USA introducing Loot box bill into Law

Prev1
As the title says the US government are now looking to regulate “loot boxes” and pay to win games. This really all stemmed from Battlefront 2 when Disney had to step in because EA were not willing to budge on ripping people off.

Admittedly SWGOH is not strictly pay to win, but it’s pay to win to a massive degree. In addition to the snide drop rates, extreme low odds on buyable shard packs etc that will end up impacting this game.

They head honchos could’ve avoided this upcoming regulation, alas they were too greedy. Clearly I agree that CG need to make their money to pay staff, overheads etc, but when a single new toon in a digital game can easily cost upwards of $300 for shards, gear etc Those kinda numbers for 1 digital toon, you could easily buy a console/pc for gaming for that kinda price instead. The money they want is absurd, gluttony was one of the 7 deadly sins dontcha know?

Reap what you sow.d71l75ylz2as.jpeg

Replies

  • Fredy5
    221 posts Member
    This is great because it's totally insane...
    Especially in term of time spent to achieve the difference...
    And when I see the new gear requirements for Padmé st G8 ...
    It is not even more P2W but simply a Pay to Play game ....
  • Nauros
    2988 posts Member
    I'm afraid that they will just kill the game off once this passes. The latest development definitely looks like they are trying to milk what they can while they still can...
    Revive the stores, the game needs it.
  • DuneFlint
    461 posts Member
    To be clear this is one senator introducing a bill. I haven't seen anything to indicate it will pass both senate and congress and be signed into law.
  • Jeric
    269 posts Member
    Please. There are other ways you can monetize this without randomized loot. It is the randomization factor that concerns Congress. We already know what the average per character is, and that x people will pay that amount. They would just have to be more transparent and say “Endor Leia Unlock” $x, upgrade 1 $y, upgrade 2 $s”

    There are several games of this type that use both the randomizes result method and a flat fee for unlocks and upgrades.
  • Nauros wrote: »
    I'm afraid that they will just kill the game off once this passes. The latest development definitely looks like they are trying to milk what they can while they still can...

    Yeah that's sad but probably the truth. I guess we just never have games being made for the love of making them anymore. They're just profit machines
  • I'm glad to hear our representative government has solved all of the other major problems facing us and can finally turn their attention here.
  • Be fair, ALL MOBILE GAMES ARE P2W!!! That is why they are created. They are all revenue streams. It's the trickle down effect. Many streams will fill the pool quicker.
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Another article worth the read:

    EA Wants to Change How It Launches Online Games After Anthem
    https://gamerant.com/ea-game-launch-changes-anthem/
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • sigsig
    132 posts Member
    Title is misleading
  • ThunderGun
    219 posts Member
    Nauros wrote: »
    I'm afraid that they will just kill the game off once this passes. The latest development definitely looks like they are trying to milk what they can while they still can...

    Yeah that's sad but probably the truth. I guess we just never have games being made for the love of making them anymore. They're just profit machines

    As far as I've read, the bill only seeks to protect minors from micro transactions, which is already easily achieved using parental controls. This bill isn't going to kill any game or get anywhere.
  • Salgarie
    10 posts Member
    LUL, even the 1purchase packs are too expensive, removing loot boxes would not change that, and there is no reason the new packs would be different.
    Exept for crystals, if I divide by 10 the price of a pack, I still don't want to buy it, and you?
  • Jarvind
    2852 posts Member
    edited May 9
    A: It's a proposal, not an actual law, and given the US's total unwillingness to disincentivize dirtbag behavior on the part of large companies I seriously doubt it will pass.

    B: The only thing in SWGOH that really qualifies as a "loot box" is the chromiums - anything else, you pretty much know what you're going to get. So at worst they'd probably just have to remove chromiums and maybe the faction packs.
  • I doubt it passes, but I'd be happy if it did.

    While I think the whole "protect the children from predatory micro-transactions" is a fairly weak argument given the various parental controls that can be used on most devices these days, and while I believe that video gaming companies should have the right to determine the business models that work best for themselves, I also believe that micro-transactions have largely ruined gaming for the consumer. The value per $ for a gamer these days is at an all time low.

  • Jarvind wrote: »
    A: It's a proposal, not an actual law, and given the US's total unwillingness to disincentivize dirtbag behavior on the part of large companies I seriously doubt it will pass.

    B: The only thing in SWGOH that really qualifies as a "loot box" is the chromiums - anything else, you pretty much know what you're going to get. So at worst they'd probably just have to remove chromiums and maybe the faction packs.

    If you read a couple more articles on what the fellow is proposing, it's not just loot boxes. Its the elimination of all pay to win micro transactions (including pay not to wait). Basically, if it ain't cosmetic, he wants to kill it. I want badly to see this happen, but would prefer that gaming companies did it themselves instead of being forced to by what I would consider a questionable law.
  • Gair
    576 posts Member
    This is about gambling, which is defined as taking a risky action in the hopes of a result. When money can be spent on ANY medium where kids play, this would be considered illegal gambling.

    Therefore, this game would either be required to be 18 or 21+. Or remove monetary gains from any possible risk with rng.
  • Mzee
    1745 posts Member
    edited May 9
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.
  • EA/CG are many things, daft isnt one of them. They will be well aware of any implications from this and their lawyers are probably going through the fine print.
    Either way, they will most likely already have plans in place to deal with this.
  • Mzee wrote: »
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.

    To your point about government reg's - loot boxes are essentially a form of lottery / gambling, and the government is very interested in regulating that.

    And re: #3) I think you the way you described this mixes up revenue (all the $$$ going into CG for ) and profit (all $$$, less costs, hopefully positive). So I'm not sure what you're getting at with your point.
  • Ironically if they binned the gambling side and just flat charged for a set amount of shards I think profits would probably go up.
  • Kyno
    22087 posts Moderator
    Mzee wrote: »
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.

    To your point about government reg's - loot boxes are essentially a form of lottery / gambling, and the government is very interested in regulating that.
    .

    That right there is the issue. Many times these laws try to define gambling to make things more clear but the issue lies that in many games the definition of gambling does not actually apply.

    Most of the laws that have come out about this topic are for people to feel like they are doing something about it and have very little effect on the current state. (Politicians being politicians)

    I have not read through any of the proposals at hand, but I would imagine that this game and many others will not be affected at all.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Mzee wrote: »
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.

    To your point about government reg's - loot boxes are essentially a form of lottery / gambling, and the government is very interested in regulating that.
    .

    That right there is the issue. Many times these laws try to define gambling to make things more clear but the issue lies that in many games the definition of gambling does not actually apply.

    Most of the laws that have come out about this topic are for people to feel like they are doing something about it and have very little effect on the current state. (Politicians being politicians)

    I have not read through any of the proposals at hand, but I would imagine that this game and many others will not be affected at all.

    I see it as the gambling laws in many countries simply have not caught up yet to the relatively new form of outright gambling in mobile/digital games. They are certainly looking at it, no matter how much people say there’s no gambling in SWGOH, well there is gambling inside of SWGOH. If EA is negatively affected (they WILL be) then SWGOH will be negatively affected too. I don’t want this game to be hurt, but they need to dial back the sheer avarice or someone will do it for them.
  • Kyno
    22087 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    Mzee wrote: »
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.

    To your point about government reg's - loot boxes are essentially a form of lottery / gambling, and the government is very interested in regulating that.
    .

    That right there is the issue. Many times these laws try to define gambling to make things more clear but the issue lies that in many games the definition of gambling does not actually apply.

    Most of the laws that have come out about this topic are for people to feel like they are doing something about it and have very little effect on the current state. (Politicians being politicians)

    I have not read through any of the proposals at hand, but I would imagine that this game and many others will not be affected at all.

    I see it as the gambling laws in many countries simply have not caught up yet to the relatively new form of outright gambling in mobile/digital games. They are certainly looking at it, no matter how much people say there’s no gambling in SWGOH, well there is gambling inside of SWGOH. If EA is negatively affected (they WILL be) then SWGOH will be negatively affected too. I don’t want this game to be hurt, but they need to dial back the sheer avarice or someone will do it for them.

    According to some of the more recent versions of these laws, there is no gambling in SWGOH. There is no "loss" factor, which has been defined in some similar laws.

    Other guidelines that have come out (from companies like Apple, to name one) dont specifically call out in game currency. So they leave open a big loophole for games to still operate.

    Without looking at the actual wording, it's hard to tell, but currently there are very (very) few places that have made laws that even touch games like SWGOH.
  • Nauros wrote: »
    I'm afraid that they will just kill the game off once this passes. The latest development definitely looks like they are trying to milk what they can while they still can...

    Yeah that's sad but probably the truth. I guess we just never have games being made for the love of making them anymore. They're just profit machines

    I can't think of a game produced that was not intended to generate money. I mean, the artist and the programmers and everyone else needs to eat. They need to get paid. I wish we all could do what we love and not worry about getting paid. But, we need to get paid. Do you work just because you love it so much? Would you do it if no one paid you? Okay then...
  • 7AnimalMother
    1712 posts Member
    edited May 9
    Kyno wrote: »
    Mzee wrote: »
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.

    To your point about government reg's - loot boxes are essentially a form of lottery / gambling, and the government is very interested in regulating that.
    .

    That right there is the issue. Many times these laws try to define gambling to make things more clear but the issue lies that in many games the definition of gambling does not actually apply.

    Most of the laws that have come out about this topic are for people to feel like they are doing something about it and have very little effect on the current state. (Politicians being politicians)

    I have not read through any of the proposals at hand, but I would imagine that this game and many others will not be affected at all.

    This proposed bill goes further than just addressing gambling.

    “Social media and video games prey on user addiction, siphoning our kids’ attention from the real world and extracting profits from fostering compulsive habits. No matter this business model’s advantages to the tech industry, one thing is clear: there is no excuse for exploiting children through such practices,” Sen. Hawley said. “When a game is designed for kids, game developers shouldn’t be allowed to monetize addiction. And when kids play games designed for adults, they should be walled off from compulsive microtransactions. Game developers who knowingly exploit children should face legal consequences.”

    A few of the articles I have read contain this tidbit, "The bill will ban loot boxes with randomized or partially randomized rewards. It will also prohibit certain exploitative pay-to-win mechanics. For example, developers won’t be able to manipulate the competitive balance of multiplayer titles to encourage players to buy microtransactions that give them an advantage. Manipulating a game’s progression system to entice players into spending money to progress won’t be allowed as well."

    The Senators Web page discussing both the loot box and PTW components:
    https://www.hawley.senate.gov/senator-hawley-introduce-legislation-banning-manipulative-video-game-features-aimed-children

    I mean that absolutely describes SWGOH and every other Pay to Win/Wait game out there.
  • Mzee
    1745 posts Member
    Mzee wrote: »
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.

    To your point about government reg's - loot boxes are essentially a form of lottery / gambling, and the government is very interested in regulating that.

    And re: #3) I think you the way you described this mixes up revenue (all the $$$ going into CG for ) and profit (all $$$, less costs, hopefully positive). So I'm not sure what you're getting at with your point.

    I personally do see this game as similar to Gambling. I just hesitate to call it that as most courts haven't begun to describe it as such, although some have such as Hawaii, and Belgium. Psychologists have found that the brain is activated the same way as it is in gambling using brain imaging. The main difference is that in gambling, when you lose you get nothing. In this game you still get something even if it is not at all what you want. Like gambling it is all about the odds. That is key component of gambling and this game's system.

    My 3rd point was just responding to the original post's point about needing the money to pay overhead.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Mzee wrote: »
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.

    To your point about government reg's - loot boxes are essentially a form of lottery / gambling, and the government is very interested in regulating that.
    .

    That right there is the issue. Many times these laws try to define gambling to make things more clear but the issue lies that in many games the definition of gambling does not actually apply.

    Most of the laws that have come out about this topic are for people to feel like they are doing something about it and have very little effect on the current state. (Politicians being politicians)

    I have not read through any of the proposals at hand, but I would imagine that this game and many others will not be affected at all.

    I see it as the gambling laws in many countries simply have not caught up yet to the relatively new form of outright gambling in mobile/digital games. They are certainly looking at it, no matter how much people say there’s no gambling in SWGOH, well there is gambling inside of SWGOH. If EA is negatively affected (they WILL be) then SWGOH will be negatively affected too. I don’t want this game to be hurt, but they need to dial back the sheer avarice or someone will do it for them.

    According to some of the more recent versions of these laws, there is no gambling in SWGOH. There is no "loss" factor, which has been defined in some similar laws.

    Other guidelines that have come out (from companies like Apple, to name one) dont specifically call out in game currency. So they leave open a big loophole for games to still operate.

    Without looking at the actual wording, it's hard to tell, but currently there are very (very) few places that have made laws that even touch games like SWGOH.

    Just as an FYI - This is not just addressing gambling aspects and loot boxes. This is a direct shot at PTW. This is definitely targeted at the SWGOH type of gaming demographic.

    From the Senator's Website with the link pasted below:

    Senator Hawley said, “Social media and video games prey on user addiction, siphoning our kids’ attention from the real world and extracting profits from fostering compulsive habits. No matter this business model’s advantages to the tech industry, one thing is clear: there is no excuse for exploiting children through such practices.

    “When a game is designed for kids, game developers shouldn’t be allowed to monetize addiction. And when kids play games designed for adults, they should be walled off from compulsive microtransactions. Game developers who knowingly exploit children should face legal consequences.”

    https://www.hawley.senate.gov/senator-hawley-introduce-legislation-banning-manipulative-video-game-features-aimed-children

    From Variety Magazine, a summary of what the bill will regulate:

    "The bill will ban loot boxes with randomized or partially randomized rewards. It will also prohibit certain exploitative pay-to-win mechanics. For example, developers won’t be able to manipulate the competitive balance of multiplayer titles to encourage players to buy microtransactions that give them an advantage. Manipulating a game’s progression system to entice players into spending money to progress won’t be allowed as well. The FTC will be responsible for enforcing the rules. If developers break them, state attorneys general could file suits to defend the residents of their states."

    https://variety.com/2019/gaming/news/missouri-senator-loot-box-ban-bill-1203208889/
  • Vendi1983
    3474 posts Member
    Finally.
  • Kyno
    22087 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Mzee wrote: »
    1. I thought this proposal was for minors only, and this game already has limitations from minors so I don't think this would be impacted. Perhaps I am interpreting things wrong.
    2. The current climate in the US very heavily favors businesses with less regulation, and this is in the opposite direction to that so I don't see this getting very far.
    3. Keep in mind a large chunk of the income of this game goes to EA, and I have no idea what salaries are like for CG's team. Nor is it my business. Just keep in mind that it may seem like this game pulls in a lot of money, it doesn't necessarily mean the developers are pulling in the money.
    4. 3. I will not go into the ethics of microtransactions or the drop rates, randomness of loot etc.

    To your point about government reg's - loot boxes are essentially a form of lottery / gambling, and the government is very interested in regulating that.
    .

    That right there is the issue. Many times these laws try to define gambling to make things more clear but the issue lies that in many games the definition of gambling does not actually apply.

    Most of the laws that have come out about this topic are for people to feel like they are doing something about it and have very little effect on the current state. (Politicians being politicians)

    I have not read through any of the proposals at hand, but I would imagine that this game and many others will not be affected at all.

    I see it as the gambling laws in many countries simply have not caught up yet to the relatively new form of outright gambling in mobile/digital games. They are certainly looking at it, no matter how much people say there’s no gambling in SWGOH, well there is gambling inside of SWGOH. If EA is negatively affected (they WILL be) then SWGOH will be negatively affected too. I don’t want this game to be hurt, but they need to dial back the sheer avarice or someone will do it for them.

    According to some of the more recent versions of these laws, there is no gambling in SWGOH. There is no "loss" factor, which has been defined in some similar laws.

    Other guidelines that have come out (from companies like Apple, to name one) dont specifically call out in game currency. So they leave open a big loophole for games to still operate.

    Without looking at the actual wording, it's hard to tell, but currently there are very (very) few places that have made laws that even touch games like SWGOH.

    Just as an FYI - This is not just addressing gambling aspects and loot boxes. This is a direct shot at PTW. This is definitely targeted at the SWGOH type of gaming demographic.

    From the Senator's Website with the link pasted below:

    Senator Hawley said, “Social media and video games prey on user addiction, siphoning our kids’ attention from the real world and extracting profits from fostering compulsive habits. No matter this business model’s advantages to the tech industry, one thing is clear: there is no excuse for exploiting children through such practices.

    “When a game is designed for kids, game developers shouldn’t be allowed to monetize addiction. And when kids play games designed for adults, they should be walled off from compulsive microtransactions. Game developers who knowingly exploit children should face legal consequences.”

    https://www.hawley.senate.gov/senator-hawley-introduce-legislation-banning-manipulative-video-game-features-aimed-children

    From Variety Magazine, a summary of what the bill will regulate:

    "The bill will ban loot boxes with randomized or partially randomized rewards. It will also prohibit certain exploitative pay-to-win mechanics. For example, developers won’t be able to manipulate the competitive balance of multiplayer titles to encourage players to buy microtransactions that give them an advantage. Manipulating a game’s progression system to entice players into spending money to progress won’t be allowed as well. The FTC will be responsible for enforcing the rules. If developers break them, state attorneys general could file suits to defend the residents of their states."

    https://variety.com/2019/gaming/news/missouri-senator-loot-box-ban-bill-1203208889/

    That will be truly impressive if this makes it through, and keeps the sentiment summarized here.

    I look forward to reading more into this.
  • This is more likely to kill games for ftp.
Sign In or Register to comment.