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

[Rune2303]

In all the honesty the lootbox situation as it is right now is too complex for a simple yes or no answer ... buuuuut if I had to boil it down to one of the two I would absolutely classify it as gambling. Yes I'm aware there are games out there which only offer cosmetic loot boxes and yes there is a difference between games that allow you to buy the boxes with actual real life currency and the ones that only allow you to buy them with in game made up currency earned through gameplay. I'm also aware there is a whole debate to be had over the "do loot boxes actually provide any sort of value in game or otherwise and are they perhaps more akin to old school collectible cards more so than actual gambling?".

 

Having said that though ... I personally hope they do end being classified as gambling simply because thats the only plausible solution I can see that might force game publishers to stop forcing them down our throats. Even if they don't I feel like there is a much better reason to remove loot boxes from gaming (Although I will admit a lot of people don't seem to share this sentiment with me, based on the profits loot boxes are raking in  ). They are a shitty mechanic that adds literally nothing to gaming as a whole

 

A least in my opinion I can't think of single game where I've thought to myself "Damn, this in game store which allows me to buy the exact item that I want for a set amount of money is great, but I wish there was some way I could let the game pick out an item at random for me and just hope its the one I actually want and not one of the ones that would otherwise literally not be worth even buying for a dollar"

 

Now I'm not even that hot on the whole idea of in game stores filled with more or less worthless items like blue or green gun skins rather than actual expansions or size able dlc's but if I have to choose between the choice where I can at least still chose what I want to buy rather than waste my time/money on your slot machines/card packs I'll choose the first option any day

[MatThaRiPP3R84]

loot boxes have only become dirty as they were abused. progress is throttled then locked behind paywalls with ridiculously low chances of probability. if you buy a box, with in-game farmable currencies, and they cant be purchased with real cash, sure. otherwise, as our lord and savior jimquisition would say: Fuck the triple a gaming industry. if anything it may force them to tone down their greed, stop relying on MTX to increase profits and rely more on good games, and stop allowing their greed to demoralise and destroy the best talented devs they have, ea chucklevision all guilty of it.

Edited July 5, 2020 by MatThaRiPP3R84

[Zircon_Lotus]

Yes, it is gambling. You're paying for a chance, not a defined item, and the possibility of being on a luck day and get a very rare / expensive item is what move people in buying those, the same thing that happens at casinos. The only difference is the prize.

 

If the items are only cosmetic, I dont care, but if the prize is something that can give you an ingame advantage like it happens on FIFA, I am against. It is a very cheap way to make money sacrificing game quality.

 

But I think games that feature loot boxes and are available to minors must have a warning of sorts to parents. Of course we know that minors plays M-rated games, but theoritically only adults will play those, and as grow ups, they must have the awareness, self-control and be responsibles for themselves, and decide if spending money on online gambling is worth. But you should not expect this from a minor (at least this is what society thinks), so parents should know about this beforehand. If you are not into gaming, there is no way to know that your child, while playing a football game, has access to a gamble-like store. 

 

Maybe games that are not M-rated and feature loot boxes should have two versions: one with loot box related features on, and other with those permanently disabled.

[DaivRules]

2 hours ago, IncreaseDark said:

 

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

 

No, Plus isn't gambling. You're buying a monthly or annual subscription to a package service which includes several features, whether you choose to use them all is up to you. You get Automatic Updates, Automatic save backups with sizable online storage, you get the ability to play online on PS4, Plus exclusive discounts, Free Shipping for PS accessories/consoles [in US], and you get access to two games each month. (I think they

 

Notice how you can't re-buy Plus over and over in the same month and get different outcomes? That's where the gamble comes in. The payout odds of "two games each month" is 100%. No gamble.

 

Now, whether the value proposition makes it worth your money to buy the service and see which two games your ~$4 a month gives you, even if you don't utilize any of the other services (which you do, the online multiplayer) is completely separate than the idea of gambling and playing the odds on different payouts and outcomes.

 

The biggest difference on loot boxes is the repeat purchase aspect with completely different results each time, hence the gamble.

[NeeyaSerena]

classifying loot boxes as gambling will set nasty precedents in the future i feel, many un-intended. first issue is that dont think for a second that if loot boxes are cut out of a game that the publisher will out of the goodness of their heart put the contents of the boxes into the game for free as unlocks or such, they will be monetized at exorbitant prices. second issue to arise will be physical card packs like pokemon, magic, or sport trading cards as they would fall under the same category as video game loot boxes. Not to mention crack machines, or dollar store loot bags. At the end of the legal rulings when everything is done, the cost to collect what ever was initially in the boxes, card packs, etc will be increased beyond what anyone can imagine. The only way that we can properly fight loot boxes without the un-intended consequences is with our wallets, whether we like it or not.

[MrBenosaurus]

1 hour 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.  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.

 

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Zircon_Lotus said:

Yes, it is gambling. You're paying for a chance, not a defined item, and the possibility of being on a luck day and get a very rare / expensive item is what move people in buying those, the same thing that happens at casinos. The only difference is the prize.

 

If the items are only cosmetic, I dont care, but if the prize is something that can give you an ingame advantage like it happens on FIFA, I am against. It is a very cheap way to make money sacrificing game quality.

 

But I think games that feature loot boxes and are available to minors must have a warning of sorts to parents. Of course we know that minors plays M-rated games, but theoritically only adults will play those, and as grow ups, they must have the awareness, self-control and be responsibles for themselves, and decide if spending money on online gambling is worth. But you should not expect this from a minor (at least this is what society thinks), so parents should know about this beforehand. If you are not into gaming, there is no way to know that your child, while playing a football game, has access to a gamble-like store. 

 

Maybe games that are not M-rated and feature loot boxes should have two versions: one with loot box related features on, and other with those permanently disabled.

The role of the concept of "self-control" in the discussion of the legality and, especially, the morality of loot boxes is double-edged: a person's self-control is just as contingent upon manipulatable outside factors as it is a person's genetics, personality, character, etc. A loot box (or any equivalent mechanic) is an environment specifically tailoured to manipulate a person's decision-making process to get them to spend, spend, spend. As such, the "poor self-control" argument also highlights the exploitative intentions behind loot boxes. Sure, we place some blame on the person who isn't careful and falls into a trap, but there is also culpability on those who set the trap (because that's what it is for the people they rather horrifically refer to as "whales"). It's not unlike how people have different perspectives on alcoholics, smokers, or people with any form of addiction - it's a moral position. 

 

Of course with kids, it's a completely different discussion because the playing field is uneven, as it is significantly easier to manipulate the behaviour of children. I wholeheartedly agree that games with chance-based microtransactions should get a big 18+ rating slapped on the front, but that would take a big chunk out of these companies' profits! How else is Activision going to please those shareholders' bloated expectations and pay for Bobby Kotick's >$30 million salary? Oh, won't somebody PLEASE think of Bobby Kotick!

 

53 minutes ago, Ric said:

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.

 

A little kindness and sympathy for the people affected is really important here - thank you for saying that ?

[Cobby]

3 hours ago, IncreaseDark said:

 

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

I'd say no. You're paying for a service. Online play, cloud saves and a few other bits I think. The games are a bonus/added incentive.

[punkshepherd]

10 minutes ago, MrBenosaurus said:

 

The role of the concept of "self-control" in the discussion of the legality and, especially, the morality of loot boxes is double-edged: a person's self-control is just as contingent upon manipulatable outside factors as it is a person's genetics, personality, character, etc. A loot box (or any equivalent mechanic) is an environment specifically tailoured to manipulate a person's decision-making process to get them to spend, spend, spend. As such, the "poor self-control" argument also highlights the exploitative intentions behind loot boxes. Sure, we place some blame on the person who isn't careful and falls into a trap, but there is also culpability on those who set the trap (because that's what it is for the people they rather horrifically refer to as "whales"). It's not unlike how people have different perspectives on alcoholics, smokers, or people with any form of addiction - it's a moral position. 

 

Of course with kids, it's a completely different discussion because the playing field is uneven, as it is significantly easier to manipulate the behaviour of children. I wholeheartedly agree that games with chance-based microtransactions should get a big 18+ rating slapped on the front, but that would take a big chunk out of these companies' profits! How else is Activision going to please those shareholders' bloated expectations and pay for Bobby Kotick's >$30 million salary? Oh, won't somebody PLEASE think of Bobby Kotick!

 

Your commment is similar to what i want to say. 

 

I'll answer the original question and put my opinion via bullet points

 

• Yes Lootboxes are gambling. People can sway definitions and believe what they want. But you aint fooling me.

 

• If we as gamers were better as parents (using parental controls and not buying kids games with loot boxes in) we wouldnt have half as many of the problems with kids emptying accounts, etc. Basic discipline...basically. 

 

• Game retailers and the esrb need to be taken into account. Basically enforcing what they say/think they do. Ive been buying 18 games since about the age of 12. Im far older now but no-one gives a damn if a 10 yr old plays GTA etc

 

• I mentioned discipline before. It'd be great if we all had self control. But we dont. Some people are addicted to gambling, people are whales n allsorts of other stuff. The lootboxes appeal to these sorts of addictive personalities who love the serotonin rush of risk. 

 

● And finally, a game should be fun enough at base price to make lootboxes unecessary. 

 

[majob]

22 hours ago, Cobby said:

The thing is, not many older parents understand it. They put their details in to buy their kid a game, then the details are stored and you don't need any passwords or anything to prevent kids spending thousands of pounds/dollars, the game itself doesn't cap it either, so a lot of damage can be done, it's not like buying off a website that'll ask for passwords or the security number of the back of ya card.

Many parents today are children of the 80s and 90s, I hardly believe they don't understand the ramifications of inputting their financial information. The details are stored only if you choose to keep them that way and that hardly excuses them not either informing their children the consequences of what would happen if they did such a thing. All I hear are attempts to excuse poor parenting.

[thefourfoldroot]

22 hours ago, djb5f said:

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

That’s gambling too. The difference is that kids had to go into a physical shop to hand over cash. With Microtransactions it’s all done anonymously via a credit card and you need no additional Pin numbers or ID,  good luck trying to spend 10,000 on panini cards at Sainsbury’s when you’re 12.

Edited July 6, 2020 by thefourfoldroot

[Ric]

13 minutes ago, majob said:

Many parents today are children of the 80s and 90s, I hardly believe they don't understand the ramifications of inputting their financial information. The details are stored only if you choose to keep them that way and that hardly excuses them not either informing their children the consequences of what would happen if they did such a thing. All I hear are attempts to excuse poor parenting.

 

The overwhelming majority of parents are not gamers of the 80s and 90s. Also the amount of gamers overal is just so much higher than in the 80s and 90s.

 

I'm one of those parents that has been gaming since the 80s and 90s. I do pay attention to that sort of stuff. But the shit I hear on school yards of all those parents of the fortnite generation is insane. A lot are of my generation (in their 30s) and they don't have a clue.  They were not nerds! (yes, gaming in the 80s and 90s was for kids, nerds and socially akward people, and did not make you popular at all).

 

I know people in their early 20s (people that you might expect grew up with this sort of stuff) that are having difficulties installing a damn game on the PC, let alone know all the available options like maybe parental controls.

 

Long story short, you'd be surprised about the amount of ignorance of a lot of parents of gaming children.

Edited July 6, 2020 by Ric

[Spacey_Dweeb]

Loot boxes are absolutely gambling and therefore they absolutely should be regulated. I'm not fully against loot boxes, they have a place. However, I think the games need a 21+ rating (same as the age being on the floor of a casino in most states) and should not be accessible to children. I fully understand that publishers want to make as much money as possible, but these mechanics are predatory. Many titles containing loot boxes have content generally appropriate for children, especially the notoriously bad FIFA and NBA2k, I don't care if the odds are shown or anything else. It just creates the psychological push that in order to keep up with your competition that you need to spend. There have been patents revealed from companies that show that they are actively interested in manufacturing that psychological drive by matchmaking them poorly so they have low probabilities of success and "advertising" to them via replay so they can see the people killing them have spent money on skins and new weapons. It's been something that has pushed me more and more into single-player games. It's not perfect there either, but I would much rather be tempted by a DLC story add-on than random draw or pay-to-win bull crap. 

[PhyrxianLibrarin]

Since people brought up issues like Magic/Pokemon/Yugioh, I'll point out that those companies have jumped through huge hoops specifically to make sure they are not treated as gambling. Wizards of the Coast (the makers of Magic) in particular has repeatedly claimed their cards have no monetary value on the secondary market. If you paid $5 and had a chance of opening a $20 card, that would be gambling, but if every card is only "worth" the cardboard it's printed on, that's not gambling. It's a complete lie, and the way they print cards shows they care deeply about how much single cards cost. But it's enough to avoid gambling laws I guess.

 

I feel like it's a totally different story if the items you're cracking can be re-exchanged for actual money. Like there was a market of CS:GO items where you could buy in-game items from other players for real dollars. In my mind, that makes CS:GO lootboxes 100% gambling. If the item you open is locked to your account and cosmetic only, and effectively has no resale value... sigh, I dunno. This feels like a very "think of the children" reaction that will do little to move the needle or change development practices. Hooray, Fortnite is now rated 18+, as if that ever stopped any kid from playing a game. Epic just adds a checkbox where you say "I am over 18" and nothing changes.

[Cobby]

3 hours ago, majob said:

Many parents today are children of the 80s and 90s, I hardly believe they don't understand the ramifications of inputting their financial information. The details are stored only if you choose to keep them that way and that hardly excuses them not either informing their children the consequences of what would happen if they did such a thing. All I hear are attempts to excuse poor parenting.

A lot of them probably are, there are also a lot of older parents and also those who just don't know a lot about technology (case and point, my mum 50s and step dad 60s have a 10 year old kid together and the pair of em are fucking useless when it comes to anything technological). Sure, some of it probably is bad parenting, just ignoring the potential of it happening, but there's definitely some cases where the parent doesnt know or fully understand and the depending how young the kid is, they just see "oh packs need Fifa points, Fifa points isn't real money let's get a load of it".

[RadiantFlamberge]

Don't expect me to say a straight yes or no to "are loot boxes gambling". I feel that loot boxes are bullshit... so I choose not to buy them. Take a Namco, Capcom, or SNK fighting game where you're able to buy your desired extra characters as DLC. That's the way it should be done, with you knowing what you buy. EA and 2K Sports, would it really bother you to follow their example?

 

Loot boxes bought with currency that can be earned in-game (NOT with real money!) are less of an issue. In that case, if you didn't get what you wanted, farm more gold and try again.

 

Parents have a way to restrict their children's PSN purchases, and they need to use it so that they don't end up with their child blowing hundreds or thousands of dollars on virtual currency packs.

[AJ_Radio]

On 7/6/2020 at 9:35 AM, Ric said:

 

The overwhelming majority of parents are not gamers of the 80s and 90s. Also the amount of gamers overal is just so much higher than in the 80s and 90s.

 

I'm one of those parents that has been gaming since the 80s and 90s. I do pay attention to that sort of stuff. But the shit I hear on school yards of all those parents of the fortnite generation is insane. A lot are of my generation (in their 30s) and they don't have a clue.  They were not nerds! (yes, gaming in the 80s and 90s was for kids, nerds and socially akward people, and did not make you popular at all).

 

I know people in their early 20s (people that you might expect grew up with this sort of stuff) that are having difficulties installing a damn game on the PC, let alone know all the available options like maybe parental controls.

 

Long story short, you'd be surprised about the amount of ignorance of a lot of parents of gaming children.

 

I define gamers as people who play video games or mobile games on a daily basis... at the very least every other day of the week. My sister turns 40 years old next month and she was never much of any sort of gamer other than play maybe once or twice a week. Yet she introduced me to Nintendo and Super Mario, she later got into Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 which cemented my love for gaming.

 

Personally I think the Baby Boomers and a portion of Generation X had a much better handle on learning on their own and actually going out and doing stuff. There was virtually nothing of anything digital back when they were growing up, so they had to play outside and think up activities. Even looking back at my childhood we didn't have much in terms of games, it was playing whatever was available and spending the rest of the day going outside. Video games were also more expensive back then, so it made sense to ask your parents to stop at your local Blockbuster to rent the latest Nintendo 64 game.

 

I think your issue with people today not having a clue draws parallels to the overall lack of training. A lot of us really don't have a clue. Is it because we're too fat and happy behind a computer screen? Is it because we're afraid to step out into the real world and carve our own path in life? I can imagine with Fortnite there are many people who try to take advantage of others, just as they would in any online game. We're more comfortable sitting back and taking pot shots on games like Fortnite, because the social media world and the internet in general has overtaken our knowledge of the outside world.

 

I for one would not want to be a kid in today's world. Not just because of COVID-19, but the fact that so many parents out there are fucking stupid and ignorant in how to prepare their kids.

 

We're good at playing games, downloading from our digital library, trouble shooting computers, and keeping track of our Android and iWatch electronics. When it comes to communication, setting an example, and going beyond being a perfect embodiment of stereotypes, we're terrible.

[cera1volta]

On 7/5/2020 at 1:27 PM, Rello-Evante said:

 

Yes! I was trying to remember which game I wanted to use as an example.

This was one of them! 

 

There has always been a fascination with 'surprise' mechanics ever since we were kids ( Kinder chocolate eggs anyone ?), and I definitely had that feeling with Hearthstone whenever you opened new packs. Heck, the whole premise of card games (Magic, Pokemon, Yu Gi Oh) was to buy and open new packs.

 

It's a weird grey area that I'm curious to see how it turns out, cause I really hope they don't just disable the ability to purchase card packs (as that will cripple developer incomes).

 

 

Lol, certainly won't cripple ea's income. All they need to do is release fifa games biannually, they already have the ground work done since fifa 2015 just some minor tweaks here and there and idiots will continue to buy the same game over and over again. Anyways, I have no problems with lootboxes, as long as it's cosmetics, stuff I can ignore. They shouldn't influence the game play.

[locoporkko]

Yes,must be forbbiden

[TJ_Solo]

53 minutes ago, locoporkko said:

Yes,must be forbbiden

 

That's an interesting assumption when gambling(real and virtual) itself isn't universally forbidden. 

[locoporkko]

3 hours ago, TJ_Solo said:

 

That's an interesting assumption when gambling(real and virtual) itself isn't universally forbidden. 

the real gambling is very dangerous and can destroy to a person in all aspect of the life and is more dangerous in people under 18 years old