State Legislator Wants to Ban Kids from Buying Video Game Loot Boxes

Nukester said:
How is this any worse than the old arcades of the past. Run out of time? Run out of lives? Pop more quarters. Man I dumped a lot of cash on Dragon's lair and Space ace. Mike Tyson kicked my ass too.
Click to expand...

It comes down to that you have a limited amount of money as a child when you went into an arcade.

Often, the argument is that parents just need to be more responsible and not tie their credit card to the console. But there's a flaw in this argument in terms that consoles (and computers) can often be outside the comfort zone of the parents, to where the kids are in charge. You know how the stereotype was that older people often couldn't work their VCR a few decades ago? Or how today it seems like the child is the one who always fixes the computer? So, the child will say, I need the credit card for some purchase, and the parent might give them access on certain key days, like their birthday or Christmas. At that point, they're screwed.

Another thing to take into consideration is that, as humans, we specialize. You can say that not understanding a simple process is the result of stupidity, but in the broad scope of things, we're all stupid to a lot of basic knowledge that's just out of our scope of experiences. When you go to a store, that's a known experience for many adults. They understand it, because they've done it before. But many adults just don't play video games nor understand them. And that is part of the problem. The credit card and purchasing are now more vulnerable to being abused, because it's accessed via a process they're unable to understand, or perhaps unwilling to learn. And you can't force people to learn something, especially if they don't plan on ever using it.

What about that little checkbox that says "Leave the credit card info on the console"? Well, in this case, think about how many people actually read a TOS. And it might be once again the kid entering the card.
 
Nukester said:
How is this any worse than the old arcades of the past. Run out of time? Run out of lives? Pop more quarters. Man I dumped a lot of cash on Dragon's lair and Space ace. Mike Tyson kicked my ass too.
Click to expand...

They were regulated in many jurisdictions, for one. There were all sorts of scare articles at the time, too, of the "turning tricks to pay for pinball | pacman | fad of the week" variety.
 
I like how he says that children don't have the wherewithal to know when to stop gambling, well neither do adults!
 
aaronspink said:
Capitalism cannot exist without a regulated society. Without a regulated society, you have anarchy and rule by warlords (or kings, presidents for lifes, gangs, etc). And a Free Market and Capitalism are not the same thing and never will be, a true Free Market basically requires anarchy. We got more regulations on Capitalism because of the age of the robber barons and the effect was the largest expanse of the middle class in history in the US. It is the decline of regulations that has led to the virtual collapse of the middle class.

But hey, if you want to go back to the days of company towns and subsidence living, be my guest.
Click to expand...

It's almost like they've never heard of the Gilded Age...but that would be silly.

Hey, what's that saying about those who forget history? ;-)
 
Last edited:
Flyingcrazy said:
I like how he says that children don't have the wherewithal to know when to stop gambling, well neither do adults!
Click to expand...

It's a little different though. As an adult, you're forced into learning how to manage money. Sure, some people may be irresponsible, but many are not. As a kid, money does grow on trees. You might understand the words that your parents aren't rich, but you most likely don't understand the concept, because you've never had to really work for it, nor had to worry about paying bills. It's this naïveté why credit card companies prey on college students, to get them into a lifetime of debt slavery before they even know what they're doing.

If only it was legal to charge kids a monthly food and board fee, or they'd be kicked out to the street, things could change.
 
tetris42 said:
So you're saying if no politicians were involved and it was just manufacturing companies competing against each other, the water would have been nice and clean because they never would have polluted to cut costs, got it.

Is that why the BP oil spill happened too, because of the power hungry politicians? I could have sworn it was because they skimped on safety REGULATIONS because it was more profitable to cut corners. I think I'm missing the part where NO regulations on that would have benefited everyone.
Click to expand...

If politicians were to stay out of things that aren't their business, then we'd be good. The things that ARE their business are the enemies of the people, internal and external, and NOT the people who follow the laws already.

Regulations hurt the people who follow the laws. Laws and penalties hurt those who don't.

Example: the EPA law that states that any "computer manufacturer" MUST have a recycling program that allows purchasers to recycle the products up to 10 years after they buy them. Also, this recycling program MUST be reviewed and approved by the EPA, at the cost of $125,000 per review, before the company can sell their products. The definition of a "computer manufacturer" in this case is a company that puts parts together to create a functional computer. So, if I want to use computer parts to build a pfsense based router and sell it to people for less than $50 per unit in profit, even if I only sell under 10 units per year, I have to make a contract with a recycling company that covers 10 years after the purchase date, arrange and pay for shipping of those products to recycle, and pay $125,000 to have the EA review the contract and plan, and if they don't like my first attempt I have to pay AGAIN to submit a modified plan, or I get fined tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. I'm not doing any harm to anyone selling small computers to use as routers, yet they'd punish me by $125,000 or more for not having their recycling program, which should be the responsibility of the user. How could I possibly offer any competition to off the shelf router manufacturers, who make such insecure and unstable products that none have escaped complaints, if I have to deal with such heavy regulations? Yet big corporations are able to shoulder these, or get around them, due to their resources, and sometimes a little bribe in the form of "campaign contributions".

On the other side of this, BP, who violated worker safety laws and endangered their workers with removing safety equipment in their rig, violated no regulations, so they were able to just keep on doing what they were doing, and the lack of enforcement of workplace safety laws by a company that is a big supporter of the Democratic party, was met with a minor fine for the accident. There were no laws in place describing penalties for such accidents or damage to the environment from them, so they could no levy penalties on BP for the damage, and yet there were tons of regulations that kept smaller companies from entering the market. There were only workers' compensation regulations. There were NO prosecutions for manslaughter for the management that ordered the removal of the safety equipment, as there should have been. BP only paid in the court of public opinion, "voluntarily" paying for much of the clean up. The government TOTALLY FAILED in that incident.

That's the difference. Regulations paralyze competition and ensure the big guys keep what they have. Laws penalize the bad actors.
 
You can't really regulate addictions to any degree of success. Thus taking a political solution is a non starter.
If this was not the case, then drug addictions would have been solved by now thanks to the harsh crimes meant to punish and jail people who do drugs.
Therefore any regulatory means of loot boxes (and lets be clear, gambling in games with money) won't be successful nor will it help. Awful games will still be awful.
 
How I see it...
I hate lootboxes - so I won't pay for them, but I'll use them if I get them free in game, however I won't stop others from buying/using them.

Here's how I think it should be attacked...
Companies like Microsoft / Apple / Google / Amazon / Facebook / Etc -- all the companies that provide the centralized user databases should make the following changes.
Any account that is a Minor needs to be attached to a verified parent's account
The parent's account will have access to all parental controls such as Time, ratings, access to IAPs
Any/All of those settings must be queried by the game/app in question - For example if IAPs are disabled by a parent there should be no way the kid can use it in game, or if it's limited to X that the kid gave the parents for the IAPs they should be able to spend that amount and no more than that amount.

That way it'd leave the Loot boxes or other in app purchases for those who want to use it, and allows parents to prevent their children from utilizing it "outside of the kids getting into the parent's account and enabling it"
 
Gigus Fire said:
You can't really regulate addictions to any degree of success. Thus taking a political solution is a non starter.
If this was not the case, then drug addictions would have been solved by now thanks to the harsh crimes meant to punish and jail people who do drugs.
Therefore any regulatory means of loot boxes (and lets be clear, gambling in games with money) won't be successful nor will it help. Awful games will still be awful.
Click to expand...

Your analogy is flawed, because we're talking supply, not demand. It would be quite easy to prevent EA from selling loot boxes (which, to be clear, I'm not advocating). Just as easy, in fact, as it is to prevent Walgreen's from selling heroin.

Then again, perhaps I've just been going to the wrong Walgreen's stores... ;)
 
Last edited:
bugleyman said:
Your analogy is flawed, because we're talking supply, not demand. It would be quite easy to prevent EA from selling loot boxes (which, to be clear, I'm not advocating). Just as easy, in fact, as it is to prevent Walgreen's from selling heroin.

Then again, perhaps I've just been going to the wrong Walgreen's stores... ;)
Click to expand...

You're going to the wrong Walgreen's stores. I know of a few in the Denver are where you can get pretty much anything you want, just outside the door. It may be unofficial and outside of corporate demands, but it still happens.
 
bugleyman said:
Your analogy is flawed, because we're talking supply, not demand. It would be quite easy to prevent EA from selling loot boxes (which, to be clear, I'm not advocating). Just as easy, in fact, as it is to prevent Walgreen's from selling heroin. Then again, perhaps I've just been going to the wrong Walgreen's stores...
Click to expand...
You're being short sighted on purpose? So swap "harsh crimes meant to punish and jail people who do drugs" to "harsh crimes meant to punish and jail people who sell drugs"? Same difference. You can't legislate these type of things. How will the law apply to a company in europe? Or that creates a game in Korea? You don't like loot boxes, don't buy games with them, it's that simple.
 
Do people really think arcades and Chucks are the same thinng as loot boxes?

I put in a quarter, I get to play.
I put in a quarter, I get continue.
I put in a quarter, I get tickets based off my performance.

I play Assualt with specific weapon, I pay $2.99, I get specialist parts. Not what I need, maybe next crate will have what I need.

I pay $2.99, receive next crate, ohh 1 Darth Vader Chip + Legendary Hans Blaster, I am getting lucky, just one more crate...

Also I didn’t have to buy The Avengers arcade itself before I could dump coins into it.
 
Gigus Fire said:
You're being short sighted on purpose? So swap "harsh crimes meant to punish and jail people who do drugs" to "harsh crimes meant to punish and jail people who sell drugs"? Same difference. You can't legislate these type of things. How will the law apply to a company in europe? Or that creates a game in Korea? You don't like loot boxes, don't buy games with them, it's that simple.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not being "short sighted" on purpose. I'm suggesting that it's pretty easy to control the supply of loot boxes. Drugs -- a cash business with no central distribution -- not so much.
 
dgingeri said:
You're going to the wrong Walgreen's stores. I know of a few in the Denver are where you can get pretty much anything you want, just outside the door. It may be unofficial and outside of corporate demands, but it still happens.
Click to expand...

I don't dispute that. But loot boxes aren't drugs. They aren't distributed or paid for in a completely decentralized, untraceable fashion.
 
Last edited:
Here is my abstract compromise:

Conservatives took away my ability to spend the money - I earned and paid taxes on - in the way I see fit. Specifically they took online poker away.

Those are the same conservatives that are now claiming loot-box gambling crosses into freedom of choice for underage gamers, and must be preserved.

If you get me my rights back, maybe your bullshit claims that this is about freedom of choice might sound more sincere.
 
dgingeri said:
If politicians were to stay out of things that aren't their business, then we'd be good. The things that ARE their business are the enemies of the people, internal and external, and NOT the people who follow the laws already.

Regulations hurt the people who follow the laws. Laws and penalties hurt those who don't.

Example: the EPA law that states that any "computer manufacturer" MUST have a recycling program that allows purchasers to recycle the products up to 10 years after they buy them. Also, this recycling program MUST be reviewed and approved by the EPA, at the cost of $125,000 per review, before the company can sell their products. The definition of a "computer manufacturer" in this case is a company that puts parts together to create a functional computer. So, if I want to use computer parts to build a pfsense based router and sell it to people for less than $50 per unit in profit, even if I only sell under 10 units per year, I have to make a contract with a recycling company that covers 10 years after the purchase date, arrange and pay for shipping of those products to recycle, and pay $125,000 to have the EA review the contract and plan, and if they don't like my first attempt I have to pay AGAIN to submit a modified plan, or I get fined tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. I'm not doing any harm to anyone selling small computers to use as routers, yet they'd punish me by $125,000 or more for not having their recycling program, which should be the responsibility of the user. How could I possibly offer any competition to off the shelf router manufacturers, who make such insecure and unstable products that none have escaped complaints, if I have to deal with such heavy regulations? Yet big corporations are able to shoulder these, or get around them, due to their resources, and sometimes a little bribe in the form of "campaign contributions".

On the other side of this, BP, who violated worker safety laws and endangered their workers with removing safety equipment in their rig, violated no regulations, so they were able to just keep on doing what they were doing, and the lack of enforcement of workplace safety laws by a company that is a big supporter of the Democratic party, was met with a minor fine for the accident. There were no laws in place describing penalties for such accidents or damage to the environment from them, so they could no levy penalties on BP for the damage, and yet there were tons of regulations that kept smaller companies from entering the market. There were only workers' compensation regulations. There were NO prosecutions for manslaughter for the management that ordered the removal of the safety equipment, as there should have been. BP only paid in the court of public opinion, "voluntarily" paying for much of the clean up. The government TOTALLY FAILED in that incident.

That's the difference. Regulations paralyze competition and ensure the big guys keep what they have. Laws penalize the bad actors.
Click to expand...
I admit I was conflating the two terms and thought you were one of these nutty extremist libertarians who thinks that there shouldn't be any enforcement of environmental protections outside of suing in court. I actually agree with what you're saying. I'm all for hard, serious, legal penalties for damage to the environment and people's lives and sidestepping regulations entirely. I thought you were arguing against any enforcement at all, when it sounds like the the reality is you want MORE, but just without any half-assed measures.
 
Going a bit back on-topic
https://www.polygon.com/2017/11/28/...efront-2-cosmetics-loot-boxes-lucasfilm-canon

It turns of EA only used upgrades (rather than cosmetics) as star cards for a very important reason:
They didn't want to break canon :)
“The one thing we're very focused on and they are extremely focused on is not violating the canon of Star Wars,”

Even though Jim points out that you can fight as Darth Vador against Yoda on Naboo...

Edit: So, who wants to play as a pink Darth?
 
Last edited:
Gigus Fire said:
You're being short sighted on purpose? So swap "harsh crimes meant to punish and jail people who do drugs" to "harsh crimes meant to punish and jail people who sell drugs"? Same difference. You can't legislate these type of things. How will the law apply to a company in europe? Or that creates a game in Korea? You don't like loot boxes, don't buy games with them, it's that simple.
Click to expand...

Well just to touch on the how to prevent companies from doing things that aren't in America, that's easy, make requirements for games HERE. Games are already localized uniquely for different countries that have different rules. Germany, Australia, some Muslim countries, lots of countries have specific localisations to them, wouldn't be hard just to turn off a check box for certain loot boxes to a game if it's pulling a US region code. I mean shit even since NES and SNES days games were changed between regions based on local rules. That part would be easy for devs to adjust for because they already do, granted the game isn't 100% built around loot boxes.
 
Armenius said:
Well, before this shit storm started people asked the ESRB to step in, which was created to prevent this kind of thing. But their opinion was that loot boxes are not gambling as defined by the law, so they were not going to make any rating changes. They made the wrong call and now the government is stepping in.

See above. Here is the quote (source):
Click to expand...

Glad I'm not the only one to catch this. The ESRB and ESA should be getting more of the blame for things getting this out of hand. May have to do with EA being part of the ESA though....conflict of interest much?
 
Hakaba said:
Do people really think arcades and Chucks are the same thinng as loot boxes?

I put in a quarter, I get to play.
I put in a quarter, I get continue.
I put in a quarter, I get tickets based off my performance.

I play Assualt with specific weapon, I pay $2.99, I get specialist parts. Not what I need, maybe next crate will have what I need.

I pay $2.99, receive next crate, ohh 1 Darth Vader Chip + Legendary Hans Blaster, I am getting lucky, just one more crate...

Also I didn’t have to buy The Avengers arcade itself before I could dump coins into it.
Click to expand...

You put a quarter in a pinball machine and you win a free game. The game has a monetary value ($0.25) and a combination of chance and skill was involved. Guess how gambling is defined by the law? I just can't believe this still hasn't been sorted out after all the noise over online betting from just a few years ago.
 
Todd Walter said:
You put a quarter in a pinball machine and you win a free game. The game has a monetary value ($0.25) and a combination of chance and skill was involved. Guess how gambling is defined by the law? I just can't believe this still hasn't been sorted out after all the noise over online betting from just a few years ago.
Click to expand...
Not quite the same. Gambling and skill don't mix. A free game on a pinball machine can be bought at any time for .25$. You can't buy these items in the loot boxes. They're designed so that you need to keep on buying them to get what you want. It's the same reason those capsule machines aren't the same as playing poker. Just because there's chance involved doesn't mean it's gambling.
 
tetris42 said:
I admit I was conflating the two terms and thought you were one of these nutty extremist libertarians who thinks that there shouldn't be any enforcement of environmental protections outside of suing in court. I actually agree with what you're saying. I'm all for hard, serious, legal penalties for damage to the environment and people's lives and sidestepping regulations entirely. I thought you were arguing against any enforcement at all, when it sounds like the the reality is you want MORE, but just without any half-assed measures.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. Plus, I was to remove the politician's decisions from the matter. Have the law state that they MUST enforce it, and the penalty MUST be enacted. That leaves out people paying campaign contributions to avoid prosecution.

If I have learned anything in this life, it is to not trust those who seek power, as they are the least worthy of it because they only want it for their own ends. Always watch them, always hold them to their word, and never, ever trust. If they do not hold to their word, fire them immediately. Diapers and politicians should be changed frequently, for the same reason.
 
Gigus Fire said:
Not quite the same. Gambling and skill don't mix. A free game on a pinball machine can be bought at any time for .25$. You can't buy these items in the loot boxes. They're designed so that you need to keep on buying them to get what you want. It's the same reason those capsule machines aren't the same as playing poker. Just because there's chance involved doesn't mean it's gambling.
Click to expand...

My point was that, through skill, you could earn a free game or two whilst playing on the first quarter. And try telling poker or baccarat players there's no skill involved!
 
Todd Walter said:
My point was that, through skill, you could earn a free game or two whilst playing on the first quarter. And try telling poker or baccarat players there's no skill involved!
Click to expand...
There's some skill, but it's still heavily based on luck. A pinball machine is actually 100% skill. Just like playing pool, darts and bowling is 100% skill.
If you can calculate trajectories of the ball in advance and have awesome timing on the flippers, you should be able to play the pinball game non stop. Almost no one has this amount of skill, but there are some good players.
Poker for example is 100% luck (at least in the first draw). Only by counting the remaining cards and knowing the odds can you make some estimated guesses on what you should do. You can use math in almost any luck based games to make the odds in your favor. Using psychology to bluff or outsmart the other players is a skill, but it's secondary to the game mechanics.
 
Todd Walter said:
You put a quarter in a pinball machine and you win a free game. The game has a monetary value ($0.25) and a combination of chance and skill was involved. Guess how gambling is defined by the law? I just can't believe this still hasn't been sorted out after all the noise over online betting from just a few years ago.
Click to expand...

I see where you are coming from but I still disagree that it’s any form of gambling. I look at it more from the side of psychological addiction.

But if the payout has to have monetary value then you may be SOL for awhile. Think two other countries said exactly the same thing you did, so loot boxes are good to go.

The only outliers might be CS:Go/PUBG, since you can trade the won items, which allows people to sell something. But is that really gambling? An item that was intended to have 0 value is assigned worth by the public and traded.

In the end though I really don’t care, I don’t use LB’s, don’t let my kids purchase them. Hell I do my best to “screw” the company over by purchasing the game on a steam flash sale for $2.99.

But I really think they should take a multi view look, cost money, rewards addictive nature, leads people to buy more.

Damn just saw a few people already answered.
 
Last edited:
Todd Walter said:
My point was that, through skill, you could earn a free game or two whilst playing on the first quarter. And try telling poker or baccarat players there's no skill involved!
Click to expand...

Ight, Jurassic Park pinball machine at Aeon, not only gives you a chance to win a fee less game at the end, you can also win a free game by meeting xxx score. Gambling?
 
Still, nobody has answered how this is any different from card packs in stuff like Pokemon / Magic or even Hearthstone. How is this different?
 
annimorpheus said:
Still, nobody has answered how this is any different from card packs in stuff like Pokemon / Magic or even Hearthstone. How is this different?
Click to expand...
Well, I don't know about Hearthstone, but for MTG, if you buy those cards, you own them. They're yours, you can trade them, use them in the future, sell them. They'll be here today, they'll be in your possession in 20 years if you want. If you buy a lootbox for Battlefront, I guaran-fucking-tee that game will be shut down in 4-10 years and you have NOTHING left for your money.
 
Hakaba said:
I see where you are coming from but I still disagree that it’s any form of gambling. I look at it more from the side of psychological addiction.

But if the payout has to have monetary value then you may be SOL for awhile. Think two other countries said exactly the same thing you did, so loot boxes are good to go.

The only outliers might be CS:Go/PUBG, since you can trade the won items, which allows people to sell something. But is that really gambling? An item that was intended to have 0 value is assigned worth by the public and traded.

In the end though I really don’t care, I don’t use LB’s, don’t let my kids purchase them. Hell I do my best to “screw” the company over by purchasing the game on a steam flash sale for $2.99.

But I really think they should take a multi view look, cost money, rewards addictive nature, leads people to buy more.

Damn just saw a few people already answered.
Click to expand...

S'okay, it's tricky business! I think you're correct with the "intended value" part of the argument as I think that's how baseball cards avoided this mess.
 
Budzman said:
Liberals love to tell you what you can and can't do.
Click to expand...
Yeah conservatives love to tell consenting adults who they can can't fuck or marry, which bathroom to go to, what you can and can't do with your bodies, forced medical procedures.. tell doctors what they can and can't discuss with patients... Yeah i will take no sugary drinks or loot boxes over toxic conservatives any minute any day.
 
Uvaman2 said:
which bathroom to go to
Click to expand...
Uhhh, i think society has decided males/men go into one and women/females go into the other. What exactly do conservatives say beyond this? That men don't belong in the women's bathroom? Yeah, that's extreme
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top