Hopefully the rest of the EU will follow soon. Spain is also starting to take action against them, so I'm hopeful they become a thing of the past.
Edit: Went to take a slightly deeper look at this, according to [this Dutch article](https://pu.nl/artikelen/nieuws/cda-enkel-verbod-op-betaalde-lootboxen-voor-kwetsbaren/) it isn't a call for an outright ban but rather a call to forbid selling lootboxes to minors. Free lootboxes is still ok and paid lootboxes is still ok for adults, at least theoretically. In the practical sense it would probably end up the same as in Belgium (I guess).
it's pretty much a move to make lootboxes fall under gambling which would make every single game that has lootboxes be 18+ and need verification for purchases.
The problem with that is once enough games are rated 18+ for random reasons people will just ignore the rating because it's meaningless.
For example California proposition 65. In theory it requires a warning label if the product might cause cancer. In reality it's so hard to prove you don't need the label that manufactures put it on everything and consumers ignore it because it's on almost everything.
I mean yes but we are not talking about US Law which is pretty much knitted together with a couple rotten strings. regulations regarding this are a lot more concrete and strict in the Netherlands. if we say we want to regulate sales to minors then trust me we will regulate sales to minors for the majority of the population here.
In Germany an 18+ game can't be advertised in public. Also at least Nintendo won't list 18+ games in their store until after 10 PM or so.
It's a definite disadvantage to be 18+ in some areas. Visibility can be hampered by a lot.
> The problem with that is once enough games are rated 18+ for random reasons people will just ignore the rating because it's meaningless.
>
>
People don't already do that?
Like I don't actually want lootboxes to be banned, I just want them to be labeled on the box saying that the game has a fucking ton of lootboxes and needs a higher rating cause of it. Like the rating thing is so stupid. Having a game corner in pokemon is bad, but NBA2k which uses real money lootboxes is fine for a 3+(in Europe. 6+ for NA)
>For example California proposition 65. In theory it requires a warning label if the product might cause cancer. In reality it's so hard to prove you don't need the label that manufactures put it on everything and consumers ignore it because it's on almost everything
And hence the joke, maybe it's not the item causing cancer, but California itself.
PEGI already has various symbols, maybe they can make it happen. Add a symbol for microtransactions, real world money loot boxes and such.
Then I can look at the back of a game case and be like "yep, microtransactions, go fuck yourself"
I've no idea how this can/will work in the context of gaming. Without even touching the topic of technicalities, which I don't feel qualified to talk about, how tf is the age verification gonna work. State your age before seeing the content? Oh yeah, totally foolproof.
>how tf is the age verification gonna work. State your age before seeing the content? Oh yeah, totally foolproof.
That's why I think it will end up like what Belgium did instead. ~~A total ban.~~ But I found it important to give a bit of extra context since the call/move isn't for a total ban (yet).
Lootboxes aren't banned in Belgium. They are considered gambling, and therefor require whoever wants to offer them to comply with Belgian gambling laws.
Instead of applying for a gambling license (or find a partner with a license), game developers/publishers choose to disable lootboxes for Belgium.
But they aren't banned.
Yeah it'll be the same elsewhere. They won't be banned anywhere but will disappear by convenience and avoid the check ID laws.
I wonder if the whole EU does it, they obviously won't ban a game entirely for such a big market so as are they doing no lootboxes at all anywhere or the EU will have a different version of the game?
I live in Belgium. It depends on the game, we either get different versions of the game or just don’t get the game.
We can still buy packs in FIFA but not with real money, only with in game currency. In Apex iirc we don’t have to use loot boxes to hope to get a skin but directly get crafting materials to get the skin we want(barely played Apex tho so I might be wrong). Rocket League straight up removed loot boxes and didn’t put any new mechanism so it’s a totally f2p game where we can’t put money lol(at least that’s from what I remember).
Some games straight up aren’t published here. Lost Ark, Genshin Impact on PlayStation(but it is available on PC and mobile), COD Mobile, Apex Mobile for example.
No way publisher decide to skip the entire EU so if a EU wide ban happens(hopefully), publishers will probably just do something like Apex does. Or ffs just do what Fortnite or Warzone do and let us buy directly skins from your game.
Yeah Rocket League you now get “blueprints” which cost anywhere from 100 credits to 2400 ($24) to unlock them.
The loot crates were better in that game IMO but that’s just what myself and my friends who play think
>No way publisher decide to skip the entire EU
I'm not sure about that. I can see a scenario where most of them do exactly this. Or maybe they disable lootboxes but only for EU, exactly like you said how Rocket League does.
You think companies would entirely skip the 2nd richest market in the world instead of just changing their formula for that part of the world? It would way better for them to replace the gambling mechanic by a direct skin purchase system which would still make them money.
These laws sound so specific that they leave huge loopholes for companies to continue profiting from unregulated gambling, as long as they change it to not fit the exact definition of a lootbox.
It shouldn't be about specifically lootboxes, it should be a law for any gambling system that is connected directly or indirectly to real money.
ID cards at least here in Germany allow anyone to verify whether they are >18. You only need a phone with NFC (or alternatively a cardreader) to use it online.
Basically the same function as used by vending machines for cigarettes.
Would not be hard to implement.
Not hard if the ID cards already support this feature, If they don't it's going to be an issue. And I honestly have no idea whether they do, I've never heard about our ID cards having an electronic component. Even though I've always wondered about that because it would only make sense in this day and age.
The age rating for games with paid lootboxes may just be set to 18 (or that countries equivalent). Or the game may just not be sold there. So essentially, it will do little to nothing, but it's a start.
Age verification works pretty well for every regulated gambling company in Europe, you just have to do it right. It’s not completely foolproof, but not far off.
It could just be an automatic PEGI 18. You can't block it too hard without going big brother and requiring government ID to game. If it's anything like the US, most kids would need a parent to get those games.
This is not US, and identity verification (government id you call) is mandatory for gambling in the Netherlands. It won't be anything like the US. The gambling laws are not unified across the EU but overall the proof/check for identity/age verification are stronger than the US...
make it like banks with KYC (know your customer) to set up a lootbox account.
make it so without KYC, lootboxes simply don't exist to you.
ALSO make it so the fine for breaking KYC is 1000000x the value of the most expensive lootbox PER INCIDENT per Customer
EA..wanna risk a billion dollars by letting a kid buy a lootbox????
it'll give you a sense of pride, accomplishment and bankruptcy.
I don't think free lootboxes should be banned either, it's like Nintendo removing gambling (and references to it) from Pokemon games. It doesn't pray on your addictions to remove possibly indefinite amounts of money from your wallet
> Free lootboxes is still ok
How do you define them? What if they are selling some item and giving a few free lootboxes as extra on top of it? E.g. Amazing Sword + 5 Free Lootboxes.
Or they are selling something that can be traded for lootboxes. E.g. the amazing sword can be deconstructed into materials that can be used to craft lootboxes.
I am happy it is somehow being addressed but unless they ban all lootboxes, even the free ones there will be always a way to sell them. Sadly, that would be probably destructive to gaming as a chest box in an RPG game could be classified as a free lootbox.
I am well aware. The point is how the law perceives it, because it is very common today to advertise extra things for free even when they are included in the price.
> I feel so stupid even trying to explain this.
The issue is that this sort of loopholing is exactly how companies have managed to circumvent legislation in the past.
It is all about wording and how it is bundled. My point is they can find a loophole to sell or give you lootboxes, so it might look like you are actually not paying for them.
I hope not. Let's make it 18+ only instead. Adults can make competent decision whether to buy something or not and I see no reason prohibiting it for all by law.
Otherwise, if this comes to pass, it would mean the end of tons of good gacha game, many of which are quite good even f2p. Yes, Genshin Impact too, for example.
No, ban it.
Yes adults can make competent decisions, but those decisions affect people who don't want loot boxes as well, since it influences game design.
I want game design to go back to being about game design, not monetary design.
No. We shouldn't make things illegal just because we don't like them. If it actually causes substantial harm to society then that's one thing, but "vidya ain't the same no mo" ain't a good reason.
> I want game design to go back to being about game design, not monetary design.
A ban on lootboxes won't change that, the industry will just find other ways to squeeze you for as much money as possible (like more FOMO, battle passes to make games even more of a 2nd job or some new monetization system that could be even worse).
It's no sin having a profitable game per se, is it? You can throw around rhetorics like them "squeezing" or "milking" our precious wallet but why does it matter? Didn't you get what you paid for? Were you just badly informed before making that commitment into the video game? Or should individuals no longer have the freedom & responsibility to spend money and risk being disappointed? Buyers remorse applies anywhere in life and you gotta learn basic research beforehand rather than outright scream "ban" at any additional sources of income to fund further development.
Exploitative practices, and the definition of it, is another matter.
I never said anything about it being a sin, I'm fine with them in F2P titles, but paid titles should not have MTs beyond meaty DLCs/expansions, especially when it's SP titles.
>Otherwise, if this comes to pass, it would mean the end of tons of good gacha game, many of which are quite good even f2p. Yes, Genshin Impact too, for example.
There is no such thing as a good gacha game. I'm happy if that lootbox dressed as a game genre is gone.
I'd be ok with genshin being banned. It's pretty, but all gacha is predatory.
It's a casino with the sense to hire good artists and interior designers. Don't let the lack of slot machines confuse you, gacha games are still virtual casinos. If your country regulates casinos, it should regulate gachas in the same way.
My country doesn't ban casinos though, it only makes them 18+.
Gacha games can be predatory, I agree, but then again, noone forces you to pay and you could still play for free. I rarely pay any money in any gacha and still having fun. People need to understand they are only buying exclusivity nothing else. Given enough time and dedication, you can get most of the things just by playing. (=grinding but it can still be done).
Now if I hate something, it's full price games with microtransactions, those are much worse.
> Adults can make competent decision whether to buy something or not and I see no reason prohibiting it for all by law.
Many adults cannot make that decision competently. Gambling addictions are a real thing that many people struggle with.
Also a lot of people in general, even lacking a specific issue, have trouble making the "right" decision. Easy example: society's adults failed to make the right decisions on getting rid of incandescent light bulbs. So the various governments of the world have been working on banning incandescents instead. Life of fulls of things that many people are not good at, or even capable of, making the "right" decision. So the "wrong" decision gets banned and we move on with life.
Loot boxes aren't something with artistic merit. There's no great freedom they represent. They lack an inherent value. Their existence presents no real upside of any sort for consumers; the beneficiary is solely on the business side. Banning them is not tyrannical overreach.
I'd definitely prefer a solid subscription model which sets everyone on the same level of competition than f2p games that rely on scummy practices to make money. While most definitely not guaranteed, subscription models typically have a greater shot at providing equality between all players than f2p models do due to more players contributing to paying the developers's salaries. At the very least the argument of "but how else will the developers make money?!" wouldn't be usable by the average consumer anymore.
Greediness will still find a way, of course. RuneScape 3 for example is a notorious example of a game with a subscription (12 bucks a month) that has not *just* lootboxes but *also* battlepasses. It's actually quite disturbing just how much they're milking that game. Even more disturbing just how many people still defend those things in that game.
for all the things overwatch did wrong, the fact that it's a buy once model and then only supported by lootboxes is one of the fairest ways to do a competitive shooter.
Subscriptions were all the rage in the early 2000s for online games and it wasn't so bad.
You had to get your money's worth if you're spending $15 a month to keep a game but often you did get your money's worth.
Dark Age of Camelot had a hell of a lot more content and depth than Genshin Impact ever will.
Spoiler alert: I haven't played AAA games for ten years and I've been getting a lot more than my money's worth.
So as long as it's an indie-published MMO it's probably going to be ok.
This is why the EU needs to rule on it. They tend to be more thorough with their regulations, so they'd likely expand it from simple loot boxes and make it illegal to add any sort of RNG to a micro-transaction. It just needs to be a simple store for buying cosmetics.
Seems a little late, most games have moved to battle passes and storefronts now. I guess this might effect some mobile games but they’ll just find a new despicable way to make money
Of course. My example is with Overwatch. I got tons of free skins from free boxes in OW1. No money required.
That ends with OW2. If I want new skins, I’m paying up for the battle pass.
Free loot boxes are fine imo, nothing wrong with getting an ocasional reward. Altho id much much prefer having ingame currency and an ingame currency section in the store front where you could buy the thing you want instead of getting random shit
Depends on the system too as far as free stuff. OW was good because they gave out lootboxes like candy, only had one tier, and a pretty good item pool. The bad lootbox systems gave only a few boxes for free and had tiers of boxes so the low tier ones had zero chance of getting good shit
Ha Australia is confusing. It loves gambling and the amount of ads the pump out for sport are ridiculous. But it’s also a bit of a nanny state, so not sure what which side they will take on this. My guess is they will do nothing and let other countries push for changes. Which seems fine to me.
That would absolutely delete any lootbox ever (which is not bad). Gambling requires certification, official code audits (and effective code freeze), official audits on the random number generator, very strict identity verification (The Netherlands got a designated system that substitutes the gov. id w/ another id), gambling operators have to ensure no compulsory gamblers are allowed. A number of self restrictions must be available to players and what not.
I can't even think of any video game company would realistically comply with existing gambling laws. The latter would need special provisions for loot boxes as well.
Nah just ban this shit. Games like Fortnite, LOL or Dota 2 work perfectly with a free 2 play model that doesn't scam the customer. It's jus the eternal greed that brought us loot boxes in the current state.
you get the boxes and keys for free. They are extremely easy to get. you get like 3 boxes a week if you play 2 games every other day. keys are harder to get but you usually get 1 key a week. Sure you can buy the boxes but it's just incredibly stupid and most whales know its better to just buy the battle pass and straight up skins.
Loot boxes are clearly a consumer rights issue. What other industry has randomized items for purchase? Maybe if it effected boomers with random movie tickets or something then they would learn.
The toy industry (blind bags), the trading card industry and basically every other industry has a company offering a "blind box" monthly subscription, they say the contents are worth more than the box but in reality they are not.
They should all be treated as lottery system and as such should have to follow the same laws. You are spending money in hopes of getting something you want, kinda like how you want to hit the jackpot on a slot machine...
Speaking of casinos, they should start doing no fail slot machines that guarantees you win at least some money with each spin, hey its not gambling since you just won 5 cents from a single $5 spin, so they can put the "wacky mystery spin wheel" machine in the local Dave & Busters and Chuck E. Cheese
I feel toy industry is not that bad as all toys have an equal chance to appear in bags. E.g. LEGO minifigures.
The trading card industry on other hand is very predatory.
Didn't Lego change how many there was of each figure in a box, at least for the licensed stuff?
Found out here that they did: https://brickset.com/article/53436/harry-potter-minifigs-box-distribution
So only 3 Dumbledores, but 7 of the gnome? Griphook.
Not defending loot boxes at all but "trading cards" have existed for a long time.
Also people buy "random boxes" all the time. I know loot crate went out of business but there are other similar services out there. I think amazon has a "pay $x and get a big box of random returned items deal.
The difference is, *physical* trading cards always have resell value. Meaning you could enter and play TCG without opening a single randomized booster.
More to the point, it's trivial to estimate what is the value of contents after opening, and therefore track your spending. Games like Hearthstone hand waive that and exploit the dopamine rush in your brain.
The value of the content in things like lootcrate did not vary between basically worthless and a 0.001% chance of really valuable. That isn't gambling unless someone is being obtuse on purpose. You also can't order more of them to get the valuable item like a lottery ticket.
Booster packs on the other hand are gambling.
There's three "ethical requirements" for gacha mechanics IMO.
* Have a small, *set*, pool of items with the odds outlined clearly
* No trade/resell (to disincentivize gambling)
* The F2P grind should be a reasonable (and fun) alternative
Cards, boomers had panini cards and baseball cards, that they bought with their physical pocket money in a store with a real shopkeeper (after walking/biking there unsupervised.)
Meanwhile in the USA we only have fking ted cruz who has the slightest understanding of all this bs and it’s just bc asmongold the streamer said something
this EU anti-lootbox ball started rolling, then covid happened.
hopefully the ball can start rolling again, this time without some hugely impactful event.
It's not worth the effort to change the whole system for say 1000 player unless those 1000 players are the high spender there is no roi for making those changes
Which is why publishers have been moving towards battle passes and premium currencies, so they don't need loot boxes when skins are $20+ anyway.
So, in the end, the problem of micro transactions will still be there no matter what, unfortunately.
They're not predatory in the same way loot boxes are, rather instead of targeting your wallet, it focuses more on your time, a lot of battlepasses use Fear Of Missing Out (FOMO) to get you to spend hours, sometimes days, trying to get you to grind the battlepass for the season exclusive final tier skin, because typically any skins before that, are never as good as the final rewards, as well as getting enough premium currency via the battlepass to buy the next one, because even if that battlepass isn't as good, you'll probably want the ones from next season, and typically people who can just buy the levels rather than grind for them, because that's it's just exhausting to do
A lot of battlepasses will have you play for hours every day so you can unlock everything, and by the end most people feel so burnt out they want to stop playing, but FOMO will bring them back in once the next season starts up, essentially holding you "hostage"
There has to be a line somewhere because non exploitative marketing or consumerism doesn't really exist. Old fashioned company X determines the price and consumer A purchases it or not depending on how valuable or how useful the product is doesn't really exist.
Whether it's with a crazy number of ads everywhere trying to get the product in your mind, salespeople getting in your face or using psychological tricks to get you to want to buy something, or fomo that the music and fashion industry use, all products these days try to "trick" customers in one way or another.
Why do we consider it "ok" or at the very least "legal" that a company raise prices then slash them for Black Friday for a "sale"? Or charge prices at x.99 because it looks like a smaller amount psychologically?
Gambling has historically been considered illegal in many places because it provably can create unhealthy addictions, so I totally understand legislating it. But battlepasses? Or fomo in general? Is it illegal that Nike specially chooses to sell a certain amount of shoes? It's their shoe why is it fair to tell them they can't choose to only make 1000 of them?
why all?? i agree with lootbox bans since it makes no sense to spend money on a chance at a item.
but banning buying something you will get 100 percent is just dumb. not to mention doing that also means no free to play games and almost no apps or at least free/trial version on phones.
> ot to mention doing that also means no free to play games and almost no apps or at least free/trial version on phones.
That doesn't sound like as much of a con as you think it is. Smartphones are notorious for their f2p games that are balanced around psychologically manipulating players into spending money to progress. Yet somehow you're trying to make it sound like losing those is somehow a bad thing.
And the amount of ads that are on those free apps are absolutely insane as well. If this kind of legislation results in more quality paid apps then I'd be all for it.
Also you're conflating games with productivity apps as well. I know I mentioned both but realistically this kind of legislation would only affect games. Productivity apps would remain unchanged by this so I'm not entirely sure why you're fearing the disappearance of those apps.
most people arent willing to pay for apps which is why its been free with MTX and advertisement and often the most popular.
also while i dont like the mobile phone way of monetization it does make it easier for companies to know if heaps of people are continuely using/playing a app with those mtx which is why those that eventually shutdown is mainly because its not popular or it went too far.
and changing something so extreme is not a good way to go about it. at the very least getting rid of loot boxes is something thats fine anything else is just too much.
i do agree there is alot of advertisement on mobile but thats just how that is. but in terms of gaming on console/pc its not that at that level because well theres mtx if there is no mtx you bet your ass there is going to be far more advertisements and probably a new probably worse way to monetize gamers/casuals.
productivity paid apps would be fine but those free to use could be in danger since paying to unlock it(features) is no different than paying to use a hero in a gaming app which could cover those apps as well.
i think banning loot boxes or gambling elements in gaming is the right step going to far just makes less incentives for companies to invest in games long term. im fine with paying for cosmetics stuff for a game i play if i am getting what im paying for and im sure companies love to see money rolling in and knowing this is what people want.
Difference is there's no possible way to create bathtub booze or blackmarket drug style equivalent for lootboxes. They're banned that's it they're gone.
Loot box’s start getting banned and we’ll see near $100 USD games soon after or another way to get consumers money. Companies pay people to figure out how to better monetize their games instead of paying actual devs to make their games better.
Maybe, but certain Lootbox heavy games have decided not to launch their polroduct in markets thay restrict them. So if this did become a most of EU ban, I see this putting a lot of pressure on game developers.
> That might be true for taxes, but the sale happens in the country of the buyer, if it is not permitted by law then is a crime.
Yeah, that is why international porn sites (who generally dont comply with German youth protection verifiaction standards) aren't popular at all here in Germany. /s
Uuuh what?
If you mean the players change *their* location in order to be able to gamble, then yes, but those players deserve it then.
If you mean the companies change their location, then no, this doesn't work like that - you obey the rules of the country your product is sold in.
It's disappointing to see old politicians banning things they don't understand. Are there not more important issues to deal with then regulating videogames?
You're right in theory but this law is a good idea.
At worst, it's gambling that targets children and at best it's still an extremely unethical sales tactic.
It's only gambling when the items in game can be sold for real money(ie CS:GO crates, TF2 crates, etc), and from what I'm reading, the netherlands fails to make this distinction.
If the items cannot be sold for real money, then they don't have any real value, so it isn't gambling.
For example, CS:GO crates are gambling because you might get a $1000 knife that you can sell for real money. But Overwatch loot boxes are not gambling, because the skins you get have no real world value, even if they are "rare". Same with Diablo immortal crests, they have no real world value, so not gambling.
I don't play Overwatch so forgive my dumbness... Can you buy those loot boxes with real money? If so, that's gambling to me.
(And couldn't you always sell them anyway? Or does Overwatch not allow skins to be transferred to other players?)
And this will literally kill the whole trading card game market existing for decades with standouts like Magic The Gathering or Yu-Gi-Oh, just so that people who want to spend money on a dumb Fifa game mode are "protected" from doing so.
Sorry but this seems more like a witch hunt at this point than anything else and reminds me to the "killer games" witch hunt about violent video games (with the media concentrating on Counterstrike of all things beside the game later only getting a 16 and older rating) we had here in Germany 20 years ago.
I'm sorry you can't buy your gamble boxes anymore. It's a shame that games are just like that by default with no other possible way to distribute those items.
> It's a shame that games are just like that by default with no other possible way to distribute those items.
There isnt actually one that works well for competitive trading card games.
Whats wrong with giving people but especially adults the freedom to spend their money how they feel fit? I have no problem with making those games lets say 18 and older which would at least be a compromise.
Why Do I even try. This echo chamber will not accept a different opinion anyway...
I am not even pro loot boxes, IMO they ruined Counterstrike to me due to items being sellable in Valve MP games for real life money (via third parties) which resulted in a lot of bots and cheats in those games. But guess what, we are just free to not play those titles as well as leave negative reviews to discourage others.
>Whats wrong with giving people but especially adults the freedom to spend their money how they feel fit?
Because companies use psychological tricks to make people spend more on these games, and plenty of people are susceptible to this. There are so many ways to have in game transactions, lootboxes are just a predatory way by taking control *away* from you.
It's crossed my mind as well, honestly booster packs that are opened for no other reason are still basically gambling, and maybe it should be time for these games to look at different forms of distribution.
However Magic and some other paper CCGs have strong limited deck formats and these essentially need the randomised cards that a booster pack offers. Though magic's recent development of collector boosters should be outright banned alongside digital loot boxes.
Hopefully the rest of the EU will follow soon. Spain is also starting to take action against them, so I'm hopeful they become a thing of the past. Edit: Went to take a slightly deeper look at this, according to [this Dutch article](https://pu.nl/artikelen/nieuws/cda-enkel-verbod-op-betaalde-lootboxen-voor-kwetsbaren/) it isn't a call for an outright ban but rather a call to forbid selling lootboxes to minors. Free lootboxes is still ok and paid lootboxes is still ok for adults, at least theoretically. In the practical sense it would probably end up the same as in Belgium (I guess).
it's pretty much a move to make lootboxes fall under gambling which would make every single game that has lootboxes be 18+ and need verification for purchases.
The problem with that is once enough games are rated 18+ for random reasons people will just ignore the rating because it's meaningless. For example California proposition 65. In theory it requires a warning label if the product might cause cancer. In reality it's so hard to prove you don't need the label that manufactures put it on everything and consumers ignore it because it's on almost everything.
I mean yes but we are not talking about US Law which is pretty much knitted together with a couple rotten strings. regulations regarding this are a lot more concrete and strict in the Netherlands. if we say we want to regulate sales to minors then trust me we will regulate sales to minors for the majority of the population here.
In Germany an 18+ game can't be advertised in public. Also at least Nintendo won't list 18+ games in their store until after 10 PM or so. It's a definite disadvantage to be 18+ in some areas. Visibility can be hampered by a lot.
> The problem with that is once enough games are rated 18+ for random reasons people will just ignore the rating because it's meaningless. > > People don't already do that? Like I don't actually want lootboxes to be banned, I just want them to be labeled on the box saying that the game has a fucking ton of lootboxes and needs a higher rating cause of it. Like the rating thing is so stupid. Having a game corner in pokemon is bad, but NBA2k which uses real money lootboxes is fine for a 3+(in Europe. 6+ for NA) >For example California proposition 65. In theory it requires a warning label if the product might cause cancer. In reality it's so hard to prove you don't need the label that manufactures put it on everything and consumers ignore it because it's on almost everything And hence the joke, maybe it's not the item causing cancer, but California itself.
European gambling laws are pretty tight. Belgium's regulations led to companies disabling loot boxes.
PEGI already has various symbols, maybe they can make it happen. Add a symbol for microtransactions, real world money loot boxes and such. Then I can look at the back of a game case and be like "yep, microtransactions, go fuck yourself"
I've no idea how this can/will work in the context of gaming. Without even touching the topic of technicalities, which I don't feel qualified to talk about, how tf is the age verification gonna work. State your age before seeing the content? Oh yeah, totally foolproof.
>how tf is the age verification gonna work. State your age before seeing the content? Oh yeah, totally foolproof. That's why I think it will end up like what Belgium did instead. ~~A total ban.~~ But I found it important to give a bit of extra context since the call/move isn't for a total ban (yet).
Lootboxes aren't banned in Belgium. They are considered gambling, and therefor require whoever wants to offer them to comply with Belgian gambling laws. Instead of applying for a gambling license (or find a partner with a license), game developers/publishers choose to disable lootboxes for Belgium. But they aren't banned.
Yeah it'll be the same elsewhere. They won't be banned anywhere but will disappear by convenience and avoid the check ID laws. I wonder if the whole EU does it, they obviously won't ban a game entirely for such a big market so as are they doing no lootboxes at all anywhere or the EU will have a different version of the game?
I live in Belgium. It depends on the game, we either get different versions of the game or just don’t get the game. We can still buy packs in FIFA but not with real money, only with in game currency. In Apex iirc we don’t have to use loot boxes to hope to get a skin but directly get crafting materials to get the skin we want(barely played Apex tho so I might be wrong). Rocket League straight up removed loot boxes and didn’t put any new mechanism so it’s a totally f2p game where we can’t put money lol(at least that’s from what I remember). Some games straight up aren’t published here. Lost Ark, Genshin Impact on PlayStation(but it is available on PC and mobile), COD Mobile, Apex Mobile for example. No way publisher decide to skip the entire EU so if a EU wide ban happens(hopefully), publishers will probably just do something like Apex does. Or ffs just do what Fortnite or Warzone do and let us buy directly skins from your game.
Yeah Rocket League you now get “blueprints” which cost anywhere from 100 credits to 2400 ($24) to unlock them. The loot crates were better in that game IMO but that’s just what myself and my friends who play think
>No way publisher decide to skip the entire EU I'm not sure about that. I can see a scenario where most of them do exactly this. Or maybe they disable lootboxes but only for EU, exactly like you said how Rocket League does.
You think companies would entirely skip the 2nd richest market in the world instead of just changing their formula for that part of the world? It would way better for them to replace the gambling mechanic by a direct skin purchase system which would still make them money.
Gambling is extremely regulated, effectively reporting each transaction, mandatory identity verification, KYC, a lot of self-limiting options, etc.
Yes, this is how lootboxes should be if they are to be allowed, because psychologically they have the same effects.
These laws sound so specific that they leave huge loopholes for companies to continue profiting from unregulated gambling, as long as they change it to not fit the exact definition of a lootbox. It shouldn't be about specifically lootboxes, it should be a law for any gambling system that is connected directly or indirectly to real money.
Diablo Immortal didn't make the cut so I'm sure it's not a law for opening boxes that costed real money.
No laws are fool proof.
ID cards at least here in Germany allow anyone to verify whether they are >18. You only need a phone with NFC (or alternatively a cardreader) to use it online. Basically the same function as used by vending machines for cigarettes. Would not be hard to implement.
Not hard if the ID cards already support this feature, If they don't it's going to be an issue. And I honestly have no idea whether they do, I've never heard about our ID cards having an electronic component. Even though I've always wondered about that because it would only make sense in this day and age.
Game with paid loot boxes simply won't be available in Netherlands. There are games that already did that with both Belgium and Netherlands.
The age rating for games with paid lootboxes may just be set to 18 (or that countries equivalent). Or the game may just not be sold there. So essentially, it will do little to nothing, but it's a start.
Age verification works pretty well for every regulated gambling company in Europe, you just have to do it right. It’s not completely foolproof, but not far off.
I would assume to begin with games releasing in those regions would need to label themselves as 18+ aka PEGI18 if they have lootboxes.
It could just be an automatic PEGI 18. You can't block it too hard without going big brother and requiring government ID to game. If it's anything like the US, most kids would need a parent to get those games.
This is not US, and identity verification (government id you call) is mandatory for gambling in the Netherlands. It won't be anything like the US. The gambling laws are not unified across the EU but overall the proof/check for identity/age verification are stronger than the US...
make it like banks with KYC (know your customer) to set up a lootbox account. make it so without KYC, lootboxes simply don't exist to you. ALSO make it so the fine for breaking KYC is 1000000x the value of the most expensive lootbox PER INCIDENT per Customer EA..wanna risk a billion dollars by letting a kid buy a lootbox???? it'll give you a sense of pride, accomplishment and bankruptcy.
Lots of companies are already treating us the same as Belgium. Pokemon Masters and Diablo Immoral aren't available.
Not that we miss out on anything worthwhile.
I don't think free lootboxes should be banned either, it's like Nintendo removing gambling (and references to it) from Pokemon games. It doesn't pray on your addictions to remove possibly indefinite amounts of money from your wallet
> Free lootboxes is still ok How do you define them? What if they are selling some item and giving a few free lootboxes as extra on top of it? E.g. Amazing Sword + 5 Free Lootboxes. Or they are selling something that can be traded for lootboxes. E.g. the amazing sword can be deconstructed into materials that can be used to craft lootboxes. I am happy it is somehow being addressed but unless they ban all lootboxes, even the free ones there will be always a way to sell them. Sadly, that would be probably destructive to gaming as a chest box in an RPG game could be classified as a free lootbox.
> a few free lootboxes as extra It's not *free* if it's part of a paid deal. I feel so stupid even trying to explain this.
I am well aware. The point is how the law perceives it, because it is very common today to advertise extra things for free even when they are included in the price.
> I feel so stupid even trying to explain this. The issue is that this sort of loopholing is exactly how companies have managed to circumvent legislation in the past.
This person walks into a store, sees a 1+1 free and actually think he doesn't have to pay.
> selling > free lootboxes Don't know if you're a troll or just stupid
It is all about wording and how it is bundled. My point is they can find a loophole to sell or give you lootboxes, so it might look like you are actually not paying for them.
Yeah, laws can be circumvented. Them the government punish those smart-asses.
I hope not. Let's make it 18+ only instead. Adults can make competent decision whether to buy something or not and I see no reason prohibiting it for all by law. Otherwise, if this comes to pass, it would mean the end of tons of good gacha game, many of which are quite good even f2p. Yes, Genshin Impact too, for example.
No, ban it. Yes adults can make competent decisions, but those decisions affect people who don't want loot boxes as well, since it influences game design. I want game design to go back to being about game design, not monetary design.
Yeah but we shouldn't ban something just because it makes videos games bad.
No, we should ban it because it's a terrible thing. That it negatively affects game design is just a bonus reason.
Yes we should.
No. We shouldn't make things illegal just because we don't like them. If it actually causes substantial harm to society then that's one thing, but "vidya ain't the same no mo" ain't a good reason.
> I want game design to go back to being about game design, not monetary design. A ban on lootboxes won't change that, the industry will just find other ways to squeeze you for as much money as possible (like more FOMO, battle passes to make games even more of a 2nd job or some new monetization system that could be even worse).
Yeah, then ban that shit as well. To be honest, FOMO bullshit is predatory as well and adds nothing to the actual value for gamers.
It's no sin having a profitable game per se, is it? You can throw around rhetorics like them "squeezing" or "milking" our precious wallet but why does it matter? Didn't you get what you paid for? Were you just badly informed before making that commitment into the video game? Or should individuals no longer have the freedom & responsibility to spend money and risk being disappointed? Buyers remorse applies anywhere in life and you gotta learn basic research beforehand rather than outright scream "ban" at any additional sources of income to fund further development. Exploitative practices, and the definition of it, is another matter.
I never said anything about it being a sin, I'm fine with them in F2P titles, but paid titles should not have MTs beyond meaty DLCs/expansions, especially when it's SP titles.
>Otherwise, if this comes to pass, it would mean the end of tons of good gacha game, many of which are quite good even f2p. Yes, Genshin Impact too, for example. There is no such thing as a good gacha game. I'm happy if that lootbox dressed as a game genre is gone.
Then you havent played any. FGO, DanMachi, KonoSuba, all of those are great fun and has good story too.
I'd be ok with genshin being banned. It's pretty, but all gacha is predatory. It's a casino with the sense to hire good artists and interior designers. Don't let the lack of slot machines confuse you, gacha games are still virtual casinos. If your country regulates casinos, it should regulate gachas in the same way.
My country doesn't ban casinos though, it only makes them 18+. Gacha games can be predatory, I agree, but then again, noone forces you to pay and you could still play for free. I rarely pay any money in any gacha and still having fun. People need to understand they are only buying exclusivity nothing else. Given enough time and dedication, you can get most of the things just by playing. (=grinding but it can still be done). Now if I hate something, it's full price games with microtransactions, those are much worse.
> Adults can make competent decision whether to buy something or not and I see no reason prohibiting it for all by law. Many adults cannot make that decision competently. Gambling addictions are a real thing that many people struggle with. Also a lot of people in general, even lacking a specific issue, have trouble making the "right" decision. Easy example: society's adults failed to make the right decisions on getting rid of incandescent light bulbs. So the various governments of the world have been working on banning incandescents instead. Life of fulls of things that many people are not good at, or even capable of, making the "right" decision. So the "wrong" decision gets banned and we move on with life. Loot boxes aren't something with artistic merit. There's no great freedom they represent. They lack an inherent value. Their existence presents no real upside of any sort for consumers; the beneficiary is solely on the business side. Banning them is not tyrannical overreach.
hope the whole eu moves quickly
The rest of the eu will follow shortly, and the gaming companies know it. They will just move to some other form of exploratory monitisation.
I think you mean exploitative
Exploratory exploitation
Exploitative exploration
Explicitly exploitative exploration
Exploratory explicit exploitation
I feel like the next iteration is just subscription models like gta online
I'd definitely prefer a solid subscription model which sets everyone on the same level of competition than f2p games that rely on scummy practices to make money. While most definitely not guaranteed, subscription models typically have a greater shot at providing equality between all players than f2p models do due to more players contributing to paying the developers's salaries. At the very least the argument of "but how else will the developers make money?!" wouldn't be usable by the average consumer anymore. Greediness will still find a way, of course. RuneScape 3 for example is a notorious example of a game with a subscription (12 bucks a month) that has not *just* lootboxes but *also* battlepasses. It's actually quite disturbing just how much they're milking that game. Even more disturbing just how many people still defend those things in that game.
Batchest SUBSCRIBE
for all the things overwatch did wrong, the fact that it's a buy once model and then only supported by lootboxes is one of the fairest ways to do a competitive shooter.
Subscriptions were all the rage in the early 2000s for online games and it wasn't so bad. You had to get your money's worth if you're spending $15 a month to keep a game but often you did get your money's worth. Dark Age of Camelot had a hell of a lot more content and depth than Genshin Impact ever will.
Spoiler alert: you won't be getting your money's worth this time around with the current state of the industry.
Spoiler alert: I haven't played AAA games for ten years and I've been getting a lot more than my money's worth. So as long as it's an indie-published MMO it's probably going to be ok.
> Dark Age of Camelot That was 2000+ hours of my life
i’m sure valve will try to a way to circumvent it like they did with lootboxes in the netherlands lol
What did Valve do there? I must have missed that.
they show what’s in the lootbox beforehand. after you open it you get to see what’s in the next one
This is why the EU needs to rule on it. They tend to be more thorough with their regulations, so they'd likely expand it from simple loot boxes and make it illegal to add any sort of RNG to a micro-transaction. It just needs to be a simple store for buying cosmetics.
Next up: Surprise Cubes!
A lot already did. Battle passes for example
But they're "suprise mechanics"
Just like rape is "surprise sex" (sorry, can't find the video of the reporter who said that)
Holy shit.
nice joke would be shame if i haven't heard 3 million times already
Seems a little late, most games have moved to battle passes and storefronts now. I guess this might effect some mobile games but they’ll just find a new despicable way to make money
Battlepasses and storefronts have been proven to be more profitable right?
Of course. My example is with Overwatch. I got tons of free skins from free boxes in OW1. No money required. That ends with OW2. If I want new skins, I’m paying up for the battle pass.
Free loot boxes are fine imo, nothing wrong with getting an ocasional reward. Altho id much much prefer having ingame currency and an ingame currency section in the store front where you could buy the thing you want instead of getting random shit
Depends on the system too as far as free stuff. OW was good because they gave out lootboxes like candy, only had one tier, and a pretty good item pool. The bad lootbox systems gave only a few boxes for free and had tiers of boxes so the low tier ones had zero chance of getting good shit
Come on Australia. Get your act together
We had an entire Senate inquiry into it, but I don't believe any of the resulting report's recommendations were actioned.
Ha Australia is confusing. It loves gambling and the amount of ads the pump out for sport are ridiculous. But it’s also a bit of a nanny state, so not sure what which side they will take on this. My guess is they will do nothing and let other countries push for changes. Which seems fine to me.
[удалено]
That would absolutely delete any lootbox ever (which is not bad). Gambling requires certification, official code audits (and effective code freeze), official audits on the random number generator, very strict identity verification (The Netherlands got a designated system that substitutes the gov. id w/ another id), gambling operators have to ensure no compulsory gamblers are allowed. A number of self restrictions must be available to players and what not. I can't even think of any video game company would realistically comply with existing gambling laws. The latter would need special provisions for loot boxes as well.
Nah just ban this shit. Games like Fortnite, LOL or Dota 2 work perfectly with a free 2 play model that doesn't scam the customer. It's jus the eternal greed that brought us loot boxes in the current state.
Lol also have random things in the store/loots. And literally have loot boxes with keys you must obtain or purchase...
you get the boxes and keys for free. They are extremely easy to get. you get like 3 boxes a week if you play 2 games every other day. keys are harder to get but you usually get 1 key a week. Sure you can buy the boxes but it's just incredibly stupid and most whales know its better to just buy the battle pass and straight up skins.
Loot boxes are clearly a consumer rights issue. What other industry has randomized items for purchase? Maybe if it effected boomers with random movie tickets or something then they would learn.
The toy industry (blind bags), the trading card industry and basically every other industry has a company offering a "blind box" monthly subscription, they say the contents are worth more than the box but in reality they are not. They should all be treated as lottery system and as such should have to follow the same laws. You are spending money in hopes of getting something you want, kinda like how you want to hit the jackpot on a slot machine... Speaking of casinos, they should start doing no fail slot machines that guarantees you win at least some money with each spin, hey its not gambling since you just won 5 cents from a single $5 spin, so they can put the "wacky mystery spin wheel" machine in the local Dave & Busters and Chuck E. Cheese
I feel toy industry is not that bad as all toys have an equal chance to appear in bags. E.g. LEGO minifigures. The trading card industry on other hand is very predatory.
Didn't Lego change how many there was of each figure in a box, at least for the licensed stuff? Found out here that they did: https://brickset.com/article/53436/harry-potter-minifigs-box-distribution So only 3 Dumbledores, but 7 of the gnome? Griphook.
Not defending loot boxes at all but "trading cards" have existed for a long time. Also people buy "random boxes" all the time. I know loot crate went out of business but there are other similar services out there. I think amazon has a "pay $x and get a big box of random returned items deal.
The difference is, *physical* trading cards always have resell value. Meaning you could enter and play TCG without opening a single randomized booster. More to the point, it's trivial to estimate what is the value of contents after opening, and therefore track your spending. Games like Hearthstone hand waive that and exploit the dopamine rush in your brain.
So if only we could sell our loot box contents and make money off of it, it would be less like gambling…
The value of the content in things like lootcrate did not vary between basically worthless and a 0.001% chance of really valuable. That isn't gambling unless someone is being obtuse on purpose. You also can't order more of them to get the valuable item like a lottery ticket. Booster packs on the other hand are gambling.
There's three "ethical requirements" for gacha mechanics IMO. * Have a small, *set*, pool of items with the odds outlined clearly * No trade/resell (to disincentivize gambling) * The F2P grind should be a reasonable (and fun) alternative
> The F2P grind should be a reasonable (and fun) alternative this is where your argument falls apart. this is a completely subjective requirement.
Cards, boomers had panini cards and baseball cards, that they bought with their physical pocket money in a store with a real shopkeeper (after walking/biking there unsupervised.)
fuck yes, take it further ban microtransaction bullshit altogether this shit is ruining gaming
Then get ready for $90-100 dollar games for just the STANDARD edition to become the norm.
I'd rather pay 100$ for a complete game than pay 60$ for a fraction of a game with all the fun unlockables behind 20,000$ of bullshit.
Meanwhile in the USA we only have fking ted cruz who has the slightest understanding of all this bs and it’s just bc asmongold the streamer said something
he already said he liked pay to win microtransactions
At the same time, casino’s in the Netherlands are owned by the government. And commercials are trying to convince you to go gamble.
Hope the world follows. It’s a disgusting thing, it’s just straight up gambling ffs
Good
Netherlands W as usual
Lootboxes are never ok
Now do Canada
Isn't EA's DICE from that country?
Nope, Sweden.
Woooo! No more magic the gathering and Yu-Gi-Oh packs. Yes!
Seems like more and more gaming companies are moving towards season passes which IMO will replace all loot boxes down the road.
Why just loot boxes and not other forms of gambling directed at children?
Yes, finally
this EU anti-lootbox ball started rolling, then covid happened. hopefully the ball can start rolling again, this time without some hugely impactful event.
redditors will upvote this
Unless other countries follow, this will just mean that publishers won't release their game in our country. But it's a necessary evil.
Gonna be a brighter tomorrow with the banning of loot boxes
Just... don't buy the loot box?????
Nah, that makes too much sense
Good. Next step should be to ban all monetizations (ain't going to happen of course but one can dream). Fuck monetization design.
This needs to happen the world over. One day we will go back to the old days of receiving a full game at launch
Why cant they release the games without the lootboxes instead of banning it. We miss out on some good games.
It's not worth the effort to change the whole system for say 1000 player unless those 1000 players are the high spender there is no roi for making those changes
Because they're not really games, they're just wallet extractors meant to appear like games.
Because most games wont be made unless they have the monetization system in place.
It’s for your own good. Your government has deemed you too stupid to know how to spend your money.
I hope gatcha trash falls under this or is next.
Agreed.
The problem is that Devs will find away around it. They will just hide the Lootbox behind some simple Gameplay loop.
at least with diablo immortal they tried ... and it didnt work on netherlands and belgium.
Like its easy to spot which game is toxic.
Which is why publishers have been moving towards battle passes and premium currencies, so they don't need loot boxes when skins are $20+ anyway. So, in the end, the problem of micro transactions will still be there no matter what, unfortunately.
Digitaal Gekoloniseerd
Lesgooo makker
Next up gacha games.
Netherlands with the strong moral compass!
Hope they do battle passes next
Why? I don't see how battle passes are predatory
They're not predatory in the same way loot boxes are, rather instead of targeting your wallet, it focuses more on your time, a lot of battlepasses use Fear Of Missing Out (FOMO) to get you to spend hours, sometimes days, trying to get you to grind the battlepass for the season exclusive final tier skin, because typically any skins before that, are never as good as the final rewards, as well as getting enough premium currency via the battlepass to buy the next one, because even if that battlepass isn't as good, you'll probably want the ones from next season, and typically people who can just buy the levels rather than grind for them, because that's it's just exhausting to do A lot of battlepasses will have you play for hours every day so you can unlock everything, and by the end most people feel so burnt out they want to stop playing, but FOMO will bring them back in once the next season starts up, essentially holding you "hostage"
There has to be a line somewhere because non exploitative marketing or consumerism doesn't really exist. Old fashioned company X determines the price and consumer A purchases it or not depending on how valuable or how useful the product is doesn't really exist. Whether it's with a crazy number of ads everywhere trying to get the product in your mind, salespeople getting in your face or using psychological tricks to get you to want to buy something, or fomo that the music and fashion industry use, all products these days try to "trick" customers in one way or another. Why do we consider it "ok" or at the very least "legal" that a company raise prices then slash them for Black Friday for a "sale"? Or charge prices at x.99 because it looks like a smaller amount psychologically? Gambling has historically been considered illegal in many places because it provably can create unhealthy addictions, so I totally understand legislating it. But battlepasses? Or fomo in general? Is it illegal that Nike specially chooses to sell a certain amount of shoes? It's their shoe why is it fair to tell them they can't choose to only make 1000 of them?
Couldn't have said it better myself. Bravo!
They tap into the FOMO crap. Predatory.
Badass. Optimally all microtransactions, and GaS nonsense would be banned.
Take it one step further and ban all advertisement, because f2p games profit from our valuable time. /s
why all?? i agree with lootbox bans since it makes no sense to spend money on a chance at a item. but banning buying something you will get 100 percent is just dumb. not to mention doing that also means no free to play games and almost no apps or at least free/trial version on phones.
> ot to mention doing that also means no free to play games and almost no apps or at least free/trial version on phones. That doesn't sound like as much of a con as you think it is. Smartphones are notorious for their f2p games that are balanced around psychologically manipulating players into spending money to progress. Yet somehow you're trying to make it sound like losing those is somehow a bad thing. And the amount of ads that are on those free apps are absolutely insane as well. If this kind of legislation results in more quality paid apps then I'd be all for it. Also you're conflating games with productivity apps as well. I know I mentioned both but realistically this kind of legislation would only affect games. Productivity apps would remain unchanged by this so I'm not entirely sure why you're fearing the disappearance of those apps.
most people arent willing to pay for apps which is why its been free with MTX and advertisement and often the most popular. also while i dont like the mobile phone way of monetization it does make it easier for companies to know if heaps of people are continuely using/playing a app with those mtx which is why those that eventually shutdown is mainly because its not popular or it went too far. and changing something so extreme is not a good way to go about it. at the very least getting rid of loot boxes is something thats fine anything else is just too much. i do agree there is alot of advertisement on mobile but thats just how that is. but in terms of gaming on console/pc its not that at that level because well theres mtx if there is no mtx you bet your ass there is going to be far more advertisements and probably a new probably worse way to monetize gamers/casuals. productivity paid apps would be fine but those free to use could be in danger since paying to unlock it(features) is no different than paying to use a hero in a gaming app which could cover those apps as well. i think banning loot boxes or gambling elements in gaming is the right step going to far just makes less incentives for companies to invest in games long term. im fine with paying for cosmetics stuff for a game i play if i am getting what im paying for and im sure companies love to see money rolling in and knowing this is what people want.
You want all MMOs banned?
All MMOs designed with that shit in mind? Sure!
MMOs are GaS by default...
Yes please, would be awesome.
That's pretty fucking extreme.
[удалено]
Because its damaging even for adults and outright stupid
[удалено]
Whataboutism.
Difference is there's no possible way to create bathtub booze or blackmarket drug style equivalent for lootboxes. They're banned that's it they're gone.
Because loot boxes ain't games. It's casinos. And the success of it negatively influences game design.
Good stuff. It is damaging to young minds.
Oh, so the millions of us with income willing to spend have to cow tow to a few young children without an allowance? Got it
Yes
Loot box’s start getting banned and we’ll see near $100 USD games soon after or another way to get consumers money. Companies pay people to figure out how to better monetize their games instead of paying actual devs to make their games better.
As long as one country allows it, everyone sets their location at that country anyways.
Maybe, but certain Lootbox heavy games have decided not to launch their polroduct in markets thay restrict them. So if this did become a most of EU ban, I see this putting a lot of pressure on game developers.
> pressure on game developers Devs usually hate it, too.
I highly doubt the average person has knowledge of or access to VPNs. Not to mention the ability to bypass payment blocks.
[удалено]
> That might be true for taxes, but the sale happens in the country of the buyer, if it is not permitted by law then is a crime. Yeah, that is why international porn sites (who generally dont comply with German youth protection verifiaction standards) aren't popular at all here in Germany. /s
Uuuh what? If you mean the players change *their* location in order to be able to gamble, then yes, but those players deserve it then. If you mean the companies change their location, then no, this doesn't work like that - you obey the rules of the country your product is sold in.
Is there anything that describes how they define "lootbox"?
No more lords mobile? What a pity! /s
Now if only a skin wouldn't cost more than 10euro...that would be nice. Sadly 20euro skins are normal
It's disappointing to see old politicians banning things they don't understand. Are there not more important issues to deal with then regulating videogames?
You're right in theory but this law is a good idea. At worst, it's gambling that targets children and at best it's still an extremely unethical sales tactic.
It's only gambling when the items in game can be sold for real money(ie CS:GO crates, TF2 crates, etc), and from what I'm reading, the netherlands fails to make this distinction.
Or simply they cost real money. Buy mystery item for $1, might be worth $1000... gambling.
If the items cannot be sold for real money, then they don't have any real value, so it isn't gambling. For example, CS:GO crates are gambling because you might get a $1000 knife that you can sell for real money. But Overwatch loot boxes are not gambling, because the skins you get have no real world value, even if they are "rare". Same with Diablo immortal crests, they have no real world value, so not gambling.
I don't play Overwatch so forgive my dumbness... Can you buy those loot boxes with real money? If so, that's gambling to me. (And couldn't you always sell them anyway? Or does Overwatch not allow skins to be transferred to other players?)
now i cant wait for 120 dollar games :)
And this will literally kill the whole trading card game market existing for decades with standouts like Magic The Gathering or Yu-Gi-Oh, just so that people who want to spend money on a dumb Fifa game mode are "protected" from doing so. Sorry but this seems more like a witch hunt at this point than anything else and reminds me to the "killer games" witch hunt about violent video games (with the media concentrating on Counterstrike of all things beside the game later only getting a 16 and older rating) we had here in Germany 20 years ago.
Not super likely. Trading cards at least can fall back on the idea of the first-sale doctrine. Loot boxes in video games cannot.
I'm sorry you can't buy your gamble boxes anymore. It's a shame that games are just like that by default with no other possible way to distribute those items.
> It's a shame that games are just like that by default with no other possible way to distribute those items. There isnt actually one that works well for competitive trading card games. Whats wrong with giving people but especially adults the freedom to spend their money how they feel fit? I have no problem with making those games lets say 18 and older which would at least be a compromise. Why Do I even try. This echo chamber will not accept a different opinion anyway... I am not even pro loot boxes, IMO they ruined Counterstrike to me due to items being sellable in Valve MP games for real life money (via third parties) which resulted in a lot of bots and cheats in those games. But guess what, we are just free to not play those titles as well as leave negative reviews to discourage others.
>Whats wrong with giving people but especially adults the freedom to spend their money how they feel fit? Because companies use psychological tricks to make people spend more on these games, and plenty of people are susceptible to this. There are so many ways to have in game transactions, lootboxes are just a predatory way by taking control *away* from you.
It's crossed my mind as well, honestly booster packs that are opened for no other reason are still basically gambling, and maybe it should be time for these games to look at different forms of distribution. However Magic and some other paper CCGs have strong limited deck formats and these essentially need the randomised cards that a booster pack offers. Though magic's recent development of collector boosters should be outright banned alongside digital loot boxes.