I haven't even technically done (4) as far as I see it, because you're relying on technicality to make that claim.
No I'm relying on facts to make that claim. I'm glad you admit that.
The way you see it > FACTS
This is really good information for anyone else who wants to try and have an intelligent conversation with you. Before they do they should really read your above comment.
The FACTS are that legal pressure was applied on an entity, said entity took actions to prevent greater consequences, and in doing so, willfully ended a profitable venture (attracting and hooking an entire new large demographic) that is of a larger potential value than the court costs would be if they had any logistical chance of winning. Settling, by the way, is admitting defeat. You don't settle if a court case is cut and dry in your favor. It's the corporate equivalent of pleading guilty, you asinine little man.
THAT is equivalent to what is happening here, not Paw Patrol selling your kid on a goddamn action figure. People should consider that before weighing a single nonsensical word to come out of your keyboard.
I remember when I first got the Internet in the early 90's. It was through my local newspaper. Back then newspapers and local companies made the Internet available. My kick ass dial up modem was so cool. I thought I had so much power. Very few people had the Internet back then. The Internet was like the wild west. No rules and anything and everything was available. Most users hung out in forums. Chat rooms were extremely popular. Games were available and MMORPGS were in its infancy.
I'm writing this because the Internet was total freedom. You got the sense back then that all things were possible through this medium. Yes Loot Boxes are addictive for some people. I say so what it is like gambling. This is the wild west Internet. Good or Bad it should never be regulated or touched. Las Vegas is around and so are Indian Casinos. I don't see anybody shutting them down. Loot boxes are akin to a slot machine. Who cares in my opinion.
Those casinos in Las Vegas and on Indian reservations are regulated.
Thats incorrect, Las Vegas is regulated Indian casino's are not. Thats why when you go to Vegas or Atlantic City you will see a sign above a slot machine that says something like 90% payout or something to that effect, They are required by law to show the machines payout over the course of its lifetime.
Indian Casino's on the other hand answer to No one except themselves, This is all information you can read about online, no grand conspiracy here. But definitely something to keep in mind on your next trip to the Casino.
In my experience Vegas and A.C. are much more generous when it comes to payouts,comp and frequency with which you win than Indian Casino's. I might be getting off topic but just wanted to clarify.
Indian Casinos donate a lot of money to charities. They also are in bed with the local cities and states. Trust me donations are made frequently. This is basically to keep the roads in good shape.
Territorial sovereignty: Tribal authority on Indian land is organic and is not granted by the states in which Indian lands
are located. Plenary power doctrine: Congress, and not the Executive
Branch, has ultimate authority with regard to matters affecting the Indian tribes.
I wasn't saying Indian casino's are bad i was simply pointing out they are not regulated, Just throwing out a interesting FACT for those of us who like to gamble.
Im not really taking a stance on the subject at hand "loot boxes" because im 50/50 on it. I think its sleazy to have this in video games but at the same time i dont want Big Government telling me what i can and can not do with my money. I agree with the gentleman everyone is ragging on, It is the parents responsibility to teach your kids right from wrong.
Back in my day as a kid we had a form of loot boxes, they were called football & baseball cards. I remember wanting that John Elway rookie card so bad, I bought countless packs and it took forever before i finally got it. Did i ever steal from my parents dresser to get more money to buy more packs ? Of course not, I was raised better than that. Did i grow up to be a degenerate gambler because i gambled on Topps football card packs to get the players i wanted ? Of course i didn't, I was raised better than that.
I completely agree with this.
It's pretty sleazy but I'd rather have people learn to make their own decisions. If they actually have a gambling problem then loot boxes are going to be the least of their worries as there are better ways to scratch a gambling itch.
And that's not a bad analogy as far as the collector's cards. I did Star Wars Cards.
At first I bought them off a kid at school who had hundreds of them. Once I had the older collections I started buying the newer editions, all to finish my collections. Many packs just to get one or two cards. I don't remember there being a backlash on sports cards or collectors' cards.
After a while I realized, not worth it and that was that.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I haven't even technically done (4) as far as I see it, because you're relying on technicality to make that claim.
No I'm relying on facts to make that claim. I'm glad you admit that.
The way you see it > FACTS
This is really good information for anyone else who wants to try and have an intelligent conversation with you. Before they do they should really read your above comment.
The FACTS are that legal pressure was applied on an entity, said entity took actions to prevent greater consequences, and in doing so, willfully ended a profitable venture (attracting and hooking an entire new large demographic) that is of a larger potential value than the court costs would be if they had any logistical chance of winning.
THAT is equivalent to what is happening here, not Paw Patrol selling your kid on a goddamn action figure. People should consider that before weighing a single nonsensical word to come out of your keyboard.
No it's actually not what's happening here. It doesnt matter how triggered you are on the side of the screen FACTS win everytime.
People really should consider how you get so emotional on here you resort to lies and then after being called out jump through hoops to defend your lies before engaging you. I've learned my lesson if my lesson learned can help one other poster thats a win.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I remember when I first got the Internet in the early 90's. It was through my local newspaper. Back then newspapers and local companies made the Internet available. My kick ass dial up modem was so cool. I thought I had so much power. Very few people had the Internet back then. The Internet was like the wild west. No rules and anything and everything was available. Most users hung out in forums. Chat rooms were extremely popular. Games were available and MMORPGS were in its infancy.
I'm writing this because the Internet was total freedom. You got the sense back then that all things were possible through this medium. Yes Loot Boxes are addictive for some people. I say so what it is like gambling. This is the wild west Internet. Good or Bad it should never be regulated or touched. Las Vegas is around and so are Indian Casinos. I don't see anybody shutting them down. Loot boxes are akin to a slot machine. Who cares in my opinion.
Those casinos in Las Vegas and on Indian reservations are regulated.
Thats incorrect, Las Vegas is regulated Indian casino's are not. Thats why when you go to Vegas or Atlantic City you will see a sign above a slot machine that says something like 90% payout or something to that effect, They are required by law to show the machines payout over the course of its lifetime.
Indian Casino's on the other hand answer to No one except themselves, This is all information you can read about online, no grand conspiracy here. But definitely something to keep in mind on your next trip to the Casino.
In my experience Vegas and A.C. are much more generous when it comes to payouts,comp and frequency with which you win than Indian Casino's. I might be getting off topic but just wanted to clarify.
Indian Casinos donate a lot of money to charities. They also are in bed with the local cities and states. Trust me donations are made frequently. This is basically to keep the roads in good shape.
Territorial sovereignty: Tribal authority on Indian land is organic and is not granted by the states in which Indian lands
are located. Plenary power doctrine: Congress, and not the Executive
Branch, has ultimate authority with regard to matters affecting the Indian tribes.
I wasn't saying Indian casino's are bad i was simply pointing out they are not regulated, Just throwing out a interesting FACT for those of us who like to gamble.
Im not really taking a stance on the subject at hand "loot boxes" because im 50/50 on it. I think its sleazy to have this in video games but at the same time i dont want Big Government telling me what i can and can not do with my money. I agree with the gentleman everyone is ragging on, It is the parents responsibility to teach your kids right from wrong.
Back in my day as a kid we had a form of loot boxes, they were called football & baseball cards. I remember wanting that John Elway rookie card so bad, I bought countless packs and it took forever before i finally got it. Did i ever steal from my parents dresser to get more money to buy more packs ? Of course not, I was raised better than that. Did i grow up to be a degenerate gambler because i gambled on Topps football card packs to get the players i wanted ? Of course i didn't, I was raised better than that.
The differences have really been pointed out ad nauseum, though.
Cards change in value based, in large part, on things outside of the manufacturer's control (careers of the players). Games are in no such situation.
Loot boxes are like sports cards, if the sports card companies unilaterally also determined how good and popular the players themselves are.
Not sure what your WTF is about. Everything above is just statement of fact. There is no opinion on the differences I pointed out between lootboxes in video games and sports cards. Manufacturers in one have unilateral control in determining value, in the other they do not.
Once again that is not true lol . Sports cards in general will have rookie cards from different companies with varying value. A topps rookie QB from say 1991 might be valued at 5.00 while the same player from Upper Deck manufacturer will be valued at 50.00. The rarity of the card is the difference controlled by the manufacturer. Also manufactures will often release rare or special foil or golden cards in their sets. Its the same thing in a sense but thats not the point i was making. And not going to circle jerk for a hour with you .
The point i was attempting to make was the responsibility should lie with the parent and how you raise your kids and teach them self control. I don't want big government telling me whats right and whats wrong, Maybe you do but i don't. Have a good one.....
I haven't even technically done (4) as far as I see it, because you're relying on technicality to make that claim.
No I'm relying on facts to make that claim. I'm glad you admit that.
The way you see it > FACTS
This is really good information for anyone else who wants to try and have an intelligent conversation with you. Before they do they should really read your above comment.
The FACTS are that legal pressure was applied on an entity, said entity took actions to prevent greater consequences, and in doing so, willfully ended a profitable venture (attracting and hooking an entire new large demographic) that is of a larger potential value than the court costs would be if they had any logistical chance of winning.
THAT is equivalent to what is happening here, not Paw Patrol selling your kid on a goddamn action figure. People should consider that before weighing a single nonsensical word to come out of your keyboard.
No it's actually not what's happening here. It doesnt matter how triggered you are on the side of the screen FACTS win everytime.
People really should consider how you get so emotional on here you resort to lies and then after being called out jump through hoops to defend your lies before engaging you. I've learned my lesson if my lesson learned can help one other poster thats a win.
Facts are that settling isn't winning. It's losing. It is the corporate equivalent of taking a plea deal. Camel took a plea deal. Camel. Lost. A. Case. On. The. Legality. Of. Their. Business. Practice.
I remember when I first got the Internet in the early 90's. It was through my local newspaper. Back then newspapers and local companies made the Internet available. My kick ass dial up modem was so cool. I thought I had so much power. Very few people had the Internet back then. The Internet was like the wild west. No rules and anything and everything was available. Most users hung out in forums. Chat rooms were extremely popular. Games were available and MMORPGS were in its infancy.
I'm writing this because the Internet was total freedom. You got the sense back then that all things were possible through this medium. Yes Loot Boxes are addictive for some people. I say so what it is like gambling. This is the wild west Internet. Good or Bad it should never be regulated or touched. Las Vegas is around and so are Indian Casinos. I don't see anybody shutting them down. Loot boxes are akin to a slot machine. Who cares in my opinion.
Those casinos in Las Vegas and on Indian reservations are regulated.
Thats incorrect, Las Vegas is regulated Indian casino's are not. Thats why when you go to Vegas or Atlantic City you will see a sign above a slot machine that says something like 90% payout or something to that effect, They are required by law to show the machines payout over the course of its lifetime.
Indian Casino's on the other hand answer to No one except themselves, This is all information you can read about online, no grand conspiracy here. But definitely something to keep in mind on your next trip to the Casino.
In my experience Vegas and A.C. are much more generous when it comes to payouts,comp and frequency with which you win than Indian Casino's. I might be getting off topic but just wanted to clarify.
Indian Casinos donate a lot of money to charities. They also are in bed with the local cities and states. Trust me donations are made frequently. This is basically to keep the roads in good shape.
Territorial sovereignty: Tribal authority on Indian land is organic and is not granted by the states in which Indian lands
are located. Plenary power doctrine: Congress, and not the Executive
Branch, has ultimate authority with regard to matters affecting the Indian tribes.
I wasn't saying Indian casino's are bad i was simply pointing out they are not regulated, Just throwing out a interesting FACT for those of us who like to gamble.
Im not really taking a stance on the subject at hand "loot boxes" because im 50/50 on it. I think its sleazy to have this in video games but at the same time i dont want Big Government telling me what i can and can not do with my money. I agree with the gentleman everyone is ragging on, It is the parents responsibility to teach your kids right from wrong.
Back in my day as a kid we had a form of loot boxes, they were called football & baseball cards. I remember wanting that John Elway rookie card so bad, I bought countless packs and it took forever before i finally got it. Did i ever steal from my parents dresser to get more money to buy more packs ? Of course not, I was raised better than that. Did i grow up to be a degenerate gambler because i gambled on Topps football card packs to get the players i wanted ? Of course i didn't, I was raised better than that.
The differences have really been pointed out ad nauseum, though.
Cards change in value based, in large part, on things outside of the manufacturer's control (careers of the players). Games are in no such situation.
Loot boxes are like sports cards, if the sports card companies unilaterally also determined how good and popular the players themselves are.
Not sure what your WTF is about. Everything above is just statement of fact. There is no opinion on the differences I pointed out between lootboxes in video games and sports cards. Manufacturers in one have unilateral control in determining value, in the other they do not.
Once again that is not true lol . Sports cards in general will have rookie cards from different companies with varying value. A topps rookie QB from say 1991 might be valued at 5.00 while the same player from Upper Deck manufacturer will be valued at 50.00. The rarity of the card is the difference controlled by the manufacturer. Also manufactures will often release rare or special foil or golden cards in their sets. Its the same thing in a sense but thats not the point i was making. And not going to circle jerk for a hour with you .
The point i was attempting to make was the responsibility should lie with the parent and how you raise your kids and teach them self control. I don't want big government telling me whats right and whats wrong, Maybe you do but i don't. Have a good one.....
Card manufacturers do not have unilateral control over value. That's just fact. Any time you depend upon the performance of someone outside and unaffiliated with your business to sell your product, you lose unilateral control. None of that means you lose all control.
Devs and publishers have unilateral control over how attractive the items in the lootbox are. Fact. They don't depend upon the performance of a gamer to make the railgun that one shot kills super popular with snipers. There is no circle jerk to be had, because I'm not stating an argument here. These are just realities.
I remember when I first got the Internet in the early 90's. It was through my local newspaper. Back then newspapers and local companies made the Internet available. My kick ass dial up modem was so cool. I thought I had so much power. Very few people had the Internet back then. The Internet was like the wild west. No rules and anything and everything was available. Most users hung out in forums. Chat rooms were extremely popular. Games were available and MMORPGS were in its infancy.
I'm writing this because the Internet was total freedom. You got the sense back then that all things were possible through this medium. Yes Loot Boxes are addictive for some people. I say so what it is like gambling. This is the wild west Internet. Good or Bad it should never be regulated or touched. Las Vegas is around and so are Indian Casinos. I don't see anybody shutting them down. Loot boxes are akin to a slot machine. Who cares in my opinion.
Those casinos in Las Vegas and on Indian reservations are regulated.
Thats incorrect, Las Vegas is regulated Indian casino's are not. Thats why when you go to Vegas or Atlantic City you will see a sign above a slot machine that says something like 90% payout or something to that effect, They are required by law to show the machines payout over the course of its lifetime.
Indian Casino's on the other hand answer to No one except themselves, This is all information you can read about online, no grand conspiracy here. But definitely something to keep in mind on your next trip to the Casino.
In my experience Vegas and A.C. are much more generous when it comes to payouts,comp and frequency with which you win than Indian Casino's. I might be getting off topic but just wanted to clarify.
Indian Casinos donate a lot of money to charities. They also are in bed with the local cities and states. Trust me donations are made frequently. This is basically to keep the roads in good shape.
Territorial sovereignty: Tribal authority on Indian land is organic and is not granted by the states in which Indian lands
are located. Plenary power doctrine: Congress, and not the Executive
Branch, has ultimate authority with regard to matters affecting the Indian tribes.
I wasn't saying Indian casino's are bad i was simply pointing out they are not regulated, Just throwing out a interesting FACT for those of us who like to gamble.
Im not really taking a stance on the subject at hand "loot boxes" because im 50/50 on it. I think its sleazy to have this in video games but at the same time i dont want Big Government telling me what i can and can not do with my money. I agree with the gentleman everyone is ragging on, It is the parents responsibility to teach your kids right from wrong.
Back in my day as a kid we had a form of loot boxes, they were called football & baseball cards. I remember wanting that John Elway rookie card so bad, I bought countless packs and it took forever before i finally got it. Did i ever steal from my parents dresser to get more money to buy more packs ? Of course not, I was raised better than that. Did i grow up to be a degenerate gambler because i gambled on Topps football card packs to get the players i wanted ? Of course i didn't, I was raised better than that.
It's all good brother. Enjoy chatting with you on this forum. I find your posts always to be good, funny, informative.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
Anyone who can't recognize the fundamental differences between physical and digital goods isn't living in the modern age by any stretch of the imagination.
I haven't even technically done (4) as far as I see it, because you're relying on technicality to make that claim.
No I'm relying on facts to make that claim. I'm glad you admit that.
The way you see it > FACTS
This is really good information for anyone else who wants to try and have an intelligent conversation with you. Before they do they should really read your above comment.
The FACTS are that legal pressure was applied on an entity, said entity took actions to prevent greater consequences, and in doing so, willfully ended a profitable venture (attracting and hooking an entire new large demographic) that is of a larger potential value than the court costs would be if they had any logistical chance of winning.
THAT is equivalent to what is happening here, not Paw Patrol selling your kid on a goddamn action figure. People should consider that before weighing a single nonsensical word to come out of your keyboard.
No it's actually not what's happening here. It doesnt matter how triggered you are on the side of the screen FACTS win everytime.
People really should consider how you get so emotional on here you resort to lies and then after being called out jump through hoops to defend your lies before engaging you. I've learned my lesson if my lesson learned can help one other poster thats a win.
Facts are that settling isn't winning. It's losing. It is the corporate equivalent of taking a plea deal. Camel took a plea deal. Camel. Lost. A. Case. On. The. Legality. Of. Their. Business. Practice.
Those are the facts. The end.
Again hoops...You stated "Government ruled Joe Camel was Illigal" the facts show that to be a lie.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
Anyone who can't recognize the fundamental differences between physical and digital goods isn't living in the modern age by any stretch of the imagination.
Well you stay in the stone age the rest will continue to move forward.
I haven't even technically done (4) as far as I see it, because you're relying on technicality to make that claim.
No I'm relying on facts to make that claim. I'm glad you admit that.
The way you see it > FACTS
This is really good information for anyone else who wants to try and have an intelligent conversation with you. Before they do they should really read your above comment.
The FACTS are that legal pressure was applied on an entity, said entity took actions to prevent greater consequences, and in doing so, willfully ended a profitable venture (attracting and hooking an entire new large demographic) that is of a larger potential value than the court costs would be if they had any logistical chance of winning.
THAT is equivalent to what is happening here, not Paw Patrol selling your kid on a goddamn action figure. People should consider that before weighing a single nonsensical word to come out of your keyboard.
No it's actually not what's happening here. It doesnt matter how triggered you are on the side of the screen FACTS win everytime.
People really should consider how you get so emotional on here you resort to lies and then after being called out jump through hoops to defend your lies before engaging you. I've learned my lesson if my lesson learned can help one other poster thats a win.
Facts are that settling isn't winning. It's losing. It is the corporate equivalent of taking a plea deal. Camel took a plea deal. Camel. Lost. A. Case. On. The. Legality. Of. Their. Business. Practice.
Those are the facts. The end.
Again hoops...You stated "Government ruled Joe Camel was Illigal" the facts show that to be a lie.
But again. It's fucking not. Because you do not have a counterargument to my claim.
If someone murders someone and pleads guilty, they are guilty of murder in the eyes of the law. Their actions have been declared unlawful. If a corporation takes a plea deal on a case involving the legality of their actions, their actions don't go away. They remain unlawful, and they have no choice but to stop conducting said actions, lest they open themselves up to another suit with the precedent that they have already admitted fault through settling.
If lootboxes get baned we can expect even more and worse microtransaction. They will need to compensate loss somewhere else. And kids using parents credit cards wont stop as they will just be buying something else. It is just how it is.
I don't think they would ban them. Like gambling is legal, so should loot boxes be legal. But they need to be controlled more. An underage can't walk into a casino, but they can easily purchase lootboxes. There's also staff in the casinos watching your behavior, which we don't have online, either. I don't know what the answer is here, but at least the conversation is getting started. Hopefully it would not only protect children, but also adults who can't control themselves and buy too much (many of the whales). If they can accomplish that, the market for it will naturally get smaller and devs will be forced to find other ways to make money.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
I own the cards and if the company that sells the cards disappears tomorrow, I still have the cards and they might even increase in value.
I never own the the rare outfit and if the company decides to close the game tomorrow because sales are slow and they have a new game your SoL.
It's 2018
Time for some ground rules concerning pixel pants.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
I own the cards and if the company that sells the cards disappears tomorrow, I still have the cards and they might even increase in value.
I never own the the rare outfit and if the company decides to close the game tomorrow because sales are slow and they have a new game your SoL.
It's 2018
Time for some ground rules concerning pixel pants.
Great point that I hadn't specifically touched on, but is one of the fundamental differences between physical and digital goods.
You don't even own the digital good in the way you do the physical. Comparing these two types of goods at all in this context just isn't very productive.
I haven't even technically done (4) as far as I see it, because you're relying on technicality to make that claim.
No I'm relying on facts to make that claim. I'm glad you admit that.
The way you see it > FACTS
This is really good information for anyone else who wants to try and have an intelligent conversation with you. Before they do they should really read your above comment.
The FACTS are that legal pressure was applied on an entity, said entity took actions to prevent greater consequences, and in doing so, willfully ended a profitable venture (attracting and hooking an entire new large demographic) that is of a larger potential value than the court costs would be if they had any logistical chance of winning.
THAT is equivalent to what is happening here, not Paw Patrol selling your kid on a goddamn action figure. People should consider that before weighing a single nonsensical word to come out of your keyboard.
No it's actually not what's happening here. It doesnt matter how triggered you are on the side of the screen FACTS win everytime.
People really should consider how you get so emotional on here you resort to lies and then after being called out jump through hoops to defend your lies before engaging you. I've learned my lesson if my lesson learned can help one other poster thats a win.
Facts are that settling isn't winning. It's losing. It is the corporate equivalent of taking a plea deal. Camel took a plea deal. Camel. Lost. A. Case. On. The. Legality. Of. Their. Business. Practice.
Those are the facts. The end.
Again hoops...You stated "Government ruled Joe Camel was Illigal" the facts show that to be a lie.
But again. It's fucking not. Because you do not have a counterargument to my claim.
If someone murders someone and pleads guilty, they are guilty of murder in the eyes of the law. Their actions have been declared unlawful. If a corporation takes a plea deal on a case involving the legality of their actions, their actions don't go away. They remain unlawful, and they have no choice but to stop conducting said actions, lest they open themselves up to another suit with the precedent that they have already admitted fault through settling.
Argue that or get out.
Guilty plea is NOT the same as an out of court settlement. More hoops.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
I own the cards and if the company that sells the cards disappears tomorrow, I still have the cards and they might even increase in value.
I never own the the rare outfit and if the company decides to close the game tomorrow because sales are slow and they have a new game your SoL.
It's 2018
Time for some ground rules concerning pixel pants.
I totally agree with your take on cards. At least you have them physically. I'm totally against anyone regulating anything on the Internet. Once you open the door everything will be screwed up. Lets us have one last place were good and bad exists freely.
Anyways that's my take on the subject. I enjoy reading your posts
I haven't even technically done (4) as far as I see it, because you're relying on technicality to make that claim.
No I'm relying on facts to make that claim. I'm glad you admit that.
The way you see it > FACTS
This is really good information for anyone else who wants to try and have an intelligent conversation with you. Before they do they should really read your above comment.
The FACTS are that legal pressure was applied on an entity, said entity took actions to prevent greater consequences, and in doing so, willfully ended a profitable venture (attracting and hooking an entire new large demographic) that is of a larger potential value than the court costs would be if they had any logistical chance of winning.
THAT is equivalent to what is happening here, not Paw Patrol selling your kid on a goddamn action figure. People should consider that before weighing a single nonsensical word to come out of your keyboard.
No it's actually not what's happening here. It doesnt matter how triggered you are on the side of the screen FACTS win everytime.
People really should consider how you get so emotional on here you resort to lies and then after being called out jump through hoops to defend your lies before engaging you. I've learned my lesson if my lesson learned can help one other poster thats a win.
Facts are that settling isn't winning. It's losing. It is the corporate equivalent of taking a plea deal. Camel took a plea deal. Camel. Lost. A. Case. On. The. Legality. Of. Their. Business. Practice.
Those are the facts. The end.
Again hoops...You stated "Government ruled Joe Camel was Illigal" the facts show that to be a lie.
But again. It's fucking not. Because you do not have a counterargument to my claim.
If someone murders someone and pleads guilty, they are guilty of murder in the eyes of the law. Their actions have been declared unlawful. If a corporation takes a plea deal on a case involving the legality of their actions, their actions don't go away. They remain unlawful, and they have no choice but to stop conducting said actions, lest they open themselves up to another suit with the precedent that they have already admitted fault through settling.
Argue that or get out.
Guilty plea is NOT the same as an out of court settlement. More hoops.
If you honestly believe that, then there is no further point in arguing here. If an oil company is fined by the EPA and settles such out of court, they've still plead guilty, and are still open to fines if the cause of that fine is not addressed. The same applies elsewhere in matters involving legal suits. Those are the facts. Good day, sir.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
I own the cards and if the company that sells the cards disappears tomorrow, I still have the cards and they might even increase in value.
I never own the the rare outfit and if the company decides to close the game tomorrow because sales are slow and they have a new game your SoL.
It's 2018
Time for some ground rules concerning pixel pants.
The ground rules concerning pixel pants falls on the consumer. If a consumer find more value in those pants then a gumball it doesnt matter what some random posters say on a random website. To them is worth the money and provides value.
The arguement is not flawed. A person thinking their opinion is the only one that matters is flawed.
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
I own the cards and if the company that sells the cards disappears tomorrow, I still have the cards and they might even increase in value.
I never own the the rare outfit and if the company decides to close the game tomorrow because sales are slow and they have a new game your SoL.
It's 2018
Time for some ground rules concerning pixel pants.
The ground rules concerning pixel pants falls on the consumer. If a consumer find more value in those pants then a gumball it doesnt matter what some random posters say on a random website. To them is worth the money and provides value.
The arguement is not flawed. A person thinking their opinion is the only one that matters is flawed.
The consumer's desire to have those pants has no bearing on ownership or marketing, though.
Sone people find value in watching two girls eat a dude's shit. You don't legislate regulations based on perceived personal value, because that's a tangled mess that no one agrees on due to its subjectivity.
Any comparison made by lawmakers between digital and physical goods will focus on the way the law currently treats them and the real actions taken by the industry. Not "well yeah, but folks seem to like skins, so they can sell and market them however they like!"
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
I own the cards and if the company that sells the cards disappears tomorrow, I still have the cards and they might even increase in value.
I never own the the rare outfit and if the company decides to close the game tomorrow because sales are slow and they have a new game your SoL.
It's 2018
Time for some ground rules concerning pixel pants.
Even when the company isn't going anywhere they might ban you for speaking your mind on their forums or make a politically incorrect joke on their chat channel. And let's not forget that you cannot legally sell your account. You own nothing, you are enjoying a service and you are at their mercy with every breath you take. Let's not freaking forget this.
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Lootboxes should be restricted to adults (and it's on the company to insure the person buying it is an adult just like Alcohol). That also means not MARKETING to kids. They should also have the odds clearly posted somewhere.
Do those 2 things and I may not like lootboxes... but think under those circumstances they should be allowed to continue.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Lootboxes should be restricted to adults (and it's on the company to insure the person buying it is an adult just like Alcohol). That also means not MARKETING to kids. They should also have the odds clearly posted somewhere.
Do those 2 things and I may not like lootboxes... but think under those circumstances they should be allowed to continue.
Lootboxes should not be banned becuase of subjective morales. What next, ban chocolate?
As to loot boxes, IMO they are gambling. Because what is the main reason most people buy them, it's a CHANCE to get the desired item. Therefore not much different then say buying a lottery ticket. Sure you always get something, but off times it's not what you wanted. So I'm all for the investigation of loot boxes in video games.
Are those quarter sticker machines gambling also? How about a gumball machine?
In the strictest sense of definition, sure.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
I would like to welcome you to the digital age.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
I own the cards and if the company that sells the cards disappears tomorrow, I still have the cards and they might even increase in value.
I never own the the rare outfit and if the company decides to close the game tomorrow because sales are slow and they have a new game your SoL.
It's 2018
Time for some ground rules concerning pixel pants.
The ground rules concerning pixel pants falls on the consumer. If a consumer find more value in those pants then a gumball it doesnt matter what some random posters say on a random website. To them is worth the money and provides value.
The arguement is not flawed. A person thinking their opinion is the only one that matters is flawed.
Sorry it just aint that easy.
We've been watching this evolve over the last few years. I've said it before and I'll say it again
It's not a matter of if these things end up getting regulated, it's a matter of when.
Comments
THAT is equivalent to what is happening here, not Paw Patrol selling your kid on a goddamn action figure. People should consider that before weighing a single nonsensical word to come out of your keyboard.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
People really should consider how you get so emotional on here you resort to lies and then after being called out jump through hoops to defend your lies before engaging you. I've learned my lesson if my lesson learned can help one other poster thats a win.
And if all of a sudden those gumball machines were taking in hundreds of dollars from folks at a time for random gumballs, likely it would've hit society-at-large's radar as an issue. None of that absolves the lootbox situation in video games.
Folks keep trying to make physical item comparisons to digital goods. Your argument is flawed from the get-go when you do that.
The point i was attempting to make was the responsibility should lie with the parent and how you raise your kids and teach them self control. I don't want big government telling me whats right and whats wrong, Maybe you do but i don't. Have a good one.....
Aloha Mr Hand !
Those are the facts. The end.
Devs and publishers have unilateral control over how attractive the items in the lootbox are. Fact. They don't depend upon the performance of a gamer to make the railgun that one shot kills super popular with snipers. There is no circle jerk to be had, because I'm not stating an argument here. These are just realities.
So when I send out my procedure to the workforce and they open it on a tablet is that different from them printing it out on physical paper?
We dont use physical paper we use tablets now. There is no difference.
If a person spends $100 on a pack of cards for a chance for that rare card there is no difference if that same person spends $100 on a loot box for that rare outfit.
Its 2018 probably time to accept we are in a digital age.
If someone murders someone and pleads guilty, they are guilty of murder in the eyes of the law. Their actions have been declared unlawful. If a corporation takes a plea deal on a case involving the legality of their actions, their actions don't go away. They remain unlawful, and they have no choice but to stop conducting said actions, lest they open themselves up to another suit with the precedent that they have already admitted fault through settling.
Argue that or get out.
I don't think they would ban them. Like gambling is legal, so should loot boxes be legal. But they need to be controlled more. An underage can't walk into a casino, but they can easily purchase lootboxes. There's also staff in the casinos watching your behavior, which we don't have online, either. I don't know what the answer is here, but at least the conversation is getting started. Hopefully it would not only protect children, but also adults who can't control themselves and buy too much (many of the whales). If they can accomplish that, the market for it will naturally get smaller and devs will be forced to find other ways to make money.
I never own the the rare outfit and if the company decides to close the game tomorrow because sales are slow and they have a new game your SoL.
It's 2018
Time for some ground rules concerning pixel pants.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
You don't even own the digital good in the way you do the physical. Comparing these two types of goods at all in this context just isn't very productive.
The arguement is not flawed. A person thinking their opinion is the only one that matters is flawed.
Sone people find value in watching two girls eat a dude's shit. You don't legislate regulations based on perceived personal value, because that's a tangled mess that no one agrees on due to its subjectivity.
Any comparison made by lawmakers between digital and physical goods will focus on the way the law currently treats them and the real actions taken by the industry. Not "well yeah, but folks seem to like skins, so they can sell and market them however they like!"
Do those 2 things and I may not like lootboxes... but think under those circumstances they should be allowed to continue.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
We've been watching this evolve over the last few years. I've said it before and I'll say it again
It's not a matter of if these things end up getting regulated, it's a matter of when.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee