That sucks, but it makes sense.
[quote]...Our gambling content descriptor is given to games that simulate or teach gambling as it’s done in real life in casinos, racetracks, etc. If a gambling commission would state that loot boxes are a form of gambling, then we would have to adjust our criteria to that.[/quote]
So the issue needs to be sorted elsewhere first, the law of the nation(s) needs to change.
"I'm not a gambling game"
"But you give people an opportunity to wager money for an arbitrary outcome of differing value, either aesthetically or practically, with net returns being on average much lower than the initial pay-in?"
"Yeah but I'm not a gambling game"
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52776800]That sucks, but it makes sense.
So the issue needs to be sorted elsewhere first, the law of the nation(s) needs to change.[/QUOTE]
It's true, their hands are tied on declaring it gambling, but it's not like they couldn't address it in other ways than applying gambling laws to it. Either way they should be trying to address what's clearly becoming a problem imo
[QUOTE=Elspin;52776848]It's true, their hands are tied on declaring it gambling, but it's not like they couldn't address it in other ways than applying gambling laws to it. Either way they should be trying to address what's clearly becoming a problem imo[/QUOTE]
I agree, but it doesn't sound like they wanna admit it's a problem yet. Whoever wrote the article doesn't seem to wanna do so either;
[quote]In other words, it's not the place of regulatory bodies to make the law, but to enforce it. Practically speaking, that means that unless and until [B]governments get involved and start making changes to the rules (which I don't think anyone really wants)[/B], game rating agencies aren't going to get involved.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Rolond Returns;52776845]"I'm not a gambling game"
"But you give people an opportunity to wager money for an arbitrary outcome of differing value, either aesthetically or practically, with net returns being on average much lower than the initial pay-in?"
"Yeah but I'm not a gambling game"[/QUOTE]
Pinball used to be illegal because it was thought to be chance and luck, and offered free games at certain scores, until a guy brought a pinball machine to court and showed that they took skill.
[quote]A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.[/quote]
This is the legal definition of gambling. How are loot boxes not gambling
[QUOTE=TheTalon;52777285]Pinball used to be illegal because it was thought to be chance and luck, and offered free games at certain scores, until a guy brought a pinball machine to court and showed that they took skill.
This is the legal definition of gambling. How are loot boxes not gambling[/QUOTE]
The key words are 'receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome'. In that context, certain would imply particular; a particular outcome, and not necessarily every outcome.
With loot boxes, you are guaranteed to win something of value every single time you unlock one. So it doesn't exactly qualify as gambling under that 'certain outcome' test. Because you'd receive something of value from [i]any[/i] outcome.
In other words, loot boxes aren't gambling because there's no significant risk (actually not any risk) of incurring a loss.
This whole fiasco is just making me realize how easy it would be to cheat the actual gambling regulations.
As long as there's always a prize, the prize has a value not decided by the "casino", and that the casino can't offer real currency for the prize, it isn't gambling.
This sounds like raffling, which surprise surprise, is also regulated!
[QUOTE=BF;52777305]The key words are 'receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome'. In that context, certain would imply particular; a particular outcome, and not necessarily every outcome.
With loot boxes, you are guaranteed to win something of value every single time you unlock one. So it doesn't exactly qualify as gambling under that 'certain outcome' test. Because you'd receive something of value from [i]any[/i] outcome.
In other words, loot boxes aren't gambling because there's no significant risk (actually not any risk) of incurring a loss.[/QUOTE]
So "low value it might as well be trash" is still "value"?
You are well aware that just means they're skirting around the legal definition of gambling with technicalities?
one of those times the spirit of the law should be taken into account instead.
[QUOTE=Van-man;52777370]So "low value it might as well be trash" is still "value"?
You are well aware that just means they're skirting around the legal definition of gambling with technicalities?
one of those times the spirit of the law should be taken into account instead.[/QUOTE]
Well the thing is that 'value' is subjective, and your opinion of value won't necessarily be what a court defines value to be. Sure, loot boxes might give you shit that you don't want, but those things could be considered valuable by someone else.
I'd argue that the 'spirit of the law' would suggest that loot boxes aren't gambling anyways. The spirit of the law may recognise gambling as any recreational activity where you wager something you own for the chance of winning something else valuable, but with a very significant chance that you do not win anything at all. It's literally impossible to not win something with loot boxes, unless there's an implementation of loot boxes where there is a common prize which simply says 'poof! You get nothing! Better luck next time' (that would actually be gambling).
[editline]14th October 2017[/editline]
But I mean don't just listen to me, two of the most-prominent game rating bodies in the world say that loot boxes aren't gambling, either.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
