. If a game company decided to switch off the server you have nothing to show for your money while collectible cards go up in value see baseball cards and rare Pokemon cards etc comparing virtual loot boxes to actual real collector cards is comparing apples to oranges.
You have the satisfaction and enjoyment that you had playing the game and getting the cards. Just because the game will someday end doesn't mean people don't gain enjoyment from collecting the cards, otherwise they wouldn't do it. This is only further made true by the lack of a secondary market where you can speculate with selling the items. The only incentive players get is the satisfaction of collecting the cards and levelling them up.
This also has the benefit of not having to worry about a bubble forming because of speculators obtaining cards solely with the intention of trying to make money from them. Lots of tradeable things have temporary spikes in value on secondary markets only to become worthless. I'm old enough to remember when people were going to get rich collecting beanie babies.
In the US, our ESRB has determined "loot boxes" are not gambling, as you always receive a prize, useful or not. The only thing that might ever happen here is restricting them from minors. We value freedom in America.
I'm pretty sure all this talk is going to blow over. It makes great sensational headlines, but I don't think enough people are going to take it seriously for anything to gain traction.
Card collectors - eg baseball cards - have always had the chance of getting rare good cards and mostly get mediocre ones in every pack. Nobody has ever called that gambling. This is just virtualizing that type of card collecting.
You have to remember who are behind ESRB though - video game companies themselves, so of course they aren't going to crap in their own business. Legislation can still change, regardless of if the people selling loot boxes and taking advantage of addictive behaviors think that what they are doing to make money is totally ok and a question of "freedom" (freedom to take advantage of others regardless of the consequences, I suppose).
[9RS | Combs] Kilana
9RS fleet is recruiting, PM me for more information!
. If a game company decided to switch off the server you have nothing to show for your money while collectible cards go up in value see baseball cards and rare Pokemon cards etc comparing virtual loot boxes to actual real collector cards is comparing apples to oranges.
You have the satisfaction and enjoyment that you had playing the game and getting the cards. Just because the game will someday end doesn't mean people don't gain enjoyment from collecting the cards, otherwise they wouldn't do it. This is only further made true by the lack of a secondary market where you can speculate with selling the items. The only incentive players get is the satisfaction of collecting the cards and levelling them up.
This also has the benefit of not having to worry about a bubble forming because of speculators obtaining cards solely with the intention of trying to make money from them. Lots of tradeable things have temporary spikes in value on secondary markets only to become worthless. I'm old enough to remember when people were going to get rich collecting beanie babies.
Here's an example...
Stt VIP points 1,000,000 350+ immortals
Value €/$/£0
I don't think the point should even be if the player gets something worth of resale value or not. There's a story going around right now about this guy, who between the ages of 13-19 spent around 13 000 dollars on microtransactions and similar. One of the most striking features of the story imo is him telling how he was effectively groomed by the various games to think that a 100 dollar in-game purchase "isn't that much money". And this wasn't a case of him having plenty of disposable income, on the contrary, at one point he was working two jobs in order to fund his habit. Yes, a habit, as in addiction, since clearly one has to be addicted to spend 13 000 dollars on these simplistic games, it is gambling, no matter how you look at it.
I also don't think anyone at all thinks that using predatory marketing tactics on a 13 year old is defensible in any way. That raises the grim question: how much money gaming companies are actually and knowingly making out of underage people, who lack adult judgment and are easy prey for marketing, plus can even potentially be groomed to be addicts? The greed really has to stop somewhere.
[9RS | Combs] Kilana
9RS fleet is recruiting, PM me for more information!
It really shouldn't have anything to do with the value of the product or whether it's resellable or not. It should have to do with the fact that it **tsk tsk** with people's brains in exactly the same way as gambling and ruins people's lives when they get addicted.
It really shouldn't have anything to do with the value of the product or whether it's resellable or not. It should have to do with the fact that it **** with people's brains in exactly the same way as gambling and ruins people's lives when they get addicted.
That just doesn't wash with me. Every state in America runs a lottery. Lots of people enjoy gambling. We don't ban things just because a few people can't handle it. Part of being an adult is having the responsibility to make your own choices without some parental figure stepping and telling you what to do. If you don't like the game and feel manipulated then don't play it. But that shouldn't give you the right to decide for everyone else. Anything that causes a dopamine release in the brain is addictive. But we don't ban things solely for that reason.
I don't think the point should even be if the player gets something worth of resale value or not. There's a story going around right now about this guy, who between the ages of 13-19 spent around 13 000 dollars on microtransactions and similar. One of the most striking features of the story imo is him telling how he was effectively groomed by the various games to think that a 100 dollar in-game purchase "isn't that much money". And this wasn't a case of him having plenty of disposable income, on the contrary, at one point he was working two jobs in order to fund his habit. Yes, a habit, as in addiction, since clearly one has to be addicted to spend 13 000 dollars on these simplistic games, it is gambling, no matter how you look at it.
I also don't think anyone at all thinks that using predatory marketing tactics on a 13 year old is defensible in any way. That raises the grim question: how much money gaming companies are actually and knowingly making out of underage people, who lack adult judgment and are easy prey for marketing, plus can even potentially be groomed to be addicts? The greed really has to stop somewhere.
Really isn't that his parent's fault? When I was 13 years old there's no way my parents would have let me do something like that. Besides which, when feature phones started getting apps and data was really expensive, there were the same sensational stories going around about kids running up $1,000 bills on cellphones buying ringtones and assorted junk. The phone companies usually refunded the money when there was evidence that a minor was the individual responsible. Companies, for the most part, aren't stupid.
It really shouldn't have anything to do with the value of the product or whether it's resellable or not. It should have to do with the fact that it **** with people's brains in exactly the same way as gambling and ruins people's lives when they get addicted.
That just doesn't wash with me. Every state in America runs a lottery. Lots of people enjoy gambling. We don't ban things just because a few people can't handle it. Part of being an adult is having the responsibility to make your own choices without some parental figure stepping and telling you what to do. If you don't like the game and feel manipulated then don't play it. But that shouldn't give you the right to decide for everyone else. Anything that causes a dopamine release in the brain is addictive. But we don't ban things solely for that reason.
Very true. But we do set age limits for them. Alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana (if it's legal in your state), even driving or voting for that matter. I happen to agree with you that making everything illegal is not a good idea, but there's tons of precedent at making them illegal for kids. They just don't have decision-making capacity at that age for what could end up being irreversible consequences.
It really shouldn't have anything to do with the value of the product or whether it's resellable or not. It should have to do with the fact that it **** with people's brains in exactly the same way as gambling and ruins people's lives when they get addicted.
That just doesn't wash with me. Every state in America runs a lottery. Lots of people enjoy gambling. We don't ban things just because a few people can't handle it. Part of being an adult is having the responsibility to make your own choices without some parental figure stepping and telling you what to do. If you don't like the game and feel manipulated then don't play it. But that shouldn't give you the right to decide for everyone else. Anything that causes a dopamine release in the brain is addictive. But we don't ban things solely for that reason.
Very true. But we do set age limits for them. Alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana (if it's legal in your state), even driving or voting for that matter. I happen to agree with you that making everything illegal is not a good idea, but there's tons of precedent at making them illegal for kids. They just don't have decision-making capacity at that age for what could end up being irreversible consequences.
Agreed. And for this reason parental controls exist that can restrict minor's access to credit and debit card accounts. It's not hard to set these up and prevent the problem in the first place.
It really shouldn't have anything to do with the value of the product or whether it's resellable or not. It should have to do with the fact that it **** with people's brains in exactly the same way as gambling and ruins people's lives when they get addicted.
That just doesn't wash with me. Every state in America runs a lottery. Lots of people enjoy gambling. We don't ban things just because a few people can't handle it. Part of being an adult is having the responsibility to make your own choices without some parental figure stepping and telling you what to do. If you don't like the game and feel manipulated then don't play it. But that shouldn't give you the right to decide for everyone else. Anything that causes a dopamine release in the brain is addictive. But we don't ban things solely for that reason.
Very true. But we do set age limits for them. Alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana (if it's legal in your state), even driving or voting for that matter. I happen to agree with you that making everything illegal is not a good idea, but there's tons of precedent at making them illegal for kids. They just don't have decision-making capacity at that age for what could end up being irreversible consequences.
Agreed. And for this reason parental controls exist that can restrict minor's access to credit and debit card accounts. It's not hard to set these up and prevent the problem in the first place.
You would think, yes. Sadly, parental control and involvement isn't what it used to be. But that's perhaps a topic for another day.
It really shouldn't have anything to do with the value of the product or whether it's resellable or not. It should have to do with the fact that it **** with people's brains in exactly the same way as gambling and ruins people's lives when they get addicted.
That just doesn't wash with me. If you don't like the game and feel manipulated then don't play it.
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play it because they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play it because they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
At some point, people have to be responsible for their own choices in life. I don't want to live in a world where anything that's remotely dangerous has to be banned to protect the small percentage of people who have a problem from themselves. We don't normally do that. Gambling is legal. State governments run lotteries. There are people who play MMORPGs until they die from exhaustion. Sometimes that's just life.
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play it because they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
At some point, people have to be responsible for their own choices in life. I don't want to live in a world where anything that's remotely dangerous has to be banned to protect the small percentage of people who have a problem from themselves. We don't normally do that. Gambling is legal. State governments run lotteries. There are people who play MMORPGs until they die from exhaustion. Sometimes that's just life.
Cigarettes and heroin are very alike we all have our crosses to carry but it seems your ok with the likes of games like Battlefront making bold steps to turn an AAA game from €80 to €2100 trying to set precedence in the gaming industry. Nowhere on this thread does it say this game or any game has to be taken away from you or anyone else it's merely debating what legislators are trying to pass as laws mainly outside the US and with senators in the US looking at how Europe and Australia plan on changing legislation due to pressure from its citizens also want to make changes to law.
Nobody made the bold claim that this game is digital heroin you came to that conclusion yourself and for someone who claims to know about addiction you seem very dismissive towards addicts with a simply just give it up attitude.
Yes lotteries are gambling we have them too outside of the states the thing over here is we buy a chance at winning life changing sums of money and it's heavily regulated.
I'd rather spend €10 to win €80m personally than 650 Dilithium for a chance to win a legendary character. Yet I have to be 18 to gamble €10 for the €80m and 12 to gamble €10 on a 650 Dilithium pull
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That just doesn't wash with me. Every state in America runs a lottery. Lots of people enjoy gambling. We don't ban things just because a few people can't handle it. Part of being an adult is having the responsibility to make your own choices without some parental figure stepping and telling you what to do.
I agree 100%. But I don't think there's much of a chance of this gaming mechanic being banned in any significant way.
Asian countries are a lot further ahead of America/Europe in terms of having the National Discussion about responsible gaming, and they've regulated some things, but not banned them. That's all we're really talking about, at the end of the day.
State lotteries? A perfect example. if Timelines and other games with any sort of loot box mechanic follows the same regulations as lotteries, I'm a happy camper. The buyer has all information available to them at the time of purchase. Said information is accurate, adequately publicized, audited from time to time to ensure accuracy, and applies the same way at all times to all players. If the buyer chooses to be unaware of that information, or for some reason prefers discard that information (in which case, that's when you get into the realm of an addiction or other disorder), that's where it ceases to be the developer's responsibility.
There may be some honest game developers who aren't manipulating systems to extract maximum revenue, but it's an open secret that many are doing just that, and that's why it's such a colossal struggle to get any of them to post drop rates, and why they all go to the hassle of creating so many different in-game currencies to skirt the issue of what real world dollar value anything has.
Give me posted drop rates and assurances that said drop rates are accurate at all times and for all players (oh, and fer chrissakes, somebody find out how DB is doing RNG, because I remain highly skeptical that they aren't using some kind of very low-end pseudo-RNG that is prone to clumpiness, and require them to meet the same standards as state lottery RNG), and I'm good.
I don't think that's too big an ask. And if the devs think it is? Well, that's why governments are starting to sniff around...
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play it because they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
At some point, people have to be responsible for their own choices in life. I don't want to live in a world where anything that's remotely dangerous has to be banned to protect the small percentage of people who have a problem from themselves. We don't normally do that. Gambling is legal. State governments run lotteries. There are people who play MMORPGs until they die from exhaustion. Sometimes that's just life.
Cigarettes and heroin are very alike we all have our crosses to carry but it seems your ok with the likes of games like Battlefront making bold steps to turn an AAA game from €80 to €2100 trying to set precedence in the gaming industry. Nowhere on this thread does it say this game or any game has to be taken away from you or anyone else it's merely debating what legislators are trying to pass as laws mainly outside the US and with senators in the US looking at how Europe and Australia plan on changing legislation due to pressure from its citizens also want to make changes to law.
Nobody made the bold claim that this game is digital heroin you came to that conclusion yourself and for someone who claims to know about addiction you seem very dismissive towards addicts with a simply just give it up attitude.
Yes lotteries are gambling we have them too outside of the states the thing over here is we buy a chance at winning life changing sums of money and it's heavily regulated.
I'd rather spend €10 to win €80m personally than 650 Dilithium for a chance to win a legendary character. Yet I have to be 18 to gamble €10 for the €80m and 12 to gamble €10 on a 650 Dilithium pull
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Well, your lottery sounds like ours. They're not much different. And if you think you're going to win a lottery, I question your intelligence. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning twice than winning big in a lottery. If you want to make a moral argument, I think it's worse that government takes advantage of its least educated and poorest citizens by offering them the false hope of a lottery. I've seen people on food assistance buy $200 dollars worth of tickets and think it's a good investment. It's more or less a regressive voluntary tax paid by people who don't understand statistics. That said I don't want to regulate people's ability to make stupid choices just because I don't like them. I'd just prefer the government wasn't acting as a bookie.
I really just think it's silly to focus on gaming adding loot boxes as some huge evil that requires legislation. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy loot boxes. I think the market should determine whether or not they remain a thing. If people like them, then they'll buy them. If they don't they'll go away on their own. I'm just not into having the state acting as a parent or a nanny unless it is absolutely necessary.
Except the government does regulate lotteries. Heavily. Even in the US I would assume. Why shouldn't online games that clearly have gambling mechanics be subject to the same regulations?
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play it because they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
At some point, people have to be responsible for their own choices in life. I don't want to live in a world where anything that's remotely dangerous has to be banned to protect the small percentage of people who have a problem from themselves. We don't normally do that. Gambling is legal. State governments run lotteries. There are people who play MMORPGs until they die from exhaustion. Sometimes that's just life.
Cigarettes and heroin are very alike we all have our crosses to carry but it seems your ok with the likes of games like Battlefront making bold steps to turn an AAA game from €80 to €2100 trying to set precedence in the gaming industry. Nowhere on this thread does it say this game or any game has to be taken away from you or anyone else it's merely debating what legislators are trying to pass as laws mainly outside the US and with senators in the US looking at how Europe and Australia plan on changing legislation due to pressure from its citizens also want to make changes to law.
Nobody made the bold claim that this game is digital heroin you came to that conclusion yourself and for someone who claims to know about addiction you seem very dismissive towards addicts with a simply just give it up attitude.
Yes lotteries are gambling we have them too outside of the states the thing over here is we buy a chance at winning life changing sums of money and it's heavily regulated.
I'd rather spend €10 to win €80m personally than 650 Dilithium for a chance to win a legendary character. Yet I have to be 18 to gamble €10 for the €80m and 12 to gamble €10 on a 650 Dilithium pull
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Ok dismiss my point if you wish. I said they're arguably as addictive as each other if not more. If you look at the actual science, nicotine is one of the most addictive substances that exists. I didn't say it was equivalent to heroin in terms of damage to one's body, but it's arguably a more addictive substance. So snark away if you must, but what I said isn't false.
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play it because they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
.
))))))))))))
How many cases of people killing other people so they could get money to buy cigarettes have you heard of?
Except the government does regulate lotteries. Heavily. Even in the US I would assume. Why shouldn't online games that clearly have gambling mechanics be subject to the same regulations?
because it isn't gambling. when you gamble you might not win anything. buying a loot box always contains something that can be used in the game.
Except the government does regulate lotteries. Heavily. Even in the US I would assume. Why shouldn't online games that clearly have gambling mechanics be subject to the same regulations?
because it isn't gambling. when you gamble you might not win anything. buying a loot box always contains something that can be used in the game.
Getting something completely useless because you have 1,000 of them already is effectively the exact same thing as getting nothing.
Except the government does regulate lotteries. Heavily. Even in the US I would assume. Why shouldn't online games that clearly have gambling mechanics be subject to the same regulations?
because it isn't gambling. when you gamble you might not win anything. buying a loot box always contains something that can be used in the game.
the only way this would not be gambling is if the player would buy loot boxes/packs/etc in order to gain the useless items he/she doesn't need.
Also the discussion shouldn't be about what the legal definition of gambling is. I said it has gambling mechanics, and it triggers the same parts of the brain as gambling. As far as human physiology goes, it is exactly the same as gambling. It should therefore be treated as such legally.
Except the government does regulate lotteries. Heavily. Even in the US I would assume. Why shouldn't online games that clearly have gambling mechanics be subject to the same regulations?
Not only that, in the US most lotteries are state-run & are used as a source of government revenue. Which is another reason online games are not currently legally considered gambling; it's hard to tax pixels.
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play itbecause they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
.
))))))))))))
How many cases of people killing other people so they could get money to buy cigarettes have you heard of?
))))))))))))))
If cigarettes were illegal and cost as much as heroin it would happen.
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play itbecause they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
.
))))))))))))
How many cases of people killing other people so they could get money to buy cigarettes have you heard of?
))))))))))))))
If cigarettes were illegal and cost as much as heroin it would happen.
You are right, cause gamblers that kill people for money to gamble are doing it because gambling is outlawed and very expensive!
“The ESRB would say that violence is bad for society so violent video games get a higher rating. Gore is bad for society so gory video games get a higher rating. And nudity and cursing, those are bad so they get a higher rating. And yet something that really could have a serious impediment to the mental development of children, they’re saying ‘well it’s not technically gambling so we’re not going to make a stand here.’
“It’s just curious to me why they’re able to choose things like violence, nudity, those types of issues, but when it comes to an issue that has some credibility behind it, especially in mobile games, I question why they’re not taking a stronger stance, or at least leaving open the possibility that it’s something they’re going to look into.”
Enthoven points to the Chinese response to loot boxes, in which the Chinese government pointed to studies that show addiction patterns in children similar to what we see with gambling addicts. The Chinese government has come out with new regulations requiring game publishers to list probability outcomes for all loot boxes, though some developers have found ways to work around these new rules.
Enthoven’s video game review aggregation website OpenCritic will soon begin addressing different revenue models, such as loot-boxes and micro-transactions, alongside its current review score aggregation in an attempt to provide consumers with even more information.
In the US, our ESRB has determined "loot boxes" are not gambling, as you always receive a prize, useful or not. The only thing that might ever happen here is restricting them from minors. We value freedom in America.
I'm pretty sure all this talk is going to blow over. It makes great sensational headlines, but I don't think enough people are going to take it seriously for anything to gain traction.
Card collectors - eg baseball cards - have always had the chance of getting rare good cards and mostly get mediocre ones in every pack. Nobody has ever called that gambling. This is just virtualizing that type of card collecting.
Give me posted drop rates and assurances that said drop rates are accurate at all times and for all players (oh, and fer chrissakes, somebody find out how DB is doing RNG, because I remain highly skeptical that they aren't using some kind of very low-end pseudo-RNG that is prone to clumpiness, and require them to meet the same standards as state lottery RNG), and I'm good.
I don't think that's too big an ask. And if the devs think it is? Well, that's why governments are starting to sniff around...
You obviously don't understand the definition of random. "Clumpiness" is perfectly normal and to be expected if the outcome is random. Random means the outcome of any two events are unrelated to each other. What happens in event 1 has no bearing on event 2, so there's no reason you shouldn't get exactly the same outcome just because it already happened once or twice before.
The human brain isn't designed to understand the concept of random outcomes, and we will always perceive patterns, even where there aren't any. This is is called perception bias. Another aspect of perception bias is the tendency to put more emotional weight on outliers, thus undesired results or extremely desired ones are likely to be perceived as happening more often than they actually do. This is why gamblers tend to inaccurately recall their actual results.
There's something called the law of large numbers. That means over time, the outcomes will always work out to the same basic ratios. Any perception of things occurring when they should not is due to perception bias and not having a large enough sample size. If you tracked every result, these perceived inconsistencies would disappear.
The developers have no reason to cheat you or anyone else. They don't benefit from messing with the outcome, as they don't gain anything from you winning or losing. The fact that you played is the only thing they derive benefit from. If anything, they'd have an incentive to skew results to the player's benefit if they were actually going to cheat. It costs them nothing when you win, and they don't gain anything when you lose.
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play itbecause they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
.
))))))))))))
How many cases of people killing other people so they could get money to buy cigarettes have you heard of?
))))))))))))))
If cigarettes were illegal and cost as much as heroin it would happen.
You are right, cause gamblers that kill people for money to gamble are doing it because gambling is outlawed and very expensive!
Oh...wait..
Gambling is still more accessible than heroin. It is very easy travel to a location where gambling is legal, and the previously mentioned state lotteries are widely availble. Even in places where it is totally illegal, all you need is a like-minded friend and a deck of cards or sporting event to watch, or a legal form of "simulated gambling" (such as the original topic).
Besides, I am not sure that there are that many heroin addicts murdering people for money anyway. Desperate people, regardless if the source of desperation, will resort to lesser crimes first, and heroin makes people sloppy, and sloppy people get caught. Most of the murders associated with heroin are committed by the gangs that profit from it, and that is true with underground mob-run casinos and with alchol during prohibition. It is the illegality that causes the societal harm; the effect on the brain is what defines an addiction.
Coming back to heroin, there was a time when it was legal, but it was prescribed by doctors to treat pain (and, ironically, opiod addiction) rather than used recreationally. When the unhealthy effects became more well known, it was banned, but doctors could still prescribe it to existing addicts and addicts could live in society. Laws were later tightened again, cutting off the supply, and the demand soared, leading to a black market, rising prices leading to rising crime and violence, inconsistant product leading to more overdoses, and more aggressive pushing by the black market to replace and grow their customer base.
Which is why, to come full circle, banning loot boxes outright would be a terrible idea, as those predisposed to gambling addiction can fall victem to a legitimate casino or underground bookmaker just as easily. There is room for some regulations, such as the publication of odds or warnings about addiction, but widespread prohibitation is rarely the answer.
What I don't get is the fact that many here claim that the packs are not gambling, when DB says they are.
The event offers that cost $$$ are "get this character and packs" the packs are a bonus, in theory you' re buying the 5* or 4* char+chrons+creds+vip+dili and as an added bonus the packs.
The gambling part, the "buy this mostly useless pack for the chance you might win something you need" they switched the currency used in order to prevent gambling accusations. Because you don't pay for it with actual currency. You buy dilithium and it's your problem what you do with it. Just like staying a virgin by taking it up the plasma exhaust.
Comments
You have the satisfaction and enjoyment that you had playing the game and getting the cards. Just because the game will someday end doesn't mean people don't gain enjoyment from collecting the cards, otherwise they wouldn't do it. This is only further made true by the lack of a secondary market where you can speculate with selling the items. The only incentive players get is the satisfaction of collecting the cards and levelling them up.
This also has the benefit of not having to worry about a bubble forming because of speculators obtaining cards solely with the intention of trying to make money from them. Lots of tradeable things have temporary spikes in value on secondary markets only to become worthless. I'm old enough to remember when people were going to get rich collecting beanie babies.
You have to remember who are behind ESRB though - video game companies themselves, so of course they aren't going to crap in their own business. Legislation can still change, regardless of if the people selling loot boxes and taking advantage of addictive behaviors think that what they are doing to make money is totally ok and a question of "freedom" (freedom to take advantage of others regardless of the consequences, I suppose).
9RS fleet is recruiting, PM me for more information!
Here's an example...
Stt VIP points 1,000,000 350+ immortals
Value €/$/£0
I also don't think anyone at all thinks that using predatory marketing tactics on a 13 year old is defensible in any way. That raises the grim question: how much money gaming companies are actually and knowingly making out of underage people, who lack adult judgment and are easy prey for marketing, plus can even potentially be groomed to be addicts? The greed really has to stop somewhere.
9RS fleet is recruiting, PM me for more information!
It really shouldn't have anything to do with the value of the product or whether it's resellable or not. It should have to do with the fact that it **tsk tsk** with people's brains in exactly the same way as gambling and ruins people's lives when they get addicted.
That just doesn't wash with me. Every state in America runs a lottery. Lots of people enjoy gambling. We don't ban things just because a few people can't handle it. Part of being an adult is having the responsibility to make your own choices without some parental figure stepping and telling you what to do. If you don't like the game and feel manipulated then don't play it. But that shouldn't give you the right to decide for everyone else. Anything that causes a dopamine release in the brain is addictive. But we don't ban things solely for that reason.
Really isn't that his parent's fault? When I was 13 years old there's no way my parents would have let me do something like that. Besides which, when feature phones started getting apps and data was really expensive, there were the same sensational stories going around about kids running up $1,000 bills on cellphones buying ringtones and assorted junk. The phone companies usually refunded the money when there was evidence that a minor was the individual responsible. Companies, for the most part, aren't stupid.
Agreed. And for this reason parental controls exist that can restrict minor's access to credit and debit card accounts. It's not hard to set these up and prevent the problem in the first place.
Spoken like someone that truly understands addiction.
People that are addicted can't just not play it because they feel manipulated. Ever try telling a drug addict "if you don't like it just stop doing it"?
First of all, you don't know me and what I have or haven't been through in my life. I've been very much addicted to smoking cigarettes, which are arguably as addictive as heroin or cocaine. I know about addiction. But trying to say this is the equivalent of digital heroin is just a bit much.
At some point, people have to be responsible for their own choices in life. I don't want to live in a world where anything that's remotely dangerous has to be banned to protect the small percentage of people who have a problem from themselves. We don't normally do that. Gambling is legal. State governments run lotteries. There are people who play MMORPGs until they die from exhaustion. Sometimes that's just life.
Cigarettes and heroin are very alike we all have our crosses to carry but it seems your ok with the likes of games like Battlefront making bold steps to turn an AAA game from €80 to €2100 trying to set precedence in the gaming industry. Nowhere on this thread does it say this game or any game has to be taken away from you or anyone else it's merely debating what legislators are trying to pass as laws mainly outside the US and with senators in the US looking at how Europe and Australia plan on changing legislation due to pressure from its citizens also want to make changes to law.
Nobody made the bold claim that this game is digital heroin you came to that conclusion yourself and for someone who claims to know about addiction you seem very dismissive towards addicts with a simply just give it up attitude.
Yes lotteries are gambling we have them too outside of the states the thing over here is we buy a chance at winning life changing sums of money and it's heavily regulated.
I'd rather spend €10 to win €80m personally than 650 Dilithium for a chance to win a legendary character. Yet I have to be 18 to gamble €10 for the €80m and 12 to gamble €10 on a 650 Dilithium pull
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I agree 100%. But I don't think there's much of a chance of this gaming mechanic being banned in any significant way.
Asian countries are a lot further ahead of America/Europe in terms of having the National Discussion about responsible gaming, and they've regulated some things, but not banned them. That's all we're really talking about, at the end of the day.
State lotteries? A perfect example. if Timelines and other games with any sort of loot box mechanic follows the same regulations as lotteries, I'm a happy camper. The buyer has all information available to them at the time of purchase. Said information is accurate, adequately publicized, audited from time to time to ensure accuracy, and applies the same way at all times to all players. If the buyer chooses to be unaware of that information, or for some reason prefers discard that information (in which case, that's when you get into the realm of an addiction or other disorder), that's where it ceases to be the developer's responsibility.
There may be some honest game developers who aren't manipulating systems to extract maximum revenue, but it's an open secret that many are doing just that, and that's why it's such a colossal struggle to get any of them to post drop rates, and why they all go to the hassle of creating so many different in-game currencies to skirt the issue of what real world dollar value anything has.
Give me posted drop rates and assurances that said drop rates are accurate at all times and for all players (oh, and fer chrissakes, somebody find out how DB is doing RNG, because I remain highly skeptical that they aren't using some kind of very low-end pseudo-RNG that is prone to clumpiness, and require them to meet the same standards as state lottery RNG), and I'm good.
I don't think that's too big an ask. And if the devs think it is? Well, that's why governments are starting to sniff around...
Well, your lottery sounds like ours. They're not much different. And if you think you're going to win a lottery, I question your intelligence. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning twice than winning big in a lottery. If you want to make a moral argument, I think it's worse that government takes advantage of its least educated and poorest citizens by offering them the false hope of a lottery. I've seen people on food assistance buy $200 dollars worth of tickets and think it's a good investment. It's more or less a regressive voluntary tax paid by people who don't understand statistics. That said I don't want to regulate people's ability to make stupid choices just because I don't like them. I'd just prefer the government wasn't acting as a bookie.
I really just think it's silly to focus on gaming adding loot boxes as some huge evil that requires legislation. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy loot boxes. I think the market should determine whether or not they remain a thing. If people like them, then they'll buy them. If they don't they'll go away on their own. I'm just not into having the state acting as a parent or a nanny unless it is absolutely necessary.
Ok dismiss my point if you wish. I said they're arguably as addictive as each other if not more. If you look at the actual science, nicotine is one of the most addictive substances that exists. I didn't say it was equivalent to heroin in terms of damage to one's body, but it's arguably a more addictive substance. So snark away if you must, but what I said isn't false.
How many cases of people killing other people so they could get money to buy cigarettes have you heard of?
because it isn't gambling. when you gamble you might not win anything. buying a loot box always contains something that can be used in the game.
Getting something completely useless because you have 1,000 of them already is effectively the exact same thing as getting nothing.
the only way this would not be gambling is if the player would buy loot boxes/packs/etc in order to gain the useless items he/she doesn't need.
Not only that, in the US most lotteries are state-run & are used as a source of government revenue. Which is another reason online games are not currently legally considered gambling; it's hard to tax pixels.
If cigarettes were illegal and cost as much as heroin it would happen.
You are right, cause gamblers that kill people for money to gamble are doing it because gambling is outlawed and very expensive!
Oh...wait..
“The ESRB would say that violence is bad for society so violent video games get a higher rating. Gore is bad for society so gory video games get a higher rating. And nudity and cursing, those are bad so they get a higher rating. And yet something that really could have a serious impediment to the mental development of children, they’re saying ‘well it’s not technically gambling so we’re not going to make a stand here.’
“It’s just curious to me why they’re able to choose things like violence, nudity, those types of issues, but when it comes to an issue that has some credibility behind it, especially in mobile games, I question why they’re not taking a stronger stance, or at least leaving open the possibility that it’s something they’re going to look into.”
Enthoven points to the Chinese response to loot boxes, in which the Chinese government pointed to studies that show addiction patterns in children similar to what we see with gambling addicts. The Chinese government has come out with new regulations requiring game publishers to list probability outcomes for all loot boxes, though some developers have found ways to work around these new rules.
Enthoven’s video game review aggregation website OpenCritic will soon begin addressing different revenue models, such as loot-boxes and micro-transactions, alongside its current review score aggregation in an attempt to provide consumers with even more information.
Source:https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2017/10/12/the-esrb-is-wrong-about-loot-boxes-and-gambling/amp/
You obviously don't understand the definition of random. "Clumpiness" is perfectly normal and to be expected if the outcome is random. Random means the outcome of any two events are unrelated to each other. What happens in event 1 has no bearing on event 2, so there's no reason you shouldn't get exactly the same outcome just because it already happened once or twice before.
The human brain isn't designed to understand the concept of random outcomes, and we will always perceive patterns, even where there aren't any. This is is called perception bias. Another aspect of perception bias is the tendency to put more emotional weight on outliers, thus undesired results or extremely desired ones are likely to be perceived as happening more often than they actually do. This is why gamblers tend to inaccurately recall their actual results.
There's something called the law of large numbers. That means over time, the outcomes will always work out to the same basic ratios. Any perception of things occurring when they should not is due to perception bias and not having a large enough sample size. If you tracked every result, these perceived inconsistencies would disappear.
The developers have no reason to cheat you or anyone else. They don't benefit from messing with the outcome, as they don't gain anything from you winning or losing. The fact that you played is the only thing they derive benefit from. If anything, they'd have an incentive to skew results to the player's benefit if they were actually going to cheat. It costs them nothing when you win, and they don't gain anything when you lose.
Gambling is still more accessible than heroin. It is very easy travel to a location where gambling is legal, and the previously mentioned state lotteries are widely availble. Even in places where it is totally illegal, all you need is a like-minded friend and a deck of cards or sporting event to watch, or a legal form of "simulated gambling" (such as the original topic).
Besides, I am not sure that there are that many heroin addicts murdering people for money anyway. Desperate people, regardless if the source of desperation, will resort to lesser crimes first, and heroin makes people sloppy, and sloppy people get caught. Most of the murders associated with heroin are committed by the gangs that profit from it, and that is true with underground mob-run casinos and with alchol during prohibition. It is the illegality that causes the societal harm; the effect on the brain is what defines an addiction.
Coming back to heroin, there was a time when it was legal, but it was prescribed by doctors to treat pain (and, ironically, opiod addiction) rather than used recreationally. When the unhealthy effects became more well known, it was banned, but doctors could still prescribe it to existing addicts and addicts could live in society. Laws were later tightened again, cutting off the supply, and the demand soared, leading to a black market, rising prices leading to rising crime and violence, inconsistant product leading to more overdoses, and more aggressive pushing by the black market to replace and grow their customer base.
Which is why, to come full circle, banning loot boxes outright would be a terrible idea, as those predisposed to gambling addiction can fall victem to a legitimate casino or underground bookmaker just as easily. There is room for some regulations, such as the publication of odds or warnings about addiction, but widespread prohibitation is rarely the answer.
Couldn't find one. But I found this, which I thought was relevant to our crowd. Love Shatner's quote at the end.
https://loweringthebar.net/2017/07/good-reason-to-kill-68-trek-v-wars.html
The event offers that cost $$$ are "get this character and packs" the packs are a bonus, in theory you' re buying the 5* or 4* char+chrons+creds+vip+dili and as an added bonus the packs.
The gambling part, the "buy this mostly useless pack for the chance you might win something you need" they switched the currency used in order to prevent gambling accusations. Because you don't pay for it with actual currency. You buy dilithium and it's your problem what you do with it. Just like staying a virgin by taking it up the plasma exhaust.
There's gambling, and then there's "gambling." Legally, it is not gambling. I don't think anyone here is saying it's not "gambling."
Also included in "gambling" is that prize claw game, skee ball, and those gumball machines at the supermarket with little prize capsules.