sigur.9453 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"coso.9173" said: > > @"sigur.9453" said: > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > > Getting a statuette doesn't automatically make it non gambling. The law surely considers those cases too as a cheap loophole. > > > > > > If all the items were purchasable with Statuettes, it would be. Then any uncommon item you get is pure bonus. You're buying it for the Statuette to work towards your end goal. Like a layaway/layby system with tokens. > > > > nope, since the "bonus" items each represent a different "value". (= literally gambling) they could bypass this by making EVERY items cost the same amount of statuettes, so technically all items would be valued the same. > > I don't think that even in that case, it wouldn't be considered gambling. > Because what is the spirit of the law? People would still be buying the boxes in hopes of the special items, not because of the statuettes. > That like saying that each time you bid in a casino you get 1 dollar back. It would still be considered gambling. i fully agree. there would be still some steps missing. same dropchance for each item, the ability sell items for the full statuet price (which would make the whole bypass useless), etc. i was prepeared to make the same casino argument, if op OP would dismiss my views :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teratus.2859 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"battledrone.8315" said: > > @"Teratus.2859" said: > > > @"battledrone.8315" said: > > > > @"Teratus.2859" said: > > > > > @"battledrone.8315" said: > > > > > > @"Teratus.2859" said: > > > > > > > @"Yggranya.5201" said: > > > > > > > It is gambling. You might notice that in threads like these, people always come to defend it, every time. You might ask, why? Because if the addicts pay anets bills, they don't have to and as long as anet makes money, the game will propably continue. > > > > > > > > > > > > As a defender I take offense to that statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > I own all of GW1's campaigns as well as a reasonable amount of account upgrades in that game. > > > > > > Likewise I preordered a collectors edition of Gw2 and own both expansion Ultimate editions. > > > > > > I will be buying Expansion 3's collectors/Ultimate editions as well and I have invested god knows how much money in the gemstore over the years. > > > > > > Not to mention I bought a friend both expansions as well a few years back. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've paid more than my fair share into this game and I am no addict. > > > > > > I support this franchse because I love this franchise. > > > > > > Plus if you give me the option to support something I care about of my own free will then I will. > > > > > > But if you try to force me to keep throwing money into something under the threat you'll take that thing away from me regardless of how much i've already invested in it.. ergo the entire premise of mandatory subscription fees!! then I will walk the hell away faster than you can say Wait!! > > > > > > Hell that is the main reason I've straight up quit supporting consoles after 30 years of collecting them, mandatory online subfees.. to hell with that. > > > > > > > > > > > > For all the hate Lootboxes are getting here I am amazed that Subscription fees are not being brought up more.. > > > > > > Mandatory Subfees are by far the most predatory and greedy practice in this industry.. far worse than any lootboxes i've ever seen.. and yet they are far more accepted despite how much they deserve to be utterly despised by gamers. > > > > > > > > > > if i dont like a game, then i prolly wont pay a sub for it, how is that PREDATORY? > > > > > lootboxes OTOH, they are manifestations of pure GREED. the desirable objects always have a astronomically low droprate. > > > > > and then they just fill the rest with low grade junk. > > > > > sub fees requires a thing, that has become rather scarce in the mmo business : TRUST > > > > > > > > I won't pay a sub even for something I like. > > > > As far as I am concerned when I buy a game that game is mine to play as I see fit. > > > > > > > > If a company tells me "oh no.. actually you're just renting the game and that initial price was nothing more than a downpayment and if you stop paying us we'll take the game away from you" then im pretty much going to tell said company to go straight to hell. > > > > > > > > Sub based games are predatory in the sense that their price tag/cost is unlimited. > > > > You'll be paying to play them forever without the possibility of ever owning the game. > > > > Just look at those who've been playing Wow non stop for the past 16 years, they've put almost 3 grand into that game just on sub costs with nothing to show for it.. Everything goes away if they decide they don't want to pay for it anymore. > > > > > > > > Oh and Wow of course also has a cash shop and lootboxes as well.. because ripping people off with a subfee just wasn't greedy enough. > > > > That's why pro sub arguments don't make any sense when criticizing alternative monetization methods like cash shops and lootboxes. > > > > > > 16 years of gaming for 3 grand sounds like a good deal to me. have you seen the price of new games, and how many hours they last? > > > i would take a good sub game over any F2P model, but sadly there arent many left > > > > Yes, because the model realistically doesn't work on a market wide scale. > > It creates a market where only X amount of games can even survive due to the nature of subscription fees, a problem that we are eventually going to run into with TV at some point as well, especially with more focus being pushed on service exclusive shows. > > > > Too many services means excessive amounts of subfees needed to access them and that ultimately limits peoples options pretty significantly. > > This is exactly the reason why so many MMO's have gone free 2 play over the years, while many others have straight up died and vanished from the world entirely. > > As much as I love Gw1, if the game had launched with a mandatory sub fee then I would place a hard bet that Gw2 would never have existed. > > > > For me it's not about the money, I'll gladly pay more to avoid being forced to pay a mandatory sub with the added penalty of having my games and movies etc taken away if I stop paying. > > I'd rather have a large physical game and movie collection that gives me total freedom and control over what entertainment I consume than pay a subscription for something like like Playstation now or Netflix. > > > > You can argue the experience is what you get when you pay for sub services and you're not entirely wrong.. but it's an expreience you can only enjoy while you're paying.. > > When you stop paying you loose everything.. you are back to square one with absolutely nothing to show for all that money you spent. > > And even then your options were always limited by the service you're paying for, you have no control over what movies and shows and games come and go on the platform and there's always a risk something you are half way through will be gone the next day and no longer available to you even though you are paying for it. > > > > At least with physical games, movies, tv shows etc you will always have access to them and you can enjoy them at any time you wish without ever having to pay for them again. > > That is something I will gladly pay for and have gladly paid for since I was old enough to earn an income. > > But I will never support a mandatory subfee service, no chance in hell. > > > wrong, if i let my sub lapse for a month, all my toons dont get wiped to level 1. do you even know, how mmos work? I never said they did, I said they get taken away from you.. ergo you can no longer access them or interact with them in any way until you pay a specific party money again. Essentially it works the exact same way as ransom does.. a bit like blackmail too, and the longer you play for and the more time and money you invest, the more value that account has to you ergo the more likely you are to keep paying just so the company that does own it doesn't strip away your access to it and hold it for ransom until you pay up again. What it means is that you don't own the game you paid for. You don't own any of the paid DLC's you paid for. You don't own any of the additional cash shop items that you also paid an additional fee for either. You don't own the account you made. You don't own the characters you made. You don't own any of the items you have aquired. You don't own anything associated with that game or account at all no matter how much money you put into it. I can't accurately put into words how utterly repulsive and unethical I find business models that works like that. Imagine if you spent a few grand on a brand new top of the line gaming PC, spent a few hundred more on a bunch of brand new games too and then Microsoft come along and say you gotta give them another 30 bucks a month forever or they'll lock you out of accessing your own computer so you cant use it at all even to use other things that you have paid for.. until you pay Microsofts monthly "ransom" fee. That's exactly what the subfee model is and does.. and that's why I'll never support anything that forces a mandatory one. > i still have a huge box with all of my old albums...useless, because i dont have a record player anymore. same with my box of old VHS tapes. and i was one of the smart ones, who didnt buy a betamax player, those guys were screwed. when you have your OWN collection, you just have to pay the fee in hardware > PS my collection of DVDs are already on the way out too, it is getting hard to find a player WITHOUT blu ray kitten Blu-rays play DvD's though I can understand if you're more of a purist with that. Old tech does have a certain kind of charm to it doesn't it. I take care of my stuff pretty well, my old tech is in good condition despite it's age. I keep an old TV around for the old AV consoles since a lot of new HD TV's no longer support that format, same for SCART as well which is also being pushed out nowdays. The N64 being the problem child as it is a pain in the rear getting that thing to work on newer TV's even with a signal converter. It's a very stubbon console but I can't help but love it ^^ I'd argue old consoles and games look better on old TV's anyway, new TV are just so clean and colourful that they don't do old games justice at all.. expose far too many imperfections that were not visible on old TV's thanks largely to the quality the screens were capable of back then. If you keep/collect old consoles and games then keeping an old CRT about is absolutely worth it imo, or at the very least a 90's era flatscreen if you can find one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fear.3865 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"Khisanth.2948" said: > It is also possible do the run in much less time than 6 hours if you are doing things that gives you Tomes of Knowledge or other similar things. > The 6 hours is just from my own experience of getting ~10 levels per hour when not using things like ToKs. I hard farm BL Keys for like one year now, I can easily make 10 keys/week, about 1 key/h, you just need a free slot and 79 ToK's per week. 5 BL Keys within the story + 5 BL Keys on fast cleansing 15 zones. Then I delete and recreate my char and repeat the farm every week. I'm a PvP/WvW player with perma wintersday and birthday boost, farming ToK's is really fast in WvW (dragonfalls path really good choice). When I got tired and the chest isn't so great, I make 5 keys/week and delete my char every two weeks. This allows me to get every special uncommon items this year, it takes around 40 keys to get the 3 specials items, and allows me to complete every BL collections thanks to the free tickets + extra bonus (dyes, 12h food, free wardrobe items etc...). It's more chill and fun to farm this way, farming gold and convert to BL Key feels like you are literaly gambling your time and money, and honestly I just hate that feeling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Alymer.3406 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"hugo.4705" said: > Frankly I don't really care about bl chest, **your choice to be addict or not**, to try your luck or not but I agree it tricks your brain into a doom spiral. Addicts don't have a choice once they're addicted, my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"sigur.9453" said: > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > Getting a statuette doesn't automatically make it non gambling. The law surely considers those cases too as a cheap loophole. > > > > If all the items were purchasable with Statuettes, it would be. Then any uncommon item you get is pure bonus. You're buying it for the Statuette to work towards your end goal. Like a layaway/layby system with tokens. > > nope, since the "bonus" items each represent a different "value". (= literally gambling) they could bypass this by making EVERY items cost the same amount of statuettes, so technically all items would be valued the same. That would be stupid. You can't have a Black Lion Bank Access contract cost the same as a dye kit for example. With ALL the items purchasable with Statuettes, you are literally just buying one item to exhange for another, there is zero gambling involved. Plus, as a bonus you have the chance to get rare items anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"coso.9173" said: > I don't think that even in that case, it wouldn't be considered gambling. > Because what is the spirit of the law? People would still be buying the boxes in hopes of the special items, not because of the statuettes. > That like saying that each time you bid in a casino you get 1 dollar back. It would still be considered gambling. It's not like saying that at all. It's like a finance company letting someone save up to buy a car by purchasing gift cards, once they buy enough cards, they can exchange them for a car of their choice. But, on the back of the gift card, there is a scratchy that also has a chance to win you other prizes along the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coso.9173 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > @"coso.9173" said: > > I don't think that even in that case, it wouldn't be considered gambling. > > Because what is the spirit of the law? People would still be buying the boxes in hopes of the special items, not because of the statuettes. > > That like saying that each time you bid in a casino you get 1 dollar back. It would still be considered gambling. > > It's not like saying that at all. > It's like a finance company letting someone save up to buy a car by purchasing gift cards, once they buy enough cards, they can exchange them for a car of their choice. But, on the back of the gift card, there is a scratchy that also has a chance to win you other prizes along the way. > > no, that won't do. if everyone buys the giftcards in hopes to get the special prizes, it's still considered gambling. If they ever really start going after lootboxes, I can assure you that statuettes won't save their asses. it's how it's working in some countries already. what matters it's the spirit of the law, not a dumb loophole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigur.9453 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > @"sigur.9453" said: > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > > Getting a statuette doesn't automatically make it non gambling. The law surely considers those cases too as a cheap loophole. > > > > > > If all the items were purchasable with Statuettes, it would be. Then any uncommon item you get is pure bonus. You're buying it for the Statuette to work towards your end goal. Like a layaway/layby system with tokens. > > > > nope, since the "bonus" items each represent a different "value". (= literally gambling) they could bypass this by making EVERY items cost the same amount of statuettes, so technically all items would be valued the same. > > That would be stupid. You can't have a Black Lion Bank Access contract cost the same as a dye kit for example. > > With ALL the items purchasable with Statuettes, you are literally just buying one item to exhange for another, there is zero gambling involved. Plus, as a bonus you have the chance to get rare items anyway. Nope, look at your wording. "chance to get rate items" it's still literally gambling. Doesn't matter if you will be able to buy the item you want with 100+ statuettes. That Rare item has a value you roll on with you real money. I could open up a lottery otherwise: 10€/ticket for a chance to win 100€ If you collect 1000tickets you get 100€ in return. By your logic that also wouldn't classify as gambling since you have a quarantied return after a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"coso.9173" said: > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > I don't think that even in that case, it wouldn't be considered gambling. > > > Because what is the spirit of the law? People would still be buying the boxes in hopes of the special items, not because of the statuettes. > > > That like saying that each time you bid in a casino you get 1 dollar back. It would still be considered gambling. > > > > It's not like saying that at all. > > It's like a finance company letting someone save up to buy a car by purchasing gift cards, once they buy enough cards, they can exchange them for a car of their choice. But, on the back of the gift card, there is a scratchy that also has a chance to win you other prizes along the way. > > > > > > no, that won't do. if everyone buys the gift cards in hopes to get the special prizes, it's still considered gambling. If they ever really start going after lootboxes, I can assure you that statuettes won't save their kitten. it's how it's working in some countries already. what matters it's the spirit of the law, not a dumb loophole. No, it's not. Because _by definition_ gambling has the possibility that you lose. It's a risk. But if value is added in the form of progress towards a goal, there is no chance of not getting it. It's a win-win. There is zero risk. You can see at the merchant that there is a price for an item and from that, you know how many chests you need to buy to get it. If you went to the electronics store to pay some money into your new laptop layby/lay-away and as part of a promotion they gave you a raffle ticket and you won a prize, it's not gambling. This is in essence what you'll be doing if all items are available. Sure, you can keep going back and paying off that layby/lay-away in the hopes you win something extra, but in the end, you get exactly what you paid for regardless of getting anything additional. > @"sigur.9453" said: > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > @"sigur.9453" said: > > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > > > Getting a statuette doesn't automatically make it non gambling. The law surely considers those cases too as a cheap loophole. > > > > > > > > If all the items were purchasable with Statuettes, it would be. Then any uncommon item you get is pure bonus. You're buying it for the Statuette to work towards your end goal. Like a layaway/layby system with tokens. > > > > > > nope, since the "bonus" items each represent a different "value". (= literally gambling) they could bypass this by making EVERY items cost the same amount of statuettes, so technically all items would be valued the same. > > > > That would be stupid. You can't have a Black Lion Bank Access contract cost the same as a dye kit for example. > > > > With ALL the items purchasable with Statuettes, you are literally just buying one item to exhange for another, there is zero gambling involved. Plus, as a bonus you have the chance to get rare items anyway. > > Nope, look at your wording. "chance to get rate items" it's still literally gambling. Doesn't matter if you will be able to buy the item you want with 100+ statuettes. That Rare item has a value you roll on with you real money. > I could open up a lottery otherwise: > 10€/ticket for a chance to win 100€ > If you collect 1000tickets you get 100€ in return. By your logic that also wouldn't classify as gambling since you have a quarantied return after a while. The chance to get the rare item is separate from the transaction. Read what I wrote to old mate above because you're not getting it. There are no additional costs or problems there because you can see _exactly_ how much you need to spend to get what you want. Here's how it would work with your example. You buy lotto tickets for $10 each with the chance to win $1000. But you can also turn in 100 tickets and get $1000. So if you spend $1000, you get $1000. But you also have the _chance_ of getting it sooner. You cannot lose, so there is no risk, so it's not gambling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigur.9453 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > > I don't think that even in that case, it wouldn't be considered gambling. > > > > Because what is the spirit of the law? People would still be buying the boxes in hopes of the special items, not because of the statuettes. > > > > That like saying that each time you bid in a casino you get 1 dollar back. It would still be considered gambling. > > > > > > It's not like saying that at all. > > > It's like a finance company letting someone save up to buy a car by purchasing gift cards, once they buy enough cards, they can exchange them for a car of their choice. But, on the back of the gift card, there is a scratchy that also has a chance to win you other prizes along the way. > > > > > > > > > > no, that won't do. if everyone buys the gift cards in hopes to get the special prizes, it's still considered gambling. If they ever really start going after lootboxes, I can assure you that statuettes won't save their kitten. it's how it's working in some countries already. what matters it's the spirit of the law, not a dumb loophole. > > No, it's not. Because _by definition_ gambling has the possibility that you lose. It's a risk. But if value is added in the form of progress towards a goal, there is no chance of not getting it. It's a win-win. There is zero risk. You can see at the merchant that there is a price for an item and from that, you know how many chests you need to buy to get it. > > If you went to the electronics store to pay some money into your new laptop layby/lay-away and as part of a promotion they gave you a raffle ticket and you won a prize, it's not gambling. This is in essence what you'll be doing if all items are available. Sure, you can keep going back and paying off that layby/lay-away in the hopes you win something extra, but in the end, you get exactly what you paid for regardless of getting anything additional. > > > @"sigur.9453" said: > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > @"sigur.9453" said: > > > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > > > > Getting a statuette doesn't automatically make it non gambling. The law surely considers those cases too as a cheap loophole. > > > > > > > > > > If all the items were purchasable with Statuettes, it would be. Then any uncommon item you get is pure bonus. You're buying it for the Statuette to work towards your end goal. Like a layaway/layby system with tokens. > > > > > > > > nope, since the "bonus" items each represent a different "value". (= literally gambling) they could bypass this by making EVERY items cost the same amount of statuettes, so technically all items would be valued the same. > > > > > > That would be stupid. You can't have a Black Lion Bank Access contract cost the same as a dye kit for example. > > > > > > With ALL the items purchasable with Statuettes, you are literally just buying one item to exhange for another, there is zero gambling involved. Plus, as a bonus you have the chance to get rare items anyway. > > > > Nope, look at your wording. "chance to get rate items" it's still literally gambling. Doesn't matter if you will be able to buy the item you want with 100+ statuettes. That Rare item has a value you roll on with you real money. > > I could open up a lottery otherwise: > > 10€/ticket for a chance to win 100€ > > If you collect 1000tickets you get 100€ in return. By your logic that also wouldn't classify as gambling since you have a quarantied return after a while. > > The chance to get the rare item is separate from the transaction. Read what I wrote to old mate above because you're not getting it. There are no additional costs or problems there because you can see _exactly_ how much you need to spend to get what you want. > > Here's how it would work with your example. You buy lotto tickets for $10 each with the chance to win $1000. But you can also turn in 100 tickets and get $1000. So if you spend $1000, you get $1000. But you also have the _chance_ of getting it sooner. You cannot lose, so there is no risk, so it's not gambling. You are incorrect, But i do Not think we will get on the Same Page on this Topic since the grounds of our logical thinking is so far apart. No Hard feelings. Lawmakers will decide anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khisanth.2948 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"The Fear.3865" said: > > @"Khisanth.2948" said: > > It is also possible do the run in much less time than 6 hours if you are doing things that gives you Tomes of Knowledge or other similar things. > > The 6 hours is just from my own experience of getting ~10 levels per hour when not using things like ToKs. > > I hard farm BL Keys for like one year now, I can easily make 10 keys/week, about 1 key/h, you just need a free slot and 79 ToK's per week. > 5 BL Keys within the story + 5 BL Keys on fast cleansing 15 zones. Then I delete and recreate my char and repeat the farm every week. > I'm a PvP/WvW player with perma wintersday and birthday boost, farming ToK's is really fast in WvW (dragonfalls path really good choice). > > When I got tired and the chest isn't so great, I make 5 keys/week and delete my char every two weeks. > > This allows me to get every special uncommon items this year, it takes around 40 keys to get the 3 specials items, and allows me to complete every BL collections thanks to the free tickets + extra bonus (dyes, 12h food, free wardrobe items etc...). > > It's more chill and fun to farm this way, farming gold and convert to BL Key feels like you are literaly gambling your time and money, and honestly I just hate that feeling. My main issue with using ToK based run time is that those take time to get as well and 79 ToK is potentially worth around 79g Also only need 78 ToKs if you are using a human character > @"Sir Alymer.3406" said: > > @"hugo.4705" said: > > Frankly I don't really care about bl chest, **your choice to be addict or not**, to try your luck or not but I agree it tricks your brain into a doom spiral. > > Addicts don't have a choice once they're addicted, my friend. They do have a choice. They can choose to seek help for their addiction instead of just waiting for their source of addiction to go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MithranArkanere.8957 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 Since BL Chests always give guaranteed rewards, they are not fully gambling. But they still have a large gambling element. They could change BL keys so they are bought with coin instead gems to 'distance' them from the cash shop, then people would buy coin with gems to buy them. But depending on the laws of a country, it may still count as gambling even if it's purchased with in-game currency. In some countries it's considered gambling only if the items you get can be traded or exchanged for cash. If it's other countries, they can just block the keys from sale, but if it's in the US, they may have to change the keys to give just statuettes, or make anything that drops from them account bound, or other measures depending on the laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fear.3865 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"Khisanth.2948" said: > My main issue with using ToK based run time is that those take time to get as well and 79 ToK is potentially worth around 79g > > Also only need 78 ToKs if you are using a human character This is more about QoL. I'm not just farming ToK's, I'm playin wvw as a main pvp player, grinding ranks, farming AT/soloq/douq, + ofc gold farm, and eventually havin some fun :3 I can't even imagine spending 3h on a single key when ToK's are free items for me, every wvw and PvP players usually delete their ToK's when they got more than 1 stack, or they stack like 5+ piles for nothing, I just decided to use mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 Posted August 7, 2020 Share Posted August 7, 2020 > @"sigur.9453" said: > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > > > I don't think that even in that case, it wouldn't be considered gambling. > > > > > Because what is the spirit of the law? People would still be buying the boxes in hopes of the special items, not because of the statuettes. > > > > > That like saying that each time you bid in a casino you get 1 dollar back. It would still be considered gambling. > > > > > > > > It's not like saying that at all. > > > > It's like a finance company letting someone save up to buy a car by purchasing gift cards, once they buy enough cards, they can exchange them for a car of their choice. But, on the back of the gift card, there is a scratchy that also has a chance to win you other prizes along the way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no, that won't do. if everyone buys the gift cards in hopes to get the special prizes, it's still considered gambling. If they ever really start going after lootboxes, I can assure you that statuettes won't save their kitten. it's how it's working in some countries already. what matters it's the spirit of the law, not a dumb loophole. > > > > No, it's not. Because _by definition_ gambling has the possibility that you lose. It's a risk. But if value is added in the form of progress towards a goal, there is no chance of not getting it. It's a win-win. There is zero risk. You can see at the merchant that there is a price for an item and from that, you know how many chests you need to buy to get it. > > > > If you went to the electronics store to pay some money into your new laptop layby/lay-away and as part of a promotion they gave you a raffle ticket and you won a prize, it's not gambling. This is in essence what you'll be doing if all items are available. Sure, you can keep going back and paying off that layby/lay-away in the hopes you win something extra, but in the end, you get exactly what you paid for regardless of getting anything additional. > > > > > @"sigur.9453" said: > > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > > @"sigur.9453" said: > > > > > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said: > > > > > > > @"coso.9173" said: > > > > > > > Getting a statuette doesn't automatically make it non gambling. The law surely considers those cases too as a cheap loophole. > > > > > > > > > > > > If all the items were purchasable with Statuettes, it would be. Then any uncommon item you get is pure bonus. You're buying it for the Statuette to work towards your end goal. Like a layaway/layby system with tokens. > > > > > > > > > > nope, since the "bonus" items each represent a different "value". (= literally gambling) they could bypass this by making EVERY items cost the same amount of statuettes, so technically all items would be valued the same. > > > > > > > > That would be stupid. You can't have a Black Lion Bank Access contract cost the same as a dye kit for example. > > > > > > > > With ALL the items purchasable with Statuettes, you are literally just buying one item to exhange for another, there is zero gambling involved. Plus, as a bonus you have the chance to get rare items anyway. > > > > > > Nope, look at your wording. "chance to get rate items" it's still literally gambling. Doesn't matter if you will be able to buy the item you want with 100+ statuettes. That Rare item has a value you roll on with you real money. > > > I could open up a lottery otherwise: > > > 10€/ticket for a chance to win 100€ > > > If you collect 1000tickets you get 100€ in return. By your logic that also wouldn't classify as gambling since you have a quarantied return after a while. > > > > The chance to get the rare item is separate from the transaction. Read what I wrote to old mate above because you're not getting it. There are no additional costs or problems there because you can see _exactly_ how much you need to spend to get what you want. > > > > Here's how it would work with your example. You buy lotto tickets for $10 each with the chance to win $1000. But you can also turn in 100 tickets and get $1000. So if you spend $1000, you get $1000. But you also have the _chance_ of getting it sooner. You cannot lose, so there is no risk, so it's not gambling. > > You are incorrect, But i do Not think we will get on the Same Page on this Topic since the grounds of our logical thinking is so far apart. No Hard feelings. > Lawmakers will decide anyway. > > Can you even explain how I am incorrect? If I go to the casino and play roulette and for every dollar I spend, they give me a voucher worth $1 that can be redeemed for $1, how is that gambling? You have zero risk of ever losing your money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CazzT.1870 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"Swagger.1459" said: > > @"tomshreds.1745" said: > > I wish all items, mounts and skins would be unlockable via gameplay. > > WoW's endgame is all about unlocking everything. GW2's shouldn't force people to pay gems. > > Let people try their luck on a dungeon/boss to get items. > > > > Those who wants to pay will pay but at least give us a way of achieving those via gameplay. > > RnG chests are also a very bad idea that will eventually get killed by law so hopefully games will see brighter days... soon. > > Are you also willing to pay a mandatory monthly subscription fee to play gw2? > > Anet doesn’t “force” anyone to buy anything off the gemstore. And you don’t have to spend a dime on items either, you can convert game gold into gems to get anything for $0. Also, nothing in bl chests gives you a combat advantage over another player. > > Some rng chests in other games aren’t great, but not in gw2. But if things change, then we better get ready to have exclusively gem priced items on the gem store for direct purchase. So those certain cosmetic items will have a much higher sticker price. I would be willing to pay a monthly sub if it gave access to all the LW chapters. ESO does something like this. You can play for free, but if you sub, you get access to all the expansions without having to buy them. I'm not asking ANET to get access to HoT/PoF with a sub, I'm fine with purchasing the expansions. But they clearly don't want new and returning players to experience this content which has a price tag of an expansion to get it all. And with a third actual expansion rumored to be coming, GW2 is about to get some fresh attention. But the way they're doing LW content is going to roadblock and scare off a lot of new and returning players. It's already got me questioning if I wanna stay. Lords know I'm not eager to pay for another expansion on top of what I just bought. Especially since I was given no heads up that I wouldn't be able to experience that content without paying more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"CazzT.1870" said: > I would be willing to pay a monthly sub if it gave access to all the LW chapters. ESO does something like this. You can play for free, but if you sub, you get access to all the expansions without having to buy them. I'm not asking ANET to get access to HoT/PoF with a sub, I'm fine with purchasing the expansions. (sigh) You can do this already. Go ahead and buy $20USD in gems every month and use them to purchase LW chapters. You can still play for free and have access to LW content. If you are so willing to pay a sub fee, just do this and stop trying to force everyone else to pay for a sub who doesn't want or need to. >But they clearly don't want new and returning players to experience this content which has a price tag of an expansion to get it all Clearly? I think that clearly you don't understand their pricing model for content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coso.9173 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 a monthly sub price isn't enough to get all LWS episodes I think. Can you get seasons 2,3,4 and 5 for 15 usd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trise.2865 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"Kodama.6453" said: > > @"Tukaram.8256" said: > > I have never seen loot boxes as gambling. To me gambling implies some chance to win something of value. Pixels have no value. But, if buying something and not knowing what is inside is gambling... then sure we can call it gambling. But then buying a pack of Pokemon cards is also gambling? > > > > Then again I would never pay real money for a lootbox. I may buy an item outright, but I would never buy a chance at an item. That is idiotic - who would buy them? > > Or the biggest evil humankind knows to this day: Kinder Surprise Eggs False equivalency. Those were banned because children were choking on the tiny, plastic tat inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kodama.6453 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"Trise.2865" said: > > @"Kodama.6453" said: > > > @"Tukaram.8256" said: > > > I have never seen loot boxes as gambling. To me gambling implies some chance to win something of value. Pixels have no value. But, if buying something and not knowing what is inside is gambling... then sure we can call it gambling. But then buying a pack of Pokemon cards is also gambling? > > > > > > Then again I would never pay real money for a lootbox. I may buy an item outright, but I would never buy a chance at an item. That is idiotic - who would buy them? > > > > Or the biggest evil humankind knows to this day: Kinder Surprise Eggs > > False equivalency. Those were banned because children were choking on the tiny, plastic tat inside. I don't say that Kinder Surprise Eggs were banned because of that. I am saying that if you consider loot boxes to be gambling because of randomised containment, then you also have to consider these surprise eggs to be gambling. Which is quite hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trise.2865 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"Kodama.6453" said: > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > @"Kodama.6453" said: > > > > @"Tukaram.8256" said: > > > > I have never seen loot boxes as gambling. To me gambling implies some chance to win something of value. Pixels have no value. But, if buying something and not knowing what is inside is gambling... then sure we can call it gambling. But then buying a pack of Pokemon cards is also gambling? > > > > > > > > Then again I would never pay real money for a lootbox. I may buy an item outright, but I would never buy a chance at an item. That is idiotic - who would buy them? > > > > > > Or the biggest evil humankind knows to this day: Kinder Surprise Eggs > > > > False equivalency. Those were banned because children were choking on the tiny, plastic tat inside. > > I don't say that Kinder Surprise Eggs were banned because of that. > I am saying that if you consider loot boxes to be gambling because of randomised containment, then you also have to consider these surprise eggs to be gambling. Which is quite hilarious. ...which is a false equivalency. The danger of Kinder eggs is not psychological, but purely medical. That's like comparing disease infections to dice games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoSundown.5419 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 For something to be gambling requires three elements be present: risk (chance), consideration (wager) and prize. Defenders of BLC loot boxes are going to attack all three. They're going to say that consideration does not apply because one can get keys with gold-to-gems or via in-game rewards. They're going to say that you always get a prize. Also, they're going to say that because you always get a prize, there is no risk. Legally, one could attack those three contentions by saying: (1) you can get keys via gems bought with cash, so there is consideration; (2) one could argue that the pattern of player use indicates that the common and guaranteed items are not what is driving repeated use; and (3) because of 1 and 2, there is risk. These arguments will be backed up by the presence of psychological factors commonly associated with gambling. Who'll win? On one side, it'll be politicians looking to make political capital by "protecting children" or other at-risk people or looking to make a name as "champions of the people." Their opponents will be politicians who despise any attempts by government to reign in corporate windfall profits. It's gong to depend on sufficient public attention being brought to the issue to make those opposing regulation want to look good to their constituents. Since public attention is no longer on the issue, it looks good right now for no regulation. All it would take, though, is another company pushing egregious loot box design like with EA and SWBF2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kodama.6453 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"Trise.2865" said: > > @"Kodama.6453" said: > > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > > @"Kodama.6453" said: > > > > > @"Tukaram.8256" said: > > > > > I have never seen loot boxes as gambling. To me gambling implies some chance to win something of value. Pixels have no value. But, if buying something and not knowing what is inside is gambling... then sure we can call it gambling. But then buying a pack of Pokemon cards is also gambling? > > > > > > > > > > Then again I would never pay real money for a lootbox. I may buy an item outright, but I would never buy a chance at an item. That is idiotic - who would buy them? > > > > > > > > Or the biggest evil humankind knows to this day: Kinder Surprise Eggs > > > > > > False equivalency. Those were banned because children were choking on the tiny, plastic tat inside. > > > > I don't say that Kinder Surprise Eggs were banned because of that. > > I am saying that if you consider loot boxes to be gambling because of randomised containment, then you also have to consider these surprise eggs to be gambling. Which is quite hilarious. > > ...which is a false equivalency. The danger of Kinder eggs is not psychological, but purely medical. That's like comparing disease infections to dice games. You are focusing on the wrong thing. When I typed that, I even forgot that in America these surprise eggs are banned and that was not the point I am making. In my country, these surprise eggs are not banned at all, you can buy them in every super market. I can exchange surprise eggs with any cornflakes brand that uses surprise gifts in their packs. I could replace them with the surprise bags you can buy at every anime convention I visited to this point. I could replace them with every trading card booster pack. My point is that if loot boxes are banned for being gambling, then literally all of this stuff is gambling, too. And in my personal opinion, this is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misterman.1530 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"Trise.2865" said: > > @"Kodama.6453" said: > > > @"Tukaram.8256" said: > > > I have never seen loot boxes as gambling. To me gambling implies some chance to win something of value. Pixels have no value. But, if buying something and not knowing what is inside is gambling... then sure we can call it gambling. But then buying a pack of Pokemon cards is also gambling? > > > > > > Then again I would never pay real money for a lootbox. I may buy an item outright, but I would never buy a chance at an item. That is idiotic - who would buy them? > > > > Or the biggest evil humankind knows to this day: Kinder Surprise Eggs > > False equivalency. Those were banned because children were choking on the tiny, plastic tat inside. No. No. Those were only banned in the US because 3 children over a span of some 40 years choked on the plastic capsule inside. 3. 40 years. There was no epidemic of kids choking on them. Heck, more kids die from choking on hotdogs than they ever did choking on the capsules. Why haven't they banned hotdogs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misterman.1530 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > For something to be gambling requires three elements be present: risk (chance), consideration (wager) and prize. > > Defenders of BLC loot boxes are going to attack all three. They're going to say that consideration does not apply because one can get keys with gold-to-gems or via in-game rewards. They're going to say that you always get a prize. Also, they're going to say that because you always get a prize, there is no risk. > > Legally, one could attack those three contentions by saying: (1) you can get keys via gems bought with cash, so there is consideration; (2) one could argue that the pattern of player use indicates that the common and guaranteed items are not what is driving repeated use; and (3) because of 1 and 2, there is risk. These arguments will be backed up by the presence of psychological factors commonly associated with gambling. > > Who'll win? On one side, it'll be politicians looking to make political capital by "protecting children" or other at-risk people or looking to make a name as "champions of the people." Their opponents will be politicians who despise any attempts by government to reign in corporate windfall profits. It's gong to depend on sufficient public attention being brought to the issue to make those opposing regulation want to look good to their constituents. Since public attention is no longer on the issue, it looks good right now for no regulation. All it would take, though, is another company pushing egregious loot box design like with EA and SWBF2. But I don't think governments are making the distinction on what is used to purchase the loot boxes. Gambling is gambling, whether you've spent real life money or virtual coins you can get within a game - according to the laws being passed, anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen.2907 Posted August 9, 2020 Share Posted August 9, 2020 > @"Teratus.2859" said: > I can't accurately put into words how utterly repulsive and unethical I find business models that works like that. If I stop paying my rent, is it unethical for the owner of the property to ask me to leave? Should Linda, my landlady who rents out this home in order to provide for herself in her old age, be expected to go hungry, forgo her medications, etc because it is, "unethical," for someone to charge for access to their property? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now