Loot Box Regulation Bill Introduced by Washington Senator

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, Seefer said:

Parents can say no to using their credit card, what? Do you think a kid is going to grab a credit card from their parents without asking or if they do they won't get punished severely? Sorry but that IS on the parents and parents are also there to guide kids, my mother when I was growing up taught me respect, right and wrong and consequences, somewhere that all got lost.

 

So if the parents don't say no to them buying loot boxes it IS on them.

Well done,  cut out the bit of my post that exemplifies how the concept that parents are responsible for things getting out of hand is nonsense and go on to address issues that not only make little sense but can't be shown to occur in reality either.  

 

I'll try and simplify it for you:   in order for parents to be responsible they have to be letting kids do it in the first place, and kids have to be the driving force behind loot boxes. Neither proposition is evidential at the moment, they are both assumptions.  Just like, (as I pointed out but you snipped out), that heavy metal, adhd, drugs and hippies were also supposed to be the result of lax parenting.

[Seefer]

23 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Well done,  cut out the bit of my post that exemplifies how the concept that parents are responsible for things getting out of hand is nonsense and go on to address issues that not only make little sense but can't be shown to occur in reality either.  

 

I'll try and simplify it for you:   in order for parents to be responsible they have to be letting kids do it in the first place, and kids have to be the driving force behind loot boxes. Neither proposition is evidential at the moment, they are both assumptions.  Just like, (as I pointed out but you snipped out), that heavy metal, adhd, drugs and hippies were also supposed to be the result of lax parenting.

Um, I am not saying don't let them do it but don't always cave in when they ask........again, kids don't have their own credit card.

[Max_Settings]

Makes sense Washington is doing this considering that Valve is headquartered there, and they are the biggest offender by far. (I say this as someone who has spent over $1000 on CSGO cases) 

[ravenshrike]

Just now, Max_Settings said:

Makes sense Washington is doing this considering that Valve is headquartered there, and they are the biggest offender by far. (I say this as someone who has spent over $1000 on CSGO cases) 

Not... really. Valve would shrug their shoulders and toss it behind an age verification wall for 21+. They'd still make plenty of money, no skin off their nose. Their profits would just be slightly less. Remember, Valve is a private company. They are not beholden to shareholders and the reduction in revenue from the minor cohort of CS:GO and TF2 is highly unlikely to significantly impact operations.

[mr moose]

25 minutes ago, Seefer said:

Um, I am not saying don't let them do it but don't always cave in when they ask........again, kids don't have their own credit card.

I don't think you understand what I mean.  

 

Having access to a credit card is moot, People are blaming parenting.  What has parenting got to do with a 30 year old buying loot boxes or the legalities of said loot boxes being gambling?  How does the discussion go from an investigation into loot boxes potentially falling under the banner of gambling to parents not doing their job?  In order for there to be any connection one has to assume that  A. parents are not doing their jobs to begin with and B. it's due to said failure on parents part that loot boxes are designed to mimic gambling thus requiring regulation.  Otherwise why would people think regulation needs to occur?

 

 

 

 

[suicidalfranco]

6 hours ago, Seefer said:

Sorry I don't like being FORCED to pay to play with my friends, I'd rather have the option of paying for a loot box, would I prefer to buy skins individually? Sure, but it's not like I can't earn loot boxes by playing the game (again I only know about Overwatch).

Then you are only part of the problem and the reason why the gaming industry is turning to complete shit

[Seefer]

56 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

Then you are only part of the problem and the reason why the gaming industry is turning to complete shit

Nah, I just don't like being forced to pay for a game only to have to pay even more in order to play with friends, I did it for 12 years with WoW, did it with Warcraft 2 and 3, Diablo series, The Witcher 3..........kinda done, I like getting changes, maps and characters for free by paying what I want, when I want and if I want. Sorry you like being forced to do something.

[Seefer]

6 hours ago, mr moose said:

I don't think you understand what I mean.  

 

Having access to a credit card is moot, People are blaming parenting.  What has parenting got to do with a 30 year old buying loot boxes or the legalities of said loot boxes being gambling?  How does the discussion go from an investigation into loot boxes potentially falling under the banner of gambling to parents not doing their job?  In order for there to be any connection one has to assume that  A. parents are not doing their jobs to begin with and B. it's due to said failure on parents part that loot boxes are designed to mimic gambling thus requiring regulation.  Otherwise why would people think regulation needs to occur?

 

 

 

 

As I said before, if you are an adult and have no self control oh well.

[mr moose]

15 minutes ago, Seefer said:

As I said before, if you are an adult and have no self control oh well.

So you agree then this has nothing to do with parenting?

[Seefer]

50 minutes ago, mr moose said:

So you agree then this has nothing to do with parenting?

It has to do with BOTH and if you bothered reading everything I said you would see that I said parents need to learn to say no and adults need to learn self control, I am 38 years old and could EASILY drop 200-300 a month on loot boxes but I have self control.

[Master Disaster]

19 hours ago, themctipers said:

wish it didn't come to this. 

The problem is EA simply won't listen to anything except money and law.

[Xander Cousins]

19 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Well, if they buy the game and then they let their kid gamble then that's on them for letting their kids break the law.

Then why force others to suffer for parents stupid actions? My friend has a brother who is going to be starting high school next year and his mum and himself knows it is stupid to buy loot boxes in OW. He sits and grinds for the Coin to get a skin he wants no just goes for the RNG of the thing.

 

I Still stay firmly by my view of which Mature gamers are getting punished because immature parents allow their child to go crazy on their credit card. Litterally none of this would really be seen if it wasn't for some immature Parent going 'Oh Sh** I just lost £150 from my account.... to cosmetics?' Then getting angry at someone else for their own stupid fault. 

 

If this came round from a neutral stand point where the Government came along and was like 'hey this seems a lot like gambling' then fine I wouldn't have the same view point as I do now. but it didn't.

 

TBH if this bill Is only affecting USA then fine by me I won't have issues (still sucks but meh)  

[Xander Cousins]

5 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

The problem is EA simply won't listen to anything except money and law.

True but no one but EA knows why they do stuff. So judging them by their current cover doesn't exactly help anything even if it does turn out to be true. 

[Master Disaster]

4 minutes ago, Alex Colson said:

Then why force others to suffer for parents stupid actions? My friend has a brother who is going to be starting high school next year and his mum and himself knows it is stupid to buy loot boxes in OW. He sits and grinds for the Coin to get a skin he wants no just goes for the RNG of the thing.

 

I Still stay firmly by my view of which Mature gamers are getting punished because immature parents allow their child to go crazy on their credit card. Litterally none of this would really be seen if it wasn't for some immature Parent going 'Oh Sh** I just lost £150 from my account.... to cosmetics?' Then getting angry at someone else for their own stupid fault. 

 

If this came round from a neutral stand point where the Government came along and was like 'hey this seems a lot like gambling' then fine I wouldn't have the same view point as I do now. but it didn't.

 

TBH if this bill Is only affecting USA then fine by me I won't have issues (still sucks but meh)  

I find it rather alarming that everyone seems to be focusing on such an irrelevant part of this debate.

 

As someone who works in childcare I know that the habbits children will have in later life are formed when they're in their teens, this is a well established fact.

 

These Lootboxes are essentially grooming children to become gamblers when they grow up, they rely on the same mechanism as gambling and are forming the same connections in our brains as sticking that quid in the fruit machine.

 

It's funny that people blame bad parenting. How many people here can honestly say they did everything their parents asked/told them to and didn't do anything they were told not too? If anybody says they did then they're lying.

 

Teenagers will do what they want to, they'll hide it from their parents, tell their parents it's something else or just flat out ignore them and do it anyway.

 

This issue is not about teenagers ignoring parents or even about parents being misinformed. It's about games publishers trying to turn the next generation of adults into gamblers at an age where they're not legally allowed to gamble at all.

 

No amount of parenting is going to stop 14 year  old Timmy buying that lootbox if he really wants to, the fact is 14 year old Timmy shouldn't have that option available to him at all.

[Xander Cousins]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

-Snip- 

14 year old timmy meets a screen saying it is bad to gamble at this age turn back now. 

 

Alright all jokes aside, Yeah I remember having this discussion with you previously I think before December in a thread you posted about Lootboxes. And I do agree that it does influence children. 

 

My view is that I'm not against the fact that they have come to this conclusion as it is annoying seeing these factors in a lot of games now what I'm annoyed about is the way it was brought around as I did state. 

 

This would still have become a topic when game companies literally went Overkill on these features but at a later time because parents who controlled their credit card wouldn't be complaining. Still like you said they will go out of their way to try and get what they want. 

 

Again doesn't mean its a bad thing. Usually I disobeyed when it came to me getting a game. How I bypass them I would source out the money myself via helping friends or Chores around the house. 

 

Long story short in some cases it can teach kids good lessons (Obviously if its for loot boxes it's more negative than positive) But it can teach them that not everything is given to you on a silver platter and allow them to realise the need to save money instead of spending it the first chance they get. 

 

As negative as I sound I am all for the removal of loot boxes, it will get game companies re evaluate children based games to be more focused on them. But at the same time this could impact negatively as the majority of gamers is ranged from Mid-Teens to Adults. so they could just go sod it and ignore the children area of Games that they would enjoy. 

[mr moose]

17 minutes ago, Seefer said:

It has to do with BOTH and if you bothered reading everything I said you would see that I said parents need to learn to say no and adults need to learn self control, I am 38 years old and could EASILY drop 200-300 a month on loot boxes but I have self control.

I did read everything you said, you quoted me telling me remember.

 

9 hours ago, Seefer said:

Parents can say no to using their credit card, what? Do you think a kid is going to grab a credit card from their parents without asking or if they do they won't get punished severely? Sorry but that IS on the parents and parents are also there to guide kids, my mother when I was growing up taught me respect, right and wrong and consequences, somewhere that all got lost.

 

So if the parents don't say no to them buying loot boxes it IS on them.

You are assuming that the problem is parents can't say no or don't say no.   If you are relying on the words of a politician to justify that position, then what ever you are trying to achieve in this discussion is founded on very weak grounds.

 

If you want the data here it is:

http://www.theesa.com/about-esa/industry-facts/

 

only 18% of gamers are under 18Yo and

94% of parents say they pay attention to the video game played by their children. With 67% playing alongside them.

 

Hardly sounds like an issue caused by or needed by parents.

 

More likely people are sick of loot boxes and are using any excuse they can to have them regulated.   And all this is forgetting that there may well be other legitimate reasons to regulate the industry in this regard, its just those reasons may not be popular.  

 

 

 

And finally, just so you  know, I am a parent, my kids love gaming, I have no problem being the parent, I am also support staff and early education staff for children with delayed learning and behavioral problems (including parent induced). I have spent my time as a youth worker, I was on the consultation panel for problem gambling and the effects on youth plus consultation for counsel intervention into youth problems pertaining to both school and domestic. I Think I know enough about this to understand when there are problems and when there is empty rhetoric.  Blaming parents is farcical in this as the sheer percentage of parents who are likely to have such a problem that would  give rise to the need for regulation is so small such regulation would change nothing.    However if such regulation does become implemented and have an impact on problem gambling, then I can assure you it is becasue there was a problem, just not a parental one.    

[Seefer]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I did read everything you said, you quoted me telling me remember.

 

You are assuming that the problem is parents can't say no or don't say no.   If you are relying on the words of a politician to justify that position, then what ever you are trying to achieve in this discussion is founded on very weak grounds.

 

If you want the data here it is:

http://www.theesa.com/about-esa/industry-facts/

 

only 18% of gamers are under 18Yo and

94% of parents say they pay attention to the video game played by their children. With 67% playing alongside them.

 

Hardly sounds like an issue caused by or needed by parents.

 

More likely people are sick of loot boxes and are using any excuse they can to have them regulated.   And all this is forgetting that there may well be other legitimate reasons to regulate the industry in this regard, its just those reasons may not be popular.  

 

 

 

And finally, just so you  know, I am a parent, my kids love gaming, I have no problem being the parent, I am also support staff and early education staff for children with delayed learning and behavioral problems (including parent induced). I have spent my time as a youth worker, I was on the consultation panel for problem gambling and the effects on youth plus consultation for counsel intervention into youth problems pertaining to both school and domestic. I Think I know enough about this to understand when there are problems and when there is empty rhetoric.  Blaming parents is farcical in this as the sheer percentage of parents who are likely to have such a problem that would  give rise to the need for regulation is so small such regulation would change nothing.    However if such regulation does become implemented and have an impact on problem gambling, then I can assure you it is becasue there was a problem, just not a parental one.    

#1 I can say I do anything, doesn't make it true and I am betting a good chunk of those 94% of parents are lying out their ears, I have played enough online games to hear and see things kids say in games and you as a parent (which I myself am) and I assume a good parent would never let those things be said. 

 

As for your being on a consultation panel? Did you miss where 2 parents tried to sue Nintendo over their kids being "addicted" to buying Pokemon cards and spending a ton of money on it? Also for the age thing, that's nice, it's a bunch of people around my age who have no self control, I have an addictive personality disorder but I can control it.

[Xander Cousins]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

If you want the data here it is:

http://www.theesa.com/about-esa/industry-facts/

 

only 18% of gamers are under 18Yo and

94% of parents say they pay attention to the video game played by their children. With 67% playing alongside them.

 

Hardly sounds like an issue caused by or needed by parents.

@Seefer

Being someone that grew up when Gaming was becoming a lot more common (Sadly not the era with the N64 and all) my parents did regulate when I was playing on the Xbox 360. First 4 games that was got for that was, COD:MW, Viva piñata, PES 6, Gotham Racing(Forgot full name).

When I first played COD:MW first reaction from both parents when they heard the game had swearing was simple and straight forward. 'If we hear you using such language or aggression we will remove that game and console' Obviously being an innocent little kid I followed that to heart and still do.  

 

I Would agree That this thing with loot boxes was accelerated due to the small handful of parenting but I can also agree on the fact that this was something that was gonna com around sooner or later. 

 

And what Mr Moose said is correct. he did provide  a link, Not many gamers are under 18yrs Old. the major half is still Mid-Teens and Adults. Being someone who would be at the lower band of that and knowing how games do things to get your interest. Being said the results can possibly be skewed but probably not as most research in this area is collected anonymously to influence more correct responses. You will still get some that will lie but would be a low percentage that prior if they had to give their name. 

 

These loot boxes are aimed more towards children (COD more recent games show that) as simple things influence your choices, Colours, Rarity, Frequently being showed it. 

 

In the stance or RB6's Alpha packs they do this quite subtle. Every time you finish a game it shows you an alpha pack and your chances of getting one. Seems harmless right? Nah being shown something that is out of your reach influences want for said item. Seeing your percentage get higher and higher for it adds to the want because you think you will get it quicker buying than waiting for that lucky chance that it drops for you. 

 

In Overwatches sense it is different they get you in by having you be able to get nearly 3 minimum a week via Arcade events that then frustrate you when you don't get the desired out come to then influence you that your next crate drop will be a lucky one and that just tumbles out of control.

 

 

[mr moose]

26 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

I find it rather alarming that everyone seems to be focusing on such an irrelevant part of this debate.

 

As someone who works in childcare I know that the habbits children will have in later life are formed when they're in their teens, this is a well established fact.

 

These Lootboxes are essentially grooming children to become gamblers when they grow up, they rely on the same mechanism as gambling and are forming the same connections in our brains as sticking that quid in the fruit machine.

 

It's funny that people blame bad parenting. How many people here can honestly say they did everything their parents asked/told them to and didn't do anything they were told not too? If anybody says they did then they're lying.

 

Teenagers will do what they want to, they'll hide it from their parents, tell their parents it's something else or just flat out ignore them and do it anyway.

 

This issue is not about teenagers ignoring parents or even about parents being misinformed. It's about games publishers trying to turn the next generation of adults into gamblers at an age where they're not legally allowed to gamble at all.

 

No amount of parenting is going to stop 14 year  old Timmy buying that lootbox if he really wants to, the fact is 14 year old Timmy shouldn't have that option available to him at all.

Before loot boxes there was McDonald's,  Their advertising was so insidious that where I grew up in the country the nearest mcdonalds was literally a 45 min drive, yet all the kids in school knew what a happy meal was and wanted one all the time.   This is before the internet.  This was all the effects of one way tv based advertising.  I imagine having an interactive version of advertising could be a goldmine for certain types of product.

 

1 minute ago, Seefer said:

#1 I can say I do anything, doesn't make it true and I am betting a good chunk of those 94% of parents are lying out their ears, I have played enough online games to hear and see things kids say in games and you as a parent (which I myself am) and I assume a good parent would never let those things be said. 

 

As for your being on a consultation panel? Did you miss where 2 parents tried to sue Nintendo over their kids being "addicted" to buying Pokemon cards and spending a ton of money on it? Also for the age thing, that's nice, it's a bunch of people around my age who have no self control, I have an addictive personality disorder but I can control it.

 

Don't like the surveys, dismiss them as liars.  That type of argument can't be countered because no one can prove anything if you are not willing to look even consider the statistics as presented.

 

Secondly pointing to even a 100 crazy parents who may legitimately be neglectful does not mean the majority are, let alone that every parent is.   That is woeful reasoning right there.   2 neglectful parents suing Nintendo doesn't change anything I have said.   And frankly it is scary that you think it does.  It is scary that you as a parent think the majority of other parents aren't as good as you when it comes to watching over their kids play games.    Can you not see how it might be that 94% of parents are just like you and me, parents who care and watch what our kids do online?

[asus killer]

20 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Well, if they buy the game and then they let their kid gamble then that's on them for letting their kids break the law.

i get your point, but it's the government job to protect kids from stupid parenting.

[Xander Cousins]

1 minute ago, asus killer said:

i get your point, but it's the government job to protect kids from stupid parenting.

governments job is to TRY and protect Kids but is dominantly falls down to the parent which sadly can't control everything their child encounters especially when it comes to the internet and online gaming.

 

[asus killer]

Just now, Alex Colson said:

governments job is to TRY and protect Kids but is dominantly falls down to the parent which sadly can't control everything their child encounters especially when it comes to the internet and online gaming.

 

nothing is certain except death i guess. Of course there is no guarantees and all one can do is try, that is valid for a parent or the government. But my point is that's what we pay taxes. Kids by definition are easily susceptible and parents can either be bad parents or simply do not even comprehend what's at stake. Not all parents are tech savvy. So i guess someone like a protection agency should know and should act.

I could not care less about bad parenting or stupid parenting or parents who do not inform themselves. But the kids still need to be protected. That's my point i guess.

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, asus killer said:

i get your point, but it's the government job to protect kids from stupid parenting.

Grrrrr,  Not you too!!!

 

 

[Xander Cousins]

1 minute ago, asus killer said:

-snip-

I Get what you mean Dude, The world is progressing down a tech path that does need to update with the times for protecting children from influential harm and others that can be faced while on the internet, Sadly not all can fall down to the government they can only do soo much and majority is just reinforcing rules and regulations, Majority does fall down to the parent to try and prevent their Kid from being influenced negatively via internet influences. School is another thing  

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Alex Colson said:

I Get what you mean Dude, The world is progressing down a tech path that does need to update with the times for protecting children from influential harm and others that can be faced while on the internet, Sadly not all can fall down to the government they can only do soo much and majority is just reinforcing rules and regulations, Majority does fall down to the parent to try and prevent their Kid from being influenced negatively via internet influences. School is another thing  

Australia (Victoria definitely)  has introduced into it's curriculum a whole section on online safety and presence. They try to deal with everything from child pornography to social media, identity theft, bullying and fraud.     

 

I think the important thing to remember here is that parenting is not done half arsed on purpose.  Most parents (literally high, 90th percentile) actually go out of their way to protect their children and raise them to be honest.   Many parents may not have the technical understanding of game economics or some other component of modern life, but they do know enough to be as good as anyone can (including us) in those situations.