Assassins Creed Mirage rated 'AO' due to containing 'real gambling'

01011001

Gold Member
this is not lootboxes.

real gambling in ESRB ratings means that there will be a currency you can wager.
this currency will be available to be purchased for real money.

basically you will be able to buy in game money, and you can play minigames inside the game where you can lose or win more of the currency.

AC had currency packs you can buy since at least 3 games.
meaning there's nothing new here to see, other than there's now confirmed to be an in-game minigame of sorts where you can lose in-game currency and win in-game currency
 

Moses85

Member
I had hope but I forgot they are still Ubicrap.

i hate them episode 2 GIF by Star Wars
 

RoadHazard

Gold Member
Lol, that would make the game illegal in several countries. I doubt they are that dumb.

Edit: Well, maybe not illegal. But it would be classified as gambling, as this says, which would probably make it illegal to sell to minors at least. I think.
 
Last edited:
They'll almost certainly try and lower the rating, but to all the people saying "Xbox/Playstation/Nintendo wouldn't sell AO games on their marketplace" I kind of disagree if it's AO due to something like lootboxes, until recently AO meant basically a porn simulator or super beyond excessive violence like the Postal games. They could definitely make an exception for loot boxes as they're very clearly not the same level of severity and not the same "type" of AO game that those companies would never allow on their stores.
 

Eddie-Griffin

Cancer the womens baby so we can pregnant the panda, we are looking for igloos tonight Are you sexy?
Do AO titles even exist on console?

Very hard to get AO on consoles, all AO games have been on PC. The only time there was ever almost a game that was AO on consoles was the original San Andreas even though that rectangular polygon ride to hell style clothed sex scene was not even obsene enough to warrant that. Now that Ride to hell has released that's actually much worse and that was never rated AO.

But Rockstar edited that out and the game sold at it's normal M rating, no other time. Oh and there was some boobs in some FMV game that was cut out on the on CD-i.
 

lmimmfn

Member
When did ubisoft release something of interest? Splinter Cell games maybe blackflag or Rainbow 6 Vegas 1/2.

They're completely irrelevant in the gaming scene unless you like a map full of icons and busy work, so this is good, fleece the suckeres that play their games when theyre all the same reskinned game.

The producers of the most soulless games on the planet.

I can't remember the last time I launched UPlay on PC, ughhhh
 
Last edited:

Gambit2483

Member
When did ubisoft release something of interest? Splinter Cell games maybe blackflag or Rainbow 6 Vegas 1/2.

They're completely irrelevant in the gaming scene unless you like a map full of icons and busy work, so this is good, fleece the suckeres that play their games when theyre all the same reskinned game.

The producers of the most soulless games on the planet.

TBF Assassin's Creed and Far Cry still sell millions worlwide...but yea, they appear to be a Publisher/Developer now past their prime
 

Pelta88

Member
AO is a non factor for me.

There's simply no way I can support this predatory practice or help sustain it via a purchase.
 

spons

Gold Member
I don't believe this game is going to be good if the previous three are any indication. Even thinking about the current state of this series makes me yawn. So incredibly uninspired and boring.
 

Elysion

Member
Microsoft is telling indie devs to censor women in bikinis now. Playground Games (Forza Horizon) is banning people for drawing WW2 pin-up girls on cars.

Seriously?

Man, at this rate Nintendo will end up being the ‘cool’ and ‘edgy’ one out of the big three.
 
Last edited:

baphomet

Member
A lotta dumb asses in this thread actually believe theres going to be real gambling in this game lol.

What do you think is going to be in it then?

Because I would say buying currency with real money, placing wagers on games, and winning or losing that currency would absolutely be "real gambling."
 

mdkirby

Member
Think we need more information. It’s quite likely people are massively over reacting and jumping the gun.

I do not know if this is the case with ESRB, but with the PEGI rating system they made a change a few years ago that instantly (and retroactively) made any games with any simulated gambling that was a representation of real world gambling, ie a poker game 18+ only. Making things like previously U rated Pokémon games suddenly 18+

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2...es_of_old_pokemon_games_could_be_rated_18plus

It could be something like that. Or Ubisoft have tried something extremely suspect and have been flagged for it, and will have to change course.
 

EDMIX

Member
They basically cut the price in half, so i wonder if this is just going to be far smaller than valhalla.

? Well I think they already confirmed this is like the first AC titles, not like the larger open world titles like Valhalla.


In terms of the whole gambling minigame, Idgaf lol I'm not paying any real money, thus don't give a shit.

Day 1.

This is a nothing story lol
 
What do you think is going to be in it then?

Because I would say buying currency with real money, placing wagers on games, and winning or losing that currency would absolutely be "real gambling."

Where does it say that this game will have wagering?>
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
Loot boxes are gambling.
No, they are not.

You can't earn real money with loot boxes. Plus if loot boxes are gambling then all Mario Bros are gambling, because not only the paid ones are loot boxes.

They will. You can't release a AAA AO game. It would be financial suicide.
GTA San Andreas was a AAA AO, and wasn't an example of financial suicide exactly. It was the opposite.

Very hard to get AO on consoles, all AO games have been on PC. The only time there was ever almost a game that was AO on consoles was the original San Andreas even though that rectangular polygon ride to hell style clothed sex scene was not even obsene enough to warrant that. Now that Ride to hell has released that's actually much worse and that was never rated AO.
It is as hard as to get any other rating. There has been many AO games more in console, but publishers always tried to avoid it because some US retailers won't put AO games on their physical shelves. Nowadays publishers don't care that much about physical stores, because most game sales are digital and a good chunk of the physical ones are bought in online stores like Amazon.

AC Mirage already is on the Xbox and PS digital stores to be preordered, plus in Amazon.
 
Last edited:

AMSCD

Member
No, they are not.

You can't earn real money with loot boxes. Plus if loot boxes are gambling then all Mario Bros are gambling, because not only the paid ones are loot boxes.


GTA San Andreas was a AAA AO, and wasn't an example of financial suicide exactly. It was the opposite.


It is as hard as to get any other rating. There has been many AO games more in console, but publishers always tried to avoid it because some US retailers won't put AO games on their physical shelves. Nowadays publishers don't care that much about physical stores, because most game sales are digital and a good chunk of the physical ones are bought in online stores like Amazon.

AC Mirage already is on the Xbox and PS digital stores to be preordered, plus in Amazon.
Loot boxes are gambling. The legal test for gambling is (a) consideration/payment; (b) chance; and (c) a prize. Loot boxes satisfy that legal test.
 

AJUMP23

Member
That is why it is $10 cheaper so they can get you into the casino. Lower the cover charge. Wait until they have a ladies night to get all the nerds in.
 
It's literally what this thread is about?

It's straight up what real gambling means to the ESRB.

What you think this was about lootboxes?

I know what this thread is about. What I am asking you is where is the evidence that this game has wagering? Because if this game does have wagering (ie: placing a bet on the unknown outcome of an event) then this game could not be sold in the US unless UBI has a gaming license in all US states that allow gambling and would be outright illegal in California since that state does not allow online gambling.

So yes, I think this "real gambling" that is being referred to in this thread is actually about lootboxes since so many people in this thread think lootboxes are gambling (which they clearly are not).
 

baphomet

Member
I know what this thread is about. What I am asking you is where is the evidence that this game has wagering? Because if this game does have wagering (ie: placing a bet on the unknown outcome of an event) then this game could not be sold in the US unless UBI has a gaming license in all US states that allow gambling and would be outright illegal in California since that state does not allow online gambling.

So yes, I think this "real gambling" that is being referred to in this thread is actually about lootboxes since so many people in this thread think lootboxes are gambling (which they clearly are not).

There's no cashing out to real money so they don't need any sort of gaming license.

The ESRB is crystal clear about what it means. There's no question about what it is, and it's not loot boxes.

-Real Gambling
Player can gamble, including betting or wagering real cash or currency

-Simulated Gambling
Player can gamble without betting or wagering real cash or currency

Loot boxes are covered under the below rating.

-In-Game Purchases (Includes Random Items)
Contains in-game offers to purchase digital goods or premiums with real world currency (or with virtual coins or other forms of in-game currency that can be purchased with real world currency) for which the player doesn’t know prior to purchase the specific digital goods or premiums they will be receiving (e.g., loot boxes, item packs, mystery awards).
 
There's no cashing out to real money so they don't need any sort of gaming license.

The ESRB is crystal clear about what it means. There's no question about what it is, and it's not loot boxes.

-Real Gambling
Player can gamble, including betting or wagering real cash or currency

-Simulated Gambling
Player can gamble without betting or wagering real cash or currency

Loot boxes are covered under the below rating.

-In-Game Purchases (Includes Random Items)
Contains in-game offers to purchase digital goods or premiums with real world currency (or with virtual coins or other forms of in-game currency that can be purchased with real world currency) for which the player doesn’t know prior to purchase the specific digital goods or premiums they will be receiving (e.g., loot boxes, item packs, mystery awards).

Show me evidence that real gambling exists in this game. Real gambling means winning a real prize. Placing a real money "wager" to win a cosmetic or some virtual currency isn't gambling.
 

baphomet

Member
Show me evidence that real gambling exists in this game. Real gambling means winning a real prize. Placing a real money "wager" to win a cosmetic or some virtual currency isn't gambling.

Are you dumb?

The ESRB just making shit up when they rate games now? It's clear as fucking day what they mean by real gambling.

I posted it directly from the ESRB above. It's being able to gamble and wager currency purchased by real money in the game. The "prize" is the ability to win (or more likely lose) the currency you spent real money on.
 
Show me evidence that real gambling exists in this game. Real gambling means winning a real prize. Placing a real money "wager" to win a cosmetic or some virtual currency isn't gambling.

Well, it isn't *legally* gambling at least. Personally I would personally consider a real money wager towards a chance of winning an item to be gambling regardless of other elements, but the law doesn't.

My opinion is that if the ESRB did rate the game AO on the basis of it containing "real gambling" then it contains what the law defines as gambling. What I'm curious about is whether or not the report is true... the article cites a reveal trailer and the Xbox store listing, but also states that another upload of the trailer says "rating pending". Does the ESRB not have any kind of official listing of its ratings? Ratings organisations in other countries often do but given that the ESRB is an industry organisation rather than a governmental one then perhaps it doesn't?

e: while I want to believe that the new Ass Creed game has actual real money gambling, and while I think it's a wet dream of all investors and corpos to insert aggressive monetisation into everything, it would be extremely bold of them to implement real money gambling into one of these games. They'd be much more likely to implement a pseudo-gambling system where you win game items. Too many countries regulate gambling for it to make sense... they'd have to conform to whatever the most severe gambling laws are. It doesn't make sense. My prediction is that the rating is incorrect and the game does not contain gambling.
 
Last edited:

baphomet

Member
Either way it's not going to be released as an AO game.

Whatever the ESRB is seeing as real gambling will be changed just enough so that it no longer qualifies for it, and you'll get another generic ass mature rated game with plenty of loot boxes and in game purchases for everyone.
 

Valonquar

Member
See at least in Red Dead Redemption 2, when I'm playing Texas Hold em and the cocksucker at the other end of the table pulls 2 back to back full houses followed by quads I can just stand up and murder everyone in the bar.
 
Either way it's not going to be released as an AO game.

Whatever the ESRB is seeing as real gambling will be changed just enough so that it no longer qualifies for it, and you'll get another generic ass mature rated game with plenty of loot boxes and in game purchases for everyone.
Exactly. I personally question the veracity of the reports about the AO rating, but I'll accept if they were testing the lines of the industry group— the ESRB— responsible for ratings. Who knows what the politics are like between these groups. But Ubi is not going to broach that line in the US, and they aren't going to expose their game to even more severe gambling laws elsewhere. They're going to release a shit game as per usual and normies are going to buy it, and a few whales will buy loot boxes... they would LOVE to expand their profits but they aren't idiots y'know?
 

Spaceman292

Banned
So can't you just, you know, choose not to do it.

But I get it, some people love to be dramatic.
Such a dumb argument that still pops up in these threads.

The balance of the game will be based around the gambling shit and will mess it up, just like the last few ubi grindathons. Remember how the pacing of Odyssey was glacially slow and it kept telling you to buy progression points? It's also about ubi wanting to hook the people who can't belp but to gamble because they've got compulsive tendancies.
 
Last edited:
I suspect given the variation in ESRB qualifications between lootboxes and gambling, that this alleged rating has floated too far into the gambling camp because Ubisoft have a hard-on for blockchain and NFTs now, and genuinely wanted to try to stealth push their NFT designs into a mainstream IP (but off-shoot title) to test the waters and consumer reception towards the model.

Loot boxes by themselves don’t constitute gambling but imagine Ubisoft tried to switching out the virtual random items for NFT random drops (that can be independently listed on NFT marketplaces and therefore easily be converted to real world money)? I can see why the ESRB would classify that as real gambling to be fair.

All conjecture but I have a strong suspicion that this is what this is about.
 

Dr.Morris79

Member
Seriously love how tone deaf big corps are being these days. The drama that comes from it is so much more entertaining than the shitty product they farted out

Keep it up corps, this is the real gold.
 

yurinka

Member
Loot boxes are gambling. The legal test for gambling is (a) consideration/payment; (b) chance; and (c) a prize. Loot boxes satisfy that legal test.
No, loot boxes are not gambling. To be gambling you must pay/bet real money and then you have chances of earning a prize that must be real money (or something you can sell for money, which isn't the case in any console game).

To count any non real money reward then every single games (including videogames) that are paid games or have any paid dlc, microtransaction, subscription or season pass would be gambling because all of them have chances to get a reward, because they are games.

This thing of 'lootboxes are gambling' or 'lootboxes cause adiction' is like the 'videogames maked kids violent': it's nonsensical hate based in absolutely no serious scientifical data and basic numbers prove it's wrong.

There is no scientific data proving that any videogame (or game feature like lootboxes, or the F2P or GaaS games) causes adiction or ludomania. If fact there are many that say the opposite, which matches with the market data that says that most users don't pay for in-app purchases even in F2P games, and most players who pay for in-app purchases pay spend in the lifetime of a game less money than the price of a paid game.

If we look at the LTV (average total amount of money paid by player during the lifetime of the game in a F2P game, with lootboxes or without them) the money spent is way lower than the one in paid games. Even if we only look at the players who spent money on them.

This thing of 'lootboxes are gambling' it's like the 'videogames make kids violent' thing, a myth from people who don't know what they are talking about and that hurts the game industry.

I worked in top publishers with games who had lootboxes and F2P, plus some of my former coworkers later went to work to other top publishers with lootboxes and F2P. We looked at real, proper research during many years and had the data from many top F2P/lootboxes games.

In F2P games almost everybody play for free and on average the ones who pay spend less money on a game than in paid games (with or without microtransactions) and they cause no issues.
 
Last edited:
Are you dumb?

The ESRB just making shit up when they rate games now? It's clear as fucking day what they mean by real gambling.

I posted it directly from the ESRB above. It's being able to gamble and wager currency purchased by real money in the game. The "prize" is the ability to win (or more likely lose) the currency you spent real money on.

First of all, show me proof that the ESRB rated this game AO for real gambling. I've asked several times already to provide any evidence that real gambling exists in this game.

Second, the ESRB is a trade association that represents the video game industry. You are an idiot if you actually believe the ESRB is going to define "real gambling" as anything less than what the legal definition of gambling is.

Finally,
 

Bo_Hazem

Gold Dealer
I don't care, they always provide enough content, way beyond most of the "no MTX" games like The Witcher 3 that had laughable loot despite being an iconic game overall.
 
Top Bottom