Support NeoGAF

[CookTrain]

What regulation exists for lootboxes outside of China?

Sadly the only real regulation employed is that if you pay for one, you get one.

 

[LordRaptor]

What regulation exists for lootboxes outside of China?

That videogame content is made transparent to parents regarding content by a coalition of independent industry regulators such as PEGI, ESRB, USK, across specific criteria applied at a regional level.

And lootboxes are not gambling, and do not fall under existing local gambling regulations as a result..

What's your barometer? I think a petition that passes the required amount of signatures for parliament to at least acknowledge it isn't too shabby. Not to mention a MP taking reasonable questions to the Government themselves.

So what is your desired outcome?
That the UK rejects IARC, and establishes a new governmental regulatory body that has oversight over all videogames availability in the UK, and which - by necessity - includes rejecting titles entirely that they do not feel are appropriate for sale in the UK?

 

[Azusa]

So what is your desired outcome?
That the UK rejects IARC, and establishes a new governmental regulatory body that has oversight over all videogames availability in the UK, and which - by necessity - includes rejecting titles entirely that they do not feel are appropriate for sale in the UK?

UK does that already.

 

[Yukinari]

Everything has sped up so quick regarding loot box controversy.

Everyone just kinda hand waved it in 2016 but now since more games are doing it we need some regulations.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Reasonable people are discussing this. None, or very few of which are even hinting that they want games banned.

Because we all know that old people in government always think reasonably about video games.

I hope you’re right, and that there’s nothing to worry about. Guess we will find out.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

That videogame content is made transparent to parents regarding content by a coalition of independent industry regulators such as PEGI, ESRB, USK, across specific criteria applied at a regional level.

And lootboxes are not gambling, and do not fall under existing local gambling regulations as a result..



So what is your desired outcome?
That the UK rejects IARC, and establishes a new governmental regulatory body that has oversight over all videogames availability in the UK, and which - by necessity - includes rejecting titles entirely that they do not feel are appropriate for sale in the UK?

So to be clear, zero regulations for Lootboxes, yes?

 

[LordRaptor]

UK does that already.

Yes, by folding videogames under the umbrella of the BBFC, who co-exist with PEGI and IARC for logistics reasons of nothing else.

e:

So to be clear, zero regulations for Lootboxes, yes?

They are regulated like any other game content is regulated.

 

[Hephaestus]

Video games, have destroyed peoples lives, jobs, relationship and have lead to death.

Shouldnt the government regulate all video games?

 

[Pie and Beans]

Part of Nut Labour's Infinite Money For Infinite Numbers Of New Jobs scheme I gather.

 

[Delusibeta]

We did not ask for this.

Lies. The anti-lootbox crowd have been demanding a total ban of them from all governments for the past fortnight.

 

[Stead Fast]

Part of Nut Labour's Infinite Money For Infinite Numbers Of New Jobs scheme I gather.

Your only takeaway from all this is Party Politics?

 

[Audioboxer]

That videogame content is made transparent to parents regarding content by a coalition of independent industry regulators such as PEGI, ESRB, USK, across specific criteria applied at a regional level.

And lootboxes are not gambling, and do not fall under existing local gambling regulations as a result..



So what is your desired outcome?
That the UK rejects IARC, and establishes a new governmental regulatory body that has oversight over all videogames availability in the UK, and which - by necessity - includes rejecting titles entirely that they do not feel are appropriate for sale in the UK?

I've said a million times what my desired outcome is. Something like China where publishers and developers must display the odds of winning in some form of breakdown.

If a F2P dev can do it other devs can have it mandated to be done https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1844310 Especially if they're not going to self-regulate, as proven by Blizzard's hostility to Chinese law.

Lies, the anti-lootbox crowd have been demanding a total ban of them from all governments for the past fortnight.

Very selective reading. Even most of GAF is saying regulation, such as drop rates, or declared gambling. Not banning.

Because we all know that old people in government always think reasonably about video games.

I hope you're right, and that there's nothing to worry about. Guess we will find out.

If the old people haven't been able to ban games with torture, sex scenes, brutal decapitation and more, coupled with no banning of monetary gambling games across the internet I don't think this newfound fear of them taking your games away is very well founded in reality. I'm sure the UK Government at a time like this is going to cut off what taxes they do actually take from Rockstar North.

 

[GodofWine]

I don't want government involved in my games. Im smart enough too not buy lot crates.

 

[CookTrain]

I don't want government involved in my games. Im smart enough too not buy lot crates.

... notsureifserious.fry

 

[M3d10n]

Whether loot boxes are gambling or not is debatable, but remember that there are games like CSGO where the possibility of trading creates a grey market where loot boxes contents can be "cashed out".

There's also the whole "teaching or incentivizing gambling" angle in terms of content restrictions. Gambling addiction is a real and well documented phenomena and it's representation in games is already subject to age restrictions.

Fantastic. This is definitely one of those things that's only given free reign because nobody with any responsibility knows what it is.

It bears repeating, why did Blizzard go out of their way to not reveal probabilities/loot odds in China? Legally, they were supposed to, but it was a better idea for them to find and utilize a loophole than to simply let the odds be publicized.

How is that not weird to everyone?

Blizzard probably does stuff that range from constantly A/B testing odds to using algorithms to tailor the odds for each individual player on each draw based on player behavior, so a simple drop chance table wouldn't cut it and they don't want players to be privy to such information.

 

[LordRaptor]

I've said a million times what my desired outcome is. Something like China where publishers and developers must display the odds of winning in some form of breakdown.

Okay.

So: deep breath, think this through;
your best case scenario is - due to hypothetical UK regulation - all games companies that provide lootboxes in their games... what, treat digital goods the same as physical goods as per the Isle Of Man, by request of the OP, and things like being scammed in an MMO or account hijacking becomes the equivalent of real world fraud?
Selling CD Keys from grey market sources becomes the same as illegal importation of goods and customs evasion?
Any digital items owned have a real world value, and are subject to things like capital gains taxation, and affect income tax personal allowance?

Or, because the UK introduces it, every publisher in the world follows suit voluntarily? Or that plucky Britain leads the way, and every other countries legislature follows suit?

Or are we saying the UK enacts some regulations, and the UK being not-China, games either make a special UK-only edition of games, or just skip the UK entirely?

I mean, "I wish the UK was more like China" is quite the statement.
We already have our poor mans great firewall and we're working on allowing governmental backdoors into citizens communications.

 

[CannonFodder52]

I don't want government involved in my games. Im smart enough too not buy lot crates.

Edit: on second thought, this is definitely a joke post.

 

[Audioboxer]

Okay.

So: deep breath, think this through;
your best case scenario is - due to hypothetical UK regulation - all games companies that provide lootboxes in their games... what, treat digital goods the same as physical goods as per the Isle Of Man, by request of the OP, and things like being scammed in an MMO or account hijacking becomes the equivalent of real world fraud?
Selling CD Keys from grey market sources becomes the same as illegal importation of goods and customs evasion?
Any digital items owned have a real world value, and are subject to things like capital gains taxation, and affect income tax personal allowance?

Or, because the UK introduces it, every publisher in the world follows suit voluntarily? Or that plucky Britain leads the way, and every other countries legislature follows suit?

Or are we saying the UK enacts some regulations, and the UK being not-China, games either make a special UK-only edition of games, or just skip the UK entirely?

I mean, "I wish the UK was more like China" is quite the statement.
We already have our poor mans great firewall and we're working on allowing governmental backdoors into citizens communications.

What the fuck are you talking about? Asking for specific regulation that loot boxes/paid for RNG have displayed winnings odds, like the whole damn gambling industry, is not turning the country into China.

I'd like to see games skip the UK entirely over damn drop rates regulation. That would be even more telling than Blizzard freaking out in China and running to find a way to mask drop rates at lightning speed.

Video game consumers in the UK spent £4.332bn on their hobby in 2016.

This is part of UKIE's Market Valuation Project, in collaboration with GamesIndustry.biz. The figure combines data from GfK (physical games and hardware), SuperData (digital, mobile and VR hardware), Kantar (pre-owned), Nielsen (books), Official Charts Company (soundtrack and movies), NPD (toys) and UKIE estimates (events).

That £4.332bn figure is 1.2% higher than the year before, when the market value was £4.28bn (revised figure from the originally announced £4.193bn).

There were certain key areas that drove this growth, and these can primarily be found in the digital space. However, physical remains a significant area of the business and accounted for almost 50% of all the revenue generated from games and games-related items in the UK last year.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-03-15-uk-games-market-generated-4-33bn-in-2016

The UK gaming industry is growing exponentially. Last year was a record year for both the monetary value of the UK gaming market (£4.33bn) and its impact on other sectors, such as films and merchandising (£100.5m).

And it's not yet finished its growth spurt; estimates from PwC suggest that by 2021, the UK market will be worth £5.2bn, growing at a rate of 6.7pc, making it Europe's largest market and the fifth largest in the world.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connect/small-business/driving-growth/uk-gaming-industry-growing-so-fast/

 

[LordRaptor]

I'd like to see games skip the UK entirely over damn drop rates regulation.

I wouldn't.
China is a market worth bending over backwards for.
The UK isn't.

 

[Ossom]

This is great. Would be happy if they required any games to include on the box/listing that they contain in game purchases and the form they are in, and for drop rates to be displayed.

I can vote with my money because I am aware of these things, but many aren't and need to be informed so that they can make a fully informed decision.

I don't necessarily want a ban on loot boxes, but it is not something I will ever support. I hope the industry changes, but then again, it's making money right now and money talks.

 

[Briarios]

There is NOTHING wrong with regulating commerce and protecting consumers from unfair business practices. That is NOT the same as regulating the content of games. The suggestion that this is like censorship or something similar is patently ridiculous.

 

[Audioboxer]

I wouldn't.
China is a market worth doing that for.
The UK isn't.

If you think having to do this, for video games, means developers and publishers all skip the UK entirely with those numbers I posted above I'd like a months supply of what you're smoking.

That is the level of hysteria you are going to? Just having to show drop rates of these boxes means skipping a £5 billion industry?

 

[CosmicQueso]

I don't think this newfound fear of them taking your games away is very well founded in reality.

I never made that claim.

And my responses to you have been respectful and dispassionate.

You really could try to be a little more pleasant and respectful of others.

 

[LordRaptor]

If you think having to do this, for video games, means developers and publishers all skip the UK entirely with those numbers I posted above I'd like a months supply of what you're smoking.

That is the level of hysteria you are going to? Just having to show drop rates of these boxes means skipping a £5 billion industry?

Your argument is the same as saying "Why wouldn't all games replace human enemies with robots or zombies to comply with stricter German (a bigger market than the UK) regulations?" or "Why wouldn't all games provide UK English in addition to US English for all text?".
Because the UK is best case scenario 10% of revenue, tops.

Do western games skip being released in Japan (another much bigger individual market) entirely due to cultural differences?

e:
This idea that the UK is so super important in the global scheme of things that people are going to acquiesce to any demands made just for the privilege of getting our custom is the same reasoning our brexit negotiations are such an embarrassing clusterfuck

 

[Audioboxer]

I never made that claim.

And my responses to you have been respectful and dispassionate.

You really could try to be a little more pleasant and respectful of others.

I'm perfectly respectful of others, I'm rebutting arguments, not people. Don't take it personally, I just think some of the arguments are really unfounded and I can't quite come to grips why they're appearing around loot boxes of all things? LordRaptor and I are having a heated, but respectful enough tussle. He keeps coming back saying things I didn't say, or silly things like I want to turn the UK into China as I'm drawing on ONE thing they've done. That gets a little frustrating.

Your argument is the same as saying "Why wouldn't all games replace human enemies with robots or zombies to comply with stricter German (a bigger market than the UK) regulations?" or "Why wouldn't all games provide UK English in addition to US English for all text?".
Because the UK is best case scenario 10% of revenue, tops.

Do western games skip being released in Japan (another much bigger individual market) entirely due to cultural differences?

So you're admitting to actually thinking games will skip the UK if the drop rates are required to be listed? You should go away and think about that if so, as that itself should tell you why others think this is a preying industry if left as is. To actually suggest a publisher or developer will not release a game in the UK, cutting off every single penny of revenue from that country, all because of drop rates, is mind-boggling. That is you essentially saying every single person arguing for this is justified, as the publishers and developers are that scummy they'd literally not release their game in a whole country that's listed as 5th in the entire world for game revenue.

What have cultural differences got to do with this?

 

[CookTrain]

I will say this, if they would be willing to skip the UK rather than publishing loot box odds... that should make people very, very suspicious.

 

[Stead Fast]

I will say this, if they would be willing to skip the UK rather than publishing loot box odds... that should make people very, very suspicious.

Agreed, which makes the argument for pushing for regulation such as this all the more valid. If this practice is more important than actually doing business here, how shady must it be?

 

[LordRaptor]

So you're admitting to actually thinking games will skip the UK if the drop rates are required to be listed? You should go away and think about that if so, as that itself should tell you why others think this is a preying industry if left as is.

No.
I am saying that if UK specific regulations come into place that forbid the sale in the UK without meeting them, it will necessarily lead to certain games being unable to be sold in the UK on purely investment : return grounds.

Like... why would you honestly think otherwise?
The only scenario it wouldnt is if multiple territories adopt similar legislations, or publishers voluntarily move to providing such data.
This is also under your literal wish fulfillment best case scenario where governmental scrutiny of the videogames market comes only to the conclusion that the only things the governement would like to see different in videogames is adding drop rate percentiles.

 

[Audioboxer]

No.
I am saying that if UK specific regulations come into place that forbid the sale in the UK without meeting them, it will necessarily lead to certain games being unable to be sold in the UK on purely investment : return grounds.

Like... why would you honestly think otherwise?
The only scenario it wouldnt is if multiple territories adopt similar legislations, or publishers voluntarily move to providing such data.
This is also under your literal wish fulfillment best case scenario where governmental scrutiny of the videogames market comes only to the conclusion that the only things the governement would like to see different in videogames is adding drop rate percentiles.

And any reason for that would be a developer or publisher CHOOSING not to comply. Which would lead us back to them literally absenting themselves from the £5 billion industry all because they will not share the drop rates for boxes/containers that they give the potential for money to be spent on.

You can't choose not to have your game rated 18 because it's violent by saying "this might hurt my image/sales". You made a violent game. If something like this was put into legislative action the response would be "you made a game with paid RNG/loot boxes". That would be how you not only stop your game selling here, but probably stop it selling as good as it could in the rest of Europe and America. You'd be known as the dodgy dev who skipped the UK all because of drop rates.

I wouldn't be concerned about that in the slightest. It's up to the publishers and developers and as a few of us said above, if someone literally refused to show some drop rates and not sell their game, then good luck handling the global PR around how dodgy you must be to do that. Let us know how you get on with that on social media and journalist headlines.

 

[LordRaptor]

And any reason for that would be a developer or publisher CHOOSING not to comply.

No, you would be not going an extra mile to appease one single markets additional requirements.
Which companies do literally all of the time.

Like... the UK has weirdly specific (and weirdly sexist) pornography legislations, and pornography that includes such activities just doesn't get released in the UK.

Blizzard aren't known as "That shady company that doesnt provide drop rates in china because they use a complicated equation to dynamically modify variables based on a myriad of factors".
They're "That company that make videogames that sell insanely well globally".

e:
And really, this argument is fucking pointless, because what will happen will either be:
1) PMQT says "LOL isle of man", lootboxes still aren't gambling, BBFC still covers retail and PEGI / IARC still covers digital, and the Lootbox Tea Party go find some other attack vector
2) We get a commission to study things, and in 10 years time it gets to the point the market is already at a la the Byron Report which is the same as 1), it just costs a lot of time and money to get there

 

[Audioboxer]

No, you would be not going an extra mile to appease one single markets additional requirements.
Which companies do literally all of the time.

Like... the UK has weirdly specific (and weirdly sexist) pornography legislations, and pornography that includes such activities just doesn't get released in the UK.

An extra mile... To list some drop rates which you already know as you programmed them, but just choose not to list? That's some extra mile.

Answer me this then, why have you got such a fear pubs and devs would not list the drop rates? What has you this worried they'd skip the UK industry instead of listing them?

Blizzard aren't known as "That shady company that doesnt provide drop rates in china because they use a complicated equation to dynamically modify variables based on a myriad of factors".
They're "That company that make videogames that sell insanely well globally".

It did get some notice http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1385862

Western media tends to do a better job of responding to Western issues. Blizzard refusing to release Overwatch 2 in the UK would be over every single English speaking website. Including social media.

 

[Stead Fast]

So you're admitting to actually thinking games will skip the UK if the drop rates are required to be listed?

No.
I am saying that if UK specific regulations come into place that forbid the sale in the UK without meeting them, it will necessarily lead to certain games being unable to be sold in the UK on purely investment : return grounds.

So... you are admitting that. Just phrasing it in a way wherein publishers are left forced to not sell games in the UK due to regulation, whereas they could easily still be sold if they simply followed said regulation - one that is simply about transparency for customers - you're saying it like that, rather than noting how poor a practice these publishers are adopting if they value loot crates over a sustained £5 billion market.

 

[Rodelero]

I would be absolutely gobsmacked (though delighted) if the UK moved to regulate loot boxes. Ironically, this is precisely the kind of legislation they should be pursuing to keep people safe on the internet, something the Conservative government talks about frequently, but they only tend to do so when trying to snoop on more of our private data and personal information.

I do think people need to slightly readjust their expectations though. If anything has been made clear over the last few weeks it's that loot crates are massively unpopular on NeoGAF, but realistically regulating loot crates isn't going to see them disappear. They will either find loop holes or simply adjust to the regulation. No government is going to ban the concept outright any more than they've banned Pokémon cards. Regulation may make gaming safer for addicts and children, companies may see their revenues drop, but the concept of the loot crate ain't going anywhere unless it stops being effective. There are two separate debates at play here. Loot crates can harm people, and that's where the government comes in. Loot crates can also harm games though, and government can't, won't, and shouldn't help with that.

 

[Lagamorph]

If nothing else I'd hope that all of this negative publicity might make developers/publishers realise they've pushed the whole loot box market too far and that they need to tone it back a bit in order to avoid regulation coming along and killing their new cash cow.

 

[LordRaptor]

So... you are admitting that. Just phrasing it in a way wherein publishers are left forced to not sell games in the UK due to regulation, whereas they could easily still be sold if they simply followed said regulation - one that is simply about transparency for customers - you're saying it like that, rather than noting how poor a practice these publishers are adopting if they value loot crates over a sustained £5 billion market.

I'm saying that adding additional legislative requirements to a single market in any industry leads to a reduction in imports in that market, which is a banal truism.

 

[Stead Fast]

I would be absolutely gobsmacked (though delighted) if the UK moved to regulate loot boxes. Ironically, this is precisely the kind of legislation they should be pursuing to keep people safe on the internet, something the Conservative government talks about frequently, but they only tend to do so when trying to snoop on more of our private data and personal information.

I do think people need to slightly readjust their expectations though. If anything has been made clear over the last few weeks it's that loot crates are massively unpopular on NeoGAF, but realistically regulating loot crates isn't going to see them disappear. Addicts may be safer, children might be safer, companies will probably see revenues drop, but the concept of the loot crate wouldn't go anywhere, nor would the concept of pay to win games, et cetera. There are two separate debates at play here. Loot crates can harm people, and that's where the government comes in. Loot crates can also harm games though, and government can't, won't, and shouldn't help with that.

Not saying they have to get rid of loot crates, or that this will lead to an attempt at doing that, it's still ultimately a customer's choice to buy them, that's why a lot of the talk being put forward here is more about transparency in that these publishers at least clarify the drop rates.

Edit:

I'm saying that adding additional legislative requirements to a single market in any industry leads to a reduction in imports in that industry, which is a banal truism.

Okay, but given how menial the legislative requirement is (still entirely hypothetical at this stage, but I'm arguing under the assumption that said legislation requires the revelation of drop rates) with regards to the publisher's and developer's requirements for getting a game released in the UK (they know their own drop rates), why should we be concerned they leave us?

 

[LordRaptor]

I do think people need to slightly readjust their expectations though. If anything has been made clear over the last few weeks it's that loot crates are massively unpopular on NeoGAF, but realistically regulating loot crates isn't going to see them disappear.

In markets where Lootboxes are just a staple of monetisation, improvements come about via market forces, because people would rather play a game where these things are better signposted than where they are black boxes.

e:

Okay, but given how menial the legislative requirement is (still entirely hypothetical at this stage, but I'm arguing under the assumption that said legislation requires the revelation of drop rates) with regards to the publisher's and developer's requirements for getting a game released in the UK (they know their own drop rates), why should we be concerned they leave us?

Its not menial. Its extra work. Unless they can just say "and heres a weblink to our Excel spreadsheet formulas, now fuck off".
At the bare minimum it is going to need UI to contextualise the formulas involved into something people that literally do not understand probabilities can sort of recognise,

 

[Jezbollah]

Lets be honest here. The least we're going to say is an official one liner about how PEGI takes into consideration any kind of gambling in their evaluation of games. The most we'll see is some kind of small print on the odds of loot crate content dropping. That small print is hardly going to put a dent into the sales of those products.

This is utterly small fry in terms of the issues this country has to deal with, especially with Brexit going on. The fact only 10,000 people have signed that petition says it all.

 

[Spaced Harrier]

Lets be honest here. The least we're going to say is an official one liner about how PEGI takes into consideration any kind of gambling in their evaluation of games. The most we'll see is some kind of small print on the odds of loot crate content dropping. That small print is hardly going to put a dent into the sales of those products.

This is utterly small fry in terms of the issues this country has to deal with, especially with Brexit going on. The fact only 10,000 people have signed that petition says it all.

Might as well figure out lootboxes, cause you sure as fuck aren't doing anything about brexit.

 

[Audioboxer]

I'm saying that adding additional legislative requirements to a single market in any industry leads to a reduction in imports in that market, which is a banal truism.

Is that your answer to my question above about why you fear loot box drop rates would stop games being released in the UK? Or do you not want to go on record with your personal opinion as to why drop rates would upset pubs/devs soo badly they'd stop selling games in the UK?

Might I add, what pubs and devs do you think it would be that would stop selling in the UK? I doubt it'll be Rockstar, the most successful developer, considering they're in the UK. Is it Blizzard you think won't sell here? Anyone else? You must have an idea who you're worried about the most? It would be good to know why you think they'd stop selling, and why you think it's unfathomable for drop rates to be known without going right to "no sale of this game at all in the UK" in the CEO boardroom?

Lets be honest here. The least we're going to say is an official one liner about how PEGI takes into consideration any kind of gambling in their evaluation of games. The most we'll see is some kind of small print on the odds of loot crate content dropping. That small print is hardly going to put a dent into the sales of those products.

This is utterly small fry in terms of the issues this country has to deal with, especially with Brexit going on. The fact only 10,000 people have signed that petition says it all.

At the very least its spawning interesting conversations. Ones which show the potential lengths our best friends devs and pubs will go to. Apparently not releasing a game, at all, in a country, if their drop rates were to be unmasked.

It's the gamers that are the pathetic whiney ones though, even if that scenario was ever to pass. Clearly, there's nothing pathetic about passing up hundreds of thousands of sales because you might have to let people know their winnings odds before handing you cold hard cash they worked for. That's ludicrous to suggest those giving you their money were privy to that information.

 

[Stead Fast]

In markets where Lootboxes are just a staple of monetisation, improvements come about via market forces, because people would rather play a game where these things are better signposted than where they are black boxes.

e:


Its not menial. Its extra work. Unless they can just say "and heres a weblink to our Excel spreadsheet formulas, now fuck off"

I'll ask again, why should we be concerned they leave us over this legislation?

Might as well figure out lootboxes, cause you sure as fuck aren't doing anything about brexit.

Wel-

I think we ca-

...fuck...yeah I got nothing.

 

[LordRaptor]

This is utterly small fry in terms of the issues this country has to deal with, especially with Brexit going on. The fact only 10,000 people have signed that petition says it all.

Literally the best case scenario for people that want the government to "Do Something For The Children" is going to be a new Byron Report, which was also a nothing burger

e:

Is that your answer to my question above about why you fear loot box drop rates would stop games being released in the UK? Or do you not want to go on record with your personal opinion as to why drop rates would upset pubs/devs soo badly they'd stop selling games in the UK?

I'll ask again, why should we be concerned they leave us over this legislation?

Because in your head canon, lootboxes are gambling, so getting additional legislation involved to scutinise that one specific aspect of videogames - and nothing more - will be what happens, and For The Greater Good.
But the reality of politics is that as dog-with-a-bone as you are about lootboxes, there are others who are just as dog-with-a-bone about videogame violence, and about British Identity, and Moral Standards, and Why Don't Kids Today Climb More Trees? and when you start drafting a bill whose aim is specifically to state that existing viodegame legislation does not go far enough, all kinds of special interests will start jumping in on that bill, who would also like to see much further reaching governemental controls over what videogames 'should be', what they consist of, and who should have access to them

The level of governmental oversight of videogames right now is pretty good.
It could be better, It could be vastly worse.

 

[formasymphonic]

Posted this in the Kotaku thread, but gonna quote it here s I live in UK and so potential regulation movement is relevant to me — its a few starting ideas for regulation.

I honestly don't expect loot crates to go anywhere, but I think more can be done to keep people informed and make informed decisions for if they want to play games that include them. I don't expect any of these to be implemented but I've been considering some rough ideas for legislation:

1) Implementations of lootcrates and other pseudo-gambling systems to be included as part of PEGI / ESRB / USK / CERO ratings system. ”This game contains psuedo-gambling elements" / ”This game contains mechanics designed to induce addictive behaviours" - idk, the exact wording can be debated but something along those lines. Perhaps separate definitions for:
- simple RNG mechanisms (random chance to receive an item) akin to CCG packs? (This gets the first warning)
- stronger language / rating for systems intrinsically designed to encourage behaviour? (This would get both warnings)

2) Inclusion will automatically raise the rating of your game. I'm not one of those people who think it should make your game AO but I definitely think Overwatch getting by with a ”12" is too low under proposed scheme. Kids shouldn't be exposed to this stuff at all. If you as a parent want to allow this and think your children can deal with the behavioural psych targeting, then that's up to you. (Yes I can hear the CCG fans groaning)

3) Inclusion of pseudo gambling systems at a later date will require a recertification of your game. This is to deincentivise publishers who like to launch without this stuff to evade it showing in reviews and add them in later.

4) Drop rates for all items must be clearly and easily available for access both in-game and on a company's website. I don't just mean:
- ”bronze items have a 20-30% drop rate"
- ”silver items have a 8-13% drop rate"
- ”gold items have a 0.01-0.7% drop rate"
...I mean you need to be able to go to a page online, and a menu item in-game (like if you want to re-watch credits) and see that ”Mjolnir hammer, Son-of-Odin Limited Winter Exclusive Edition™" is a 0.01% drop. I understand that UI space is at a premium while playing a game and the more general figures may occur there but the full figures must always be disclosed, easily available, and updated whenever the rates are updated.

5) Drop rates must be consistent across all territories a game is available in. No lowering the odds in specific regions except for testing & diagnostic reasons. Eg, right now there are several games that we think we know the rates of because disclosure is required in China. But what is stopping a publisher from improving the rates in regions they are required to disclose in, but lowering them elsewhere?

6) If crate systems can be obtained with real money currency directly, or an intermediary current obtained with real money the game is required to disclose a running total of how much a player has spent. This must be shown both at time of purchase and available for later viewing via a menu item (similar to if a player wishes to re-watch credits).

7) Parental options to limit or block purchases should be implemented by both platform vendors and publishers for best practice. They have collaborated in order to enable these systems — it would not be an undue burden on either side to collaborate to provide monitoring mechanisms. Ideally a global option for blocking with an opt-in system per game to control limits. Eg you can allow a player to limit themselves to say £5/$5 a month increments or something. (I can already see publishers adjusting pricing to get to Incentivise you to go beyond that though).

Anyways those are just some rough ideas. I'm sure you guys can come up with better ones. I'd rather publishers toned this stuff down in the first place but if these systems aren't going to go away, we can at least encourage some more responsibility from publishers on them — as well as ask for some tools to better protect ourselves from their effects.

 

[Audioboxer]

Literally the best case scenario for people that want the government to "Do Something For The Children" is going to be a new Byron Report, which was also a nothing burger

e:



Because in your head canon, lootboxes are gambling, so getting additional legislation involved to scutinise that one specific aspect of videogames - and nothing more - will be what happens, and For The Greater Good.
But the reality of politics is that as dog-with-a-bone as you are about lootboxes, there are others who are just as dog-with-a-bone about videogame violence, and about British Identity, and Moral Standards, and Why Don't Kids Today Climb More Trees? and when you start drafting a bill whose aim is specifically to state that existing viodegame legislation does not go far enough, all kinds of special interests will start jumping in on that bill, who would also like to see much further reaching governemental controls over what videogames 'should be', what they consist of, and who should have access to them

The level of governmental oversight of videogames right now is pretty good.
It could be better, It could be vastly worse.

For me personally, I'm happy enough if they do not get classed as gambling. I can live with that distinction in the law saying as it's not actual money being waged on, so it's not going to satisfy current gambling definitions. As for individual gamers calling it gambling, I've said many times on GAF why people perceive when they hand over cash for an RNG CHANCE at what they want, they'll call it gambling. I posted a reasonable quick lift from the dictionary here, along with why individuals might feel it applies, but even that was met with hostility. Legislatively, having drop rates known is a satisfactory end goal for me. It doesn't require an 18 rating.

Again, I think you're going away off on a paranoia tangent (British Identity, and Moral Standards, and Why Don't Kids Today Climb More Trees???). I'll try asking once more, what is it personally about drop rates specifically, that you think will lead to games not being sold in the UK, and publishers/devs absolutely paralyzed by fear to let the industry know their chances? People are handing over their own hard earned money for these chances. This is not simply debate club 101. Actual money is being handed over in incredibly high amounts, and those reaping the rewards of those hundreds of millions won't even self-regulate to let people know what their chances of getting what they want are.

Someone said on GAF the other day you were a developer, to which you denied, so I'll have to believe that as it's only fair to take you on your word. Your reluctance to speak about your personal opinions on drop rates and why it is you think games won't be released in the UK is confusing though. What is driving your opinions inside your head that actually thinks we'd have genuine situations where pubs and devs sit out the UK? Can you speak openly about the devs and pubs you think it would be? If you think one of them would do it, then if you speak the name people can maybe begin to debate if they think they would. We've been talking about Blizzard, so I just assumed you thought them, but you've been non-committal to pretty straightforward questions I'm proposing. You're bringing up hypotheticals galore, to the extent of complete abandonment of the UK games industry, but not really putting any opinionated meat on the bone to back up why you feel how you do.

 

[Stead Fast]

Literally the best case scenario for people that want the government to "Do Something For The Children" is going to be a new Byron Report, which was also a nothing burger

e:



Because in your head canon, lootboxes are gambling, so getting additional legislation involved to scutinise that one specific aspect of videogames - and nothing more - will be what happens, and For The Greater Good.
But the reality of politics is that as dog-with-a-bone as you are about lootboxes, there are others who are just as dog-with-a-bone about videogame violence, and about British Identity, and Moral Standards, and Why Don't Kids Today Climb More Trees? and when you start drafting a bill whose aim is specifically to state that existing viodegame legislation does not go far enough, all kinds of special interests will start jumping in on that bill, who would also like to see much further reaching governemental controls over what videogames 'should be', what they consist of, and who should have access to them

The level of governmental oversight of videogames right now is pretty good.
It could be better, It could be vastly worse.

For a third time, why should we be concerned they leave us due to these regulations?

I'm asking you to describe to me why the hypothetical situation you put forwards that these publishers are forced to not sell certain games in the UK as it breaches our legislation should concern us.

Edit:

Since I know you aren't being vindictive with any of these comments, I'll defuse a bit on my end and go onto some of the stuff you have replied back. For clarity I guess I kinda do see them as gambling. But, I don't hate gambling. I gamble from time to time, usually around my birthday. I just don't have the money most of the year to casually play with it. I can certainly see the argument for them not being classed as such, since you do get a return. However they are a manufactured aspect of the games market, with a pre-determined and secret drop rate, under no circumstance can I fathom a scenario that this drop rate is not biased towards the publishers and developers, and the likelihood of winning loot a player will be looking for is stacked against them. That's not gambling, but when it concerns taking money out of people's pockets, it's potentially as bad as, and likely to trigger the same addictive tendencies that actual gambling does. So yeah, I am a bit dog-with-a-bone about this, as the solution is a simple bit of transparency for customers. Nothing more. As to the other bit about others co-opting this into an attack on games or media in general, and said co-opters looking to return Britain to their glory, they're still gonna be there, and they'll try and co-opt any movement put into Parliament if they thought for a second it gave them a chance. But to suggest we completely neglect any scenario wherein Parliament discusses that out of fear of their co-opting of it is to sit there and accept what is.

You yourself said it could be better, why is asking for this not better?

 

[MUnited83]

It has been stated multiple times in this thread that we dont want the government to regulate the gaming industry, we want the gaming regulators to regulate the industry.

PEGI and ESRB refused to do so on this issue, and this is the consequences of that. We did not ask for this.

I mean people asked on the ESRB thread for games with lootboxes to literally be banned by having a AO+ rating. (none of the console providers accept AO games)

 

[Azusa]

I mean people asked on the ESRB thread for games with lootboxes to literally be banned by having a AO+ rating. (none of the console providers accept AO games)

They will have to start accepting 18+ games. In Europe most games are 18+ (GTA, Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor, etc) and still sold in retail for PS4 and Xbox.

 

[Lagamorph]

I mean people asked on the ESRB thread for games with lootboxes to literally be banned by having a AO+ rating. (none of the console providers accept AO games)

If Call of Duty and Fifa got rated as AO because of loot boxes you can guarantee that policy will change literally overnight.

 

[LordRaptor]

For me personally, I'm happy enough if they do not get classed as gambling. I can live with that distinction in the law saying as it's not actual money being waged on, so it's not going to satisfy current gambling definitions

But that is not what the questions being posed in the OP are asking.
They are literally and directly equating lootboxes with illegal gambling and gambling for minors.

That is why I asked what you actually want, because government legislation based on the questions specifically asked in the OP is calls for brand new legislation, and on the assumption that digital goods have an inherent value as per the Isle Of Mans stance.

There is literally nothing there about "make drop rates visible".
If thats what you want, that is not what the person who contacted their MP wants.

Do you not see the inherent problem?

I have no problem with drop rates being more visible. But I don't believe legislating for that will be the way that happens that best suits responsible adult customers.
People didn't stop buying horse armour on moral grounds; they stopped buying low impact cosmetics because they're shit value for money, and in games like CoD have like, a 12 month shelf life.

Companies that introduce better-for-people-that-like-lootbox systems will sell more lootboxes than cokpanies that don't.
That happens after people that don't like lootboxes stop whining about it and trying to find gotchas.

I play games with lootboxes in, and find them a fairer alternative than most of the alternative additional monetisation systems out there.
If someone comes up with something better than that, I will move and play that instead.

e:
And because you keep making sinister implications about "my motives" for liking lootboxes;
I don't own shares in any company that sell lootboxes, I don't work at any company that sells lootboxes, my sole exposure to lootboxes is as a consumer, and only in some of the games I play. But I play games on multiple platforms, and of multiple different monetisation methods and lootboxes are not a new thing to me.

For a third time, why should we be concerned they leave us due to these regulations?

I'm asking you to describe to me why the hypothetical situation you put forwards that these publishers are forced to not sell certain games in the UK as it breaches our legislation should concern us.

Have you ever had a job where one customer makes you fill out a bunch of paperwork that has to be vetted by a lawyer who is a specialist in that particular field, versus one where you just do the job you usually do?

Even if this hypothetical legislation literally does only the one thing you want and touches nothing else, there will be games that just skip the jump;ing through hoops entirely, and with digital purchases that is as simple as a "This game is not available in your region" checkbox on submission.

Like.... why is there any doubt that that would happen at all?

 

[Stead Fast]

Have you ever had a job where one customer makes you fill out a bunch of paperwork that has to be vetted by a lawyer who is a specialist in that particular field, versus one where you just do the job you usually do?

Even if this hypothetical legislation literally does only the one thing you want and touches nothing else, there will be games that just skip the jump;ing through hoops entirely, and with digital purchases that is as simple as a "This game is not available in your region" checkbox on submission.

Like.... why is there any doubt that that would happen at all?

Okay, sound, so then why should we miss the games you're talking about under the highlighted?