Jump to content
ScLines

Remember Loot Boxes? Either keep them off this game for good or make this game Adults Only (ESRB Rating)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ScLines said:

ESRB's own website says that AO rating applies to games that have gambling with real currency. M rating doesn't have it. Multiple studies and sources have already shown that the majority have pointed out that loot boxes are gambling hence why this game should be rated AO and not M. But it is better to remove loot boxes, if not, put an AO rating at least for ESRB's rating.

AOnly rating implies brutal things or sex in-game neither of which is present or that you can cash out the money you win which is not true either. And I told you this already.

 

Guess that means we should get the T rating instead as a thread back suggested since that one does include simulated gambling. /s

Edited by jerycho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2019 at 3:41 AM, CookiePuss said:

Imagine designing a world around addicts.

Hard pass.

that works both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2019 at 5:25 AM, MattScott said:

 

 

3) Replacing these mechanics takes time - if it can be done at all.

 

I don't feel that players completely understand the financial impact that this new legislation will have on game companies. Not all games have monetization mechanics yet that they can survive on if their loot boxes are removed. So I also think players need to be prepared for many games to simply shutdown when this eventual legislation passes. Perhaps that is okay. But I'm guessing that many players will be upset when their favorite, smaller game doesn't make it.

 

 

Ultimately my preference is to move slowly and work with lawmakers on a reasonable timeline that we can all meet together.

 

Thanks,
Matt

That's the worst part, People raging all over loot boxes when 1 of my games allready is being shutdown due to "no more money coming in" due to the "cosmetic only" lootboxes being removed.

It's not even a "what if we removed boxes will it kill the game?" it's allready happend and continues to happen How are free games supposed to make money? Donations?.

 

And before everyone dislikes this YES i am against lootboxes (look at that company that's greedier then pre LO g1 they literally removed every item "box" you could buy for in-game money and made every box require IRL money /warface my.com), However i don't want games that've lasted 6 years to simply just die because their only source of income is now illegal. (AVA is also gone).

 

APB has LO backing it so this wouldn't kill apb instantly (no lootboxes) because it still has direct purchasable equipment, not every other game has that much money behind it so on one hand Complain about the lootboxes but realise without them (i'm only fine with cosmetic only again i must state) free games couldn't survive.

 

P.S Free games should be the ONLY game that can even dare monitize their games I've paid 60$ for a game i don't want to be milked for every last penny i have, Paid games with F2P monitzation models there's no excuse.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, this is why regulations and laws are needed in order to keep businesses in check.

8 hours ago, Solamente said:

isnt this how every business works regardless of industry?

 

the division 2 paid lootboxes are similar iirc, you can only receive each item once

 

i find it odd that you see this as preferable to the current system but with increased drop rates - obviously there's the potential (however small) for current boxes to never reward the grand prize, but with over 100 guns available in joker boxes (plus differing lease lengths) you're still looking at several hundred dollars even if every item is only rewarded once

Because the current system is still the same where you spin for a chance to earn a reward. And more often than not, you get items that are neither valuable or desirable.

 

It removes the strong arming tactic of holding items behind an RNG chance to obtain them. It's so, you don't end up buying hundreds of lootboxes because you failed to get that one item that you wanted. They could easily re-organise the drops in the JMBs into weapon or clothing packs that contain multiple items. Plus, leased weapons for real world money is stupid and in of it self a nasty pratice that should also be removed from Armas entirely.

 

Edited by Glubbable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2019 at 11:25 PM, Doom32 said:

Issue can simply be resolved by putting the weapons on armas marketplace, as a person who spent a lot of money and has a lot of the loot box weapons, I don't mind this move, I think its a better option, plus maybe sales will increase. 

that makes the game pay2win and the argument starts again, then they get put in the joker store and they make no money...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I'm not fond of the F2P mechanics. Feels more grindier that the game has to be designed around the convenience that you can pay more and more money just to progress better in the game usually. I guess I'm old fashioned and prefer to pay a game before getting to play it or going for a subscription per monthly model instead and do away with all the microtransactions if possible. But this doesnt look likely to happen anytime soon, if ever at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AO is for graphic porn and shit at that level not 'instances of gambling'. MA fits this rating just fine. gtfo you are stupid.

 

Also it's great that they are pulling the old 'think of the children' angle, but in what anti-lootbox story is it involving actual children? Saw the kotaku or wtv one that was shopped around when the bf2 drama was occurring, but that was a guy trying to buy social currency and influence not a gambling addict(he was late teens borderline adult). Every other story I've seen in passing is an adult. Glad the soccer moms and manipulative people are on this train.

 

I don't like microtransactions or how hard stuff is designed around monetization(apb is hardly that bad of an offender) but the people pushing the OP's angle are complete cancer. It's not kids being manipulated it's stupid adults, and in many of the stories younger adults who the parents are babying.

 

 

EDIT: The only instance of microtransactions that bother me is when AAA games or games you have to pay upfront contain it or heavily push for it. They already have their income stream. If they can't also afford to keep the game on their own servers for the same cost then just go back to the days of people hosting servers. F2P doesn't bother me in the slightest unless it is overly egregious, but the market will sort those out.

Edited by MICFILLER
  • Confused 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MICFILLER said:

AO is for graphic porn and shit at that level not 'instances of gambling'. MA fits this rating just fine. gtfo you are stupid.

 

Also it's great that they are pulling the old 'think of the children' angle, but in what anti-lootbox story is it involving actual children? Saw the kotaku or wtv one that was shopped around when the bf2 drama was occurring, but that was a guy trying to buy social currency and influence not a gambling addict(he was late teens borderline adult). Every other story I've seen in passing is an adult. Glad the soccer moms and manipulative people are on this train.

 

I don't like microtransactions or how hard stuff is designed around monetization(apb is hardly that bad of an offender) but the people pushing the OP's angle are complete cancer. It's not kids being manipulated it's stupid adults, and in many of the stories younger adults who the parents are babying.

 

 

EDIT: The only instance of microtransactions that bother me is when AAA games or games you have to pay upfront contain it or heavily push for it. They already have their income stream. If they can't also afford to keep the game on their own servers for the same cost then just go back to the days of people hosting servers. F2P doesn't bother me in the slightest unless it is overly egregious, but the market will sort those out.

Then you are ignoring ESRB'S own definition of the AO rating on their own website that does say it involves gambling with real currency.

 

Plus those three videos in my first original post have already detailed several studies and actual stories of children exposed to loot boxes. Safe to say loot boxes are gambling because they are and shouldn't be exposed to minors or adolescents. 

 

It's another case where the mainstream media or even local media where you live just turn a blind eye or refuse to cover stories of people addicted to these bad video game monetization practices.

  • Thanks 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>continues to forget the ESRB rated a game with literal slot machines and other casino games a lower rating than APB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Alani said:

>continues to forget the ESRB rated a game with literal slot machines and other casino games a lower rating than APB.

Yep. That's a whole another issue to deal with. This whole loot box and predatory monetization has sadly been ignored for years until only in recent times.

  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alani said:

>continues to forget the ESRB rated a game with literal slot machines and other casino games a lower rating than APB.

That because organizations like the ESRB and PEGI aren't actually government agencies. They're just corporate entities that were originally created by the publishers of the very games they put their ratings on to provide an excuse for the government to not have to regulate the industry. It's a long known fact that these ratings boards are on publisher payroll, and put whatever rating the publishers want them to put on the games they release. In most cases they don't bother, but in cases like NBA2k20 they very much flex that money to force a rating that won't get in the way of sales.

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ScLines said:

Then you are ignoring ESRB'S own definition of the AO rating on their own website that does say it involves gambling with real currency.

 

Plus those three videos in my first original post have already detailed several studies and actual stories of children exposed to loot boxes. Safe to say loot boxes are gambling because they are and shouldn't be exposed to minors or adolescents. 

 

It's another case where the mainstream media or even local media where you live just turn a blind eye or refuse to cover stories of people addicted to these bad video game monetization practices.

"Player can gamble, including betting or wagering real cash or currency"

This likely refers to literal direct gambling like online casinos. APB would fall under simulated gambling as would most lootboxes due to the items having no tangible real world value. Hell in yongyea's video the report he is citing has to argue that people trading things for money outside the company is as close as it gets to real world gambling.

 

The stories are pretty weak. You have 1 story of a game rated young having a roulette style minigame, another where 3% of young teenagers had used an illegally operating betting website and then kids teasing each other over having less fancy skins(and parents overreacting to their bad sob stories). Also your first video is just yongyea going over a recommendation to the government regarding video games in general and they have 1 section talking about 'financial harms' that isn't conclusive about anything. The second video is surface level exploring of monetization and psychological states. The 3rd is just referencing the second video so it's not just anecdotes. All the people harmed in every single one of these are adults and not a single child, but the fear they were 'exposed'.

 

The stories are pretty few and far between. The thing is they all follow the same smart principle where it is a person who is unable to control their spending and will spend spend spend. This isn't new to people or unique to video games as it's just a person who is addicted to spending on something which you can find in literally anything. Shockingly someone crying that they spent all their money on stuff they will never actually own or have any tangible possession of without being scammed just isn't that compelling unless they are inputting crazy stories.

  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

"Player can gamble, including betting or wagering real cash or currency"

This likely refers to literal direct gambling like online casinos. APB would fall under simulated gambling as would most lootboxes due to the items having no tangible real world value. Hell in yongyea's video the report he is citing has to argue that people trading things for money outside the company is as close as it gets to real world gambling.

 

Uhu. Either APB will get an AO-like rating from all other rating agencies like everybody else or not have them at all to avoid that rating. Currently it is a big program that minors/adolescents are exposed to these gambling-like mechanics. It is a problem with regulation sadly.

 

Quote

The stories are pretty weak. You have 1 story of a game rated young having a roulette style minigame, another where 3% of young teenagers had used an illegally operating betting website and then kids teasing each other over having less fancy skins(and parents overreacting to their bad sob stories). Also your first video is just yongyea going over a recommendation to the government regarding video games in general and they have 1 section talking about 'financial harms' that isn't conclusive about anything. The second video is surface level exploring of monetization and psychological states. The 3rd is just referencing the second video so it's not just anecdotes. All the people harmed in every single one of these are adults and not a single child, but the fear they were 'exposed'.

May seem weak to you but you can play coy all you want but these predatory monetizations still existing is still a problem. It doesn't really change things too much as minors/adolescents and people with addiction problems are affected by these bad video game designs to begin with due to no gambling regulations. Some people sympathize with developers trying to make a profit but I disagree. You should make a good game that should not revolve around microtransactions like loot boxes which are gambling. If you will not take away that, then I think developers need to follow gambling rules and regulations if when that does take place. Belgium did just that and several companies refused to be involved in those new regulations. To me, that is the way to go.

 

Quote

The stories are pretty few and far between. The thing is they all follow the same smart principle where it is a person who is unable to control their spending and will spend spend spend. This isn't new to people or unique to video games as it's just a person who is addicted to spending on something which you can find in literally anything. Shockingly someone crying that they spent all their money on stuff they will never actually own or have any tangible possession of without being scammed just isn't that compelling unless they are inputting crazy stories.

Preying on people with shopping addictions isn't new either isn't it? It's just another new low the video game industry are willing to sink into when this didn't have to exist in the first place like the old days. And you don't seem to take the issue with people with shopping/gambling addictions as seriously as what you are saying in your response. Mainstream games (not just mainstream games but mobile etc.) have pretty much turned my seemingly harmless hobby into how much more money can you spend on a single game just to get what you want. Especially with that new NBA game that literally has slot machines in it with none of the rating agencies taking the issue too seriously. It is very disappointing to see. 

Edited by ScLines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care about people with addictions, they are sick and should seek help for their problems not drag the rest of us down to their level.

 

If we banned everything that people are addicted to we would litterally not be able to do anything.

  • Thanks 3
  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ScLines said:

Uhu. Either APB will get an AO-like rating from all other rating agencies like everybody else or not have them at all to avoid that rating. Currently it is a big program that minors/adolescents are exposed to these gambling-like mechanics. It is a problem with regulation sadly.

 

May seem weak to you but you can play coy all you want but these predatory monetizations still existing is still a problem. It doesn't really change things too much as minors/adolescents and people with addiction problems are affected by these bad video game designs to begin with due to no gambling regulations. Some people sympathize with developers trying to make a profit but I disagree. You should make a good game that should not revolve around microtransactions like loot boxes which are gambling. If you will not take away that, then I think developers need to follow gambling rules and regulations if when that does take place. Belgium did just that and several companies refused to be involved in those new regulations. To me, that is the way to go.

 

Preying on people with shopping addictions isn't new either isn't it? It's just another new low the video game industry are willing to sink into when this didn't have to exist in the first place like the old days. And you don't seem to take the issue with people with shopping/gambling addictions as seriously as what you are saying in your response. Mainstream games (not just mainstream games but mobile etc.) have pretty much turned my seemingly harmless hobby into how much more money can you spend on a single game just to get what you want. Especially with that new NBA game that literally has slot machines in it with none of the rating agencies taking the issue too seriously. It is very disappointing to see. 

The reward has no tangible value so you are not trading actual money therefor it is not actual gambling. This is why gumball machines and the small coin operated machines that have toys are not AO rated as well. That's why the UK report that yongyea is referencing to had to reach for people trading ingame items for money outside the game as the closest link to this. Is that clear enough for you Lovejoy?

 

Nope I don't see it as an issue myself. Some drooler wants to go bankrupt to get a nano well that's too bad...hopefully he doesn't hit up any hard drugs cause then they are going to be actually fucked. Sure I'll give you that current design is orbiting these designs far too much(in other games...apb's lootboxes are more gimmick than central design), but that's essentially in the mobile market(cheaper costs and potential profit) and AAA greed that's doing it anyways. Belgium just made them illegal they didn't seek a middle ground or try to deal with them.

 

Taking advantage of any addiction isn't new nor is it illegal. Whether a person can or will is not the concern, but whether it is a decision of their own making. If you took my response as one holding great concern you are reading too into it. Wait did you think arcades were designed to give you a full and meaningful play session that was efficient for your money? HAHAHAHAHA How stupid are you? Arcades were designed to empty your pockets. The only difference is you are seeing what free and unlimited access to things will do to a tiny portion of the population.

 

I will say though Lovejoy that your ohh so real concern now is just so moving. You could be off helping addicts who actually do real harm in their lives, but instead your big slacktivist move is to attempt to push the rating of a game 1 tier higher as you think that will suddenly prevent a problem exclusive to that group. What a brave and noble soul you are. Waging this war for 4 whole months so as some drooler won't go bankrupt renting something. Your pearl clutching is pathetic.

  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ScLines said:

Then you are ignoring ESRB'S own definition of the AO rating on their own website that does say it involves gambling with real currency.

 

Plus those three videos in my first original post have already detailed several studies and actual stories of children exposed to loot boxes. Safe to say loot boxes are gambling because they are and shouldn't be exposed to minors or adolescents. 

 

It's another case where the mainstream media or even local media where you live just turn a blind eye or refuse to cover stories of people addicted to these bad video game monetization practices.

First and foremost I'm telling you this the third time but I'm not going to repeat myself. Read my previous replies instead about the AO rating.

 

+17, no minors or adolescents should be around. If you are 17 you should know the value of money.

 

Puh-lease mainstream media jump on the opportunity to trash video games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TheDogCatcher said:

I don't care about people with addictions, they are sick and should seek help for their problems not drag the rest of us down to their level.

 

If we banned everything that people are addicted to we would litterally not be able to do anything.

 

But we should legalize all sort of drugs, psychotropics, heroin, cocaine, lsd, etc. instead? I mean...we have addicted personalities or tendencies and addictive substances and practices. Though I totally agree with you but just wanted to point out this observation that arose from your comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Salvick said:

 

But we should legalize all sort of drugs, psychotropics, heroin, cocaine, lsd, etc. instead? I mean...we have addicted personalities or tendencies and addictive substances and practices. Though I totally agree with you but just wanted to point out this observation that arose from your comment.

 You can't really compare physical addictions like drug addiction to psychological addictions like gambling they are two very different things.

 

Although to be honest I would rather see the drug market legalised and properly regulated rather than left in the hands of criminals, drugs can be harmful but by banning them we are merely sweeping the issue under the carpet and infact making the problem much worse because we have absolutely no control over the market. As things currently stand anyone of any age can go out and buy whatever they want with no restrictions whatsoever. It would also be easier to monitor the health of addicts and provide appropriate treatment where needed in a more open environment.

 

anyway this going way off topic, so I won't derail the thread any further.

  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheDogCatcher said:

 You can't really compare physical addictions like drug addiction to psychological addictions like gambling they are two very different things.

 

Although to be honest I would rather see the drug market legalised and properly regulated rather than left in the hands of criminals, drugs can be harmful but by banning them we are merely sweeping the issue under the carpet and infact making the problem much worse because we have absolutely no control over the market. As things currently stand anyone of any age can go out and buy whatever they want with no restrictions whatsoever. It would also be easier to monitor the health of addicts and provide appropriate treatment where needed in a more open environment.

 

anyway this going way off topic, so I won't derail the thread any further.

Agreed. Going on topic, the thing is the gaming market seems to be targeting that sort of people specifically and even triggering these habits in young and not so young players, I think that's the issue here but also I think is a different discussion that should be brought up somewhere else than in a particular game's forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/16/2019 at 10:09 AM, Seadee said:

that makes the game pay2win and the argument starts again, then they get put in the joker store and they make no money...

then I guess they better get to making unique clothes and vehicles. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2019 at 1:33 PM, Spy said:

It is yes, there are multiple companies who provide free VPN services, google is your friend.

I wouldn't recommend to use free VPN services as there's bandwidth cap and certain limitations. Go for a cheap and affordable one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get other companies like EA and what not but dont bring this kind of controversy to apb. It's a game that always had "loot boxes" that never really gave you anything other than a UNIQUE weapon thats can only be found in those boxes. There a WHOLE SELECTION (a better selection honestly) of guns to choose from. to take away "loot boxes" from this game is to literally cripple what money they can pull in. this game needs more money and less controversy. if you want to create shit just say "nerf ntec". APB doesnt need this kind of BULL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...