Selling Gambling to Children - Do we ACTUALLY care?

Kerg3927

New member
Jun 8, 2015
496
0
0
MHR said:
However, I couldn't give a crap to the damage it does to those morons. They deserve it if you ask me. I partially consider it to be schadenfreude; seeing someone screw themselves over has a perverse sense of satisfaction, a self-inflicted justice. It's quite amusing to imagine some idiot kid using mommy's credit card to flush away hundreds on a stupid video game and see the veins on daddy's head pop out as he yells at them.

It's the same as seeing someone comically bumble their way into an electric fence. But I suppose the debate is more about whether there should be an electric fence in the first place where kids can bump into it.

But no, I don't really care. In fact, if it were a way to fund free updates for free games like TF2, I don't care if it drains a toddler's college fund, I'd be all for it.
Lol
 

WeepingAngels

New member
May 18, 2013
1,722
0
0
RaikuFA said:
For those who use the TCG comparison: you're getting a physical good out of it. You can sell/trade cards for other cards. You can't trade your Mercy Halloween skin for that Roadhog Halloween skin. But I'm sure I can trade a Take Inventory for a Desert of the Indomitable.
You buy a loot crate/pack of cards and you don't really know what you are going to get, that is the issue here and being able to trade cards doesn't nullify that.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 12, 2020
4,469
2,274
118
Country
United States
WeepingAngels said:
RaikuFA said:
For those who use the TCG comparison: you're getting a physical good out of it. You can sell/trade cards for other cards. You can't trade your Mercy Halloween skin for that Roadhog Halloween skin. But I'm sure I can trade a Take Inventory for a Desert of the Indomitable.
You buy a loot crate/pack of cards and you don't really know what you are going to get, that is the issue here and being able to trade cards doesn't nullify that.
Nah. Actually getting a physical thing you own and can do with what you want is a fairly significant difference. Especially opposed to something the company can take back or delete on a whim.

If Wizards of the Coast stops supporting Magic tomorrow, we can still use those random cards we bought. What happens to your loot boxes when the Overwatch servers go down?
 

WeepingAngels

New member
May 18, 2013
1,722
0
0
altnameJag said:
WeepingAngels said:
RaikuFA said:
For those who use the TCG comparison: you're getting a physical good out of it. You can sell/trade cards for other cards. You can't trade your Mercy Halloween skin for that Roadhog Halloween skin. But I'm sure I can trade a Take Inventory for a Desert of the Indomitable.
You buy a loot crate/pack of cards and you don't really know what you are going to get, that is the issue here and being able to trade cards doesn't nullify that.
Nah. Actually getting a physical thing you own and can do with what you want is a fairly significant difference. Especially opposed to something the company can take back or delete on a whim.

If Wizards of the Coast stops supporting Magic tomorrow, we can still use those random cards we bought. What happens to your loot boxes when the Overwatch servers go down?
It may be a significant difference it's just not relevant here where we are discussing gambling as that applies to both.
 

Korskarn

New member
Sep 9, 2008
72
0
0
babinro said:
Team Fortress was the first major franchise to popularize this concept to my knowledge.
We've had literally DECADES of facebook games and mobile games doing this.
Tons of credible free to play games have done something similar as well.

So the issue has been around for decades...children have had access to it for decades WITH NO BARRIER TO ENTRY SINCE IT WAS OFTEN FREE TO PLAY on platforms kids have direct access to.
Facebook has only been around since 2004, and only opened to the general public in 2006. The iPhone and the growth of mobile gaming has only been around since 2007. It has not been "literally DECADES" - that would involve more than one decade, and back in 1997 even Everquest and Neopets were still just in the concept phase.

Free-to-Play as a business model has only been around since 1999 with the release of QuizQuiz in Korea, but in the West it would arguably take until 2009 with Farmville for free-to-play to gain mass appeal. "Loot Boxes", with the added factor of not actually knowing in advance what you are paying for, weren't created until 2007 on ZT Online and again only came to the West later, in 2010 with Team Fortress 2.

So, no, we haven't had decades of free-to-play games, nor Facebook and mobile platforms on which to play them. For the vast majority of people, free-to-play is not even a decade old - and lootboxes are an even newer phenomenon. Despite it feeling like they've been around forever.
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,577
0
0
WeepingAngels said:
altnameJag said:
WeepingAngels said:
RaikuFA said:
For those who use the TCG comparison: you're getting a physical good out of it. You can sell/trade cards for other cards. You can't trade your Mercy Halloween skin for that Roadhog Halloween skin. But I'm sure I can trade a Take Inventory for a Desert of the Indomitable.
You buy a loot crate/pack of cards and you don't really know what you are going to get, that is the issue here and being able to trade cards doesn't nullify that.
Nah. Actually getting a physical thing you own and can do with what you want is a fairly significant difference. Especially opposed to something the company can take back or delete on a whim.

If Wizards of the Coast stops supporting Magic tomorrow, we can still use those random cards we bought. What happens to your loot boxes when the Overwatch servers go down?
It may be a significant difference it's just not relevant here where we are discussing gambling as that applies to both.
It actually does represent a significant difference since there is a thriving second hand market that, as a physical good, the double (or triple and quadruple if we're honest) cards can be exchanged with other players of the games for ones you don't have or even sold to a different merchant for a (admittedly minimal) monetary return.

It also doesn't cripple the gameplay since the base game of Pokemon or Magic can be purchased by someone, and then sit down with a like minded player and have multiple fulfilling matches without laying hands on a single booster pack.

I admit this is a myopic viewpoint since I grew up on Magic the Gathering and Pokemon TCG and Australian Rugby cards before that.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0
McElroy said:
Other kinds of greed existing does not mean this is not greed. It means you want to invest in Whataboutism. It's greedy and it's wrong. If you don't agree, then that problem is yours. Nothing grumpus about it. It's morality. I'm demonstrating a moral fiber. If you don't like it, that's not my concern. It's still bad and it will be bad, regardless. You didn't make it less true. You only pointed out that there was more greed, which just means that there's more deplorable greed in the world. That's fine, but that doesn't mean you ignore one for the other. They're both bad, and you should feel that they're bad.
 

WeepingAngels

New member
May 18, 2013
1,722
0
0
Gordon_4 said:
WeepingAngels said:
altnameJag said:
WeepingAngels said:
RaikuFA said:
For those who use the TCG comparison: you're getting a physical good out of it. You can sell/trade cards for other cards. You can't trade your Mercy Halloween skin for that Roadhog Halloween skin. But I'm sure I can trade a Take Inventory for a Desert of the Indomitable.
You buy a loot crate/pack of cards and you don't really know what you are going to get, that is the issue here and being able to trade cards doesn't nullify that.
Nah. Actually getting a physical thing you own and can do with what you want is a fairly significant difference. Especially opposed to something the company can take back or delete on a whim.

If Wizards of the Coast stops supporting Magic tomorrow, we can still use those random cards we bought. What happens to your loot boxes when the Overwatch servers go down?
It may be a significant difference it's just not relevant here where we are discussing gambling as that applies to both.
It actually does represent a significant difference since there is a thriving second hand market that, as a physical good, the double (or triple and quadruple if we're honest) cards can be exchanged with other players of the games for ones you don't have or even sold to a different merchant for a (admittedly minimal) monetary return.

It also doesn't cripple the gameplay since the base game of Pokemon or Magic can be purchased by someone, and then sit down with a like minded player and have multiple fulfilling matches without laying hands on a single booster pack.

I admit this is a myopic viewpoint since I grew up on Magic the Gathering and Pokemon TCG and Australian Rugby cards before that.
They are both gambling, the ability to trade the cards doesn't change that.
 

McElroy

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,203
215
68
Finland
FalloutJack said:
McElroy said:
Other kinds of greed existing does not mean this is not greed. It means you want to invest in Whataboutism. It's greedy and it's wrong. If you don't agree, then that problem is yours. Nothing grumpus about it. It's morality. I'm demonstrating a moral fiber. If you don't like it, that's not my concern. It's still bad and it will be bad, regardless. You didn't make it less true. You only pointed out that there was more greed, which just means that there's more deplorable greed in the world. That's fine, but that doesn't mean you ignore one for the other. They're both bad, and you should feel that they're bad.
I definitely don't agree. You have a simplistic view of either gambling or greed (or both) OR you share this world with an uncountable amount of unforgivably greedy people, and that would make anybody into a grump.

My point is that your point of view might be impossible to relate to - your moral fiber being so stiff.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0
McElroy said:
Snip fo' space
Well, I can't agree to your not agreeing. You're being weirdly stiff about me not liking gambling and casinos - which DO take advantage of people by causing a psychological addiction - and not stiff enough about gambling itself because you want to prioritize Black Friday. Well, Black Friday is bad TOO - as people go fucking nuts and all the employees of the stores are miserable - but it doesn't supplant the importance of this issue. I'm not saying that you're wrong, Elroy. I'm saying you're not right enough. I'm saying your plate is big enough to disapprove of both things, and that you should because both are horrible. That's it.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 12, 2020
4,469
2,274
118
Country
United States
WeepingAngels said:
They are both gambling, the ability to trade the cards doesn't change that.
Nope. Random doesn't automatically equal gambling.

Blind bag minis aren't gambling. Sports cards aren't gambling. TCG's aren't gambling (they were at one point, but then rules changed so that players weren't playing to win each other's cards). POGs were not gambling, though they were often used to gamble. Cakewalks are gambling, because they're used to raise money, but they often get a pass because they often raise money for charity.

Does this seem slightly arbitrary? Good, glad you're paying attention. What is and is not considered gambling is arbitrary, and up to public opinion and lawmakers. There isn't some codified ruelset that you can point to to make solid definitions for gambling in meatspace. Magic tournaments with cash prizes aren't gambling because Magic isn't played to gamble. Poker tournaments are gambling because Poker is Gambling. Yahtzee isn't gambling unless you play for enough money to have the government want to take their cut, Craps is always Gambling[footnote]some weird racial undertones to that one in the States[/footnote]. Baseball cards aren't gambling even though some are worth a lot of money, because that is not the point of baseball cards.

Electronic lootcrates use the mechanics of gambling to sell you things you do not own. That should be regulated. Hell, at bare freaking minimum they should have to post the actual percentage stats. Shitty Japanese Gatcha games can do that much. Because they have to.
 

CannibalCorpses

New member
Aug 21, 2011
987
0
0
Gambling:

noun

1. the activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes.
2. the act or practice of risking the loss of something important by taking a chance or acting recklessly:

Purchase:

noun

1. to acquire by the payment of money or its equivalent; buy.

Since you get a thing everytime you spend your money this practice is a tough one to call gambling. It's a gamble to the purchaser but not truly gambling in the sense of legislated slot machines or betting on the horses etc. You always get a thing for your money, despite that thing being random and often useless to you.

I don't like the system and have never contributed to it. I'd like to see them scrap it but i just heard that activision made 3 billion dollars profit last year from microtransactions alone...i can see why they wont do it without a fight. My guess is that they will pretend to backtrack a bit and just keep milking the shit out of you stupid consumers
 

McElroy

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,203
215
68
Finland
FalloutJack said:
Well, I can't agree to your not agreeing. You're being weirdly stiff about me not liking gambling and casinos - which DO take advantage of people by causing a psychological addiction - and not stiff enough about gambling itself because you want to prioritize Black Friday. Well, Black Friday is bad TOO - as people go fucking nuts and all the employees of the stores are miserable - but it doesn't supplant the importance of this issue. I'm not saying that you're wrong, Elroy. I'm saying you're not right enough. I'm saying your plate is big enough to disapprove of both things, and that you should because both are horrible. That's it.
Y'know, I think I got a little carried away and fell into the classic internet trap of thinking the other person is just making crazy generalizations for the heck of it. Personally, my perspective into gambling is probably different as every supermarket and gas station is a small "casino" in Finland. Gambling, sports betting, horse races, and lotteries belong exclusively to a state-owned company that redistributes the income to social programs as well as sports and art. This "charity cut" is also always taken first before anybody wins anything so one doesn't even have to feel bad for getting the jackpot.

I can't *exactly* know where you stand, but where one sews their moral fiber is a hard case if one really wants to think it through. P2W is easy to condemn as greed, because it undermines the integrity of gaming (at least for some), but knowing that "microtransaction whales" exist it's dumb not to offer them a service they want. Or let's think about the Black Friday deal I was referring to: HTC Vive for 300 bucks in an online store. The catch: limited offer, only the FIRST THREE would be getting it. There is no longer any semblance of reason to try to get it as everyone with 300 or more to spend will be smashing F5 at 8 in the morning to try to be the lucky one. It would be dumb not to try. Note: I missed the deal.
 

CritialGaming

New member
Mar 25, 2015
2,170
0
0
babinro said:
Potentially controversial topic ahead but one I feel could be interesting.

I'm sure many people here are at least vaguely familiar with the Battlefront 2 news surrounding loot boxes. Essentially, negative PR has lead to people and even countries calling out Loot boxes as potentially predatory practices that are akin to legal gambling accessible to children. The reason for this is because loot boxes represent random rewards for money spent where it could take an excessive amount of spending until you get the thing you desire (assuming you ever do).

I've seen a lot of people jump on board this issue and using the defense of children as the0 major point to strengthen their beliefs.



This is where things get interesting/controversial....

If this was our personal belief all along then why did it take until 2017 for this to become a HUGE issue in gaming?

Team Fortress was the first major franchise to popularize this concept to my knowledge.
We've had literally DECADES of facebook games and mobile games doing this.
Tons of credible free to play games have done something similar as well.

So the issue has been around for decades...children have had access to it for decades WITH NO BARRIER TO ENTRY SINCE IT WAS OFTEN FREE TO PLAY on platforms kids have direct access to.

If this issue truly is an ETHICAL and MORALE one...why did we stay silent?


It's my opinion that people getting on board the 'gambling to children' bandwagon are using it as a crutch to justify their actual purely selfish preferences on game design.


It reminds me of other controversial debates you'd hear about growing up from generation's prior. Don't listen to that music because _______. Don't play D&D because of _____.


Maybe being able to unite under a single reason that sounds good is all that matters if it leads to positive change?


Personal Note: Not that it should matter but I have not played any of the big 2017 loot box games. This post isn't coming from any personal bias for or against any particular game getting backlash. I don't personally care for loot box progression as a concept so I simply didn't buy any of those games.
To be fair, most Facebook and Mobile games have had microtransactions, not loot boxes. Theses are two different things that need to be made separately.

Lootboxes are gambling because the items you receive are RANDOM. Microtransactions are not random, you want the extra skin for a character in league? You buy it. You want a bigger space for your farmville farm, you buy it. There is no guessing, no risk that you aren;t getting want you are trying to pay for.

Whereas in lootboxes, you are paying for mystery items, most of which are basically trash and are of no interest or value to the player.

This goes against the ruling the ESRB made saying that gambling has a risk of getting nothing, but Lootboxes always give SOMETHING. There is value being given to the player even if it is minimal.

Now a better argument would be Trading Card Games which are basically also gambling in the same way lootboxes are gambling. Typically people buy randomized booster packs to hopefully get the good card they want, or multiple copies of said good card.

The biggest difference here is that kids can't just buy a bunch of booster packs in a physical card game for a couple of reasons. Number 1, they don't have access to the store 24/7 so there is very little possibility of buying on reflex or impulse. Number 2, video games like Battlefront 2 are constantly advertising and pushing these lootbox purchases on the player, meaning kids are going to be more highly exposed to this things and thus more likely to buy into them.

Even Shadow of War advertises the lootboxes literally everytime you pause the game. Remember how many times your parents made you pause the game as a kid to do something? Think about getting asked to buy shit every single fucking time you so much as pause the game. Keeping things fresh in kid's minds like that makes them more and more likely to ask for it.

Now it obviously falls upon parents to control extra spending their kids might do or want. But frankly parents also shouldn't have to deal with what amounts to an exploitative toy store constantly in their kids face. Video games should be a thing you buy and a thing you play, not a thing you buy and a thing that constantly keeps asking you to buy.
 

-Dragmire-

King over my mind
Mar 29, 2011
2,821
0
0
CannibalCorpses said:
Gambling:

noun

1. the activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes.
2. the act or practice of risking the loss of something important by taking a chance or acting recklessly:

Purchase:

noun

1. to acquire by the payment of money or its equivalent; buy.

Since you get a thing everytime you spend your money this practice is a tough one to call gambling. It's a gamble to the purchaser but not truly gambling in the sense of legislated slot machines or betting on the horses etc. You always get a thing for your money, despite that thing being random and often useless to you.

I don't like the system and have never contributed to it. I'd like to see them scrap it but i just heard that activision made 3 billion dollars profit last year from microtransactions alone...i can see why they wont do it without a fight. My guess is that they will pretend to backtrack a bit and just keep milking the shit out of you stupid consumers
Would slot machines still be gambling if they guaranteed a return of a random sticker or something else equally meaningless? I don't think that even if you technically get a thing, that it stops being gambling.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
-Dragmire- said:
CannibalCorpses said:
Gambling:

noun

1. the activity or practice of playing at a game of chance for money or other stakes.
2. the act or practice of risking the loss of something important by taking a chance or acting recklessly:

Purchase:

noun

1. to acquire by the payment of money or its equivalent; buy.

Since you get a thing everytime you spend your money this practice is a tough one to call gambling. It's a gamble to the purchaser but not truly gambling in the sense of legislated slot machines or betting on the horses etc. You always get a thing for your money, despite that thing being random and often useless to you.

I don't like the system and have never contributed to it. I'd like to see them scrap it but i just heard that activision made 3 billion dollars profit last year from microtransactions alone...i can see why they wont do it without a fight. My guess is that they will pretend to backtrack a bit and just keep milking the shit out of you stupid consumers
Would slot machines still be gambling if they guaranteed a return of a random sticker or something else equally meaningless? I don't think that even if you technically get a thing, that it stops being gambling.
In the 1800s the official British lottery had a point where you were guaranteed to get, at the very least, 10% of your money back.

It was still gambling.
 

Roboshi

New member
Jul 28, 2008
229
0
0
WeepingAngels said:
They are both gambling, the ability to trade the cards doesn't change that.
That's certainly a good point, and personally I think having a random box of some kind is not inherently a bad thing. But Yugioh or pokemon TCG doesn't come with a rolling roulette wheel or flashing lights to get the dopamine running through your brain. I think there's something to the fact card booster pack unwrapping videos get a fraction of the views any lootbox opening is.

I think parents have an easier time curbing the overpurchase of trading cards. Very few people would give heir kids unlimited access to their amazon account to buy booster packs, meanwhile how many parents will accidentally leave their credit card info on psn?

Really there are gonna be 3 groups of people, ones who are angry because they want to protect kids, those who want to cause a stink for the business practise and are using kids to get their way and those who care about both and find that the fact this corporate greed is now actively harming it't younger users.