I stick to my guns that Lockboxes are not gambling
So you dismiss the science that shows loot boxes have the exact same effect on the brain that slot machines do? Your cool with modern video games encouraging kids to develop gambling addictions?
Actually, as a 43 year old gamer, with 35 years+ of gaming, yes I do, as EVERYONE is different. I've been playing games which have involved killing and fighting (some of which also have 'gambling) for a very, very long time. I'm not a murderer, I don't go round beating up people, I don't go round stealing cars, and I don't gamble on any machines at all! Giving a child a present would also illicit the same response that you claim, as does Cryptic giving freebies, which some players complain about as not being 'good enough'! The responsibility lies with the parents of children, to teach discipline and to not allow purchases at all, and STO clearly states this game is 13 yrs plus. You're implying that Magic and Pokemon are gambling, which they legally are not and has been proven in a court of law, and with those games, you do need to buy more to be competitive, and also, you, by association, implying that the C-Store is having the same effect in the case of Space Barbie. There is zero need to do so in STO. The lockbox principles are completely different for STO than for Magic, Pokemon et all, that require you buy more to progress or need to compete, which I re-iterate, STO does not.
I'll add this isn't a 'gambling' addicition either. It's a supposed addiction to buying things, just like a wife buying 200 pairs of shoes she clearly doesn't need!
"You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
> @meimeitoo said:
> markhawkman wrote: »
>
> IF legislation actually gets written... It'll probably get written as some sort of one-size-fits-all-badly thing and how much it impacts any individual game will be questionable.
>
>
>
>
>
> I doubt it, honestly. Sure, all loot boxes may get deemed gamble boxes, but any half-way decent law would categorize them by 'severity', so to speak. so, you'll likely get 'Type A', 'Type B', 'Type C' gamble boxes, where the STO lock box may fall into any of those categories (each with different requirement loot box makers will have to comply to).
>
> As that Senator lady said though, you really don't want the FCA to step in, as they tend to regulate rigorously. That (lock box-)ship may have already sailed, though.
Name any 1 "half-way decent law" as you term it & I guarantee there are people being screwed over by it needlessly.
Probably. Even that Senator lady said the ESRB would be far better off self-regulating properly, precisely because when the FCA comes in with legislation (meaning the ESRB has *not* been able to handle things properly themselves), it means more stringent rules were needed.
That's a far stretch from a 'one-size-fits-all' law, though.
I stick to my guns that Lockboxes are not gambling
So you dismiss the science that shows loot boxes have the exact same effect on the brain that slot machines do? Your cool with modern video games encouraging kids to develop gambling addictions?
Actually, as a 43 year old gamer, with 35 years+ of gaming, yes I do, as EVERYONE is different. I've been playing games which have involved killing and fighting (some of which also have 'gambling) for a very, very long time. I'm not a murderer, I don't go round beating up people, I don't go round stealing cars, and I don't gamble on any machines at all!
The difference between pretending to shoot guns at people and actually shooting guns at people is self-evident. One is real, the other is not.
The difference between spending money on lockboxes and spending money on slot machines however is not that one is real and the other isn't. Both are real ways to spend money.
Hence a comparison to "video games don't turn me into a murderer" is flawed. The point is that the same thing done in the game is the same thing that we forbid kids from doing elsewhere.
You're implying that Magic and Pokemon are gambling, which they legally are not and has been proven in a court of law, and with those games
In your country perhaps. It doesn'T have to apply to every country. Even then it doesn't have to apply all the time, if new evidence is found.
However, there are still strong differences between Magic and Pokemon and lockboxes. An infinite amount of lockboxes can be produced, at no cost to the provider, with no additional effort of the provider. You can easily spend 200 Dollars on lockboxes in 5 minutes of STO. And that includes the complete experience of the lockbox, not just the "well, in 3 days my shipment of magic cards can arrive, and I can see whether I got that super-rare card I hoped for" if you put in an online order, but with the immediate feedback whether you got that super-rate lockbox item, and if you don't, you can simply continue.
The instant (non)gratification is likely to factor in heavily into the addictiveness of lockbox gambling vs Magic or Pokémon.
Name any 1 "half-way decent law" as you term it & I guarantee there are people being screwed over by it needlessly.
This is stretching the original scope of the thread a bit, but let's go for it.
You will of course find an example. Even ignoring different opinions on what is correct and what is incorrect, there is only one way to avoid (a) people (or companies or ...) not getting the things they deserve/being punished while at the same time (b) others are getting some benefits or are not being punished despite by general consensus it shouldn't be like that.
This way is either allowing everything or forbidding everything. And it will only get rid of one of the two problems. This "one size fits all" approach however is in most cases plain silly, and often leads to examples like in this very thread "If you ban lockboxes you must also ban Dabo" or "If you see no problem with lockboxes you don't recognize gambling addiction".
There has to be, and will be if implemented, a kind of sliding scale. Where exactly it tips will be disputable, and probably be wrong from your point of view, or my point of view, or Joe-from-the-Street's point of view, but you can and should differentiate. Slippery slope (and this doesn't refer to azrael but to some other comments in here) really isn't the main issue.
My mother was an epohh and my father smelled of tulaberries
You're implying that Magic and Pokemon are gambling
Actually, I've stated that TCGs are the one category I hope will not be impacted by any legislation, because unlike loot boxes almost everything in a pack is valuable to a specific deck type. For example, in Hearthstone some of the most impactful cards have been of the common rarity.
I'll add this isn't a 'gambling' addicition either. It's a supposed addiction to buying things, just like a wife buying 200 pairs of shoes she clearly doesn't need!
Are you saying you don't believe gambling addiction is real? People have lost everything because they couldn't stop gambling, and while it's on adults to know their limits and seek help if needed kids do not have the maturity for all that. And since the games current adults grew up with didn't have these systems I wouldn't be surprised if most parents don't even know about loot boxes.
The verbage I've heard used by a lawmaker in Hawaii (don't remember his exact title unfortunately) is that lootbox refers to any system where real world money is used in a video game to obtain randomized rewards. That broad definition would hit CoD, SW:BF2, STO, SWTOR, and even TCGs like Hearthstone.
I think this is probably an overly broad definition, given how many things in video games are fundamentally random. If a game sells a dungeon ticket, which you then go in and beat up a monster for a random item...is that a lootbox?
Honestly they'll have to be broad like that, otherwise companies like EA will just find a loophole and carry on with business as usual.
You're implying that Magic and Pokemon are gambling
Actually, I've stated that TCGs are the one category I hope will not be impacted by any legislation, because unlike loot boxes almost everything in a pack is valuable to a specific deck type. For example, in Hearthstone some of the most impactful cards have been of the common rarity.
I'll add this isn't a 'gambling' addicition either. It's a supposed addiction to buying things, just like a wife buying 200 pairs of shoes she clearly doesn't need!
Are you saying you don't believe gambling addiction is real? People have lost everything because they couldn't stop gambling, and while it's on adults to know their limits and seek help if needed kids do not have the maturity for all that. And since the games current adults grew up with didn't have these systems I wouldn't be surprised if most parents don't even know about loot boxes.
The verbage I've heard used by a lawmaker in Hawaii (don't remember his exact title unfortunately) is that lootbox refers to any system where real world money is used in a video game to obtain randomized rewards. That broad definition would hit CoD, SW:BF2, STO, SWTOR, and even TCGs like Hearthstone.
I think this is probably an overly broad definition, given how many things in video games are fundamentally random. If a game sells a dungeon ticket, which you then go in and beat up a monster for a random item...is that a lootbox?
Honestly they'll have to be broad like that, otherwise companies like EA will just find a loophole and carry on with business as usual.
Apologies, the wording got lost in translation with supposed (sup-pos-ed rather than sup-posed). I was trying highlight the type of addiction. However, for a child to buy something with real cash in-game, they need to have access to a debit/credit card, for which the ages to actually have one are 16 and 18 in most countries. Parents are legally responsible for their child's actions upto the age of 18 in most countries, with minors being held criminally responsible from the age of 10 in the UK for crimes. My Parents did a great job, despite being working class folks at teaching me the value of money and the consequences of being irresponsible, and yes I know some parents are not as vigilant, but you cannot lay sole responsibility of what a child does on a gaming company. Cryptic highlights quite clearly in it's T&C's the age rating of this game, and it's not their fault people refuse to read them properly. Ignorance of the T&C's is not a usable defence.
The only reason people in STO have their backs up so much, is because they didn't win the top-tier prize in a guaranteed prize box. If, and I mean if there is a legal challenge, and as I understand Gambling Law (Yes, I did study Law and continue to read up on it), the most people can hope for is published odds, because the simple fact is, and I repeat this often, nobody is forced to open those boxes as progression is not prevented, unlike what EA did, and when I buy keys for boxes, I am rewarding Cryptic for their work, whilst winning a couple of ships out of the 60 or so key's I buy, and making alot of EC if I don't. So I don't consider STO's lockboxes legally gambling as I ALWAYS win something.
And the other thing that's in Cryptic's favour, Keys can be bought with EC, which is a 'free, earned in-game' resource, Zen likewise with Dil. So there is sufficient in-game option to purchase a premium item without having to spend real-cash. Had there been only a real cash option to buy keys, then my opinion might have been swayed, but only if progression was locked to the boxes, but even then I would not consider it gambling still. I would consider that as 'extortion' a la EA.
"You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
So I don't consider STO's lockboxes legally gambling as I ALWAYS win something.
And the other thing that's in Cryptic's favour, Keys can be bought with EC, which is a 'free, earned in-game' resource, Zen likewise with Dil. So there is sufficient in-game option to purchase a premium item without having to spend real-cash. Had there been only a real cash option to buy keys, then my opinion might have been swayed, but only if progression was locked to the boxes, but even then I would not consider it gambling still. I would consider that as 'extortion' a la EA.
I would have to agree with this. Thanks to STO having multiple ways of getting C-Store stuff, it is actually possible to not spend a dime on the game and get not only Lockbox stuff, but high end C-Store stuff as well. AND you ALWAYS get SOMETHING out of the lockbox. People save up those VIP mining tokens for a rainy day too. And there's always someone out there who can use the mark bonus pools.
I actually bought my Kelvin Connie and Prototype Dread with ECs. Literally the only top prize ship I ever one in all my years of playing STO... was a Tholian Tarantula. Everything else has been either gifted or ground out.
Another game that does the lockbox system right is Team Fortress 2. Other than some of the tracker components... practically EVERYTHING in the box can be obtained via alternate means.
random drop
bought from the Mann Co. Store directly
Crafted
I mean... there is also literally NO gameplay benefit to any weapon other than "it feels good to you and your playstyle". So you have an Unusual Sydney Sleeper? Ok... no stat difference between that and my bog standard Sydney Sleeper. Nice minigun... it has the same gameplay stats as my kill tracking Strange Minigun!
The verbage I've heard used by a lawmaker in Hawaii (don't remember his exact title unfortunately) is that lootbox refers to any system where real world money is used in a video game to obtain randomized rewards. That broad definition would hit CoD, SW:BF2, STO, SWTOR, and even TCGs like Hearthstone.
I think this is probably an overly broad definition, given how many things in video games are fundamentally random. If a game sells a dungeon ticket, which you then go in and beat up a monster for a random item...is that a lootbox?
Technically, yes, some people would see it that way. As covered in many T&C's, any purchase in a game (such as STO), doesn't mean that a person owns anything. They are buying the 'license' to use said item. It's the same language that covers a film or other media, be it physical or digital, hence why you are not allowed to 'publicly' show films or play music...without a license to do so, and that license costs alot more. In STO, buying a Key is exactly the same as buying a ship, and there are people who own every ship in the C-Store, which means they have spent thousands.....are they considered gamblers?? The process for buying either is exactly the same, and then we have those that throw away hundreds on keys, and are actively encouraged to do so, just to buy EC to buy the ship off another player, thereby actually losing way more benefit than if they actually used the keys to open boxes! I refuse point blank to buy keys just to sell for EC, as I know I will benefit by multitudes more if I use those keys myself to open boxes. 1 ship (that's it) for $200's worth of keys, or open 200 boxes and get a ton of stuff (possibly 2 or 3 ships) that I can benefit from and/or resell. That's a no-brainer, and I know exactly my limit and what I'm doing.
"You don't want to patrol!? You don't want to escort!? You don't want to defend the Federation's Starbases!? Then why are you flying my Starships!? If you were a Klingon you'd be killed on the spot, but lucky for you.....you WERE in Starfleet. Let's see how New Zealand Penal Colony suits you." Adm A. Necheyev.
Comments
Actually, as a 43 year old gamer, with 35 years+ of gaming, yes I do, as EVERYONE is different. I've been playing games which have involved killing and fighting (some of which also have 'gambling) for a very, very long time. I'm not a murderer, I don't go round beating up people, I don't go round stealing cars, and I don't gamble on any machines at all! Giving a child a present would also illicit the same response that you claim, as does Cryptic giving freebies, which some players complain about as not being 'good enough'! The responsibility lies with the parents of children, to teach discipline and to not allow purchases at all, and STO clearly states this game is 13 yrs plus. You're implying that Magic and Pokemon are gambling, which they legally are not and has been proven in a court of law, and with those games, you do need to buy more to be competitive, and also, you, by association, implying that the C-Store is having the same effect in the case of Space Barbie. There is zero need to do so in STO. The lockbox principles are completely different for STO than for Magic, Pokemon et all, that require you buy more to progress or need to compete, which I re-iterate, STO does not.
I'll add this isn't a 'gambling' addicition either. It's a supposed addiction to buying things, just like a wife buying 200 pairs of shoes she clearly doesn't need!
Probably. Even that Senator lady said the ESRB would be far better off self-regulating properly, precisely because when the FCA comes in with legislation (meaning the ESRB has *not* been able to handle things properly themselves), it means more stringent rules were needed.
That's a far stretch from a 'one-size-fits-all' law, though.
The difference between pretending to shoot guns at people and actually shooting guns at people is self-evident. One is real, the other is not.
The difference between spending money on lockboxes and spending money on slot machines however is not that one is real and the other isn't. Both are real ways to spend money.
Hence a comparison to "video games don't turn me into a murderer" is flawed. The point is that the same thing done in the game is the same thing that we forbid kids from doing elsewhere.
In your country perhaps. It doesn'T have to apply to every country. Even then it doesn't have to apply all the time, if new evidence is found.
However, there are still strong differences between Magic and Pokemon and lockboxes. An infinite amount of lockboxes can be produced, at no cost to the provider, with no additional effort of the provider. You can easily spend 200 Dollars on lockboxes in 5 minutes of STO. And that includes the complete experience of the lockbox, not just the "well, in 3 days my shipment of magic cards can arrive, and I can see whether I got that super-rare card I hoped for" if you put in an online order, but with the immediate feedback whether you got that super-rate lockbox item, and if you don't, you can simply continue.
The instant (non)gratification is likely to factor in heavily into the addictiveness of lockbox gambling vs Magic or Pokémon.
Fixedsomebrokenquoteseditmonsterpleaseletthispostlive
This is stretching the original scope of the thread a bit, but let's go for it.
You will of course find an example. Even ignoring different opinions on what is correct and what is incorrect, there is only one way to avoid (a) people (or companies or ...) not getting the things they deserve/being punished while at the same time (b) others are getting some benefits or are not being punished despite by general consensus it shouldn't be like that.
This way is either allowing everything or forbidding everything. And it will only get rid of one of the two problems. This "one size fits all" approach however is in most cases plain silly, and often leads to examples like in this very thread "If you ban lockboxes you must also ban Dabo" or "If you see no problem with lockboxes you don't recognize gambling addiction".
There has to be, and will be if implemented, a kind of sliding scale. Where exactly it tips will be disputable, and probably be wrong from your point of view, or my point of view, or Joe-from-the-Street's point of view, but you can and should differentiate. Slippery slope (and this doesn't refer to azrael but to some other comments in here) really isn't the main issue.
Actually, I've stated that TCGs are the one category I hope will not be impacted by any legislation, because unlike loot boxes almost everything in a pack is valuable to a specific deck type. For example, in Hearthstone some of the most impactful cards have been of the common rarity.
Are you saying you don't believe gambling addiction is real? People have lost everything because they couldn't stop gambling, and while it's on adults to know their limits and seek help if needed kids do not have the maturity for all that. And since the games current adults grew up with didn't have these systems I wouldn't be surprised if most parents don't even know about loot boxes.
Honestly they'll have to be broad like that, otherwise companies like EA will just find a loophole and carry on with business as usual.
Apologies, the wording got lost in translation with supposed (sup-pos-ed rather than sup-posed). I was trying highlight the type of addiction. However, for a child to buy something with real cash in-game, they need to have access to a debit/credit card, for which the ages to actually have one are 16 and 18 in most countries. Parents are legally responsible for their child's actions upto the age of 18 in most countries, with minors being held criminally responsible from the age of 10 in the UK for crimes. My Parents did a great job, despite being working class folks at teaching me the value of money and the consequences of being irresponsible, and yes I know some parents are not as vigilant, but you cannot lay sole responsibility of what a child does on a gaming company. Cryptic highlights quite clearly in it's T&C's the age rating of this game, and it's not their fault people refuse to read them properly. Ignorance of the T&C's is not a usable defence.
The only reason people in STO have their backs up so much, is because they didn't win the top-tier prize in a guaranteed prize box. If, and I mean if there is a legal challenge, and as I understand Gambling Law (Yes, I did study Law and continue to read up on it), the most people can hope for is published odds, because the simple fact is, and I repeat this often, nobody is forced to open those boxes as progression is not prevented, unlike what EA did, and when I buy keys for boxes, I am rewarding Cryptic for their work, whilst winning a couple of ships out of the 60 or so key's I buy, and making alot of EC if I don't. So I don't consider STO's lockboxes legally gambling as I ALWAYS win something.
And the other thing that's in Cryptic's favour, Keys can be bought with EC, which is a 'free, earned in-game' resource, Zen likewise with Dil. So there is sufficient in-game option to purchase a premium item without having to spend real-cash. Had there been only a real cash option to buy keys, then my opinion might have been swayed, but only if progression was locked to the boxes, but even then I would not consider it gambling still. I would consider that as 'extortion' a la EA.
I would have to agree with this. Thanks to STO having multiple ways of getting C-Store stuff, it is actually possible to not spend a dime on the game and get not only Lockbox stuff, but high end C-Store stuff as well. AND you ALWAYS get SOMETHING out of the lockbox. People save up those VIP mining tokens for a rainy day too. And there's always someone out there who can use the mark bonus pools.
I actually bought my Kelvin Connie and Prototype Dread with ECs. Literally the only top prize ship I ever one in all my years of playing STO... was a Tholian Tarantula. Everything else has been either gifted or ground out.
Another game that does the lockbox system right is Team Fortress 2. Other than some of the tracker components... practically EVERYTHING in the box can be obtained via alternate means.
I mean... there is also literally NO gameplay benefit to any weapon other than "it feels good to you and your playstyle". So you have an Unusual Sydney Sleeper? Ok... no stat difference between that and my bog standard Sydney Sleeper. Nice minigun... it has the same gameplay stats as my kill tracking Strange Minigun!
Technically, yes, some people would see it that way. As covered in many T&C's, any purchase in a game (such as STO), doesn't mean that a person owns anything. They are buying the 'license' to use said item. It's the same language that covers a film or other media, be it physical or digital, hence why you are not allowed to 'publicly' show films or play music...without a license to do so, and that license costs alot more. In STO, buying a Key is exactly the same as buying a ship, and there are people who own every ship in the C-Store, which means they have spent thousands.....are they considered gamblers?? The process for buying either is exactly the same, and then we have those that throw away hundreds on keys, and are actively encouraged to do so, just to buy EC to buy the ship off another player, thereby actually losing way more benefit than if they actually used the keys to open boxes! I refuse point blank to buy keys just to sell for EC, as I know I will benefit by multitudes more if I use those keys myself to open boxes. 1 ship (that's it) for $200's worth of keys, or open 200 boxes and get a ton of stuff (possibly 2 or 3 ships) that I can benefit from and/or resell. That's a no-brainer, and I know exactly my limit and what I'm doing.