Most of Europe (and Washington State) bands together to tackle the lootbox problem

[Brooksie359]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

Then you have no idea how a child's mind works.

 

Until they turn into adults children have very little understanding of the difference between cause and consequence (it's actually worse in boys, girls reach maturity at a younger age than boys do).

 

This is why you very often find teenagers doing very dumb things for fun, they don't associate the risks with the situation and also the reason why young male drivers are infinitely more likely to crash a car than any other age groups.

 

A child would understand the difference between apple juice and cider by the taste of it, they wouldn't understand the effect the cider is going to have on them nor the consequences. Same with lootboxes and gambling, a child could understand the difference if it was explained to them, they wouldn't understand the effects properly even if it was explained to them.

 

This is precisely why so many laws exist to protect children and why they're classed as vulnerable.

I completely understand how a child's mind is very impressionable and can be brought bad habits not realizing the risks and bad side effects of those habits. The ones that help their children understand and protect them from those habits are the parents and it isn't the government job to do so. Lootboxes are nothing more than some thing you buy. The government can prevent shopping addiction and that is up to the parents to prevent and fix. 

[Brooksie359]

3 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I am more point out that it's targeted by the initiator. And it also effects minors, they shouldn't be exposed to gambling so young.

It's not gambling though. 

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Arokhantos said:

Can't kids buy pokemon card packs already those been around for as long as pokemon it self, if you gonna deal with lootboxes deal with that kind of thing also, i know they won't think you can even still buy card packs in hearthstone in Belgium correct me if i am wrong.

This has been debunked time and time again. Gambling is every bit as much about the experience as it is the actual gambling.

 

Ripping open a pack of trading cards is not the same thing as the brightly coloured screens with flashing lights and spinners slowing down to reveal the contents of the box, the cards coming out slowly, usually facing backwards and slowly being revealed.

 

It's all designed to create association in the brain, association between the endorphin rush and the experience of opening the box. It's exactly like a casino but on screen.

[Master Disaster]

2 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I completely understand how a child's mind is very impressionable and can be brought bad habits not realizing the risks and bad side effects of those habits. The ones that help their children understand and protect them from those habits are the parents and it isn't the government job to do so. Lootboxes are nothing more than some thing you buy. The government can prevent shopping addiction and that is up to the parents to prevent and fix. 

When EA are selling games rated as Teen that contain lootboxes how exactly are the parents supposed to protect them? Would most parents even know what's going on?

 

No one is talking about legislation, they want skin gambling killed (which is against the law pretty much everywhere without a license) and the publishers to be responsible with what they sell to children.

[Brooksie359]

Just now, Arokhantos said:

 

Kids should't even have acces to in game purchases at all heck in game purchases should require id and age verification or parent approval, i can't imagine any parent tho that would be like hey have this credit card go wild with it, unless there parents are like super rich and have wealth that everyone else can only dream of then who cares.

I know people who do that with their kids and it makes me sad. I agree that microtransactions in general seem like a horrible idea for children. It's a huge money hole that children aren't mature enough to have self restraint. 

[Brooksie359]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

When EA are selling games rated as Teen that contain lootboxes how exactly are the parents supposed to protect them? Would most parents even know what's going on?

 

No one is talking about legislation, they want skin gambling killed (which is against the law pretty much everywhere without a license) and the publishers to be responsible with what they sell to children.

Skin gambling and lootboxes are two different things. 

[Deus Voltage]

8 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

It's not gambling though. 

Gambling as defined by Dictionary.com:

 

1) The activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes.

2) The act or practice of risking the loss of something important by taking a chance or acting recklessly.

Merriam Webster:

1) To play a game for money or property.

2) To bet on an uncertain outcome.

Oxford Dictionary:

 

1) Play games of chance for money; bet.

2) Take risky action in the hope of a desired result.

[Master Disaster]

Just now, Brooksie359 said:

Skin gambling and lootboxes are two different things. 

Agreed and the distinction has been made clear. You ignored the part about publishers being responsible with what they sell to kids.

[The Benjamins]

9 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

It's not gambling though. 

Gambling - take risky action in the hope of a desired result

 

Loot boxes fits the definition.

[Master Disaster]

3 minutes ago, Arokhantos said:

 

What kind of parent would't let payment details on there kids account tho for kids to do whatever they want, at some point tho if your kids would buy loot boxes and credit card got charged you would see the extra payments and investigate tho, but yes i do agree those warnings should be there, but parents should pay attention either way almost everything has loot boxes these days, if not loot boxes then in game purchases like cosmetics and sometimes both.

 

5 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I know people who do that with their kids and it makes me sad. I agree that microtransactions in general seem like a horrible idea for children. It's a huge money hole that children aren't mature enough to have self restraint. 

I think a huge part of this is precisely about promoting responsible parenting and educating parents on exactly what their teenage children are being exposed too.

 

Belgium have classed lootboxes as illegal and EA have refused to remove them from FIFA in the country. This is the kind of behaviour parents are up against.

 

[Master Disaster]

Just now, BadMonkey said:

Among them, stupidity is condensed ...

 

Incredibly insightful and constructive post. It's comical that this has nothing to do with the EU at all.

[Mihle]

Lootboxes should at least make a game 18+ or more if nothing else.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Mihle said:

Lootboxes should at least make a game 18+ or more if nothing else.

That's very likely whats going to happen.

[Deus Voltage]

Just now, Master Disaster said:

That's very likely whats going to happen.

Which does not solve the problem. Individuals below 18 will still be able to play above 18 games simply because their parents are not sufficiently informed about games on a case by case basis.

 

Ban the bloody things, and give fat fines to game companies who implement them.  

[The Benjamins]

8 minutes ago, Mihle said:

Lootboxes should at least make a game 18+ or more if nothing else.

 

6 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

That's very likely whats going to happen.

And if that happens the games would not be able to be sold on Xbox or PS, they both have policies banning A+ games on the platforms.

 

@Deus Voltage

[Master Disaster]

Just now, Deus Voltage said:

Which does not solve the problem. Individuals below 18 will still be able to play above 18 games simply because their parents are not sufficiently informed about games on a case by case basis.

 

Ban the bloody things, and give fat fines to game companies who implement them.  

You can't just ban them as then you're preventing people of legal age from partaking.

 

Make lootbox games Adult only (which instantly prevents most stores from selling them) and slap huge warnings on them that they contain gambling like mechanics. That way adults can still buy them as verified adults and any parents buying them for their kids can instantly be labelled as irresponsible parents and be punished as required.

[Master Disaster]

Just now, The Benjamins said:

 

And if that happens the games would not be able to be sold on Xbox or PS, they both have policies banning A+ games on the platforms.

But you could still buy them physically from Amazon using an account thats verified as being 18+ by the credit card.

[The Benjamins]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

But you could still buy them physically from Amazon using an account thats verified as being 18+ by the credit card.

Not on Xbox or PS, They will not allow games with A+ on the platform. GTA had issues with it, they chagned to game to be able to be launched on those platforms.

 

But yes you can still buy the games, but many places have policies against A+ games. (not sure if amazon does but gamestop and bestbuy don't sell A+ games)

 

Steam will allow it. 

[Deus Voltage]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

You can't just ban them as then you're preventing people of legal age from partaking.

 

Make lootbox games Adult only (which instantly prevents most stores from selling them) and slap huge warnings on them that they contain gambling like mechanics. That way adults can still buy them as verified adults and any parents buying them for their kids can instantly be labelled as irresponsible parents and be punished as required.

I see your point, and I would have agreed with you had we been discussing this topic 10 or so years earlier.

 

The problem, in my view, is that digital distribution is more ubiquitous. Under 18 individuals can easily bypass the age restriction on the internet (steam, GOG....).

 

I'm also against lootboxes for adults in video games as well. My experience with MMO's, particularly Age of Wushu/ Wulin made it very clear that loot boxes and purchasable items are among the slipperiest of slopes in video games. 

[maartendc]

Good. The only way to stop these kind of predatorial business practices is to address them at a EU level.

 

However, many countries were already "looking into" this. Apart from the specific action taken by the Belgian courts, I don't see any real legal or legislative action being taken here, other than saying "we are looking into it". So there is really no news here, other than that those countries are "looking at it" together.

 

And about the self-regulating nature: Didn't the ESRB already come out with a "lootbox label" for games that basically just says "may contain ingame purchases" or something ridiculously vague like that? If that is what they are trying to achieve, that falls way short of what is needed in my opinion.

 

We need clear and precise legislation about what is allowed (perhaps cosmetic items that you cannot resell and where you know the chance of getting them) versus not allowed (real-money marketplaces to trade lootbox items and hidden chance % of items you may receive). Also if the game is NOT rated Mature (18+ only), they should completely take out any form of "chance": aka lootboxes you can buy with real money. It is still a "game of chance" even if the chances are listed and the items are digital only. It still preys on kids to spend money to get cosmetic items.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, The Benjamins said:

Not on Xbox or PS, They will not allow games with A+ on the platform. GTA had issues with it, they chagned to game to be able to be launched on those platforms.

 

But yes you can still buy the games, but many places have policies against A+ games. (not sure if amazon does but gamestop and bestbuy don't sell A+ games)

 

Steam will allow it. 

Is that a fact? I have to admit i was genuinely unaware of that. That's an interesting development that throws a spanner in the works for sure.

 

3 minutes ago, Deus Voltage said:

I see your point, and I would have agreed with you had we been discussing this topic 10 or so years earlier.

 

The problem, in my view, is that digital distribution is more ubiquitous. Under 18 individuals can easily bypass the age restriction on the internet (steam, GOG....).

 

I'm also against lootboxes for adults in video games as well. My experience with MMO's, particularly Age of Wushu/ Wulin made it very clear that loot boxes and purchasable items are among the slipperiest of slopes in video games. 

But then is that not the slippery slope of the government intruding on our personal freedom. I can't say I disagree with idea, it's the principle of the idea I'm against.

 

As a government you have to accept people will always ignore the law, that doesn't mean they shouldn't legislate at all though.

[The Benjamins]

2 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Is that a fact? I have to admit i was genuinely unaware of that. That's an interesting development that throws a spanner in the works for sure.

 

But then is that not the slippery slope of the government intruding on our personal freedom. I can't say I disagree with idea, it's the principle of the idea I'm against.

 

As a government you have to accept people will always ignore the law, that doesn't mean they shouldn't legislate at all though.

Ya It happened during the Xbox 360 gen, its not talked about a lot.

I have no clue if I can find a source, but just try and find a AO game on Xbox one or PS4.

[Deus Voltage]

What I am about to say might seem a bit controversial, perhaps even unfeasible, but I'm trying to find a middle ground.

 

Steam accounts and the like should be authenticated via a person's own identity card in order ensure that the person is not faking the information. Said individual has the freedom to use a pseudonym of course.

 

Perhaps also create an incentive system to push the scammers away and reduce the amount of people who would hack/ cheat a game knowing that their identity card information is known by steam.

 

Again, this is highly controversial, but I know of no other solution that can be as effective.

 

[Brooksie359]

3 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

Gambling - take risky action in the hope of a desired result

 

Loot boxes fits the definition.

That is the most vague definition ever. It's talking about the phrase not the actual thing. Like some saying oh that's a gamble when referring to something risky that might work like a hailmary for football. It's a risky play that can get a desired result and therefore can be considered a gamble but one would not define that as gambling in the sense one would with black jack. 

[Thaldor]

1 hour ago, Arokhantos said:

Just create laws to enforce it it kinda already happens but you don't have to proof that your 118 years old aka born in 1 januari 1900 *cough* steam since you don't have to identify yourself, heck perhaps digital payments should play a role in it, and perhaps game devs should be forced to disallow connecting paypal account or save payment details unless ages is verified with an identification card or sorts, that way parents know there kids cant buy stuff behind there backs, and if they still let them well that's there choice.

Age verification is one heck of a problem to solve, even within only one country with one set of laws and so on. Let's take a Finland as an example (just because I know thing or two), firstly you need to make sure your systems are up to the task for creating legal personal information database, this includes safety, accessibility (people can request to see/delete/change their information) and so on (if you have some sort of way to store payment information, you probably already have this). Second and third parts are the real problems, how do you allow people to identify themselves and how do you make sure people really are the ones they claim to be? "Sen image of you passport, drivers licence, ID card or any other legal document that proofs who you are" is one way, but it has really big BUT, how are you going to manage handle let's say 100k-1M images of varying quality of different identification documents? Also what stops little-Bob here to take an image out of his fathers drivers licence?

OK, those aside, let's say you outsource that and use excelent service that Finnish government acctually at least started to create called "Tunnistus", people can identify themselves through ID-cards that can be read with card reader, mobile identification and through all of the Finnish banks that have online banking, problem soved? Far from it, let's leave the size and capability of the service aside, because while being major thing at least when they fall from the rush of players, they can be managed. But you want to extent your playerbase to Sweden you need to find a same kind of service from Sweden that is compatible with the Tunnistus and I'm 95% sure, there isn't one, so you need to build completely new system to identify Swedish players with whatever identification choices they have. Now repeat that on global scale, in EU you have some chances to manage to come up with something reasonable, because all countries in EU have standardised passports and drivers licences (at least mostly), but then you get back to the question of managing the mess of thousands and thousands of different quality images of ID-papers which is very soon unmanageable and your only choice is to have a system that collects them and hope that no one figures out that it really just takes an image in and considers you identified.

 

And as you said, there already is things called "gambling laws" that game companies have pushed and probably now they have pushed them too far and will face concequences. It very much seems like big game companies have just fixated on how to avoid taxes and forgot that there is other laws that may affect how they can run their business. Game companies went too far and hopefully they are put back in their places with some restrictions just to stop loot box -like milking before next one even borns.

 

The most I'm disappointed in this is IGDA, which says to be a game developer assosiation and handle everything, but they haven't done anything else than kept a some sort of discussion session at GDC that was titled something like "Regulations limiting creativity: the matter of loot boxes". If they spent at least 10% of the power they have in the game development circles to create some kind of self-regulation, that would tackle things like "how to not create monetization that is presumably illegal in the most of the world" or "how to not break laws", as they try to use to tackle workplace harrashment and patting each others back at meetups, they probably could have done for loot boxes a lot before it was too late and EA managed to piss on everybodys cereals. (IGDA actually has a lot of very competent and powerful people in it and they have a ton of influence within game developers, they just don't really seem to use it to other than educate game developers and to make good enviroment among game develoeprs to do what they do)

 

IMO at the moment only thing they can do is to "remove" loot boxes and return to good old microtransactions. Like how about your game has shop that accepts real money and currency that you can earn from playing and player can buy anything that was in the loot boxes but they have a choice to buy a random box that gives something 2 things from the shop at the price of one or something like that.