Bodolza wrote on Nov 29, 2022, 13:20:
I don't understand. The whole controversy is because real money IS involved. If loot boxes were just random items you got as part of playing a game then no one would care.

The articles say that in 2018 the committee recommended approaching loot boxes on a case-by-case basis, since the mechanics aren't the same in every game. The new, proposed bill updates their legal definitions and applies restrictions to paid loot boxes.

Bodolza wrote on Nov 29, 2022, 13:20:
I don't understand. The whole controversy is because real money IS involved. If loot boxes were just random items you got as part of playing a game then no one would care.

bingo
Australia needs to change their law on gambling.

I don't understand. The whole controversy is because real money IS involved. If loot boxes were just random items you got as part of playing a game then no one would care.

Mr. Tact wrote on Nov 28, 2022, 21:49:
I'd like to know what portion of the legal definition they don't meet...

This wasn't hard information to find. In the linked article it says,

In 2018, a five-month inquiry into loot boxes by the Environment and Communications Reference Committee concluded they met all the psychological criteria for gambling but not the legal definition, and called for further research into the potential gambling-related harms of loot boxes.

Click on the link, and 5 sentences in it explains:

While it was conclusive that loot boxes meet the five psychological criteria for gambling, unless the contents can be monetised for real-world value, they do not meet the legal definition under Australian law.

That doesn't seem like an absurd or arbitrary threshold to me. If real-world money isn't involved then you're not jumping on games for every use of a random number generator.

fakespyder wrote on Nov 28, 2022, 20:43:

...a five-month inquiry into loot boxes by the Environment and Communications Reference Committee concluded they met all the psychological criteria for gambling but not the legal definition...

When is a duck not a duck?

When it's a platypus.

I'd like to know what portion of the legal definition they don't meet...

...a five-month inquiry into loot boxes by the Environment and Communications Reference Committee concluded they met all the psychological criteria for gambling but not the legal definition...

When is a duck not a duck?