Chris Lee interviews an ESA Lobbyist on Lootboxes with interesting results

[Master Disaster]

So this is a video posted on YouTube, in full, by Chris Lee himself showing a public interview he conducted with an ESA lobbyist and representative, the answers to the questions are very telling but even more so is the lobbyists body language when the independent witness talks very frankly about Battlefront 2 and EA CEO Andrew Wilson.

I'll briefly outline the questions and answers then post the video at the end, I'll add any thoughts I have in italic

Question One

Quote

Chris Lee: Is it concerning that people, and kids, are ending up with addiction issues due to video game mechanics?

Quote

Representative: The industry recognised it had an issue which is why the ESRB was created.

Let's be super clear, the ESRB was created because the publishers didn't want government legislation over violence in video games in the 90s. It was created by the industry to stop legislation, not because they actually cared about best practices and certainly not because of gambling in video games.

Question Two

Quote

Chris Lee: Does the ESRB currently rate gambling mechanics in video games?

Quote

Representative: I cannot answer that.

 

So why are you conducting an interview on the subject if you don't know the answer to incredibly basic questions?

Quote

Witness: The ESRB does not currently rate gambling mechanics in video games, in fact the ESRB have made public statements saying Lootboxes are not gambling.

Question Three

Quote

Chris Lee: Would you agree that mechanics with a cash out option, like skin betting, are gambling?

Quote

Representative: I cannot answer that.

 

Convenient

Question Four

Quote

Chris Lee: When it comes to Lootboxes, how does a player know the odds of getting what they're paying for?

Quote

Representative: Lootboxes are optional.

Quote

Chris Lee: So is not walking into a casino but if a player were inclined to buy a Lootbox how would they know their odds of winning?

Quote

Representative: I cannot answer that.

 

Anybody noticing a pattern here?

Quote

Witness: As far as I am aware there's no disclosure of odds in any games, and I play a lot of games.

Quote

Chris Lee: Are you aware of legislation in China forcing publishers to show odds to players?

Quote

Representative: No I'm not.

 

Better than I can't answer that but obviously nonsense

Question Five

Quote

Chris Lee: Has the industry identified an age which they deem as appropriate to play games containing these mechanisms?

Quote

Representative: Go the the ESRB website

 

No I'm not making that sound worse than it was, that's genuinely his answer

Quote

Witness: The point is the ESRB don't rate Lootboxes and if they did we wouldn't be here. Also there's clear evidence of Andrew Wilson talking about deliberately creating player frustration to sell Lootboxes and then EA release SWBF2 which deliberately creates frustration to sell Lootboxes.

Quote

Representative: Correction, those mechanics only existed in the beta and were removed from the final release.

 

Correction: those mechanics were present in the final release until customers caused a big enough fuss to get them removed. Also kind of funny that now it suits you're an expert?

Quote

Chris Lee: Are you aware that EA have stated those mechanics are going to return?

Quote

Representative: I was not aware of that.

 

But you were aware they took them out in the first place place? Interesting

Question Six

Quote

Chris Lee:Is there anywhere a parent can go to find out if a game contains Lootboxes?

Quote

Reprsentative: The ESRB

Quote

Chris Lee: Does that contain information on Lootboxes and gambling?

Quote

Representative: I'm not sure but we've already discussed that the ESRB don't rate Lootboxes so probably not

Quote

Witness: No it does not

So it's ultra clear this representative has his own agenda and is willing to obfuscate everything he can in order to protect the industry. He knows the answers to all of these questions but he also knows what might happen if he admits to it.

 

I hope Chris Lee is successful in his campaign as the industry has no intentions of changing or trying to self regulate. They're the proverbial 3 year old sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting so they can't hear what everyone is saying in the hopes we will go away.

[ItsMitch]

Can't answer that.......

[Guest]

Just don't buy the game that sells the Lootboxes. They won't try and make more money if they can't.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, RorzNZ said:

Just don't buy the game that sells the Lootboxes. They won't try and make more money if they can't.

There's a bigger issue here, it's not just about Lootboxes. Take Lootboxes away tomorrow and by June they'd be replaced with something else.

 

No this is about the industry using predatory practices to try and take as much money from players as possible even after they've sold them a product.

 

It's funny how studios are now being praised for only including cosmetic MTXs in games that cost full price. Can you name me one other industry that's able to sell you a full priced product then carry on taking money from you after the sale?

 

It's pure greed.

[Suika]

Oh look, an example of a private industry being unable to regulate themselves. Who would have guessed?

[Cole5]

so now we need to tell the ESRB to go away and regulate the industry like they should have 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

There's a bigger issue here, it's not just about Lootboxes. Take Lootboxes away tomorrow and by June they'd be replaced with something else.

 

No this is about the industry using predatory practices to try and take as much money from players as possible even after they've sold them a product.

 

It's funny how studios are now being praised for only including cosmetic MTXs in games that cost full price. Can you name me one other industry that's able to sell you a full priced product then carry on taking money from you after the sale?

 

It's pure greed.

If you don't buy their products then they will have to change it to sell to consumers. If they can't sell it in the first place then they can't sell in-game items. 

[Blademaster91]

A waste of time interview for Lee, full of "I can't answer that"  and "I'm not aware of that". ESRB recognizes the problem but won't do a thing about it because huge lootbox profits also benefits these lobbyists.

[Bananasplit_00]

what? did people expect any other answeres?

[Master Disaster]

3 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

A waste of time interview for Lee, full of "I can't answer that"  and "I'm not aware of that". ESRB recognizes the problem but won't do a thing about it because huge lootbox profits also benefits these lobbyists.

Sometimes saying nothing says much more than saying something. I wouldn't call it a waste of time, it's ammunition for his campaign.

[apm]

20 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

If you don't buy their products then they will have to change it to sell to consumers. If they can't sell it in the first place then they can't sell in-game items. 

i agree, but there arent as many as you think there are. these games still sell millions and companies make billions off lootboxes and the ultimate team bullshit in fifa etc. 

around half the games EA releases every year are sports games and they all include wilson lootboxes, even other games have lootboxes in some form.

i think the sims is the only series that doesnt have lootboxes yet. that of all games doesnt have them.

[Carclis]

1 hour ago, RorzNZ said:

If you don't buy their products then they will have to change it to sell to consumers. If they can't sell it in the first place then they can't sell in-game items. 

True, but their target audience usually aren't the ones buying the games. The parents do. Unfortunately we have a problem where parents are buying games for their kids without knowing that gambling exists in the game (because the ESRB doesn't classify loot boxes as gambling) and where they are buying "skins" for their kids which are actually chances to obtain the skins they want.

[Guest]

59 minutes ago, Carclis said:

True, but their target audience usually aren't the ones buying the games. The parents do. Unfortunately we have a problem where parents are buying games for their kids without knowing that gambling exists in the game (because the ESRB doesn't classify loot boxes as gambling) and where they are buying "skins" for their kids which are actually chances to obtain the skins they want.

Don't give ur kids ur credit card then  

[Carclis]

6 minutes ago, RorzNZ said:

Don't give ur kids ur credit card then  

You don't "give" your kids your credit card. You buy them games and it's usually the popular ones that everyone else has that they want so they can play with their friends. They might also say that they want skins and the parent would choose to pay $xx to allow them to put towards the skins their child may want. It's a clever trick that the publishers pull to get money by appealing to those who don't have money, just like placing confectionery at store checkouts.

[DeScruff]

Quote

Chris Lee: Is there anywhere a parent can go to find out if a game contains Lootboxes?

Representative: The ESRB

Chris Lee: Does that contain information on Lootboxes and gambling?

Representative: I'm not sure but we've already discussed that the ESRB don't rate Lootboxes so probably not

I almost can't believe an exchange happened like that...
"Oh yeah we have something.... except we don't."

[sof006]

Well this is highly concerning. I feel like we're going to get nowhere talking to the publishers on this. EA is clear on their agenda, lootboxes are going to stay. Best way to get through to EA, don't buy their games. Or the public could turn their attention to the age rating system currently in place and point fingers at the ESRB/PEGI/BBFC etc. Force them with pressure from the public to overhaul the rating system for modern games.

[Cheezdoodlez]

11 hours ago, apm said:

i think the sims is the only series that doesnt have lootboxes yet. that of all games doesnt have them.

Yeah The Sims has no lootboxes. But instead The Sims 4 have around 25 DLCs and The Sims 3 had around 20 DLCs (Sims 2 had a crapton of DLCs too iirc). So don't worry, EA still makes a ton of money of the Sims series

[Master Disaster]

44 minutes ago, sof006 said:

Well this is highly concerning. I feel like we're going to get nowhere talking to the publishers on this. EA is clear on their agenda, lootboxes are going to stay. Best way to get through to EA, don't buy their games. Or the public could turn their attention to the age rating system currently in place and point fingers at the ESRB/PEGI/BBFC etc. Force them with pressure from the public to overhaul the rating system for modern games.

That's exactly what is happening

 

It seems like most governments want three things to happen...

 

1) For rating boards to consider skins, lootboxes and gambling mechanics when rating a game and force publishers to include that information on the items packaging or store description.

2) For publishers to include the odds of winning specific items with variable odds MTXs.

3) For any game that includes microtransactions to be classed as adult only games and to have the sale of them restricted.

 

They're pushing pretty hard for number 1 & 2 and will likely succeed in getting them through, number 3 however is more difficult.

 

[Master Disaster]

14 minutes ago, Cheezdoodlez said:

Yeah The Sims has no lootboxes. But instead The Sims 4 have around 25 DLCs and The Sims 3 had around 20 DLCs (Sims 2 had a crapton of DLCs too iirc). So don't worry, EA still makes a ton of money of the Sims series

DLC is a bit strong for most of what the Sims 4 offers tbh, Downloadable Shit is closer.

 

I mean the last DLC was called Laundry Stuff and featured washing machines, dryers and laundry hampers for god sakes.

[Xander Cousins]

But the problem isn't that EA has made their agenda clear they have done this for years within their sport games (which are fantasy teams and the main community of it didn't have problems paying for them ) and the just forced it onto a FPS game which caused the up roar. The thing to do with lootboxes is that they are a lazy way of replacing Challenge systems while still making profit.  Secondly making the games rated Adult won't do much it will remove them temporarily from games until they find a loop hole or another method of making profit without it being classed as gambling/lootboxes. 

 

Being someone that has seen how stupid lootboxes can be *Cough* COD games after AW *Cough* and EA's release of SWBF2 return of the Greed. it is blatant but once again it comes down to who allowed this to happen? Us we thought they where fine, we thought that it was nothing major and then it escalated.

[Cheezdoodlez]

39 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

DLC is a bit strong for most of what the Sims 4 offers tbh, Downloadable Shit is closer.

 

I mean the last DLC was called Laundry Stuff and featured washing machines, dryers and laundry hampers for god sakes.

Yeah most of the DLCs are craptastic stuff named stuff packs. But they still cost 10 bucks and I bet they sell quite a few of these new fancy washing machines to kids and completionists.  

 

edit: Personally I hold The Sims accountable for starting the Wave of infinite numbers of DLCs most AAA titles have these days. Much as MTX is a plague started on iOS and Android and spread to PC games. Mobile gaming has gone to shit with the introduction of MTX and the PC side is quickly catching up sadly. 

[Carclis]

46 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

That's exactly what is happening

 

It seems like most governments want three things to happen...

 

1) For rating boards to consider skins, lootboxes and gambling mechanics when rating a game and force publishers to include that information on the items packaging or store description.

2) For publishers to include the odds of winning specific items with variable odds MTXs.

3) For any game that includes microtransactions to be classed as adult only games and to have the sale of them restricted.

 

They're pushing pretty hard for number 1 & 2 and will likely succeed in getting them through, number 3 however is more difficult.

 

I guarantee you that companies as slimy as EA, Activision Blizzard and WB will find a way to circumvent these protective measures. I doubt number 2 would ever happen since these companies would not want to reveal their hand or how deplorable their measures of making money are. I'd put money on them making loot boxes hard(er) to obtain in games whilst selling to players "boosts" which allow players to accumulate them significantly faster for short periods of time.

[apm]

5 hours ago, Cheezdoodlez said:

Yeah most of the DLCs are craptastic stuff named stuff packs. But they still cost 10 bucks and I bet they sell quite a few of these new fancy washing machines to kids and completionists.  

 

edit: Personally I hold The Sims accountable for starting the Wave of infinite numbers of DLCs most AAA titles have these days. Much as MTX is a plague started on iOS and Android and spread to PC games. Mobile gaming has gone to shit with the introduction of MTX and the PC side is quickly catching up sadly. 

they could easily make lootboxes with random furniture, but i dont think the demographic that mostly plays the series is into that shit.

[Doobeedoo]

Gambling or not, I don't support LB shitty practices in games, I don't even care about them. To me it's not rewarding but whatever. It's sad many sheep will continue to support it, like they actually play cause of loot boxes. Even throw tons of cash to buy them. People are just to easily brainwashed though. 

Peoples mentality need to change. 

[MoonSpot]

7 hours ago, Carclis said:

I doubt number 2 would ever happen since these companies would not want to reveal their hand or how deplorable their measures of making money are.

Not only that, but who's to say that they don't change the formulae from one update to another; or that they aren't personalizing the odds on individual user bases after weighing the data they've collected and the physiological factors that they've subjected the 'customer' to. 

I suspect the odds are dynamic, and if they are how can they even report them?

Would we even believe them if they told us some odds?  Any reason why we should?

 

Super Mario Bros. and tetris are looking like better and better games every minute.