was no money in it then they wouldn’t do it anymore. They are not holding a gun to your head to force you to buy lootboxes.

When someone murders it’s their own fault. They chose to murder and are to be blamed. So we punish with “regulations”. But they are still responsible for the murder.

 

[AbyssalMonkey]

They are not holding a gun to your head to force you to buy lootboxes.

Is this supposed to be the standard for deciding when something is wrong? Because that's a pretty damn sad bar to set.

It's your own fault if you buy from a monopolistic company. It's your own fault for gambling. It's your own fault for not researching the medicine you take. It's your own fault for not buying from a car manufacturer who is trying to do better with car emissions. No one is pointing a gun to your head forcing you to buy them.

See where this is going? Again, I will never understand your argument on it's flawed foundations when in context of living in a democracy.

 

[SG854]

Is this supposed to be the standard for deciding when something is wrong? Because that's a pretty damn sad bar to set.

It's your own fault if you buy from a monopolistic company. It's your own fault for gambling. It's your own fault for not researching the medicine you take. It's your own fault for not buying from a car manufacturer who is trying to do better with car emissions. No one is pointing a gun to your head forcing you to buy them.

See where this is going? Again, I will never understand your argument on it's flawed foundations when in context of living in a democracy.

Medicine is a whole nother topic where companies can lie about them.


Lootboxes isn’t in the same category. It’s straight forward. You pay, you get items at random. Not hard to understand. It’s people playing victim.


Yes things do require a bit of research before you buy. Buy an IPhone or Android. What features interest you most.

 

[jt_1258]

I wonder if right-leaning people will argue against this bill just because dems support it or if they will support it in spite of political differences

overlap between parties can be a thing right?

 

[BORTZ]

I don't really know if this will be a good thing or not.

I think you might be on to something.

 

[DarkKaine]

Good! Next up pay to win mechanics in general please

 

[Foxi4]

I wonder if right-leaning people will argue against this bill just because dems support it or if they will support it in spite of political differences

I will happily argue against this bill not because the Democrats support it, but because it's an asinine interventionist policy that interferes in the free market and the relationship between game developers and their customers. Nobody has ever forced anyone to buy a loot box at the point of a gun, it has always been optional. If people don't like loot boxes, they have the option to not play the games that feature them, or just not buying the loot boxes. Clearly they do like them, since it's a profitable mechanic, so gamers are simply being hypocrites. By restricting alternative revenue streams like this the government effectively makes game design harder, especially in the F2P sector and especially for small, independent developers. This isn't going to affect Activision nearly as much as people think it will - they have the capital to sink half a billion dollars into a game like Destiny. However, this *is* going to affect smaller developers who release F2P titles in hopes to gain traction and make up for the costs of development over time via insignificant cosmetics. It's a bill designed to protect people from themselves, I said as much on previous occasions, and anyone who thinks they will benefit from it need only to look at Nintendo's withdrawal from the mobile market in areas where loot boxes were banned. You as the consumer are fully responsible for your purchasing decisions, you don't need the government to step in and prohibit the ones you don't like for everybody.

 

[Kigiru]

You... don't get how gambling works do you? How it ropes you in? How it manipulates your needs, your desires?

Most of what people call today "children gambling addiction" in my times was miraclously healed by turning off the computer/console/TV and hiding some kind of important component of it from kid's sight. Today it's easier, you don't need to pull the cable - just grab phone or tablet and make your children stop playing. And when in young age kid's use of the internet will be controled and they will learn how to use it properly, there will be way less addicted adults.

Seriously, humanity is going into wrong direction if you can't figure out how to deal with this kind of problem and need goverment to help you. Watch out for when you all will need regulations for what is in your fridge or when you are allowed to use toilet because clearly it will soon be like that...

 

[JamesMerloni]

Wow guys scared of developers making money? Are you telling me that businesses should not be allowed to try and make the most money possible? Baba.

 

[DANTENDO]

Wow guys scared of developers making money? Are you telling me that businesses should not be allowed to try and make the most money possible? Baba.

Not when Yr paying for a silly bit of clothing I'd be ashamed if I was part of tht team and would tell my colleagues Yr a bunch of scamming arseholes

 

[JamesMerloni]

Not when Yr paying for a silly bit of clothing I'd be ashamed if I was part of tht team and would tell my colleagues Yr a bunch of scamming arseholes

Then dont buy the silly clothing

 

[Bladexdsl]

Wow guys scared of developers making money? Are you telling me that businesses should not be allowed to try and make the most money possible? Baba.

let them make $ by making actual good games instead of crappy gamemaker pixel, weeb trash FAP games filled with loot boxes and micro$ GARBAGE

 

[DANTENDO]

Then dont buy the silly clothing

People are better off going to ther local charity shops and buying clothing for a couple of quid then childish loot boxes