-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Belgium declares loot boxes gambling and therefore illegal
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
Right. The ability to cash out is actually precisely the problem I think the Netherlands had with stuff like CS:Go and its ability to sell stuff via the Steam Marketplace.
So you prefer to region-lock and offer store-exclusives instead of... random cards? I don't agree with you at all.
Well if you're already addicted, it can be hard to stop. I understand.
Personally I never used, because I saw how destructive they might be.
Do you think law makers care about gameplay advantages vs cosmetics?
Considering CS:GO items have real world value, and they are not okay, having real world value won't solve it and with items having real world value, it's way more gambling than regular lootboxes. (With Netherlands banning only lootboxes that contain items with real world value).
Ok? You're calling for something that you consider bad for customers banned and the solution you're giving is even more anti-customer. That's just madness. In which way region-locking and making store-exclusives is better than having the same but random stuff all over the world?
Couldn't they get around this by giving away "free" lootboxes with a currency purchase?
Currently, $40 gets you 50 lootboxes in OW. They could just have $40 get you 1000 gold + 50 "free" boxes.
Think I read Hearthstone works this way in China.
Currently, $40 gets you 50 lootboxes in OW. They could just have $40 get you 1000 gold + 50 "free" boxes.
Think I read Hearthstone works this way in China.
I wonder how they came to that determination? Why does giving a value to a card turn it into gambling? Is it because by saying "Card A is worth $100 but buy a pack for $5 for a CHANCE for this $100 card" means you're gambling for real "value" as opposed to secondary market perceived value?
That doesn't make sense to me because skins in something like CS:GO that you roll for have secondary market value (set by others?) and follows a similar model but IS considered gambling. Is it the physical nature of these goods that keep them safe?
I'm endlessly fascinated by this topic. But I prefer non-emotional arguments and more factual arguments because I like the data and reasoning.
It's because it falls under gambling, which is not exclusive to the Netherlands.
So you'll see similar stuff happen in Belgium, Germany, France, Spain, etc.
Regulation is something they can and are authored to do. This will not take care of the root of the problem, which needs new legislation to combat.
However considering the risks on minors and other vulnerable groups, this is a thing that probably will happen.
They've stated they haven't looked at all games this may apply to and thus obviously this would be an ongoing process.
Tbf that's not the only thing the Dutch Gaming Authority had problems with (also with slot machine sfx, frequency with which you could buy them, near miss mechanics, a complete lack of measures to counteract child addiction and more), this is just the problem that makes it clear cut illegal.
I honestly don't know.
Given the following choice:
A) Roll dice for swim suit that makes you look cute and that's all.
B) Roll dice for swim suit that makes you look cute AND gives you +1000 ATK.
I would say B is worse. I can see why people dislike A, but I haven't been able to convince myself that A is "bad". Of course, I do recognize that this sort of practice is predatory for younger audiences or those with addictive personalities. But I wasn't sure if lawmakers were going to consider the impact of spending real money to gamble on the chance to be better than others (versus just spending money to look different and have zero impact on gameplay performance).
That's why I enjoy this topic. This ruling is good, but it also doesn't really make sense because there are a TON of shitty mobile games and such that are much much worse than the big games mentioned in the ruling.
No i meant to people here and gaming industry whole? Is that just because people like star wars and nostalgia that triggers people like rhinos?
When i clicked on this thread i fully expected the thread title to be disconnected from the actual article, but it sounds like this is actually outlawing blind purchases in belgium, wow. What a great example to lead by.
After all the talk of "Nothing will come of this stop talking about it" and countless whataboutisms, its actually happening. As others have mentioned, it's hard to put into words how badly EA fucked up here.
After all the talk of "Nothing will come of this stop talking about it" and countless whataboutisms, its actually happening. As others have mentioned, it's hard to put into words how badly EA fucked up here.
Yeah the legal world also includes courts where this decision will be appealed or contested since these companies are not going to roll over. A gaming commission's decision is hardly the end of this.
Right. I'm just saying that when there is a defense offered for stuff like Trading Card Games that your local comic shop selling individual cards gives people a non-RNG alternative to buy stuff directly, it's worth pointing out that this exact defense makes it more like gambling in some people's eyes.
The definition of gambling is a legal one. The nation of Belgium can define gambling as anything it wants.
I fully understand that. I was mostly calling out the shriekers and shrillers that refused the idea that legal definitions can change.
I think this is a very winnable fight, though it is possible that scumbag companies could bribe lawmakers, undercut the court with slimy tricks, or otherwise viciously campaign against the law.
Lootboxes uses the same psychological hook as gambling does to make you spend money, but I really don't see what difference there is in lootboxes today that additional legislation must be made when blind boxes with the exact same psychological hook as been a thing forever. The only argument I can see is that the digital nature makes it easier to market an impulse purchase than going in a physical store?
I dunno about COD, but Battlefront 2 gutted its system and you can't buy lootcrates with any currency. They're only earned in game and they only have cosmetic items like emotes. Skins can be directly purchased with in game currency (credits) or for real money (crystals).
It takes time for things to rise on the public and political agenda. This has been a hot button topic the past year, and that's why it rose to the top. I don't think there's much more to it.
Based Belgium saving those people from the despair of not rolling Jeanne Alter
Unless Belgium decides to also ban blindboxes I think the video game lobbyists will have a pretty good defense case to appeal though.
Yup, this is what I was hoping for.
Hopefully this becomes a thing in other countries as well.
I don't think so really, because blindboxes (trading cards and such you mean?) are not almost 1:1 comparable to slot machines in terms of audiovisual stimuli, near miss effects, etc.
The definition is already there. They can change it to fit the new mold, but that won't happen overnight.
There aren't that many lootboxes using the CSGO gambling spinning case, most uses an animation of a box opening and revealing the content, like any blindbox. That audio-stimuli argument is pretty weak and easily sidestepped for devs to keep lootboxes in imo.
That's a pretty big assumption, we already know of two other gambling authorities that have ruled differently, it's unlikely all the EU countries are going to agree on Belgium's interpretation.
Those characteristics are also common to regular videogames, pinball tables, dart boards, skeeball machines, etc. Just because you can make some similar generalizations about an amusement device's appearance donesn't make it the same as a slot machine.
I wasn't saying that games have no effect on children, just that they can't really be said to be gambling addicts.
User Warned: Thread derailment attempt
https://www.theguardian.com/global-...-rape-laws-sexual-violence-study-equality-now
Priorities ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Priorities ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Which games don't do the visual effects then because just about every one I've seen does it?
If developers remove some of the hooks that make them so predatory, that's a win by me.
???
Yeah, but in 'regular videogames' and pinball tables the goal isn't to get a prize after put in microtransactions/coins; the goal is to enjoy yourself. And if you could get money out of a pinball table by 'winning', they would be in casinos, not arcades.
Nobody's saying kids will become gambling addicts per se; it's just making them more inclined to gamble, which, I assume you can agree with, is unhealthy.
Last edited:
YEAH!!!
"A statement from Minister of Justice Koen Geens said FIFA 18, Overwatch and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive were therefore illegal and demanded their loot boxes removed. If they're not, the publishers "risk a prison sentence of up to five years and a fine of up to 800,000 euros". When minors are involved, those punishments can be doubled, Greens added.
Belgium expressed a particular concern about the impact loot boxes have on young people. "It is often children who come into contact with such systems and we cannot allow that," Geens warned."
Very good !
"A statement from Minister of Justice Koen Geens said FIFA 18, Overwatch and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive were therefore illegal and demanded their loot boxes removed. If they're not, the publishers "risk a prison sentence of up to five years and a fine of up to 800,000 euros". When minors are involved, those punishments can be doubled, Greens added.
Belgium expressed a particular concern about the impact loot boxes have on young people. "It is often children who come into contact with such systems and we cannot allow that," Geens warned."
Very good !