Current Events > Why are they trying to nail the lootboxes as gambling?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Dash_Harber posted...

"You are free to disagree, but don't you dare disagree."

How in the fuck could you possibly interpret what he said as that? What mindset must you have to be so intellectually dishonest?
---

dave_is_slick posted...

Dash_Harber posted...

"You are free to disagree, but don't you dare disagree."

How in the fuck could you possibly interpret what he said as that? What mindset must you have to be so intellectually dishonest?

He told me I'm allowed to disagree, but I can't say what I think about the subject. I'm not really sure where to go from there.

thronedfire2 posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

thronedfire2 posted...

people have no willpower

and some parents are dumb and don't monitor what their kids are doing online

Kids is smoke and mirrors to disguise the fact that most of the victims are adults.

http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-2570-how-young-gamers-can-quietly-ruin-their-parents-finances.html

I know its cracked but theres plenty of source links in the article

and obviously most "victims" are adults, but kids buying shit with a parents CC does happen. its not just loot boxes and skins though

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that this affects normal people more than parents of irresponsible kids.
---

Dash_Harber posted...

He told me I'm allowed to disagree, but I can't say what I think about the subject. I'm not really sure where to go from there.

Intellectual dishonesty is a helluva drug. I get it, in order to stay on your knees for these companies you need to pretend you don't understand something when it's pretty fucking clear, just know we all see it as pathetic.
---

dave_is_slick posted...

Dash_Harber posted...

He told me I'm allowed to disagree, but I can't say what I think about the subject. I'm not really sure where to go from there.

Intellectual dishonesty is a helluva drug. I get it, in order to stay on your knees for these companies you need to pretend you don't understand something when it's pretty fucking clear, just know we all see it as pathetic.

I understand him just fine, but he said I could disagree with the study (which implied lootboxes were gambling) but that I couldn't say that lootboxes were gambling. He also said I didn't back up my argument with reasons, which I did.

So your only point is that you want to be obnoxious about it? Okay, I won't waste my time with you, either, then.

Dash_Harber posted...

I understand him just fine, but he said I could disagree with the study (which implied lootboxes were gambling) but that I couldn't say that lootboxes were gambling. He also said I didn't back up my argument with reasons, which I did.

So your only point is that you want to be obnoxious about it? Okay, I won't waste my time with you, either, then.

You haven't backed up anything. He's the only one that's provided a source and you're simply going "nu-uh"! And frankly, I've never given a shit what people think of me here so toodles!
---

I spent $1500 on packs on FIFA 18

Get fucking rid of them pls

Not even buying FIFA 19
---

Sorry @Dash_Harber but your own personal belief about the matter on whether loot boxes are gambling or not doesn't hold nearly as much weight, or credibility, as a scientific study that weighs in on the same subject.

Unless you publish a paper with several field studies cited, multiple sample pools while corroborated results, AND have that paper recognized and accepted as using reliable and repeatable information, you won't have as much of a say.

However, you are free to believe what you want, and try to support that however you can. The problem you seem to be having is that other people are also free to disagree with you and point out where you're wrong. Right now the people against your interpretation have more evidence and sources supporting their side. In order to continue your argument (without looking stubborn or ignorant) you need to find sources countering theirs that support your side, or create and execute your own studies that back up your argument.

TL;DR: You're wrong, the evidence is against you. If you don't want to keep being wrong, get your own evidence for your side.

STL;DR: Prove it or shut it.
---

Dash_Harber posted...

Yes, a gamble, however, you are using equivocation here; the gambling we are talking about is a game of chance where money is wagered on the chance for more valuable money or property. The other means, "any chance". Again, if I said, "I gambled on a fart and shit my pants", that doesn't mean it's a literal game of chance.

I don't pay money to "gamble" on a fart, nor is farting / shitting optional even if you had to pay money for it. It's also not a game, period. A video game is a game. Cards are a game. Throwing dice and betting on odds are a game. Pinball is a game. You farting is just something that happens and isn't optional. You're also using an informal vernacular definition of gambling. This analogy makes about as much sense as saying that jumping through hoops to get a research paper done means you engaged in physical cardio exercise.

Dash_Harber posted...

Okay, here's my problem with that;
- Even if it is harmful, banning lootboxes is the same as banning gambling, or alcohol, or anything else that can be addictive. It doesn't work.
- Children shouldn't be able to do it, anyway, so the 'think of the children!' argument holds no water.

This is bullshit. Raising the drinking age to 21 (18 previously) and crackdowns on DUI have dramatically reduced the amount of alcohol-related problems. Additionally, no one is asking gambling to be banned, not as casino roulette and not as loot boxes in games. We just want these games to be regulated and counted as gambling. That means.....

1. AO ESRB rating
2. You have to do a harder job of verifying that anyone using your game is 21 years or older. This doesn't stop adults from pissing away their life on the games, however, without a sizeable amount of people, most of whom are children, to play your mobage mmo for free, most of these games will outright fail and generally become non profitable as the free players help keep the community alive so the paying players feel as though they are getting their money's worth.

Additionally, verifying that people are 21 years or older is a bit tougher than most game companies need or want to have to go through. The games will still exist, the same way Online Poker does, but they will be dramatically crippled in their ability to exploit people with random pay-for loot.

Dash_Harber posted...

I actually didn't. There must be some miscommunication there, because I have been saying they are nothing alike this whole time.

No. This is what you said, verbatim:

Dash_Harber posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

There's more game than there is in something like roulette or slots.

Not in the lootbox feature

Dash_Harber posted...

And the content of the lootboxes is known to you before you buy the lootbox. How is that different?

The contents aren't known. That's the point of the loot box. FFG's card games have a list of every card, by name, and the quantities it appears in, in every pack, for every card game they make. If you want a card, you know exactly what pack to buy. The packs provide 3 copies of each card (max allowed per deck). Video loot boxes contain unknown items until purchased.
---

here is the thign with loot boxes they dont even have to give out the top tier rewards do to that hole no regulations thing

and yes it is gambling it ticks all the same boxes it feeds on addiction even they use predatory practices to trick people into spending tons of money

and i look foward to the coming crash for companies like EA who have been praying on these factors

i hope they also go after gatcha games but well japan would just ignore it and just not release them out side of japan any more
---

Hopefully EA loses this fight.
---

Mr_Karate_II posted...

Hopefully EA loses this fight.

as a gamer you stand to gain nothing from continued lootbox stuff
---

Sabram posted...

Sorry @Dash_Harber but your own personal belief about the matter on whether loot boxes are gambling or not doesn't hold nearly as much weight, or credibility, as a scientific study that weighs in on the same subject.

Unless you publish a paper with several field studies cited, multiple sample pools while corroborated results, AND have that paper recognized and accepted as using reliable and repeatable information, you won't have as much of a say.

However, you are free to believe what you want, and try to support that however you can. The problem you seem to be having is that other people are also free to disagree with you and point out where you're wrong. Right now the people against your interpretation have more evidence and sources supporting their side. In order to continue your argument (without looking stubborn or ignorant) you need to find sources countering theirs that support your side, or create and execute your own studies that back up your argument.

TL;DR: You're wrong, the evidence is against you. If you don't want to keep being wrong, get your own evidence for your side.

STL;DR: Prove it or shut it.

First, literally the only paper anyone has shown so drew a ridiculous conclusion; even if it fit some of the categories, then it still counted.

Second, appeal to authority.

Tyranthraxus posted...

I don't pay money to "gamble" on a fart, nor is farting / shitting optional even if you had to pay money for it. It's also not a game, period. A video game is a game. Cards are a game. Throwing dice and betting on odds are a game. Pinball is a game. You farting is just something that happens and isn't optional. You're also using an informal vernacular definition of gambling. This analogy makes about as much sense as saying that jumping through hoops to get a research paper done means you engaged in physical cardio exercise.

I was illustrating how it was equivocation, I wasn't arguing that it was gambling. I think you completely misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying arguing that it was gambling was an example of equivocation, not that it was a good analogy for the situation. Sorry for the misunderstanding, there.

Tyranthraxus posted...

This is bullshit.

Here is the issue; AO games are basically banned from retail. It's the kiss of death. It's just a fancy way to ban out it without outright banning it.

Tyranthraxus posted...

The contents aren't known.

Uhhh ... pretty much every single game I'm aware of shows you what you could get from a lootbox. As for card games ... that's simply not true. For example, MTG only lists rarities, not amounts of cards in each pack. I think the fact that you are saying that there is nothing random about trading cards means you are really, really stretching the scenario here to fit your argument.

"Loot boxes aren't gambling"

Belgium already ruled that they are. Fifteen more countries will be behind them soon enough.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-09-17-15-european-gambling-regulators-unite-to-tackle-loot-box-threat
---

Loot boxes are fucking cancer to the gaming industry.
---

I refuse to support this shitty business practice, i have never bought loot boxes in any mobile game that i have played.
---

Saying it's not gambling because you always end up with something is like saying the lottery isn't gambling because you still end up with a beautiful piece of paper.

If lootboxes aren't gambling, then they aren't in name only.

It's a form of gambling. Not sure if the gov't should get involved though. The problem with loot boxes is people being dumb, not the concept itself. If no one used them, they'd disappear.
---

Don't bother discussing this with Dash_Harber. He continues to tout his assumptions and opinions as fact in the face of actual facts.
I posted the actual Belgian legislation regarding gambling and the Belgian Gaming Commission's report which lead to this whole thing. He didn't even adress it because it conflicted with his assumptions.
---

Knowledge_King posted...

If no one used them, they'd disappear.

>IRL gambling
>cigarettes
>heroin
>payday loans/loansharks

I know what you're saying, I'm just pointing out that this is what people said about other vices. That people were just being stupid.

It's time that everybody be able to acknowledge and admit that Lootboxes are unethical and simply exist to get you addicted to games. That's literally the only reason they exist now, because gaming companies realized they can stimulate that dopamine response and make you pay for virtual items out the ass
---

GATTJT posted...

DarthAragorn posted...

It doesn't fit the US definition of gambling, sure

But it absolutely uses the same methodology as gambling

How is it any different from, say, Magic or Yugioh booster packs?

I will agree that they should be straight forward in regards to the chances of getting something desirable.

You have a fix amount of card produce in every sheet that cant be adjusted by the company "the house" meanwhile with logo boxes they can sure as hell tweak the odds at a whim.
---

Dash_Harber posted...

I was illustrating how it was equivocation, I wasn't arguing that it was gambling. I think you completely misunderstood what I was saying. I was saying arguing that it was gambling was an example of equivocation, not that it was a good analogy for the situation. Sorry for the misunderstanding, there.

No there's no misunderstanding. I'm telling you that you're using an informal definition of gambling to describe something that isn't gambling and then saying that because shitting your pants isn't gambling then neither is paying real cash money for a computer randomized outcome.

Dash_Harber posted...

Here is the issue; AO games are basically banned from retail. It's the kiss of death. It's just a fancy way to ban out it without outright banning it.

Not a single mobile game in the world is on sale in a retail store and they all manage to do just fine and the most successful of them even dramatically exceed the profits of most retail games to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. What you're describing predominantly hurts games like FIFA to which the entire point of this exercise is to force loot boxes out of those games so that they can stay in retail stores.

AO games also aren't banned from retail stores. It's a self-regulated decision. Adherence to any ESRB standards is entirely voluntary and companies do so in order to build goodwill with customers. The ESRB is not a government bureau the way something like the FAA is and can't actually force anyone to do anything.

Dash_Harber posted...

Uhhh ... pretty much every single game I'm aware of shows you what you could get from a lootbox. As for card games ... that's simply not true. For example, MTG only lists rarities, not amounts of cards in each pack. I think the fact that you are saying that there is nothing random about trading cards means you are really, really stretching the scenario here to fit your argument.

No. The loot box has a list of possible outcomes but the actual contents of the box are an extremely small subset of all possible outcomes and while all possible outcomes are known, the contents of the box themselves are not. If I go play Roulette, for example, I can see every number on the wheel. I know the ball must stop on one of those numbers, but I won't know what number it will stop on until we actually spin the wheel and let the ball stop.

And once again, if I want a specific MTG card, I can just buy the card. I can play MTG without ever buying a booster pack.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

.And once again, if I want a specific MTG card, I can just buy the card. I can play MTG without ever buying a booster pack.

And you can play Overwatch without ever buying a lootbox. They're optional, you don't need to buy lootboxes to play, they just give you some visual bonuses.
---

gmanthebest posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

.And once again, if I want a specific MTG card, I can just buy the card. I can play MTG without ever buying a booster pack.

And you can play Overwatch without ever buying a lootbox. They're optional, you don't need to buy lootboxes to play, they just give you some visual bonuses.

You can also play p2w mobage like Game of War: Fire Age without buying loot boxes. You just will never progress past beginner content. Stupid argument. Next.
---

By most legal definitions loot boxes would be considered a lottery or a form of gambling.

The industry will obviously fight that characterization but it's a tough arguement to make convincingly. As someone that works in law, in the casino industry, its a fight that is better fought by lobbying and influencing public opinion with the goal of preventing the regulation from happening or delay it than in a court room.

Governments always lag in regulating new forms of gambling and regulating tech in general, these are just another example of it. As more people become aware of how pervasive loot boxes have become you can expect to see more regulation over the next few years.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

gmanthebest posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

.And once again, if I want a specific MTG card, I can just buy the card. I can play MTG without ever buying a booster pack.

And you can play Overwatch without ever buying a lootbox. They're optional, you don't need to buy lootboxes to play, they just give you some visual bonuses.

You can also play p2w mobage like Game of War: Fire Age without buying loot boxes. You just will never progress past beginner content. Stupid argument. Next.

And if someone wants to waste their money on a p2w, the government shouldn't stop them. Stupid argument. Next.
---

gmanthebest posted...

And if someone wants to waste their money on a p2w, the government shouldn't stop them. Stupid argument. Next.

I assume you feel this way about gambling, too, though, so I'm not sure why you feel compelled to weigh in with respect to whether or not they are gambling
---

None of this has anything to do with robbing consumers of their right to spend their money as they please. This is about whether or not lootboxes are markedly manipulative business models, and if they should be permitted.

gmanthebest posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

gmanthebest posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

.And once again, if I want a specific MTG card, I can just buy the card. I can play MTG without ever buying a booster pack.

And you can play Overwatch without ever buying a lootbox. They're optional, you don't need to buy lootboxes to play, they just give you some visual bonuses.

You can also play p2w mobage like Game of War: Fire Age without buying loot boxes. You just will never progress past beginner content. Stupid argument. Next.

And if someone wants to waste their money on a p2w, the government shouldn't stop them. Stupid argument. Next.

I don't want the government to stop them, I just want them to count it as gambling. Stupid argument. Next.
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

None of this has anything to do with robbing consumers of their right to spend their money as they please.

Tell that to the nanny states who want them illegal.
---

Once upon a time you unlocked various skins and other things by actually playing the game. But once companies figured out that people would PAY to potentially unlock them via random chance they couldn't stop rubbing their hands together at all of the free money that was about to be coming their way.

Only recent game that thus far I haven't seen any proof of them locking stuff behind a paywall is the new Spiderman game, which a buddy of mine has finished already but played for 30-40 or more hours and unlocked a LOT of stuff just by playing it.

At least if these companies guaranteed you something you could use that would be worth taking the chance would be in these digital lockboxes then less people would complain about them. But when you're only given an X% chance of unlocking what you NEED to make the game a bit easier without grinding then it is a gamble and not that much of a stretch to get to where these governments have and call this gambling.
---

gmanthebest posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

None of this has anything to do with robbing consumers of their right to spend their money as they please.

Tell that to the nanny states who want them illegal.

See, this is why you need to read the whole post before you reply.

Dragonblade01 posted...

gmanthebest posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

None of this has anything to do with robbing consumers of their right to spend their money as they please.

Tell that to the nanny states who want them illegal.

See, this is why you need to read the whole post before you reply.

Just pointing out that you were wrong. There's no reason to prohibit lootboxes other than nanny state.
---

gmanthebest posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

gmanthebest posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

None of this has anything to do with robbing consumers of their right to spend their money as they please.

Tell that to the nanny states who want them illegal.

See, this is why you need to read the whole post before you reply.

Just pointing out that you were wrong. There's no reason to prohibit lootboxes other than nanny state.

Wrong about what? It's literally about what companies are allowed to do. That's it.

GATTJT posted...

How is it any different from, say, Magic or Yugioh booster packs?

I can't speak to loot boxes, but Magic gets away with it mainly for two reasons:

1. Wizards of the Coast doesn't acknowledge the secondary market at all. You can't buy cards directly from them or sell directly to them, so they deem the contents of a pack to be worthless. This means that it functions closer to those machines in stores that spit out a toy for a quarter, which in the US at least is not controlled as gambling.

2. The frequency of premium cards is all explicitly spelled out on the pack(this has been a problem with digital products in some countries specifically, e.g. Hearthstone, where despite the cards having no value as they are not tradeable/resellable/etc. the fact that you're paying without being told your odds ran afoul of some gambling laws)

Now that's just the US, so idk how Belgium treats it.
---

fuck loot crates
---

I couldn't imagine defending loot boxes or thinking in my head that loot boxes aren't at least a form of gambling.

No, the contents don't have real world value, but I don't think that just disqualifies it as gambling. They do have an extremely high personal value to the person using the loot boxes. And if one is wagering money on a chance to get something that is personally valuable to them, be it an extremely rare Rocket League decal, a CSGO camo, or a Lionel Messi card, then that's gambling.

They're going to experience that same rush that a person waiting for the wheel to land on black experiences when they're waiting for wheel to stop on a Camo or for Ronaldo to be sitting at the end of the pack.
---

Anteaterking posted...

This means that it functions closer to those machines in stores that spit out a toy for a quarter, which in the US at least is not controlled as gambling.

Not disagreeing with you, just adding.

In a lot of places those machines are gambling devices that would be illegal if they didn't fit into some specific statutory exception and sometimes are outright illegal. In Florida for example, the claw grabber machines that kids get stuck in are legally "slot machines" that fit into an exception for amusement machines that is very limited to those types of machines. In NJ there is a whole section of the law and regulatory body for carnival games because all of those games played on the boardwalks would be prohibited gambling games without the exception.

Its hard to play the "this is like that" game with gambling because so much of it is politically drawn lines that don't make sense.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

No there's no misunderstanding. I'm telling you that you're using an informal definition of gambling to describe something that isn't gambling and then saying that because shitting your pants isn't gambling then neither is paying real cash money for a computer randomized outcome.

First, again, I was making an example of equivocation, not trying to compare what is and isn't gambling. Second, I'm saying they aren't gambling, so I'm not sure what you are arguing with if you agree with that.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Not a single mobile game in the world is on sale in a retail store and they all manage to do just fine and the most successful of them even dramatically exceed the profits of most retail games to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. What you're describing predominantly hurts games like FIFA to which the entire point of this exercise is to force loot boxes out of those games so that they can stay in retail stores.

AO games also aren't banned from retail stores. It's a self-regulated decision. Adherence to any ESRB standards is entirely voluntary and companies do so in order to build goodwill with customers. The ESRB is not a government bureau the way something like the FAA is and can't actually force anyone to do anything.

That's why I said 'basically'. No AAA developers is going to use them because there are those regulations in place at the store level. Read my post again, I never said it was a ban, I said it would effectively work as one.

Tyranthraxus posted...

No. The loot box has a list of possible outcomes but the actual contents of the box are an extremely small subset of all possible outcomes and while all possible outcomes are known, the contents of the box themselves are not. If I go play Roulette, for example, I can see every number on the wheel. I know the ball must stop on one of those numbers, but I won't know what number it will stop on until we actually spin the wheel and let the ball stop.

Which is exactly the same as trading cards. So you are saying if they said, "you have x% chance to win y" then it wouldn't be gambling?

Tyranthraxus posted...

And once again, if I want a specific MTG card, I can just buy the card. I can play MTG without ever buying a booster pack.

Yes, in an unregulated aftermarket. However, the aftermarket is not what they are talking about regulating, so it makes absolutely no difference.

Also, some games offer that ability, as well. For example, Destiny 2 allows you to purchase lootbox items straight out with in game currency. So I guess that disqualifies that from gambling too, huh?

Dash_Harber posted...

First, again, I was making an example of equivocation, not trying to compare what is and isn't gambling. Second, I'm saying they aren't gambling, so I'm not sure what you are arguing with if you agree with that.

Yes. I am trying to explain that not only is your equivocation completely meritless, but the conclusion that loot boxes aren't gambling because of shitting your pants is non sequitur and wrong.

Dash_Harber posted...

That's why I said 'basically'. No AAA developers is going to use them because there are those regulations in place at the store level. Read my post again, I never said it was a ban, I said it would effectively work as one.

It won't be a ban. They can still make the game. It just won't have loot boxes if they want to sell it in store.

Dash_Harber posted...

Which is exactly the same as trading cards. So you are saying if they said, "you have x% chance to win y" then it wouldn't be gambling?

You saying it's the same thing as trading cards over and over again doesn't make it true. I can play trading cards without gambling. I cannot play Roulette without gambling (barring private for-fun roulette contraptions). In Mobage, I have no way to get most premium items without gambling. While the individual packs are gambling, they are also optional because of the aftermarket.

Dash_Harber posted...

Yes, in an unregulated aftermarket. However, the aftermarket is not what they are talking about regulating, so it makes absolutely no difference.

They're not regulating the aftermarket because the aftermarket doesn't deal in gambling.

Dash_Harber posted...

Also, some games offer that ability, as well. For example, Destiny 2 allows you to purchase lootbox items straight out with in game currency. So I guess that disqualifies that from gambling too, huh?

In systems where the only way to purchase lootboxes is with in game currency that cannot be purchased for real money, for example, Dissidia NT, then it is not gambling. It's functionally identical to MMO boss drops at that point.
---

Bok_Choi posted...

Knowledge_King posted...

If no one used them, they'd disappear.

>IRL gambling
>cigarettes
>heroin
>payday loans/loansharks

I know what you're saying, I'm just pointing out that this is what people said about other vices. That people were just being stupid.

It's time that everybody be able to acknowledge and admit that Lootboxes are unethical and simply exist to get you addicted to games. That's literally the only reason they exist now, because gaming companies realized they can stimulate that dopamine response and make you pay for virtual items out the ass

tbf I don't care about those other things either. But that's just me.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Yes. I am trying to explain that not only is your equivocation completely meritless, but the conclusion that loot boxes aren't gambling because of shitting your pants is non sequitur and wrong.

Again, it was an example of equivocation. It's not meritless, because it is an example of equivocation. I'm not saying it's similar in any way to the situation, I'm saying it's an example of the equivocation fallacy that is also being used in this topic.

Tyranthraxus posted...

It won't be a ban. They can still make the game. It just won't have loot boxes if they want to sell it in store.

So how is that functionally not a ban on the lootboxes? You think that the companies will keep making games with them even though they can't sell them?

Tyranthraxus posted...

You saying it's the same thing as trading cards over and over again doesn't make it true. I can play trading cards without gambling. I cannot play Roulette without gambling (barring private for-fun roulette contraptions). In Mobage, I have no way to get most premium items without gambling. While the individual packs are gambling, they are also optional because of the aftermarket.

And you saying I'm wrong over and over again doesn't make that true.

Basically, you are saying, if an aftermarket exists, it's not gambling in the case of trading cards, but in the case of games, the existence of an aftermarket is negligible. So which is it?

Also, what trading card game are you playing where booster packs are optional? If no one buys them, there is no aftermarket.

Tyranthraxus posted...

They're not regulating the aftermarket because the aftermarket doesn't deal in gambling.

Yes, thank you for agreeing with me.

Tyranthraxus posted...

In systems where the only way to purchase lootboxes is with in game currency that cannot be purchased for real money, for example, Dissidia NT, then it is not gambling. It's functionally identical to MMO boss drops at that point.

That's not what you said. You said that trading cards weren't gambling because;
- You always knew what you were getting (you actually don't)
- An aftermarket exists (one exists in lootbox games, too) so it's not gambling
- Trading cards have the option to buy specific items outright (and so do some games)
All of those things are either untrue, or also true in lootboxes. You are just arbitrarily saying one is okay and one is not.

card pack s do have rules and regulations they have to fallow there are no rules for loot boxes they dont even legally have to give out rare items ever meaning yes they can be lieing about what you are buying

oh and it was just factually proven loot boxes adhere tot he same addiction parts of the brain as gambling by australia
---

Dunno why people are defending companies ripping gamers off.
---

powerman1426 posted...

Cuz fuck em that's why

---

LightningAce11 posted...

Dunno why people are defending companies ripping gamers off.

I'm not defending that, I'm saying it's shortsighted to run to the government to correct the problem after;
A) we spent a long ass time trying to be recognized as a medium capable of appealing to adults, and,
B) the problem is largely created by gamers who are now trying to pass the buck and say, 'no, I'm just worried about the children, I would never buy them!'.

Dash_Harber posted...

LightningAce11 posted...

Dunno why people are defending companies ripping gamers off.

I'm not defending that, I'm saying it's shortsighted to run to the government to correct the problem after;
A) we spent a long ass time trying to be recognized as a medium capable of appealing to adults, and,
B) the problem is largely created by gamers who are now trying to pass the buck and say, 'no, I'm just worried about the children, I would never buy them!'.

do you know how addiction works cus you seem to be blind to the fact loot boxes prey upon addiction

as for video games being taken seriously guess what that includes regulations just like movies and tv shows and comics and books and just about every other bussiness has on them to ensure consumers and employees are treated fairly (granted america fails at this hole thing)
---

Dash_Harber posted...

LightningAce11 posted...

Dunno why people are defending companies ripping gamers off.

I'm not defending that, I'm saying it's shortsighted to run to the government to correct the problem after;
A) we spent a long ass time trying to be recognized as a medium capable of appealing to adults, and,
B) the problem is largely created by gamers who are now trying to pass the buck and say, 'no, I'm just worried about the children, I would never buy them!'.

You tell me, as a gamer, how do I stop other gamers from buying loot boxes?
---

shnangyboos posted...

Dash_Harber posted...

LightningAce11 posted...

Dunno why people are defending companies ripping gamers off.

I'm not defending that, I'm saying it's shortsighted to run to the government to correct the problem after;
A) we spent a long ass time trying to be recognized as a medium capable of appealing to adults, and,
B) the problem is largely created by gamers who are now trying to pass the buck and say, 'no, I'm just worried about the children, I would never buy them!'.

You tell me, as a gamer, how do I stop other gamers from buying loot boxes?

You don't? You just stop fucking buying them? Why does it need to be a crusade?

Dash_Harber posted...

shnangyboos posted...

Dash_Harber posted...

LightningAce11 posted...

Dunno why people are defending companies ripping gamers off.

I'm not defending that, I'm saying it's shortsighted to run to the government to correct the problem after;
A) we spent a long ass time trying to be recognized as a medium capable of appealing to adults, and,
B) the problem is largely created by gamers who are now trying to pass the buck and say, 'no, I'm just worried about the children, I would never buy them!'.

You tell me, as a gamer, how do I stop other gamers from buying loot boxes?

You don't? You just stop fucking buying them? Why does it need to be a crusade?

You seem to be saying there's no blame to be levied and are basically saying there's nothing wrong.
---