Lockboxes really aren't any different than packs of playing cards
Total and absolute BS. Physical items vs digital items. I can sell for real money or trade for other valuables with a trading card of value... over time can even trade it in for a car or something else of like value.
If I get tired of it I can resell it... so I get that super rare T6 ship.... After a few months of use, can I resell it? Trade it to someone else?
If they allowed folks to resell/trade used ships... lockboxes would be worthless and no longer a money sink for folks to gamble with.
LB is gambling. Anything that is based on RNG, odds is gambling. LB is pure evil because there is no guarantee of winning the top prize if you are super unlucky. Each box has the same odds regardless if it is your 1st box, or your 1 millionth box. Pure evil to me since this is a game, and the prizes has no intrinsic real world value... you can not sell the ship for real world money (without a ban coming your way). If each box you opened raised your odds and after a fixed number of boxes you are SURE to get the ship then it would be more fair in a game. If this was a game were RWM is used and can cash out, then it's no different than playing a game of chance at Vegas then that's fine and all. But it't not, it's a game for pure entertainment value with no way to "cash out" for real money, and all prizes has no value, cost is nothing since it is all digital with infinite supply.
Again about lockboxes? This isn't EA. In sto u have the option to skip boxes. There is nothing in it which you cannot play without. You can skip boxes (like discovery box), you can sell keys and buy items from boxes in auction.
The [Pen] Meta isnt on lockbox weapons, you don't need a lobi ship to play any content. You get 3 free ships a year, which you unlcok with some dailly minis. (yes it will cost forum rage posts, but every player enjoys sto on his/her own way).
Nothing in the box requires you to spend zen, nothing in the box is needed to play any of the content.
Sto is generous to playing gamers. And you can play thegame totally free.
Using adicts or children as an excuse or reason to shut down the game in your country because some people think they are so awesome and can beat te odss is weak. If you want to try to get that epic ship with 1 key, or expect that your justified to get a ship by opening masses of them, is not how the lockbox works.
Th f2p games in eu i cant play since the license forbids me to play a good version of the game (and avordable). Some games are so broken by item shops lottery that you love to hate the game. The model Arc uses is quite friendly, you can all you need in game for free. In the old days you unlocked things by gaming and using skills, and not by spending bucks. Theres the dil ex, the Exchange.
Im not saying i love lockboxes, but these are nothing compared to EA scams, or GF scams. Some people sponsor this game (again not me) by opening alot of these boxes, so you can play for free. Sub games are dying for a reason, and Sto is very friendly.
"Reports of our depression are vastly exaggerated." "Anyaway, we don't often see a sense of humor in Section 31."
That's not how this would turn out in Germany, no one, no person or agency of office here, would gain any money. This is truly about the concern for the minors.
That may be true, but I tend to be more cynical about government, hence my opinion.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
That's not how this would turn out in Germany, no one, no person or agency of office here, would gain any money. This is truly about the concern for the minors.
That may be true, but I tend to be more cynical about government, hence my opinion.
Well, when the money just isn't there, your opinion is demonstratably false.
I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I don't see anything demonstrated at all yet, as a ruling has yet to be made to my knowledge.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
I suspect the real issue on the topic in general is all the players that hate the model and find it exploitive, predatory and/or fun-killing.
When lock boxes were first introduced, ppl hated them; probably indeed because they were deemed exploitive, predatory and/or fun-killing. I hated them too. Gotta hand it to Gecko, though, the man knows how to make a business flourish; and, the money-grubbing despite, a lot of it has been visibly (and audibly, btw) poured back into the game, with lots new stuffz, cool voice actresses, etc. So, to-date, I would hate to see the lock box go, as it would likely mean the game itself were on its way out too.
In this specific case however, it's based on a study suggesting that there are structural similarities in business model and revenue numbers between traditional gambling enterprises and games utilizing lockboxes.
You can always count on you to cut thru all the BS, and simply reduce the matter to what it's simply really about.
My 2 cents: This has nothing to do with protecting children, as children don't see this sort of thing as gambling. To them it's more like Christmas. "What did I get this time?" Also, children don't have the resources to sink into it on a massive scale. Protecting children is an excuse. This is about adults, who cannot manage themselves, and seem more than happy to allow a government, any government, to do it for them.
Children are simply not adults. And the difference is not just in size. Children need protecting. Mostly by the parents; but society, as a whole (and not just 'governments'), has also decided, a long time ago, that it needs a role. So, society forbids children the consumption of alcohol, and we don't let them drive cars yet, etc. Often, ironically, precisely to protect the children FROM dumb parents. And we don't let children gamble, either (when RL money is involved). Why? Because it's generally deemed that children tend to be too impulsive, and not yet fully able to grasp the full consequences of their actions.
Any law to protect children from potentially harmful and/or addictive behavior, is really nothing more than the codification of the recognition that children aren't adults yet. Nothing more, nothing less.
P.S. And someone was going to say this, sooner or later, so it might as well be me: "OMG! Think of the children!!" :P
As has been said before, other things are considered "gambling" as well. Being considered "gambling" does not necessarily mean being considered "dangerous" or "illegal" here, however. It is important to understand that distinction.
What can (not must) make these a problem is the possible addictivity of the gamble and the amount and speed of money being paid by customers. So indeed, if a noticeable number of people start going into debt, paying hundreds of euros a week for Kinder eggs to get their smurf figurine, it may easily get controlled.
Things like Kinder Eggs, Cracker Jacks, prizes in cereal boxes and trading cards have been around for decades (if not longer). Why has there been little to nothing done about controlling them? The principal of how prizes are rewarded is exactly the same as lootboxes.
I answered that part already in the very text you were quoting: possible addiction and amount of money lost in a short time are possible criteria. And we're not talking "theoretically possible" but "how does it turn out in practice?" Thus why it took a study.
I never said there were any disgruntled players in this thread. I just find it interesting that there is no public outcry for other products which work exactly the same way and are specifically marketed toward children. Seems to me this latest case has little to do with protecting children and more about some disgruntled folk out there (not on these forums or in this thread) who cannot afford something they want in a lockbox due to players setting high prices.
I wasn't talking about this thread either. The whole issue at hand, i. e. a German agency possibly reacting on a study, has nothing to do with "cannot afford" players at all.
My 2 cents: This has nothing to do with protecting children, as children don't see this sort of thing as gambling. To them it's more like Christmas. "What did I get this time?" Also, children don't have the resources to sink into it on a massive scale. Protecting children is an excuse. This is about adults, who cannot manage themselves, and seem more than happy to allow a government, any government, to do it for them. (To be fair, I'm not singling out Germany, as I am well aware that this topic has broader implications beyond their borders.) If a government, any government, takes any action on this, it will be so they can get money from it for themselves in some fashion.
Again, no government is involved at all, so what a government may or may not gain from this isn't at stake. This is about an already existing agency looking at already existing laws in a different light due to possible new evidence.
As for "protecting children is an excuse": it may seem like that to you, but it most certainly isn't the case with gambling laws. As has been mentioned, it isn't the only point, but it is an important point. Here I think both in perception as in ideas how to handle an issue we see a huge cultural difference between the US and much of Europe. The US are way more of an "everybody is the architect of his own fortune - or downfall" society, while Europeans often have a more "we're in this together" mentality. Sure, we complain about (perceived or real) overregulation just as much as the next guy, but setting rules to prevent people from exploiting others doesn't seem as strange to us. A "European" counter question to your adults who cannot control themselves could be "So what would be bad about acknowledging the problem you have and asking for help? And what would be bad about helping each other and preventing problems like this to become an epidemic?"
(The preceding paragraph is meant more as a general explanation, not necessarily as pertinent to the subject at hand.)
Edit:repaired missing closing quote tag
My mother was an epohh and my father smelled of tulaberries
Well, as I said, it's my opinion, which of course is formed through my own personal biases and viewed through my own cultural lens. I'm sure many of the differing opinions in this thread are due to cultural differences more than anything else. It doesn't make any of it right or wrong, just different.
In the end, this subject will be, hopefully, decided using the simple, cold truth of legal definitions and the law without much of the emotional hand-wringing that can come along with it.
How Germany, and possibly later the EU, decides to handle this is of little consequence to me as an American, except where it may have a potential to influence our own lawmakers. As a member of THIS community, however, it is very concerning about how the future of THIS community may be effected, either positively or negatively.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
I think this is very suspect. Where has the public concern been for kinder eggs, trading cards, blind box toys of all kinds, cereal boxes with "special prizes", cracker jacks etc. etc.? Following the discussion here, these are all a form of gambling and all are marketed to minors, yet they have been around for decades?
How often do you want to repeat the very same question without acknowledging the answers already given? You may find them insufficient, and maybe justifiably so, but just repeating the same line does not make an argument.
Well, as I said, it's my opinion, which of course is formed through my own personal biases and viewed through my own cultural lens. I'm sure many of the differing opinions in this thread are due to cultural differences more than anything else. It doesn't make any of it right or wrong, just different.
In the end, this subject will be, hopefully, decided using the simple, cold truth of legal definitions and the law without much of the emotional hand-wringing that can come along with it.
How Germany, and possibly later the EU, decides to handle this is of little consequence to me as an American, except where it may have a potential to influence our own lawmakers. As a member of THIS community, however, it is very concerning about how the future of THIS community may be effected, either positively or negatively.
True, nothing here is inherently "right" or "wrong". I was most of the time only trying to explain, and in my understanding this holds for others like mustrum, soph, targ, meimei as well, what the story and what the "European understading" of it is. It may also be (read: it certainly is the case) that we have skewed views due to our own culture, and it may also be (read: see above) that we tend to argue for it, but neither of us on either side of the pond is capable to influence what will happen, but, and this is not so much directed at you but at other comments in this thread, we Europeans may just better understand what is going on because we live here, whether we like it or not.
(For the record: I like it)
My mother was an epohh and my father smelled of tulaberries
Sorry, I find it very suspect that all of a sudden there is this push to investigate whether lockboxes are "illegal" gambling when everything from trading cards and blind box toys to kinder eggs are apparently considered "legal" forms of gambling and always have been.
This is not what is being investigated, though.
A yet unpublished study found evidence that current business models in video games share characteristics of gambling. Based on that study it will be determined whether lootboxes will be defined as gambling or not. If that happens it doesn't mean anything is illegal, the process has to determine how these new gambling mechanics fit the current existing laws. This is for Germany at least more complicated than a simple "ban". There aren't even federal regulations for gambling, they're different for the 16 federal states of Germany. The states had a contract defining federal rules, but it wasn't extended and currently no valid contract is in effect. So all of that would mean nothing for the immediate future.
What is being investigated by the Landesmedienanstalten (state media authorities - 16 of them) is whether the way Lootboxes work and how they are advertised violates the federal youth protection contract because one part of this contract states that businesses aren't allowed to advertise their products at children and teenagers by exploiting their lack of experience or their naivety (§6 JMStV) - this has nothing to do with gambling first and foremost, it has to do with advertisement. The debate just happened to be fixated on the legal definition of gambling in Germany, but that's actually not what would primarily cause a ban of lootboxes.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I think this is very suspect. Where has the public concern been for kinder eggs, trading cards, blind box toys of all kinds, cereal boxes with "special prizes", cracker jacks etc. etc.? Following the discussion here, these are all a form of gambling and all are marketed to minors, yet they have been around for decades?
How often do you want to repeat the very same question without acknowledging the answers already given?
But no answer has been given, save to blindly ignore the fact that all of those are exactly parallel to the argument being presented in favor of considering STO lockboxes as "gambling". In fact, a better case can be made that Kinder Eggs and Cracker Jacks are gambling; the prizes involved have physical existence, and there are collectors who will pay you cash for some items (they aren't all present at the same rates, some being more rare than others, and in the case of Cracker Jacks some prizes were discontinued a decade or so back and fetch pretty good prices on eBay). Also, Kinder Eggs and the like can actually be purchased with cash money, so can (and often are!) bought by children, while STO keys can only be purchased online with ZEN (which can either be grinded for, or bought with a credit card - and possession of a credit card is generally considered online as prima facie evidence that the purchaser is an adult).
I mean, you can repeat the same statements over and over until the cows come home, but those statements do not address the above issue - instead, they dismiss it as absurd. Much as I dismiss the argument that STO lockboxes are "gambling" as absurd.
Sorry, I find it very suspect that all of a sudden there is this push to investigate whether lockboxes are "illegal" gambling when everything from trading cards and blind box toys to kinder eggs are apparently considered "legal" forms of gambling and always have been.
This is not what is being investigated, though.
A yet unpublished study found evidence that current business models in video games share characteristics of gambling. Based on that study it will be determined whether lootboxes will be defined as gambling or not. If that happens it doesn't mean anything is illegal, the process has to determine how these new gambling mechanics fit the current existing laws. This is for Germany at least more complicated than a simple "ban". There aren't even federal regulations for gambling, they're different for the 16 federal states of Germany. The states had a contract defining federal rules, but it wasn't extended and currently no valid contract is in effect. So all of that would mean nothing for the immediate future.
What is being investigated by the Landesmedienanstalten (state media authorities - 16 of them) is whether the way Lootboxes work and how they are advertised violates the federal youth protection contract because one part of this contract states that businesses aren't allowed to advertise their products at children and teenagers by exploiting their lack of experience or their naivety (§6 JMStV) - this has nothing to do with gambling first and foremost, it has to do with advertisement. The debate just happened to be fixated on the legal definition of gambling in Germany, but that's actually not what would primarily cause a ban of lootboxes.
Interesting. 10 pages and this is the first someone has seen fit to mention any of that. I'd say the debate has very deliberately been directed at the definition of gambling by those here who can actually read the source material.
This brings us back to what I said on the first page: "Nothing of any business importance is going to come out of it."
As for "protecting children is an excuse": it may seem like that to you, but it most certainly isn't the case with gambling laws.
Actually, here's a counter question: how often do children actually have enough money for underage gambling to be a problem?
I would say... not often. And that is why it's seen as an excuse. People are talking about writing laws to prevent a problem whose existence is dubious.
Interesting. 10 pages and this is the first someone has seen fit to mention any of that. I'd say the debate has very deliberately been directed at the definition of gambling by those here who can actually read the source material.
This brings us back to what I said on the first page: "Nothing of any business importance is going to come out of it."
Seriously, everyone in this thread can read the German original source - there is Google translate and it works fair enough.
As for the questions why people are discussing whether lootboxes are gambling and whether it's about protecting children or not, the headline and of the head paragraph of article read: "Country media institutions: Youth protector{s} check prohibition of {lootboxes}. {Lootboxes} as in Middleearth are gambling. This assesment comes from an investigation by the University of Hamburg. Now youth protection officers at the state media authorities are considering a ban of such elements."
For transparency: I did 3 minor edits, marked by {...}, to improve grammar and readability compapred to the Google translation; the meaning remains the same.
I also like to disagree with angrytarg's statement that "this has nothing to do with gambling first and foremost" and that considering lootboxes as gambling is "actually not what would would primarily cause a ban of lootboxes". In my understanding, advertisement may only become a problem - and may be used as a leverage for a potential ban - if it has been established that lootboxes are considered gambling by the defenition of the exisiting German laws.
Different views are welcome - IDIC
- edited post to mark the edits I made in the Google translation with {...} for full transparency.
Yes and no. Paragraph 6 of the JMStV (Youth Media State Contract) applies regardless of the gambling issue. A business of any kind is not allowed to advertise to children and teenagers by 'exploiting their lack of experience or gullibility' (naivetè). Now this is of course legalese since there are cohorts of marketing guys making a squealin heap of money by studying how to market for a adolescent mind, but the law applies whether it's gambling or shoes or cereals. It is the base for investigating concrete cases and judge them on that basis.
The gambling issue can work in conjuncture with this or the JMStV does on it's own. The latter case can theoretically lead to a ban of the practice while the gambling POV is unlikely to lead to a ban, it would - I think, lay Targ here, lead to the necessity of PWE (in our case) to adhere to the (currently defunct) Gambling State Contract. This might lead to a voluntary retreat from the German market since the effort of adhering to it (age verification, public advertisement restrictions) might be too big. But the government sided ban can only be issued on the youth protection case. And that - once again lay Targ grunting - can in my believe be averted by removing fly-bys, publishing the odds and maybe adding a disclaimer in the German localized text for something, I can't think of one. Licensed gambling, like the state lottery, need to have a disclaimer after each ad that gambling might lead to addictive behaviour and they link to a institution affected can find help.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Phones. And they should especially not waste their break on this xP
*editbecausefirumsdon'tknowemoji*
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Comments
Total and absolute BS. Physical items vs digital items. I can sell for real money or trade for other valuables with a trading card of value... over time can even trade it in for a car or something else of like value.
If I get tired of it I can resell it... so I get that super rare T6 ship.... After a few months of use, can I resell it? Trade it to someone else?
If they allowed folks to resell/trade used ships... lockboxes would be worthless and no longer a money sink for folks to gamble with.
LB is gambling. Anything that is based on RNG, odds is gambling. LB is pure evil because there is no guarantee of winning the top prize if you are super unlucky. Each box has the same odds regardless if it is your 1st box, or your 1 millionth box. Pure evil to me since this is a game, and the prizes has no intrinsic real world value... you can not sell the ship for real world money (without a ban coming your way). If each box you opened raised your odds and after a fixed number of boxes you are SURE to get the ship then it would be more fair in a game. If this was a game were RWM is used and can cash out, then it's no different than playing a game of chance at Vegas then that's fine and all. But it't not, it's a game for pure entertainment value with no way to "cash out" for real money, and all prizes has no value, cost is nothing since it is all digital with infinite supply.
The [Pen] Meta isnt on lockbox weapons, you don't need a lobi ship to play any content. You get 3 free ships a year, which you unlcok with some dailly minis. (yes it will cost forum rage posts, but every player enjoys sto on his/her own way).
Nothing in the box requires you to spend zen, nothing in the box is needed to play any of the content.
Sto is generous to playing gamers. And you can play thegame totally free.
Using adicts or children as an excuse or reason to shut down the game in your country because some people think they are so awesome and can beat te odss is weak. If you want to try to get that epic ship with 1 key, or expect that your justified to get a ship by opening masses of them, is not how the lockbox works.
Th f2p games in eu i cant play since the license forbids me to play a good version of the game (and avordable). Some games are so broken by item shops lottery that you love to hate the game. The model Arc uses is quite friendly, you can all you need in game for free. In the old days you unlocked things by gaming and using skills, and not by spending bucks. Theres the dil ex, the Exchange.
Im not saying i love lockboxes, but these are nothing compared to EA scams, or GF scams. Some people sponsor this game (again not me) by opening alot of these boxes, so you can play for free. Sub games are dying for a reason, and Sto is very friendly.
"Anyaway, we don't often see a sense of humor in Section 31."
That may be true, but I tend to be more cynical about government, hence my opinion.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I don't see anything demonstrated at all yet, as a ruling has yet to be made to my knowledge.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
When lock boxes were first introduced, ppl hated them; probably indeed because they were deemed exploitive, predatory and/or fun-killing. I hated them too. Gotta hand it to Gecko, though, the man knows how to make a business flourish; and, the money-grubbing despite, a lot of it has been visibly (and audibly, btw) poured back into the game, with lots new stuffz, cool voice actresses, etc. So, to-date, I would hate to see the lock box go, as it would likely mean the game itself were on its way out too.
You can always count on you to cut thru all the BS, and simply reduce the matter to what it's simply really about.
Children are simply not adults. And the difference is not just in size. Children need protecting. Mostly by the parents; but society, as a whole (and not just 'governments'), has also decided, a long time ago, that it needs a role. So, society forbids children the consumption of alcohol, and we don't let them drive cars yet, etc. Often, ironically, precisely to protect the children FROM dumb parents. And we don't let children gamble, either (when RL money is involved). Why? Because it's generally deemed that children tend to be too impulsive, and not yet fully able to grasp the full consequences of their actions.
Any law to protect children from potentially harmful and/or addictive behavior, is really nothing more than the codification of the recognition that children aren't adults yet. Nothing more, nothing less.
P.S. And someone was going to say this, sooner or later, so it might as well be me: "OMG! Think of the children!!" :P
I answered that part already in the very text you were quoting: possible addiction and amount of money lost in a short time are possible criteria. And we're not talking "theoretically possible" but "how does it turn out in practice?" Thus why it took a study.
I wasn't talking about this thread either. The whole issue at hand, i. e. a German agency possibly reacting on a study, has nothing to do with "cannot afford" players at all.
Again, no government is involved at all, so what a government may or may not gain from this isn't at stake. This is about an already existing agency looking at already existing laws in a different light due to possible new evidence.
As for "protecting children is an excuse": it may seem like that to you, but it most certainly isn't the case with gambling laws. As has been mentioned, it isn't the only point, but it is an important point. Here I think both in perception as in ideas how to handle an issue we see a huge cultural difference between the US and much of Europe. The US are way more of an "everybody is the architect of his own fortune - or downfall" society, while Europeans often have a more "we're in this together" mentality. Sure, we complain about (perceived or real) overregulation just as much as the next guy, but setting rules to prevent people from exploiting others doesn't seem as strange to us. A "European" counter question to your adults who cannot control themselves could be "So what would be bad about acknowledging the problem you have and asking for help? And what would be bad about helping each other and preventing problems like this to become an epidemic?"
(The preceding paragraph is meant more as a general explanation, not necessarily as pertinent to the subject at hand.)
Edit:repaired missing closing quote tag
In the end, this subject will be, hopefully, decided using the simple, cold truth of legal definitions and the law without much of the emotional hand-wringing that can come along with it.
How Germany, and possibly later the EU, decides to handle this is of little consequence to me as an American, except where it may have a potential to influence our own lawmakers. As a member of THIS community, however, it is very concerning about how the future of THIS community may be effected, either positively or negatively.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
How often do you want to repeat the very same question without acknowledging the answers already given? You may find them insufficient, and maybe justifiably so, but just repeating the same line does not make an argument.
True, nothing here is inherently "right" or "wrong". I was most of the time only trying to explain, and in my understanding this holds for others like mustrum, soph, targ, meimei as well, what the story and what the "European understading" of it is. It may also be (read: it certainly is the case) that we have skewed views due to our own culture, and it may also be (read: see above) that we tend to argue for it, but neither of us on either side of the pond is capable to influence what will happen, but, and this is not so much directed at you but at other comments in this thread, we Europeans may just better understand what is going on because we live here, whether we like it or not.
(For the record: I like it)
This is not what is being investigated, though.
A yet unpublished study found evidence that current business models in video games share characteristics of gambling. Based on that study it will be determined whether lootboxes will be defined as gambling or not. If that happens it doesn't mean anything is illegal, the process has to determine how these new gambling mechanics fit the current existing laws. This is for Germany at least more complicated than a simple "ban". There aren't even federal regulations for gambling, they're different for the 16 federal states of Germany. The states had a contract defining federal rules, but it wasn't extended and currently no valid contract is in effect. So all of that would mean nothing for the immediate future.
What is being investigated by the Landesmedienanstalten (state media authorities - 16 of them) is whether the way Lootboxes work and how they are advertised violates the federal youth protection contract because one part of this contract states that businesses aren't allowed to advertise their products at children and teenagers by exploiting their lack of experience or their naivety (§6 JMStV) - this has nothing to do with gambling first and foremost, it has to do with advertisement. The debate just happened to be fixated on the legal definition of gambling in Germany, but that's actually not what would primarily cause a ban of lootboxes.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I mean, you can repeat the same statements over and over until the cows come home, but those statements do not address the above issue - instead, they dismiss it as absurd. Much as I dismiss the argument that STO lockboxes are "gambling" as absurd.
This brings us back to what I said on the first page: "Nothing of any business importance is going to come out of it."
I would say... not often. And that is why it's seen as an excuse. People are talking about writing laws to prevent a problem whose existence is dubious.
My character Tsin'xing
http://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/2018/02/12/hawaii-news/bills-target-video-games-with-rewards-for-a-price/
1st bill - need to be 21 baby for games with microtransactions/loot boxes... government knows what is best
2nd bill - prominently label of games that feature micro-transactions/loot boxes & of need to disclose odds
Seriously, everyone in this thread can read the German original source - there is Google translate and it works fair enough.
As for the questions why people are discussing whether lootboxes are gambling and whether it's about protecting children or not, the headline and of the head paragraph of article read: "Country media institutions: Youth protector{s} check prohibition of {lootboxes}. {Lootboxes} as in Middleearth are gambling. This assesment comes from an investigation by the University of Hamburg. Now youth protection officers at the state media authorities are considering a ban of such elements."
For transparency: I did 3 minor edits, marked by {...}, to improve grammar and readability compapred to the Google translation; the meaning remains the same.
I also like to disagree with angrytarg's statement that "this has nothing to do with gambling first and foremost" and that considering lootboxes as gambling is "actually not what would would primarily cause a ban of lootboxes". In my understanding, advertisement may only become a problem - and may be used as a leverage for a potential ban - if it has been established that lootboxes are considered gambling by the defenition of the exisiting German laws.
Different views are welcome - IDIC
- edited post to mark the edits I made in the Google translation with {...} for full transparency.
The gambling issue can work in conjuncture with this or the JMStV does on it's own. The latter case can theoretically lead to a ban of the practice while the gambling POV is unlikely to lead to a ban, it would - I think, lay Targ here, lead to the necessity of PWE (in our case) to adhere to the (currently defunct) Gambling State Contract. This might lead to a voluntary retreat from the German market since the effort of adhering to it (age verification, public advertisement restrictions) might be too big. But the government sided ban can only be issued on the youth protection case. And that - once again lay Targ grunting - can in my believe be averted by removing fly-bys, publishing the odds and maybe adding a disclaimer in the German localized text for something, I can't think of one. Licensed gambling, like the state lottery, need to have a disclaimer after each ad that gambling might lead to addictive behaviour and they link to a institution affected can find help.
*editmonstersacrificesinceit'shardtotypeonaphonewithclovenhoovesxP*
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
*editbecausefirumsdon'tknowemoji*
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!