Banning games with loot boxes

gerd

gerd

Retired Footballer
8 January 2002
Over the moon
KRC Genk, Spurs
I start this thread, because here in Belgian something important for gamers might be happening. With the launch of Star Wars Battlefront a discussion has started about games with loot boxes. In games like Star Wars and Overwatch, players can only end the game or rise in level if they buy loot boxes with unforseeable content. You buy a loot box, but you don't know what you will get. This has been discussed in parliament and some people consider these loot boxes gambling. They have the opinion that those games are played by kids (my 14 year old son plays Overwatch, but never buys loot boxes) and that legislation has to protect kids from gambling. I tend to agree with this. I'm also shocked that more and more Belgian football teams (and our FA) are sponsored by gambling enterprises like Unibet and oothers.
This is supposed to be a forum about PES, this also happens in MyClub...

Our parliament is considering a law to ban these games entirely. Personally, i tend to think it's a good thing...Some of these loot boxes are completely ridiculous ( in Forza Motorsport for example).

What do you people think about this?
 
Not a fan of microtransactions in games at all, but at the end of the day the reason they're there is because people are too dumb and lazy not to buy them. Definitely can't stand the way betting advertising has become so standard, it's everywhere, as you say club shirts, even stadiums these days (Stoke City for example), personally I don't think any betting advertising should be allowed where children can see it, that means all football shirt sponsors, TV before 9pm etc. etc.
 
If i understand all this well, then what happens in Star Wars Battlefront goes beyond being lazy, Placebo.
The way i understood that game (haven't bought it) is that if you don't buy loot boxes, you don't have the chance to play the game entirely, you can't for example play certain levels with the more popular Star Wars characters...and even if you buy those loot boxes, it remains to be seen that this will be possible.

It is this last element wich makes the game something like gambling and that is why more and more people in Belgium want those games banned...it could stop microtransactions, or at least the lootboxes where you are never sure what you will get...but i think i'm too optimistic.
 
It's not a game I've followed very closely so I don't understand how the loot boxes work in it but I thought it was just about being able to unlock certain characters in the game to play with that originally took about 4 years of continual play (or you pay for them).
 
For me, it's as simple as - if I pay for a game, I don't expect to see any paid shortcuts in there. (But they're not going away.)

People give the example of someone who hasn't got the time to play PES/FIFA (or Star Wars) for "five hours a night" and therefore can't fairly compete with everybody else (or unlock the stuff they really want), so those guys need a shortcut to better players, and they're happy to pay for it.

Giving someone an opportunity to buy assistance isn't fixing a problem - it's just reversing it. Suddenly it's not the guys with no time to play who are at a disadvantage, it's the guys with no money to spend.

Simultaneously, it creates an arms race, where you have bands of people spending various amounts of money on a regular basis - for something that DOESN'T PHYSICALLY EXIST - to continue to compete. Suddenly, a £50 game turns into a £50 monthly subscription.

I'd love to think that the Star Wars backlash is the start of something big, but it isn't going to be. Money rules the world, and both EA and Konami produce games that create many times more money through microtransactions than through sales of the game itself.

If anything, I think the major change will be a switch to a "seasonal" output, as Andrew Wilson discussed here. Given the lack of major evolution between FIFA/PES releases recently, and if microtransactions fail to find new users (i.e. if us single-player plebs continue to refuse to spend money), they may decide to charge all of us regularly to continue playing the game whilst it receives constant tweaks. Perhaps even splitting it into modules (£10 a month for Career Mode, £10 a month for Ultimate Team, £10 a month for Clubs, £25 a month for the complete package).

Either way, there is no way the big companies are going to decide they no longer want money for nothing (which is literally what MyClub/Ultimate Team microtransactions are - from a business point of view, it is [evil] genius).
 
My son has friends who have payed upto 500 euro to buy a sword or a skin for a gun in a shooter...that is madness...money for nothing...absolutely agree with Chris' post...a ban will not stop this, but it might sent out a message.
 
Never bought DLC, skins or lootboxes in my life. Probably wont unless I become insane.

Don't have time to waste 500$ on freakin skin and OP weapons, I can buy food and upgrade my PC with that money. That's why I never cared about FUT and Myclub.
 
gerd said:
My son has friends who have payed upto 500 euro to buy a sword or a skin for a gun in a shooter...that is madness...money for nothing...absolutely agree with Chris' post...a ban will not stop this, but it might sent out a message.
Click to expand...

I hope that was just a typo...



I really do.
 
Gunslinger said:
Best not to ban things if at all possible. Slippery slope...
Click to expand...
I used to think that too.
That changes with age.

Not implying that it has anything to do with wisdom, mind you...i'm 55 year old and still waiting for wisdom to come...will never come i guess.

I can see your point, but i don't agree anymore.

One can ask the question if banning commercial products is censorship.
It depends on the product and the circumstances, if games bring childeren in contact with gambling, i don't think one can speak about censorship...
 
Seems to me the parents should be more involved in this situation rather than relying on the government to babysit. I'm 49 by the way and full of wisdom.:NO:
 
That is indeed the sensible answer, but easier said than done.
This supposes that parents go to the trouble of transposing themselves in the world of their teenage childeren, that is not always easy. Being a (litle bit) a gamer myself, it's ok for me, same for music...But social media for example...instagram? Not for me...

In the end having a good bond with your kids and trusting them up to a certain point, helps...but not always.
 
For me it's about more than protecting kids*.

These purchases aren't real. You aren't paying for something tangible, you're paying for code to change from 0s to 1s.

It's like buying a car and then the manufacturer charging your credit card every time you go above 40mph. Meanwhile, it's gridlock for everyone who can't afford it, because they've just spent a fortune on the car.

The argument of "I'm an adult and if I want it I should be allowed to buy it" is what enables this literal money-for-nothing. It's not like this is a "nanny state" thing, it's like if Currys started forcing you to buy that stupid, worthless insurance with everything you bought from them.

If it was regular DLC or a subscription model where the game is being updated all the time (gameplay-wise), your money is paying for that work. Paying for a random player or loot box isn't paying for work. It's paying for what you've already paid for.

It just creates a game where everyone who isn't paying has to pay to compete (a situation borne out of Mr. No-Time paying to compete).

*Even though that's important - and just today this article was written about a new game with cartoon graphics packed with microtransactions.
 
Last edited:
I would love action to be taken against lootboxes/packs etc, absolutely despise that model. I can deal with cosmetic-only stuff like how Rocket League does it, but even there I still much prefer the DLC packs where I pay a few quid and know exactly what I'm getting.

How it hasn't been regarded as gambling until now by any authorities is a mystery to me, it fits pretty much any definition of the term... I agree with the view that sports betting and online casino advertising should be heavily clamped down on too.

Really wish the FIFA community wouldn't just lap it up so willingly with FUT (and now PES with MyClub) - it is clearly pay to win and unbalanced. Whenever you say something like that though on Reddit or the like, you get downvoted to oblivion, called a "noob" and get told that it's actually just skill based... Yeah, because a super-mega-team-of-the-century-fifth-inform Ronaldo with 99 shooting isn't going to score more shots, apparently.
 
Last edited:
Gunslinger said:
Seems to me the parents should be more involved in this situation
Click to expand...

They should yes but parents are less and less engaged and responsible for their children than ever before, so these kinds of bans would protect the parents as much as the children, what happens to the parents once the child's full on gambling addiction has kicked in?
 
I'm afraid we will see something similar in sports coverage.
In a not so distant future we will be able to watch CL group stage for free and then we will have to pay for the laater stages, or perhaps be able to see the first half of big matches and then pay for the second.

Tour de France: flat stages for free and the mountian stages behind a paywall.

World Cup: group stages for free and the latter stages behind a pay wall.
 
Most of the decent sport is already behind paywalls in the UK (Sky/BT subscriptions) and boxing/MMA already does what you say with the PPV cards where the main events are behind yet another paywall (though UFC PPVs are just on BT Sport in the UK). All the greed is turning sports into a farce, especially football. Everything has sports betting sponsorship and advertising plastered all over it...
 
They get pocket money, you know.
And the kid who piad 500 euro's asked money for his birthday and got it from several relatives. He also saved up his pocket money (not sure if pocket money is correct English, in Beglium from a certain age kids get money from their parents to buy things, my kids get 5 euro a week, which isn't much compared to lots of others).
 
You can buy the Xbox/PS gift cards in shops with cash, then use that credit to gamble on FUT packs/loot boxes etc... You can get a debit card at 11 years old... It's not hard for kids to get into it.

FUT is basically an elaborate slot machine hidden within a football game - addictive and exploitative in the same ways; children should not be exposed to such predatory practices to develop a gambling addiction.

Should we allow kids into casinos to play blackjack and roulette with their pocket money? No, I don't think anyone argues that shouldn't be banned... So why shouldn't packs/lootboxes have such age restrictions either?
 
Last edited:
Gunslinger said:
How are the kids paying for this stuff?
Click to expand...

Well, I get 1 $ 5 days a week for eating tiffin in college. I save those moneys and use it on FUT Packs, Loot Boxes I mean food and video games and save some for emergency.

That's how children pay for stuffs like these.
 
There was a big debate about this in Japan I think due to the popularity of gacha games. Nothing much ever came from it apart from having to enter an adult DOB when starting the game which isn't gonna do much.
 
Skin betting is huge among teenagers (didn't know the name, but i know some kids spent crazy money on new skins for guns).

I did buy Panini stickers, nowadays some kids spent huge amount on skin betting. Some game developers or publishing companies have a huge responsiblity.

I have a feeling that the UK Always has had a betting culture, but here in Belgium and Holland this is new and it worries me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom