Mr. Tact wrote on Feb 16, 2018, 08:35:
As for proving you are over 18, is there actually a meaningful way to do that online?

Credit cards generally work well, not always perfectly however. The other option is to restrict lootboxes to M rated titles. The laws are already in place in many states and provinces that restrict sales to those who are above the age of majority.

jdreyer wrote on Feb 16, 2018, 02:22:

RedEye9 wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 18:15:
We love our guns more than our kids.

Why do you hate the constitution?

Thanks, I needed that.

theglaze wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 11:51:
The gaming industry's argument is that the player never "loses" when opening a loot box; a reward is always provided, even if undesirable.

It is the worst garbage argument of all time. Play Russian Roulette, you get a reward every time! If there was no bullet, your reward is you get to live! If there's a bullet, your reward is a bullet!

That said, Senator "I need to score some points with shit I know nothing about" is conflagrating two completely separate arguments. Micro transactions are not "often referred to as loot boxes." A loot box is (very often) a micro transaction, but the other way around does not automatically hold true.

I have a problem with the "You have a 0.00002% chance to get something useful" loot box garbage, especially if a game is completely designed around this horseshit grind. Straight up micro-transactions, eh. I could do without them, but as a long as a game isn't designed around me buying the $39.99 MegaWinRifle, I don't really care.

This comment was edited on Feb 16, 2018, 14:13.

Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Feb 16, 2018, 01:07:
Problem is, it's not just people over 18. There's plenty of games marketed Teen which have loot boxes, which is a problem.

Right. Which is why I said it the way I did. I certainly would have no issue with legal requirements for publishing odds. As for proving you are over 18, is there actually a meaningful way to do that online?

The prevalence of in-game micro-transactions, often referred to as ‘loot boxes,’ raises several concerns surrounding the use of psychological principles and enticing mechanics that closely mirror those often found in casinos and games of chance.

It's not microtransactions per se, but MTs with a random loot element. I don't mind a straight-up for-pay MT if I know what it is. ALthough pay-to-win objects can ruin a game, at least I can see what's for sale and how much it costs.

RedEye9 wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 18:15:
We love our guns more than our kids.

Why do you hate the constitution?

Mr. Tact wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 23:47:
On the other hand anyone over 18 who is falling for this nonsense is likely to lose their money in some other equally silly way if you prevent them from doing it on loot boxes.

So... six in one, half a dozen in the other.

Problem is, it's not just people over 18. There's plenty of games marketed Teen which have loot boxes, which is a problem. There's a huge swath of the mobile market that's marketed Everyone with p2w and loot boxes in it.

There's a reason why you can't buy lottery tickets under the age of majority in most places. On top of it, loot boxes offer no intrinsic value outside of the game itself.

I have mixed feelings on the subject. On the one hand, I don't like or care to see game companies effectively scamming people out of money using well established gambling tools. On the other hand anyone over 18 who is falling for this nonsense is likely to lose their money in some other equally silly way if you prevent them from doing it on loot boxes.

So... six in one, half a dozen in the other.

Turd Ferguson wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 10:46:
If more ppl would vote with their wallet, we would not have this kind of issue, however, having a label "loot box alert" attached to the game would be a small step in recognizing that this mechanic is a problem.

That's like telling a junkie not to buy cocaine cut with Borax.

Marvin T. Martian wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 18:09:
Yep--fix loot boxes but completely ignore being bought by the NRA and the deaths of even more children. One f'k up country!

Maybe you should ask a better question like: "Was it a really good idea for democrats, and progressives to destroy the mental health system in the 1980's? Turning it into the revolving door system that it is today, where people actively avoid getting treatment. And first responders are now the front-line in dealing with mentally unstable people." Now keep in mind that this wasn't a US only occurrence, it happened all over western countries. But it was pushed by one very specific side of the political spectrum, and it's caused no shortage of problems.

If you don't think it's a problem, go to your local courthouse and go read back over the last year. And you'll see "remand: MHR-eval, pickup threatening/others. Violent threat/physical attacks public/hospital/self-harm/etc" and the names will be listed over, and over, and over again. With the same revolving door. Into facility, on meds 7-14 days, off meds, repeat behavior, remand, back into facility. Start step 1, back on meds...

Marvin T. Martian wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 18:09:

Jivaro wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 17:50:
Will somebody think of the children?!

Yep--fix loot boxes but completely ignore being bought by the NRA and the deaths of even more children. One f'k up country!

We love our guns more than our kids.

after typing that I checked to see if I used than/then correctly and found this https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/18/opinions/guns-children-taylor-opinion/index.html

Jivaro wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 17:50:
Will somebody think of the children?!

Yep--fix loot boxes but completely ignore being bought by the NRA and the deaths of even more children. One f'k up country!

Will somebody think of the children?!

I think a lot more pressure must be made.

They are focusing on protecting the children and that's not the the only issue.
People of all ages play games. And bringing gambling like tactics to mass market full priced games is a problem.

Besides it is extremely easy to circumvent age restrictions in games.
We all know it.
There are countless underage gamers that play M rated games.

Most publishers provide NO WAY of exchanging your loot (ie casino chips) into real cash.

Yep, and that is a good thing. This is a purely optional purchase in a game - something you should be playing for fun.

teens could be targeted for what is arguably petty gambling

Are prizes in candy and cereal gambling? I mean you paid for those 45,000 boxes of Diabeetus0's, but you had to! How else could you win the prize? Curse those awful sugar barons targeting our teens! Get your pitchforks! We have to think of the children!!

How is this drastically different from baseball cards (which actually can be worth a lot of money)? CCGs?

Now, if you could exchange your loot box for cash then you might be on to something, but that isn't the case. Not to mention you can get the Great Golden Derp Gun of +1 without grinding and the "house" gets your cash. You winning and the house winning (or whatever) are no longer mutually exclusive events. They don't really need to act like a casino, a player with cosmetic items is really just an advertisement for their loot box system.

I don't really like loot boxes that much (micro trans ones anyway - ones for progress can be kind of fun) and we may need to mark games that have them. Beyond that I really can't see how this can be an issue. We have random chance based things all around us, gamers have been able to buy progress (gold farmers in MMOs etc), and it looks like civilization is still here. We seem to be fairly resilient when it comes to great moral panics.

It would be nice if publishers/developers simply stopped adding loot boxes as a thing. Thankfully I can still choose games that simply don't have it, at this point in time. Heck, they even added lootboxes to one game I despise above all others, even more than Elder Scrolls and Elder Scrolls: Fallout, and that would be MWO - Mech Warrior is dead as a franchise as far as I'm concerned when its currently base wish for "MWO2" - "Please Sir, could I have some more F2P Grind and Lootboxes!"

Saying you never lose because you always get something (when it is always one or two special things among hundreds) is like saying you never lose a car lotto for a Ferrari because everyone is always guaranteed at least a Matchbox car. For which you paid $15 for the ticket.

It's basically the ESRB's job to ignore problems until the government threatens to do something isn't it? Then they step in and implement the softest regulations they can that will get the government to back off. That's probably what will happen to lootboxes if the US leads the way - the ESRB will reconsider their position and implement something weak like more warning labels and hope the controversy goes away.

Turd Ferguson wrote on Feb 15, 2018, 13:30:
Personally I don't want any government getting involved in anything video game wise, I also feel that when they do, rather than helping us, the gamers, they'll find a way to profit themselves while ignoring the core of the problem.

Usually I'd want the government to mind their own business while the free market votes, whether I agree with the outcome or not. In this case though a few "whales" could ruin games for the masses, and teens could be targeted for what is arguably petty gambling, which makes the government's involvement at least understandable.

Personally I don't want any government getting involved in anything video game wise, I also feel that when they do, rather than helping us, the gamers, they'll find a way to profit themselves while ignoring the core of the problem.

However, if the developers and publisher houses don't have the minerals to police and monitor themselves, who is there to do it for them? A public oversite committee? That was hell for music industry back in the day (referring to Twisted Sister vs Parental Control & Censorship).

My hope is with the devs & publisher houses...but won't hold my breath.

Would be nice to see "Because of profits..." not being the answer to everything for change....but again, won't hold my breath, lol