US lawmaker lays out plans for anti-loot box law

[Marinatall_Ironside]

4 minutes ago, catzambia said:

Why does the government need to step in?

Because people are dumb sheep, that's why. It's unfortunate, but that's how it boils down.

 

That's basically how I'm summarizing this entire thread.

[Frankenburger]

10 minutes ago, catzambia said:

Why does the government need to step in?

Better question - why doesn't the government need to step in?

[AresKrieger]

They can simply make it so you can buy loot box items rather than the boxes, boxes would still be allowed so long as they cannot be bought

 

And though I don't want government regulation in pretty much any form this would make me laugh as it will make EA very very sad, just deserts.

[catzambia]

27 minutes ago, JurunceNK said:

Because people are dumb sheep, that's why. It's unfortunate, but that's how it boils down.

 

That's basically how I'm summarizing this entire thread.

 

20 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

Better question - why doesn't the government need to step in?

So, it is the government's job to make sure people don't give these companies their money? Or, is it the person's decision and none of the government's goddamn business?

[Frankenburger]

6 minutes ago, catzambia said:

So, it is the government's job to make sure people don't give these companies their money?

In one word - yes

Sheeple can't be trusted. It's how we got here in the first place.

If you're someone who already boycotts loot boxes, are a legal adult with a disposable income, and have access to a debit or credit card, then the government forcing games with loot crates to be rated as AO ultimately won't affect you.

[PlayStation 2]

Tell me why we need the government to interfere with this?

[Marinatall_Ironside]

7 minutes ago, catzambia said:

So, it is the government's job to make sure people don't give these companies their money? Or, is it the person's decision and none of the government's goddamn business?

 

6 hours ago, Frankenburger said:

The whole "vote with your wallet" argument is extremely flimsy and holds no water. If it did hold water, we wouldn't be here right now. The problem is the vast majority of people are OK with micro transactions. People like me and you who boycott egregious practices are in the minority.

 

3 hours ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Gambling is gambling. I don't gamble, and refuse to participate in gambling activities in games. It's stupid. It's wrong. And it's important to target and exploit children or adults.

 

One of the concepts with gambling is the user of trusted brands. People trust Star Wars to be family friendly, just as online casinos showing gambling customer protection organizations as supporting their site. Makes you feel more "ok" about gambling. 

 

I think this is why BF2 has had do much publicity. It's not about just one game, it's about a construct today had become socially tolerable until it's reached a tipping point. Same thing with smoking in public places. It was ok until it wasn't ok. The "Don't take your child to Denny's, and make them s home cooked meal" ignored the smoking is a public health concern. Something can be said about Lootboxes and gambling in ALL non-casino registered games. Zynga is one of the worst, and needs to be regulated AF...

 

I don't even want to gamble for player skins. You cannot pick and choose, that's how corporations take advantage of the system. Blanket statement works perfectly fine in this case: "stop raping society".

 

[Inkz]

Would this be retroactive? I wonder how games like OverWatch would be affected. I cant imagine them making it an Adult only game.

[PlayStation 2]

1 minute ago, Inkz said:

Would this be retroactive? I wonder how games like OverWatch would be affected. I cant imagine them making it an Adult only game.

Or Team Fortress 2, a game that actually does the crate/loot box system right.

[ravenshrike]

6 hours ago, LordTaco42 said:

Ok look I hate EA and even hate the loot box system even more but do we really need the government coming in and intervening.  We could just you know not buy their shit...

Given that if the ESRB had done their fucking job in the first place and rated the games AO we wouldn't be in this situation, yes. The system in place meant to remove the need for govt. intervention failed completely.

[catzambia]

3 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

In one word - yes

Sheeple can't be trusted. It's how we got here in the first place.

If you're someone who already boycotts loot boxes, are a legal adult with a disposable income, and have access to a debit or credit card, then the government forcing games with loot crates to be rated as AO ultimately won't affect you.

Sheeple can't be trusted? what the fuck

I suggest you read ANY of Thomas Paine's writings or the Federalist Papers, idk something of that sort.

1 minute ago, JurunceNK said:

snip

Dude, they are not raping society. Someone saying, "hey, I'll give you this box for 5 bucks, but I won't tell you what's inside, you have to find out." Has that man, if he buys it, been raped? Has his life, liberty, or property been taken from him? No, it hasn't, he just wasted money. It is not the government's job to protect the guy from wasting his money, the purpose and origin of government is to protect each person's life, liberty, and property, not stick its nose into private affairs.

[Frankenburger]

1 minute ago, Inkz said:

Would this be retroactive? I wonder how games like OverWatch would be affected. I cant imagine them making it an Adult only game.

I hope it's retroactive. Honestly, even if Overwatch was rated as AO, I don't see that cutting into Blizzard's bottom line by any significant degree at this point. But ultimately what I hope happens when it comes to Overwatch is Blizzard removes the loot crate system and makes cosmetics up front purchases. I enjoy the gameplay to Overwatch, but the reward system is so blatantly designed to encourage loot crate sales that it kills my enjoyment of the game. If I want that dope AF demoness Mercy skin, why can't I simply buy it?

[ravenshrike]

4 hours ago, mynameisjuan said:

Actually PS2 pushed the $50 price tag and PS3 pushed the $60. So prices have been $60 for over a decade which people demanding better graphics and more gameplay which requires more time and devs which increase development cost. 

 

$60 is honestly too cheap for modern games even though typing that made me cringe at spending more than that. 

That assumes that the audience has remained the same size. Instead it has been continuously growing, and with the advent of digital distribution costs per unit have plummeted. As such, the idea that each unit needs to be more expensive is absurd.

[Frankenburger]

1 minute ago, catzambia said:

Sheeple can't be trusted? what the fuck

I suggest you read ANY of Thomas Paine's writings or the Federalist Papers, idk something of that sort.

Ok, so if you're against the government stepping in and enforcing ONE change - to make loot crate games rated AO - I would like to hear your alternative to the issue.

 

Keep in mind the government isn't enforcing censorship, nor are they taking away your right to buy games with loot crates. They're simply encouraging the enforcement of a rating system. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Marinatall_Ironside]

5 minutes ago, catzambia said:

Sheeple can't be trusted? what the fuck

I suggest you read ANY of Thomas Paine's writings or the Federalist Papers, idk something of that sort.

-snip-

Yep, you can't trust sheeple because they make dumb choices and follow blindly, without question too.

 

What was relevant back then isn't relevant today. Sociey changes. If you're not willing to adapt, then you'll be left behind.

Edited December 7, 2017 by JurunceNK

[-TesseracT-]

Csgo has had crates since 2013. No one bats an eye. Now, bf2 has gotten so much attention, that governments are looking into it. Why not before then? Or have they? Csgo is a very popular game (f u pubg) and the "gambling" works in the same way there?

[Frankenburger]

Just now, -TesseracT- said:

Csgo is a very popular game (f u pubg) and the "gambling" works in the same way there?

There's a bit of a loop hole with the crates in CSGO and PUBG. The act of buying crates is done outside of the respective games. If you want to buy crates, it's done through Steam, and you buy it from players rather than directly from Valve. Mind you, Valve still gets their cut, and I'm sure BlueHole does as well, but it's way more low key than what EA tried to pull. Personally, I would like to see loot crates go away from CSGO and PUBG as well, or at least remove the ability to sell them through the marketplace. Not necessarily because of the gambling aspect (though that's one part of the reason) but because that's how botters/hackers are earning the money to buy keys to flip on G2A and Kinguin (especially in PUBG).

[Guest]

Given that data from one of Melbourne's largest hospitals showed that gambling played the primary cause in approximately 1 in 5 suicidal patients who were being admitted.

 

Australia pretty much has the biggest gambling addiction problem in the world and if banning loot crates stops the next wave of youth going down that same road, I'm okay with that.

[catzambia]

1 hour ago, Frankenburger said:

Ok, so if you're against the government stepping in and enforcing ONE change - to make loot crate games rated AO - I would like to hear your alternative to the issue.

 

Keep in mind the government isn't enforcing censorship, nor are they taking away your right to buy games with loot crates. They're simply encouraging the enforcement of a rating system. Nothing more, nothing less.

My alternative is that the government minds its own business.

[Ryujin2003]

2 hours ago, JurunceNK said:

 

 

 

??

33 minutes ago, catzambia said:

My alternative is that the government minds its own business.

Holy shit, that was a great contribution to the discussion. Please, tell me more of your amazing insight and experience??

[catzambia]

1 minute ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Holy shit, that was a great contribution to the discussion. Please, tell me more of your amazing insight and experience??

He asked what my alternative was, and I gave it.

You are shitposting.

[Frankenburger]

43 minutes ago, catzambia said:

My alternative is that the government minds its own business.

So you would rather things stay the way they are - in a downward spiral plummeting towards another gaming industry crash?

 

Cool

[catzambia]

8 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

So you would rather things stay the way they are - in a downward spiral plummeting towards another gaming industry crash?

 

Cool

I'd type out a response but I think I've derailed this thread enough, lol.

gg @Frankenburger

[mikat]

11 hours ago, Tedny said:

bad to think like that 

It surely looks like all it's designed to do is to avoid taxes

also: 6k posts wooooooooooooooo

[mynameisjuan]

17 hours ago, Egg-Roll said:

If you cant sell your game for 40-50 and still make enough money to produce the next one, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. I'm more willing to hand my hard earned money to a Indie dev over AAA Devs, because they have realistic profit requirements with equally good games. Sure not all, but a few.

I am not saying they are doing it right. like at all. Even though I said they should be $80 I will never pay that. Im just justifying the cost. My ideology is keep cost down to sell more copies, always has been. But game companies are just dumping money at new games and there is a reason it cost $80

17 hours ago, Egg-Roll said:

quickly dropped down to a reasonable price within a month of their release.

Im talking about release prices since that is where a huge majority of the sales come from, except for one offs like post release patches that fix a game. I mean with that argument I can say all games are $30 because I waiting 4 months or waited for a steam sale.