Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday November 23 2017, @04:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the microtransaction-fail dept.

Video game gambling schemes known as "loot boxes" or "loot crates" could be banned or restricted by regulators:

We learned last week that Belgium's gambling authority was investigating loot crates in Star Wars Battlefront II over concerns that they constitute gambling. Now, the decision is in, and the answer is a resounding yes, according to Dutch-language publication VTM Nieuws. The commission claims that purchasable add-on boxes, the contents of which are randomized, mix "money and addiction" and thus are a form of gambling.

Belgian Minister of Justice Koen Geens added: "Mixing gambling and gaming, especially at a young age, is dangerous for the mental health of the child." The commission will now reportedly work through the European Union's process to execute a total ban. We've reached out to Belgium's Gaming Commission for more details on its next steps and the legal implications of the ruling.

The country isn't alone in its stance on loot boxes. Just hours ago, Rep. Chris Lee (D) from Hawaii denounced EA's "predatory behavior" in a speech uploaded to YouTube (first spotted by Kotaku). In the clip, Lee also talks of the detrimental affect micro-transactions have on children, with specific reference to Battlefront II, which he describes as a a "Star Wars-themed online casino, designed to lure kids into spending money".

What Are Loot Boxes? Gaming's Big New Problem, Explained

Press 'F' to pay respects.

Related: Why Call of Duty WW2 Bosses Won't 'Shy Away' from History
Star Wars Game in U-Turn After Player Anger


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by vux984 on Thursday November 23 2017, @08:45PM (8 children)

    by vux984 (5045) on Thursday November 23 2017, @08:45PM (#600809)

    "loot boxes" are a scourge on gaming right now. I shouldn't have every game I play afflicted with stupid lootboxes that I would have to make 'microtransaction' purchases for keys to 'unlock'. Its a distracting irritation in any game its in; since I refuse to participate. I never buy them, and I never will, so why can't i just turn them the fuck off? Don't award them to me, I don't care. They've been added to games I play -- its bad enough if they were always there and you knew what you signed up for. But adding them is just disgusting.

    You are playing a game... and every now and than it says, "hey you got some cool loot... pay $1 to see what it is! ooogh... this time it might be rare loot! you'll need an extra expensive key to get at this!"
    Its fucking horse armor all over again, except instead of getting horse armor, you just get a worthless stupid purple hat that you've already got 6 of, but maybe one day if you keep buying you'll actually get the horse armor. So its worse than horse armor... it basically playing slots for horse armor.

    Random loot is fine. Random loot is fun. Random loot attached to micro--transactions is just garbage. If they can nail it as gambling and ban it, then I wish them luck.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 23 2017, @08:55PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 23 2017, @08:55PM (#600814)

    You don't like it so you're happy with it being banned by any means necessary? How very principled of you.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by vux984 on Thursday November 23 2017, @09:14PM (1 child)

      by vux984 (5045) on Thursday November 23 2017, @09:14PM (#600829)

      "You don't like it so you're happy with it being banned by any means necessary? How very principled of you."

      I don't like it. And it *IS* gambling, so if that's sufficient to get it banned then, yes, that's great.

      I'm for much strong consumer protection laws in general; where people have the right to control and modify the things they buy. Where not everything can be turned into a "subscription" contract, or a "license agreement" and then open you up to having to submit to pretty much whatever terms of use they can think of, from binding arbitration if they fuck up and harm you, to suing you if you make this thing you bought and paid for work without connecting to their servers... and dealing with 'loot boxes' could be quickly dealt with under such a regime -- run a game server with them disabled, mod the game to remove them or automatically unlock them... whatever.

      That's what I'd really like to see happen.
      But it IS gambling, and I can be pragmatic and use the tools that exist. Just as the and BSD exist GPL because they are pragmatic solutions in a world where fixing the actual copyright rules is all but impossible.

      • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 23 2017, @09:25PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 23 2017, @09:25PM (#600833)

        I don't like it. And it *IS* gambling, so if that's sufficient to get it banned then, yes, that's great.

        Excellent! How principled, wanting something banned by any means necessary. It reminds me of the people who claim to want to protect us from terrorism by any means necessary, even if doing so involves violating our rights.

        I'm for much strong consumer protection laws in general

        I don't want your authoritarian "protection" anymore than I want the drug war.

        And I say this as someone who despises most game companies and gamers for being addicts who feed proprietary software developers while frequently defending or ignoring their unethical practices. A comical example of this is an instance where many people said they would boycott a certain game and then most of them were later found to be playing it. I just don't think the right way to go about it is to have the government ban things.

        Where not everything can be turned into a "subscription" contract, or a "license agreement" and then open you up to having to submit to pretty much whatever terms of use they can think of, from binding arbitration if they fuck up and harm you, to suing you if you make this thing you bought and paid for work without connecting to their servers... and dealing with 'loot boxes' could be quickly dealt with under such a regime -- run a game server with them disabled, mod the game to remove them or automatically unlock them... whatever.

        I don't think binding arbitration clauses should be enforceable at all, since people need to be able to get recourse in a neutral court. This is, however, quite different from banning gambling in video games.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 24 2017, @04:19PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 24 2017, @04:19PM (#601069)

      Umm, yeah? That is what being principled is all about, holding to your convictions. May not be YOUR principles but too bad.

  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday November 23 2017, @09:16PM (1 child)

    by frojack (1554) on Thursday November 23 2017, @09:16PM (#600830) Journal

    If they can nail it as gambling and ban it, then I wish them luck.

    You can't be serious. After all, Rep. Chris Lee of Hawaii wasn't serious:

    in a speech uploaded to YouTube

    Oh the righteous indignation! Such determination! He really means it this time!

    Posting a rant on YouTube!!! Like peeing yourself in a black wool suit. Warm fuzzy feeling, but nobody notices.

    Vote with your feet, and run away from these games, instead of ranting here where NOBODY from the game devs will ever see it.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by vux984 on Thursday November 23 2017, @11:55PM

      by vux984 (5045) on Thursday November 23 2017, @11:55PM (#600881)

      "Vote with your feet, and run away from these games, instead of ranting here where NOBODY from the game devs will ever see it."

      'instead' ? I do both.

      I am not currently playing anything with lootboxes, and I actively avoid games that have them. But my leaving doesn't affect the developers -- they're making money from the people who are sucked in by it. They never cared about me. They're happy to fleece the suckers for dozens or hundreds or thousands of dollars. On some level, I agree with the whole 'personal responsibility' 'free market' and so forth line of arguments... but really, at the same time you can't reasonably expect 12 year old child to come out on top versus a big corporation backed by massive investment in behavioural science, and a product development cycle designed to make the product as addictive as possible.

  • (Score: 2) by Mykl on Friday November 24 2017, @12:09AM (1 child)

    by Mykl (1112) on Friday November 24 2017, @12:09AM (#600883)

    I absolutely hate them too - they are really destroying the ability of developers to come up with proper reward schemes within games that don't involve continuing to pay for stuff forever.

    In a perfect world, gamers would just avoid these games and the devs would get the message - DO NOT WANT. Unfortunately, there are people out there that have more money than sense. For example, I'm playing the mobile version of "Middle Earth - Shadow of War" at the moment. Not a bad game behind it, but loot-boxed to the hilt. I read messages in group chat from some players who have spent over $100 in loot boxes just to get legendary characters (like Legolas, Gandalf etc). By my estimate, you'd need to play for over a year to unlock these characters without forking over cash.

    More realistically, I think that it will be hard to ban loot boxes outright. Perhaps we can confirm that loot boxes are indeed a form of gambling, and therefore require a R18+ rating for any game that includes them? At least that gets them out of the hands of kids (and, incidentally the Apple App Store).

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by vux984 on Friday November 24 2017, @12:41AM

      by vux984 (5045) on Friday November 24 2017, @12:41AM (#600884)

      "Unfortunately, there are people out there that have more money than sense. "

      This is starting to reach the point where we are blaming the victim. The developers are targeting these people and crafting the games to give them the little hits of dopamine etc to get them addicted. Its backed by behavioural science. Its not merely that these people have more money than sense -- they're being actively hunted and baited... and lots of these people are kids.

      "By my estimate, you'd need to play for over a year to unlock these characters without forking over cash."

      And that's the worst... the idea that game is simultaneously engaging enough to get players hooked playing, yet designed around deliberately withholding the stuff players want to the point that players will actually pay not to have to play the game to get what they want from it. It's brilliant... it's evil.