You mean I thought about things differently 8 years ago?!
I glad you do. You were a real ass back then.
“I do not care if people know the percentage. Some may, some may not. If people are entering credit card information without knowing the percentage and then attempting to get something out of these boxes, I will never have sympathy for them.”
If I were a company and a small population market like Canada passed this law I would just stop selling products in Canada. I am positive Canadians would still buy the product if they wanted it, and I wouldn't have to change anything.
I hope they do this as it would make me laugh hilariously as all the tyrants that love imposing their tyranny on other people will have a huge middle-finger thrown at them.
Actually, if the case passes in Canada, there is a good chance America will also adopt that policy, given how similar Canada and America are in this regard.
Which I wager is why EA will fight tooth and nail to not let this happen.
I think you may have just insulted a bunch of Canadians.
We take no offense. We just smile and say in our heads "There, but for the grace of God, go I."
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
You mean I thought about things differently 8 years ago?!
I glad you do. You were a real ass back then.
“I do not care if people know the percentage. Some may, some may not. If people are entering credit card information without knowing the percentage and then attempting to get something out of these boxes, I will never have sympathy for them.”
What brought about the change?
There isn't really anything inconsistent in what I think right now compared to what I thought back then.
I still think people are responsible for their purchases. That you don't share that opinion is strange to me.
So, these thoughts are not mutually exclusive:
1. People need to act responsibly and be aware of what they are purchasing. 2. Loot boxes are predatory for those that have a gambling problem.
Even back then you will find me talking about that. The only change is that I have sympathy for those with a gambling problem.
Keep attacking 8 year old comments though. It makes you totally not, as you refer to me, an ass.
I still think people are responsible for their purchases. That you don't share that opinion is strange to me.
So, these thoughts are not mutually exclusive:
1. People need to act responsibly and be aware of what they are purchasing. 2. Loot boxes are predatory for those that have a gambling problem.
----
It's already been proven that the reward system in video games can cause addiction. Someone that has a gambling addiction and poor impulse control should not be playing video games much less on the net making microtransactions of any kind.
I mean the ads that we are all seeing pop up on this page are costume tailored to each of us by search engines that track every thing we do on the net. If you don't think that's predatory tactic's I don't know what is.
One thing that has always bothered me is that it's illegal to leave your kid in a hot car or in a public park unsupervised while you go shopping. But allow them unsupervised access to the net with a credit card and some how they become someone else responsibility.
Not arguing with anything you said in your last post btw just given my opinion on the topic.
They're both predatory which is why we should be digging deeper. There are a lot of ways MMOs and other GAAS games implement predatory revenue streams. Let's start with Loot Crates and get some sort of regulation in place, then go for the jugular and hit them hard in every user hostile revenue practice.
Although I share your views on these monetary practices (I have never bought a single lootbox or item that quacks like a lootbox), we need to realize that attacking them by law will not necessarily result in making more MMOs without them. It will probably just mean that these MMOs will stop being made or marketed in these countries and people with our "tastes" will still get nothing in place of them.
Same goes for all practices/games I have seen being condemned in these boards (loot boxes, crowdfunding, cash shops, BRs, MMOs that deviate from the old school designs). The reason these games flourish is because people throw money at them. And the only way the market is going to stop making them and make more MMOs to our taste instead is if they see more demand and money into them (personally I am putting my money where my mouth is, I am subbing to my MMO atm). Current reality says the opposite.
We just need a large enough market area to ban the practises we don't want to see. Devs are unlikely to change their game for a small area like Belgium, but if USA or EU were to pass a law then devs would change their game accordingly to avoid losing a large market.
I still think people are responsible for their purchases. That you don't share that opinion is strange to me.
So, these thoughts are not mutually exclusive:
1. People need to act responsibly and be aware of what they are purchasing. 2. Loot boxes are predatory for those that have a gambling problem.
----
It's already been proven that the reward system in video games can cause addiction. Someone that has a gambling addiction and poor impulse control should not be playing video games much less on the net making microtransactions of any kind.
I mean the ads that we are all seeing pop up on this page are costume tailored to each of us by search engines that track every thing we do on the net. If you don't think that's predatory tactic's I don't know what is.
One thing that has always bothered me is that it's illegal to leave your kid in a hot car or in a public park unsupervised while you go shopping. But allow them unsupervised access to the net with a credit card and some how they become someone else responsibility.
Not arguing with anything you said in your last post btw just given my opinion on the topic.
I don't think anyone feels or think parents should not be responsible and let their kids run off with their credit cards etc.
Being a shitty parent is not an excuse for anything however if your underage teenager runs off with some money taken from your wallet, while you are not looking, goes to a strip club buys some blow, beer and fun times with a working girl then maybe the place offering such entertainment should be held accountable too no?
It's not all black and white like some people would wish it to be. That's the difficulty with these new techs and how it changes and shapes our society.
As some things change it's just too overly simplistic to put all the responsibility on the parents or all on society and to harken back back an old school idea, "'It takes a village..."
The problem is our villages are much bigger now and virtual even with how rampant social media/online life is etc.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
They're both predatory which is why we should be digging deeper. There are a lot of ways MMOs and other GAAS games implement predatory revenue streams. Let's start with Loot Crates and get some sort of regulation in place, then go for the jugular and hit them hard in every user hostile revenue practice.
Although I share your views on these monetary practices (I have never bought a single lootbox or item that quacks like a lootbox), we need to realize that attacking them by law will not necessarily result in making more MMOs without them. It will probably just mean that these MMOs will stop being made or marketed in these countries and people with our "tastes" will still get nothing in place of them.
Same goes for all practices/games I have seen being condemned in these boards (loot boxes, crowdfunding, cash shops, BRs, MMOs that deviate from the old school designs). The reason these games flourish is because people throw money at them. And the only way the market is going to stop making them and make more MMOs to our taste instead is if they see more demand and money into them (personally I am putting my money where my mouth is, I am subbing to my MMO atm). Current reality says the opposite.
Players are not interested in subbing. They want the game for free and want other players to pay for their presence. This is the root of the problem right there.
As long as I'm not buying the lootbox what do I care that others are and that it is destroying the genre. As long as I get to play for free I'm good.
See this is why these types of mechanics grew in popularity and if lootboxes are considered gambling and game companies have to change the way they are making money they will drop MMORPGs. You will see even less than the already pitiful numbers currently being developed dwindled even further.
I cannot think of a solution but I do want lootboxes out and now we have to worry about gacha too.
MMORPGs will go the way of the Dodo and not in a distant future either.
They're both predatory which is why we should be digging deeper. There are a lot of ways MMOs and other GAAS games implement predatory revenue streams. Let's start with Loot Crates and get some sort of regulation in place, then go for the jugular and hit them hard in every user hostile revenue practice.
Although I share your views on these monetary practices (I have never bought a single lootbox or item that quacks like a lootbox), we need to realize that attacking them by law will not necessarily result in making more MMOs without them. It will probably just mean that these MMOs will stop being made or marketed in these countries and people with our "tastes" will still get nothing in place of them.
Same goes for all practices/games I have seen being condemned in these boards (loot boxes, crowdfunding, cash shops, BRs, MMOs that deviate from the old school designs). The reason these games flourish is because people throw money at them. And the only way the market is going to stop making them and make more MMOs to our taste instead is if they see more demand and money into them (personally I am putting my money where my mouth is, I am subbing to my MMO atm). Current reality says the opposite.
Players are not interested in subbing. They want the game for free and want other players to pay for their presence. This is the root of the problem right there.
As long as I'm not buying the lootbox what do I care that others are and that it is destroying the genre. As long as I get to play for free I'm good.
See this is why these types of mechanics grew in popularity and if lootboxes are considered gambling and game companies have to change the way they are making money they will drop MMORPGs. You will see even less than the already pitiful numbers currently being developed dwindled even further.
I cannot think of a solution but I do want lootboxes out and now we have to worry about gacha too.
MMORPGs will go the way of the Dodo and not in a distant future either.
There are legitimate reasons to not like subs. I don't like subscriptions because you're effectively paying for the promise of content. You're paying the same amount regardless of quantity or quality, and you lose the power to reward or withhold rewarding the developer for their work.
And as we've seen with WoW, the dichotomy between subs and cash shops is a myth. If they can get away with doing both, they will.
They're both predatory which is why we should be digging deeper. There are a lot of ways MMOs and other GAAS games implement predatory revenue streams. Let's start with Loot Crates and get some sort of regulation in place, then go for the jugular and hit them hard in every user hostile revenue practice.
Although I share your views on these monetary practices (I have never bought a single lootbox or item that quacks like a lootbox), we need to realize that attacking them by law will not necessarily result in making more MMOs without them. It will probably just mean that these MMOs will stop being made or marketed in these countries and people with our "tastes" will still get nothing in place of them.
Same goes for all practices/games I have seen being condemned in these boards (loot boxes, crowdfunding, cash shops, BRs, MMOs that deviate from the old school designs). The reason these games flourish is because people throw money at them. And the only way the market is going to stop making them and make more MMOs to our taste instead is if they see more demand and money into them (personally I am putting my money where my mouth is, I am subbing to my MMO atm). Current reality says the opposite.
Players are not interested in subbing. They want the game for free and want other players to pay for their presence. This is the root of the problem right there.
As long as I'm not buying the lootbox what do I care that others are and that it is destroying the genre. As long as I get to play for free I'm good.
See this is why these types of mechanics grew in popularity and if lootboxes are considered gambling and game companies have to change the way they are making money they will drop MMORPGs. You will see even less than the already pitiful numbers currently being developed dwindled even further.
I cannot think of a solution but I do want lootboxes out and now we have to worry about gacha too.
MMORPGs will go the way of the Dodo and not in a distant future either.
There are legitimate reasons to not like subs. I don't like subscriptions because you're effectively paying for the promise of content. You're paying the same amount regardless of quantity or quality, and you lose the power to reward or withhold rewarding the developer for their work.
And as we've seen with WoW, the dichotomy between subs and cash shops is a myth. If they can get away with doing both, they will.
Cash shops are not the problem. In FFXIV if you wanted more than the number of retainers given you bought them or to buy an outfit or pet is perfectly fine in WoW. These types of things aren't the problem. Lootboxes and any method to obtain cash from us based on a random mechanic is. That is a way to earn far more than what one cash shop item could. This is an insanely lucrative option because of the gambling incentive.
Buying a sub and then selling it for gold in WoW isn't gambling. We may not like it but lootboxes are far worse.
Even indirect methods of obtaining money for a gambling option in game is also bad. In BDO people bought outfits to sell so that they could have the cash they needed to gamble on upgrades. That is an insidious thing even if it is done indirectly. At least lootboxes are slightly more honest in their clear gambling objectives.
For the price of what I use to pay per month for a single MMO, I get to play from a large catalogue of games including a decent number of new releases. All the games that I played from that catalogue don’t have any loot boxes.
Do you guys also have problems with state and national lotteries, they are kind of like lootboxes in a way?
Good catch.
Loot boxes are like the Lottery.
Which is the whole point of this case and many points of contention about Lootboxes.
"The Lottery" or Lottery like games, are gambling, and they make it very clear that it is gambling, it is controlled by the Gambling Commision, and needs to follow all Local, State, and Federal Rules regarding it being gambling.
So, I don't have an issue with Lotteries, because they are gambling, and they are treated as such, where loot boxes try to pass off that they are not gambling, and that is where all the problems start.
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.
Do you guys also have problems with state and national lotteries, they are kind of like lootboxes in a way?
Only they are not same. While laws are different in every area of the world there are 3 general rules are that lawyers will tell you need to be applied.
In the case of lootboxs your not placing a bet with the publisher. And there is no winner/loser/prize. You always get what you pay for even if it is randomized and not what you wanted.
For example you want start raising chickens for their eggs. So you buy a bunch of unhatched eggs to incubate. Doing so fits within rules of consideration and chance. But again the farmer that sold you those eggs is not offering your a awarded prize.
The example is just in general. Different publisher do did things with surprise mechanic's some of which is not legal. This is why you see the Korea government going after certain lootbox games despite the country liking gacha mechanic's. Same thing with the Netherlands case.
I still think people are responsible for their purchases. That you don't share that opinion is strange to me.
So, these thoughts are not mutually exclusive:
1. People need to act responsibly and be aware of what they are purchasing. 2. Loot boxes are predatory for those that have a gambling problem.
----
It's already been proven that the reward system in video games can cause addiction. Someone that has a gambling addiction and poor impulse control should not be playing video games much less on the net making microtransactions of any kind.
I mean the ads that we are all seeing pop up on this page are costume tailored to each of us by search engines that track every thing we do on the net. If you don't think that's predatory tactic's I don't know what is.
One thing that has always bothered me is that it's illegal to leave your kid in a hot car or in a public park unsupervised while you go shopping. But allow them unsupervised access to the net with a credit card and some how they become someone else responsibility.
Not arguing with anything you said in your last post btw just given my opinion on the topic.
I don't think anyone feels or think parents should not be responsible and let their kids run off with their credit cards etc.
Being a shitty parent is not an excuse for anything however if your underage teenager runs off with some money taken from your wallet, while you are not looking, goes to a strip club buys some blow, beer and fun times with a working girl then maybe the place offering such entertainment should be held accountable too no?
It's not all black and white like some people would wish it to be. That's the difficulty with these new techs and how it changes and shapes our society.
As some things change it's just too overly simplistic to put all the responsibility on the parents or all on society and to harken back back an old school idea, "'It takes a village..."
The problem is our villages are much bigger now and virtual even with how rampant social media/online life is etc.
We already went through the drug dealing publisher topic in this thread so not going to go over it again lol.
That being said if your child is a hard drug user with a addiction and is stealing. You dam well better take responsibility for them or put them in jail.
On the topic of subs for mmo's. They really just don't work anymore. Most of the games with subs that do work tend to have a decade or more worth of content to go through. Something that new games can't compete with at release. And even most of those older games now allow access to the game for free even if that access is limited.
Do you guys also have problems with state and national lotteries, they are kind of like lootboxes in a way?
Only they are not same. While laws are different in every area of the world there are 3 general rules are that lawyers will tell you need to be applied.
In the case of lootboxs your not placing a bet with the publisher. And there is no winner/loser/prize. You always get what you pay for even if it is randomized and not what you wanted.
For example you want start raising chickens for their eggs. So you buy a bunch of unhatched eggs to incubate. Doing so fits within rules of consideration and chance. But again the farmer that sold you those eggs is not offering your a awarded prize.
The example is just in general. Different publisher do did things with surprise mechanic's some of which is not legal. This is why you see the Korea government going after certain lootbox games despite the country liking gacha mechanic's. Same thing with the Netherlands case.
Buying eggs is not comparable to buying lootboxes: With eggs you're paying for something of unknown value - an egg that may or may not hatch. That's not legally counted as gambling.
Whereas lootboxes could be considered gambling because you're not paying for the box, you're paying for its contents, and both parties go out of their way to make the trade with contents placed inside the box so that it's left up to chance whether the buyer gets what he wants or something else.
The difference is the legal definition of gambling. Not the meaning of the word in the dictionary. People may use the word gambling in conversation and not mean the legal definition but the legal definition is what differentiates the unhatched egg from the lootbox.
'A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.Gambling does not include bona fide business transactions valid under the law of contracts, such as the purchase or sale at a future date of securities or commodities, contracts of indemnity or guaranty and life, health or accident insurance.'
The egg comes under a normal sale and purchase contract.
Do you guys also have problems with state and national lotteries, they are kind of like lootboxes in a way?
Only they are not same. While laws are different in every area of the world there are 3 general rules are that lawyers will tell you need to be applied.
In the case of lootboxs your not placing a bet with the publisher. And there is no winner/loser/prize. You always get what you pay for even if it is randomized and not what you wanted.
For example you want start raising chickens for their eggs. So you buy a bunch of unhatched eggs to incubate. Doing so fits within rules of consideration and chance. But again the farmer that sold you those eggs is not offering your a awarded prize.
The example is just in general. Different publisher do did things with surprise mechanic's some of which is not legal. This is why you see the Korea government going after certain lootbox games despite the country liking gacha mechanic's. Same thing with the Netherlands case.
Buying eggs is not comparable to buying lootboxes: With eggs you're paying for something of unknown value - an egg that may or may not hatch. That's not legally counted as gambling.
Whereas lootboxes could be considered gambling because you're not paying for the box, you're paying for its contents, and both parties go out of their way to make the trade with contents placed inside the box so that it's left up to chance whether the buyer gets what he wants or something else.
It's exactly the same. When buying the egg your not paying for something of unknow value your buying a unhatched egg. The value is set with the sales. Yes you can always turn around and sell it for more or less. That does not change the fact that the item has a known value when it's sold.
You agree that buying the random contents of the egg is not gambling. And there is more factors at play then just if the egg may or may not hatch. You could end up with all males which is not your desired outcome since you want hens to lay eggs for you. But your are aware of all this and the risks before you even make the purchase.
You go on to say your not paying for the box but the randomized content in the box. Just like your not buying the eggs for the egg shells your buying them for the content inside the egg shells. And again in both instances the buyer and seller are aware that the content within is random.
But like I said before despite the example above were you can end up with dead chickens. You should always get a item of equal value that you paid for from randomize mechanic's. You should never get trash items that the publisher sell for less then the actual price of the randomized item.
The difference is the legal definition of gambling. Not the meaning of the word in the dictionary. People may use the word gambling in conversation and not mean the legal definition but the legal definition is what differentiates the unhatched egg from the lootbox.
'A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.Gambling does not include bona fide business transactions valid under the law of contracts, such as the purchase or sale at a future date of securities or commodities, contracts of indemnity or guaranty and life, health or accident insurance.'
The egg comes under a normal sale and purchase contract.
I provided a link you should look at it. I did not pull it from the dictionary it's the view of many lawyer's.
Your suggesting that digital items do not have no value and do not have to abide by the law because they are not a physical commodity and that has been proven in court to be untrue.
I already said that laws very based on the area. What you copy and pasted is
Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-12-20
Thankfully Alabama does not rule the world....but we can look at this specific rule of law none the less.
There is no risk or stakes being placed in a contest of chance. The seller is not accepting bets on certain outcomes with you.
Section 5) However, lottery tickets, policy slips and other items used in the playing phases of lottery and policy schemes are not gambling devices within this definition.
So if you believe that lootboxs are like lottery tickets. This rule in fact defines lootboxs as NOT gambling devices.
Section 8) PLAYER. A person who engages in any form of gambling solely as a contestant or bettor, without receiving or becoming entitled to receive any profit therefrom other than personal gambling winnings, and without otherwise rendering any material assistance to the establishment, conduct or operation of the particular gambling activity.
Your not a contestant or bettor. And you are entitled to what you pay for it's not personal gambling winnings. If it was then it would be taxable by IRS under "other income". If you did not report it as such then that would be tax fraud.
Section (10) SLOT MACHINE. A gambling device that, as a result of the insertion of a coin or other object, operates, either completely automatically or with the aid of some physical act by the player, in such a manner that, depending upon elements of chance, it may eject something of value. A device so constructed or readily adaptable or convertible to such use is no less a slot machine because it is not in working order or because some mechanical act of manipulation or repair is required to accomplish its adaptation, conversion or workability. Nor is it any less a slot machine because apart from its use or adaptability as such it may also sell or deliver something of value on a basis other than chance.
There is no MAY eject something of value. Again you should always be gaining something of value.
When you buy an egg, you are buying the EGG, not what it might be, but what it is, for the value it offers as an egg. regardless if you are buying that egg for incubation or to make an omelette, you are still just buying the egg, and at the end of the day, you got exactly what you paid for, an egg.
With that said, If you wanted a baby chicken, you should just have gone and bought a baby chicken.
If a farmer refused to sell me a baby chicken, and instead told me I had to play some roulette game with buying eggs, I would not be buying eggs or chickens from that farmer.
If you wanted chicken meat, you should have just bought that. Just like above, if wanted some chicken breast, and the farmer told me I had to buy the egg and play a lottery to get a chicken to get the breast. I would not be buying Eggs, Chickens, or Meat from that famer.
Ideally this should be just typical common sense.
This is also why I am overall annoyed by RNG store items, I feel that if a game is good enough, it should just be able to sell its product, and not depend on gambling schemes to make money.
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.
Do you guys also have problems with state and national lotteries, they are kind of like lootboxes in a way?
Only they are not same. While laws are different in every area of the world there are 3 general rules are that lawyers will tell you need to be applied.
In the case of lootboxs your not placing a bet with the publisher. And there is no winner/loser/prize. You always get what you pay for even if it is randomized and not what you wanted.
For example you want start raising chickens for their eggs. So you buy a bunch of unhatched eggs to incubate. Doing so fits within rules of consideration and chance. But again the farmer that sold you those eggs is not offering your a awarded prize.
The example is just in general. Different publisher do did things with surprise mechanic's some of which is not legal. This is why you see the Korea government going after certain lootbox games despite the country liking gacha mechanic's. Same thing with the Netherlands case.
Buying eggs is not comparable to buying lootboxes: With eggs you're paying for something of unknown value - an egg that may or may not hatch. That's not legally counted as gambling.
Whereas lootboxes could be considered gambling because you're not paying for the box, you're paying for its contents, and both parties go out of their way to make the trade with contents placed inside the box so that it's left up to chance whether the buyer gets what he wants or something else.
It's exactly the same. When buying the egg your not paying for something of unknow value your buying a unhatched egg. The value is set with the sales. Yes you can always turn around and sell it for more or less. That does not change the fact that the item has a known value when it's sold.
You agree that buying the random contents of the egg is not gambling. And there is more factors at play then just if the egg may or may not hatch. You could end up with all males which is not your desired outcome since you want hens to lay eggs for you. But your are aware of all this and the risks before you even make the purchase.
You go on to say your not paying for the box but the randomized content in the box. Just like your not buying the eggs for the egg shells your buying them for the content inside the egg shells. And again in both instances the buyer and seller are aware that the content within is random.
But like I said before despite the example above were you can end up with dead chickens. You should always get a item of equal value that you paid for from randomize mechanic's. You should never get trash items that the publisher sell for less then the actual price of the randomized item.
I did not agree that "buying the random contents of the egg is not gambling". I used term unknown, not random.
Buying or selling something unknown is not legally considered gambling. Whether it's an egg that may or may not hatch, or a high risk stock that may turn out to be worth fortune or nothing, an unknown value or unknown result does not make an activity gambling.
Only situations where humans go out of their way to introduce randomness can be considered gambling. For example when you make lootboxes with random content, or when you go to play in casion, or bet in sports. Those are all situations where participants go out of their way to make the prize depend on chance instead of just doing a simple trade like "You'll get first prize if you pay this much $$$".
I always looked at loot boxes as gambling in a sense but i was okay with it. Then again, loot boxes came into fruition when i was older and understood things better.
I consider loot boxes just a pathetic way to fund your game and normally dont like games with them more because the game sucks and the mechanics of it as well, rather than their presence.
Path of exile has loot boxes, but the game isnt built around it, so it doesnt bother me.
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
I already said that laws very based on the area. What you copy and pasted is
Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-12-20
.......
Section 5) However, lottery tickets, policy slips and other items used in the playing phases of lottery and policy schemes are not gambling devices within this definition.
So if you believe that lootboxs are like lottery tickets. This rule in fact defines lootboxs as NOT gambling devices.
You failed to read the law further. Lottery tickets and other items used in the playing phases are not defined as gambling devices because possession of a gambling device is a crime. See: Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-12-27
That law is clearly made against people who run and organize gambling and own stuff like slot machines. Their intention was never to punish participants to a lottery for gambling.
EDIT: This means that the definition of gambling device is not meant to define whether something is gambling or not. It's just for the definition of where you'll be punished because you had something meant for running or organizing gambling.
I already said that laws very based on the area. What you copy and pasted is
Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-12-20
.......
Section 5) However, lottery tickets, policy slips and other items used in the playing phases of lottery and policy schemes are not gambling devices within this definition.
So if you believe that lootboxs are like lottery tickets. This rule in fact defines lootboxs as NOT gambling devices.
You failed to read the law further. Lottery tickets and other items used in the playing phases are not defined as gambling devices because possession of a gambling device is a crime. See: Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-12-27
That law is clearly made against people who run and organize gambling and own stuff like slot machines. Their intention was never to punish participants to a lottery for gambling.
EDIT: This means that the definition of gambling device is not meant to define whether something is gambling or not. It's just for the definition of where you'll be punished because you had something meant for running or organizing gambling.
No I did not say I believe lootboxs are like lottery tickets. I just found it amusing. So what your saying is that the lootbox is not a gambling device because the video game is.
When you buy an egg, you are buying the EGG, not what it might be, but what it is, for the value it offers as an egg. regardless if you are buying that egg for incubation or to make an omelette, you are still just buying the egg, and at the end of the day, you got exactly what you paid for, an egg.
With that said, If you wanted a baby chicken, you should just have gone and bought a baby chicken.
Would you prefer something more along the fertility clinics that many people use with end results that are still based on chance ?
Your logic on the egg could be applied to a lootboxs. Your not buying what will be when you open it. If the end results don't matter then your just buying a lootbox and you got exactly what you paid for.
If you want a baby chicken you have the right to go out and buy one. But that does not give you the right to make that choice for someone else. If someone is trying to sell you something you don't want you have every right to not buy it and go somewhere else.
Comments
“I do not care if people know the percentage. Some may, some may not. If people are entering credit card information without knowing the percentage and then attempting to get something out of these boxes, I will never have sympathy for them.”
What brought about the change?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I still think people are responsible for their purchases. That you don't share that opinion is strange to me.
So, these thoughts are not mutually exclusive:
1. People need to act responsibly and be aware of what they are purchasing.
2. Loot boxes are predatory for those that have a gambling problem.
Even back then you will find me talking about that. The only change is that I have sympathy for those with a gambling problem.
Keep attacking 8 year old comments though. It makes you totally not, as you refer to me, an ass.
So, these thoughts are not mutually exclusive:
1. People need to act responsibly and be aware of what they are purchasing.
2. Loot boxes are predatory for those that have a gambling problem.
----
It's already been proven that the reward system in video games can cause addiction. Someone that has a gambling addiction and poor impulse control should not be playing video games much less on the net making microtransactions of any kind.
I mean the ads that we are all seeing pop up on this page are costume tailored to each of us by search engines that track every thing we do on the net. If you don't think that's predatory tactic's I don't know what is.
One thing that has always bothered me is that it's illegal to leave your kid in a hot car or in a public park unsupervised while you go shopping. But allow them unsupervised access to the net with a credit card and some how they become someone else responsibility.
Not arguing with anything you said in your last post btw just given my opinion on the topic.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
As long as I'm not buying the lootbox what do I care that others are and that it is destroying the genre. As long as I get to play for free I'm good.
See this is why these types of mechanics grew in popularity and if lootboxes are considered gambling and game companies have to change the way they are making money they will drop MMORPGs. You will see even less than the already pitiful numbers currently being developed dwindled even further.
I cannot think of a solution but I do want lootboxes out and now we have to worry about gacha too.
MMORPGs will go the way of the Dodo and not in a distant future either.
And as we've seen with WoW, the dichotomy between subs and cash shops is a myth. If they can get away with doing both, they will.
Buying a sub and then selling it for gold in WoW isn't gambling. We may not like it but lootboxes are far worse.
Even indirect methods of obtaining money for a gambling option in game is also bad. In BDO people bought outfits to sell so that they could have the cash they needed to gamble on upgrades. That is an insidious thing even if it is done indirectly. At least lootboxes are slightly more honest in their clear gambling objectives.
go figure
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Do you guys also have problems with state and national lotteries, they are kind of like lootboxes in a way?
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
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
Loot boxes are like the Lottery.
Which is the whole point of this case and many points of contention about Lootboxes.
"The Lottery" or Lottery like games, are gambling, and they make it very clear that it is gambling, it is controlled by the Gambling Commision, and needs to follow all Local, State, and Federal Rules regarding it being gambling.
So, I don't have an issue with Lotteries, because they are gambling, and they are treated as such, where loot boxes try to pass off that they are not gambling, and that is where all the problems start.
https://business-law.freeadvice.com/business-law/gambling-law/the-three-core-elements-that-make-up-gambling.htm
In the case of lootboxs your not placing a bet with the publisher. And there is no winner/loser/prize. You always get what you pay for even if it is randomized and not what you wanted.
For example you want start raising chickens for their eggs. So you buy a bunch of unhatched eggs to incubate. Doing so fits within rules of consideration and chance. But again the farmer that sold you those eggs is not offering your a awarded prize.
The example is just in general. Different publisher do did things with surprise mechanic's some of which is not legal. This is why you see the Korea government going after certain lootbox games despite the country liking gacha mechanic's. Same thing with the Netherlands case.
That being said if your child is a hard drug user with a addiction and is stealing. You dam well better take responsibility for them or put them in jail.
On the topic of subs for mmo's. They really just don't work anymore. Most of the games with subs that do work tend to have a decade or more worth of content to go through. Something that new games can't compete with at release. And even most of those older games now allow access to the game for free even if that access is limited.
Whereas lootboxes could be considered gambling because you're not paying for the box, you're paying for its contents, and both parties go out of their way to make the trade with contents placed inside the box so that it's left up to chance whether the buyer gets what he wants or something else.
'A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.Gambling does not include bona fide business transactions valid under the law of contracts, such as the purchase or sale at a future date of securities or commodities, contracts of indemnity or guaranty and life, health or accident insurance.'
The egg comes under a normal sale and purchase contract.
You agree that buying the random contents of the egg is not gambling. And there is more factors at play then just if the egg may or may not hatch. You could end up with all males which is not your desired outcome since you want hens to lay eggs for you. But your are aware of all this and the risks before you even make the purchase.
You go on to say your not paying for the box but the randomized content in the box. Just like your not buying the eggs for the egg shells your buying them for the content inside the egg shells. And again in both instances the buyer and seller are aware that the content within is random.
But like I said before despite the example above were you can end up with dead chickens. You should always get a item of equal value that you paid for from randomize mechanic's. You should never get trash items that the publisher sell for less then the actual price of the randomized item.
Your suggesting that digital items do not have no value and do not have to abide by the law because they are not a physical commodity and that has been proven in court to be untrue.
I already said that laws very based on the area. What you copy and pasted is
Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-12-20
Thankfully Alabama does not rule the world....but we can look at this specific rule of law none the less.There is no risk or stakes being placed in a contest of chance. The seller is not accepting bets on certain outcomes with you.
Section 5) However, lottery tickets, policy slips and other items used in the playing phases of lottery and policy schemes are not gambling devices within this definition.
So if you believe that lootboxs are like lottery tickets. This rule in fact defines lootboxs as NOT gambling devices.
Section 8) PLAYER. A person who engages in any form of gambling solely as a contestant or bettor, without receiving or becoming entitled to receive any profit therefrom other than personal gambling winnings, and without otherwise rendering any material assistance to the establishment, conduct or operation of the particular gambling activity.
Your not a contestant or bettor. And you are entitled to what you pay for it's not personal gambling winnings. If it was then it would be taxable by IRS under "other income". If you did not report it as such then that would be tax fraud.
Section (10) SLOT MACHINE. A gambling device that, as a result of the insertion of a coin or other object, operates, either completely automatically or with the aid of some physical act by the player, in such a manner that, depending upon elements of chance, it may eject something of value. A device so constructed or readily adaptable or convertible to such use is no less a slot machine because it is not in working order or because some mechanical act of manipulation or repair is required to accomplish its adaptation, conversion or workability. Nor is it any less a slot machine because apart from its use or adaptability as such it may also sell or deliver something of value on a basis other than chance.
There is no MAY eject something of value. Again you should always be gaining something of value.
When you buy an egg, you are buying the EGG, not what it might be, but what it is, for the value it offers as an egg. regardless if you are buying that egg for incubation or to make an omelette, you are still just buying the egg, and at the end of the day, you got exactly what you paid for, an egg.
With that said, If you wanted a baby chicken, you should just have gone and bought a baby chicken.
If a farmer refused to sell me a baby chicken, and instead told me I had to play some roulette game with buying eggs, I would not be buying eggs or chickens from that farmer.
If you wanted chicken meat, you should have just bought that. Just like above, if wanted some chicken breast, and the farmer told me I had to buy the egg and play a lottery to get a chicken to get the breast. I would not be buying Eggs, Chickens, or Meat from that famer.
Ideally this should be just typical common sense.
This is also why I am overall annoyed by RNG store items, I feel that if a game is good enough, it should just be able to sell its product, and not depend on gambling schemes to make money.
Buying or selling something unknown is not legally considered gambling. Whether it's an egg that may or may not hatch, or a high risk stock that may turn out to be worth fortune or nothing, an unknown value or unknown result does not make an activity gambling.
Only situations where humans go out of their way to introduce randomness can be considered gambling. For example when you make lootboxes with random content, or when you go to play in casion, or bet in sports. Those are all situations where participants go out of their way to make the prize depend on chance instead of just doing a simple trade like "You'll get first prize if you pay this much $$$".
I always looked at loot boxes as gambling in a sense but i was okay with it. Then again, loot boxes came into fruition when i was older and understood things better.
I consider loot boxes just a pathetic way to fund your game and normally dont like games with them more because the game sucks and the mechanics of it as well, rather than their presence.
Path of exile has loot boxes, but the game isnt built around it, so it doesnt bother me.
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-12-27
That law is clearly made against people who run and organize gambling and own stuff like slot machines. Their intention was never to punish participants to a lottery for gambling.
EDIT: This means that the definition of gambling device is not meant to define whether something is gambling or not. It's just for the definition of where you'll be punished because you had something meant for running or organizing gambling.
Would you prefer something more along the fertility clinics that many people use with end results that are still based on chance ?
Your logic on the egg could be applied to a lootboxs. Your not buying what will be when you open it. If the end results don't matter then your just buying a lootbox and you got exactly what you paid for.
If you want a baby chicken you have the right to go out and buy one. But that does not give you the right to make that choice for someone else. If someone is trying to sell you something you don't want you have every right to not buy it and go somewhere else.