[UPDATED V2] Several countries respond to Loot Box outrage in SWBF2

[goodtofufriday]

12 hours ago, aisle9 said:

Oh good, loot boxes are going to be banned now. Since we no longer have a way to let the stupid few subsidize the game for the rest of us, I hope everyone enjoys paying $80 for the non-DLC base copy of games going forwards.

Whats wrong with that. Game prices used to vary based on the games budget and cost for physical media. 

If it cost 80 then it cost 80.

[Misanthrope]

Well kids do struggle a lot with gambling: Don't get me started on those stupid kinder surprise eggs. With the fact that you also need real currency I'd be ok for limiting those schemes to adult audiences only.

[samcool55]

Someone on reddit ( u/H_O_T_S_H_O_T ) translated the article already from VTM news.

Quote

The minister of Justice wants to ban in-game purchases, if you don't know exactly what it will contain. "Combining gambling and gaming, especially at a young age, is dangerous for the mental health of the child.

 

The commotion started last week with the new game Star Wars: Battlefront in the the game you could buy so called "loot boxes", virtual boxes which could contain advantages for the game. You don't know however what it contains beforehand.

 

"The combination of money and addiction is gambling", ruled the gambling committee. VTM News brought the news and a few days later EA withdrew the function from the game, partially because Disney complained, which has the rights to the Star Wars merchandise.

 

Geens now wants to prevent that these kinds of functions will be in any games going forward. "But that takes time, because we'll have to make a proposal to the EU. We will definitely try to ban it."

I live in Belgium, i can speak dutch and can confirm this is basically as accurate as it can be.

I'll try to transcript and translate the video soon. There's a bit more in-depth information in it that's imo interesting and important.

 

edit: transcription/translation of the video is done! It's a bit rough but it should be good enough to understand, i hope.

Quote

Battlefront II will release Friday, basically all characters from Star Wars will appear in the game. You can them, if you play a lot, upgrade them. They can get new weapons for example.

 

Who doesn’t want to spend time (to get the upgrades) can also buy them but, and this is where the problem lies, you do it via lootboxes, a sort of virtual chest where you don’t know from beforehand what’s in them.

 

You indeed need to pay for an item and you don’t know always know beforehand what’s in the chest. Even tho it matters what’s in the chest to continue playing the game with more energy, more powers or more powers to complete the game. We have to investigate this because if this is indeed gambling it can’t be done (it can’t be available) without a permit from the “kansspeelcommissie” (basically the the gambling commission that keeps an eye on everything that’s related to gambling and also the group that’s investigating it.)

 

The game costs 60 euro's but some people spend hundreds of euro’s on extra’s, according to the “kansspeelcommissie” this is mainly a danger for minors that can spend a lot of money due to social pressure.

 

They (minors) look of course on the internet what other teenagers do and if they see them using game elements (like a specific character) that they don’t have, are they more easily inclined to buy the same thing.

 

At Electronic Arts, the creators of Battlefront II are currently not reacting (they basically don't want to comment on this). The investigation of the “kansspeelcommissie” has only just begun but can cause in the worst case that EA needs to pay hundred thousands of euro’s as a fine and the game being pulled from the shelves.

@SC2Mitch If you want you can add the translation in the first post, that's up to you

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I'd be ok for limiting those schemes to adult audiences only.

Agreed.  However an 18+ rating won't stop kids nowadays.  The only solution IMO is to simply ban the games until the publishers and devs remove the entire gambling nonsense.

[samcool55]

Just now, Captain Chaos said:

Agreed.  However an 18+ rating won't stop kids nowadays.  The only solution IMO is to simply ban the games until the publishers and devs remove the entire gambling nonsense.

True, one of the main reasons this is an issue is due to social pressure. Slapping an 18+ rating on it won't solve it. If 1 kid does it, a lot of them will.

 

KuLeuven already has statistics about kids/teens and gambling and it's not only the kids that are an issue but the parents as well. Like half of them are even unaware about lootboxes and stuff and how they work.

[Misanthrope]

22 minutes ago, Captain Chaos said:

Agreed.  However an 18+ rating won't stop kids nowadays.  The only solution IMO is to simply ban the games until the publishers and devs remove the entire gambling nonsense.

 

16 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

True, one of the main reasons this is an issue is due to social pressure. Slapping an 18+ rating on it won't solve it. If 1 kid does it, a lot of them will.

 

KuLeuven already has statistics about kids/teens and gambling and it's not only the kids that are an issue but the parents as well. Like half of them are even unaware about lootboxes and stuff and how they work.

Suddenly I picture modern day mafiosos selling bootleg games and Monster Energy drink cans to 12 year olds.

[AlwaysFSX]

37 minutes ago, Captain Chaos said:

The only solution IMO is to simply ban the games until the publishers and devs remove the entire gambling nonsense.

You're just going to end up in the Wolfenstein situation where if something is illegal in one country, they'll remove it there, not everywhere.

 

Who wants more region locked content?

[Ryujin2003]

13 hours ago, SC2Mitch said:

Snip

First source I've seen, so you might want to update, but apparently Belgium found that Lootboxes ARE in fact GAMBLING!

http://aliveforfootball.com/2017/11/belgium-finished-investigation-on-loot-boxes-deems-them/

Quote

Following the backlash against EA for its implementation of microtransactions in Star Wars: Battlefront II, the Belgium gaming commission has ruled on the question of whether or not in-game loot boxes constitute gambling. It's actually similar to the situation in China, where legislation ensures that those who buy loot boxes know the exact odds of what they'll be getting out. The answer is yes. This information comes to us from the Belgian site VTM News, but PC Gamer has translated the article for English speaking audiences to read. Though the Google Translation is a bit rough, the commission notes that "the mixing of money and addiction is gambling", and loot boxes fall right into that category.

The Belgium based website, VTM Nieuws, is reporting that Belgium's Minister of Justice wants to nix loot boxes from the market because it's pretty much gambling.

Belgium's Minister of Justice Koen Geens agrees, saying that "Mixing gambling and gaming, especially at a young age, is risky for the mental health of the child". Moreover, Geens is keen on taking the matter beyond Belgium's borders, an effort that will see such digital implementations banned across Europe.

 

[samcool55]

Just now, AlwaysFSX said:

You're just going to end up in the Wolfenstein situation where if something is illegal in one country, they'll remove it there, not everywhere.

 

Who wants more region locked content?

If Belgium does manage to convice the EU (which is likely, at least that's what history tells us) it will have a massive impact that can't easily be ignored.

Especially FIFA, like most people that play FIFA and spend money on their lootbox stuff live in the EU. If EA would suddenly no longer be able to sell lootbox stuff there it would have a massive impact on the revenue EA gets from FIFA...

[samcool55]

Just now, Ryujin2003 said:

First source I've seen, so you might want to update, but apparently Belgium found that Lootboxes ARE in fact GAMBLING!

http://aliveforfootball.com/2017/11/belgium-finished-investigation-on-loot-boxes-deems-them/

 

Check the third post on page 3, proper translation of the VTM article and a rough translation of the video can be found there

What they actually said that at first glance it does indeed look like gambling, atm they are doing further investigation to properly pinpoint why it's considered gambling and other games like FIFA are also under investigation. Seems to me they are taking it very seriously and are digging deep to properly investigate this.

 

Confirming is a bit early, that will mainly depend what the report will say but right now it does look great for the gamers

[AlwaysFSX]

3 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

If Belgium does manage to convice the EU (which is likely, at least that's what history tells us) it will have a massive impact that can't easily be ignored.

Especially FIFA, like most people that play FIFA and spend money on their lootbox stuff live in the EU. If EA would suddenly no longer be able to sell lootbox stuff there it would have a massive impact on the revenue EA gets from FIFA...

Yeah but still, you guys will get lootbox free games (probably at a massive upcharge) and we'll get the same massive upcharge and lootboxes.

 

You'll think you're winning when someone is still getting dealt the same shit and we're all losing more money.

[Ryujin2003]

1 minute ago, samcool55 said:

Check the third post on page 3, proper translation of the VTM article and a rough translation of the video can be found there

What they actually said that at first glance it does indeed look like gambling, atm they are doing further investigation to properly pinpoint why it's considered gambling and other games like FIFA are also under investigation. Seems to me they are taking it very seriously and are digging deep to properly investigate this.

 

Confirming is a bit early, that will mainly depend what the report will say but right now it does look great for the gamers

Hmm.. maybe OP can actually update the post as new information comes out? That would be super awesome and helpful.

[samcool55]

Just now, AlwaysFSX said:

Yeah but still, you guys will get lootbox free games (probably at a massive upcharge) and we'll get the same massive upcharge and lootboxes.

 

You'll think you're winning when someone is still getting dealt the same shit and we're all losing more money.

Might be a bit too early to draw conclusions. But thinking worst case scenario is of course not unrealistic because in the end it's EA.

You can always move if you don't like where you live...

 

And how exactly am i going to lose more money? I don't even buy their stuff, apart from NFS 2015 for 20 euro's but that didn't have lootboxes and it was imo worth the money. But i'm not planning to buy another game from them, including the new NFS, the performance upgrade mechanic is broken AF...

[Delicieuxz]

17 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Yeah but still, you guys will get lootbox free games (probably at a massive upcharge) and we'll get the same massive upcharge and lootboxes.

 

You'll think you're winning when someone is still getting dealt the same shit and we're all losing more money.

AAA games have been, and still are $60 without any loot boxes in them. I don't see why prices would be affected at all by the banning of them in games.

 

The excessive money that some publishers are getting from loot boxes and microtransactions is a pretty new development in gaming, which they mostly aren't used to expecting to be there. And AAA games are more profitable now than they've ever been before.

 

So, I don't expect anything to change regarding the consumer up-front cost for a game. Also, publishers can't raise the price on games without there being consumers willing to pay what they charge - and I'm not sure that most gamers are willing to pay more than they already are for their games. And if the prices are increased too much, then gamers will have no choice but to buy fewer games - so, it's not even entirely a question of what people are willing to pay for a game.

[samcool55]

Just now, Ryujin2003 said:

Hmm.. maybe OP can actually update the post as new information comes out? That would be super awesome and helpful.

I tagged him and if something new comes out it's likely i'll find it and post it somewhere with translation.

[CTR640]

EA, thank you very much for adding lootboxes and pushing them. Now you get rekt!

[AlwaysFSX]

9 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

Might be a bit too early to draw conclusions. But thinking worst case scenario is of course not unrealistic because in the end it's EA.

You can always move if you don't like where you live...

 

And how exactly am i going to lose more money? I don't even buy their stuff, apart from NFS 2015 for 20 euro's but that didn't have lootboxes and it was imo worth the money. But i'm not planning to buy another game from them, including the new NFS, the performance upgrade mechanic is broken AF...

I'm looking at this worst case scenario-like because I'm trying to see what I would do as a business. Those are my two steps for maintaining my bottom line, and it would work surprisingly well, and consumers will still take it because most of them are uninformed and don't care.

 

Take the one game you'd want to play, suddenly it costs more than €60 like it did a year or two ago because of these regulations. You really don't want to, but you really want the game. And the company is still around because the vast majority of gamers only want to spend money to waste their brain away playing the latest and greatest, they don't care that EA is a terrible company.

8 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

AAA games have been, and still $60 without any loot boxes in them. I don't see why prices would be affected at all by the banning of them in games.

 

The excessive money that some publishers are getting from loot boxes and microtransactions is a pretty new development in gaming, which they mostly aren't used to expecting to be there. And AAA games are more profitable now than they've ever been before.

 

So, I don't expect anything to change regarding the consumer up-front cost for a game. Also, publishers can't raise the price on games without there being consumers willing to pay what they charge - and I'm not sure that most gamers are willing to pay more than they already are for their games. And if the prices are increased too much, then gamers will have no choice but to buy fewer games - so, it's not even entirely a question of what people are willing to pay for a game.

A company like EA will go through great lengths to maintain their bottom line as much as they can. If that means raising prices to compensate the loss of additional revenue in Europe, so be it. Hey, it's only €10 more than last year, but no lootboxes. I guess that's the price for finally get a fully-fledged game again? Meanwhile in places where it's not banned, the price may or may not go up, my money is that it will, and they'll continue to have look boxes and other microtransactions.

 

Remember, games used to be less than $60. Now you're looking around $100+ if you get things like a season pass to get content that should've been base-game to begin with.

[michaelocarroll007]

13 hours ago, aisle9 said:

Oh good, loot boxes are going to be banned now. Since we no longer have a way to let the stupid few subsidize the game for the rest of us, I hope everyone enjoys paying $80 for the non-DLC base copy of games going forwards.

yeah But paying $60 then loosing a game due to someone else paying $120 Is Worse IMO then us both being equal and paying $80 for a game. 

If boxes are all cosmetics only then im sort of fine with letting some dumbass spend 300 on the game for my price to stay at $60 lmao but it opens this can of worms in general of non cosmetics and more. 

[ItsMitch]

54 minutes ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Hmm.. maybe OP can actually update the post as new information comes out? That would be super awesome and helpful.

sure

[samcool55]

38 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

I'm looking at this worst case scenario-like because I'm trying to see what I would do as a business. Those are my two steps for maintaining my bottom line, and it would work surprisingly well, and consumers will still take it because most of them are uninformed and don't care.

 

Take the one game you'd want to play, suddenly it costs more than €60 like it did a year or two ago because of these regulations. You really don't want to, but you really want the game. And the company is still around because the vast majority of gamers only want to spend money to waste their brain away playing the latest and greatest, they don't care that EA is a terrible company.

Well that's the free markt. I don't buy games that cost 60 euro's. Doesn't matter how good it is, 60 is just too much for me.

How do you think apple got so rich or an even better example, why gold is worth so much?

Gold is quite useless but REALLY expensive because there's a lot of demand for it because rich people want it and it all started with a marketing campaign, creating demand for it.

 

Supply/demand, creating a market for something, that's free market. If EA wants to ask 250 euro's for the next NFS, no problem. They can do that, perfectly legal.

Not many people will buy it but there's also nothing wrong with asking such price for it.

[BuckGup]

CSGO gambling is still a much bigger issue

[ItsMitch]

Updated OP friends

[aisle9]

3 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Well kids do struggle a lot with gambling: Don't get me started on those stupid kinder surprise eggs.

You mean the ones that are banned in the US because kids choke to death on the toys inside?

[aisle9]

1 hour ago, michaelocarroll007 said:

yeah But paying $60 then loosing a game due to someone else paying $120 Is Worse IMO then us both being equal and paying $80 for a game. 

If boxes are all cosmetics only then im sort of fine with letting some dumbass spend 300 on the game for my price to stay at $60 lmao but it opens this can of worms in general of non cosmetics and more. 

Hence my thoughts that loot boxes should affect cosmetics of the game only, not mechanics or giving out pay-to-win advantages. There will always be people with too much money who are willing to pay $0.99 per loot box over and over again to get a carbon fiber skin for their stupid knife that no one uses anyway, so let them do so. They're paying $100 for the game and looks, I'm paying $60 for the game, we're on a level playing field, cool.

[michaelocarroll007]

23 minutes ago, aisle9 said:

Hence my thoughts that loot boxes should affect cosmetics of the game only, not mechanics or giving out pay-to-win advantages. There will always be people with too much money who are willing to pay $0.99 per loot box over and over again to get a carbon fiber skin for their stupid knife that no one uses anyway, so let them do so. They're paying $100 for the game and looks, I'm paying $60 for the game, we're on a level playing field, cool.

Yeah but as it stands Games are Becoming more accepting of allowing a More then cosmetic Loot box and thats the problem. They realized wow ass these dumbasses are paying $50 extra bucks for some colored guns. Imagine how much they would pay for an actual gun.

 

COD and Star wars and more have been testing waters with this.