Loot boxes in games gambling petition

[rob4001]

https://www.change.org/p/entertainme...es-as-gambling

[ik9000]

spot on. This needs nipping in the bud, and quickly.

[BobF64]

Should extend it to a lot of in app purchases too, things like Candy Crush effectively make you gamble on being able to continue the level.

[spacein_vader]

Should extend it to a lot of in app purchases too, things like Candy Crush effectively make you gamble on being able to continue the level.

Strictly that's not gambling. You're paying for a defined benefit, extra lives/more play time.

[TheAnimus]

Given how these things appear to target children/childish urges I guess I'm surprised that it's even legal. I didn't think you could gamble for anything that has a value.

[Pob255]

It's not legally/technically gambling, as you always get something.
Psychologically it's gambling and a very close eye needs to be kept on the situation.

@TheAnimus, did you never have a kinder egg when you where a kid? What about "collectable" sticker packs?
I'm sure "collectable" sticker packs would be used to support game loot boxes in any legal battles, they may not be a current trend but they where in the past.

[wazzickle]

Just because you always get something back does not make it not gambling. That would be a rather strict interpretation of gambling if it were 'lose everything you've wagered' vs 'win something'. It doesn't matter whether the range of things you can win can have monetary value, either, what's important in encouraging gambling is the sense of jeopardy, having risked something, and the variation between having gotten something good and something rubbish. This ticks all the boxes, and the claim that because you always get something means it's not gambling is at best disingenuous.

[wazzickle]

As a more concrete example, when you go to the casino and make bets on, for instance, roulette, you can make a multitude of bets at the same time. In terms of your expectation, there is no mathematical difference between lumping £100 on a single number and putting £2-3 on each, totalling £100 in bets. The house takes the same rake (~1/37) in expectation from you whatever happens. How much you can win or lose will vary, of course, but the average doesn't, and you will always get something back, but you're still, obviously, gambling, legally and technically, and there's little difference between that and this situation.

[Butcher]

As a more concrete example, when you go to the casino and make bets on, for instance, roulette, you can make a multitude of bets at the same time. In terms of your expectation, there is no mathematical difference between lumping £100 on a single number and putting £2-3 on each, totalling £100 in bets. The house takes the same rake (~1/37) in expectation from you whatever happens. How much you can win or lose will vary, of course, but the average doesn't, and you will always get something back, but you're still, obviously, gambling, legally and technically, and there's little difference between that and this situation.

In roulette you can lose everything, there is no guaranteed return, just because on average you get something doesn't mean you will. Lootboxes have a guaranteed return (even if it's not "useful") so it's not really the same thing. It's more akin to sticker packs.

Also, while I'm not a huge lootbox fan, removing them will basically just remove content from games, or drive up prices elsewhere.

[Gerrard]

Whilst I agree it is a scummy predatory practice, I view it as a form of gambling in the same group as Kinder Eggs, sticker packs, CCG packs and basically anything where you don't know what exactly you are getting, including I guess those "Loot Crate" physical mystery boxes. As such, I don't think legally it can be challenged unless the law changes their view on all those other things mentioned. Just think back to when you used to hear in the news about the violence involving children and Pokemon cards, and the law didn't change then.

[ik9000]

Whilst I agree it is a scummy predatory practice, I view it as a form of gambling in the same group as Kinder Eggs, sticker packs, CCG packs and basically anything where you don't know what exactly you are getting, including I guess those "Loot Crate" physical mystery boxes. As such, I don't think legally it can be challenged unless the law changes their view on all those other things mentioned. Just think back to when you used to hear in the news about the violence involving children and Pokemon cards, and the law didn't change then.

I disagree - with sticker packs you get 6 stickers of current footballers (or whatever). With these it's like buying a raffle ticket and you may get £10k or you may just get a 1p chew. Ie. gambling.

[Gerrard]

I disagree - with sticker packs you get 6 stickers of current footballers (or whatever). With these it's like buying a raffle ticket and you may get £10k or you may just get a 1p chew. Ie. gambling.

I'll be honest and state I don't know a lot of details about each loot box system, but CS:GO is the only one I know that money associated with it and I agree is gambling. But otherwise, most of the these systems can't be transferred back to money as far as I know? So that leaves how effective the item you get is, and I guess the law probably doesn't and can't really cover that. But again, how many of the other things I stated don't have rare or special items (like "shineys" in your example). "Magic" cards are another thing I only vaguely know about, but I think they are worth something to someone, and I guess rarity and effectiveness of the card effects its value, so are they gambling?

[TooNice]

Loot box system do vary from from game to game, although they tend to be horrendous in Freemium games where rarity is directly tied to effectiveness and therefore absolute advantage.

And with the odds for of acquiring the "Ultra Rare" / Extreme Rare / "Legendary" etc. sometime as low as the 0.x, or 0.0x %, the odds of acquiring specific card can sometime cost in the hundreds if not thousands of pound (I can give discrete examples). Enough to make the cost of an iPhone X an afterthought.

Part of me hate the fact that people get suckered into it, as part of me think it is the buyer that drives the supplies. Then again, there is addictive nature to it, and we do ban some additive substances (yet not others).

[BobF64]

Strictly that's not gambling. You're paying for a defined benefit, extra lives/more play time.

Sounds like playing poker to me.

Tbh, my only issue with the "cash for extra time/moves" is that the "game boards" are usually random, meaning its not a game of skill, but one of chance instead.

[wazzickle]

In roulette you can lose everything, there is no guaranteed return, just because on average you get something doesn't mean you will. Lootboxes have a guaranteed return (even if it's not "useful") so it's not really the same thing.

It is. You can make bets, as I described above, such that you still get something back guaranteed, i.e. you don't lose everything, and it's still very clearly gambling.

Poker is gambling. Whether or not you're gambling with a positive edge, i.e. you're a winning player, you're still gambling, in the same way the house is gambling with you, even when they expect to win.

This could be seen as a rather loose definition of gambling, but that's how I see it - everything in life, where we don't know the outcome 100% (i.e. everything) is a gamble. Some are formalized gambling, like, yaknow, gambling; some are just part and parcel of every day life where it's not really a gamble (i.e. the sun coming up every day); others are playing up the gambling side, while getting away with not calling it gambling, technically or legally, because for some reason people think that just because you can't lose everything, that you always get something, then it's not gambling. It is.

[Macman]

EA knew EXACTLY what they were doing hence why it NEEDS to be regulated. They didn't do as a 'TAX' they did it because they THOUGHT they could. But it seems they pushed past the boundary.

EA altered NFS Payback as far as I'm aware after the backlash they rec'd on SWBFII. And if anyone hasn't seen it... they got a REWARD section which is drawn up as a slot machine...

Maybe if the government can restrict what devs/publishers CAN and CANNOT do the better.

P.s. CSGO included... clamp that down.