Suppose the best possible items in a loot box were a sword, a robe, or a panda pet.
If the company just gave everyone a sword, a robe, and a panda pet, would that moot the loot box claim?
Or would the fact that some paid while others did not pay change things?
Then again, they would have received what they paid for, so where would be the harm?
Or is the harm the loss of the rarity of the items?
Wow. This would make a great exam question.
1. It would not moot the claim, at least not in cases where someone purchased more than one loot box.
The company would have to refund the money to moot the claim.
2. As long as you paid for the box, others getting that free doesn't really change things. Unless you're sold something like "exclusive", or "limited item", or such, in which case the company suddenly giving a million of those away for free might cause you harm. But as long as there's no explicit agreement that it's exclusive/limited/etc. the company generally can give them free to everyone.
So these gamers were not happy with wasting money and want it back and are using other countries laws to word it into being gambling. I mean they do the same when they pay for the game, they gamble that money on the hopes they will actually like the game.
What about all the other games that do loot boxes but call them something different?
Do you buy 1000 copies of the game hoping for a better game? Nope.
It still stands to reason given the logic of people screaming about randomized rewards for cash.
A better example would be you buy a game. Fight a mob while risking death in game and then gain a random reward for killing it. Image how fun games would be if there was no randomness to them because it was outlawed.
I don't Know Canada but the loot box mechanic started in the USA around the mid 1800's with cards.
Now I don't like loot boxes for the most part or EA as a company. I tend to avoid both when every I can. But what I do not do is try to limited the options of other consumers and developers just because I spent 50 bucks and could not get the pretty pink pony I REALLY wanted.
China is a great example of this. If parents are ok with their 17 year old playing video games with his overseas friends on the weekend. Instead of sneaking out of the house to do god knows what that's their right.
As for genshin impact i have mixed feeling about it. I love how you can interact with just about every thing in the environment it feels great and i wish more developers would invest as much time into their games in that way. That being said i hate the loot crate system of it. But they did make back their production cost in 2 weeks without the game being overly p2w. That is what really matters because that's is what investors and developers see. That's how good or bad mechanics get passed on to newer games.
In short the solution is not restricting the rights of consumers and developers. It's about supporting good games with great game mechanics. So that more are made like them.
I hope "Lootbox Laws" become a thing here in the U.S too if there is ever any laws or voting for such i'll vote to ban such Lootbox here in America, or require in the least that every lootbox fully disclose the exact odds of obtaining each item on the box, and specify (Totally Random).
Google Play says they require Lootbox odds to be disclosed, but company like "Net Ease" are violating Google Plays policy on the APP Developer, and yet Google doesn't remove the specified APP to be specific a game called "Life After" is full of heavy gambling addiction and children using their parents credit cards, but Google allows this as I reported the issue more than a month ago and it remains on the store with no changes to date.
However Google is quick to ban Fort Nite after they bypass the 30% fee, why can't they do the same for other APPS violating the Play Store policy and changing odds without telling people basically comitting fraud and stealing money?
Why are they specifically targeting EA? There are hundreds of other PC & mobile games with the exact same type of monetization systems. Did EA not pay off the right people or something?
For the same reason that lawsuits target McDonalds and not Winerschnitzel (outside ease of spelling and saying the name of course), is because high profile cases attract public eye and support, and gain attention for the cause.
Show me a real example of that happening.
Unless Canada turned into a communist country recently you can't target a single entity over the same thing hundreds of others do. It has to be specific otherwise it's just a show lawsuit that a 1st year law student for EA can win.
CA - You have gambling in your games.
EA 1st year law student - Here are examples of hundreds of other games with the exact same monetization systems that make 10x the amount we do.
The end.
False. The court can find that something is against law no matter how many people do it.
A lot of laws about consumer protection, advertising, and business practices actually evolve that way. Business constantly evolves and does new and different things, and occasionally some of those are taken into court so far that it becomes a precedent for whether something is allowed or forbidden. Often rest of the business world then follows that precedent out of their own initiative if it's something that's not too expensive to change.
This specific case a person at all times is fully aware of their own actions and the 'rules' are laid out for them to see. It is no different than the surprise Funko surprise boxes. If anything online games make their customers more aware cause they post the win % and I don't see any win % on Funko boxes. The person charges their credit card the same way they charge their card to buy those surprise boxes. How about Magic & Yu-Gi-Oh cards at stores? They all have to be sued too for decades of doing exactly what EA has been doing just since 2015(GoH). What's that old saying? "Don't like it, don't buy it". No one is forcing anyone to buy anything and like I said before the customer is fully aware of what they are doing at all times.
Why are they specifically targeting EA? There are hundreds of other PC & mobile games with the exact same type of monetization systems. Did EA not pay off the right people or something?
For the same reason that lawsuits target McDonalds and not Winerschnitzel (outside ease of spelling and saying the name of course), is because high profile cases attract public eye and support, and gain attention for the cause.
Show me a real example of that happening.
Unless Canada turned into a communist country recently you can't target a single entity over the same thing hundreds of others do. It has to be specific otherwise it's just a show lawsuit that a 1st year law student for EA can win.
CA - You have gambling in your games.
EA 1st year law student - Here are examples of hundreds of other games with the exact same monetization systems that make 10x the amount we do.
The end.
This is not true at all, this why landmark cases against one entity set the stage for changes among all similar entities, and we have what is called a Cascade effect.
One tumbles and the others follow.
Often in those cases, it is always best to go after high profile clients, that can do their best to defend, because during that legal process they close all the loopholes going forward.
As far as legality goes, If the fact that others did it, was enough to claim something was legal, nothing would be illegal. Case in point, you don't need to catch all the speeders..
You are talking about things that actually deal with criminal behavior and this is not criminal behavior. If this was criminal behavior like "speeding" that actually endangers life then sure but people buying entertainment sitting behind their computer is less dangerous than some of the toxic goods I've bought from Amazon. No where did it say in the description my $30 seat cushion would smell like formaldehyde.. time to sue Amazon Canada.. If this was criminal behavior then why have the Google & Apple stores been able to profit in the billions/trillions from companies that do the exact same thing as EA. Why not sue Apple & Google for facilitating these criminal acts if it was actually criminal behavior? oh that's right... cause there's nothing actually wrong with people VOLUNTARILY spending their money however they want in a free market capitalist society...
This is not true at all, this why landmark cases against one entity set the stage for changes among all similar entities, and we have what is called a Cascade effect.
One tumbles and the others follow.
Often in those cases, it is always best to go after high profile clients, that can do their best to defend, because during that legal process they close all the loopholes going forward.
As far as legality goes, If the fact that others did it, was enough to claim something was legal, nothing would be illegal. Case in point, you don't need to catch all the speeders..
You are talking about things that actually deal with criminal behavior and this is not criminal behavior. If this was criminal behavior like "speeding" that actually endangers life then sure but people buying entertainment sitting behind their computer is less dangerous than some of the toxic goods I've bought from Amazon. No where did it say in the description my $30 seat cushion would smell like formaldehyde.. time to sue Amazon Canada.. If this was criminal behavior then why have the Google & Apple stores been able to profit in the billions/trillions from companies that do the exact same thing as EA. Why not sue Apple & Google for facilitating these criminal acts if it was actually criminal behavior? oh that's right... cause there's nothing actually wrong with people VOLUNTARILY spending their money however they want in a free market capitalist society...
Not sure why you are defending this.
But even so your rant is misguided.
While you might be free to spend your money as you will, you are NOT free to peddle any wears you wish, some items are in fact controlled, like for example, narcotics.
As such, regardless if you love loot boxes or not, gambling schemes are in fact one of the things you need a special licence to peddle, ergo, If you are selling something you are not licenced to sell, that is in fact criminal behavior.
In short, if Loot Boxes are deemed gambling, that means that MMO's need to either be placed under the jurisdiction of the Federal Gambling Commission, or remove the loot boxes.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Well, I hope the lawsuit wins and lootboxes are somehow removed from gaming entirely, along with all forms of gambling. Probably won't happen, and even if it does some businesses will just find other unethical ways to make money. But it's still a worthy fight.
Until then, I'll continue to do what we can all do: exercise personal choice and never spend money on lootboxes
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
False. The court can find that something is against law no matter how many people do it.
A lot of laws about consumer protection, advertising, and business practices actually evolve that way. Business constantly evolves and does new and different things, and occasionally some of those are taken into court so far that it becomes a precedent for whether something is allowed or forbidden. Often rest of the business world then follows that precedent out of their own initiative if it's something that's not too expensive to change.
This specific case a person at all times is fully aware of their own actions and the 'rules' are laid out for them to see. It is no different than the surprise Funko surprise boxes. If anything online games make their customers more aware cause they post the win % and I don't see any win % on Funko boxes. The person charges their credit card the same way they charge their card to buy those surprise boxes. How about Magic & Yu-Gi-Oh cards at stores? They all have to be sued too for decades of doing exactly what EA has been doing just since 2015(GoH). What's that old saying? "Don't like it, don't buy it". No one is forcing anyone to buy anything and like I said before the customer is fully aware of what they are doing at all times.
Not exactly, as WotC and MTG, did in face gambling charges, the reason why they are not Gambling, is because results per booster pack are always be the same, with each pack containing, 1 rare, 2 uncommon 5 common, cards.
This was a fixed return for purchase.
You were in fact not gambling, as you would always get a consistent ROI for your dollar spent. You would never open a booster pack wondering if you were not going to get a rare.
Same with Funko box, you were always going to get 6 currently available common 6 POP's, as a fixed reward, all of which you would be able to buy individually from a retailer, You are never going to pull say, a discontinued Vinyl Skeletor.
With a loot box (of course this depends on the game), it's a complete gamble on what you will get, you can get anything from an Ultra Rare to Common Trash, with no stabilized ROI for your investment, which is what brings up the case that they are in fact gambling.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
False. The court can find that something is against law no matter how many people do it.
A lot of laws about consumer protection, advertising, and business practices actually evolve that way. Business constantly evolves and does new and different things, and occasionally some of those are taken into court so far that it becomes a precedent for whether something is allowed or forbidden. Often rest of the business world then follows that precedent out of their own initiative if it's something that's not too expensive to change.
This specific case a person at all times is fully aware of their own actions and the 'rules' are laid out for them to see. It is no different than the surprise Funko surprise boxes. If anything online games make their customers more aware cause they post the win % and I don't see any win % on Funko boxes. The person charges their credit card the same way they charge their card to buy those surprise boxes. How about Magic & Yu-Gi-Oh cards at stores? They all have to be sued too for decades of doing exactly what EA has been doing just since 2015(GoH). What's that old saying? "Don't like it, don't buy it". No one is forcing anyone to buy anything and like I said before the customer is fully aware of what they are doing at all times.
Not exactly, as WotC and MTG, did in face gambling charges, the reason why they are not Gambling, is because results per booster pack are always be the same, with each pack containing, 1 rare, 2 uncommon 5 common, cards.
MTG's stance was each card had the same value regardless of perceived value. So you paid for x cards and always got x cards.
Has any one here even bothered reading the claim? I am not even half way done and can't stop laughing about some of it.
In a early section they go on about how game developers intentionally design games to encourage you to keep playing them.............
Section 20. claims that publishers invented the concept of randomize rewards to keep players attention which we know is false. Then section 23. Cleary states that loot boxes are simply a extension of the randomized loot systems found in early digital games.
I do agree with section 25. people should know what they are getting and the odds of getting it.
As for using of laws in other countries to set a example that's more then misleading.
A. and B. are more or less about the same thing. Korea caught publishers altering the drop rates and suggesting they were higher then they really were. But filed claim is not about that.
D. UK is pretty big on their child welfare hell the kid stalking sony and making terrorist bomb threats only got a slap on the wrist. Their main focus is on predatory tactics against children and the risk vs reward addiction that was present in video games before loot boxes became more common. And given all the crazy things politicians in the USA say using them as a example is a joke.
It'll take some time to force governments into forming legislation and industry-wide regulations on exploitative loopholes such as Loot Boxes and other "intangible goods or estates for sale" in games but it will happen eventually.
The mechanics in these type of games only serve to leech money off addicted and vulnerable consumers. If you look at mobile gaming, it is plagued with this kind of "business practice".
What I've come to realize is that random rewards are inherently fun. Especially when they're as tangible as gacha mechanics. When gacha mechanics are just a free part of a game's reward system, like in Xenoblade Chronicles 2, they really provide an incentive to keep playing or even replaying.
But spending money should not be fun. That's what makes the lootbox model so insiduous even outside of the "is it illegal gambling?" question (it is illegal gambling).
People, especially after Genshin, keep getting worked up about how terrible gachas can be, and wonder if the popularity of Genshin will mean such things will start moving into PC/console games. I keep looking at those statements, and saying, "what about loot boxes in cash shops, and other such things that PC online games have been using years before mobile gacha games were ever a thing?"
Gaming companies adopt every bad funding practice they can, this has all happened before with F2P, doubtless it will happen with Gacha. The only difference is that Gacha is more easily recognised as an abusive system.
One thing that is very notable is the speed that companies take up these practices has accelerated hugely. It took nearly a decade, with huge resistance from fans for F2P to become the norm. It only took a couple of years for something like loot boxes to pop up all over gaming, even in solo games.
If you have the rolling for items with in game currency like when a vendor has a loot box in their inventory and you use in game currency it is not an issue. The issue is the use of real money to buy the loot box or to buy currency to buy the loot box. There is a clear difference and the difference is the use of real money.
What ever currency you earn within a game is not a problem the problem only happens when you use real money to gamble for the loot boxes. That should be regulated.
If adults are doing it the problem is personal because like casinos exist and are regulated but children play games and this is why it becomes an issue. The fact that children cannot just waltz into a casino or take part in online gambling is a definite example of why loot boxes that gamble with real money should be regulated.
Not to forget governments are quite keen to also tax loot box income. It will just be a matter of time before they use regulation to tax it even if they allow it. I wonder how they will explain that away.
Why are they specifically targeting EA? There are hundreds of other PC & mobile games with the exact same type of monetization systems. Did EA not pay off the right people or something?
For the same reason that lawsuits target McDonalds and not Winerschnitzel (outside ease of spelling and saying the name of course), is because high profile cases attract public eye and support, and gain attention for the cause.
Show me a real example of that happening.
Unless Canada turned into a communist country recently you can't target a single entity over the same thing hundreds of others do. It has to be specific otherwise it's just a show lawsuit that a 1st year law student for EA can win.
CA - You have gambling in your games.
EA 1st year law student - Here are examples of hundreds of other games with the exact same monetization systems that make 10x the amount we do.
The end.
False. The court can find that something is against law no matter how many people do it.
A lot of laws about consumer protection, advertising, and business practices actually evolve that way. Business constantly evolves and does new and different things, and occasionally some of those are taken into court so far that it becomes a precedent for whether something is allowed or forbidden. Often rest of the business world then follows that precedent out of their own initiative if it's something that's not too expensive to change.
This specific case a person at all times is fully aware of their own actions and the 'rules' are laid out for them to see. It is no different than the surprise Funko surprise boxes. If anything online games make their customers more aware cause they post the win % and I don't see any win % on Funko boxes. The person charges their credit card the same way they charge their card to buy those surprise boxes. How about Magic & Yu-Gi-Oh cards at stores? They all have to be sued too for decades of doing exactly what EA has been doing just since 2015(GoH). What's that old saying? "Don't like it, don't buy it". No one is forcing anyone to buy anything and like I said before the customer is fully aware of what they are doing at all times.
I admit that I myself am a heavy Gacha / Gambling addict, Lootbox make me overspend in games especially if they don't disclose % chance.
I've also heard kids in Mobile Games on voice crying for not getting certain outfits in games, it's a real problem and something needs to be done.
I've put at much as $400 for a costume before and never got it because the company changed the odds and didn't disclose them even though they are required to since it was a cross platform app.
Also there is a difference between those "Gacha" machines IRL where you put in a token for a prize, or 50 cents, the difference being that you can get your prize and sell it or give it away to another person.
In an online game like Overwatch, if you obtain the same loot multiple times, You do not have that choice to exchange, trade, sell, or give it away to others.
In Phantasy Star Online 2, it's even worse, you can't directly give away cosmetics, you can sell them on the market, but getting good items is pretty hard for $100 I got trash 90% garbage, and (You can't exchange meseta") for in game credits, and you can't buy from 3rd parties or risk ban, so you are forced to farm it, with again no way to obtain items you want.
There needs to be changes to laws and Lootbox, so yes big difference between in-game Lootbox and real world.
Also there is a difference between those "Gacha" machines IRL where you put in a token for a prize, or 50 cents, the difference being that you can get your prize and sell it or give it away to another person.
In an online game like Overwatch, if you obtain the same loot multiple times, You do not have that choice to exchange, trade, sell, or give it away to others.
In Phantasy Star Online 2, it's even worse, you can't directly give away cosmetics, you can sell them on the market, but getting good items is pretty hard for $100 I got trash 90% garbage, and (You can't exchange meseta") for in game credits, and you can't buy from 3rd parties or risk ban, so you are forced to farm it, with again no way to obtain items you want.
There needs to be changes to laws and Lootbox, so yes big difference between in-game Lootbox and real world.
It's the ones with secondary markets that are the biggest problems.
Hello actual illegal gambling websites for CS GO skins.
What if you opened loot boxes with a key, and you can either get the key by finishing a quest, or you can buy it?
Still illegal gambling?
Distinctions like this becomes an issue and perhaps a total ban on any form of loot box might help unless the game is rated M. Might seem draconian but the industry will face too many loopholes or else.
What if you opened loot boxes with a key, and you can either get the key by finishing a quest, or you can buy it?
Still illegal gambling?
Distinctions like this becomes an issue and perhaps a total ban on any form of loot box might help unless the game is rated M. Might seem draconian but the industry will face too many loopholes or else.
The traditional argument is that it isn't P2W if you can also get it in the game without paying for it. Of course, they might make it extremely hard to get, but it is technically possible.
So I can see the game companies simply making the loot box keys available, but very hard to get. You can "pay for the convenience" of speeding it up.
Comments
The company would have to refund the money to moot the claim.
2. As long as you paid for the box, others getting that free doesn't really change things. Unless you're sold something like "exclusive", or "limited item", or such, in which case the company suddenly giving a million of those away for free might cause you harm. But as long as there's no explicit agreement that it's exclusive/limited/etc. the company generally can give them free to everyone.
It still stands to reason given the logic of people screaming about randomized rewards for cash.
A better example would be you buy a game. Fight a mob while risking death in game and then gain a random reward for killing it. Image how fun games would be if there was no randomness to them because it was outlawed.
I don't Know Canada but the loot box mechanic started in the USA around the mid 1800's with cards.
Now I don't like loot boxes for the most part or EA as a company. I tend to avoid both when every I can. But what I do not do is try to limited the options of other consumers and developers just because I spent 50 bucks and could not get the pretty pink pony I REALLY wanted.
China is a great example of this. If parents are ok with their 17 year old playing video games with his overseas friends on the weekend. Instead of sneaking out of the house to do god knows what that's their right.
As for genshin impact i have mixed feeling about it. I love how you can interact with just about every thing in the environment it feels great and i wish more developers would invest as much time into their games in that way. That being said i hate the loot crate system of it. But they did make back their production cost in 2 weeks without the game being overly p2w. That is what really matters because that's is what investors and developers see. That's how good or bad mechanics get passed on to newer games.
In short the solution is not restricting the rights of consumers and developers. It's about supporting good games with great game mechanics. So that more are made like them.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
Google Play says they require Lootbox odds to be disclosed, but company like "Net Ease" are violating Google Plays policy on the APP Developer, and yet Google doesn't remove the specified APP to be specific a game called "Life After" is full of heavy gambling addiction and children using their parents credit cards, but Google allows this as I reported the issue more than a month ago and it remains on the store with no changes to date.
However Google is quick to ban Fort Nite after they bypass the 30% fee, why can't they do the same for other APPS violating the Play Store policy and changing odds without telling people basically comitting fraud and stealing money?
This specific case a person at all times is fully aware of their own actions and the 'rules' are laid out for them to see. It is no different than the surprise Funko surprise boxes. If anything online games make their customers more aware cause they post the win % and I don't see any win % on Funko boxes. The person charges their credit card the same way they charge their card to buy those surprise boxes. How about Magic & Yu-Gi-Oh cards at stores? They all have to be sued too for decades of doing exactly what EA has been doing just since 2015(GoH). What's that old saying? "Don't like it, don't buy it". No one is forcing anyone to buy anything and like I said before the customer is fully aware of what they are doing at all times.
You are talking about things that actually deal with criminal behavior and this is not criminal behavior. If this was criminal behavior like "speeding" that actually endangers life then sure but people buying entertainment sitting behind their computer is less dangerous than some of the toxic goods I've bought from Amazon. No where did it say in the description my $30 seat cushion would smell like formaldehyde.. time to sue Amazon Canada.. If this was criminal behavior then why have the Google & Apple stores been able to profit in the billions/trillions from companies that do the exact same thing as EA. Why not sue Apple & Google for facilitating these criminal acts if it was actually criminal behavior? oh that's right... cause there's nothing actually wrong with people VOLUNTARILY spending their money however they want in a free market capitalist society...
But even so your rant is misguided.
While you might be free to spend your money as you will, you are NOT free to peddle any wears you wish, some items are in fact controlled, like for example, narcotics.
As such, regardless if you love loot boxes or not, gambling schemes are in fact one of the things you need a special licence to peddle, ergo, If you are selling something you are not licenced to sell, that is in fact criminal behavior.
In short, if Loot Boxes are deemed gambling, that means that MMO's need to either be placed under the jurisdiction of the Federal Gambling Commission, or remove the loot boxes.
This was a fixed return for purchase.
You were in fact not gambling, as you would always get a consistent ROI for your dollar spent. You would never open a booster pack wondering if you were not going to get a rare.
Same with Funko box, you were always going to get 6 currently available common 6 POP's, as a fixed reward, all of which you would be able to buy individually from a retailer, You are never going to pull say, a discontinued Vinyl Skeletor.
With a loot box (of course this depends on the game), it's a complete gamble on what you will get, you can get anything from an Ultra Rare to Common Trash, with no stabilized ROI for your investment, which is what brings up the case that they are in fact gambling.
I wish gaming is taken more seriously in EU and NA and there are laws like in Korea where if you're caught cheating, you could face jail time.
Has any one here even bothered reading the claim? I am not even half way done and can't stop laughing about some of it.
In a early section they go on about how game developers intentionally design games to encourage you to keep playing them.............
Section 20. claims that publishers invented the concept of randomize rewards to keep players attention which we know is false. Then section 23. Cleary states that loot boxes are simply a extension of the randomized loot systems found in early digital games.
I do agree with section 25. people should know what they are getting and the odds of getting it.
As for using of laws in other countries to set a example that's more then misleading.
A. and B. are more or less about the same thing. Korea caught publishers altering the drop rates and suggesting they were higher then they really were. But filed claim is not about that.
D. UK is pretty big on their child welfare hell the kid stalking sony and making terrorist bomb threats only got a slap on the wrist. Their main focus is on predatory tactics against children and the risk vs reward addiction that was present in video games before loot boxes became more common. And given all the crazy things politicians in the USA say using them as a example is a joke.
But spending money should not be fun. That's what makes the lootbox model so insiduous even outside of the "is it illegal gambling?" question (it is illegal gambling).
Gaming companies adopt every bad funding practice they can, this has all happened before with F2P, doubtless it will happen with Gacha. The only difference is that Gacha is more easily recognised as an abusive system.
One thing that is very notable is the speed that companies take up these practices has accelerated hugely. It took nearly a decade, with huge resistance from fans for F2P to become the norm. It only took a couple of years for something like loot boxes to pop up all over gaming, even in solo games.
What ever currency you earn within a game is not a problem the problem only happens when you use real money to gamble for the loot boxes. That should be regulated.
If adults are doing it the problem is personal because like casinos exist and are regulated but children play games and this is why it becomes an issue. The fact that children cannot just waltz into a casino or take part in online gambling is a definite example of why loot boxes that gamble with real money should be regulated.
Not to forget governments are quite keen to also tax loot box income. It will just be a matter of time before they use regulation to tax it even if they allow it. I wonder how they will explain that away.
I've also heard kids in Mobile Games on voice crying for not getting certain outfits in games, it's a real problem and something needs to be done.
I've put at much as $400 for a costume before and never got it because the company changed the odds and didn't disclose them even though they are required to since it was a cross platform app.
https://gamerant.com/genshin-impact-lacari-twitc-2000-dollars-rare-character/#:~:text=Genshin%20Impact%20Twitch%20Streamer%20Spends%20Over%20%242%2C000%20to%20Get%20Rare%20Character,-0%20Comments&text=Twitch%20streamer%20Lacari%20spent%20over,to%20pulling%20high%2Dtier%20characters.
In an online game like Overwatch, if you obtain the same loot multiple times, You do not have that choice to exchange, trade, sell, or give it away to others.
In Phantasy Star Online 2, it's even worse, you can't directly give away cosmetics, you can sell them on the market, but getting good items is pretty hard for $100 I got trash 90% garbage, and (You can't exchange meseta") for in game credits, and you can't buy from 3rd parties or risk ban, so you are forced to farm it, with again no way to obtain items you want.
There needs to be changes to laws and Lootbox, so yes big difference between in-game Lootbox and real world.
Hello actual illegal gambling websites for CS GO skins.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.