inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Sept 3, 2020 22:26:52 GMT
What exactly is going to happen if the government regulates lootboxes? This one lawsuit isn't going to let the government have tyrannical power over how every aspect of games are made, it's just about lootboxes and whether it breaches gambling laws... It doesn't mean other lawsuits involving government intervention are all suddenly going to win forever after now. Like.... They all have to make a case for themselves individually each time something comes up. It'll open the door for them to protest and shut down anything they are against, with the legal precedence to support it. It's not like some governments haven't already tried that, some succeeding. I'm not one to take that chance, especially lately, when there are far easier alternatives as simple as a single password. Cause government has such a great track record of listening to protestors?
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Apr 19, 2024 15:24:55 GMT
30,241
Hanako Ikezawa
22,352
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Sept 3, 2020 22:27:14 GMT
Set up equipment like consoles or computers to need passwords in order to use credit cards, then don’t tell children the passwords. Simple solution for simple problem, unlike the Pandora’s box that having the government determine what’s suitable in a game will open. And if a company decides NOT to put a "require password at checkout" option in their console or digital storefront? Why, I suppose you would need a law that compels them to do so. Every single company already has that as an option in their computers or consoles. So then this is a waste of time that could be addressing actual threats to children.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Sept 3, 2020 22:36:26 GMT
And if a company decides NOT to put a "require password at checkout" option in their console or digital storefront? Why, I suppose you would need a law that compels them to do so. Every single company already has that as an option in their computers or consoles. So then this is a waste of time that could be addressing actual threats to children. If they aren't being compelled by law, then what's stopping them from taking it away? What IS an actual threat to children, if exposing them to gambling and fostering addiction is not a threat? Governments already have laws against child abuse. Short of putting cameras in every home, I don't know what else you expect them to do about it. You still haven't said what specifically you are afraid of your government doing.
|
|
gum
N1
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 20 Likes: 69
inherit
11632
0
Sept 28, 2020 6:19:05 GMT
69
gum
20
Aug 27, 2020 21:45:50 GMT
August 2020
gum
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by gum on Sept 3, 2020 22:47:25 GMT
What exactly is going to happen if the government regulates lootboxes? This one lawsuit isn't going to let the government have tyrannical power over how every aspect of games are made, it's just about lootboxes and whether it breaches gambling laws... It doesn't mean other lawsuits involving government intervention are all suddenly going to win forever after now. Like.... They all have to make a case for themselves individually each time something comes up. It'll open the door for them to protest and shut down anything they are against, with the legal precedence to support it. It's not like some governments haven't already tried that, some succeeding. I'm not one to take that chance, especially lately, when there are far easier alternatives as simple as a single password. Who is protesting...? The government? What does "anything they're against" mean here? When has this happened on a large scale in relation to games? And succeeded? Protests happen for specific reasons and the ones that are successful have specific contexts that allowed that to happen. Why would that apply to this? I'm trying very hard to understand the point of view here, but I'm not sure what there is to be afraid of in this case. Like, very specifically, what is the fear here? Like, I'm sorry but this whole conversation feels like a lot of buzzwords thrown around to create a vague boogieman to be afraid of, but for what cause? Anti-protest...? Anti-change in general...?? Is it still just in favor of lootboxes? Help me out here
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Apr 19, 2024 15:24:55 GMT
30,241
Hanako Ikezawa
22,352
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Sept 3, 2020 22:59:43 GMT
Every single company already has that as an option in their computers or consoles. So then this is a waste of time that could be addressing actual threats to children. If they aren't being compelled by law, then what's stopping them from taking it away? What IS an actual threat to children, if exposing them to gambling and fostering addiction is not a threat? Governments already have laws against child abuse. Short of putting cameras in every home, I don't know what else you expect them to do about it. You still haven't said what specifically you are afraid of your government doing. Hunger, poverty, disease, etc. In case you hadn't noticed, there's a lot of that happening nowadays. And for those things yeah there are laws sure, but how much money and time will be wasted on this thing that already has a solution instead of going to addressing these other issues or making them better. As for what I'm afraid of the government doing, anything they get enough of a consensus for. For example say Trump and his fellows get a huge majority. Well, say goodbye to things like representation in games. After all that's encouraging things that "will hurt the children".
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Apr 19, 2024 15:24:55 GMT
30,241
Hanako Ikezawa
22,352
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Sept 3, 2020 23:13:39 GMT
I didn't see anyone for this respond to this, but what aout other randomized things? Like trading card packs, mystery boxes, packaged food? Should all those be banned too? After all you don't know for sure what's inside so that's gambling according to this definition you propose.
|
|
gum
N1
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 20 Likes: 69
inherit
11632
0
Sept 28, 2020 6:19:05 GMT
69
gum
20
Aug 27, 2020 21:45:50 GMT
August 2020
gum
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by gum on Sept 4, 2020 0:10:10 GMT
I didn't see anyone for this respond to this, but what aout other randomized things? Like trading card packs, mystery boxes, packaged food? Should all those be banned too? After all you don't know for sure what's inside so that's gambling according to this definition you propose. Well, ignoring the fact that the previous arguments about hunger and Trump are kind of irrelevant to the way games operate+are regulated here and the fact that trading cards are not the topic of discussion, the definition of things like trading cards, packaged food, and even physical mystery boxes do not fit the common definition of gambling because whether you get something you wanted or not, you still have an object that is worth some material value afterwards. People can resell cards for instance. In gambling, you can either gain or completely lose money and as far as games go, you usually cannot resell the items from lootboxes, making them essentially worthless in terms of material value and currency. Another problem with lootboxes in games is that there is an immediacy to buying them that isn't present in things like trading cards, which cause lootboxes to simulate gambling much more than a physical product. And for consistency's sake, if trading cards hypothetically start marketing themselves in a way that leads to a huge uptick in gambling issues present in kids, I would be for regulation there too, but since that isn't as much of an issue afaik it's not my primary concern at this moment in time. All I'm saying is that none of this is as much of a "slippery slope" situation as people fear it is. Legal action like this happens all the time and will continue to with varying degrees of legitimacy.
|
|
githcheater
N3
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
Posts: 819 Likes: 952
inherit
959
0
Apr 19, 2024 16:42:33 GMT
952
githcheater
819
Aug 13, 2016 20:29:15 GMT
August 2016
githcheater
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by githcheater on Sept 4, 2020 0:27:14 GMT
I didn't see anyone for this respond to this, but what aout other randomized things? Like trading card packs, mystery boxes, packaged food? Should all those be banned too? After all you don't know for sure what's inside so that's gambling according to this definition you propose. Trading cards do not need to be purchased from the original manufacturer. They can be bought on ebay without the original manufacturer seeing a dime.
There also is this other little known fact:
Trading cards can be traded.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Apr 19, 2024 15:24:55 GMT
30,241
Hanako Ikezawa
22,352
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Sept 4, 2020 0:56:24 GMT
I didn't see anyone for this respond to this, but what aout other randomized things? Like trading card packs, mystery boxes, packaged food? Should all those be banned too? After all you don't know for sure what's inside so that's gambling according to this definition you propose. Trading cards do not need to be purchased from the original manufacturer. They can be bought on ebay without the original manufacturer seeing a dime.
There also is this other little known fact:
Trading cards can be traded.
Still gambling, according to the rules of this argument.
|
|
Sanunes
N6
Just a flip of the coin.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Prime Posts: 4392
Prime Likes: 882
Posts: 5,899 Likes: 8,927
inherit
1561
0
8,927
Sanunes
Just a flip of the coin.
5,899
Sept 13, 2016 11:51:12 GMT
September 2016
sanunes
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
4392
882
|
Post by Sanunes on Sept 4, 2020 1:04:14 GMT
I didn't see anyone for this respond to this, but what aout other randomized things? Like trading card packs, mystery boxes, packaged food? Should all those be banned too? After all you don't know for sure what's inside so that's gambling according to this definition you propose. Trading cards do not need to be purchased from the original manufacturer. They can be bought on ebay without the original manufacturer seeing a dime.
There also is this other little known fact:
Trading cards can be traded.
If there is a court ruling against EA in this matter I doubt these arguments would cause judgement against those other companies or products for I bet they could be easily nullified. The argument I see being used here and I haven't read it too closely is that because its random it becomes gambling. The problem is what is and isn't gambling is defined by law and not a person's opinion on the subject. So I think it would be required to have laws changed before anything really happens and then the product will be changed just to be on the legal side of the line again. I think pachinko machines in Japan and what happened to them is a good example of what might happen. In Japan gambling is illegal and pachinko became considered gambling. So the pachinko operators just changed it so the machine gave out toys and then they setup a store that would buy the toys and that is how they got their payout instead. The other example is what happened with Activision Blizzard and their lootboxes in China where they just changed how they were sold to exploit a loophole in new laws there.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Apr 19, 2024 23:01:48 GMT
31,194
colfoley
16,545
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Sept 4, 2020 1:50:34 GMT
Yey this frakin nonsense again. People crying out to the courts/ government because they don't have self control. That lacks some sympathy. People don't know they're sensitive to addiction until they're actually addicted. It's all well and good to say that 99% of people aren't prone when 1% of all the people who will play is still a LOT of people. I'm not unsympathetic. While I have never had a psychologist confirm this it wouldn't surprise me in the least if I had an 'addictive' personality. And I also would be mildly surprised if most people don't battle some form of addiction at various points in their life...though more the connotation of that rather then the denotation of a clinical diagnosis. I also know people personally who have suffered greatly at the hands of MTXs. But if you have a problem you should get help for that problem. Rely on your friends, family, significant, authority figures. Talk it out with people, make sure you are doing the right thing if you are making risky purchases and...if worse comes to worse...get psychological help. But 'gambling' (even if we are to stretch the definition of gambling to include lootboxes) is the pure definition of a victimless crime. These wounds are self inflicted, casinos/ game companies like EA are not forcing you to buy their stuff. You make that decision. And getting the government involved in this sort of thing is just begging for trouble considering everything the government does tends to devolve into a disaster.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Sept 4, 2020 3:46:04 GMT
That lacks some sympathy. People don't know they're sensitive to addiction until they're actually addicted. It's all well and good to say that 99% of people aren't prone when 1% of all the people who will play is still a LOT of people. I'm not unsympathetic. While I have never had a psychologist confirm this it wouldn't surprise me in the least if I had an 'addictive' personality. And I also would be mildly surprised if most people don't battle some form of addiction at various points in their life...though more the connotation of that rather then the denotation of a clinical diagnosis. I also know people personally who have suffered greatly at the hands of MTXs. But if you have a problem you should get help for that problem. Rely on your friends, family, significant, authority figures. Talk it out with people, make sure you are doing the right thing if you are making risky purchases and...if worse comes to worse...get psychological help. But 'gambling' (even if we are to stretch the definition of gambling to include lootboxes) is the pure definition of a victimless crime. These wounds are self inflicted, casinos/ game companies like EA are not forcing you to buy their stuff. You make that decision. And getting the government involved in this sort of thing is just begging for trouble considering everything the government does tends to devolve into a disaster. Suicide and eating disorders are also "self-inflicted", arguably, but that doesn't mean anyone should be allowed to make a business out of encouraging suicide and anorexia. But the entire business model of gambling also operates by preying on mental illness and psychological exploitation and abuse, and that's apparently just fine. If a business overwhelmingly harms people, then there's a solid case to be made that said business shouldn't exist. Most of the United States apparently thinks the gambling industry shouldn't exist. Only two states in the entire USA allow casino-style gambling, I believe? And general gambling restrictions vary from state to state. It's also important not to conflate industry regulations with regulations on a personal level. There's a massive gulf between making casinos illegal and making it illegal to gamble with friends in the privacy of your own home. Your argument also ignores those around the addict who are harmed by their behaviour. Spouses and children who are rendered homeless by debt, for example. They don't self-inflict that on themselves. Obviously the sentiment that "the government should do something" is predicated on the government actually 1) being competent and 2) serving the citizenry as it is supposed to. I doubt that anyone here seriously wants, say, Donald Trump's administration getting involved in video games, regardless of where they fall on this issue. But he's also not likely to attempt to legislate gambling. He *makes money* from gambling. He is possibly the most personally tied to the gambling industry of any president in the entire history of the United States. People say "the government should do something", because *that is what governments are supposed to do*. Make regulations and enforce them. The purpose of governments IS to intervene and interfere, especially when corporations act against the interests and wellbeing of the public. Without the FDA, to take a US example (I assume most of the posters here live in the US), corporations would be entirely free to lie about the contents of food and drink. I think you can agree that that would be a bad thing. Corporations do not need your empathy or concern, and you shouldn't give it to them. Fears about the government unfairly restricting video games are totally unfounded. Western governments, and the US government in particular (on both sides), are in the pockets of big corporations, not the other way around. You're imagining a power dynamic that simply *does not exist*. The fact that the US games industry gets ahead of legislation and institutes its own measures is *nice*, but legislation is still necessary, because as corporations get richer and gain more political influence, they will be able to hurt people more, in more different ways, and the government won't stop them. Meanwhile, the AAA games industry is playing the victim and preying on the fear of 'censorship' to keep you on side while it actively seeks to exploit you and everyone you care about.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Apr 19, 2024 23:01:48 GMT
31,194
colfoley
16,545
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Sept 4, 2020 4:12:52 GMT
I'm not unsympathetic. While I have never had a psychologist confirm this it wouldn't surprise me in the least if I had an 'addictive' personality. And I also would be mildly surprised if most people don't battle some form of addiction at various points in their life...though more the connotation of that rather then the denotation of a clinical diagnosis. I also know people personally who have suffered greatly at the hands of MTXs. But if you have a problem you should get help for that problem. Rely on your friends, family, significant, authority figures. Talk it out with people, make sure you are doing the right thing if you are making risky purchases and...if worse comes to worse...get psychological help. But 'gambling' (even if we are to stretch the definition of gambling to include lootboxes) is the pure definition of a victimless crime. These wounds are self inflicted, casinos/ game companies like EA are not forcing you to buy their stuff. You make that decision. And getting the government involved in this sort of thing is just begging for trouble considering everything the government does tends to devolve into a disaster. Suicide and eating disorders are also "self-inflicted", arguably, but that doesn't mean anyone should be allowed to make a business out of encouraging suicide and anorexia. But the entire business model of gambling also operates by preying on mental illness and psychological exploitation and abuse, and that's apparently just fine. If a business overwhelmingly harms people, then there's a solid case to be made that said business shouldn't exist. Most of the United States apparently thinks the gambling industry shouldn't exist. Only two states in the entire USA allow casino-style gambling, I believe? And general gambling restrictions vary from state to state. It's also important not to conflate industry regulations with regulations on a personal level. There's a massive gulf between making casinos illegal and making it illegal to gamble with friends in the privacy of your own home. Your argument also ignores those around the addict who are harmed by their behaviour. Spouses and children who are rendered homeless by debt, for example. They don't self-inflict that on themselves. Obviously the sentiment that "the government should do something" is predicated on the government actually 1) being competent and 2) serving the citizenry as it is supposed to. I doubt that anyone here seriously wants, say, Donald Trump's administration getting involved in video games, regardless of where they fall on this issue. But he's also not likely to attempt to legislate gambling. He *makes money* from gambling. He is possibly the most personally tied to the gambling industry of any president in the entire history of the United States. People say "the government should do something", because *that is what governments are supposed to do*. Make regulations and enforce them. The purpose of governments IS to intervene and interfere, especially when corporations act against the interests and wellbeing of the public. Without the FDA, to take a US example (I assume most of the posters here live in the US), corporations would be entirely free to lie about the contents of food and drink. I think you can agree that that would be a bad thing. Corporations do not need your empathy or concern, and you shouldn't give it to them. Fears about the government unfairly restricting video games are totally unfounded. Western governments, and the US government in particular (on both sides), are in the pockets of big corporations, not the other way around. You're imagining a power dynamic that simply *does not exist*. The fact that the US games industry gets ahead of legislation and institutes its own measures is *nice*, but legislation is still necessary, because as corporations get richer and gain more political influence, they will be able to hurt people more, in more different ways, and the government won't stop them. Meanwhile, the AAA games industry is playing the victim and preying on the fear of 'censorship' to keep you on side while it actively seeks to exploit you and everyone you care about. Its kind of hillarious to me that you went to the suicide well considering I was going to bring it up in my post up there but decided it would be a poor example... You're going to have to show me stats and logic how the business model of gambling or loot boxes 'overwhelmingly harms people'. Yes, it is a risk when you put your hard earned money on something that is not a sure thing...but people should be free to make that choice on their own as long as they do not harm others to do so. On the contrary my argument specifically addresses the 'other people hurt' by such behavior... because I mentioned that everyone has a support apparatus outside of the government which can help them far more effectively then the government can in this instance. And no the government should not interfere in the private affairs of individuals making private decisions for themselves. Even if they are dumb decisions...where would that stop? While Hanako example might be stretching things a bit...what else can we consider gambling? What else will be regulated for the 'public interest?' The government should only protect us from malicious individuals trying to take our life, liberty, and property. And it is incumbant upon anyone to prove to me how companies doing lootboxes violate either of those three precepts, in other words who is the perp and who is the victim in this crime.
|
|
Sanunes
N6
Just a flip of the coin.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Prime Posts: 4392
Prime Likes: 882
Posts: 5,899 Likes: 8,927
inherit
1561
0
8,927
Sanunes
Just a flip of the coin.
5,899
Sept 13, 2016 11:51:12 GMT
September 2016
sanunes
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
4392
882
|
Post by Sanunes on Sept 4, 2020 4:48:50 GMT
I'm not unsympathetic. While I have never had a psychologist confirm this it wouldn't surprise me in the least if I had an 'addictive' personality. And I also would be mildly surprised if most people don't battle some form of addiction at various points in their life...though more the connotation of that rather then the denotation of a clinical diagnosis. I also know people personally who have suffered greatly at the hands of MTXs. But if you have a problem you should get help for that problem. Rely on your friends, family, significant, authority figures. Talk it out with people, make sure you are doing the right thing if you are making risky purchases and...if worse comes to worse...get psychological help. But 'gambling' (even if we are to stretch the definition of gambling to include lootboxes) is the pure definition of a victimless crime. These wounds are self inflicted, casinos/ game companies like EA are not forcing you to buy their stuff. You make that decision. And getting the government involved in this sort of thing is just begging for trouble considering everything the government does tends to devolve into a disaster. Suicide and eating disorders are also "self-inflicted", arguably, but that doesn't mean anyone should be allowed to make a business out of encouraging suicide and anorexia. But the entire business model of gambling also operates by preying on mental illness and psychological exploitation and abuse, and that's apparently just fine. If a business overwhelmingly harms people, then there's a solid case to be made that said business shouldn't exist. Most of the United States apparently thinks the gambling industry shouldn't exist. Only two states in the entire USA allow casino-style gambling, I believe? And general gambling restrictions vary from state to state. It's also important not to conflate industry regulations with regulations on a personal level. There's a massive gulf between making casinos illegal and making it illegal to gamble with friends in the privacy of your own home. Your argument also ignores those around the addict who are harmed by their behaviour. Spouses and children who are rendered homeless by debt, for example. They don't self-inflict that on themselves. Obviously the sentiment that "the government should do something" is predicated on the government actually 1) being competent and 2) serving the citizenry as it is supposed to. I doubt that anyone here seriously wants, say, Donald Trump's administration getting involved in video games, regardless of where they fall on this issue. But he's also not likely to attempt to legislate gambling. He *makes money* from gambling. He is possibly the most personally tied to the gambling industry of any president in the entire history of the United States. People say "the government should do something", because *that is what governments are supposed to do*. Make regulations and enforce them. The purpose of governments IS to intervene and interfere, especially when corporations act against the interests and wellbeing of the public. Without the FDA, to take a US example (I assume most of the posters here live in the US), corporations would be entirely free to lie about the contents of food and drink. I think you can agree that that would be a bad thing. Corporations do not need your empathy or concern, and you shouldn't give it to them. Fears about the government unfairly restricting video games are totally unfounded. Western governments, and the US government in particular (on both sides), are in the pockets of big corporations, not the other way around. You're imagining a power dynamic that simply *does not exist*. The fact that the US games industry gets ahead of legislation and institutes its own measures is *nice*, but legislation is still necessary, because as corporations get richer and gain more political influence, they will be able to hurt people more, in more different ways, and the government won't stop them. Meanwhile, the AAA games industry is playing the victim and preying on the fear of 'censorship' to keep you on side while it actively seeks to exploit you and everyone you care about. If you want to go the route of making comparisons like that there are arguments that there are aspects of society that do encourage that behavior. You could take Hollywood and modeling to be industries that encourage that behavior by normally only showing the "perfect" image of what people think they should look like and that is where you can see people making those claims. You could also even point to all the health industry aspects that take advantage of people that feel they are overweight and should look like what they should be so they have them spending money trying to lose weight in some fashion to reach what our society considers normal. Even the peer pressure towards losing weight could be considered with the public shaming of people that are overweight or not perfect looking. Another aspect could be the plastic surgery industry where doctors will alter a person's body again to be that perfect image they crave and there are plenty of stories of people spending hundreds of thousands of dollars altering their bodies. Doctors have been known to just treat patients with drugs to take the edge off their symptoms without going for a real cure of their mental health so they stay on the edge for longer then necessary so they can make a profit. Now insurance companies have been known to turn down people for different afflictions such as mental health issues as a "pre-existing condition" so they denied their claims and they would be unable to afford help on their own. Any US company will work its way around any legislation and get around it, that is why the lobbying industry spends such big money in Washington. Not to mention a few well placed bucks will have legislation that was imposed a few years earlier rescinded such as the banking laws after they put the world in a recession because of profit over people. The video game industry is acting just like any other industry where people are calling for lawmakers to interfere. The only real way to get change is for people to stop buying them, for any legislation they will look for a way around it and continue business as usual for they chasing their profits.
|
|
inherit
Now with HESH rounds!
912
0
6,636
The Biotic Trebuchet
Stolen by inquisition forces.
2,616
Aug 11, 2016 22:59:51 GMT
August 2016
thebioticbread
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Trebuchet_MkIV
[(e^x )- 4]
69
|
Post by The Biotic Trebuchet on Sept 4, 2020 5:01:45 GMT
Didn't someone at Bio said that someone spent like $10000 bucks on ME3mp lootboxes alone? That shit is insane and mess up. Btw, i can confirm that children are special victims with this kind of stuff, i remember when i was younger (we had like 12- 14 yold), me and some friends from school used to play Crossfire, a FPS, somewhat like a CS styled game with a shitload of cosmetics and overpowered weapons (most aviable behind lootboxes that could only be bought via "ZP" points, which in order to get you had to spent money using a credit card or sending a fuckload of SMS messanges), needless to say that most of us spent an awful lot of the SMS messages to the point we spent all of them if not most of the plan/pre-charge limit (this was in 2008/10 when SMS were a thing), and 2 chaps from my group directly stole their parents credit cards and spent well over $50000 CLP (more or less 100 bucks at that time, in a country with lower wages than most of the developed world) just to flex some digital skins and shoot some broken weapons for a month then move on to the next game. You can't blame their parents most of the cases, because this always happened while they were busting their asses at work or when they were enjoying their free time taking naps. So if a little law is needed to lift some pressure over the parents, that would be welcome.
|
|
Sanunes
N6
Just a flip of the coin.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Prime Posts: 4392
Prime Likes: 882
Posts: 5,899 Likes: 8,927
inherit
1561
0
8,927
Sanunes
Just a flip of the coin.
5,899
Sept 13, 2016 11:51:12 GMT
September 2016
sanunes
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
4392
882
|
Post by Sanunes on Sept 4, 2020 5:09:44 GMT
Didn't someone at Bio said that someone spent like $10000 bucks on ME3mp lootboxes alone? That shit is insane and mess up. It was Manveer Heir after he didn't have his contract renewed after the closure of BioWare Montreal while trying to get people interested in his new indie studio. I am skeptical of his claims in that matter because information like that is something that would be kept more confidential and not openly shared. My experience was a lot of information shared to teams was averages or brackets, but never anything getting that close to specifics and it was privacy concerns with the information that could be around those specific figures.
|
|
gum
N1
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 20 Likes: 69
inherit
11632
0
Sept 28, 2020 6:19:05 GMT
69
gum
20
Aug 27, 2020 21:45:50 GMT
August 2020
gum
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by gum on Sept 4, 2020 5:20:35 GMT
On the contrary my argument specifically addresses the 'other people hurt' by such behavior... because I mentioned that everyone has a support apparatus outside of the government which can help them far more effectively then the government can in this instance. And no the government should not interfere in the private affairs of individuals making private decisions for themselves. Even if they are dumb decisions...where would that stop? While Hanako example might be stretching things a bit...what else can we consider gambling? What else will be regulated for the 'public interest?' The government should only protect us from malicious individuals trying to take our life, liberty, and property. And it is incumbant upon anyone to prove to me how companies doing lootboxes violate either of those three precepts, in other words who is the perp and who is the victim in this crime. It simply isn't true that everyone has a support network outside of the government though...? Like, you can't honestly make the point that everyone has family, friends, money, or whatever means necessary to get support for things like addiction, when the people worst off are often worst off because they have no support network? And I think it's kind of dishonest to imply that stats will persuade you here, when you've already clearly established that your definition of freedom is whether or not people choose to spend money, including a value judgement on some of those "choices" being dumb. You can't in good faith demand evidence from the opposing argument and then make assumptions about people's lived situations and claim that those assumptions cover your argument lol As far as the "what else will be regulated for public interest" question goes, that's literally something we deal with each time legal action comes up with anything? They're issues we deal with on a case by case basis, so the fear that it'll lead to further regulations that harm consumers is questionable, both because we're already constantly adjusting our laws and regulations and because lootboxes are ultimately an anti-consumer concept. Also, this legal case isn't about private individuals, it's about whether or not a public company has possibly breached already established gambling laws in the state of California, so there's that. Anyway, I don't disagree that companies won't keep looking for loopholes and even lobbying to get regulations rescinded, as we've seen centuries of history that supports this lol. But that's also why I think it's silly that we're fear mongering over whether government intervention is going to lead to the loss of our freedoms in cases like this (Which is being really ill-defined here? Our Freedom to spend money on lootboxes? Outrageous) Like, I can be honest with the cynicism I feel regarding how effective regulations are against corporations, but I still can't for the life of me understand why there's people defending lootboxes so hard.
|
|
Sanunes
N6
Just a flip of the coin.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Prime Posts: 4392
Prime Likes: 882
Posts: 5,899 Likes: 8,927
inherit
1561
0
8,927
Sanunes
Just a flip of the coin.
5,899
Sept 13, 2016 11:51:12 GMT
September 2016
sanunes
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
4392
882
|
Post by Sanunes on Sept 4, 2020 5:47:39 GMT
On the contrary my argument specifically addresses the 'other people hurt' by such behavior... because I mentioned that everyone has a support apparatus outside of the government which can help them far more effectively then the government can in this instance. And no the government should not interfere in the private affairs of individuals making private decisions for themselves. Even if they are dumb decisions...where would that stop? While Hanako example might be stretching things a bit...what else can we consider gambling? What else will be regulated for the 'public interest?' The government should only protect us from malicious individuals trying to take our life, liberty, and property. And it is incumbant upon anyone to prove to me how companies doing lootboxes violate either of those three precepts, in other words who is the perp and who is the victim in this crime. It simply isn't true that everyone has a support network outside of the government though...? Like, you can't honestly make the point that everyone has family, friends, money, or whatever means necessary to get support for things like addiction, when the people worst off are often worst off because they have no support network? And I think it's kind of dishonest to imply that stats will persuade you here, when you've already clearly established that your definition of freedom is whether or not people choose to spend money, including a value judgement on some of those "choices" being dumb. You can't in good faith demand evidence from the opposing argument and then make assumptions about people's lived situations and claim that those assumptions cover your argument lol As far as the "what else will be regulated for public interest" question goes, that's literally something we deal with each time legal action comes up with anything? They're issues we deal with on a case by case basis, so the fear that it'll lead to further regulations that harm consumers is questionable, both because we're already constantly adjusting our laws and regulations and because lootboxes are ultimately an anti-consumer concept. Also, this legal case isn't about private individuals, it's about whether or not a public company has possibly breached already established gambling laws in the state of California, so there's that. Anyway, I don't disagree that companies won't keep looking for loopholes and even lobbying to get regulations rescinded, as we've seen centuries of history that supports this lol. But that's also why I think it's silly that we're fear mongering over whether government intervention is going to lead to the loss of our freedoms in cases like this (Which is being really ill-defined here? Our Freedom to spend money on lootboxes? Outrageous) Like, I can be honest with the cynicism I feel regarding how effective regulations are against corporations, but I still can't for the life of me understand why there's people defending lootboxes so hard. I think the big difference for this and other areas where the government will set regulations is this is a civil matter since its a lawsuit and not a state or legislative body looking into it, so I highly doubt there will be anything done here aside from interpreting the law as it stands now which lootboxes are considered fine. One thing that never got much attention in the day is that a Gaming Commission sent Valve an official letter asking them to shutdown their marketplace because the manner it was being used was allowing gambling to happen. Valve did nothing about it and that was a regulatory committee sending that letter to a situation where it looked more like gambling then this and nothing happened. Until legistators do something, I just find it hard to believe there will be any rulings or precedents created because as they are now I bet lootboxes are just on the side of being okay.
|
|
gum
N1
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 20 Likes: 69
inherit
11632
0
Sept 28, 2020 6:19:05 GMT
69
gum
20
Aug 27, 2020 21:45:50 GMT
August 2020
gum
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by gum on Sept 4, 2020 6:01:44 GMT
I think the big difference for this and other areas where the government will set regulations is this is a civil matter since its a lawsuit and not a state or legislative body looking into it, so I highly doubt there will be anything done here aside from interpreting the law as it stands now which lootboxes are considered fine. One thing that never got much attention in the day is that a Gaming Commission sent Valve an official letter asking them to shutdown their marketplace because the manner it was being used was allowing gambling to happen. Valve did nothing about it and that was a regulatory committee sending that letter to a situation where it looked more like gambling then this and nothing happened. Until legistators do something, I just find it hard to believe there will be any rulings or precedents created because as they are now I bet lootboxes are just on the side of being okay. For curiosity's sake, I'll definitely have to look into the Valve case at some point, because that does sound interesting. But yeah, I don't doubt that what you're saying here is all true tbh. My personal feelings on lootboxes aside, I've been skeptical that this case would find much success in removing or changing lootboxes at all, let alone leading to regulations on a bunch of other unrelated things.
|
|
Sanunes
N6
Just a flip of the coin.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Prime Posts: 4392
Prime Likes: 882
Posts: 5,899 Likes: 8,927
inherit
1561
0
8,927
Sanunes
Just a flip of the coin.
5,899
Sept 13, 2016 11:51:12 GMT
September 2016
sanunes
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
4392
882
|
Post by Sanunes on Sept 4, 2020 6:12:48 GMT
I think the big difference for this and other areas where the government will set regulations is this is a civil matter since its a lawsuit and not a state or legislative body looking into it, so I highly doubt there will be anything done here aside from interpreting the law as it stands now which lootboxes are considered fine. One thing that never got much attention in the day is that a Gaming Commission sent Valve an official letter asking them to shutdown their marketplace because the manner it was being used was allowing gambling to happen. Valve did nothing about it and that was a regulatory committee sending that letter to a situation where it looked more like gambling then this and nothing happened. Until legistators do something, I just find it hard to believe there will be any rulings or precedents created because as they are now I bet lootboxes are just on the side of being okay. For curiosity's sake, I'll definitely have to look into the Valve case at some point, because that does sound interesting. But yeah, I don't doubt that what you're saying here is all true tbh. My personal feelings on lootboxes aside, I've been skeptical that this case would find much success in removing or changing lootboxes at all, let alone leading to regulations on a bunch of other unrelated things. Its been lost to time pretty much, but here is the BBC summary of the situation BBC Link. Pretty much it was the Gaming Commission telling Valve stop allowing their skin marketplace to be used for gambling. I did forget Valve sent a reply. Valve's ReponsePretty much the way I understood is that they considered Valve allowing marketplace sales to leave the protected space of the Steam client it was allowing people to gamble those skins. The big problem I always saw with what Valve was allowing versus something like Ultimate Team is that it can be taken out of the control of the platform and used for other means. Such as the skins being used as chips for gambling.
|
|
Hrungr
Twitter Guru
ღ N-Special
More coffee...? More coffee.
Staff Mini-Profile Theme: Hrungr
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Origin: Hrungr
Prime Posts: 18,258
Prime Likes: 65,767
Posts: 29,466 Likes: 104,067
inherit
ღ N-Special
151
0
104,067
Hrungr
More coffee...? More coffee.
29,466
August 2016
hrungr
Hrungr
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Hrungr
18,258
65,767
|
Post by Hrungr on Sept 4, 2020 6:24:36 GMT
Didn't someone at Bio said that someone spent like $10000 bucks on ME3mp lootboxes alone? It was actually $15,000.
|
|
gum
N1
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 20 Likes: 69
inherit
11632
0
Sept 28, 2020 6:19:05 GMT
69
gum
20
Aug 27, 2020 21:45:50 GMT
August 2020
gum
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by gum on Sept 4, 2020 6:41:46 GMT
For curiosity's sake, I'll definitely have to look into the Valve case at some point, because that does sound interesting. But yeah, I don't doubt that what you're saying here is all true tbh. My personal feelings on lootboxes aside, I've been skeptical that this case would find much success in removing or changing lootboxes at all, let alone leading to regulations on a bunch of other unrelated things. Its been lost to time pretty much, but here is the BBC summary of the situation BBC Link. Pretty much it was the Gaming Commission telling Valve stop allowing their skin marketplace to be used for gambling. I did forget Valve sent a reply. Valve's ReponsePretty much the way I understood is that they considered Valve allowing marketplace sales to leave the protected space of the Steam client it was allowing people to gamble those skins. The big problem I always saw with what Valve was allowing versus something like Ultimate Team is that it can be taken out of the control of the platform and used for other means. Such as the skins being used as chips for gambling. Wow, I can see how that would read more as gambling to the Commission, but unless I'm missing something, it does seem like a tough position for Valve when they weren't promoting or directly profiting off these third parties. It might be that I'm not understanding how the marketplace functions in this context and if there was an easier way to prevent trading from leaving it other than the cease and desist notices though. Not that my perspective on this changes whether they were within the law or not, technically speaking. But if this is what actually constitutes as gambling in a strict legal sense, I can see how a lawsuit against lootboxes wouldn't work under the same gambling restrictions.
|
|
inherit
265
0
11,980
Pounce de León
Praise the Justicat!
7,910
August 2016
catastrophy
caustic_agent
|
Post by Pounce de León on Sept 4, 2020 7:35:07 GMT
For curiosity's sake, I'll definitely have to look into the Valve case at some point, because that does sound interesting. But yeah, I don't doubt that what you're saying here is all true tbh. My personal feelings on lootboxes aside, I've been skeptical that this case would find much success in removing or changing lootboxes at all, let alone leading to regulations on a bunch of other unrelated things. Its been lost to time pretty much, but here is the BBC summary of the situation BBC Link. Pretty much it was the Gaming Commission telling Valve stop allowing their skin marketplace to be used for gambling. I did forget Valve sent a reply. Valve's ReponsePretty much the way I understood is that they considered Valve allowing marketplace sales to leave the protected space of the Steam client it was allowing people to gamble those skins. The big problem I always saw with what Valve was allowing versus something like Ultimate Team is that it can be taken out of the control of the platform and used for other means. Such as the skins being used as chips for gambling. Valve had an API that allowed an external store to plug in and trade with store items. It was used with a gambling front. And this shit was prone to money laundering and credit card fraud. Digital market are in general. It really kicked off with Counterstrike skins. PUBG similarly.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Sept 4, 2020 8:19:40 GMT
Its kind of hillarious to me that you went to the suicide well considering I was going to bring it up in my post up there but decided it would be a poor example... You're going to have to show me stats and logic how the business model of gambling or loot boxes 'overwhelmingly harms people'. Yes, it is a risk when you put your hard earned money on something that is not a sure thing...but people should be free to make that choice on their own as long as they do not harm others to do so. On the contrary my argument specifically addresses the 'other people hurt' by such behavior... because I mentioned that everyone has a support apparatus outside of the government which can help them far more effectively then the government can in this instance. And no the government should not interfere in the private affairs of individuals making private decisions for themselves. Even if they are dumb decisions...where would that stop? While Hanako example might be stretching things a bit...what else can we consider gambling? What else will be regulated for the 'public interest?' The government should only protect us from malicious individuals trying to take our life, liberty, and property. And it is incumbant upon anyone to prove to me how companies doing lootboxes violate either of those three precepts, in other words who is the perp and who is the victim in this crime. I don't think the comparison is poor at all. If a hypothetical business encouraged suicide as its business model, it would be exploiting poor mental health and vulnerability just like gambling does. The point of similarity is the exploitation of human psychology. The fact that nobody would actually get away with it is rather beside the point. To be clear, I don't classify casino gambling as harmful because of high rates of addiction. I do not know the statistics for gambling addiction. I consider it harmful because it exploits psychology in order to take people's money while giving them nothing, except the "fun" of risking said money. Even if you don't become addicted, you were still exploited ("harmed"). Similarly, even if you only smoke one cigarette and never become addicted or get lung cancer, that cigarette still harmed you. Cigarettes are literally poison, they possess no helpful or nutritional ingredients. Casinos, likewise, do nothing good for the people who partake. Cigarettes are intrinsically harmful, as is casino gambling. Even so, I do not personally advocate for making cigarettes *or* casinos illegal. I am simply saying there is a case to be made. I also have not said whether or not lootboxes are "gambling". This is a point on which I am undecided. Although even if they aren't, numerous studies show they have the same psychological impact, and I find that concerning. I think it's definitely a strong basis for arguing, at the very least, that they should be kept out of games that are rated for children, just like the fictional casinos that are standard in JRPGs (where no real life money is involved at all) are kept out of games rated for children in Europe and Australia. I don't see how anyone could reasonably oppose that. Surely even with your strong views on personal responsibility, you make some allowances for young children. Impulse control is a behaviour we all have to *learn*, we are not born with it. Again, to be clear, I am not personally arguing for all gambling content to be removed from games. I enjoy JRPG casinos very much. When the Game Corner was removed from the Pokemon series, I was disappointed. I think your assertion that families can help with addiction "better than the government can" is... mistaken. Better than the US government maybe, but the US government *has* the resources to build a proper mental health support network, and simply chooses to use them on tanks for the police instead. The US is the wealthiest country in the world. It could build an excellent public mental health network, if only it gave a fuck. Having to counsel your spouse on addiction while also personally dealing with the ramificiations of their disease (majority medical opinion is that addiction IS a disease, and should be treated as such), is a, frankly, ridiculous thing to ask of anybody. What exactly are they supposed to do? Read textbooks on psychotherapy to help the person who caused them to become homeless? Addiction *destroys* families. And as for professional help, how is someone in poverty as a result of gambling addiction supposed to get that? In other countries, my own and Europe, for example, there are avenues, provided by the government, through which one can gain access to subsidised or even free mental health services. Maybe they aren't as good as private services, I don't know, I can't afford private mental health. But surely it's better than the *nothing* that the US government provides. Finally, I have also not said that governments should interfere in people's personal lives. As a gay man, that would be a very stupid thing for me to say. I have said that they should regulate *industries*, which is not at all the same thing, and not even a strange thing to ask, because the US government, and most other functioning governments around the world, already have regulatory bodies for many, many industries. Food, Travel, Education, Film, Medicine, just to name a few. There is no good reason why the video game industry should be specially exempt, except a few people erroneously believe it would make video games less violent, which, aside from being incredibly unlikely is also not a real problem by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly not as real a problem as gambling addiction. COD doesn't render brain splatter on cement as realistically anymore? I shall play a sad song on the world's smallest violin.
|
|
helios969
N4
Kamisama
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Origin: helios969
Prime Posts: No Clue
Prime Likes: Who Cares
Posts: 1,853 Likes: 2,478
inherit
867
0
Apr 13, 2024 10:39:49 GMT
2,478
helios969
Kamisama
1,853
August 2016
helios969
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
helios969
No Clue
Who Cares
|
Post by helios969 on Sept 4, 2020 8:45:15 GMT
Personal responsibility, folks. It's something I'm seeing less and less of in society (at least American) and consequently, we have more and more laws to protect people from their own stupidity...or children from their own inept and lazy parents who cannot be bothered to properly teach their own. I kind of get tired of people blaming everyone else for their shortcomings. If you smoke you're going to have breathing issues, if you eat crap or eat 3x a serving size you're going to be fat, if you gamble you will lose (over the long haul)...I could go on and on about behavior. Our solution nowadays is to litigate everything...maybe if we didn't tie up our courts on stupid sh*t we might actually be able to address important social issues.
|
|