23 ms·

Loot boxes are obviously gambling

181 points by Tuldok 8y ago

warcher 8y ago
Hey uh, I don’t do a lot of mobile gaming, but what’s a loot box and why should I care if it’s gambling or not?
- ruytlm 8y ago
  Loot boxes are in-game containers, that contain a randomly generated set of reward items, of varying value. They are also present in far more than just mobile games. They use addictive techniques similar to gambling/casinos to encourage players to purchase more boxes, for a chance at a better reward, sometimes irresponsibly. Using addictive techniques to encourage people to spend in an irresponsible manner can destroy lives, which is why gambling is highly regulated. Loot boxes are using addictive techniques to encourage people to spend in an irresponsible manner, should be considered gambling, and should be regulated.
  - pfisch 8y ago
    > Loot boxes are using addictive techniques to encourage people to spend in an irresponsible manner, should be considered gambling, and should be regulated. Gambling should be considered gambling. If paying for variable and unpredictable levels of entertainment is gambling, then you have broadened the definition so wide that it is now meaningless. You have now created a definition where buying a ticket to a movie that you may or may not enjoy is a form of gambling.
    - fraudsyndrome 8y ago
      > You have now created a definition where buying a ticket to a movie that you may or may not enjoy is a form of gambling. The appropriate comparison would be buying a ticket to sit down and watch a movie, you don't get to choose the movie though, you have a chance to see the movie you want but there are maybe 9 other movies that you don't want to watch. Maybe the movie you want to watch is super popular and you've seen the other 9 movies several times already. Probably the most basic comparison minus an analogy for all the addictive flashing lights and all that associated with gambling (incl. loot boxes)
      - pfisch 8y ago
        No, that would not be the appropriate comparison at all. That is the comparison that is more similar to loot boxes, but not to the definition you have decided upon. Loot boxes give you variable entertainment, but for that to be gambling you have now defined entertainment value as the element of prize. Gambling requires chance, prize and consideration. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e7b39fc2-501e-4e7d-863f-e8e526e31648 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e7b39fc2-501e... At the point where entertainment value is the prize, you have now created a definition of gambling that includes both your example of a random movie, and my example of any movie. The thing I hate about all of these lootboxes as gambling arguments is that they have no appreciation for what gambling actually is. Instead gambling is now just whatever you feel like is gambling in your gut, not an actual real legal and enforceable definition. You want to regulate lootboxes, fine, but trying to draw an equivalency to real gambling and lootboxes is just not possible without classifying almost every transaction as gambling. But honestly, if you want to regulate loot boxes we should probably start by regulating video game addiction because it is a much larger problem that effects a much larger audience. All of these deeply concerned people who want to regulate loot boxes somehow don't seem to overlap with the group of people who want to regulate video game addiction though. Because the deeper truth is that people want to wield the tools of government like a cudgel to force video game developers to make the kind of games they want. This whole thing is just a fig leaf similar to how child porn is used to censor the internet and enforce copyright.
        oldcynic 8y ago
        > Loot boxes give you variable entertainment, but for that to be gambling you have now defined entertainment as the element of prize Variable entertainment? Then a lottery scratch card is "variable entertainment", whatever that is supposed to be. As is I can't distinguish a scratchcard from a lootbox except one has some regulation. They have a feature prize that is the reason for purchase, they have small odds of achieving the feature/promoted prize (Game loot boxes frequently don't give the actual odds), they cost real currency, they can give something of value. Do you then claim that a scratch card is not gambling?
  - Karunamon 8y ago
    How are loot boxes significantly different to CCGs of the kind children have been playing and buying/having their parents buy boosters for, for years? Or sports cards? The concept is identical as far as I can tell. This sudden push for regulation throws up every single one of the “think of the children” red flags for bad legislation in my mind.
    - __david__ 8y ago
      For one, loot boxes are instant gratification. Cards and arcade machine rewards required going somewhere and physically buying something. A loot boxes is more like sitting in front of a slot machine and thinking, "oh just one more roll, I was so close this time!". Loot boxes also tend to really push you towards expensive options. 10 boxes for $9.99, 25 for $19.99, 125 for $99.99 (best value!!). Magic The Gathering cards are not cheap either but they also don't try to push you into buying a whole booster box as an impulse purchase.
      - pfisch 8y ago
        This has nothing to do with whether it is gambling or not.
        daveFNbuck 8y ago
        It's pretty obvious that both CCGs and loot boxes are forms of gambling. The question is what effects they're having and how they need to be regulated. Loot boxes have a lot more of the features that make gambling a problem, and children are less equipped to handle it. It's reasonable to regulate the benign thing differently from the harmful thing.
        pfisch 8y ago
        I think it is more clear that a CCG is a form of gambling. Loot boxes do not give you anything that you can redeem for cash.
    - watwut 8y ago
- JasonSage 8y ago
  Couple things: 1) This is very prevalent in high budget desktop/console games as well, not just mobile games. 2) These games typically do little to nothing to abide by laws that prohibit gambling by minors. There are definitely concerns of whether this is ethical or legal.
  - pfisch 8y ago
    You seem to have accepted that loot boxes are a form of gambling even though that is not really the agreed upon legal definition of gambling.
    - irishsultan 8y ago
      The question was "why should I care whether it's gambling". Answers that point out the (legal/moral) consequences of it being gambling are entirely appropriate, even if they don't give any consideration to the possibility that it might not in fact be gambling.
- siddboots 8y ago
  The article is talking about competitive multiplayer games, rather than mobile games. DOTA 2 and CS:GO are the examples used. Theres a few elements that, together, make it extremely problematic in my opinion. Using CS:GO as the example: 1. Items are dropped randomly, or you can buy randomised "crates". By design, plain looking drops are common, while visually impressive drops are rare. 2. When you buy crates and unlock them, there is a "wheel of fortune" style visual system that indicates what item you will receive. There are audio and visual cues indicating how rare or common the item is. 4. There is an in-game trading system that allows users to buy and sell items at an agreed price. Rare items are naturally more expensive on this market. The majority of CS:GO's revenue comes from cuts of these trades. 5. Kids play CS:GO. It is very common to run into young teenagers (13-15) in matchmaking servers. 6. Kids who are exposed to gambling are much more likely to become addicted than adults, are much less likely to have the means to repay debt, and therefore are not held responsible for gambling losses in the eyes of the law. Gambling under the age of 16 is illegal in most countries, and in many cases under 18.
  - ygra 8y ago
    It should be noted that most items in CS:GO cannot be obtained as a normal drop, only from a crate, so it's not so much that good-looking drops are rare, it's that good-looking items can usually only be obtained by paying money to open a box (AWP Dragon Lore being one of the few exceptions).
- zeta0134 8y ago
  A loot box is specifically an item that can be purchased in-game that offers a random reward, typically from a loot table and with set odds known only to the game maker. They come in many forms; one of the most obvious is found in Overwatch right now, typically awarded to the player after they level up in game. Overwatch's loot box animation is very pretty. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdB17umeKB0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdB17umeKB0 If this sounds kind of familiar, it's because a similar concept exists in many Arcades already, in the form of capsule machines. Japanese Gashapon are the oft-cited inspiration, but countless variations on this idea exist. Here in South Texas, they're a common sight in grocery stores and restaurants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gashapon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gashapon On their own, random rewards in a video game sound tame, but where this gets questionably ethical are games which (a) accept real money for in-game purchases, and (b) offer loot-boxes as an in-game purchase. This enables game players to pay real money to receive a random reward, and it's not hard to draw comparisons to real life slot machines. Unlike real-life gambling though, loot boxes have been popping up in games that are often targeted towards minors, making the issue even more complicated. I won't weigh in on the issue here, I just wanted to try to clarify what they are.
  - ng12 8y ago
    I think Overwatch is a bad example because you can't turn the loot into real money. Valve's games are a better example because you can sell the loot directly through Steam -- in some cases for hundreds of dollars.
    - dharmab 8y ago
      Overwatch is also a bad (good) example because the developers have a policy where only cosmetic items are available through the loot boxes, while all gameplay features are free for everyone. Many other loot box games offer items that increase player power or change gameplay in loot boxes. For example, the prerelease version of Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) had a backlash because of items such as "Deal 30% more damage with ship blasters." Other games may have items such as "Deal 20% more damage, but reduce health by 30%" which open up additional strategic options.
tounu 8y ago
I found myself spending so much cash in Dota 2 loot boxes... It's very addictive. Yet I wasn't opening those boxes to grab something valuable in order to make money out of it, and that's probably where the use of the word "gambling" is confusing people. I was just looking for those ultra-rare unique cosmetics in order to feel good and unique as well. There is a social dimension to this problem, if Dota 2 was a solo game, I wouldn't have spent a dime on cosmetics.
evolighting 8y ago
Gambling is gambling, loot box is loot box, I think we should not spending time on arguing the definition, but instead limit loot box as what we do with gambling. New stuff come with new rules, may sound more resealable.
- pentae 8y ago
  I agree - Gambling is rolling the dice to make back more money than you put in. Loot box is rolling the dice to get digital items you want with no expectation to profit. There is a difference.
  - Double_a_92 8y ago
    How is it with no expectation of profit? E.g. in CSGO you could pull skins that are worth 100s of dollars... and then sell them on 3rd party sites. Also the rare skin itself can be the profit because you get a higher status and prestige within your peers.
- acou_nPlusOne_t 8y ago
  I often wish, there was a diffrent sort of gambling- taking the customers money and refunding it - in secrecy to the familys whos reward-circuitry-hacked members bleed them dry. That- and only that, is the acceptable gambling that i could accept existing.
  - tialaramex 8y ago
    The British government owns lots of banks, one of them, the National Savings and Investment Bank has a product that is almost this (but not secret), named 'Premium Bonds'. You buy bonds, and like a lottery ticket they might randomly win a prize in a draw. But because it's a bank not a lottery the bonds themselves never go away if you don't win, it's basically a savings account except instead of boring percentage interest you randomly win prizes.
- seanhunter 8y ago
  Here's the definition of a "lottery" under the uk gambling act "(2)An arrangement is a simple lottery if— (a)persons are required to pay in order to participate in the arrangement, (b)in the course of the arrangement one or more prizes are allocated to one or more members of a class, and (c)the prizes are allocated by a process which relies wholly on chance." There is also a complex lottery where the process begins with chance. This covers things like scratchcards where you choose which things to scratch off but which card you are given, and what is printed on the card is governed by chance. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/14 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/14 Lotteries are one of 3 forms of gambling covered by this regulation, so in the uk at least it seems pretty obvious that lootboxes are gambling from a legal point of view. Lotteries are permitted for people older than 16 in the UK but it's an offence to allow a "child" (someone younger than 16 in this law) to participate (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/56 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/56) It's also an offence if your company to manufacture, supply, install or adapt gambling software without a license. So they could be liable from that point of view also, in the UK at least. edit: clarify one bit of wording
lathiat 8y ago
I much prefer how Epic Games have done this with Fortnite. And by all accounts their method is raking in a LOT of cash. All cosmetic items only, but you purchase the exact item you want directly. The items are a little more expensive than you might expect (I think on average $4-10 each) and it includes skins, different "axes" to break objects, different dances and different "gliders" that you fly into the game on. It's quite fun, but also totally unnecessary and you only spend money on exactly what you want - no random chance. On top of the fact that it's a free to play game in the first place, and you can also get quite a wide range of skins, axes and dances (10s of them) by playing to complete the battle pass which is only about $10 or so per season. Plus there are a few freebies even if you pay nothing, and some you can get from linking to Twitch Prime, etc. I think this is winning partly because it is fun (the skins are quite comedic) but also just because you know what you're getting. By comparison I spent about $10 on keys for PUBG and stopped because I just got useless crap that isn't really exciting - they're just basic clothing items. Even the rarer items aren't as exciting which doesn't help but the chance of getting one is quite low. The thing Epic/Fortnite have done to make them sell more (compared to the random chance) is that there is <10 items for sale per day for 24 hours, after 24 hours the set changes and you may not be able to buy that item again (though in practice many returns a few days or weeks later, you can't be certain). So instead of random chance gambling they're capitalising on missing out / time limited offers. Plus there's a constant influx of new items so instead of wasting time gambling for that ultra rare item - instead you can keep up with whats newer and cooler.
- sundvor 8y ago
  Fwiw, PUBG loot boxes are not game play impacting; they are cosmetic only. If you don't want that "chance", you could just buy the specific item you'd like on the Steam store from other players. You may even sell unopened boxes (which require a key) there. Sauce: https://www.finder.com.au/playerunknowns-battlegrounds-will-never-have-pay-to-win-items https://www.finder.com.au/playerunknowns-battlegrounds-will-...
  - cannonedhamster 8y ago
    So what you're saying is that there's a variable real world amount of monetary value that you could win determined solely on the random outcome of a loot box. Sounds exactly like gambling. If someone spent $5 on a chance to win either a marmot, a squirrel, a fancy coat, or a golden banjo and the rarity of winning those depended upon their real world value, it would still be gambling. The only difference with loot boxes is that their real world value is determined by their rarity.
YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
>> The loot box mechanism is straightforward: you buy a box for a fixed price, and you receive a random reward. Some rewards are commonplace and low value; others are rare and high value. So far, so gambling: these essential features are found in roulette, slot machines, betting on horses, raffles, and lotteries. Er. And Magic: the Gathering booster packs. Does that mean I have a gambling problem then? Because I had hoped that despite my M:tG habit [1], I was not really-really a gambler. ____________ [1] And let's not discuss my DnD etc RPG habit. I flip cards and roll dice way too much for someone who sincerely thinks she's not into games of chance.
- joekrill 8y ago
  > Does that mean I have a gambling problem then? Because I had hoped that despite my M:tG habit [1], I was not really-really a gambler. Just because someone gambles doesn't automatically mean they have a "gambling problem". But I certainly don't see why M:tG booster packs wouldn't be considered gambling, as well. > And let's not discuss my DnD etc RPG habit. I flip cards and roll dice way too much for someone who sincerely thinks she's not into games of chance. But do you have to pay a fixed price each time you roll the dice or flip the card?
  - YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
    For M:tG cards, yes, I think so. I have to pay something to get the cards in the first place, and I guess you could see the cost spread over each use of a card (uses which, btw, are limited in time- there's only a limited number of times I'll get to include a rare card in a deck, draw it and play with it, until I get bored or it rotates out of the most popular formats I'm engaged with).
- tialaramex 8y ago
  The psych people I've talked to explain it as a rule of thumb "If it's not a problem, it's not a problem". Say you feel you need to wear a hat made of marshmallow. Is that a problem? Well, is it? For example if you lost your job because of the hat, that's a problem. If you spend so much on marshmallow hats that you can't afford your rent, that's a problem. If you killed somebody's dog because it tried to eat your hat, that's a problem, and so on. If you spend money on MTG and enjoy it even if it's $5000 per week that could be fine, psychologically at least, if it didn't cause you or others to suffer. But if you find you're ruining your life, or other people's to buy cards, even if it's just $50 of cards per month then that's a gambling problem.
partycoder 8y ago
Loot boxes work by having a list of items with weighted probabilities adding up to 1, and what you buy is getting one or more of those items at random. The way the weighted probabilities list is constructed changes from implementation to implementation. The prevalent one so far is "box gacha", the spiritual successor to "complete gacha". The latter is now banned in Japan and the rest are somehow regulated. The motivations are many. First, it distributes large payments over smaller payments making people lose control over their spending. Then, it complicates people's perception of how expensive an item is. In a sense, lottery games are the same in spirit. For example, what's the probability of getting an arbitrary unique combination of 6 numbers out of 49 (lottery)? Very, very low. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery_mathematics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery_mathematics In mobile, they're usually coupled with "events" that have a leaderboard. Events are actually auctions were people "play" (bid) for a better place in the leaderboard. The rewards are usually not worth it, because through successive updates they're made worthless (e.g.: stats inflation).
gkya 8y ago
Maybe nit-picky, but this is one place (the title here I'm talking about) a properly choosen dash would've saved me a couple seconds or so. When I was reading this, I thought first to myself, what is a crap-loot box, only to understand later that the endash there stood for a semicolon. But endash is for word pairs (i.e. black--white, on--of); here, an emdash would be more appropriate.
- DerekL 8y ago
  The original article uses an em-dash. So either Are Technica fixed it since it was submitted, or the submission mistyped it.
- radicalbyte 8y ago
  There's nothing wrong per se with using the dash, at least if you get the spacing right. If you use a dash as a punctuation you should either use spaces or - as you said - the correct glyph.
  - gkya 8y ago
    I'd say otherwise. It's not like it's really important here, but in a book, that would be a very bright sign of amateurishness to me. Just like with sans serif dotless `i', `n' and `m' the only difference is not the number of the loops, the same with the hyphen, endash and emdash, they mean different things. Hyphen compounds words or breaks them across the line break, endash connects them in logical relations, and an emdash can stand for a colon or a pair of parantheses, indicating a subordinate clause that serves as an aside, generally. When these are mixed up, parsing the text becomes harder. It's not much of a trouble here in an internet title, but when this kinds of misuse appear in a long, difficult period in some rather complex text, it can end up consuming too much time.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
baxtr 8y ago
There was an discussion on HN about this recently when Belgium prohibited loot boxes https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16929119 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16929119
paradite 8y ago
Related: China already regulates loot boxes in games: https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/2/15517962/china-new-law-dota-league-of-legends-odds-loot-box-random https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/2/15517962/china-new-law-dot...
zerostar07 8y ago
Most games contain calculated random rewards or else the game would be boring and predictable. However to call this gambling it's quite a stretch as you can't cash out. Whoever decided to make those "boxes" look like slot machines spinning brought it upon themselves.
- ReverseCold 8y ago
  > However to call this gambling it's quite a stretch as you can't cash out. In some games you can. See: CS:GO. As long as items can be traded, someone will make a 3rd party site to buy/sell the items.
- simion314 8y ago
  This is not random loot you find in the world, you pay real money to buy a box and hope you win some cool helmet or gun, you can't buy that item directly and have to buy many boxes until you win it or in some games as mentioned in the article this items can be traded on some gray markets. There are games that just sell you the item, no randomness involved.
- InclinedPlane 8y ago
  In many games you can cash out, either above board (steam marketplace) or in the grey/black market. But even then, does it necessarily matter? Things of value still have value, and digital goods still have value. People pay cash money for software constantly and we don't question that, we believe that software can have tangible real-world value, sometimes considerably. If someone gifted you a copy of Photoshop or AutoCAD etc. you wouldn't think of that as valueless. The same is true in entertainment products too, and just as with professional software it's a matter of enforced artificial scarcity.
- oldcynic 8y ago
  Even if you can't trade the items (and you often can), they have a perceived value, and often a hard cash market value. A value that is frequently over-promoted by the game to encourage purchase of more premium currency by the naive to buy more boxes. I can't distinguish a loot box from a scratch card -- except a scratch card must reveal odds. I'm old-school in terms of paying for games: £xx for a complete game, £x for a month's access as they provide a known value exchange. Doubly so when it's the underage being sold to. My kids learnt never to ask - my answer was always no. Lootboxes and other variable rewards, time unlocks and so forth are just a piss-take driven by sheer greed of the GameCo that's ruined many games.
Double_a_92 8y ago
I personally would say it's only gambling if there is a trading system so that you might trade for money (even if it's outside the official platform).
jmiserez 8y ago
The same arguments could apply to physical card packs (e.g. MtG cards) sold at tabletop gaming stores. Yet nobody seems to mind there?
- yAnonymous 8y ago
  With digital goods, the distributor can stack the odds against you to make you spend more money. They know what you want and they can make sure you don't get it. And then you possibly don't realize how much you've spent, because unlike real cards, digital ones don't pile up. It's definitely different.
- pavlov 8y ago
  I guess buying physical cards is not so addictive that anyone would pay attention. In mobile games, everything is set up for you to make repetitive purchases in the hope of winning bigger: your credit card is on file, the design of the boxes echoes casinos, etc.
  - bsder 8y ago
    > I guess buying physical cards is not so addictive that anyone would pay attention. Ummmm, they call Magic the Gathering "cardboard crack" for a reason ...
    - pavlov 8y ago
      Perhaps, but it's a very niche audience. What's the revenue of the company that makes MtG? Some mobile game companies do billions per year. That kind of sales attract regulatory attention.
      - bsder 8y ago
        Hasbro gets roughly a billion a year in the gaming category and explicitly calls out Monopoly and Magic the Gathering as the vast majority of that. https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-details/hasbro-reports-first-quarter-2018-financial-results https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-detai...
FrozenVoid 8y ago
The lootbox mechanic can be easily disguised without making it seem like gambling: 1.Buy lots in-game currency with cash or grind X hours for it. 2.Buy "A ticket to dungeon Y" with in-game currency. 3.The dungeon has a boss that is essentially a easy to kill walking lootbox. Tada, all gambling regulations bypassed. If you want to play loot-centric games this is your choice. All MMOs that revolve around items and loot will bypass the "lootbox" ban with a system as described above or better. (for the record, this system is actually in widespread use in Asia-based MMOs)
- Nullabillity 8y ago
  So.. single-use dungeon tickets are gambling too?
  - slavik81 8y ago
    There's one level of indirection between letting you buy an exclusive pass to fight a monster that has some special random drop vs. letting you buy a special random drop. That's basically the 'skill-testing question' hack that's used to run every sweepstakes in Canada. You'd have a revolt on your hands if you outlawed "Roll Up the Rim to Win".
  - Drakim 8y ago
    Game Publisher: Oh no, We wouldn't dream of having gambling in our game! That's why we don't have single-use dungeon tickets (which is just gambling with one extra step between). You can do our dungeons as many times as you want, they aren't single use. Of course doing a dungeon run costs five purple crystals, which costs five bucks. After an epic story focused (cut-scenes that you can skip) showdown with a boss (that you can take down in one attack) you get random loot from a loot table, just like in good old games like Diablo (functionally the same as a lootbox). Of course, the fact that it works out to 5 bucks for a random item is not gambling, since we now have two steps instead of just one.
    - pas 8y ago
      In both WoW and Diablo2 doing instas required nothing but the game itself (for WoW it was the monthly subscription, for Diablo2 it was a one time purchase). Of course, if there's a freemium model, it's very hard to argue that it's not gambling, if people buy in-game-something to speed up grinding. But in that regard simply wasting time for a low-probability-drop item is also gambling. The problem is that in the direct microtransaction lootbox model there's just an insane feedback loop, to get that nice knife/gun/armor/breastplate. It should be treated like addiction - which it is. People like to play hazard games, so gambling will be with us forever, and some people will not be able to handle the accompanying mental draw to that dopaminergic feedback loop.
staticelf 8y ago
> Regulations that tightly restrict or absolutely prohibit loot boxes will definitely hurt the gaming industry and will hurt, perhaps even fatally, games I love. Maybe actually charge for the game that companies used to? I hate free 2 play games because I am a whale and I know it. When I get hooked I can easily pay hundres of dollars of digital shit. Much more than I would ever have if I had just purchased the game. Fuck loot boxes and fuck companies trying to defend the practice.
- saintPirelli 8y ago
  I agree with this. I wish more consumers would pressure game companies into practices like CD Project RED displays. Those fellas keep some integrity in the industry.
m12k 8y ago
I think there's a pattern here: 'Highly talented company makes highly praised product but eventually realizes there is much more money in exploitative products instead'. Valve made the amazing Half-Life series, then later seems to have come to the conclusion that their return on investment is just much higher if they focus on multiplayer games with loot boxes (plus selling other people's games and taking a cut). Blizzard went through a similar transformation from e.g. Warcraft 3 to World of Warcraft, Heroes of the Storm and Hearthstone (these days WoW is probably even the less exploitative of the bunch). Facebook went from being 'the place to hear about what my friends are up to', to just trying to show me as targeted ads as possible. I don't blame them, per se - these companies are just following the economic reality, but I just wish being exploitative wasn't so damn profitable.
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  I would easily argue Blizzard has the most generous/least exploitative loot box models. Cosmetic only with a fairly regular/healthy rate of freebies, not to mention the currency you get that lets you acquire the ones you actually want without relentlessly "rolling". Heroes of the Storm steps it up even further with a reroll mechanic you can use for disappointing boxes. Compared to the others in the industry, Blizzard is downright pleasant.
  - SmallDeadGuy 8y ago
    HotS and Overwatch really aren't exploitative sure, but Hearthstone is incredibly exploitative. Unless you are so good you can go "infinite" in arena (always make your gold entry fee back and then some, on average), you have to buy packs for every expansion that comes out. Or you have to play with lower-tier cards, which some people do successfully, but to get the most out of the game or be "competitive" they will need the best cards eventually. Out of the 3 games, I probably played Overwatch the most, followed closely by Hearthstone, but the amount of money I invested in Hearthstone is easily 3-4x the initial price I paid for OW. I got fed up of the "pay or fall behind" nature of Hearthstone and stopped playing a long time ago though.
    - 8y ago
Jedd 8y ago
> There will definitely be economic harm, and games companies will have to figure something out to fill the monetary gap. Regulation painted as 'economic harm' is hard to defend in an industry that's been around a long time without these kinds of practices being so widespread, and so user-hostile, that regulators are actually starting to care. Games companies long ago figured out how to fill the monetary gap -- sell a game for money. The transaction is straightforward, transparent, and aligned with the expectations most people have for most goods and services exchanges. What that kind of traditional transaction does not lend itself to is changing the contractual arrangement after the exchange (to the purchaser's disadvantage), or to orchestrate a situation where the vendor can continually identify, manipulate, and abuse the weaknesses of the purchaser.
- GhostVII 8y ago
  I think the difference with games now is that the expectations are much higher - games cost far more to produce than they used to, and are much more complex and have better graphics, so it is harder to recoupe development costs by selling a game at an upfront cost, especially when the expectation is that a game should cost $60 or less. Maybe we need to change our expectations of how much a good game should be worth.
kossTKR 8y ago
Seems to me like we are in a race to to the bottom in all parts of the software and entertainment industry. When behavioural economics and data mining became all encompassing we lost all that was positive and good in this field. This modeling of the human psyche has existed in PR and the commercial industry for a century, but the incredible multiplier that lies in the constant connection and the advancement of fast and agressive interfaces has now made us all like rats pushing levers in a Skinner box. Hordes of psychologists, data analysts and digital designers has become like a mercenary army that whores itself out to the global-internet-consciousness that itself has become like a cancer that eats up peoples last moments of clarity. We now stand completely naked and exposed as the irrational, animal, mamalian ape that we are in front of the extreme exponential technological whirlwind that has made everything so complex, fast changing and exploitative that we have no option but to completely drop out or ride the tiger.
- andrei_says_ 8y ago
  > We now stand completely naked and exposed as the irrational, animal, mamalian ape that we are in front of the extreme exponential technological whirlwind that has made everything so complex, fast changing and exploitative that we have no option but to completely drop out or ride the tiger. Love the imagery in your writing... I think we do have an option for now (turn off your phone when you get home/go on vacation etc.) and that the animal were riding is not a tiger but a rabid monkey in heat stung by a scorpion, which is how some yogis describe the unquestioned mind. The observation of my own patterns and relationship with media/attention grabbing tech it has become clear to me that if I am to be productive and healthy, I need to change my relationship with my mind. It’s a challenge, but a worthy one.
  - saintPirelli 8y ago
    I can't help but feel like this will divide society. Like fast food and eating healthy. Everybody knows eating healthy is better for you, but a lot just can't be bothered. Consuming media on the most addictive feeds will be the same. Only this time we won't have an obesity epidemic, but an epidemic of retardation and uselessness.
Cub3 8y ago
I still haven't heard anyone take on physical vs digital card games as part of this. Typically cards are sold in random 'packs' (see Hearthstone, Gwent and Valves 'up and coming' card game) which should fall under this definition. But blind card packs (Magic the Gathering, Pokemon) physically are not banned by any government, nor, have I ever heard them talked about in the same umbrella as gambling?
- jimrandomh 8y ago
  Randomized physical card packs can be gambling, but they also have non-gambling uses; in MtG, there are ways of playing (drafts) where the randomized packs are logistically important to how the game is played, and those ways of playing are legitimately fun.
  - majewsky 8y ago
    Roulette is also "legitimately fun" to many people.
    - jimrandomh 8y ago
      Apparently I didn't get the point across. MtG drafts remain fun and the randomization of the card packs remains necessary even if you remove the ownership element entirely, by agreeing to destroy the cards afterwards.
- alwaysdoit 8y ago
  For skins or other purely cosmetic items with no effect on gameplay, to me it's equivalent to a gumball machine where you might not get your favorite color.
- zumu 8y ago
  From what I understand, Magic and other card games are not gambling because the cards are considered to all be of equal value despite rarity. If the company that sells Magic (Wizards or the Coast / Hasbro) were to acknowledge that the cards DO have a secondary market value, it would qualify as gambling. Especially so, if they acknowledged they knew the relative values of the cards during the design / planning phases (which they absolutely do). Though I love magic, I have no doubt, if all the facts were to come to light in court, the law would stipulate drastic changes to their model, which is part of the reason why Wizards of the Coast is run like a cult.
em3rgent0rdr 8y ago
> "Loot boxes work like gambling, and they're designed like gambling. They're designed to provoke compulsive reward-seeking behavior." Just because A has some properties of B doesn't mean that A is B. I think both gambling and loot-boxes could be categorized as subsets of the set of things that are "compulsive reward-seeking behavior".
- manicdee 8y ago
  Gambling is defined as the activity of playingva game for stakes or betting on an uncertain outcome. Playing poker for matchsticks is just as much gambling as playing poker for a $50k pot. The only thing changing is the stakes of the gamble.
  - jerrre 8y ago
    Is monopoly gambling? Where buying property is betting on the uncertain outcome of someone landing there later, and the stakes are playmoney or the honors of winning?
    - draugadrotten 8y ago
      To argue that monopoly for playmoney is "gambling" is sophism. When one talks about gambling the bet is for real money (or other tokens with real monetary value). Playing roulette "for honors" would not be gambling either, it would be just playing. The argument you make is sophistic because you are focusing on the word gambling instead of seeing the real issue - that gambling for real money can cause addiction and worse. A random number generator is taking chances all the time, but it is not gambling for money until you connect the outcomes to real money.
    - manicdee 8y ago
      What stakes are you playing monopoly for? When the game is packed up back in its box, is the winner walking away from the table with value extracted from the other players?
- Sharlin 8y ago
bni 8y ago
There was outrage from the "gamer community" in Sweden a few years back when Swedish gambling authority wanted to regulate "Internet Cafes". I guess the line between games and gambling wasnt so clear cut after all. Disgusting. This needs to be rooted out completely from the gaming industry.
PhasmaFelis 8y ago
This sort of thing is going to keep happening, and not just because game publishers are greedy bastards. These days, it's very, very difficult to make a profit on a AAA game at only $60 a pop, but if anyone tries to raise that price the fans will cry bloody murder. So publishers are desperately trying to find ways to make up the difference. Cosmetic sales, DLC packs, loot boxes, anything. Making loot boxes illegal doesn't fix the problem; it just pushes it somewhere else. Source, among others: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhWGQCzAtl8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhWGQCzAtl8
Jaruzel 8y ago
There are different classes of gambling, and in the UK at least they are regulated differently: 1. Proper full-on skill-based gambling; Poker, Blackjack, type games, plus arguably Horse Racing and other sports where you learn the starts and make judgement calls. 2. 'Luck' based games; Pay money, get 'prize' - this is where loot boxes fall into, and in also in the real world, CTGs and LEGO Minifig bags (for example). You always get a prize no matter how small. 3. Raffles; Buy a ticket for a fixed sum, win a prize. The prizes on offer are known up front. Viewed slightly different (for some reason) - most non-business places can run one of these without a licence. However the nationwide Lottery does require a licence, even though it's basically just a raffle. Types 1 and 2 require different licences if you want to operate them, type one definitely has to have all the GambleAware[1] stuff prominently shown. You'll see on many daytime and light entertainment programs on TV that they run 'competitions' for the viewers where the question is stupidly simple. They do this to step around the 'gambling' licence issue. By asking a question (no matter how simple) it legally occludes the fact that the text-in/phone-in competition is basically a Lottery. Back to the point of Games... All games publishers have to do is get a gambling licence (for the region they want to sell the game in) and be up front that their game contains 'some gambling'. Of course though, if they do that, then they can't sell their game to minors... -- [1] http://www.whenthefunstops.co.uk/ http://www.whenthefunstops.co.uk/
JaceLightning 8y ago
When I was a kid, we'd buy packs of unknown Pokemon cards hoping for a shiny. I wouldn't consider that gambling.
krsdcbl 8y ago
Got to raise the question here: following this argumentation, aren't collectible card games like Magic The Gathering also to be considered gambling?

181 points by Tuldok 8y ago

warcher 8y ago

Hey uh, I don’t do a lot of mobile gaming, but what’s a loot box and why should I care if it’s gambling or not?

ruytlm 8y ago
Loot boxes are in-game containers, that contain a randomly generated set of reward items, of varying value. They are also present in far more than just mobile games. They use addictive techniques similar to gambling/casinos to encourage players to purchase more boxes, for a chance at a better reward, sometimes irresponsibly. Using addictive techniques to encourage people to spend in an irresponsible manner can destroy lives, which is why gambling is highly regulated. Loot boxes are using addictive techniques to encourage people to spend in an irresponsible manner, should be considered gambling, and should be regulated.
- pfisch 8y ago
  > Loot boxes are using addictive techniques to encourage people to spend in an irresponsible manner, should be considered gambling, and should be regulated. Gambling should be considered gambling. If paying for variable and unpredictable levels of entertainment is gambling, then you have broadened the definition so wide that it is now meaningless. You have now created a definition where buying a ticket to a movie that you may or may not enjoy is a form of gambling.
  - fraudsyndrome 8y ago
    > You have now created a definition where buying a ticket to a movie that you may or may not enjoy is a form of gambling. The appropriate comparison would be buying a ticket to sit down and watch a movie, you don't get to choose the movie though, you have a chance to see the movie you want but there are maybe 9 other movies that you don't want to watch. Maybe the movie you want to watch is super popular and you've seen the other 9 movies several times already. Probably the most basic comparison minus an analogy for all the addictive flashing lights and all that associated with gambling (incl. loot boxes)
    - pfisch 8y ago
      No, that would not be the appropriate comparison at all. That is the comparison that is more similar to loot boxes, but not to the definition you have decided upon. Loot boxes give you variable entertainment, but for that to be gambling you have now defined entertainment value as the element of prize. Gambling requires chance, prize and consideration. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e7b39fc2-501e-4e7d-863f-e8e526e31648 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e7b39fc2-501e... At the point where entertainment value is the prize, you have now created a definition of gambling that includes both your example of a random movie, and my example of any movie. The thing I hate about all of these lootboxes as gambling arguments is that they have no appreciation for what gambling actually is. Instead gambling is now just whatever you feel like is gambling in your gut, not an actual real legal and enforceable definition. You want to regulate lootboxes, fine, but trying to draw an equivalency to real gambling and lootboxes is just not possible without classifying almost every transaction as gambling. But honestly, if you want to regulate loot boxes we should probably start by regulating video game addiction because it is a much larger problem that effects a much larger audience. All of these deeply concerned people who want to regulate loot boxes somehow don't seem to overlap with the group of people who want to regulate video game addiction though. Because the deeper truth is that people want to wield the tools of government like a cudgel to force video game developers to make the kind of games they want. This whole thing is just a fig leaf similar to how child porn is used to censor the internet and enforce copyright.
      - oldcynic 8y ago
        > Loot boxes give you variable entertainment, but for that to be gambling you have now defined entertainment as the element of prize Variable entertainment? Then a lottery scratch card is "variable entertainment", whatever that is supposed to be. As is I can't distinguish a scratchcard from a lootbox except one has some regulation. They have a feature prize that is the reason for purchase, they have small odds of achieving the feature/promoted prize (Game loot boxes frequently don't give the actual odds), they cost real currency, they can give something of value. Do you then claim that a scratch card is not gambling?
- Karunamon 8y ago
  How are loot boxes significantly different to CCGs of the kind children have been playing and buying/having their parents buy boosters for, for years? Or sports cards? The concept is identical as far as I can tell. This sudden push for regulation throws up every single one of the “think of the children” red flags for bad legislation in my mind.
  - __david__ 8y ago
    For one, loot boxes are instant gratification. Cards and arcade machine rewards required going somewhere and physically buying something. A loot boxes is more like sitting in front of a slot machine and thinking, "oh just one more roll, I was so close this time!". Loot boxes also tend to really push you towards expensive options. 10 boxes for $9.99, 25 for $19.99, 125 for $99.99 (best value!!). Magic The Gathering cards are not cheap either but they also don't try to push you into buying a whole booster box as an impulse purchase.
    - pfisch 8y ago
      This has nothing to do with whether it is gambling or not.
      - daveFNbuck 8y ago
        It's pretty obvious that both CCGs and loot boxes are forms of gambling. The question is what effects they're having and how they need to be regulated. Loot boxes have a lot more of the features that make gambling a problem, and children are less equipped to handle it. It's reasonable to regulate the benign thing differently from the harmful thing.
        pfisch 8y ago
        I think it is more clear that a CCG is a form of gambling. Loot boxes do not give you anything that you can redeem for cash.
  - watwut 8y ago
JasonSage 8y ago
Couple things: 1) This is very prevalent in high budget desktop/console games as well, not just mobile games. 2) These games typically do little to nothing to abide by laws that prohibit gambling by minors. There are definitely concerns of whether this is ethical or legal.
- pfisch 8y ago
  You seem to have accepted that loot boxes are a form of gambling even though that is not really the agreed upon legal definition of gambling.
  - irishsultan 8y ago
    The question was "why should I care whether it's gambling". Answers that point out the (legal/moral) consequences of it being gambling are entirely appropriate, even if they don't give any consideration to the possibility that it might not in fact be gambling.
siddboots 8y ago
The article is talking about competitive multiplayer games, rather than mobile games. DOTA 2 and CS:GO are the examples used. Theres a few elements that, together, make it extremely problematic in my opinion. Using CS:GO as the example: 1. Items are dropped randomly, or you can buy randomised "crates". By design, plain looking drops are common, while visually impressive drops are rare. 2. When you buy crates and unlock them, there is a "wheel of fortune" style visual system that indicates what item you will receive. There are audio and visual cues indicating how rare or common the item is. 4. There is an in-game trading system that allows users to buy and sell items at an agreed price. Rare items are naturally more expensive on this market. The majority of CS:GO's revenue comes from cuts of these trades. 5. Kids play CS:GO. It is very common to run into young teenagers (13-15) in matchmaking servers. 6. Kids who are exposed to gambling are much more likely to become addicted than adults, are much less likely to have the means to repay debt, and therefore are not held responsible for gambling losses in the eyes of the law. Gambling under the age of 16 is illegal in most countries, and in many cases under 18.
- ygra 8y ago
  It should be noted that most items in CS:GO cannot be obtained as a normal drop, only from a crate, so it's not so much that good-looking drops are rare, it's that good-looking items can usually only be obtained by paying money to open a box (AWP Dragon Lore being one of the few exceptions).
zeta0134 8y ago
A loot box is specifically an item that can be purchased in-game that offers a random reward, typically from a loot table and with set odds known only to the game maker. They come in many forms; one of the most obvious is found in Overwatch right now, typically awarded to the player after they level up in game. Overwatch's loot box animation is very pretty. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdB17umeKB0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdB17umeKB0 If this sounds kind of familiar, it's because a similar concept exists in many Arcades already, in the form of capsule machines. Japanese Gashapon are the oft-cited inspiration, but countless variations on this idea exist. Here in South Texas, they're a common sight in grocery stores and restaurants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gashapon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gashapon On their own, random rewards in a video game sound tame, but where this gets questionably ethical are games which (a) accept real money for in-game purchases, and (b) offer loot-boxes as an in-game purchase. This enables game players to pay real money to receive a random reward, and it's not hard to draw comparisons to real life slot machines. Unlike real-life gambling though, loot boxes have been popping up in games that are often targeted towards minors, making the issue even more complicated. I won't weigh in on the issue here, I just wanted to try to clarify what they are.
- ng12 8y ago
  I think Overwatch is a bad example because you can't turn the loot into real money. Valve's games are a better example because you can sell the loot directly through Steam -- in some cases for hundreds of dollars.
  - dharmab 8y ago
    Overwatch is also a bad (good) example because the developers have a policy where only cosmetic items are available through the loot boxes, while all gameplay features are free for everyone. Many other loot box games offer items that increase player power or change gameplay in loot boxes. For example, the prerelease version of Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2017) had a backlash because of items such as "Deal 30% more damage with ship blasters." Other games may have items such as "Deal 20% more damage, but reduce health by 30%" which open up additional strategic options.

tounu 8y ago

I found myself spending so much cash in Dota 2 loot boxes... It's very addictive. Yet I wasn't opening those boxes to grab something valuable in order to make money out of it, and that's probably where the use of the word "gambling" is confusing people. I was just looking for those ultra-rare unique cosmetics in order to feel good and unique as well. There is a social dimension to this problem, if Dota 2 was a solo game, I wouldn't have spent a dime on cosmetics.

evolighting 8y ago

Gambling is gambling, loot box is loot box, I think we should not spending time on arguing the definition, but instead limit loot box as what we do with gambling. New stuff come with new rules, may sound more resealable.

pentae 8y ago
I agree - Gambling is rolling the dice to make back more money than you put in. Loot box is rolling the dice to get digital items you want with no expectation to profit. There is a difference.
- Double_a_92 8y ago
  How is it with no expectation of profit? E.g. in CSGO you could pull skins that are worth 100s of dollars... and then sell them on 3rd party sites. Also the rare skin itself can be the profit because you get a higher status and prestige within your peers.
acou_nPlusOne_t 8y ago
I often wish, there was a diffrent sort of gambling- taking the customers money and refunding it - in secrecy to the familys whos reward-circuitry-hacked members bleed them dry. That- and only that, is the acceptable gambling that i could accept existing.
- tialaramex 8y ago
  The British government owns lots of banks, one of them, the National Savings and Investment Bank has a product that is almost this (but not secret), named 'Premium Bonds'. You buy bonds, and like a lottery ticket they might randomly win a prize in a draw. But because it's a bank not a lottery the bonds themselves never go away if you don't win, it's basically a savings account except instead of boring percentage interest you randomly win prizes.
seanhunter 8y ago
Here's the definition of a "lottery" under the uk gambling act "(2)An arrangement is a simple lottery if— (a)persons are required to pay in order to participate in the arrangement, (b)in the course of the arrangement one or more prizes are allocated to one or more members of a class, and (c)the prizes are allocated by a process which relies wholly on chance." There is also a complex lottery where the process begins with chance. This covers things like scratchcards where you choose which things to scratch off but which card you are given, and what is printed on the card is governed by chance. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/14 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/14 Lotteries are one of 3 forms of gambling covered by this regulation, so in the uk at least it seems pretty obvious that lootboxes are gambling from a legal point of view. Lotteries are permitted for people older than 16 in the UK but it's an offence to allow a "child" (someone younger than 16 in this law) to participate (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/56 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/19/section/56) It's also an offence if your company to manufacture, supply, install or adapt gambling software without a license. So they could be liable from that point of view also, in the UK at least. edit: clarify one bit of wording

lathiat 8y ago

I much prefer how Epic Games have done this with Fortnite. And by all accounts their method is raking in a LOT of cash. All cosmetic items only, but you purchase the exact item you want directly. The items are a little more expensive than you might expect (I think on average $4-10 each) and it includes skins, different "axes" to break objects, different dances and different "gliders" that you fly into the game on. It's quite fun, but also totally unnecessary and you only spend money on exactly what you want - no random chance. On top of the fact that it's a free to play game in the first place, and you can also get quite a wide range of skins, axes and dances (10s of them) by playing to complete the battle pass which is only about $10 or so per season. Plus there are a few freebies even if you pay nothing, and some you can get from linking to Twitch Prime, etc. I think this is winning partly because it is fun (the skins are quite comedic) but also just because you know what you're getting. By comparison I spent about $10 on keys for PUBG and stopped because I just got useless crap that isn't really exciting - they're just basic clothing items. Even the rarer items aren't as exciting which doesn't help but the chance of getting one is quite low. The thing Epic/Fortnite have done to make them sell more (compared to the random chance) is that there is <10 items for sale per day for 24 hours, after 24 hours the set changes and you may not be able to buy that item again (though in practice many returns a few days or weeks later, you can't be certain). So instead of random chance gambling they're capitalising on missing out / time limited offers. Plus there's a constant influx of new items so instead of wasting time gambling for that ultra rare item - instead you can keep up with whats newer and cooler.

sundvor 8y ago
Fwiw, PUBG loot boxes are not game play impacting; they are cosmetic only. If you don't want that "chance", you could just buy the specific item you'd like on the Steam store from other players. You may even sell unopened boxes (which require a key) there. Sauce: https://www.finder.com.au/playerunknowns-battlegrounds-will-never-have-pay-to-win-items https://www.finder.com.au/playerunknowns-battlegrounds-will-...
- cannonedhamster 8y ago
  So what you're saying is that there's a variable real world amount of monetary value that you could win determined solely on the random outcome of a loot box. Sounds exactly like gambling. If someone spent $5 on a chance to win either a marmot, a squirrel, a fancy coat, or a golden banjo and the rarity of winning those depended upon their real world value, it would still be gambling. The only difference with loot boxes is that their real world value is determined by their rarity.

YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago

>> The loot box mechanism is straightforward: you buy a box for a fixed price, and you receive a random reward. Some rewards are commonplace and low value; others are rare and high value. So far, so gambling: these essential features are found in roulette, slot machines, betting on horses, raffles, and lotteries. Er. And Magic: the Gathering booster packs. Does that mean I have a gambling problem then? Because I had hoped that despite my M:tG habit [1], I was not really-really a gambler. ____________ [1] And let's not discuss my DnD etc RPG habit. I flip cards and roll dice way too much for someone who sincerely thinks she's not into games of chance.

joekrill 8y ago
> Does that mean I have a gambling problem then? Because I had hoped that despite my M:tG habit [1], I was not really-really a gambler. Just because someone gambles doesn't automatically mean they have a "gambling problem". But I certainly don't see why M:tG booster packs wouldn't be considered gambling, as well. > And let's not discuss my DnD etc RPG habit. I flip cards and roll dice way too much for someone who sincerely thinks she's not into games of chance. But do you have to pay a fixed price each time you roll the dice or flip the card?
- YeGoblynQueenne 8y ago
  For M:tG cards, yes, I think so. I have to pay something to get the cards in the first place, and I guess you could see the cost spread over each use of a card (uses which, btw, are limited in time- there's only a limited number of times I'll get to include a rare card in a deck, draw it and play with it, until I get bored or it rotates out of the most popular formats I'm engaged with).
tialaramex 8y ago
The psych people I've talked to explain it as a rule of thumb "If it's not a problem, it's not a problem". Say you feel you need to wear a hat made of marshmallow. Is that a problem? Well, is it? For example if you lost your job because of the hat, that's a problem. If you spend so much on marshmallow hats that you can't afford your rent, that's a problem. If you killed somebody's dog because it tried to eat your hat, that's a problem, and so on. If you spend money on MTG and enjoy it even if it's $5000 per week that could be fine, psychologically at least, if it didn't cause you or others to suffer. But if you find you're ruining your life, or other people's to buy cards, even if it's just $50 of cards per month then that's a gambling problem.

partycoder 8y ago

Loot boxes work by having a list of items with weighted probabilities adding up to 1, and what you buy is getting one or more of those items at random. The way the weighted probabilities list is constructed changes from implementation to implementation. The prevalent one so far is "box gacha", the spiritual successor to "complete gacha". The latter is now banned in Japan and the rest are somehow regulated. The motivations are many. First, it distributes large payments over smaller payments making people lose control over their spending. Then, it complicates people's perception of how expensive an item is. In a sense, lottery games are the same in spirit. For example, what's the probability of getting an arbitrary unique combination of 6 numbers out of 49 (lottery)? Very, very low. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery_mathematics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery_mathematics In mobile, they're usually coupled with "events" that have a leaderboard. Events are actually auctions were people "play" (bid) for a better place in the leaderboard. The rewards are usually not worth it, because through successive updates they're made worthless (e.g.: stats inflation).

gkya 8y ago

Maybe nit-picky, but this is one place (the title here I'm talking about) a properly choosen dash would've saved me a couple seconds or so. When I was reading this, I thought first to myself, what is a crap-loot box, only to understand later that the endash there stood for a semicolon. But endash is for word pairs (i.e. black--white, on--of); here, an emdash would be more appropriate.

DerekL 8y ago
The original article uses an em-dash. So either Are Technica fixed it since it was submitted, or the submission mistyped it.
radicalbyte 8y ago
There's nothing wrong per se with using the dash, at least if you get the spacing right. If you use a dash as a punctuation you should either use spaces or - as you said - the correct glyph.
- gkya 8y ago
  I'd say otherwise. It's not like it's really important here, but in a book, that would be a very bright sign of amateurishness to me. Just like with sans serif dotless `i', `n' and `m' the only difference is not the number of the loops, the same with the hyphen, endash and emdash, they mean different things. Hyphen compounds words or breaks them across the line break, endash connects them in logical relations, and an emdash can stand for a colon or a pair of parantheses, indicating a subordinate clause that serves as an aside, generally. When these are mixed up, parsing the text becomes harder. It's not much of a trouble here in an internet title, but when this kinds of misuse appear in a long, difficult period in some rather complex text, it can end up consuming too much time.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

baxtr 8y ago

There was an discussion on HN about this recently when Belgium prohibited loot boxes https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16929119 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16929119

paradite 8y ago

Related: China already regulates loot boxes in games: https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/2/15517962/china-new-law-dota-league-of-legends-odds-loot-box-random https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/2/15517962/china-new-law-dot...

zerostar07 8y ago

Most games contain calculated random rewards or else the game would be boring and predictable. However to call this gambling it's quite a stretch as you can't cash out. Whoever decided to make those "boxes" look like slot machines spinning brought it upon themselves.

ReverseCold 8y ago
> However to call this gambling it's quite a stretch as you can't cash out. In some games you can. See: CS:GO. As long as items can be traded, someone will make a 3rd party site to buy/sell the items.
simion314 8y ago
This is not random loot you find in the world, you pay real money to buy a box and hope you win some cool helmet or gun, you can't buy that item directly and have to buy many boxes until you win it or in some games as mentioned in the article this items can be traded on some gray markets. There are games that just sell you the item, no randomness involved.
InclinedPlane 8y ago
In many games you can cash out, either above board (steam marketplace) or in the grey/black market. But even then, does it necessarily matter? Things of value still have value, and digital goods still have value. People pay cash money for software constantly and we don't question that, we believe that software can have tangible real-world value, sometimes considerably. If someone gifted you a copy of Photoshop or AutoCAD etc. you wouldn't think of that as valueless. The same is true in entertainment products too, and just as with professional software it's a matter of enforced artificial scarcity.
oldcynic 8y ago
Even if you can't trade the items (and you often can), they have a perceived value, and often a hard cash market value. A value that is frequently over-promoted by the game to encourage purchase of more premium currency by the naive to buy more boxes. I can't distinguish a loot box from a scratch card -- except a scratch card must reveal odds. I'm old-school in terms of paying for games: £xx for a complete game, £x for a month's access as they provide a known value exchange. Doubly so when it's the underage being sold to. My kids learnt never to ask - my answer was always no. Lootboxes and other variable rewards, time unlocks and so forth are just a piss-take driven by sheer greed of the GameCo that's ruined many games.

Double_a_92 8y ago

I personally would say it's only gambling if there is a trading system so that you might trade for money (even if it's outside the official platform).

jmiserez 8y ago

The same arguments could apply to physical card packs (e.g. MtG cards) sold at tabletop gaming stores. Yet nobody seems to mind there?

yAnonymous 8y ago
With digital goods, the distributor can stack the odds against you to make you spend more money. They know what you want and they can make sure you don't get it. And then you possibly don't realize how much you've spent, because unlike real cards, digital ones don't pile up. It's definitely different.
pavlov 8y ago
I guess buying physical cards is not so addictive that anyone would pay attention. In mobile games, everything is set up for you to make repetitive purchases in the hope of winning bigger: your credit card is on file, the design of the boxes echoes casinos, etc.
- bsder 8y ago
  > I guess buying physical cards is not so addictive that anyone would pay attention. Ummmm, they call Magic the Gathering "cardboard crack" for a reason ...
  - pavlov 8y ago
    Perhaps, but it's a very niche audience. What's the revenue of the company that makes MtG? Some mobile game companies do billions per year. That kind of sales attract regulatory attention.
    - bsder 8y ago
      Hasbro gets roughly a billion a year in the gaming category and explicitly calls out Monopoly and Magic the Gathering as the vast majority of that. https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-details/hasbro-reports-first-quarter-2018-financial-results https://investor.hasbro.com/news-releases/news-release-detai...

FrozenVoid 8y ago

The lootbox mechanic can be easily disguised without making it seem like gambling: 1.Buy lots in-game currency with cash or grind X hours for it. 2.Buy "A ticket to dungeon Y" with in-game currency. 3.The dungeon has a boss that is essentially a easy to kill walking lootbox. Tada, all gambling regulations bypassed. If you want to play loot-centric games this is your choice. All MMOs that revolve around items and loot will bypass the "lootbox" ban with a system as described above or better. (for the record, this system is actually in widespread use in Asia-based MMOs)

Nullabillity 8y ago
So.. single-use dungeon tickets are gambling too?
- slavik81 8y ago
  There's one level of indirection between letting you buy an exclusive pass to fight a monster that has some special random drop vs. letting you buy a special random drop. That's basically the 'skill-testing question' hack that's used to run every sweepstakes in Canada. You'd have a revolt on your hands if you outlawed "Roll Up the Rim to Win".
- Drakim 8y ago
  Game Publisher: Oh no, We wouldn't dream of having gambling in our game! That's why we don't have single-use dungeon tickets (which is just gambling with one extra step between). You can do our dungeons as many times as you want, they aren't single use. Of course doing a dungeon run costs five purple crystals, which costs five bucks. After an epic story focused (cut-scenes that you can skip) showdown with a boss (that you can take down in one attack) you get random loot from a loot table, just like in good old games like Diablo (functionally the same as a lootbox). Of course, the fact that it works out to 5 bucks for a random item is not gambling, since we now have two steps instead of just one.
  - pas 8y ago
    In both WoW and Diablo2 doing instas required nothing but the game itself (for WoW it was the monthly subscription, for Diablo2 it was a one time purchase). Of course, if there's a freemium model, it's very hard to argue that it's not gambling, if people buy in-game-something to speed up grinding. But in that regard simply wasting time for a low-probability-drop item is also gambling. The problem is that in the direct microtransaction lootbox model there's just an insane feedback loop, to get that nice knife/gun/armor/breastplate. It should be treated like addiction - which it is. People like to play hazard games, so gambling will be with us forever, and some people will not be able to handle the accompanying mental draw to that dopaminergic feedback loop.

staticelf 8y ago

> Regulations that tightly restrict or absolutely prohibit loot boxes will definitely hurt the gaming industry and will hurt, perhaps even fatally, games I love. Maybe actually charge for the game that companies used to? I hate free 2 play games because I am a whale and I know it. When I get hooked I can easily pay hundres of dollars of digital shit. Much more than I would ever have if I had just purchased the game. Fuck loot boxes and fuck companies trying to defend the practice.

saintPirelli 8y ago
I agree with this. I wish more consumers would pressure game companies into practices like CD Project RED displays. Those fellas keep some integrity in the industry.

m12k 8y ago

I think there's a pattern here: 'Highly talented company makes highly praised product but eventually realizes there is much more money in exploitative products instead'. Valve made the amazing Half-Life series, then later seems to have come to the conclusion that their return on investment is just much higher if they focus on multiplayer games with loot boxes (plus selling other people's games and taking a cut). Blizzard went through a similar transformation from e.g. Warcraft 3 to World of Warcraft, Heroes of the Storm and Hearthstone (these days WoW is probably even the less exploitative of the bunch). Facebook went from being 'the place to hear about what my friends are up to', to just trying to show me as targeted ads as possible. I don't blame them, per se - these companies are just following the economic reality, but I just wish being exploitative wasn't so damn profitable.

ocdtrekkie 8y ago
I would easily argue Blizzard has the most generous/least exploitative loot box models. Cosmetic only with a fairly regular/healthy rate of freebies, not to mention the currency you get that lets you acquire the ones you actually want without relentlessly "rolling". Heroes of the Storm steps it up even further with a reroll mechanic you can use for disappointing boxes. Compared to the others in the industry, Blizzard is downright pleasant.
- SmallDeadGuy 8y ago
  HotS and Overwatch really aren't exploitative sure, but Hearthstone is incredibly exploitative. Unless you are so good you can go "infinite" in arena (always make your gold entry fee back and then some, on average), you have to buy packs for every expansion that comes out. Or you have to play with lower-tier cards, which some people do successfully, but to get the most out of the game or be "competitive" they will need the best cards eventually. Out of the 3 games, I probably played Overwatch the most, followed closely by Hearthstone, but the amount of money I invested in Hearthstone is easily 3-4x the initial price I paid for OW. I got fed up of the "pay or fall behind" nature of Hearthstone and stopped playing a long time ago though.
  - 8y ago

Jedd 8y ago

> There will definitely be economic harm, and games companies will have to figure something out to fill the monetary gap. Regulation painted as 'economic harm' is hard to defend in an industry that's been around a long time without these kinds of practices being so widespread, and so user-hostile, that regulators are actually starting to care. Games companies long ago figured out how to fill the monetary gap -- sell a game for money. The transaction is straightforward, transparent, and aligned with the expectations most people have for most goods and services exchanges. What that kind of traditional transaction does not lend itself to is changing the contractual arrangement after the exchange (to the purchaser's disadvantage), or to orchestrate a situation where the vendor can continually identify, manipulate, and abuse the weaknesses of the purchaser.

GhostVII 8y ago
I think the difference with games now is that the expectations are much higher - games cost far more to produce than they used to, and are much more complex and have better graphics, so it is harder to recoupe development costs by selling a game at an upfront cost, especially when the expectation is that a game should cost $60 or less. Maybe we need to change our expectations of how much a good game should be worth.

kossTKR 8y ago

Seems to me like we are in a race to to the bottom in all parts of the software and entertainment industry. When behavioural economics and data mining became all encompassing we lost all that was positive and good in this field. This modeling of the human psyche has existed in PR and the commercial industry for a century, but the incredible multiplier that lies in the constant connection and the advancement of fast and agressive interfaces has now made us all like rats pushing levers in a Skinner box. Hordes of psychologists, data analysts and digital designers has become like a mercenary army that whores itself out to the global-internet-consciousness that itself has become like a cancer that eats up peoples last moments of clarity. We now stand completely naked and exposed as the irrational, animal, mamalian ape that we are in front of the extreme exponential technological whirlwind that has made everything so complex, fast changing and exploitative that we have no option but to completely drop out or ride the tiger.

andrei_says_ 8y ago
> We now stand completely naked and exposed as the irrational, animal, mamalian ape that we are in front of the extreme exponential technological whirlwind that has made everything so complex, fast changing and exploitative that we have no option but to completely drop out or ride the tiger. Love the imagery in your writing... I think we do have an option for now (turn off your phone when you get home/go on vacation etc.) and that the animal were riding is not a tiger but a rabid monkey in heat stung by a scorpion, which is how some yogis describe the unquestioned mind. The observation of my own patterns and relationship with media/attention grabbing tech it has become clear to me that if I am to be productive and healthy, I need to change my relationship with my mind. It’s a challenge, but a worthy one.
- saintPirelli 8y ago
  I can't help but feel like this will divide society. Like fast food and eating healthy. Everybody knows eating healthy is better for you, but a lot just can't be bothered. Consuming media on the most addictive feeds will be the same. Only this time we won't have an obesity epidemic, but an epidemic of retardation and uselessness.

Cub3 8y ago

I still haven't heard anyone take on physical vs digital card games as part of this. Typically cards are sold in random 'packs' (see Hearthstone, Gwent and Valves 'up and coming' card game) which should fall under this definition. But blind card packs (Magic the Gathering, Pokemon) physically are not banned by any government, nor, have I ever heard them talked about in the same umbrella as gambling?

jimrandomh 8y ago
Randomized physical card packs can be gambling, but they also have non-gambling uses; in MtG, there are ways of playing (drafts) where the randomized packs are logistically important to how the game is played, and those ways of playing are legitimately fun.
- majewsky 8y ago
  Roulette is also "legitimately fun" to many people.
  - jimrandomh 8y ago
    Apparently I didn't get the point across. MtG drafts remain fun and the randomization of the card packs remains necessary even if you remove the ownership element entirely, by agreeing to destroy the cards afterwards.
alwaysdoit 8y ago
For skins or other purely cosmetic items with no effect on gameplay, to me it's equivalent to a gumball machine where you might not get your favorite color.
zumu 8y ago
From what I understand, Magic and other card games are not gambling because the cards are considered to all be of equal value despite rarity. If the company that sells Magic (Wizards or the Coast / Hasbro) were to acknowledge that the cards DO have a secondary market value, it would qualify as gambling. Especially so, if they acknowledged they knew the relative values of the cards during the design / planning phases (which they absolutely do). Though I love magic, I have no doubt, if all the facts were to come to light in court, the law would stipulate drastic changes to their model, which is part of the reason why Wizards of the Coast is run like a cult.

em3rgent0rdr 8y ago

> "Loot boxes work like gambling, and they're designed like gambling. They're designed to provoke compulsive reward-seeking behavior." Just because A has some properties of B doesn't mean that A is B. I think both gambling and loot-boxes could be categorized as subsets of the set of things that are "compulsive reward-seeking behavior".

manicdee 8y ago
Gambling is defined as the activity of playingva game for stakes or betting on an uncertain outcome. Playing poker for matchsticks is just as much gambling as playing poker for a $50k pot. The only thing changing is the stakes of the gamble.
- jerrre 8y ago
  Is monopoly gambling? Where buying property is betting on the uncertain outcome of someone landing there later, and the stakes are playmoney or the honors of winning?
  - draugadrotten 8y ago
    To argue that monopoly for playmoney is "gambling" is sophism. When one talks about gambling the bet is for real money (or other tokens with real monetary value). Playing roulette "for honors" would not be gambling either, it would be just playing. The argument you make is sophistic because you are focusing on the word gambling instead of seeing the real issue - that gambling for real money can cause addiction and worse. A random number generator is taking chances all the time, but it is not gambling for money until you connect the outcomes to real money.
  - manicdee 8y ago
    What stakes are you playing monopoly for? When the game is packed up back in its box, is the winner walking away from the table with value extracted from the other players?
Sharlin 8y ago

bni 8y ago

There was outrage from the "gamer community" in Sweden a few years back when Swedish gambling authority wanted to regulate "Internet Cafes". I guess the line between games and gambling wasnt so clear cut after all. Disgusting. This needs to be rooted out completely from the gaming industry.

PhasmaFelis 8y ago

This sort of thing is going to keep happening, and not just because game publishers are greedy bastards. These days, it's very, very difficult to make a profit on a AAA game at only $60 a pop, but if anyone tries to raise that price the fans will cry bloody murder. So publishers are desperately trying to find ways to make up the difference. Cosmetic sales, DLC packs, loot boxes, anything. Making loot boxes illegal doesn't fix the problem; it just pushes it somewhere else. Source, among others: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhWGQCzAtl8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhWGQCzAtl8

Jaruzel 8y ago

There are different classes of gambling, and in the UK at least they are regulated differently: 1. Proper full-on skill-based gambling; Poker, Blackjack, type games, plus arguably Horse Racing and other sports where you learn the starts and make judgement calls. 2. 'Luck' based games; Pay money, get 'prize' - this is where loot boxes fall into, and in also in the real world, CTGs and LEGO Minifig bags (for example). You always get a prize no matter how small. 3. Raffles; Buy a ticket for a fixed sum, win a prize. The prizes on offer are known up front. Viewed slightly different (for some reason) - most non-business places can run one of these without a licence. However the nationwide Lottery does require a licence, even though it's basically just a raffle. Types 1 and 2 require different licences if you want to operate them, type one definitely has to have all the GambleAware[1] stuff prominently shown. You'll see on many daytime and light entertainment programs on TV that they run 'competitions' for the viewers where the question is stupidly simple. They do this to step around the 'gambling' licence issue. By asking a question (no matter how simple) it legally occludes the fact that the text-in/phone-in competition is basically a Lottery. Back to the point of Games... All games publishers have to do is get a gambling licence (for the region they want to sell the game in) and be up front that their game contains 'some gambling'. Of course though, if they do that, then they can't sell their game to minors... -- [1] http://www.whenthefunstops.co.uk/ http://www.whenthefunstops.co.uk/

JaceLightning 8y ago

When I was a kid, we'd buy packs of unknown Pokemon cards hoping for a shiny. I wouldn't consider that gambling.

krsdcbl 8y ago

Got to raise the question here: following this argumentation, aren't collectible card games like Magic The Gathering also to be considered gambling?