8 ms·

> “It doesn’t necessarily look like ‘real’ money to a minor,” This is intentional. In many games, some things cost "gold" earned by playing the game, and othe

• Vanit 8y ago
  You're right, but I don't think this is quite what the quote is referencing. If payment details are stored and kids are merely presented with a colourful popup confirming they want to spend $99 for 2000 gems, it doesn't seem like a real transaction to them (putting aside the fact most kids have no appreciation for the value of money).
• AlexandrB 8y ago
  > At some point the game companies should bear some of the responsibility for deceiving children. I hope a reckoning is coming in this regard. Many games include mechanics that are hard to distinguish from video slot machines and should be regulated the same way gambling is (rated 18+, audited for "fairness").
  • bytematic 8y ago
    When I followed the Valve game CS:GO a few years ago, I was pretty disgusted by the gambling done in that game. It made up an insane % of players, many of them children, who would bet weapon skins on third party websites based on ESports games. Valve shut those third party sites down but continued to market different kinds of skins such as gloves, music, etc. I wonder how much money moved to and away minors during that period.
    • knome 8y ago
      I believe it was Belgium that banned unboxing as a form of gambling, leading to it being disabled across Valve games, afaik.
  • Spooky23 8y ago
    Unlikely. Society shifted and gambling is stigma free. My son is old enough that arcades are interesting to him now. I was pretty shocked to see how they have declined into shitty skinner boxes and games of chance to win tickets. That was always a factor, but is much more prominent today. The casual acceptance of sports betting is another example of that shift. There’s probably some free marketeer who will opine that teaching children about gambling is a good thing!
    • int_19h 8y ago
      I wouldn't exactly call it stigma free to let (much less encourage) kids gamble. There's a difference between acceptance, and anything goes.
      • fhbdukfrh 8y ago
        Well, i went to the local arcade with my 9 year old last weekend. It is fully licensed, has games where you drop a ball (at a cost of about 2 bucks) to win tickets ranging in value from 10 to 500 points and redeem them for prizes like candy and video game themed toys. I'd say that's stigma-free.
        • asynchrony 8y ago
          Legislation is stuck at the money-in-money-out mechanic.
          • Mirioron 8y ago
            That's because gambling, by definition, requires money to change hands.
    • FiveSquared 8y ago
      Well sports betting has been around forever, but dark patterns and intentional deception in mobile games leads to children being manipulated. Not consenting adults, CHILDREN. https://humanetech.com/ https://humanetech.com/
  • miluge 8y ago
    Candy Crush is litterally a slot machine on smartphone at least thats how I see it.
    • efdee 8y ago
      I've been playing Candy Crush casually for the last 4 years, I'm at a ridiculously high level and have never spent a penny on it. I don't think calling it a slot machine is fair.
      • bigbugbag 8y ago
        Except it is exactly like a slot machine, well akin to an evolved version actually. It is designed to be addictive with compulsion loops and reinforcement, exploiting brain mechanisms you are not aware of such as disproportionate feedback coming directly from slot machines. Candy crush is a sort of glorified skinner box. Same as gambling machines, candy crush makes use of "illusion of control" by congratulating the player for being skilled for things that actually happened by chance (or were made to happen by the game itself). The comparison does not stop here, similar to gambling machines candy crush makes money not on the vast majority of people but on a limited few that will spend lots of money the "whales". The fun thing with candy crush is that as long as you never pay the game plays fair but once you've become a paying customer the game starts to play tricks on you to nudge you into paying more, it will become harder or impossible to win without the use of bonus you have to pay to get. The game actually adapts to you to maximize profit it can squeeze out of you. There was a detailed article about all this mechanism a few years back when I did not shaarlize[0] all my interesting findings so I can't link it here, but everything I just written comes from memory of what was described in this article. [0] : https://shaarli.readthedocs.io/en/master/ https://shaarli.readthedocs.io/en/master/
        • Mirioron 8y ago
          >It is designed to be addictive with compulsion loops and reinforcement, exploiting brain mechanisms you are not aware of such as disproportionate feedback coming directly from slot machines. Candy crush is a sort of glorified skinner box. So, in your opinion what makes something a slot machine is which psychological effects it tries to use? Do you know where else all of these same psychological effects come up? Human interaction. Candy Crush is basically somebody trying to sweet talk you and wrap you around their finger. Do you consider that to be a slot machine too?
• yholio 8y ago
  This whole idea of storing a payment token that a company can charge at will (as opposed to a fixed top-up with cash) and then for me to be unable to deny those charges, I find it all unacceptable and refuse to allow it ever. After providing such a payment token there should be no proof and dispute involved, just a single click in a web interface "I refuse to pay for that and I revoke the token". The user of the token should make sure I am happy so he can continue to charge the token. This is in sharp contrast with user initiated payments for a fixed amount, that should be carefully secured, require strong authentication and should almost never be reversible, unless actual fraud can be proven by the payer. The problem with cards on the internet and their high abuse and chargeback rates, for which we all pay, is that they conflate these fundamentally different use cases into a single set of static numbers.
  • colejohnson66 8y ago
    Single use cards like privacy.com provides might be the solution you’re looking for
    • deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    • vezycash 8y ago
      Isn't privacy.com US only?
      • Cu3PO42 8y ago
        According to their website you need either a US checking account or debit card, so for all intents and purposes, yes. If you're in (certain parts of) Europe, Revolut will offer you one-time use virtual debit cards if you're on one of their paid plans. However, I have no personal experience with them. Being limited to one transaction each makes them a lot less interesting in my opinion, since I can't set up my subscriptions through different cards.
        • miluge 8y ago
• emiliobumachar 8y ago
  I have seen cartoonish green notes as in-game currency, parallel to gold, but much more scarce and can be bought with real money. Kids don't stand a chance.
  • dylan604 8y ago
    How much of this is the result of parents allowing children to play games unattended with games they themselves have not played to vet? With all things parenting, it ultimately falls on their shoulders on what they allow their kids to do. Not shilling for the slime balls preying on kids knowing parents are lazy, but parents are not blameless.
    • emiliobumachar 8y ago
      I vet all of my kid's games, but this particular pattern was not a deal-breaker for me. However, I've set my Google Play Store to require a password for each purchase. When my kid gets confused, he gets negative feedback in the form of a frustrating dead-end. Hopefully that'll help learning.
      • justtopost 8y ago
        Thats some valuable time to be wasting to disciver dead ends in video games. Maybe there is a better way?
    • lsc 8y ago
      >parents allowing children to play games unattended with games they themselves have not played to vet? So, I'm not telling anyone else how to raise their children... but the fact that society has attitudes like this contributed to my own personal decision to not have any children of my own. Playing every game your child plays seems... really excessive. I know when I was a child in the '80s and '90s, I had a lot of alone time on the computer, and got to explore a lot of things without my parents; I think it was good for me? I mean, unquestionably, it contributed to my income later on, but I think it might have been good for me in other ways, too? I think it was probably good for my parents, too. But then, I super want to reiterate that I am not telling others how to raise kids; I've worked with a few people who kept their kid with them almost 24x7, and that was what they wanted. And it seemed to work out ok? I've totally opted out of that whole thing. I'm just saying, I don't expect anyone to be with their kid 24x7.
• sjg007 8y ago
  I wish Apple would crack down on this. Especially annoying are the games that let you pay to remove ads but then force you to watch a video ad (or buy real money gems) to get another play. So I paid to remove ads but I still get ads. And all of these in app purchases and ads are a really frustrating experience for games that would otherwise be fun. Not to mention they've all effectively turned into pay to play with a slot machine like experience.
  • dwighttk 8y ago
    I agree that it would be nice for Apple to clean up this type of transaction, but I've never found that a game containing them was particularly fun to play.
  • tinus_hn 8y ago
    The ads and IAP are annoying but Apple does have a way to get a refund for this kind of ‘purchases’: https://www.macworld.com/article/2140066/how-to-get-an-app-store-refund-for-kids-accidental-in-app-purchases.html https://www.macworld.com/article/2140066/how-to-get-an-app-s...
• ehnto 8y ago
  I used to think it wasn't nefarious unless your gameplay mechanics essentially coerce you to pay for in-game currency to progress or otherwise fully enjoy the game. But it seems like it's enough just to sell cosmetic enhancements, because kids will be just as caught up in that as they would be in actual gameplay progression. All that said. It's your kid, your card and your money. Kids a mischievous, but the blame isn't entirely on games companies.
• Mirioron 8y ago
  At some point parents should have to take some responsibility for parenting their children. Absolutely everything seems to be somebody else's fault, except for the parents. Kids don't earn their own money. If kids are spending real money in a game then the parents had to okay it.
  • i_cant_speel 8y ago
    I would imagine that in a lot of cases parents just don't understand how these apps work. Something like this happens the first time, and then they figure out how to put those controls into place.