US Senate Against Lootboxes and Pay2Win Micro-Transactions

[Nowak]

Even if it does make it to the senate floor, I don't think this will pass. The senate's full of corporate bootlickers.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Never said Mitch was the brightest show in town.

Hell, half of the Republicans in the Senate are unremarkable.

I just don't like how Mitch handles his office. If polling shows a majority, or at least a sizable portion of the population polled, voting on any bills should proceed. He seems to obstruct based on his own desires (or donors). 

[Drak3]

4 minutes ago, Nowak said:

The senate's full of corporate bootlickers.

Better than government bootlickers.

[ARikozuM]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Better than government bootlickers.

I'd rather have people bootlickers. 

[mr moose]

Quote

The Entertainment Software Association, the video game industry lobbyist group, sent over a statement shortly after this bill was introduced: “Numerous countries, including Ireland, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, determined that loot boxes do not constitute gambling. 

Bull Shit,  The Australian government has only completed an inquiry and has concluded that:

 

Quote

further research into the potential for gambling-related harms to be experienced as a result of interaction with loot boxes

Should occur.

 

They did not conclude anything of the sort concerning it being gambling or not, in fact given the above quote it is more likely a conclusion that they do consider it a form of gambling.

https://responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au/about-us/news-and-media/australian-government-seeking-submissions-loot-boxes/

 

 

 

It seems the US government is also a pay to win system.  But lets not got here to quickly.

[thorhammerz]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

It seems the US government is also a pay to win system.  But lets not got here to quickly.

Nothing wrong with flat out stating the truth though - the unwillingness to do so due to "political correctness" or "your views are too radical, therefore not free speech" ultimately fetter open discourse (to the favour of those controlling what gets fettered).

[mr moose]

12 minutes ago, thorhammerz said:

Nothing wrong with flat out stating the truth though - the unwillingness to do so due to "political correctness" or "your views are too radical, therefore not free speech" ultimately fetter open discourse (to the favour of those controlling what gets fettered).

 

When I said "lets not go there to quickly", I was more thinking glass houses and stones.  make sure your happy with your own backyard before criticizing others so to speak.

[Brooksie359]

3 hours ago, Commodus said:

Yeah, this is the classic example of why you need at least some regulation.  Some game developers are clearly abusing the practice knowing full well that kids will spend tons of money in hopes of getting a new skin or progressing through a mobile game.  We shouldn't get rid of all microtransactions, but you should know exactly what you're getting and shouldn't need to buy them just to make reasonable progress.

 

And to those who blame the players or their parents (not you, clearly) -- I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be forced to skip half the games on the market just because you have a gambling disorder.  It's time we stop blaming victims and ask game devs to do better.

We dont ban the production of alcohol just because there are alcoholics so your analogy really doesn't make sense. I could see the argument for banning loot boxes in games that are rated under M but anything else would be kinda ridiculous. 

[D13H4RD]

You know what I find funny? 

 

Voting with wallets doesn't work not necessarily because a whole heap of people do it but it's usually because there's a small sunset of people dumping tons of cash into them. 

 

With all that said, I can't say this will go all too well, regardless of whether this passes or not. 

[DesolationGod]

while it would be nice to see some action taken against these practices, this will never see the light of day in the senate let alone the rest of congress

[Semper]

I've been through this more than once on this forum. Many more times over on Reddit.

Government intervention and legislation isn't the answer to everything. When you give government power, you end up with the likes of Article 13 and the UK's porn ban (among many other malicious, insidious, atrocious, anti-human, indecent, disgusting, horrendous, tragic, evil things that power corruption eventually brings). "But it's only lootboxes", stab yourself once with a needle, it's going to hurt a bit, but you'll probably be okay. Stab yourself a thousand times and you're significantly more likely to have permanent damage and/or death.

I don't like what loot boxes and not-so-micro transactions have become, as much as the lot of you here.
I don't watch porn either (you're welcome to believe what you'd like on this matter, I have no intention of trying to substantiate my claims, it ain't worth the effort)

If you don't like them, don't partake in them. If you don't want to support the concept, bar yourself from publishers that use them. This'll bar you from playing some good games, absolutely, but your life isn't going to end as a result. There's a load of games that I play that have lootboxes coming out the wazoo. The moment they become P2W, I'll abandon the title faster than a jackrabbit being shot through the Hadron collider, or at least what's left of it after the initial G-Forces rip it to unrecognizable levels of destruction. Until then, I'll continue to play being perfectly content not buying any boxes.
 

[thorhammerz]

1 hour ago, D13H4RD said:

Voting with wallets doesn't work not necessarily because a whole heap of people do it but it's usually because there's a small sunset of people dumping tons of cash into them. 

One man, one vote.

 

...

 

One dollar, one word of your choosing on this new law being written!

[HomeBoi]

13 hours ago, Drak3 said:

I would. I've thrown $5 at games I've like a handful of times in the past.

Ah yes so you are part of the problem, i still remember when you paid 60 USD for a game and it was a full game.

[Drak3]

53 minutes ago, HomeBoi said:

i still remember when you paid 60 USD for a game and it was a full game.

And. Game prices have not changed with inflation.

 

54 minutes ago, HomeBoi said:

Ah yes so you are part of the problem

Not really, because lootboxes and micro transactions are not a problem. Lack of personal responsibility is.

[Thaldor]

9 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

And. Game prices have not changed with inflation.

Games also are not worth 60$ anymore.

[williamcll]

I guess we're going back to subscription-based games after this. 

[Drak3]

7 minutes ago, Thaldor said:

Games also are not worth 60$ anymore.

Then don’t buy, it’s that simple.

[Doobeedoo]

16 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Still don't see why we should suffer because a few people can't control themselves and some parents can't do their job.

Suffer, wut? Also, "few people" some parents" ye no. It's a whole swarm. 

[Doobeedoo]

Really screw any kind of LB and p2w micro though. Shitty design fueled by degenerates therefore companies focusing on that part way too much and neglect the actual gameplay, amount of content and quality in geneal. 

[The Friendly Elite]

16 hours ago, Drak3 said:

I would. I've thrown $5 at games I've like a handful of times in the past.

how about throwing 5 bucks at a game and knowing exactly what your getting. its not banning all micro transactions. just lootboxes 

[Drak3]

15 minutes ago, The Friendly Elite said:

how about throwing 5 bucks at a game and knowing exactly what your getting

Because, believe it or not, I enjoy the occassional roll of the dice.

 

I'm just not one of the few people that blows a shit ton of money on it.

[samcool55]

2 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Because, believe it or not, I enjoy the occassional roll of the dice.

 

I'm just not one of the few people that blows a shit ton of money on it.

Well you can always go to a casino then. We don't need to be able to do that in games, there are a lot of options out there that are regulated and allow you to do a roll of the dice for a few bucks. Online casinos are also a thing so plenty of options.

 

I really don't see why we should keep unregulated gambling in games.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, samcool55 said:

I really don't see why we should keep unregulated gambling in games.

Because it's blatant government overreach.

[samcool55]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Because it's blatant government overreach.

Nah, it's not, It's fine.

I live in Belgium, lootboxes are banned and it's all fine!

They are gone in cs:go, rocket league and fifa 19 and surprise surprise, people change their location to Belgium so they can play the game without lootboxes.

I haven't heard a single person here that is against that rule.

 

You might like lootboxes, but know that most people don't agree with you.

 

The biggest reason they want it banned is to protect the kids, which is fine.

You said "well if kids spend a lot of money, it's the parent's fault" which is true, but then we should regulate who is allowed to have kids and everything that comes with parenting and regulating that is a LOT more difficult and sensitive people don't even want to talk about it. Let alone create laws about it.

[Princess Luna]

48 minutes ago, Mr. horse said:

Remove the loot boxes and stuff and would those games even still be worth playing ?

Yes? I always played CoD for the single player campaign which become worsen and worsen until there was no more SP campaign at all because gotta keep making Battle Royal with a shot load of loot boxes and micro transactions to profit from nowadays children.

 

I really miss the old times money was made by making a good game and not an elaborated gambling system that targets children's tendency to get addicted.