Belgium says loot boxes are gambling, wants them banned in Europe

[Ohoni.6057]

> @Shirlias.8104 said:

>As many said, the fact that players are able to convert Golds into Gems is mostly because of those who buy gems with cash, and i am pretty sure that most of the income were because BLC, with its tickets.

 

>I doubt that without RNG ANET could have been able to make the same profit ( many would have been able to convert every month X into gems and buy without cash ).

 

Then they have a bad business model, because any business that cannot sustain itself without gambling is a business you don't want to be involved with. If they just took all the items out of the gem store and posted them at a fair price, then people would buy them. This is already somewhat the case with most of the items in BLCs, like for example the Permanent Hair Stylist Contract can be bought on the TP for 2700-3550 gold. That equates to 13,000 gems, or roughly the cost of buying out the mount licenses. Why don't they just put it on the store for that? Or better yet, put it at a lower price, so that everyone else could buy it.

 

 

[Shirlias.8104]

> @Ohoni.6057 said:

> > @Shirlias.8104 said:

> >As many said, the fact that players are able to convert Golds into Gems is mostly because of those who buy gems with cash, and i am pretty sure that most of the income were because BLC, with its tickets.

>

> >I doubt that without RNG ANET could have been able to make the same profit ( many would have been able to convert every month X into gems and buy without cash ).

>

> Then they have a bad business model, because any business that cannot sustain itself without gambling is a business you don't want to be involved with. If they just took all the items out of the gem store and posted them at a fair price, then people would buy them. This is already somewhat the case with most of the items in BLCs, like for example the Permanent Hair Stylist Contract can be bought on the TP for 2700-3550 gold. That equates to 13,000 gems, or roughly the cost of buying out the mount licenses. Why don't they just put it on the store for that? Or better yet, put it at a lower price, so that everyone else could buy it.

>

>

 

Because 13000 gems are not 3500g due to taxes.

 

> https://gw2efficiency.com/currencies/gems?filter.conversion_type=gemsToGold_gems&filter.conversion_input=13000

 

it would be more 20k gems for 3500g

 

> https://gw2efficiency.com/currencies/gems?filter.conversion_type=gemsToGold_gems&filter.conversion_input=20000

 

And also is something related to BLC, which allows those who like gamble to trade their jackpot for golds.

And this part is normal.

You can both buy it from tp, or try to gamble with BLC.

 

Here we have instead 2 problems

 

> **ACCOUNT BOUND EXCLUSIVE LOOT FROM BLC**

 

Like Hydra staff, Balthazar Pijamas and glider skins. Those items can't be traded in the first place ( maybe after months through an item like [black Lion Exclusive Chest](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Black_Lion_Exclusives_Chest "Black Lion Exclusive Chest"). Here we do have an alternative indeed but it sucks because you have to wait because at firt it would be an exclusive for those who purchased chests ).

 

> **RNG COLLECTION, LIKE THE MOUNTS COLLECTION**

 

It is true that you can't have duplicate skins, but even so ( though is way better thant BLC, currently ) it's a scam.

I can accept the RNG that way but they should allow players to buy mounts outside that system in order to have an alternative to RNG.

[FrizzFreston.5290]

I have to say though, I think since you only can buy gems and nothing directly as well as gem into gold conversion, doesnt that either make any kind of lootbag in the TP or other gold obtainable items with RNG loot suspect. Or because you buy gems rather than lootboxes directly make it impossible to quantify how much of it is gambling.

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @FrizzFreston.5290 said:

> I have to say though, I think since you only can buy gems and nothing directly as well as gem into gold conversion, doesnt that either make any kind of lootbag in the TP or other gold obtainable items with RNG loot suspect. Or because you buy gems rather than lootboxes directly make it impossible to quantify how much of it is gambling.

 

The reason why certain mechanics are implemented is also important. Christmas lottery is for charity but it's also a type of gambling. Anet could have implemented direct purchase for mounts but decided to go with RNG, because of greed. EA could make progression system reasonable in BF2 but they decided to gate it heavily to push real money purchases, because of greed.

[FrizzFreston.5290]

> @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > @FrizzFreston.5290 said:

> > I have to say though, I think since you only can buy gems and nothing directly as well as gem into gold conversion, doesnt that either make any kind of lootbag in the TP or other gold obtainable items with RNG loot suspect. Or because you buy gems rather than lootboxes directly make it impossible to quantify how much of it is gambling.

>

> The reason why certain mechanics are implemented is also important. Christmas lottery is for charity but it's also a type of gambling. Anet could have implemented direct purchase for mounts but decided to go with RNG, because of greed. EA could make progression system reasonable in BF2 but they decided to gate it heavily to push real money purchases, because of greed.

 

Intention means very little in law. First of all, Christmas lottery is also 18+. Plus if you go by your word its greed and if you go by ArenaNets word they wanted to not make them very expensive and made the cost lower by applying RNG to a mix of low and high priced mounts. You could agree with both.

 

So while you might feel right by saying its greed, theres no law prohibiting any game company to put "super high prices" on their virtual items. Also greed, but totally allowed.

 

I was more concerned how extensive such law would go in RNG systems already in the game that are only very indirectly tied to real money purchases.

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @FrizzFreston.5290 said:

> > @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > > @FrizzFreston.5290 said:

> > > I have to say though, I think since you only can buy gems and nothing directly as well as gem into gold conversion, doesnt that either make any kind of lootbag in the TP or other gold obtainable items with RNG loot suspect. Or because you buy gems rather than lootboxes directly make it impossible to quantify how much of it is gambling.

> >

> > The reason why certain mechanics are implemented is also important. Christmas lottery is for charity but it's also a type of gambling. Anet could have implemented direct purchase for mounts but decided to go with RNG, because of greed. EA could make progression system reasonable in BF2 but they decided to gate it heavily to push real money purchases, because of greed.

>

> Intention means very little in law. First of all, Christmas lottery is also 18+. Plus if you go by your word its greed and if you go by ArenaNets word they wanted to not make them very expensive and made the cost lower by applying RNG to a mix of low and high priced mounts. You could agree with both.

>

> So while you might feel right by saying its greed, theres no law prohibiting any game company to put "super high prices" on their virtual items. Also greed, but totally allowed.

>

> I was more concerned how extensive such law would go in RNG systems already in the game that are only very indirectly tied to real money purchases.

 

Lootbox mechanic is made directly to make people pay more for things. Anet may make ridiculous prices in gemstore but nobody will pay overpriced skins. Most things in gemstore are already overpriced when you translate gem value to money. They know that if they bait people to play lootbox roullette, they will make more money. This is malicious practice.

[Nikal.4921]

> @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > @Shirlias.8104 said:

> > > @"Grey Moon.6531" said:

> > > I can't believe there are people actually defending loot boxes... Or maybe they are just trying to defend ANet and don't care for what reason?

> > > When other game companies are putting the boot in and using the fact that their games don't have loot boxes in them as a selling point should give an idea of what loot boxes actually are!

> >

> > If it's something which gives advantages i am up to this.

> > It it's something fashion related ( not Qol related ) i see no problem.

> >

> > And we are talking about a mmo with

> >

> > * core f2p game

> > * no subscription

> > * 30$ expansion pack every 2 years

> > * possibility to convert game currency into shop currency

> > * Qol items not on lootboxes.

> >

> > Players should probably check other mmos with shop and compare them to gw2.

>

> Anet can earn money without gambling.

Lootboxes are a _lazy_ way to make money. These gaming companies might find themselves having to work to come up with better quality content, better advertising, and better, fairer store practices in order to retain players and attract new ones. It's about time, too. Games have been sliding further and further into this lazy practice, often accompanied by less or lower quality content, at the cost of their customers, but when they all do it, where are people who want to play video games to turn? It's time to end predatory monetization.

[Ashen.2907]

> @Nemmar.8491 said:

> > @Feanor.2358 said:

> > > @apharma.3741 said:

> > > > @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > > > I'm happy this stuff is going to be revied and hopefully regualted. Gaming became gambling in last 2 decades. It was a slow process to make people feel it's okay to pay money and not get things they wanted. Games don't need to use malicious practices, like recent gw2 mount boxes, to earn money. Those companies who are going to adapt and treat their customers fair will stay on market. Rest of them may bankrupt.

> > >

> > > The worst part about all this ANet stuff is that many players would happily through money at ANet for non RNG gemstore skins. Even if you convert gold to gems to buy it someone payed money for those gems.

> >

> > We'll see how happy the players are when the prices rise. Which they will.

>

> Very happy.

>

> Lootbox gambling is an unfixed amount of money added to your purchase. An increase in price is a fixed one. You can decide whether you want the product or not without being lured in with false promises.

 

Agreed, but keepp in mind that price increases could (very likely, IMO, if this becomes legislation) affect not just items currently in rng boxes, but the entire gemstore.

[Neural.1824]

Lootboxes, online casinos, and digital gambling in general are just fine... for adults.

[Zeivu.3615]

Just how are they going to be able to enforce it? Gw2 is a worldwide game stationed in the USA. Are they going to make a separate servers that are isolated from the rest of the gaming world like China? Are they going to have to ban access to the gem store if you are using a specific IP (God, help you if you get a false positive)? Are they going to have to check your age when you sign up (Like underage children won't lie to access the content. Children these days are far more resourceful in the digital age.) The international laws will just muddy everything too.

 

The only logical thing I can think of is for the second-hand distributors in Belgium to card their patrons. This currently isn't an American issue right now. (Though, further defined laws would at least get everyone to shut up)

 

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @Zeivu.3615 said:

> Just how are they going to be able to enforce it? Gw2 is a worldwide game stationed in the USA. Are they going to make a separate servers that are isolated from the rest of the gaming world like China? Are they going to have to ban access to the gem store if you are using a specific IP (God, help you if you get a false positive)? Are they going to have to check your age when you sign up (Like underage children won't lie to access the content)? The international laws will just muddy everything too.

 

If anet wants gw2 to operate in EU region after gambling restrictions go live, they have to make changes or leave the market.

[Zeivu.3615]

> @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > Just how are they going to be able to enforce it? Gw2 is a worldwide game stationed in the USA. Are they going to make a separate servers that are isolated from the rest of the gaming world like China? Are they going to have to ban access to the gem store if you are using a specific IP (God, help you if you get a false positive)? Are they going to have to check your age when you sign up (Like underage children won't lie to access the content)? The international laws will just muddy everything too.

>

> If anet wants gw2 to operate in EU region after gambling restrictions go live, they have to make changes or leave the market.

 

Repeat: Just how are they going to do that?

[Tomahawk.7361]

> @Ohoni.6057 said:

> > @goldencenser.7046 said:

> > Guild wars loot box I see is no different then a pack of sports cards, Pokémon, or any of those cards hidden behind a foil wrapper you can’t see through and are $3+ dollars, just hoping you get a good card or a player you want or need to complete your set and kids get to buy them too. So according some of you people that is gambleing and needs a 18+ to purchase or get lottery license. Lol that sounds kitten, you don’t want to take a chance then don’t, no one is forcing you to purchase these.

>

> It is similar, and yeah, I'm opposed to those game too. I think they are pretty predatory in nature. Still, there are some differences. 1. with those games, those *are* the game/product. If that's not a thing you want, then you just don't participate at all. The Mount Licenses are *inside* GW2, so it's fully possibly to *like* GW2 but hate this one element of the game, and I think it's fair to be critical of it on those grounds. 2. With CCGs and that sort of thing, there is at least an aftermarket. Players who do not want to engage in RNG can buy the pieces they want directly from other players. If all you want is a Charizard or whatever, you can buy one directly, and yeah, it might be a bit pricey, but it'll be less than buying an entire case (and still maybe not getting one).

>

> Ultimately though, if those games also had to shift business models, I wouldn't shed a single tear. Either way, keep those practices out of other games.

>

> > @Tomahawk.7361 said:

> > 'Gambling: A conscious, deliberate effort to stake valuables, usually but not always currency, on how some event happens to turn out'

> >

> > 'Problem gambling (aka compulsive gambling): A progressive disorder characterized by a continuous or periodic loss of control over gambling; a preoccupation with gambling and with obtaining money with which to gamble; irrational thinking; and a continuation of the behavior despite adverse consequences'

> >

> > Found those definitions from a reliable peer-evaluated study. As much as I **hate** paid RNG loot boxes there are some loopholes that might harm the opportunity to end them. Sometimes you can transfer earnable in-game currency to get these boxes (now depending how hard that becomes might make a difference as I mention later). The other being that something like the mounts was a closed system. You could not continue to spend money on RNG boxes like that as there is a finite amount (30 skins for the mounts I think?), leaving you little time to form a 'gambling addiction,' unless of course you start including the black lion chests.

>

> To point 1. so what? Even if you're converting gold to gems, ANet has established that gems have real economic value, and therefore gold has real economic value. At the current exchange rate one Tyrian gold is worth seven US cents, and that is an officially supported value according to the company. If you spend 400 gems, you are spending $5 USD. Of you spend 400 gems bought using gold, it would cost 109.56 gold, or $7.67. That is an officially supported exchange rate. In game currency has official real world value, even if you are not legally allowed to *return* that value back into USD.

>

> As to point 2. for some people, $120 is still way too much, especially if you only intended to spend $5, $10, etc. Personally, I am not a problem gambler, and have not participated in this system, but if I could buy the skins individually, I would only want maybe 6-8 of them, tops. That would add up to $30-40. If the RNG system meant that I didn't get those skins that I wanted within $40 spent (and the odds are *massively* stacked against that happening), and then I continued spending anyway, then that would be problematic gambling, even if it did have a finite conclusion. What if I were in a situation where I were living paycheck to paycheck, and spending $40 was something I could handle, but spending $100 would leave me $20 short on food or rent for the week. If I were prone to problem gambling, I might not be able to stop myself after 8 pulls, spend that money I needed, and have to make hard life choices. Obviously there is an element of personal responsibility at play there, but still, Anet should not be encouraging such inherently corrupt offerings.

>

> > @Yamazuki.6073 said:

> > Gambling has no hard cap, you can lose infinitely, and the loot boxes in question follow these rules.

>

> Gambling *can* have no hard cap, but a lack of a hard cap does not prevent something being gambling.

>

> >There's also the fact that the main concern regarding EA's system is the pay to win element. Which is also why mobile games are referenced, these games are all designed in ways that FORCE you to spend the 1$ here the 1$ there.

>

> That's a subjective distinction. Objectively there's no difference between cosmetics and pay to win, it all just comes down to whether it matters *to you* whether your character performs better or looks better doing it. Remember that this entire Battlefront situation kicked off with players upset that Darth Vader took too long to grind out without loot boxes. Darth Vader was intended to be no more powerful than the free Darth Maul, therefore, what people were upset about was a *cosmetic* distinction. *That* is what got the most downvotes in Reddit history, not "pay to win."

>

>

 

> @Nemmar.8491 said:

> > @Tomahawk.7361 said:

> > 'Gambling: A conscious, deliberate effort to stake valuables, usually but not always currency, on how some event happens to turn out'

> >

> > 'Problem gambling (aka compulsive gambling): A progressive disorder characterized by a continuous or periodic loss of control over gambling; a preoccupation with gambling and with obtaining money with which to gamble; irrational thinking; and a continuation of the behavior despite adverse consequences'

> >

> > Found those definitions from a reliable peer-evaluated study. As much as I **hate** paid RNG loot boxes there are some loopholes that might harm the opportunity to end them. Sometimes you can transfer earnable in-game currency to get these boxes (now depending how hard that becomes might make a difference as I mention later). The other being that something like the mounts was a closed system. You could not continue to spend money on RNG boxes like that as there is a finite amount (30 skins for the mounts I think?), leaving you little time to form a 'gambling addiction,' unless of course you start including the black lion chests. The real grey area for me is that fine-studied insidious line of the amount of time someone would want to put into earning something versus the amount of time being long enough to sway people to spend money for convenience. Now I think that falls in the realm of triggering spending addictions, which is just as atrocious imo, but that cannot be attacked from the gambling perspective.

> >

> > I'm slightly relieved Anet stated they will not offer RNG sales like that in the future (talk being cheap however, but I'll take them at their word for now). I won't be spending real money for their RNG mounts, but have gotten 2 via gold earning. As politicians comb through these things, I think the alternative currencies and how fairly they are implemented will need to be discussed.

>

> Remind me, what happens in this game when you buy gems with gold.

> I'm pretty sure i get an e-mail with a transaction.

>

> What people don't get is that having lootboxes is fine aslong as they aren't purchasable with real life money. And no, a fake currency you can buy with money is not a workaround.

>

> If its cosmetics or not, it doesn't matter.

> If you have the option of getting all the unlocks like the mount licenses in this game, it doesn't matter.

>

> If you are paying real life money for an unpredictable rewards, it's gambling and as such must be subject to it's regulation. Especially if you aren't getting a physical good from the purchase.

>

> And for the record, yes, the chests are more gambling than the licenses in the case of GW2. But they are both gambling. You just have an option to circumvent the gambling if you pay enough for the licenses. But nothing is stopping anet from adding even more skins as time goes on. for example.

 

Man oh man oh man. Re-read. I’m not disagreeing with you. These are some of the hurdles and conversation points we will have to argue, even from a litigious standpoint, if we wish to win this. You totally misunderstand where I’m coming from. I agree with your points. By the first definition it is ALL gambling imo, but these are the arguments people will use against us.

 

Also the reason I bring up addiction is it is one of the reasons gambling laws exist. You may need to prove that addiction is occurring at the legal level.

[Danikat.8537]

> @Bloodstealer.5978 said:

> > @Ragnarox.9601 said:

> > Imagine that you go into shop and want to buy a new processor, so you buy 5 boxes and in that box might be new Intel processor that you want, and you open those boxes and you get 1 stuffed plastic animal.

> >

> > Imagine that you go to another shop buying food, so you get 10 boxes of food and when you open them you get some random stuff like electric bulb, empty cd, spoon,...

> >

> > Its still gambling, you might get good stuff and you might end up having nothing.

> >

> > Praise for Belgium.

>

> Bad analogy is just bad.. why would you go into a shop to buy boxes of mystery food.. you wouldn't

> Why would you go into a PC shop and buy a mystery processor... that's right, you wouldn't

> Your trying to compare apples and soap imo.

>

> Do you know of any shops that you can walk in and use a worthless digital currency in order to purchase that food or processor... hmm I think not.

>

> The closest analogy to the GW2 loot boss system is football cards, pokemon etc.. they provide the same rng hook but cost actual money for the chance of getting the super shiny.

> The one thing that they do provide that GW2 doesn't is the ability to sell or trade.. maybe this could help appease the situation in game, but I can imagine the prices being pretty unattractive for many.

 

That's exactly what Anet have done the majority of the time. Until the beginning of this year there was nothing in Black Lion Chests which could not be obtained elsewhere - either purchased directly on the gem store or by buying it from another player who got it from a chest. And a lot of people (including me) did count that as one of the things that made them better than most other games RNG boxes because it meant if you didn't want to gamble you didn't have to and if you got a 'good' drop you didn't like you could 'exchange it' for a lot of gold by selling it to another player, so everyone ended up (reasonably) happy.

 

It still wasn't a perfect system though because if you did choose to gamble you could end up stuck with an account bound item you didn't want (which is arguably less annoying than being unable to get something you do want, but still annoying). For most of the game's life those were boosters - every chest was guaranteed to drop 1 booster and people were almost always asking for them to be removed from the drop table because anyone who opened chests regularly got far more than they wanted.

 

Then earlier this year they changed the chests so the booster was replaced with a guaranteed 'seasonal' item which they seem to be trying to make useful and/or tradable, but they also started adding a small number of account bound items which cannot be found anywhere else. This is somewhat better for people who open chests because you're less likely to be stuck with things you don't want (although more annoying when you are because I'm sure they'd be worth a lot) but a lot worse for people who don't open chests. Which is probably exactly their intention.

 

They have also periodically brought out other RNG boxes, like the [Wintersday Mystery Box](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Wintersday_Mystery_Box "Wintersday Mystery Box") and the [Kite Fortune](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Kite_Fortune "Kite Fortune") which did contain account bound items which could not be found elsewhere, but in general (after the first couple of attempts, which were badly received) they've tried to find ways to make them acceptable to players, which varying success.

 

I suspect the same is true of other games. No developer wants to alienate their players, even if that's only because people who get angry and quit your game aren't likely to spend money on it. RNG boxes, loot crates, whatever you want to call them are definitely not a black & white issue. There's a lot of variables which can make them better or worse. But that doesn't mean the 'less bad' ones can't be made even better, or that anyone has to accept a format they're not happy with just because there's something even worse out there.

[Teratus.2859]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> > @Bloodstealer.5978 said:

> > Aggressive RNG is bad for the game.. yes we all know what's happened in recent times with the likes of Battlefront2 so trying to make the RNG system a little faire but still maintaining a revenue stream seems a smart move to me.. what's the alternative - subscription. So maybe they do away with loot boxes and introduce subscription then lets see the forums light up.

>

> Both systems were wrong.

>

> Is no one else going to bring up that no Glider skin cost more than 1000 gems. Meanwhile mounts are being squeezed harder than your average junkie looking for his next quick fix.

>

> Both practices are disturbing and both should be looked down on.

 

Exactly my fear.. cheap mount skins removed and replaced with expensive ones because people were salty about the RNG element.

Sorry but when it comes right down to it.. I'll take cheap skins with RNG every time over the ridiculous presumption that a singular mount skin is worth the price of an expansion pack.

 

To quote on Bloodstealer too.. if Anet added a monthly sub to this game.. I don't care how much I love this game nor how much money and time i've invested into it.. if they added a monthly sub I would quit playing the day they announced it.

But I know they wouldn't do that.. Anet are well aware that no sub fees was a huge selling point for the Guildwars franchise.. and chances are a huge number of the Gw2 community would leave the game if they added them.

 

[Teratus.2859]

> @"Ayumi Spender.1082" said:

> At least I could keep that toy forever.

> I'm pretty sure I can't keep that mount skin forever. There IS things called server closure you know.

 

You're looking way too far into the future.. Guildwars 1 is still up and running despite being 12 years old.. hardly a factor you should be seriously considering now.. why bother even buying the expansions otherwise..

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > > Just how are they going to be able to enforce it? Gw2 is a worldwide game stationed in the USA. Are they going to make a separate servers that are isolated from the rest of the gaming world like China? Are they going to have to ban access to the gem store if you are using a specific IP (God, help you if you get a false positive)? Are they going to have to check your age when you sign up (Like underage children won't lie to access the content)? The international laws will just muddy everything too.

> >

> > If anet wants gw2 to operate in EU region after gambling restrictions go live, they have to make changes or leave the market.

>

> Repeat: Just how are they going to do that?

 

not my problem, nobody pays me to find solutions

[Teratus.2859]

> @spellchekc.5409 said:

> https://powerup-gaming.com/2017/11/22/victorian-gambling-authority-loot-boxes-gambling/

>

> This is turning into a world wide effort to help encourage a healthier relationship between businesses and customers

 

Considering the way some companies take advantage and straight up prey on their customers I can't be against it tbh..

I have to admit that I am enjoying the smugness knowing that EA is the reason this has become a big deal.. I despise that company more than any other.

[xDudisx.5914]

I would like to be informed what are the % chances of each drop. That said, I think it is almost always a bad mistake to increase government power over individuals and markets. Anet is not forcing anyone to buy their RNG boxes. If you want to buy you should be allowed to. If you dont want to buy, just do not buy.

[Zeivu.3615]

> @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > > @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > > > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > > > Just how are they going to be able to enforce it? Gw2 is a worldwide game stationed in the USA. Are they going to make a separate servers that are isolated from the rest of the gaming world like China? Are they going to have to ban access to the gem store if you are using a specific IP (God, help you if you get a false positive)? Are they going to have to check your age when you sign up (Like underage children won't lie to access the content)? The international laws will just muddy everything too.

> > >

> > > If anet wants gw2 to operate in EU region after gambling restrictions go live, they have to make changes or leave the market.

> >

> > Repeat: Just how are they going to do that?

>

> not my problem, nobody pays me to find solutions

 

Why bother even quoting me then if you are neither going to offer a solution or at least read anything that I type? What are you really trying to accomplish?

[Grey Moon.6531]

I wish people would stop trying to conflate (paid for) loot boxes with the gem store (aka "micro" transactions). Whilst you might use "micro" transactions to buy gacha boxes, they are 2 different things. I much prefer the Japanese name for them as once you start buying them, they _gacha_ money!!!!

[Zeivu.3615]

> @xDudisx.5914 said:

> I would like to be informed what are the % chances of each drop. That said, I think it is almost always a bad mistake to increase government power over individuals and markets. Anet is not forcing anyone to buy their RNG boxes. If you want to buy you should be allowed to. If you dont want to buy, just do not buy.

 

 

And the items don't even have any advantage over anything in game. It's purely cosmetic. I don't really think these people understand the rammifications of getting a gov't involved with their games. If you don't have the willpower to say 'No' and not buy anything entirely optional, how will you stand up to the gov't when they ruin everything you love in your games in an attempt to enforce those laws? There are a lot of technical and programming limitations that only get worse on a global scale. Just ban the game from sale in Belgium or require an ID to make the purchase in Belgium. That is the only reasonable thing you can do without fucking the rest of the world over. (Though I am sure people in Belgium will still find away to do it anyway.)

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > > > @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > > > > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > > > > Just how are they going to be able to enforce it? Gw2 is a worldwide game stationed in the USA. Are they going to make a separate servers that are isolated from the rest of the gaming world like China? Are they going to have to ban access to the gem store if you are using a specific IP (God, help you if you get a false positive)? Are they going to have to check your age when you sign up (Like underage children won't lie to access the content)? The international laws will just muddy everything too.

> > > >

> > > > If anet wants gw2 to operate in EU region after gambling restrictions go live, they have to make changes or leave the market.

> > >

> > > Repeat: Just how are they going to do that?

> >

> > not my problem, nobody pays me to find solutions

>

> Why bother even quoting me then if you are neither going to offer a solution or at least read anything that I type? What are you really trying to accomplish?

 

Not my job to offer anet solution. People are being paid for creating legal solutions in such cases so anet should pay these people, not use their players. If anet didn't go so low to use lootbox mechanics to push revenue from gemstore, they wouldn't be worried now. Easy.

[Zeivu.3615]

> @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > > @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > > > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > > > > @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > > > > > @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > > > > > Just how are they going to be able to enforce it? Gw2 is a worldwide game stationed in the USA. Are they going to make a separate servers that are isolated from the rest of the gaming world like China? Are they going to have to ban access to the gem store if you are using a specific IP (God, help you if you get a false positive)? Are they going to have to check your age when you sign up (Like underage children won't lie to access the content)? The international laws will just muddy everything too.

> > > > >

> > > > > If anet wants gw2 to operate in EU region after gambling restrictions go live, they have to make changes or leave the market.

> > > >

> > > > Repeat: Just how are they going to do that?

> > >

> > > not my problem, nobody pays me to find solutions

> >

> > Why bother even quoting me then if you are neither going to offer a solution or at least read anything that I type? What are you really trying to accomplish?

>

> Not my job to offer anet solution. People are being paid for creating legal solutions in such cases so anet should pay these people, not use their players. If anet didn't go so low to use lootbox mechanics to push revenue from gemstore, they wouldn't be worried now. Easy.

 

Repeat: Why bother even quoting me then if you are neither going to offer a solution or at least read anything that I type? What are you really trying to accomplish?

 

I think you just want to see yourself type. Am I wrong?

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @Zeivu.3615 said:

> > @xDudisx.5914 said:

> > I would like to be informed what are the % chances of each drop. That said, I think it is almost always a bad mistake to increase government power over individuals and markets. Anet is not forcing anyone to buy their RNG boxes. If you want to buy you should be allowed to. If you dont want to buy, just do not buy.

>

>

> And the items don't even have any advantage over anything in game. It's purely cosmetic. I don't really think these people understand the rammifications of getting a gov't involved with their games. If you don't have the willpower to say 'No' and not buy anything entirely optional, how will you stand up to the gov't when they ruin everything you love in your games in an attempt to enforce those laws? There are a lot of technical and programming limitations that only get worse on a global scale. Just ban the game from sale in Belgium or require an ID to make the purchase in Belgium. That is the only reasonable thing you can do without kitten the rest of the world over. (Though I am sure people in Belgium will still find away to do it anyway.)

 

From bussiness point of view this is EU market, not belgium market. For years corporations are using holes in law exploiting their customers with shady practices. Since the lootbox case seems impossible to be regulated by market itself, because of corporates unwilling to respect their customers, now they gonna deal with regulators. If the result will be their bankrupcy, it means they don't deserve being a player on free market.