Topic: ESRB Says "Loot Boxes" Aren't Gambling

[nickmitch]

Again UB you cannot apply you example but replacing it with dog turd instead of a dollar as you are explicitly placing a wager in exchange for a chance of more money especially so with known payouts.

So, replace the million dollar prize with a super powerful Pokemon card.  Or a Honus Wagner trading card.  Or the Hope Diamond.  Or a small island off the coast of Maine.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that it's not gambling if the prize isn't money?

The problem in the dog turd example isn't the big prize, it's the lesser prize.  The dog turd is worthless and completely unrelated to whatever the big prize is, whether it's cash or an island or w/e.  If you buy a pack of Pokemon cards, you're going to get Pokemon cards.  You're not definitely getting dog **** and maybe a new car.  You're getting Pokemon cards, one of which my be incredibly rare or really valuable to you because it makes you deck complete/more competitive.

[UncleBob]

The dog turd is worthless.  Sure.  To most people.

To most people, a virtual crate containing virtual horse armor is worthless as well.

This kinda goes into what differentiates gambling from not gambling to me.  Is the no-prize worth the cost of buy-in.  Are the nine basic Pokémon cards in the pack worth the price of the pack?  Even if they're nine cards I already have?  Keeping in mind, I buy a lot of trading cards.

For me, even, there can come a point where it's no longer worth it.  It's why I don't buy blind-bag/box toys - and there's some really cool MotU ones out that I wouldn't mind picking up.  To me, getting a single repeat would make the purchase a waste - so buying a second box is a gamble - to me.

How does one legislate this?  Or even make rules around it as an independent body?  I don't know.  Is that basic horse armor worth $5?  Who gets to make that decision on such a large scale?

In my opinion, it needs to be clearly stated what the odds of any particular item is and there needs to be clear checks and balances in place to verify that if they say Rare Horse Armor is in One in Every 25 crates, then it can be guaranteed that the true average is 1 in 25.  If a prize is limited and awarded (for example, say ten Rainbow Horse Armor is going to be given away in Loot crates this month!), then once that prize is extinguished, it can no longer be listed as a prize.

[ThePerm]

I think with digital goods there should be the option to resell or trade. That way you're not stuck with a virtual good you have no use for.

With cards you can do this.

On the opposite end of this I got free games for doing surveys and entering in product codes on Wii U.

[oohhboy]

I know you are trying really, really hard(as dog turds) to argue that loot boxes is gambling but it isn't.

You are not making a wager when you buy a box. You are purchasing the unknown item. If you do get a high value item it is not the company that pays out(The item costs the same to them regardless of value), it is the people willing to buy the item off you in the market hence no one is taking your bet nor is there a pot/pool of prizes. You also can't take a bet on yourself with yourself or else everything you do could be considered gambling.

As for new regulations it cannot be done under the guise of gambling as the collateral damage is too wide ranging as it would require a redefinition of gambling which has been carefully constructed and honed over countless cases. Risk would become gambling.

If there are any changes it would be covered under existing law with virtual loot boxes added to whatever covers CCG etc as they are the same.

I think with digital goods there should be the option to resell or trade. That way you're not stuck with a virtual good you have no use for.

With cards you can do this.

Steam has been doing this for a long time. Being able to trade them on a marketplace is what gives the items value beyond their in game utility. Otherwise they would be worthless. Exactly the same with CCG. If no one can buy and/or won't buy it is truly worthless.

[ThePerm]

Here's what kills the Dog turd argument

[oohhboy]

Woof

[broodwars]

Just FYI, but allowing consumers to sell & trade their loot box purchases essentially opens the door to gambling further.

I don't have to speak in hypothetical here, as it's already happened. See the CSGO Lotto scandal.

IMO, Loot Boxes aren't gambling under the traditional model, but they are essentially gambling. They're under a similar loophole that allows things like Pachinko to not be considered gambling in Japan: "Oh, you're not playing for money! You're playing for balls, which just so happen to have value across the street!"

Yes, you're not getting money out of loot boxes (though you often can get game-specific currency) However, they use the same psychological hooks as gambling, they require the same monetary investment as gambling in most cases, & the execute the same way as traditional gambling. There's no skill involved, just pure luck of the RNG. They're probably going to require case-specific legislation to outlaw if the industry won't knock it off, but to me it's gambling.

[UncleBob]

You keep changing what makes gambling gambling.  How am I supposed to keep up?

Let's do this then... I'm going to give Disney $1,000 for 1,000 vouchers, making each voucher cost me exactly $1.  999 of the vouchers are $1 worth of Disney Bucks, which I, nor pretty much anyone else will give you anything for.  The last voucher is for a 4-person, 3-day all-expenses paid trip to Disney.

Now, everyone can buy a raffle tickets for $5.  I'll sell exactly 1,000 tickets.  The prizes cost me the same, the prizes have no monetary value from me, everyone gets a prize, the top prize isn't something I'm paying out....

Not gambling?

[Order.RSS]

Had to read up on this a bit, I didn't realise that lootboxes are a "new" form of microtransactions. Pretty interesting development, do people enjoy this more than picking what they want outright and paying for it? I suppose the "booster pack"-model is a tried & tested winner for collectible card games, so I think I get the appeal.

Just out of curiosity, do any of you purchase microtransactions or loot boxes often? It's fairly rare that I do.

Used to play a lot of Team Fortress 2, and you would often receive random crates in that with items that would slightly improve a character (or change their appearance). Those were pretty much free though; although you couldn't hold a ton of items without purchasing at least one microtransaction. I remember buying a helmet (which promised to benefit a charity) for a few bucks to increase my inventory space. Traded the helmet a while later with someone, who was collecting them I think.

I've not shelled out for new characters in Smash Bros. 4 though. I think I might spring for the Breath of the Wild expansion DLC if it's good, but at 20$ I'd hardly consider that a microtransaction. More like an expansion pack you used to get on PC games a lot, like Age of Empires or Rollercoaster Tycoon.

[oohhboy]

Loot boxes aren't new but they have finally hit the big time as you would say by getting the attention of the authorities.

Full expansion packs these days are a rarity. Even then some of them that claim are proper expansions can be a bit weak like civilisation where they feel like systems that should have been in the game from the start or feel trivial.

Compare this to X-COM 2 where it shakes up the game so much it plays differently or could have been sequel material. This doesn't mean they didn't release half ass DLC like the cosmetics which were sort of broken and far far far better done in Steam Workshop.

What Steam Workshop doesn't do properly for XCOM 2 is high quality gameplay breaker changes. Great for tweaks but the average guy or even long war doesn't have the manpower or access.

[nickmitch]

How does one legislate this?  Or even make rules around it as an independent body?  I don't know.  Is that basic horse armor worth $5?  Who gets to make that decision on such a large scale?

Not to sound like a capitalist, but I think some of the answers involve "blah, blah, blah, Free Market". But I think I see your point because similar practices in the mobile space are absolutely predatory and should be stopped.

[oohhboy]

I have never understood those mobile games and why people "Play" them or do so to such an extent they should be classed as mentally ill and seek help.

You wouldn't directly legislate loot boxes, CCG etc. You can say that these kind of digital purchases must require 2 Factor Authentication. This reduces access by increasing the hassle of getting a box and hopefully cut out the kid that got his hand on your credit card.

I am not sure if this is true but I heard many CCG has moved to a guarantee loot rarity ratio. You buy a pack you always get X common cards, X uncommon, X rare. So rares can still be more rare than others but because of increased supply prices go down and people treat it as less of a gamble and the utility of the card is more important than the on sale price of the card.

Not to say it isn't still exploitive given you still have the compulsion to collect them all. But given that is isn't gambling but speculation it is not appropriate to redefine gambling.

[Moblin]

Christmas presents are like loot boxes, you never know what you're going to get.

unless you peeked. Hopefully the gift you got the giver is as good as the gift they gifted you.

[Order.RSS]

I am not sure if this is true but I heard many CCG has moved to a guarantee loot rarity ratio. You buy a pack you always get X common cards, X uncommon, X rare. So rares can still be more rare than others but because of increased supply prices go down and people treat it as less of a gamble and the utility of the card is more important than the on sale price of the card.

This is definitely true for Pokémon cards, yeah. I think every blind pack has at least 2 holographic ones in it, and a few other useful cards (usually two Pokémon from the same evolutionary line, or one or two non-common ones). The deck boxes just list every card in them on the back.
I'd assume they took that idea from Magic, since I think those games were both run by Wizards of the Coast for a long time.

Just so I understand this correctly, are lootboxes expected to replace regular "pick your in-game item of choice" microtransactions? Or are they meant to co-exist alongside each other?

[nickmitch]

I imagine they would replace the more direct model and the loot box would warrant multiple purchases.

[ejamer]

I imagine they would replace the more direct model and the loot box would warrant multiple purchases.

I'm glad that my backlog is big enough I don't much care about buying new games any longer.


This loot box situation sounds like absolute garbage... although I suppose (hope?) that the contents are always optional enough that you wouldn't need to buy any.

[oohhboy]

Halo 5 multiplayer "Burn" cards pretty much screwed this up already. You can buy blind packs with in-game current from playing but you also use real money.

Guess what, the real money packs were all rare etc while the "Free" packs was always junk.

[nickmitch]

That's a horribly corrupt practice, especially if it's not upfront.

I think one way to regulate this would be to have the probabilities posted somewhere where the devs could be held accountable.  Maybe even make their algorithms subject to audit.