GrubySzymek.1362 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Grok Krog.9581" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > Thank you for sharing your opinion. You are wrong. However, Anet made a big step with BL statuettes. Most likely a preparation or incoming regulations for gambling in video games which is exploitation of children. With the statuettes Anet can now say that even with 100% bad rng you will get what you want. Eventually. > > > > Still hate gaming industry as a whole, anet included, for exploiting children with gambling. > > It's not technically gambling, as you're always guaranteed a prize. It may not be what you want, but it might what someone else really wanted. I think it can only be considered gambling if it's a chance to win something but not guaranteed to win something It's a trick gaming industry uses to avoid gambling regulations. "You got something. So what it's trash". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > > > The [swrve Survey](https://www.swrve.com/company/press/swrve-finds-015-of-mobile-gamers-contribute-50-of-all-in-game-revenue "https://swrve.com/company/press/swrve-finds-015-of-mobile-gamers-contribute-50-of-all-in-game-revenue") that found these numbers monitored in-game purchases over all their games for the span of a full month. Tens of millions of gamers, and nobody buys anything. > > So, if the numbers in this source (is it reputable?) were true; and if the findings were transferable (maybe not) and we were to assume GW2 has 500,000 active players (who knows, but I'm picking that number just for giggles), then only 1.5% of them (7,500) spend money on gems. Of that 7,500, 750 buy 50% of those gems. In 2Q17, NCSoft reported revenue of 13,557 M Kwn, which by today's conversion would equal $12,743,580 US. 50% of that figure is $6,371,790. So, 750 people spent an average of ~$8,495. On gems. That would be 849.5 purchases of 800 gems ($10 each), or 679,600 gems _apiece_. Over a three month period, that's ~226,500 gems per month. Just what the kitten are they buying? Gold? There's not enough stuff in the store to warrant that kind of spending consistently. The numbers look even sillier if GW2 active player numbers are less than 500K. Fudge the revenue numbers for the trickle of new game purchases in that quarter, they look a tiny bit less silly. > > I don't know. Maybe numbers from mobile games are in the ballpark for MMO's. Maybe not. I'm dubious that we can infer that they are directly transferable. I briefly considered becoming a tailor once. This bad idea was given to me while I was on a trip to a mall here in Vegas. While my group was looking at other things, I happened to wander into a clothing store. Sitting on the hangers was an assortment of fairly nice blazers, windbreakers, jackets, and coats. There was one simple jacket that I liked... until I looked at the price tag. It was over $3000. A single jacket, in randomly placed in a mall, was over three grand. This person is in business. This 3 stack jacket was selling well enough to keep somebody fed and working. No custom fitting, no private tailoring. Just a 3-G jacket, on a mall hanger. Everything else in this store was similarly priced. However I digress. GW2 has a few alternate revenue streams, from account upgrades, merchandise, and people purchasing the expansions/core game. The numbers are not directly transferable from a freemium game to an MMO, but they do represent the whole trend of the microtransaction market. Your surprise is mirrored by, well... everyone. If you do any research on the subject, you'll find that everyone is amazed that such whales exist, and a great deal of effort goes into finding out exactly who these people are and what drives them. The data is reputable, because it is similar to the results of every other study going back for nearly a decade now. The biggest number I saw for one game (can't remember which one) said that 7% of the playerbase use microtransactions regularly. You can quadruple the number of whales if you go by that number, but it is important to recognize that these players have habits that differ from the regular player. Most people have one account, maybe two. These are the people with 20 accounts, who want to unlock the upgrades and full wardrobe on every one of these accounts. All of their characters are kitted out in full ascended armor with maximum stat bonuses, and once that character is done they do it over again with a new one. These are the kind of people who buy new things because they simply like the sensation of buying new things. These are the people who will go into a mall, and walk out with that three-stack jacket, sitting unceremoniously on a hanger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faaris.8013 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > The point is that "gambling" isn't a useful word in this discussion. It means different things to different people, especially depending on the context. Better to describe what it is about BL chests that one thinks is bad for the game or bad for specific people, instead of trying to get people to agree on the definition... especially since we can see that even the lawyers don't agree. For once I agree with you here. Even if we were lawyers specialized on this topic, we might still disagree because from a German's point of view, what defines gambling is certainly different from someone in the USA. I tend to disagree with the statement that BLCs are gambling because in Germany, we wouldn't call carnival lotteries gambling, and BLCs resemble that more than Poker or Roulette, which we definitely call gambling. But that might be different in other countries, and Anet has to abide to the laws of the countries the game is played (or payed from). So even if that US court said it's not unlawful gambling, it could be in Europe. So far, we had no major cases as far as I know. Someone wanna sue and follow through until the European Court of Justice makes a decision? I'm pretty sure Anet would settle outside of court to avoid such a decision, and it would take several years to get there anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faaris.8013 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > I understand there are people who can't control their impulses. But ridding the world of anything that might addict them, means taking away almost everything, because there are few things in this world someone isn't going to get addicted to. Where do you draw the line? Should we get rid of sugar because a lot of people get addicted to that. I don't think people want to rid the world of stuff that can be addicitve (maybe a minority ^^). But if something has the potential to make you spend all and more of your money, lose your job, your family etc. ---> destroy your life, we expect the provider of these goods or services to follow the rules that come with that. You can be addicted to sugar or caffein or sports or almost anything, but most of these things won't destroy your life or harm your trelationships. If you earn money by offering gambling services, there are regulations you have to follow, like warning people about the addictive potential, or even provide a phone number to an organisation that helps gamblers. Gambling is regulated for good reasons, I won't go into detail here, but publishers of games are not considered providers of services that are gambling yet, so they don't have to follow those regulations like casinos or slot machine companies. There are no mechanics that keep people from spending thousands of Euros in a day, even casinos have limits. While watching a slot machine while waiting for my fried chicken a few days ago, I noticed a timer at the screen. It was counting down the seconds and minutes with a note that said "if you wait XX:XX, then you can play another 60 minutes, otherwise you can only play 50 minutes without break". Trust me, that wasn't an idea the company that builds the machines had, it's some kind of regulation. They are forced to give the player a break. Calling everything that exists addictive is ignoring that harmful addictions exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Faaris.8013" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > But for small purchases, like BL keys, it's targeted at everybody. Look at their scheme - from time to time they offer you free key in gemstore. So you don't care what you get, it's free right? But they are already programming you, the thrill of gambling is there and in some cases it's gonna work. You get baited to buy next key, and another one, and another, wishing for the big prize. Or anything expensive you can sell. Let's say you buy 1 key per week. It's still money for them. This system is made to teach you to accept gambling and not getting the desired reward to overpay for multiple tries. > > But it's not working out for them because still only a tiny part of players actually buy keys with real money. I don't have numbers of course, but I can see the huge impact a free key has on prices on the market. Only 1 free key per account and you see prices dropping for 50% or even 75% and more. Shadow Abyss Dye dropped from buy/sell 470/600 to 75/90 the day Anet gave 1 single free key per account. Prices for BL weapon skins have dropped significantly too. Heck even such extremely rare things like the Permanent Hair Stylist Contract dropped in prices after that day. > > If players actually got several keys per day or week, one free key would not have such an impact on the market for BLC items. Actually, it's exactly otherwise. A single key for everyone should not cause such drop in prices. So, what you're seeing is likely some people buying a batch of keys after they've "tried out" the free one. Or remembering to make a BL key farm character. Or both. They may not continue to do so in the following weeks, but come new free key, the pattern repeats again. Notice also, that often the free key introduction happens around the same time as changes to the black lion chests' conent, which may also affect the prices. > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > I don't know. Maybe numbers from mobile games are in the ballpark for MMO's. Maybe not. I'm dubious that we can infer that they are directly transferable. From what i heard (though cannot find the link for that article now), in MMOs it's changed a bit. In general, web-based and mobile games rely more on high turnover than on dedicated longtime players. In MMO it's exactly opposite. From what i remember, in MMOs with cash shop it's usually the _second_ group (i believe they call it "dolphins") that brings in the most revenue. How (and if) that is applicable to GW2, i have no idea however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vayne.8563 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Faaris.8013" said: > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > I understand there are people who can't control their impulses. But ridding the world of anything that might addict them, means taking away almost everything, because there are few things in this world someone isn't going to get addicted to. Where do you draw the line? Should we get rid of sugar because a lot of people get addicted to that. > > I don't think people want to rid the world of stuff that can be addicitve (maybe a minority ^^). But if something has the potential to make you spend all and more of your money, lose your job, your family etc. ---> destroy your life, we expect the provider of these goods or services to follow the rules that come with that. You can be addicted to sugar or caffein or sports or almost anything, but most of these things won't destroy your life or harm your trelationships. If you earn money by offering gambling services, there are regulations you have to follow, like warning people about the addictive potential, or even provide a phone number to an organisation that helps gamblers. Gambling is regulated for good reasons, I won't go into detail here, but publishers of games are not considered providers of services that are gambling yet, so they don't have to follow those regulations like casinos or slot machine companies. There are no mechanics that keep people from spending thousands of Euros in a day, even casinos have limits. While watching a slot machine while waiting for my fried chicken a few days ago, I noticed a timer at the screen. It was counting down the seconds and minutes with a note that said "if you wait XX:XX, then you can play another 60 minutes, otherwise you can only play 50 minutes without break". Trust me, that wasn't an idea the company that builds the machines had, it's some kind of regulation. They are forced to give the player a break. > > Calling everything that exists addictive is ignoring that harmful addictions exists. Nor are there such warnings on magic the gathering cards. Nor were there such warnings on baseball cards. Nor are there such warnings on strip clubs, where people pay all sorts of money. Addicts exist all over the place in all sorts of situations. This kind of gambling isn't the kind of gambling that people usually have to sell their houses for. Comparing say the mount skins, which was the big uproar recently, to a casino, when you could get ALL the mount skins for a fixed price and never spend another penny is a perfect example of the kind of over-reaction I'm talking about. Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. I just feel it's disingenuous to compare black lion chests to Vegas casinos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. The difference is, you can trade unwanted baseballs cards. You are stuck with most of BLC content and what's available for sale is rare or very rare. > @"Vayne.8563" said: > I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. I'm pretty sure we can find examples of people going huge debt because of microtransactions, especially lootboxes. There are people addicted to such things and BLCs are to blame as much as any other lootbox in any game. However, worth mentioning, BL statuettes are huge step in good direction. Probably trying to be one step ahead of possible regulations of in-game gambling for kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faaris.8013 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. > > I just feel it's disingenuous to compare black lion chests to Vegas casinos. Oh I don't consider BLCs gambling, and I don't think Anet would fall under gambling regulations. I was merely responding to your statement about addictions and the responsibilities because I wholeheartedly disagree. As does the WHO apparently, that is about to add "Gaming Disorder" to its list of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) (right below Gambling Disorder). There are games on the market though that make people lose everything. If you only have 200 Euros per month after paying everything you need to live, buying stuff in an online game can easily break you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vayne.8563 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. > > The difference is, you can trade unwanted baseballs cards. You are stuck with most of BLC content and what's available for sale is rare or very rare. > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. > > I'm pretty sure we can find examples of people going huge debt because of microtransactions, especially lootboxes. There are people addicted to such things and BLCs are to blame as much as any other lootbox in any game. > > However, worth mentioning, BL statuettes are huge step in good direction. Probably trying to be one step ahead of possible regulations of in-game gambling for kids. Pretty sure more people would have gone into debt over a bidding on ebay addiction though. This is not the wide spread problem some people are making it out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. > > > > The difference is, you can trade unwanted baseballs cards. You are stuck with most of BLC content and what's available for sale is rare or very rare. > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. > > > > I'm pretty sure we can find examples of people going huge debt because of microtransactions, especially lootboxes. There are people addicted to such things and BLCs are to blame as much as any other lootbox in any game. > > > > However, worth mentioning, BL statuettes are huge step in good direction. Probably trying to be one step ahead of possible regulations of in-game gambling for kids. > > Pretty sure more people would have gone into debt over a bidding on ebay addiction though. This is not the wide spread problem some people are making it out to be. > Yet. You don't give children menthols just because they are less unhealthy than normal cigarettes. Same with gambling. And if it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't have been acknowledged by WHO as mentioned above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vayne.8563 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. > > > > > > The difference is, you can trade unwanted baseballs cards. You are stuck with most of BLC content and what's available for sale is rare or very rare. > > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. > > > > > > I'm pretty sure we can find examples of people going huge debt because of microtransactions, especially lootboxes. There are people addicted to such things and BLCs are to blame as much as any other lootbox in any game. > > > > > > However, worth mentioning, BL statuettes are huge step in good direction. Probably trying to be one step ahead of possible regulations of in-game gambling for kids. > > > > Pretty sure more people would have gone into debt over a bidding on ebay addiction though. This is not the wide spread problem some people are making it out to be. > > > > Yet. You don't give children menthols just because they are less unhealthy than normal cigarettes. Same with gambling. And if it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't have been acknowledged by WHO as mentioned above. We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. Shrugs. The age of the average player if this game is probably in the 30s. There are very few kids by percentage playing this game. I wish people would stop making this about kids, because it's really not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. > > > > > > > > The difference is, you can trade unwanted baseballs cards. You are stuck with most of BLC content and what's available for sale is rare or very rare. > > > > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. > > > > > > > > I'm pretty sure we can find examples of people going huge debt because of microtransactions, especially lootboxes. There are people addicted to such things and BLCs are to blame as much as any other lootbox in any game. > > > > > > > > However, worth mentioning, BL statuettes are huge step in good direction. Probably trying to be one step ahead of possible regulations of in-game gambling for kids. > > > > > > Pretty sure more people would have gone into debt over a bidding on ebay addiction though. This is not the wide spread problem some people are making it out to be. > > > > > > > Yet. You don't give children menthols just because they are less unhealthy than normal cigarettes. Same with gambling. And if it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't have been acknowledged by WHO as mentioned above. > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. Shrugs. The age of the average player if this game is probably in the 30s. There are very few kids by percentage playing this game. I wish people would stop making this about kids, because it's really not. Well, I wouldn't mind if a game providing gambling experience was tagged as 18+, but unfortunately gamind industry avoids gambling regulations. At least for now. I already explained why your baseball card argument doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Red Arachnid.2493 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. > > > > The difference is, you can trade unwanted baseballs cards. You are stuck with most of BLC content and what's available for sale is rare or very rare. > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. > > > > I'm pretty sure we can find examples of people going huge debt because of microtransactions, especially lootboxes. There are people addicted to such things and BLCs are to blame as much as any other lootbox in any game. > > > > However, worth mentioning, BL statuettes are huge step in good direction. Probably trying to be one step ahead of possible regulations of in-game gambling for kids. > > Pretty sure more people would have gone into debt over a bidding on ebay addiction though. This is not the wide spread problem some people are making it out to be. > I've heard of cases where people have died from drinking too much water. It is a bad idea to only look at the extreme cases, because if you do that then you'll come to the conclusion that water is bad for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vayne.8563 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. > > > > > > > > > > The difference is, you can trade unwanted baseballs cards. You are stuck with most of BLC content and what's available for sale is rare or very rare. > > > > > > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. > > > > > > > > > > I'm pretty sure we can find examples of people going huge debt because of microtransactions, especially lootboxes. There are people addicted to such things and BLCs are to blame as much as any other lootbox in any game. > > > > > > > > > > However, worth mentioning, BL statuettes are huge step in good direction. Probably trying to be one step ahead of possible regulations of in-game gambling for kids. > > > > > > > > Pretty sure more people would have gone into debt over a bidding on ebay addiction though. This is not the wide spread problem some people are making it out to be. > > > > > > > > > > Yet. You don't give children menthols just because they are less unhealthy than normal cigarettes. Same with gambling. And if it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't have been acknowledged by WHO as mentioned above. > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. Shrugs. The age of the average player if this game is probably in the 30s. There are very few kids by percentage playing this game. I wish people would stop making this about kids, because it's really not. > > Well, I wouldn't mind if a game providing gambling experience was tagged as 18+, but unfortunately gamind industry avoids gambling regulations. At least for now. > > I already explained why your baseball card argument doesn't work. And I don't agree with your explanation but look, it's clear we're simply never going to agree on this. This is obviously a hot-button issue for some people and for other people it's not. I'm one of those other people apparently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrubySzymek.1362 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > @"Kheldorn.5123" said: > > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > > Black Lion Chests are gambling, but so were baseball cards. > > > > > > > > > > > > The difference is, you can trade unwanted baseballs cards. You are stuck with most of BLC content and what's available for sale is rare or very rare. > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > > I'm pretty sure people haven't lost their house or families over Black Lion Chests, which provide only virtual, in game items that can't be taken out of game. I'm not sure how you can compare spending too much money to get a specific skin, or spending too much money to make more real world money. They're very different circumstances. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm pretty sure we can find examples of people going huge debt because of microtransactions, especially lootboxes. There are people addicted to such things and BLCs are to blame as much as any other lootbox in any game. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, worth mentioning, BL statuettes are huge step in good direction. Probably trying to be one step ahead of possible regulations of in-game gambling for kids. > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure more people would have gone into debt over a bidding on ebay addiction though. This is not the wide spread problem some people are making it out to be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet. You don't give children menthols just because they are less unhealthy than normal cigarettes. Same with gambling. And if it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't have been acknowledged by WHO as mentioned above. > > > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. Shrugs. The age of the average player if this game is probably in the 30s. There are very few kids by percentage playing this game. I wish people would stop making this about kids, because it's really not. > > > > Well, I wouldn't mind if a game providing gambling experience was tagged as 18+, but unfortunately gamind industry avoids gambling regulations. At least for now. > > > > I already explained why your baseball card argument doesn't work. > > And I don't agree with your explanation but look, it's clear we're simply never going to agree on this. This is obviously a hot-button issue for some people and for other people it's not. I'm one of those other people apparently What you don't agree with? The fact that you can't trade BLC trash but you can trade unwanted baseball cards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcShriek.5829 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. From the decision: " At the time the plaintiffs purchased the package of cards, which is the time the value of the package should be determined, they received value-eight or ten cards, one of which might be an insert card-for what they paid as a purchase price. Their disappointment upon not finding an insert card in the package is not an injury to property. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. Fortunately, not all of us live in US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcShriek.5829 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > Fortunately, not all of us live in US. I think this issue has been brought up to the courts where you live also. It's not a new concept. I wouldn't be surprised if your courts made a similar decision. I urge you to do a search and see what you find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seera.5916 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > > From the decision: > " At the time the plaintiffs purchased the package of cards, which is the time the value of the package should be determined, they received value-eight or ten cards, one of which might be an insert card-for what they paid as a purchase price. Their disappointment upon not finding an insert card in the package is not an injury to property. " > They determined that it wasn't unlawful gambling. To be determined unlawful gambling, it first has to meet the legal definition of the word gambling. Which involves 3 parts: consideration, chance, and prize. The Consideration part is that there is a chance of a loss when gambling. That is not the case with BLC chests. You always gain something of some value, even if you don't find the value in it AND you can get keys without purchasing them. That is how courts have ruled in the past - it's how places can run raffles and what not - because they allow for people to enter without purchasing anything. Otherwise things like the Monopoly game at McDonalds or many raffles and things that people and companies do would be considered gambling. And the loss has to be money. Law hasn't caught up to the internet with in game currency. Any money spent was used to buy gems and not the keys. Right now, BLC's aren't unlawful gambling because it fails at meeting the legal definition of gambling - there's no loss if you don't get the grand prize. Laws and interpretations can change and given the recent outcry against loot boxes, it may help the law and/or its interpretation catch up to the digital age. At least as it pertains to gambling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcShriek.5829 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Seera.5916" said: > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > > > > From the decision: > > " At the time the plaintiffs purchased the package of cards, which is the time the value of the package should be determined, they received value-eight or ten cards, one of which might be an insert card-for what they paid as a purchase price. Their disappointment upon not finding an insert card in the package is not an injury to property. " > > > > They determined that it wasn't unlawful gambling. > > To be determined unlawful gambling, it first has to meet the legal definition of the word gambling. Which involves 3 parts: consideration, chance, and prize. The Consideration part is that there is a chance of a loss when gambling. That is not the case with BLC chests. You always gain something of some value, even if you don't find the value in it AND you can get keys without purchasing them. That is how courts have ruled in the past - it's how places can run raffles and what not - because they allow for people to enter without purchasing anything. Otherwise things like the Monopoly game at McDonalds or many raffles and things that people and companies do would be considered gambling. And the loss has to be money. Law hasn't caught up to the internet with in game currency. Any money spent was used to buy gems and not the keys. Right now, BLC's aren't unlawful gambling because it fails at meeting the legal definition of gambling - there's no loss if you don't get the grand prize. > > Laws and interpretations can change and given the recent outcry against loot boxes, it may help the law and/or its interpretation catch up to the digital age. At least as it pertains to gambling. You just said it's not gambling by not passing your three point test. What is your point? According to your post, if chests meet 3 point requirement, then they are gambling. Chests do no meet 3 point requirement. Therefore, chests are not gambling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seera.5916 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > @"Seera.5916" said: > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > > > > > > From the decision: > > > " At the time the plaintiffs purchased the package of cards, which is the time the value of the package should be determined, they received value-eight or ten cards, one of which might be an insert card-for what they paid as a purchase price. Their disappointment upon not finding an insert card in the package is not an injury to property. " > > > > > > > They determined that it wasn't unlawful gambling. > > > > To be determined unlawful gambling, it first has to meet the legal definition of the word gambling. Which involves 3 parts: consideration, chance, and prize. The Consideration part is that there is a chance of a loss when gambling. That is not the case with BLC chests. You always gain something of some value, even if you don't find the value in it AND you can get keys without purchasing them. That is how courts have ruled in the past - it's how places can run raffles and what not - because they allow for people to enter without purchasing anything. Otherwise things like the Monopoly game at McDonalds or many raffles and things that people and companies do would be considered gambling. And the loss has to be money. Law hasn't caught up to the internet with in game currency. Any money spent was used to buy gems and not the keys. Right now, BLC's aren't unlawful gambling because it fails at meeting the legal definition of gambling - there's no loss if you don't get the grand prize. > > > > Laws and interpretations can change and given the recent outcry against loot boxes, it may help the law and/or its interpretation catch up to the digital age. At least as it pertains to gambling. > > You just said it's not gambling by not passing your three point test. What is your point? > > According to your post, if chests meet 3 point requirement, then they are gambling. > Chests do no meet 3 point requirement. > Therefore, chests are not gambling. They are gambling though by the common person's definition of the word. Most people consider it to be gambling if you don't have any way to guarantee that you'll get what you want when you buy something. Just not considered gambling by the courts based on current interpretation of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarcShriek.5829 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"Seera.5916" said: > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > @"Seera.5916" said: > > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > > > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > > > > > > > > From the decision: > > > > " At the time the plaintiffs purchased the package of cards, which is the time the value of the package should be determined, they received value-eight or ten cards, one of which might be an insert card-for what they paid as a purchase price. Their disappointment upon not finding an insert card in the package is not an injury to property. " > > > > > > > > > > They determined that it wasn't unlawful gambling. > > > > > > To be determined unlawful gambling, it first has to meet the legal definition of the word gambling. Which involves 3 parts: consideration, chance, and prize. The Consideration part is that there is a chance of a loss when gambling. That is not the case with BLC chests. You always gain something of some value, even if you don't find the value in it AND you can get keys without purchasing them. That is how courts have ruled in the past - it's how places can run raffles and what not - because they allow for people to enter without purchasing anything. Otherwise things like the Monopoly game at McDonalds or many raffles and things that people and companies do would be considered gambling. And the loss has to be money. Law hasn't caught up to the internet with in game currency. Any money spent was used to buy gems and not the keys. Right now, BLC's aren't unlawful gambling because it fails at meeting the legal definition of gambling - there's no loss if you don't get the grand prize. > > > > > > Laws and interpretations can change and given the recent outcry against loot boxes, it may help the law and/or its interpretation catch up to the digital age. At least as it pertains to gambling. > > > > You just said it's not gambling by not passing your three point test. What is your point? > > > > According to your post, if chests meet 3 point requirement, then they are gambling. > > Chests do no meet 3 point requirement. > > Therefore, chests are not gambling. > > They are gambling though by the common person's definition of the word. Most people consider it to be gambling if you don't have any way to guarantee that you'll get what you want when you buy something. > > Just not considered gambling by the courts based on current interpretation of the law. > @"Seera.5916" said: > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > @"Seera.5916" said: > > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > > > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > > > > > > > > From the decision: > > > > " At the time the plaintiffs purchased the package of cards, which is the time the value of the package should be determined, they received value-eight or ten cards, one of which might be an insert card-for what they paid as a purchase price. Their disappointment upon not finding an insert card in the package is not an injury to property. " > > > > > > > > > > They determined that it wasn't unlawful gambling. > > > > > > To be determined unlawful gambling, it first has to meet the legal definition of the word gambling. Which involves 3 parts: consideration, chance, and prize. The Consideration part is that there is a chance of a loss when gambling. That is not the case with BLC chests. You always gain something of some value, even if you don't find the value in it AND you can get keys without purchasing them. That is how courts have ruled in the past - it's how places can run raffles and what not - because they allow for people to enter without purchasing anything. Otherwise things like the Monopoly game at McDonalds or many raffles and things that people and companies do would be considered gambling. And the loss has to be money. Law hasn't caught up to the internet with in game currency. Any money spent was used to buy gems and not the keys. Right now, BLC's aren't unlawful gambling because it fails at meeting the legal definition of gambling - there's no loss if you don't get the grand prize. > > > > > > Laws and interpretations can change and given the recent outcry against loot boxes, it may help the law and/or its interpretation catch up to the digital age. At least as it pertains to gambling. > > > > You just said it's not gambling by not passing your three point test. What is your point? > > > > According to your post, if chests meet 3 point requirement, then they are gambling. > > Chests do no meet 3 point requirement. > > Therefore, chests are not gambling. > > They are gambling though by the common person's definition of the word. Most people consider it to be gambling if you don't have any way to guarantee that you'll get what you want when you buy something. > > Just not considered gambling by the courts based on current interpretation of the law. You have no figures to back up your statement. You have no idea what most people consider gambling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seera.5916 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > @"Seera.5916" said: > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > @"Seera.5916" said: > > > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > > > > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > > > > > > > > > > From the decision: > > > > > " At the time the plaintiffs purchased the package of cards, which is the time the value of the package should be determined, they received value-eight or ten cards, one of which might be an insert card-for what they paid as a purchase price. Their disappointment upon not finding an insert card in the package is not an injury to property. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > They determined that it wasn't unlawful gambling. > > > > > > > > To be determined unlawful gambling, it first has to meet the legal definition of the word gambling. Which involves 3 parts: consideration, chance, and prize. The Consideration part is that there is a chance of a loss when gambling. That is not the case with BLC chests. You always gain something of some value, even if you don't find the value in it AND you can get keys without purchasing them. That is how courts have ruled in the past - it's how places can run raffles and what not - because they allow for people to enter without purchasing anything. Otherwise things like the Monopoly game at McDonalds or many raffles and things that people and companies do would be considered gambling. And the loss has to be money. Law hasn't caught up to the internet with in game currency. Any money spent was used to buy gems and not the keys. Right now, BLC's aren't unlawful gambling because it fails at meeting the legal definition of gambling - there's no loss if you don't get the grand prize. > > > > > > > > Laws and interpretations can change and given the recent outcry against loot boxes, it may help the law and/or its interpretation catch up to the digital age. At least as it pertains to gambling. > > > > > > You just said it's not gambling by not passing your three point test. What is your point? > > > > > > According to your post, if chests meet 3 point requirement, then they are gambling. > > > Chests do no meet 3 point requirement. > > > Therefore, chests are not gambling. > > > > They are gambling though by the common person's definition of the word. Most people consider it to be gambling if you don't have any way to guarantee that you'll get what you want when you buy something. > > > > Just not considered gambling by the courts based on current interpretation of the law. > > > @"Seera.5916" said: > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > @"Seera.5916" said: > > > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > > > > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > > > > > > > > > > From the decision: > > > > > " At the time the plaintiffs purchased the package of cards, which is the time the value of the package should be determined, they received value-eight or ten cards, one of which might be an insert card-for what they paid as a purchase price. Their disappointment upon not finding an insert card in the package is not an injury to property. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > They determined that it wasn't unlawful gambling. > > > > > > > > To be determined unlawful gambling, it first has to meet the legal definition of the word gambling. Which involves 3 parts: consideration, chance, and prize. The Consideration part is that there is a chance of a loss when gambling. That is not the case with BLC chests. You always gain something of some value, even if you don't find the value in it AND you can get keys without purchasing them. That is how courts have ruled in the past - it's how places can run raffles and what not - because they allow for people to enter without purchasing anything. Otherwise things like the Monopoly game at McDonalds or many raffles and things that people and companies do would be considered gambling. And the loss has to be money. Law hasn't caught up to the internet with in game currency. Any money spent was used to buy gems and not the keys. Right now, BLC's aren't unlawful gambling because it fails at meeting the legal definition of gambling - there's no loss if you don't get the grand prize. > > > > > > > > Laws and interpretations can change and given the recent outcry against loot boxes, it may help the law and/or its interpretation catch up to the digital age. At least as it pertains to gambling. > > > > > > You just said it's not gambling by not passing your three point test. What is your point? > > > > > > According to your post, if chests meet 3 point requirement, then they are gambling. > > > Chests do no meet 3 point requirement. > > > Therefore, chests are not gambling. > > > > They are gambling though by the common person's definition of the word. Most people consider it to be gambling if you don't have any way to guarantee that you'll get what you want when you buy something. > > > > Just not considered gambling by the courts based on current interpretation of the law. > > You have no figures to back up your statement. You have no idea what most people consider gambling Would you agree that gambling is giving something up (money, tickets, etc) and in return getting something random in return (money, prizes, etc) where the pool of something's have a different value - some high, some low, some middle ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted January 18, 2018 Share Posted January 18, 2018 > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > @"DarcShriek.5829" said: > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > > > > We keep using the word children here, and I'm picturing 8 year olds That was the age I started buying baseball cards. > > > > Yes, the baseball cards (and all other similar collectibles, like MtG) are also a problem. And should probably be looked into as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the US, this issue has been looked into. The federal courts have determined it is not gambling. > > Fortunately, not all of us live in US. > > I think this issue has been brought up to the courts where you live also. Actually, it hadn't, as far as i know. Besides, we happen to have a new gambling law now, which is way more restrictive than the one before. By the way: as far as lootboxes are concerned... >Under Gambling Law, slot machine games are defined as "games played with the use of mechanical, electromechanical or electronic devices, computers included, for cash or in-kind prizes, where the game features an element of chance". As the definition is broad, many types of electronic games can be treated as slot machine games under the Gambling Law if they offer cash or in-kind prizes. An "in-kind prize" in relation to slot machine games is also understood to cover winning either: > Additional play time. > The ability to start a new game without having to pay a new game fee. >Under the Gambling Law, slot machine games are also "games played with the use of mechanical, electromechanical or electronic devices, computers included, organised for commercial purposes, _even if there is no possibility to win any cash and/or in-kind prizes, but the game features an element of chance_". >Slot machine games are only permitted inside casinos. Since that's a rather wide definition, the ultimate ruling in each case (meaning: each singular game) is left to the Ministry of Finance which has the authority to declare a game to _not_ be gambling. As far as i know, there's no such declaration for online games (well, besides online casinos and similar cases, of course) made so far, but few months ago MoF mentioned that they are "going to be looking closely" at the lootbox problem. 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