This is interesting

soulforger · May 2019

Today, on the 8th, a Senator in the US has introduced a Bill, that if passed, would make "loot boxes", "pay-2-win", and other such things banned from games that are either aimed at children, or, are aimed at a wider range of players, yet, let children par-take in micro-transactions.

Btw, before a certain someone (or others that think this way) comes and says "Lock boxes are not loot boxes!" With how the Bill words it, they would be considered to fall under this rule. As it is being aimed at micro-transactions that offer random or partially random rewards to players. And yes, due to the fact that keys are bought using currency normally bought with real money, CO/STO/NWO's boxes would fall under this ruling.

Now, the bill is truly aimed more at games that are aimed at children, yet, allows for targeting games that are aimed at a more general player base. For the most part, games that are designed 100% for Adults (doesn't mean games that are just labeled M for mature mind you, but, games TRULY aimed at adults, games with excessive amounts of swearing, gore, nudity/sex, etc), will not be affected by this bill.

Companies of games that are affected by this bill would be treated as if performing "unfair trade practices".

All the bill would even authorize State Attorney Generals to file suits on behalf of the residents of their states.

But, of course, this is only going to happen if the Bill passes.

With that possibility in mind, what would Cryptic/PWI have to do to not get in trouble? How badly would this game be affected? What do you think the chances are of the bill passing?

Mind you, I am not asking to debate if lock boxes are or are not gambling, that is not the actual purpose of the Bill, it isn't there to punish gambling, but, rather, randomly rewarded micro-transactions and pay-2-win stuff in games either aimed for kids, or for wider groups of players, so, whether or not they are gambling, is a moot point for this bill.

nepht · May 2019

soulforger wrote: »

Today, on the 8th, a Senator in the US has introduced a Bill, that if passed, would make "loot boxes", "pay-2-win", and other such things banned from games that are either aimed at children, or, are aimed at a wider range of players, yet, let children par-take in micro-transactions.

It will lead to most mmos games when they are released in the USA getting and adults only rating. As mmos are mostly played by adults it wont effect these games too badly. Trash like Fortnite and Overwatch will be in trouble though.

spinnytop · May 2019

Easy solution: All video games that aren't expressly aimed at kids ( Club Penguin and its ilk... ) are now 13+ only, so if a kid gets in there and buys a lockbox, they're doing so illegally and the game company gets to sue their parents \o/

Or even better: No more video games for kids, universal law that bans kids from playing video games. They don't appreciate em, and they can entertain themselves by eating dirt so they don't need em anyway. Ban the squeekers! \o/

Or I dunno.. probably nothing. I'm sure a bunch of salty CoXers will make a big stink and demand somebody come after CO, but I doubt any state attorney general would be interested. They'd be too busy going after Overporn and Star Wars Bumblestump.

kamokami · May 2019

soulforger wrote: »

With that possibility in mind, what would Cryptic/PWI have to do to not get in trouble?

Nothing

pantagruel01 · May 2019

The proposed bill actually bans sale of loot boxes in games targeted at minors (CO isn't really) and penalizes all-ages games that knowingly permit them to be sold to minors (could be a problem). However, without knowing whether it will even pass, or in what form it will pass if it does, it's premature to speculate.

jonsills · May 2019

It also defines "loot boxes" a bit more narrowly than the OP presents; they are defined as boxes which, when a fee is paid to unlock them, will present the player with an item otherwise impossible to get that will give them a significant advantage in gameplay. This doesn't really apply to anything Cryptic is doing, so once again concern here is overblown.

lezard21 · May 2019

If I owned a MMO that was rated for all ages, I would just give a random NPC a cigarette or have it say "Hell". Done! Game is now PG rated (or whatever rating videogames used), you can't sue me

pantagruel01 · May 2019

lezard21 wrote: »

If I owned a MMO that was rated for all ages, I would just give a random NPC a cigarette or have it say "Hell". Done! Game is now PG rated (or whatever rating videogames used), you can't sue me

Unlikely that would matter. It's probably just a general ban on selling lootboxes to minors, and of course games that don't have any minors don't have to worry.

wingedkagouti · May 2019

jonsills wrote: »

It also defines "loot boxes" a bit more narrowly than the OP presents; they are defined as boxes which, when a fee is paid to unlock them, will present the player with an item otherwise impossible to get that will give them a significant advantage in gameplay. This doesn't really apply to anything Cryptic is doing, so once again concern here is overblown.

With certain vehicles and powers being gated by lock boxes (either directly, via vouchers or Drifter Salvage), an argument could be made that they do fall under this definition. Back when Legion gear was the best gear and only obtainable through lock boxes they definitely would have.

What happens long term is going to depend on whether the bill passes into law and if it does, what the actual text ends up being. Also note that if you're not old enough to vote you're a minor in the eyes of the law, 17 years old is still a minor when talking law. Since Champions Online is not rated Adults Only it is considered to be marketed towards minors and could potentially fall foul of whatever this law ends up looking like.

flyingfinn · May 2019

mithrosnomore · May 2019

wingedkagouti wrote: »

With certain vehicles and powers being gated by lock boxes (either directly, via vouchers or Drifter Salvage), an argument could be made that they do fall under this definition. Back when Legion gear was the best gear and only obtainable through lock boxes they definitely would have.

What happens long term is going to depend on whether the bill passes into law and if it does, what the actual text ends up being. Also note that if you're not old enough to vote you're a minor in the eyes of the law, 17 years old is still a minor when talking law. Since Champions Online is not rated Adults Only it is considered to be marketed towards minors and could potentially fall foul of whatever this law ends up looking like.

What argument can be made for lockbox vehicles?

They aren't any better than non-lockbox vehicles. No one said that a game couldn't sell items directly, so the vehicles in the C-store, never mind the vehicles available through playing events, eliminate any lockbox vehicle considerations.

Or does the bill also say that loot boxes can not offer unique appearances?

What legion gear used to be is irrelevant. Is it the best gear now? No? Then it doesn't matter.

And in the end? I was thinking the same thing Lezard said; Just add an NPC smoking and/or drinking, add a minor curse word here or there, maybe even add a scantily clad NPCs to certain areas saying things like "looking for a good time, hero?", and change the rating of the game.

And anyway, what Senator? What bill? Source?

pantagruel01 · May 2019

wingedkagouti wrote: »

With certain vehicles and powers being gated by lock boxes (either directly, via vouchers or Drifter Salvage), an argument could be made that they do fall under this definition.

A bit depends on what 'significant' means (lockbox vehicles aren't any better than other tier 2 vehicles so not significant, powers and devices are less certain). It might be necessary to rearrange stores or add stuff to the z store, but it doesn't seem like an insurmountable problem.

soulforger · May 2019

nepht wrote: »

soulforger wrote: »

Today, on the 8th, a Senator in the US has introduced a Bill, that if passed, would make "loot boxes", "pay-2-win", and other such things banned from games that are either aimed at children, or, are aimed at a wider range of players, yet, let children par-take in micro-transactions.

It will lead to most mmos games when they are released in the USA getting and adults only rating. As mmos are mostly played by adults it wont effect these games too badly. Trash like Fortnite and Overwatch will be in trouble though.

That is something I believe will also happen. But, current games that are Rated T or lower, would most likely be affected.

spinnytop wrote: »

Easy solution: All video games that aren't expressly aimed at kids ( Club Penguin and its ilk... ) are now 13+ only, so if a kid gets in there and buys a lockbox, they're doing so illegally and the game company gets to sue their parents \o/

Or even better: No more video games for kids, universal law that bans kids from playing video games. They don't appreciate em, and they can entertain themselves by eating dirt so they don't need em anyway. Ban the squeekers! \o/

Or I dunno.. probably nothing. I'm sure a bunch of salty CoXers will make a big stink and demand somebody come after CO, but I doubt any state attorney general would be interested. They'd be too busy going after Overporn and Star Wars Bumblestump.

The system would include games that are 13+, for those games are rated T. The only games that would not be looked at (for the most part, unless it is proven a large number of kids play the game) are the ones rated M.

So, that wouldn't work.

kamokami wrote: »

soulforger wrote: »

With that possibility in mind, what would Cryptic/PWI have to do to not get in trouble?

Nothing

I'd like to agree, but, CO is not rated M. So, it would fall under the affects of the Bill.

pantagruel01 wrote: »

The proposed bill actually bans sale of loot boxes in games targeted at minors (CO isn't really) and penalizes all-ages games that knowingly permit them to be sold to minors (could be a problem). However, without knowing whether it will even pass, or in what form it will pass if it does, it's premature to speculate.

Early or not, one should always be ready for anything, not being prepared is the worst thing you can do. And, yes, if I was not clear on what the bill was doing, that was what I was trying to say the bill was doing. CO, is not an adult only game, thus, kids do play in it. Is there lots of kids? I doubt it. But, even so, they either exist in small numbers, or have.

jonsills wrote: »

It also defines "loot boxes" a bit more narrowly than the OP presents; they are defined as boxes which, when a fee is paid to unlock them, will present the player with an item otherwise impossible to get that will give them a significant advantage in gameplay. This doesn't really apply to anything Cryptic is doing, so once again concern here is overblown.

Not what I seen from the bill personally myself. You might be thinking of an older one, for I know from older arguments in the past years, that is what they were saying. Would like to know where you got that info from. I got my info from the senator himself. Also, that part is the part the cover for the pay-2-win. The bill goes after two things. General random rewards and pay-2-win stuff. So, not sure where you got your info from. Please share on that point.

lezard21 wrote: »

If I owned a MMO that was rated for all ages, I would just give a random NPC a cigarette or have it say "Hell". Done! Game is now PG rated (or whatever rating videogames used), you can't sue me

PG is still suited for and aimed at general age groups, thus would still fall under the Bill.

wingedkagouti wrote: »

jonsills wrote: »

It also defines "loot boxes" a bit more narrowly than the OP presents; they are defined as boxes which, when a fee is paid to unlock them, will present the player with an item otherwise impossible to get that will give them a significant advantage in gameplay. This doesn't really apply to anything Cryptic is doing, so once again concern here is overblown.

With certain vehicles and powers being gated by lock boxes (either directly, via vouchers or Drifter Salvage), an argument could be made that they do fall under this definition. Back when Legion gear was the best gear and only obtainable through lock boxes they definitely would have.

What happens long term is going to depend on whether the bill passes into law and if it does, what the actual text ends up being. Also note that if you're not old enough to vote you're a minor in the eyes of the law, 17 years old is still a minor when talking law. Since Champions Online is not rated Adults Only it is considered to be marketed towards minors and could potentially fall foul of whatever this law ends up looking like.

Correct. Still though, I want to see where he got his info.

flyingfinn wrote: »

Better to be a concerned Silly Billy than to find your ship sinking in the middle of the ocean with no life boats to save you. Better to be prepared with a plan.

mithrosnomore wrote: »

wingedkagouti wrote: »

With certain vehicles and powers being gated by lock boxes (either directly, via vouchers or Drifter Salvage), an argument could be made that they do fall under this definition. Back when Legion gear was the best gear and only obtainable through lock boxes they definitely would have.

What happens long term is going to depend on whether the bill passes into law and if it does, what the actual text ends up being. Also note that if you're not old enough to vote you're a minor in the eyes of the law, 17 years old is still a minor when talking law. Since Champions Online is not rated Adults Only it is considered to be marketed towards minors and could potentially fall foul of whatever this law ends up looking like.

What argument can be made for lockbox vehicles?

They aren't any better than non-lockbox vehicles. No one said that a game couldn't sell items directly, so the vehicles in the C-store, never mind the vehicles available through playing events, eliminate any lockbox vehicle considerations.

Or does the bill also say that loot boxes can not offer unique appearances?

What legion gear used to be is irrelevant. Is it the best gear now? No? Then it doesn't matter.

And in the end? I was thinking the same thing Lezard said; Just add an NPC smoking and/or drinking, add a minor curse word here or there, maybe even add a scantily clad NPCs to certain areas saying things like "looking for a good time, hero?", and change the rating of the game.

And anyway, what Senator? What bill? Source?

Did I not put the bill's name before? Well, if not, the bill is called: Protecting Children from Abusive Games Act, The Senator is Josh Hawley, (R-MO). Don't let the name fool. The bill would affect any game not rated M (meaning, CO would be affected). Also, don't let his video fool you either, for I think that is where someone got the idea of what the bill is doing from, despite the fact there is more to the bill, and his video was only talking about a small portion of it.

And no, Lezard's idea wouldn't work, to small. Maybe yours would, because you branched out on it more. But, I don't think such NPCs would be added.

soulforger · May 2019

pantagruel01 wrote: »

wingedkagouti wrote: »

With certain vehicles and powers being gated by lock boxes (either directly, via vouchers or Drifter Salvage), an argument could be made that they do fall under this definition.

A bit depends on what 'significant' means (lockbox vehicles aren't any better than other tier 2 vehicles so not significant, powers and devices are less certain). It might be necessary to rearrange stores or add stuff to the z store, but it doesn't seem like an insurmountable problem.

In my opinion, they should have always just sold the stuff in lock-boxes directly. But, they make more money this way.

spinnytop · May 2019

Also, you don't have to open lockboxes to get those things, you can just buy them off other players for in-game currency. From what I've seen, the games that sparked this controversy don't seem to have a player market so they only had one way to acquire these items.

Also, if the issue is kids buying stuff in video games, why the focus on lootboxes? Hell if your kid gets a hold of your credit card they could probably bankrupt you in any game with micro-transactions. Maybe what the law should say is "video games targeted at kids or that have general audiences aren't allowed to have micro-transactions at all". Why the focus on gambleboxes? Are lawmakers under the impression that kids will make stupid spending decisions only if gambling is involved?

markhawkman · May 2019

pantagruel01 wrote: »

The proposed bill actually bans sale of loot boxes in games targeted at minors (CO isn't really) and penalizes all-ages games that knowingly permit them to be sold to minors (could be a problem). However, without knowing whether it will even pass, or in what form it will pass if it does, it's premature to speculate.

My best guess is they add a check box to verify that you are at least 18 before spending actual money. Simple and reasonably effective.

This is interesting

Comments