War Eternal.. Not available in your region.. again

[evlover.6270]

It started with the "lottery" a while ago which certain EU zones couldn't participate in, and instead of taking these things into account, people are forced to watch from the sidelines again.

 

You know that because of the gambling aspect, things with a random outcome like black lion keys, dye kits etc already cause most of the gem store packs to be not available in these regions. We understand there might be some difficulties taking care of that (not really, since all that needs to be done is remove the dye packs from them) but srsly, stop adding new initiatives that suffer from the same problem. I suppose in the War Eternal Supply Drop Requisition, it's the black lion keys that make it unavailable again.

 

Why not put a character slot in them, or bank tabs, bag slot, storage expander, total makeovers or whatever..? There's plenty of stuff that can be used that wouldn't render entire packages unavailable for certain EU regions, yet every single time, these issues are ignored and it's getting frustrating.

[Khisanth.2948]

There are also the dye packs and the Guaranteed Wardrobe Unlock probably counts too.

[zealex.9410]

> @"evlover.6270" said:

> It started with the "lottery" a while ago which certain EU zones couldn't participate in, and instead of taking these things into account, people are forced to watch from the sidelines again.

>

> You know that because of the gambling aspect, things with a random outcome like black lion keys, dye kits etc already cause most of the gem store packs to be not available in these regions. We understand there might be some difficulties taking care of that (not really, since all that needs to be done is remove the dye packs from them) but srsly, stop adding new initiatives that suffer from the same problem. I suppose in the War Eternal Supply Drop Requisition, it's the black lion keys that make it unavailable again.

>

> Why not put a character slot in them, or bank tabs, bag slot, storage expander, total makeovers or whatever..? There's plenty of stuff that can be used that wouldn't render entire packages unavailable for certain EU regions, yet every single time, these issues are ignored and it's getting frustrating.

 

Black lion keys and dye kits have more value for prob alot of ppl

[evlover.6270]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

 

> Black lion keys and dye kits have more value for prob alot of ppl

 

It's already a problem that we can't even get those by any means and it's not getting fixed. That aside, they can always discount these items seperately without bundling them into other packages, rendering the other items that we would be able to obtain unavailable as well.

 

Or make a pack that bundles all these items that we wouldn't be able to get anyway, and another pack that doesn't cause issues.

(one package with keys, dye kits, random mounts selects, and a second package with outfit and a selectable mount for example)

 

There are plenty of ways to go around it, yet it feels like there's zero effort to address the issue and some countries are just completely left out because of that.

 

 

[LucianDK.8615]

Hrm? I live in Denmark EU, and I bought the War Eternal supply drop just fine.

[Jojo.6140]

Its quite interesting, i remember that Belgium got a lot of praise by gamers when they introduced that anti-lootbox law. But lately what i read from Belgium Players is not that positive. In the end, they have to suffer under their choices being limited.

 

For a solution, idk what the ToS says about VPN. In case its allowed, you could try using one to make the purchase.

[Sariel.2143]

Havent spend anything since they blocked Belgium. Everything gets in a pack with dye kits or keys. 45mount skins I cant get at the moment ... Lol

 

Might use vpn and see if it works.

[Syrus.2174]

Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

 

Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

 

While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

 

If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Syrus.2174" said:

> Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

>

> Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

>

> While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

>

> If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

 

This.

 

Unfortunately early adopters are punished (or rather better protected) from unhealthy practices. Game companies can still make enough money by ignoring the few countries with very strict anti lootbox laws. Once a critical mass is reached, the entire industry is going to flip. It's slowly happening in some areas already. Just look at how important it is to EA PR speak to always include the no lootboxes phrase on new titles.

 

Some established titles are moving and shifting their micro-transactions to be more in line with less predatory practices.

[DeanBB.4268]

So, what is it that is of interest to you in this package? Not dyes and keys I'm guessing. The mount skins, outfit and staff are or will be available directly from the gem store. Or is it simply the being excluded from the offer that is of concern?

 

I would think Anet would catch a lot of grief if they offered an alternative package without the random items in it, so what are they to do? Nothing will satisfy everyone.

[Danikat.8537]

> @"Jojo.6140" said:

> Its quite interesting, i remember that Belgium got a lot of praise by gamers when they introduced that anti-lootbox law. But lately what i read from Belgium Players is not that positive. In the end, they have to suffer under their choices being limited.

>

> For a solution, idk what the ToS says about VPN. In case its allowed, you could try using one to make the purchase.

 

The problem is that a lot of companies, Anet included, took the quickest, easiest solution they could find to the problem, which is unfortunately to block players in Belgium from purchasing those items without creating any alternative. It loses them sales, but apparently they don't feel it's enough to justify the time it would take to create an actual work-around.

 

As other people have said it's a good law, and if it was more wide-spread it could do a lot to reverse some of the less desirable trends in the industry in recent years, but at the moment it's in a messy intermediate stage where companies aren't really on board with the idea so no real alternatives are being created.

[Zaklex.6308]

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > @"Syrus.2174" said:

> > Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

> >

> > Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

> >

> > While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

> >

> > If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

>

> This.

>

> Unfortunately early adopters are punished (or rather better protected) from unhealthy practices. Game companies can still make enough money by ignoring the few countries with very strict anti loot box laws. Once a critical mass is reached, the entire industry is going to flip. It's slowly happening in some areas already. Just look at how important it is to EA PR speak to always include the no loot boxes phrase on new titles.

>

> Some established titles are moving and shifting their micro-transactions to be more in line with less predatory practices.

 

Stop with the false gambling narrative, it's not gambling...only in the loosest sense of the term, if you wanted to go with the strictest sense it definitely isn't gambling, because in the strictest sense you could spend money and get absolutely nothing...in this case you're guaranteed something, whether it's something you want or not doesn't matter, you win, there fore it's not gambling, simple as that. It's not my fault or any companies fault if certain people and countries don't understand this. Unfortunately the only reason Belgium went and said loot boxes were gambling is because of the extreme route EA went with SW:BF2(putting some of the best items behind randomness in loot boxes, if they had only included cosmetic items we wouldn't be at this stage)...it's that simple. Now we shouldn't derail this thread by going off on the tangent of what is and isn't gambling, everyone will have a difference of opinion, mine just happens to be based on fact(not based on how it stimulates areas of the brain, which is totally not the point and a ridiculous reason.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Zaklex.6308" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > @"Syrus.2174" said:

> > > Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

> > >

> > > Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

> > >

> > > While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

> > >

> > > If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

> >

> > This.

> >

> > Unfortunately early adopters are punished (or rather better protected) from unhealthy practices. Game companies can still make enough money by ignoring the few countries with very strict anti loot box laws. Once a critical mass is reached, the entire industry is going to flip. It's slowly happening in some areas already. Just look at how important it is to EA PR speak to always include the no loot boxes phrase on new titles.

> >

> > Some established titles are moving and shifting their micro-transactions to be more in line with less predatory practices.

>

> Stop with the false gambling narrative, it's not gambling...only in the loosest sense of the term, if you wanted to go with the strictest sense it definitely isn't gambling, because in the strictest sense you could spend money and get absolutely nothing...in this case you're guaranteed something, whether it's something you want or not doesn't matter, you win, there fore it's not gambling, simple as that. It's not my fault or any companies fault if certain people and countries don't understand this. Unfortunately the only reason Belgium went and said loot boxes were gambling is because of the extreme route EA went with SW:BF2(putting some of the best items behind randomness in loot boxes, if they had only included cosmetic items we wouldn't be at this stage)...it's that simple. Now we shouldn't derail this thread by going off on the tangent of what is and isn't gambling, everyone will have a difference of opinion, mine just happens to be based on fact(not based on how it stimulates areas of the brain, which is totally not the point and a ridiculous reason.

 

I would argue how the brain, and especially developing brains of minors, are affected is at the very center of this discussion. You can disagree, but that doesn't solve or remove the issue. It simply says that you are less sensitive or care less about the total impact of this regulation.

 

I could care less of why or why not a country decided to implement a certain regulation. I do care about the self regulation of the gaming industry failing miserably. The ESRB basically proved to be absolutely unreliable in self regulating aggressive predatory practices. They don't need customers to stand up for them and protect these type of predatory practices, trust me, they can do that well enough on their own.

 

Your definition of gambling might be based on the current laws in your country (if at all since most people just like to mouth off without actually taking the time to read up on actual gambling laws), and laws can be changed if need be. Don't assume though that this regulation applies world wide.

[Bloodstealer.5978]

> @"Zaklex.6308" said:

> > @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> > > @"Syrus.2174" said:

> > > Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

> > >

> > > Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

> > >

> > > While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

> > >

> > > If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

> >

> > This.

> >

> > Unfortunately early adopters are punished (or rather better protected) from unhealthy practices. Game companies can still make enough money by ignoring the few countries with very strict anti loot box laws. Once a critical mass is reached, the entire industry is going to flip. It's slowly happening in some areas already. Just look at how important it is to EA PR speak to always include the no loot boxes phrase on new titles.

> >

> > Some established titles are moving and shifting their micro-transactions to be more in line with less predatory practices.

>

> Stop with the false gambling narrative, it's not gambling...only in the loosest sense of the term, if you wanted to go with the strictest sense it definitely isn't gambling, because in the strictest sense you could spend money and get absolutely nothing...in this case you're guaranteed something, whether it's something you want or not doesn't matter, you win, there fore it's not gambling, simple as that. It's not my fault or any companies fault if certain people and countries don't understand this. Unfortunately the only reason Belgium went and said loot boxes were gambling is because of the extreme route EA went with SW:BF2(putting some of the best items behind randomness in loot boxes, if they had only included cosmetic items we wouldn't be at this stage)...it's that simple. Now we shouldn't derail this thread by going off on the tangent of what is and isn't gambling, everyone will have a difference of opinion, mine just happens to be based on fact(not based on how it stimulates areas of the brain, which is totally not the point and a ridiculous reason.

 

You actually made it quite clear why Belgium did it.. now consider what you value most out of BLC's.. and how you get them.. it is gambling in any sense of the term because it uses predatory practices to attempt to get players (of all ages, but including those considered under age) to play the game of chance in the hope they get that one shiny they seek. ANET have at least gone down the route of pushing out guaranteed returns and "choose your mount" options for various packs, but more could and should be done.

If other countries begin to take a hardened look at these types of gambling mechanics like Belgium (and there are others already engaged in that process) then it may well come to head and force ANET to actually rethink their loot box strategy … until then spend responsibly and read before you buy is all.

 

EDIT - There are some interesting studies and statistics that have been put out for general consumption in regards to online gambling and more notably underage gambling.. google is your friend if you want to see just how easy it has become for certain demographics to get into addictive levels of gambling from both online gaming and online betting and the trend is upward.

 

That said.. it is not just ANET who should be making the effort to safeguard against such things happening within their product, personal responsibility is mustard, but those deemed underage are so for good reasons, therefor parents must shoulder the responsibility for this as well.

[Yamazuki.6073]

> @"Syrus.2174" said:

> Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

>

> Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

>

> While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

>

> If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

 

Or, people could "hate" their government for zero effort regulation and hold parents responsible for their own children. Why did it take people getting upset for them to do anything in the first place? On top of that, why didn't they do anything about what people actually complained about? The issues at the time weren't even about loot boxes on their own, but how the game was designed to pressure people into spending money, which can, and has been done without the existence of loot boxes; especially when you consider the fact most video games themselves are nothing but a massive loot box. Thinking loot boxes are the only predatory monetiziation methods and are the problem alone and banning them fixes anything is naive, this ifs before taking into account that history has shown banning anything hasn't solved issues.

 

In regards to children, this is their parent's fault, not developers. It's already been shown the use of technology on its own is poor for children, never mind playing games excessively; and if they're buying loot boxes, I wonder just how low effort their parents put into monitoring their kids. Removing loot boxes wouldn't solve a single problem with issues children have. If loot boxes need to be banned because of randomness and addiction, the West may as well follow other parts of the world and ban any popular game as a whole.

 

I don't even like loot boxes or excessive, rng, but I'm not going to ever praise lazy governments for recycling regulation and applying them to other markets, with zero effort put into taking the larger picture into consideration.

 

By the way online under age gambling and loot boxes aren't the same. Banning loot boxes doesn't stop under aged individuals from gambling, especially when it's already not supposed to be happening.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Syrus.2174" said:

> Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

>

> Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

>

> While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

>

> If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

 

I strongly agree with you. I hope the USA and China will take action against loot boxes; if those two forbid them, everyone else would likely follow suit and we would finally be rid of this kind of predatory practice.

[Ashen.2907]

If you, via your governmental representatives, choose to outlaw some of a company's product(s) then there isnt really room to complain that the product is not available in your country.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Syrus.2174" said:

> Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

>

> Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

>

> While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

>

> If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

 

The average age of an MMO player is 26.

 

Children are not the target audience of mmo developers.

[Vyrulisse.1246]

A.net really needs to offer alternative solutions for countries with such laws. It's insanely manipulative to hold these packs hostage to try and pressure their customers into complaining to their Governments just so they can continue their predatory gambling push. Make no mistake, that is what's going on across the board.

 

Anet: Just get rid of your RNG nonsense please. You can entice people without them.

[VDAC.2137]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> > @"Syrus.2174" said:

> > Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

> >

> > Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

> >

> > While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

> >

> > If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

>

> I strongly agree with you. I hope the USA and China will take action against loot boxes; if those two forbid them, everyone else would likely follow suit and we would finally be rid of this kind of predatory practice.

 

I sincerely hope not. I am an adult and should be allowed to spend my time and money how I wish. We don’t need a nanny state, thank you.

[AlexxxDelta.1806]

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Syrus.2174" said:

> > Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

> >

> > Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

> >

> > While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

> >

> > If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

>

> The average age of an MMO player is 26.

>

> Children are not the target audience of mmo developers.

 

Average doesn't mean there are no kids playing MMOs, quite the opposite actually.

 

If studios don't include children in their intended target audience, then they should age-rate their games accordingly, just like other entertainment industries do. Give your game a 18+ rating and then put all the gambleboxes you want in it. I'm not seeing anyone doing that though, wondering why...

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Syrus.2174" said:

> > Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

> >

> > Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

> >

> > While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

> >

> > If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

>

> The average age of an MMO player is 26.

>

> Children are not the target audience of mmo developers.

 

First off, average is often not of concern when implementing regulations, most often it's special need groups like elderly, children or minority fractions on the population (in case of gambling, people with addictions).

 

Second, legislation against lootboxes is not based around MMOs but rather mobile games, which are heavily targeted and created for children.

[Astraea.6075]

So much misinformation, so little time...

 

Firstly, Belgium did not enact any new laws but the existing regulator made a determination that video game lootboxes were covered by existing laws. In theory, this determination could be challenged and overturned, but it's unlikely that any video game publisher would attempt to do so given the potential for negative PR.

 

While there is a solid case that can be made about protecting minors from exposure to "gambling" of any form, my personal observation is that children are already being targeted by toy manufacturers with various "collectible" toys sold in blind bags/boxes, which seems to me to be a more insidious issue than lootboxes in videogames.

 

Back to the topic at hand, the OP has probably done all they can at this point. They have created a forum thread outlining their issue and even offered some suggestions for possible resolution. ANet have to decide whether the lost sales revenue is worth expending the effort needed to create a solution.

 

My gut feeling is that it might be worth ANet creating non-RNG bundles if they were made available to all regions, as they may pick up enough sales from outside Belgium from players that might not be interested in buying a bundle containing RNG items. However, it's ultimately a decision for ANet to make.

[Manasa Devi.7958]

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Syrus.2174" said:

> > Don't hate on the country finally setting up laws against gambling in games, hate on the companies still continuing with it, and not offering alternatives, despite some people not being able to "participate".

> >

> > Because the "exclude the people who's government bans gambling in video games"-tactic seems to be working quite well for them; they make the players push against those laws despite how necessary they actually should be. Gambling is a slippery slope, which children should have no access to, even as an adult I consider it dangerous terrain where you can lose track of how much you actually spend quite quickly.

> >

> > While I cannot and will not tell adults how or where to spend their money, laws banning gambling in games (especially those targeted at a younger audience, which MMOs usually are), are in now way a bad thing. The "unfair treatment" you feel just isn't because of the laws in a way, but the game companies' unwillingness to stop making children gamble with real life money.

> >

> > If more countries took a move against this rampant loot box gambling, though hopefully with clear lines of where it starts ..., game companies would have to rethink their sales models and would HAVE to offer alternatives.

>

> The average age of an MMO player is 26.

>

> Children are not the target audience of mmo developers.

 

So, slap on an 18+ age rating, register with the appropriate government agency for an online gambling license and sell however many loot boxes you can.

 

Not going to happen. Why? Because that average of 26 is only that low because there are a great many players a lot younger than that to compensate for the legions of old farts like me.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Astraea.6075" said:

> So much misinformation, so little time...

>

> Firstly, Belgium did not enact any new laws but the existing regulator made a determination that video game lootboxes were covered by existing laws. In theory, this determination could be challenged and overturned, but it's unlikely that any video game publisher would attempt to do so given the potential for negative PR.

>

 

Good point. Law is often a matter of interpretation. Again this only applies to Belgium, other countries either have different laws in place, the judicial system has not interpreted the laws in a similar way or is still in the process of doing so (and pro lootbox lobbying certainly does not help the matter).

 

> @"Astraea.6075" said:

> While there is a solid case that can be made about protecting minors from exposure to "gambling" of any form, my personal observation is that children are already being targeted by toy manufacturers with various "collectible" toys sold in blind bags/boxes, which seems to me to be a more insidious issue than lootboxes in videogames.

>

 

True, but two wrongs do not make a right. Also while toy companies deserve their fair share of scrutiny, there is a reason why old school toy businesses are going broke (Toy's R Us filed for chapter 11 end of last year) while the mobile revenue market is growing. The shift towards more digital products getting sold to minors is ever present.

 

> @"Astraea.6075" said:

> Back to the topic at hand, the OP has probably done all they can at this point. They have created a forum thread outlining their issue and even offered some suggestions for possible resolution. ANet have to decide whether the lost sales revenue is worth expending the effort needed to create a solution.

>

> My gut feeling is that it might be worth ANet creating non-RNG bundles if they were made available to all regions, as they may pick up enough sales from outside Belgium from players that might not be interested in buying a bundle containing RNG items. However, it's ultimately a decision for ANet to make.

 

My guess is, any well prepared gaming company will be working on long term plans how to monetize their games with a different set of legislation in place. Until then, and most likely until necessity demands it, the easiest traditional monetization will remain in place. Also people need to remember, monetization and business plans are usually made up months and some time years in advance. Shifting on the fly is not something companies do at a whim or unless absolutely forced to.