http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/11/22/us-legislator-wants-to-limit-sale-of-games-with-loot-boxes-in-wake-of-battlefr...

I figure that since we have plenty of debates here on microtransactions, aesthetic items, the slippery slope, how EA and Activision are garbage, etc., I should post this here. Looks like EA finally pushed their bullshit far enough to get the government potentially involved. This'll be interesting to watch play out.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/11/22/us-legislator-wants-to-limit-sale-of-games-with-loot-boxes-in-wake-of-battlefr...

I figure that since we have plenty of debates here on microtransactions, aesthetic items, the slippery slope, how EA and Activision are garbage, etc., I should post this here. Looks like EA finally pushed their bullshit far enough to get the government potentially involved. This'll be interesting to watch play out.

I absolutely do not want legislation, but I DO want the ESRB ratings to reflect loot boxes. If it is indeed gambling, then you can make a game with them, but you just get an AO rating.

This will either do two things:

It will either destigmatize the AO rating and allow more creative freedom. Currently AO games aren't stocked in many retailers and both Sony and Microsoft will not put AO games on their stores. It's kind of like NC-17 for film; it's a death sentence for your game.

Or it will just prevent loot boxes entirely in order to not get an AO rating.

Either way, it's a win.

I absolutely do not want legislation, but I DO want the ESRB ratings to reflect loot boxes. If it is indeed gambling, then you can make a game with them, but you just get an AO rating.

This will either do two things:

It will either destigmatize the AO rating and allow more creative freedom. Currently AO games aren't stocked in many retailers and both Sony and Microsoft will not put AO games on their stores. It's kind of like NC-17; it's a death sentence for your game.

Or it will just prevent loot boxes entirely in order to not get an AO rating.

Either way, it's a win.

I'm down with that. My kneejerk reaction was not to legislate gaming, but what if the legislation was some sort of mandate for the ESRB regarding something along the lines of what you described? I'm not sure they'd ever go the AO route, though.

I absolutely do not want legislation, but I DO want the ESRB ratings to reflect loot boxes. If it is indeed gambling, then you can make a game with them, but you just get an AO rating.

This will either do two things:

It will either destigmatize the AO rating and allow more creative freedom. Currently AO games aren't stocked in many retailers and both Sony and Microsoft will not put AO games on their stores. It's kind of like NC-17; it's a death sentence for your game.

Or it will just prevent loot boxes entirely in order to not get an AO rating.

Either way, it's a win.

I'm down with that. My kneejerk reaction was not to legislate gaming, but what if the legislation was some sort of mandate for the ESRB regarding something along the lines of what you described? I'm not sure they'd ever go the AO route, though.

It's an awful idea to legislate the ratings boards. The whole point of them is to work without government interference. And I am pretty sure that legislating ratings is de facto censorship and a violation of amendment 1. We take free speech very seriously in the United States for good reason.

I definitely agree. I'm not sure where this may be heading, but it's going to get interesting if they're serious and if any legislation has any teeth to it. Legislation could lead to a lot of issues for gamers and gaming in general. And the ESRB is an entirely different issue, and I don't know if they'd ever tackle this issue.

I definitely agree. I'm not sure where this may be heading, but it's going to get interesting if they're serious and if any legislation has any teeth to it. Legislation could lead to a lot of issues for gamers and gaming in general. And the ESRB is an entirely different issue, and I don't know if they'd ever tackle this issue.

I don't know. Wasn't the ESRB created in response to the threat of government interference in gaming? If we're getting to that point again, they might have to take the hardline stance to avoid it.

That's neither here nor there.

Are lootboxes gambling? No. No more than baseball cards. You buy a pack hoping for an Aaron Judge rookie card but you get 3 Anibal Sanchezes. Are we going to legislate baseball cards for their predatory practices, encouraging kids to buy them with bubblegum? No. Cause it's not a problem.

Cody might be right that the ESRB should do something, although I don't think an AO rating helps. Maybe like a little sticker saying "in game micro transactions," as a warning.

Maybe like a little sticker saying "in game micro transactions," as a warning.

The fuss right now isn't about microtransactions, though a warning about those should be in place (hell, Google's app store has this warning). The problem is about loot boxes.

I agree that the government shouldn't legislate on this. This is the kind of thing you're much better off with the ESRB ratings that the publishers (for now) still deeply care about. I mean, how many times do we hear about games going back to the devs for changes to comply with a less-severe ESRB score?

If I buy trading cards, at least I get actual products. I can sell them or trade them. It’s even in the name! Don’t get me wrong, I think trading cards are bullshit too.

If I buy loot boxes, mostly I’m just getting screwed. I would argue that Destiny 2 isn’t too bad. Most items seem to have a “fair” value if you break them down into dust. I put fair in quotes because it’s hard to judge with a system like that. Maybe “not unreasonable” would work better.

He did not suggest that, though.

I think maybe in the EU such rating is law. I`d remind you that any rating system is always vulnerable to individuals with an agenda. Ratings can be used as tool to unfairly censor content if it is not run by the government too. In general, though, the whole point is protecting kids from experienced they aren´t equipped psychologically to deal with. I don´t see the children being very concerned with free speech. In some countries it is illegal to sell adult rated content to kids. This is a part of a greater discussion we could have about trust and distrust in ones government. And where the limits of it´s mandate should be, especially over parents rights to decide what is best for their kids. We don´t have to go into that. But, I think in the US many are quick to push that responsibility on the parents, which is fair. But, the counter arguments is that this is not really protecting the children where the parents aren´t. And at the end of the day parents vote.

Keep in mind, I have limited knowledge on the actual laws. I neither live in the US or the EU. And I am not advocating changing anything about the institution that is ESRB. I´m just saying you think it is about free speech, because for you it is. That is not all there is to it.

All subscription boxes like Loot Crate should be banned. I absolutely hate them. Carry-on

In some countries it is illegal to sell adult rated content to kids.

Actually, laws were passed here in several states to make that so, but they were struck down as unconstitutional at great cost to us taxpayers.

- No text -

I'll continue collecting random neat things that cost me lower than equivalent market value which can be utilized as gifts or for trade in at my local hobby store when I don't want the items thank you very much.

- No text -

I agree, but some games with random drops also have marketplaces where it can go back into money. The examples that they list are not gambling, but Diablo 2 (as much as I understand their system from afar) could have a colorable argument that it is both gambling and maybe commodities trading.

I figure myself pretty willing to allow the government to regulate industries when that industry will otherwise lead to a harmful practice But…

• Government legislating creative content is terrifying.
  
• Government legislating restrictions that extend past the age of majority is worrisome.
  
• Government trying to do an end-run around the constitution by re-framing a product as something that it clearly is not (see more thoughts on "gambling" below) is a slippery slope leading to thorns.
  
• This person clearly has no idea what gambling and/or the loot boxes are. One of these things are not like the other.

If they are so gung-ho on protecting consumers from the predatory practices of tech industry, they can please pay attesting to the FCC de-regulations that are moving through committees right now. Please.

Oh, okay. I did not know that. Working out if something is unconstitutional does not strike me as a waste of money.

Actually I think periodically updating laws to fit modern society is very important. I believe the constitution kind of functions as a buffer so changes do not happen too fast that may infringe on peoples fundamental rights or core values. If there is real will and consensus that something is a positive change people will work around the constitution.. Or other places than the US, update the darn thing.. (I don´t think the short list of amendments I´ve read really counts as changing anything about it. But, hey.. It is the basis of your whole nation state, and it is fine to hold it in high regard.)

Asking yourself if something strictly needs to be regulated by the government seems reasonable to me. I respect that principle. And arguably that seems to have worked with ESRB--But don´t forget that in this case we are talking about kids and gambling. Currently the gaming industry is not keeping itself in check. Your laws are obviously up to you to decide. Mind you, this will also be an issue outside of the US. Legislature in those markets might end up influence the loot box game design trend instead. That´s just some thoughts thrown out there..

Btw. The Dude Soup podcast had an interview with a video game attorney a while back (#146, about 30 minutes in). That´s worth a listen..

Oh, okay. I did not know that. Working out if something is unconstitutional does not strike me as a waste of money.

It was a waste of money, because these laws were repeatedly passed, with the politicians fully well knowing they would get struck down as all the other ones have in the past. It just gives them the illusion of doing something for the kids.

Asking yourself if something strictly needs to be regulated by the government seems reasonable to me. I respect that principle. And arguably that seems to have worked with ESRB--But don´t forget that in this case we are talking about kids and gambling. Currently the gaming industry is not keeping itself in check.

Which is why rating games with loot boxes AO is the perfect solution. No government oversight, and because of the nature of the rating, the abusive practices will vanish. And if you want loot boxes in your game you can still do it.

- No text -

https://www.lootcrate.com/crates/destiny2