SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Weeks ago, Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) released an outline for the The Protecting Children from Abusive Games Act, aimed at stopping randomized loot boxes and pay-to-win mechanics in the game industry. Today, Hawley was joined by Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) in formally introducing that bill in the Senate, complete with an 18-page draft of its legislative text.
Perhaps the most interesting portion of the bill attempts to define so-called "pay-to-win" mechanics in games. Those are defined broadly here as purchasable content that "assists a user in accomplishing an achievement within the game that can otherwise be accomplished without the purchase of such transaction" or which "permits a user to continue to access content of the game that had previously been accessible to the user but has been made inaccessible after the expiration of a timer or a number of gameplay attempts."
For multiplayer games, this would also include any purchasable in-game content that "from the perspective of a reasonable user, provides a competitive advantage."
As far as loot boxes are concerned, the act targets games where purchasable in-game content is randomized or partially randomized. This includes games where you purchase one item for the chance to purchase unknown or random items in the future, closing one potential loophole before it even starts.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @10:18AM (3 children)
Parents shouldn't give young children access to spend real money, and older children can learn lessons regarding the value of money and how to spot bad deals.
But then there's this:
So, no more free trials then? Terrible.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @06:58PM (1 child)
That's not how any of this works.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Saturday May 25 2019, @10:00PM
Wouldn't be the first time poorly written law doesn't work as expected. I wouldn't claim to know what's eventually going to be prohibited until the dust settles, including lawsuits to revoke part or all of the law and the subsequent exploits that bypass the meat of the law because the games don't fit the wording of the law.
(Score: 1) by Chrontius on Sunday May 26 2019, @03:20AM
That particular bit is aimed at games like Dungeon Keeper – a real-time strategy on PC, but when ported to mobile you could basically take one action per hour unless you bought tokens.
This didn’t slow down the adventurers coming to raid your dungeon, though – just your ability to respond. Zynga calls this “fun pain” but really what it is, is your sense that this should be fun, but it’s really fucking frustrating.
(Score: 4, Touché) by crafoo on Saturday May 25 2019, @11:32AM (5 children)
Good to see our lawmakers are tackling the hard-hitting, critical issues that confront our nation. Good work guys.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @12:12PM (1 child)
Well, if you actually do attempt to address real issues like Trump you see what happens. Rich idiots form coup attempts and try to undermine you, while poor idiots ramble incoherently about lies they tell each other about you on the internet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @03:54PM
And normal idiots like you who tell lies about each other.
(Score: 2) by stormreaver on Saturday May 25 2019, @12:59PM (2 children)
Just because murderers exist doesn't mean that bank robbers should get a free ride.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Saturday May 25 2019, @02:40PM (1 child)
That's a false metaphor for the issue, which is not in the least like murder/robbery; it's personal choice or being forbidden to choose which means there should not be a law: [fyngyrz.com]
--
Wow. Apparently it's "rude" to ask the parents
of a kid on a leash if it was a rescue.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday May 25 2019, @10:08PM
(Score: 3, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday May 25 2019, @12:56PM (13 children)
They might be able to get a federal lootbox ban through the courts on account of it's gambling. No fucking way will a p2w ban hold up though; they very much lack authority to place such a ban and life itself is p2w.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday May 25 2019, @01:02PM (5 children)
That's the one fucking thing that's stopping me from getting back into gaming after a 25-year hiatus. Why should I grind and dedicate all my free time to a game when some rich fag can buy unlimited nukes, ships, horses, trinkets, etc. Oh, well, there's always the old-skool smash hit Ethnic Cleansing. Of course, pay-to-win with respect to gaming has its roots in arcade coin-ops: Midway's Strikeforce is a good example, when you're in the "shop" you can deposit additional quarters to buy more weapons rather than lives.
The good thing about that game called "real life" is that I can minimize my chances of encountering rich fucks by avoiding all of the Jewish neighborhoods.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday May 25 2019, @01:52PM
Nice, I didn't see how you were going to work in a bit about 'da juice' on this one.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @02:15PM (2 children)
What is your opinion on sending dick pics to disabled women with fibromyalgia on Twitter?
(Score: 3, Touché) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday May 25 2019, @02:18PM (1 child)
You have to be polite, establish a rapport, and ensure that they are aware of the incoming payload and that they will appreciate them before you send them. Otherwise you're just an obtuse dick. And a sexual harasser.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @02:23PM
Sounds reasonable.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @07:01PM
You can also do what I do, cement dimes to the pavement in a nice exclusion zone around your neighborhood. The Jews congragate at these sites and after failing to recover the coins, get mad and turn around.
(Note that bacon also works, but attracts the birds)
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Saturday May 25 2019, @02:49PM (2 children)
Not that I disagree on their lack of authority, but that rarely stops legislators and governors/presidents from doing anything.
Occasionally such an arrogation of power makes it to a court, and even more occasionally a court invalidates same, as per your "hold up" assertion... but usually said legislation has done quite a bit of harm by then.
I accuse you of unfounded optimism, suh! My second will meet your second to arrange for syllogisms at dawn!
--
I'm having people over to stare at their
phones later, if you want to come by.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday May 25 2019, @05:28PM
You may very well be correct on that. I don't believe the current court is as likely to invent new government authority as many past ones but it's still quite possible, so I cede the point.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @07:37PM
obligatory simpsons reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlSvf0c9Gn4 [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Monday May 27 2019, @01:37AM (3 children)
I don't think they're actually 'banning' loot boxes, but rather forcing them to be rated as adult-only (e.g. R). They absolutely will be able to do that.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 27 2019, @01:59AM (2 children)
Actually, no. They have a stronger legal argument for banning them entirely. They have authority to regulate interstate commerce but they don't have much ground to stand on when it comes to mandating age limits on anything except holding office or voting. That's why they've had to tie drinking, smoking, and driving age limits to federal funding and get the states to implement the laws.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Monday May 27 2019, @05:26AM (1 child)
You're probably right (I don't know US law that well), but if game rating systems can federally restrict the amount of violence, sex, swearing etc in a game, why can't they restrict the amount of gambling (real or fake money) too?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 27 2019, @10:35AM
Game rating systems aren't official. It's 100% legal for a five year old to go buy a game rated M. It's the stores themselves that won't allow it, just like theaters and movie ratings.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Saturday May 25 2019, @03:33PM
...there goes my high score on the leaderboard.
(Score: 5, Funny) by sshelton76 on Saturday May 25 2019, @06:14PM (1 child)
I read the title.. "Senators Officially Introduce Loot Box, “Pay-to-Win” Legislation" and for some reason video games didn't come to mind at all. Took me a solid 2 or 3 minutes to realize the topic wasn't about new avenues for lobbying.
Am I the only one?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @07:44PM
no, i thought it must be campaign reform or something too.