Loot box = gambling ?

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> Anet will sidestep the laws through two technicalities.

>

> (1): The Gold to Gem conversion means that keys can be bought and used solely through in-game effort. This doesn't make chests gambling any more than anything else in the game.

> (2): When you open a chest, you're getting a statuette with some additional bonus items. This constitutes, at the minimum, a guaranteed purchase. It doesn't count as gambling because of this.

In US, you mean. In my country both mechanics have been already recognized for what they are - an attempt to circumvent the spirit of the law, and so are actually covered by the current legislation and the only thing that prevents lootboxes from actually being treated as gambling is that they still sort of "fly under radar".

 

It's not like the people making the laws are completely dumb, you know. Even if there is a lot of lobbying being done to leave those loopholes, those are still loopholes, and everyone that is even tangentially interested in the issue _knows_ that they are loopholes. Eventually they _will_ get fixed. The only question is how long will it take.

[coso.9173]

if people buy the lootboxes for specific item(s) and they only assure you a poor low value item each time, I don't think that's enough to consider them not gambling IMO

[hugo.4705]

> @"Taril.8619" said:

> > @"hugo.4705" said:

> > your choice to be addict or not

>

> That's literally not how addiction works.

 

Your choice, ofc I can have a predisposition to be addict to casino or drug BUT if I never go there for my entire life, I will never be addict.

 

I am cunscious that there are cases that can't live without their cannabis or smoking. But it is due to the addictive substances. I am in no way defending lootboxes, but if the player IS aware that the droprates are trapped, and that the player will lose, why playing the game? Sure companies are culprits but players doing gambling or opening lootboxes too.

 

Why comercial phone call exists? Why ads on your internet browser? Why phising or hacking? Drug selling? You always have persons fished by thoses.

 

And finally, it has been said and resaid, but, Bl keys are bad? Then don't buy it.

 

You seems to feel like lootbox are devil and peoples using it too, I ask you, would you prefer gw2 with subscription without gemstore?

 

Everytime I open gw2, I see the gemstore icon, do I click on it? Nope, I don't care of it. I very rarely buy key with ingame earned gems for the lol, but i'm not disapointed. Last time was okay, got the foefire grieves skin. Have I bought more keys since? Nope, i have 1500 gems. But even if I had dropped nothing, I wouldn't be sad.

 

I know precisely how addiction works, my brother can't stop smoking. But what I think about it? If he never had touched a cigarette, he wouldn't had an addiction. It's that simple, avoid things that can cause addiction.

 

Need money to have a chance to earn something permit many things? Say NO.

 

And as some said above, it is really a matter of kids burning money to go faster.

 

It is also REALLY a matter of self control, and ofc I know, my grandfather who smoked for 40 years successfuly stopped at 60yo. No needs anymore. Why? He realized he put its life in danger. And I admire him.

[Teratus.2859]

> @"Zok.4956" said:

> Of course can Anet be held liable for their game and the real money gambling it includes if there are laws. This gambling is intentional to make more money through this gambling. As an alternative Anet could just put the requested items in the gem store without the need for gambling for this items.

>

> And: GW2 is not a game only for adults.

>

> The BLCs are in its core gambling with real money. This fact is not changed because Anet gives some keys away through other ways (like dealers give new clients a fix).

>

 

It's intended as one method of adding revenue into a game that is pretty much free to play at this point.

 

Pretty much all free to play games need some alternative forms of monitization to exist, that's essential to their survival.

Anet could have easily made BLK only available via real world money and with far lower drop rates on rare goods and they still wouldn't be half as bad other games.

Thankfully they didn't or I would be on the other side of this debate myself lol.

 

Anyway we're not arguing on whether or not Lootboxes are gambling.. pretty much everyone agrees that they are a form of gambling.

What we're arguing about is whether or not Gw2's lootboxes are "predatory" and "unfair" that's a big difference.

 

Anet giving away or adding other methods of obtaining keys is absolutely vital in this discussion.

The whole gambling argument against BLK is that you have to buy them and they contain exclusive rewards.

Well so do Trick or Treat bags.. they contain exclusive rare rewards too, what if someone spends 100 dollars on gems, converst them to gold and blows the whole lot on ToT bags and doesn't get that one rare reward they wanted? does that make ToT bags now predatory gambling as well?

It's exactly the same thing by your argument.. "This fact is not changed because Anet gives some keys away through other ways" as you put it.

 

This can be applied to many RNG based loot containers in the game that can be sold on the trading post.. and even those that cant, it's all RNG with the potential to invest real world money for them or a great deal of time.

BLC's just require an extra step.. a key which you can buy directly off the store or just like any other RNG based container in the game.. be obtained through some kind of farming method or even by casually playing the game.

 

That difference matters.. and that's why I strongly reject any claims that BLC's in Gw2 are predatory.

So far i've seen no compelling arguments to prove otherwise.

[Teratus.2859]

> @"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.

[Yggranya.5201]

> @"Teratus.2859" said:

> 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.

 

At least we agree on this.

 

 

 

[Teratus.2859]

> @"Yggranya.5201" said:

> > @"Teratus.2859" said:

> > 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.

>

> At least we agree on this.

>

 

Haha Indeed, nice to finally see im not alone on that one XD

 

 

[Tekoneiric.6817]

> @"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.

 

GW2 is supported via the gem store. We have the option to earn in-game gold then convert to gems so in essences you can unlock them via game play if your willing to earn the gold. It's not as easy as it has in the past or even the recent past. I think the glut of materials from the south Drizzlewood meta has caused a major drop in mat prices which affects people who farm but there are still ways to make gold. It just takes a little longer.

 

I do think that RNG chests that can be purchased by real money need to be banned. I think they are a cheap way for the company to avoid coming out with more creative items on the gem store. People suggest and request items all the time that would make nice ways to make money. Not to mention they lock items away for long periods of time from the gem store. What they need to do is provide a backdoor method of purchasing gem store items not currently featured. One way to do that is via the chat codes. Post a chat code, then right click on it to purchase the item on the gem store. That wouldn't be a huge income boost but it would drive some.

 

One thing I'd like to see on the gem store is a gift box valued at 50 gems that would allow you to wrap up ascended gear (up to 5 items) and send it to someone on your friends list. The items would become account bound to the recipient when they open it. I think there would be enough sales of it to make worth their effort.

 

I for one would be willing to buy gems with money if they came up with a player housing map that we can add to like a guild hall. I've suggested a Dragon's Watch guild hall before as player housing where we could interact with the NPC members of Dragon's Watch, do upgrades and have a private farming zone in a wild area of the map.

 

I'd even pay some money if they would remove the feed bag, one sided arm thing and oversized necklace from the Carapace Jerkin skin. ;)

[Korval.3751]

More than likely Arenanet would eliminate BLCs and make the items available either in game with currency or karma purchases, legandary recipes, or Gem store purchases. In any case, it would no longer be an RNG system. You know precisely what you're getting.

[Mil.3562]

Loot boxes are worse gambling. Don't forget the drop chance can (and definitely has been manipulated from time to time) be adjusted. You have a better chance with real gambling.

[Khisanth.2948]

I don't expect much impact from such a law. Sure some business might fail as a result but successful businesses can quickly adapt to changing conditions while governments move at the speed of glaciers. Sooner or later someone is going to come up with a different business model of questionable ethics that earns just as much money.

 

[Mil.3562]

Loot boxes are worse than gambling. If you step into a casino, win or lose depends on pure luck. Loot boxes? The so called RNG rate can be manipulated, in stealth. The recent BLC uncommon item drop rates are waayyyy rarer than before. And ANet locked all the good stuff in RNG or eternal grinding. I missed the old GW2.

 

edited: typos

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @"Teratus.2859" said:

>

> Anyway we're not arguing on whether or not Lootboxes are gambling.. pretty much everyone agrees that they are a form of gambling.

 

I don't think there is a consensus.

 

> What we're arguing about is whether or not Gw2's lootboxes are "predatory" and "unfair" that's a big difference.

 

Good point.

 

On that subject, the _definition_ of predatory that is relevant is: "Seeking to exploit or oppress others." I hope we can agree to drop any consideration of oppression. Since "or" is used, exploit is a sufficient qualifier, anyway.

 

The relevant definition of exploit is: "make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)." Loot boxes are designed as they are to entice people to spend more money on a desired item than they would spend if the item were sold at a fixed price that the market would bear. I'd be hard pressed to argue against the idea that getting more money out of people than they would be willing to spend if they knew the price qualifies as "making full use of." I suppose one could say that other game companies have worse loot boxes, but there I think we'd be arguing degree of exploitation, not presence versus absence.

 

Further, there can be no dispute that ANet derives benefit whether the player is buying gems with cash, or buying gems bought by others with gold. In one case, they get cash directly, in the other, indirectly because a higher gems-->gold ratio is more of an enticement to splash cash on gold.

 

To me, though, the most telling consideration is that loot boxes are designed around psychological tricks. The first trick is the carrot. That is, the idea that you could get lucky and get a desirable virtual gewgaw for very little outlay. Odds are, you won't, but a lot of people are willing to take that chance because the initial outlay is small.

 

The second trick is the big whammy, though. That's the conscious design choice to make use of some peoples' tendency to believe the gambler's fallacy, sunk cost fallacy, or both. Arguably, those people are the ones being exploited. The people who only open chests with keys obtained via play, or the ones who have the self control to stop after a few are not being exploited. To be honest, neither group is sufficient for ANet to bother with loot boxes in the first place. The players who can't control themselves, though, they're the ones being "made full use of." While I don't think much of the decision to exploit human weakness for money, it's not like things like that haven't been going on until recently.

 

Fairness is another matter, one I won't discuss now.

[Zeivu.3615]

If it becomes law, they will have to stop. And nothing of moral fiber will be lost.

[Khisanth.2948]

> @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > @"Teratus.2859" said:

> >

> > Anyway we're not arguing on whether or not Lootboxes are gambling.. pretty much everyone agrees that they are a form of gambling.

>

> I don't think there is a consensus.

>

> > What we're arguing about is whether or not Gw2's lootboxes are "predatory" and "unfair" that's a big difference.

>

> Good point.

>

> On that subject, the _definition_ of predatory that is relevant is: "Seeking to exploit or oppress others." I hope we can agree to drop any consideration of oppression. Since "or" is used, exploit is a sufficient qualifier, anyway.

>

> The relevant definition of exploit is: "make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)." Loot boxes are designed as they are to entice people to spend more money on a desired item than they would spend if the item were sold at a fixed price that the market would bear. I'd be hard pressed to argue against the idea that getting more money out of people than they would be willing to spend if they knew the price qualifies as "making full use of." I suppose one could say that other game companies have worse loot boxes, but there I think we'd be arguing degree of exploitation, not presence versus absence.

>

> Further, there can be no dispute that ANet derives benefit whether the player is buying gems with cash, or buying gems bought by others with gold. In one case, they get cash directly, in the other, indirectly because a higher gems-->gold ratio is more of an enticement to splash cash on gold.

>

> To me, though, the most telling consideration is that loot boxes are designed around psychological tricks. The first trick is the carrot. That is, the idea that you could get lucky and get a desirable virtual gewgaw for very little outlay. Odds are, you won't, but a lot of people are willing to take that chance because the initial outlay is small.

>

> The second trick is the big whammy, though. That's the conscious design choice to make use of some peoples' tendency to believe the gambler's fallacy, sunk cost fallacy, or both. Arguably, those people are the ones being exploited. The people who only open chests with keys obtained via play, or the ones who have the self control to stop after a few are not being exploited. To be honest, neither group is sufficient for ANet to bother with loot boxes in the first place. The players who can't control themselves, though, they're the ones being "made full use of." While I don't think much of the decision to exploit human weakness for money, it's not like things like that haven't been going on until recently.

>

> Fairness is another matter, one I won't discuss now.

 

The first trick is having gems exist or any sort of intermediate currency.

[Super Hayes.6890]

> @"Zok.4956" said:

> > @"Teratus.2859" said:

> > Anet however is not one of those companies and I have defended Gw2's lootboxes on multiple occasions because of how easily accessable they are even to people who don't want to pay for them.

> > (getting 3 free keys a week with a 1-60 personal storyrun is easy, but if you're willing to farm you can get as many as you like since the level 40 and 60 keys are not timegate locked like the level 10 weekly key is.)

> >

> > Black Lion Chests imo are one of the best examples of Lootboxes done right! and I do not want to see Anet and Gw2 have to suffer due to what I would describe as an authoritarian-esque law that shouldn't even exist just because there are some bad companies out there (most on the other side of the planet) that abuse their consumers.

> >

> > When innocents are punished because of the crimes of others purely on the basis that they share traits.. (in this case compaines that use a the same monetization concept in different ways that have a distinct fair and abuse ratio to seperate them)

>

> The high value items in Black Lion Chests are not guaranteed but have a very low random drop rate.

> Keys are bought with gems, gems are bought with real money. This is buying lootboxes with real money and Anet is not innocent.

>

> That fact is not changed because you can get a few free keys with playing the story or that you can get some keys with RNG or that rich players can convert their gold to gems.

>

> My guess is: Most BLCs are opened with keys that were bought with gems that were bought with real money.

>

> To be innocent Anet has to show proof (they have the internal numbers) that buying keys (with gems) with real money does not happen very often.

>

>

 

And yet they are innocent because an alternative to spending real money exists. Go walk into a casino and ask them to let you gamble with something besides money and let them know you expect to win the same jackpots as customers that spend real money. Let me know how that goes.

[Tukaram.8256]

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?

[Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582]

> @"Super Hayes.6890" said:

> > @"Zok.4956" said:

> > > @"Teratus.2859" said:

> > > Anet however is not one of those companies and I have defended Gw2's lootboxes on multiple occasions because of how easily accessable they are even to people who don't want to pay for them.

> > > (getting 3 free keys a week with a 1-60 personal storyrun is easy, but if you're willing to farm you can get as many as you like since the level 40 and 60 keys are not timegate locked like the level 10 weekly key is.)

> > >

> > > Black Lion Chests imo are one of the best examples of Lootboxes done right! and I do not want to see Anet and Gw2 have to suffer due to what I would describe as an authoritarian-esque law that shouldn't even exist just because there are some bad companies out there (most on the other side of the planet) that abuse their consumers.

> > >

> > > When innocents are punished because of the crimes of others purely on the basis that they share traits.. (in this case compaines that use a the same monetization concept in different ways that have a distinct fair and abuse ratio to seperate them)

> >

> > The high value items in Black Lion Chests are not guaranteed but have a very low random drop rate.

> > Keys are bought with gems, gems are bought with real money. This is buying lootboxes with real money and Anet is not innocent.

> >

> > That fact is not changed because you can get a few free keys with playing the story or that you can get some keys with RNG or that rich players can convert their gold to gems.

> >

> > My guess is: Most BLCs are opened with keys that were bought with gems that were bought with real money.

> >

> > To be innocent Anet has to show proof (they have the internal numbers) that buying keys (with gems) with real money does not happen very often.

> >

> >

>

> And yet they are innocent because an alternative to spending real money exists. Go walk into a casino and ask them to let you gamble with something besides money and let them know you expect to win the same jackpots as customers that spend real money. Let me know how that goes.

 

Innocence is a lack of wrong doing, but the reasoning behind RNG loot boxes is not of benefit to players, it can ONLY cause harm long term.

 

Marketers know they can make a lot of money by tying these items to RNG and purchase of keys. This is fact. Marketers employ sordid tactics to get people to experience certain emotions and feelings in order to create the need to obtain items or spend more to get them when RNG is not on their side and it rarely is. That's why the gem store doesn't have a full inventory, so when "Items Returning!" pops up, people get FOMO and purchase asap.

 

Marketers essentially manipulate people into spending that, if people considered all the relevant factors, they wouldn't spend.

 

In both cases, you are spending time. Money is just the accepted medium of exchange.

[Mokk.2397]

Many of the items in the Black lion chests can be sold on the trading post. Now say people could pick and choose the items they want .Some of those people would buy up as many as they could there by flooding the TP market there by reducing the value of said items. The Gem store would crash over night because there would be no need for people to buy Gems when the items are in the TP at a deflated price . By making things Random it keeps the market relatively stable . There is NO tactic to make people pull out a credit card since Gems can be purchased with in game gold. Its's about market stability within the game .

Nobody is forcing you to buy anything . If you don't like the concept then don't buy keys.

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> In US, you mean. In my country both mechanics have been already recognized for what they are - an attempt to circumvent the spirit of the law, and so are actually covered by the current legislation and the only thing that prevents lootboxes from actually being treated as gambling is that they still sort of "fly under radar".

>

> It's not like the people making the laws are completely dumb, you know. Even if there is a lot of lobbying being done to leave those loopholes, those are still loopholes, and everyone that is even tangentially interested in the issue _knows_ that they are loopholes. Eventually they _will_ get fixed. The only question is how long will it take.

 

Then you have a level of confidence and faith in governing bodies that I cannot share.

[battledrone.8315]

> @"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

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> Then you have a level of confidence and faith in governing bodies that I cannot share.

I never said that i believe they won't get something else wrong - in fact, the stronger opposition to the idea of regulating lootboxes, and the less likely the business is to self-regulate to satisfactory degree, the more likely that the future government restrictions will be an overkill. But, generally, once government truly decides to regulate something, then you won't be able to get away with very obvious and easily visible loopholes. Because those make the government look stupid, and the one thing that no government wants is to look stupid and ineffective.

 

Where lot of money is involved, business is often allowed to get away with a lot of stuff, but it always needs to at least give an _appearance_ of the government controlling things. You can only get away with acting "look, we keep saying our self-regulations are fine, but we're really just laughing in your face, and everyone around can see that" if the government is not paying too much attention to you. Once something brings the sticking-out nail into a limelight, someone is going eventually to pull out a hammer and start hammering, even if they don't really care about the issue itself. And by that point they won;t likely care about how many fingers they will smash as a collateral.

 

[Khisanth.2948]

> @"Mokk.2397" said:

> Many of the items in the Black lion chests can be sold on the trading post. Now say people could pick and choose the items they want .Some of those people would buy up as many as they could there by flooding the TP market there by reducing the value of said items. The Gem store would crash over night because there would be no need for people to buy Gems when the items are in the TP at a deflated price . By making things Random it keeps the market relatively stable .

 

This is already happening anyway. It's the reason for the cheap gemstore dyes and black lion weapon skins

 

> There is NO tactic to make people pull out a credit card since Gems can be purchased with in game gold.

 

Except as people buy more and more gems with gold the cost will go up unless there are enough people making trades in the other direction.

[HardRider.2980]

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> Anet will sidestep the laws through two technicalities.

>

> (1): The Gold to Gem conversion means that keys can be bought and used solely through in-game effort. This doesn't make chests gambling any more than anything else in the game.

> (2): When you open a chest, you're getting a statuette with some additional bonus items. This constitutes, at the minimum, a guaranteed purchase. It doesn't count as gambling because of this.

 

Actually the way they market and sell the loot boxes are actually gambling. As they always say x items now in the box.. go get em if you're lucky.

Just because you get something as a basic doesn't mean it's not gambling compared to how to market it

[Kantra.6285]

IMO, lootboxes = gambling. You toss real money, and hope for a chance of getting something considered valuable. They share the same basic mechanic.

Black lion chest don't do exception, even if you can open them by grinding gold in game. The only fact the option to buy keys with money exist make it enter the category.

For people saying they are fine with it and they can't see a problem here, yes you can say that. But i'll take an extreme example to make you think a little further:

 

-I don't take drugs, and I wont. But it won't change the nature of drugs: it create addictive behaviours, and people will be better if it wasn't available in their neighborhood (or not available at all). Same with lootboxes: You don't pay for them, I don't pay for them, but people will be better if it didn't exist. It is not as extreme as drugs, but it encourage addictive behaviours. You have to keep in mind there are people all around the world who can't see the dangers in addiction (underage people and young adults mainly), and can't make a difference between addictive behaviours and healthy ones until they experience the drawbacks themselves.

 

The best option should be to sell straight to the player, like LoL did. but game editors are so greedy nowadays (they want money and I don't blame them, but there should be more ethical ways to do it), I think change won't happen before a long time (it's like that since at least a decade, so...).