Are Loot Boxes Gambling? What's your take on it.

[Wavergray]

4 minutes ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

 

Predatory gambling isn't defined by having the ability to trade or sell items.

Just because I use the words predatory and gambling in a statement does not mean i'm talking about whatever definition of predatory gambling you are using.

In this case predatory is used to describe the effect of the closed system, which preys upon people's inability to acquire items outside of the closed system.

In a open system people don't have to rely on the system to acquire the items, because they have the ability to use a third-party in order to acquire the items they may want.

However, loot boxes are still form of luck based gambling like rolling dice or playing poker for money.

Also goes without saying people don't have to participate in the system at all. Just don't play the game with loot boxes or play the game without touching the loot box system at all.

[ShadeSplit]

10 minutes ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

I made my point that loot boxes are gambling just like trade cards are gambling. You pointed out the differences between physical products and digital products. Said difference doesn't disprove the similarity I commented about.

 

Also, analogies are not about being the exact same in every aspect. Analogies are about comparing the similarities. 

 

No, your point was clearly that the situations are on the same level. If that was not the case, then it's your fault for wording your comment as you did.

 

Yes, everyone knows what an analogy is. Yours still doesn't make any sense.

[starcrunch061]

7 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

Yes you do. You probably haven’t looked for it, but it’s absolutely there. 

Agreed. I would be STUNNED if the information about payout versus take wasn’t public. 
 

13 minutes ago, ShadeSplit said:

 

If that wasn't the point of your comment, then you should have made the point you wanted to make instead. No one can read your mind. As it stands, you said "It's no more gambling than...", which is wrong.

 

If I’m being pedantic, I apologize, but I too don’t understand your designation.

 

Let’s take the following hypothetical: I have a dollar slot. You are guaranteed to receive a shiny quarter if you play. However, you might also receive an ounce of pure gold. Can I say that this isn’t gambling? After all, you are getting a physical product, with value. Further, you can always buy an ounce of pure gold if you want. 

[TJ_Solo]

Quote

In this case predatory is used to describe the effect of the closed system, which preys upon people's inability to acquire items outside of the closed system.

 

Well "predatory" is an adjective and in the context of your comment the only other word could attach to would have "gambling".

I've head of "predatory gambling" but you claim that isn't what you're referring to. What "predatory" system are you talking about and where is it defined?

2 minutes ago, ShadeSplit said:

 

No, your point was clearly that the situations are on the same level. If that was not the case, then it's your fault for wording your comment as you did.

 

Yes, everyone knows what an analogy is. Yours still doesn't make any sense.

 

Nope. You fail again.

[ShadeSplit]

2 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

Agreed. I would be STUNNED if the information about payout versus take wasn’t public. 
 

 

If I’m being pedantic, I apologize, but I too don’t understand your designation.

 

Let’s take the following hypothetical: I have a dollar slot. You are guaranteed to receive a shiny quarter if you play. However, you might also receive an ounce of pure gold. Can I say that this isn’t gambling? After all, you are getting a physical product, with value. Further, you can always buy an ounce of pure gold if you want. 

 

Read the rest of the comments. I would think everyone knows what gambling is at this point, so I'm not sure why anyone would need to argue over the definition of it. The point is that the two situations are not the same.

[starcrunch061]

11 minutes ago, ShadeSplit said:

Read the rest of the comments. I would think everyone knows what gambling is at this point, so I'm not sure why anyone would need to argue over the definition of it. The point is that the two situations are not the same.

Don’t be obtuse. You said some gobbledygook that because you get physical items from trading cards, and because you can buy cards individually, that the situation is not the same. That has nothing to do with the gambling aspect of the transaction, which is the whole point of the thread.

[Wavergray]

6 minutes ago, TJ_Solo said:

I've head of "predatory gambling" but you claim that isn't what you're referring to. What "predatory" system are you talking about and where is it defined?

First: you define "predatory gambling" since this seems to be the crux of your problem with my statement.

Second: The "predatory" system is, Call of Duty, Overwatch, Hearthstone, and ect... styled Lootboxes/Card packs.

[ShadeSplit]

3 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

Don’t be obtuse. You said some gobbledygook that because you get physical items from trading cards, and because you can buy cards individually, that the situation is not the same. That has nothing to do with the gambling aspect of the transaction, which is the whole point of the thread.

 

So we need 100+ posts arguing about the definition of the word gambling, and you think I'm being obtuse? Ridiculous.

[SasquatchSaul]

Gambling. While the monetary risk isnt as high it could be just as damaging to kids who only receive an allowance or even using their parents card. Needs strict guidelines to warn against as youre losing money in your own home while not earning anything (Like a monetary prize). Also needs a baked in option for the console to disable the feature in all games. 

[djb5f]

2 hours ago, funboy1246 said:

incorrect. with baseball and pokemon cards you are getting a physical item. something you can hold in your hand. some that has worth, albeit very little most of the time. loot boxes are fake. they have nothing in them that is truely tangible. you can't hold it in your hands. can't turn around and sell what you got for money (other than in game credits at best) not even remotely similar.

virtual items have value or else people would not spend millions (collectively) on Fortnite skins and the like.

 

In fact virtual items often have more value than physical items.  And many have sold virtual items including myself.  There is a good market for it.  

Edited July 5, 2020 by djb5f

[Upendo_Vitani]

I wish developers would stop with these loot box mechanics. Put more time into developing the actual game. It's gambling, and children have access to it, so yeah I don't think they're a good practice. I also don't like the idea of potentially spending a crap load of money, and still not getting the thing I want. And some of these games being pay to win basically.

Edited July 5, 2020 by Upendo_Vitani

[IncreaseDark]

11 hours ago, Cobby said:

It's still gambling, whether it's real money or in game, you're gambling your chances at earning something better. It's gambling.

 

Okey, hey guys. 

I don't know if this question is already put into this, but just in regard of this quote as an example I will ask this. 

 

Is than e.g. PS Plus gambling? If yes then loot boxes, too. If not then somebody should explain why loot boxes then. 

Ok for some the 2 free games are not of any interest and only care about playing online, but what about those other people for whom it is switched around? 

 

I buy PS plus for the free games and as a nice addition I can play online whenever I want. 

 

Is it gambling because I hope to get the best games every month? Because I don't care if I get shitty games for most of the times. Maybe it applies to the loot boxes as well. 

 

Please answer and thank you. Have a nice day

Edited July 5, 2020 by IncreaseDark

[starcrunch061]

This thread is nauseating to me, because people’s motivations are so transparent. 
 

Loot boxes are bad. They are cancer. You don’t like them. I don’t like them. We would all love to be rid of them. But that doesn’t mean you can make up stuff about “predatory gambling” and “closed systems” and the like.

 

And honestly, if governments crack down on this practice, good, because screw these companies. But let’s not pretend that anyone gives an ounce of feces for poor Johnny Everykid who’s at the mercy of mighty Gamblor. It’s a made-up bunch of nonsense.
 

It’s like I’m back in the 80s, where church marms who hate rock and roll music insist that Ozzy causes kids to commit suicide, or that D&D is a gateway to Satan worship. Won’t someone please think of the children?!?

[XchocomanX]

2 hours ago, djb5f said:

No more gambling than buying a physical pack of baseball/Pokémon/whatever cards.  Oh the horrors!

 

2 hours ago, TJ_Solo said:

It's no more gambling than buying a pack of trading cards from a store. The sudden amount of stupidity around video game gambling is staggering. 

 Took these people less than 24 hours to show up to defend what cannot be defended (With "irony"). Amazing, really. 

Fun Fact: Pokemon Red/Blue are rated as 12+ by Pegi 'cause gamblin' (https://www.igdb.com/games/pokemon-red/age_rating#:~:text=Age Rating for Pokémon Red&text=The content of this game,12 years and over only.) How come Fifa and NBA with their SuPrIsE MeChANics are Rated E? ( I bet it's 'cause MooooooOOOOOneYyyyYYY).

Besides the rotten apples, I'm happy to be in this forum with y'all amazing, intelligent peeps ?.

[Mattiechuu]

PS Plus isn't marketed that way. It's for playing online and cloud based storage, which don't require the RNG gods to be in your favour. The free games are a bonus. If you don't like the games we get, you can't then go "well hey, didn't get what I wanted, let me buy another subscription to PS Plus and see if I get the games I want this time,"

 

Loot boxes are absolutely gambling. It's mental that it took this long to begin regulating honestly. I keep seeing the statement that it doesn't have the ability to break the bank, but yes. Yes it really does. People saying it's parents fault for putting their details on their kids account are to blame as well. A lot of parents don't know much about gaming, but they shouldn't have to think the game they bought for their child with an age rating of 3, has the ability to drain thousands out of their bank accounts... If a game wants to include that, then fine, but they should be rated appropriately.

[Property_Damage]

A Rose by any other name is still a Rose

[djb5f]

13 minutes ago, XchocomanX said:

 

 Took these people less than 24 hours to show up to defend what cannot be defended (With "irony"). Amazing, really. 

Fun Fact: Pokemon Red/Blue are rated as 12+ by Pegi 'cause gamblin' (https://www.igdb.com/games/pokemon-red/age_rating#:~:text=Age Rating for Pokémon Red&text=The content of this game,12 years and over only.) How come Fifa and NBA with their SuPrIsE MeChANics are Rated E? ( I bet it's 'cause MooooooOOOOOneYyyyYYY).

Besides the rotten apples, I'm happy to be in this forum with y'all amazing, intelligent peeps .

Uh, you are supporting my argument.  If you consider buying physical packs of cards gambling (I don’t), then you can consider virtual packs and loot boxes to be gambling.  Same mechanic.

 

Generations have bought and enjoyed baseball cards, part of the fun is not knowing who you are going to get.  Now the nancies want to label that as gambling!  ?

 

 

[theSpirae]

I don't understand why people keep blaming devs and publishers for pushing loot boxes in. If you want to blame anyone, blame gamers for spending money on it. It really is as simple as that. Pople spending so much money on loot boxes are cancer that is destroying the gaming industry. 

[djb5f]

16 minutes ago, theSpirae said:

I don't understand why people keep blaming devs and publishers for pushing loot boxes in. If you want to blame anyone, blame gamers for spending money on it. It really is as simple as that. Pople spending so much money on loot boxes are cancer that is destroying the gaming industry. 

Tend to agree.  Consumers are equally culpable.  So thirsty for that next skin!

 

But there is an upside to people wasting money on cosmetics and such.  That money is used and reinvested into games to make gaming better.  A lot of the revenue from micro-transactions feeds R&D, etc.  So thank you person with no self-control, you are indirectly making gaming better for me.  ?

 

 

 

 

Edited July 5, 2020 by djb5f

[Wavergray]

20 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

Loot boxes are bad. They are cancer. You don’t like them. I don’t like them. We would all love to be rid of them. But that doesn’t mean you can make up stuff about “predatory gambling” and “closed systems” and the like.

If you are talking about me, not sure what you mean by making things up.
Is this your first time hearing about a closed system? i.e. a system where when you put something in nothing comes out?
Also I never said anything about predatory gambling. The closed system in this case can be seen as predatory since if you put money in you will not get anything that can be used outside the system.
Lootboxes are a form of gambling like IRL card packs and just like card packs they are not inherently predatory.

[Ric]

20 minutes ago, djb5f said:

Uh, you are supporting my argument.  If you consider buying physical packs of cards gambling (I don’t), then you can consider virtual packs and loot boxes to be gambling.  Same mechanic.

 

Generations have bought and enjoyed baseball cards, part of the fun is not knowing who you are going to get.  Now the nancies want to label that as gambling!  ?

 

 

 

This has been debunked so often, I can't believe this argument is still brought up.

1. In collectible cards without rarities (like foils), every card is printed the same amounts of time, thus giving equal opportunity to get each one. The publishers of these physical cards have no incentive of making a certain player more rare than another one. I used to collect those panini stickers that people love to bring up with this. I've completed almost every one I collected. Some kids have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a single Fifa player, and failed misserable, bankrupting their parents in the process. E for Everyone right? Well, mostly E for EA.
2. Virtual card packs are hidden from parents and predatory to kids. People know what physical cards are about. A lot of parents don't think about the card packs in games. They just thought they bought their kid a nice game.
3. Physical cards can be traded and/or sold (without it being against any sort of ToS that might get you banned). Sure, there may be online market places, and guess who get's a cut of every sale?
4. Your card collection isn't reset every year. Your Fifa card of Messi of 2017? Pretty much worthless forever. A 2017 physical baseball card of a player of similar status will probably be worth at least some money, and potentially a lot.
5. Odds of physical cards are very hard to manipulate once printed. Virtual ones can be changed on a whim.

Stop being naïeve. There's  a reason more and more places all over the world are starting to regulate the loot boxes/card packs.

Edited July 5, 2020 by Ric

[djb5f]

17 minutes ago, Ric said:

 

This has been debunked so often, I can't believe this argument is still brought up.

1. In collectible cards without rarities (like foils), every card is printed the same amounts of time, thus giving equal opportunity to get each one. I used to collect those panini stickers that people love to bring up with this. I've completed almost every one I collected. Some kids have spent thousands of dollars trying to get a single Fifa player, and failed misserable, bankrupting their parents in the process. E for Everyone right? Well, mostly E for EA.
2. Virtual card packs are hidden en predatory. People know what physical cards are about. A lot of parents don't think about the card packs in games. They just thought they bought their kid a nice game.
3. Physical cards can be traded and/or sold (without it being against any sort of ToS that might get you banned). Sure, there may be online market places, and guess who get's a cut of every sale?
4. Your card collection isn't reset every year. Your Fifa card of Messi of 2017? Pretty much worthless forever. A 2017 physical baseball card of a player of similar status will probably be worth a lot.
5. Odds of physical cards are very hard to manipulate once printed. Virtual ones can be changed on a whim.

Stop being naïeve. There's  a reason more and more places all over the world are starting to regulate the loot boxes/card packs.

They are being regulated partially because people are financially irresponsible and lack self-control.  But that is a different argument.  It applies just as much to people wasting thousands of dollars on in-game cosmetics where they know exactly what they are getting.  Or people buying hundreds or thousands of extra games to add to their backlog but never play.  It does not make it any safer/better.

 

Many of these games label the contents of the packs or odds of pulling certain tier players.  NHL and UFC (both EA Sports) do and I imagine others will follow (those that have not).  My guess is that FIFA already does but I don’t play that.

 

Virtual cards you get from packs can all be traded on the Auction House for virtual coins (which are also awarded just from playing the game) and you can target whichever players you want in the Auction House specifically.  So it is not like you are ever stuck with certain cards.  They are completely transferable.

 

 

 

Edited July 5, 2020 by djb5f

[Ric]

6 minutes ago, djb5f said:

They are being regulated partially because people are financially irresponsible and lack self-control.  But that is a different argument.  It applies just as much to people wasting thousands of dollars on in-game cosmetics where they know exactly what they are getting.  It does not make it any safer/better.

 

Many of these games label the contents of the packs or odds of pulling certain tier players.  NHL and UFC (both EA Sports) do and I imagine others will follow (those that have not).  My guess is that FIFA already does but I don’t play that.

 

Virtual cards you get from packs can all be traded on the Auction House for virtual coins (which are also awarded just from playing the game) and you can target whichever players you want in the Auction House specifically.  So it is not like you are ever stuck with certain cards.  They are completely transferable.
 

 

There are people with serious addiction issues that are being preyed upon by these companies. Yes, they lack self control, and they should be helped, not leeched upon from their own couch in the comfort of their own home.

 

They label the rarest players less than 1%. There's an infinity of options below 1%. Is it 0,1? 0,000001? It's all manipulative and means nothing. They're just throwing sand in people's eyes.

 

Last time I played ultimate team, ea took a percentage on every transfer.

[starcrunch061]

5 minutes ago, Ric said:

Last time I played ultimate team, ea took a percentage on every transfer.

You’ve mentioned this a couple of times. Are you bothered that there is no other marketplace? Because any online marketplace will take a cut on every transaction.

[djb5f]

4 minutes ago, Ric said:

 

Last time I played ultimate team, ea took a percentage on every transfer.

well yes, they have to do that or the Auction House would not function.  They aren’t doing it for greed but instead to help combat certain people trying to price lock players.  If there were no tax, it would be so easy to buy and flip and would lock casual players out.  
 

Even with a 5-10% tax, it is still pretty easy to flip for profit but with no tax, the AH would crumble.  Those with huge amount of coins would have a monopoly and dictate all player prices.