Netherlands: Some loot boxes are gambling and illegal

[Canadamus Prime]

I believe they were caught cheating on their emissions tests last year.

No, I believe you're talking about Volkswagen, actually. Happened back in 2015.

Its seems that last year BMW was also accused of cheating on its emission tests. In fact they were accused of colluding with Volkswagen, so this may be connected to that whole emissions scandal Volkswagen had back in 2015.

Its seems that last year BMW was also accused of cheating on its emission tests. In fact they were accused of colluding with Volkswagen, so this may be connected to that whole emissions scandal Volkswagen had back in 2015.

Oh, I hadn't heard of that. Just goes to show that they're all trying the same tricks, and they're only sorry that they got caught.

Regardless the long and short of it is they both suck and should choke on their emissions and die.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

The issue i took, and the reason i quoted you, is because you said the skinner box system is as bad as, or worst than lootboxes. That however cannot be true, since regular skinner-box models don't cost you money. Of course this practice was popularized in Subscription based MMOs which then bled into games with microtransactions ( not including lootboxes), but that's an entirely different conversation .

Then battlefront 2 took the practice of, lootboxes and tied it to progressions and thats where the controversy comes in.

Now i agree , that lootboxes cannot exist without skinner-boxes. But to put them on the same category of exploitiveness just isn't fair.

One of the most important things with regards to anything is time because your time is really your most precious resource. So if a game is wasting my time / not respecting my time, then there's something majorly wrong with the game IMO. I know this will sound like I'm pro lootbox/microtransaction, but they at least give you the option of using money to bypass something that sucks. And saying that I'm guessing you're thinking of that Jim Sterling voice of him quoting a publisher/dev/PR guy saying such and such monetization only gives the consumer more options. I'm just anti of anything that I feel wastes my time and it's the Skinner box that's the culprit. It's like the backlash of the Shadow of War Orc thing, it was no different than say Arkham Knight making the player do all that bullshit to see the "real" ending; Arkham Knight just didn't let you pay to go faster basically. Also why does it even matter much when there's Youtube and you can just watch the "real" ending of Shadow of War on Youtube when that's what everyone did with Arkham Knight anyway? Lots of games have "gated" bonus/true endings behind 100%ing the game that like no one does and watches on Youtube anyway. But throw in some monetization that can be bypassed by just going to Youtube and gamers get pissed for very little reason. Why not demand the core element that is the cause be fixed instead? It's not even completely to do with time either, every element of a game should be good. Barely anyone 100%s Arkham Knight because the collectible Riddler trophies are shit content that's not engaging or enjoyable along with most of the sidequests, why put content in any game that isn't good? It's there just so gamers are like "this game takes 50 hours to complete so it's worth $60". So some amazing 10 hour game is either rented or bought when it drops in price but a game that's 100 hours with only 10 good hours is worth $60. See how we gamers have caused this ourselves basically?

 

[Lufia Erim]

The issue i took, and the reason i quoted you, is because you said the skinner box system is as bad as, or worst than lootboxes. That however cannot be true, since regular skinner-box models don't cost you money. Of course this practice was popularized in Subscription based MMOs which then bled into games with microtransactions ( not including lootboxes), but that's an entirely different conversation .

Then battlefront 2 took the practice of, lootboxes and tied it to progressions and thats where the controversy comes in.

Now i agree , that lootboxes cannot exist without skinner-boxes. But to put them on the same category of exploitiveness just isn't fair.

One of the most important things with regards to anything is time because your time is really your most precious resource. So if a game is wasting my time / not respecting my time, then there's something majorly wrong with the game IMO. I know this will sound like I'm pro lootbox/microtransaction, but they at least give you the option of using money to bypass something that sucks. And saying that I'm guessing you're thinking of that Jim Sterling voice of him quoting a publisher/dev/PR guy saying such and such monetization only gives the consumer more options. I'm just anti of anything that I feel wastes my time and it's the Skinner box that's the culprit. It's like the backlash of the Shadow of War Orc thing, it was no different than say Arkham Knight making the player do all that bullshit to see the "real" ending; Arkham Knight just didn't let you pay to go faster basically. Also why does it even matter much when there's Youtube and you can just watch the "real" ending of Shadow of War on Youtube when that's what everyone did with Arkham Knight anyway? Lots of games have "gated" bonus/true endings behind 100%ing the game that like no one does and watches on Youtube anyway. But throw in some monetization that can be bypassed by just going to Youtube and gamers get pissed for very little reason. Why not demand the core element that is the cause be fixed instead? It's not even completely to do with time either, every element of a game should be good. Barely anyone 100%s Arkham Knight because the collectible Riddler trophies are shit content that's not engaging or enjoyable along with most of the sidequests, why put content in any game that isn't good? It's there just so gamers are like "this game takes 50 hours to complete so it's worth $60". So some amazing 10 hour game is either rented or bought when it drops in price but a game that's 100 hours with only 10 good hours is worth $60. See how we gamers have caused this ourselves basically?

100% Agree. You should actually make a thread about that, that's a very intereresting topic to discuss.

Hell i was playing, Nier automata last week and got ending A and i know i'm suppose to go through the game 5 times to get the true ending. The thing is i have absolutely no will to.

I'm 29. And have been playing videogames since i was 3 years old ( my dad was video game enthusiast) and i definitely see how the videogame industry has evolved over time and how videogame design has changed. Basically, gamers have shaped the industry by voting with their wallets. We are the reason things are like this. And unfortunately, it is only going to get worst.

 

[Erttheking]

Also more news. Belgium has brought their boot down on loot boxes.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/04/video-game-loot-boxes-are-now-considered-criminal-gambling-in-belgium/?amp=1

 

[TrulyBritish]

Some people seem to be worrying that unless countries on mass decide to declare loot boxes gambling, companies may just decide to stop selling those games in countries like Belgium that have.
It'll be interesting to see if their claims of "Oh so now gamers in Belgium just won't be able to buy those games at all" will turn out true, considering I seem to remember this argument being brought up when Australia had been talking about suing Steam over Refunds.

 

[Erttheking]

The issue i took, and the reason i quoted you, is because you said the skinner box system is as bad as, or worst than lootboxes. That however cannot be true, since regular skinner-box models don't cost you money. Of course this practice was popularized in Subscription based MMOs which then bled into games with microtransactions ( not including lootboxes), but that's an entirely different conversation .

Then battlefront 2 took the practice of, lootboxes and tied it to progressions and thats where the controversy comes in.

Now i agree , that lootboxes cannot exist without skinner-boxes. But to put them on the same category of exploitiveness just isn't fair.

One of the most important things with regards to anything is time because your time is really your most precious resource. So if a game is wasting my time / not respecting my time, then there's something majorly wrong with the game IMO. I know this will sound like I'm pro lootbox/microtransaction, but they at least give you the option of using money to bypass something that sucks. And saying that I'm guessing you're thinking of that Jim Sterling voice of him quoting a publisher/dev/PR guy saying such and such monetization only gives the consumer more options. I'm just anti of anything that I feel wastes my time and it's the Skinner box that's the culprit. It's like the backlash of the Shadow of War Orc thing, it was no different than say Arkham Knight making the player do all that bullshit to see the "real" ending; Arkham Knight just didn't let you pay to go faster basically. Also why does it even matter much when there's Youtube and you can just watch the "real" ending of Shadow of War on Youtube when that's what everyone did with Arkham Knight anyway? Lots of games have "gated" bonus/true endings behind 100%ing the game that like no one does and watches on Youtube anyway. But throw in some monetization that can be bypassed by just going to Youtube and gamers get pissed for very little reason. Why not demand the core element that is the cause be fixed instead? It's not even completely to do with time either, every element of a game should be good. Barely anyone 100%s Arkham Knight because the collectible Riddler trophies are shit content that's not engaging or enjoyable along with most of the sidequests, why put content in any game that isn't good? It's there just so gamers are like "this game takes 50 hours to complete so it's worth $60". So some amazing 10 hour game is either rented or bought when it drops in price but a game that's 100 hours with only 10 good hours is worth $60. See how we gamers have caused this ourselves basically?

?Something that sucks? is pretty subjective here, but I think you solved your own dilemma. Just don?t put filler content in games.

 

[CaitSeith]

I'm just anti of anything that I feel wastes my time and it's the Skinner box that's the culprit. It's like the backlash of the Shadow of War Orc thing, it was no different than say Arkham Knight making the player do all that bullshit to see the "real" ending; Arkham Knight just didn't let you pay to go faster basically. Also why does it even matter much when there's Youtube and you can just watch the "real" ending of Shadow of War on Youtube when that's what everyone did with Arkham Knight anyway?

Because reaching the end isn't the point in Shadow of War gameplay. The nemesis system is; which was changed from the one in Shadow of Mordor to be less rewarding, in order to incentivize buying lootboxes. In other words, they turned the "Waste time" dial several notches up for the sake of lootboxes (they intentionally made the game to suck).

I hope this example can show the real point here: in order to sell lootboxes, they break the core elements.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

I'm just anti of anything that I feel wastes my time and it's the Skinner box that's the culprit. It's like the backlash of the Shadow of War Orc thing, it was no different than say Arkham Knight making the player do all that bullshit to see the "real" ending; Arkham Knight just didn't let you pay to go faster basically. Also why does it even matter much when there's Youtube and you can just watch the "real" ending of Shadow of War on Youtube when that's what everyone did with Arkham Knight anyway?

Because reaching the end isn't the point in Shadow of War gameplay. The nemesis system is; which was changed from the one in Shadow of Mordor to be less rewarding, in order to incentivize buying lootboxes. In other words, they turned the "Waste time" dial several notches up for the sake of lootboxes (they intentionally made the game to suck).

I hope this example can show the real point here: in order to sell lootboxes, they break the core elements.

They didn't break the core elements, I would've agreed if the implementation of loot boxes actually had a big impact on the nemesis system for people who didn't buy loot boxes, but it didn't. I played through the game and got to the true ending without feeling the need to buy a single lootbox, I can not understand why anyone would buy one when you can get high-level gear and chieftains so easily in the first place.

OT: This is obviously not an ideal solution but it's better than letting paid lootboxes go rampant and be intrusive and a huge part of every modern game. Good on Belgium, hopefully other countries will follow.

 

[sXeth]

Some people seem to be worrying that unless countries on mass decide to declare loot boxes gambling, companies may just decide to stop selling those games in countries like Belgium that have.
It'll be interesting to see if their claims of "Oh so now gamers in Belgium just won't be able to buy those games at all" will turn out true, considering I seem to remember this argument being brought up when Australia had been talking about suing Steam over Refunds.

Its depend how awkward and costly it starts getting really. Im not sure about the size of Australia's market, but even if they write off Belgium or Netherlands as inconsequential, if any serious legal steam starts there its going to move up the ladder to the actual EU, and that's a much bigger market to try and pass off. The publishers would be better off sorting out a compromise before they start becoming entangled in dozens of slightly different regulations so they can have a hope of not getting the worst amalgamation if/when it jumps up to that level.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Its depend how awkward and costly it starts getting really. Im not sure about the size of Australia's market, but even if they write off Belgium or Netherlands as inconsequential, if any serious legal steam starts there its going to move up the ladder to the actual EU, and that's a much bigger market to try and pass off. The publishers would be better off sorting out a compromise before they start becoming entangled in dozens of slightly different regulations so they can have a hope of not getting the worst amalgamation if/when it jumps up to that level.

Doubly so if the EU as a whole comes down against Fifa's Ultimate Team mode.

The EU is Fifa's biggest market. Ultimate Team lootboxes/card packs are EA's biggest money maker.

If they lose that market, hooooo boy that's gonna make them sweat a little.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

100% Agree. You should actually make a thread about that, that's a very intereresting topic to discuss.

Hell i was playing, Nier automata last week and got ending A and i know i'm suppose to go through the game 5 times to get the true ending. The thing is i have absolutely no will to.

I'm 29. And have been playing videogames since i was 3 years old ( my dad was video game enthusiast) and i definitely see how the videogame industry has evolved over time and how videogame design has changed. Basically, gamers have shaped the industry by voting with their wallets. We are the reason things are like this. And unfortunately, it is only going to get worst.

Thanks. Maybe I might make a thread about it.

From playing the 1st Nier, you really do have to do all the playthroughs to get the full story though. I don't think the structure worked for the 1st game (not sure about Automata) as I didn't care for replaying large chunks of the game. Nier gameplay is not nearly good enough to merit playing any more of it than needed. Even Automata is much improved but its combat is basically barebones Platinum combat, they can do that simple but flashy Automata combat in their sleep pretty much. Plus, I found Nier's storyline at the quality of an average anime and it wasn't worth the time I put in. The characters really carried the 1st Nier and the androids in Automata (from the demo) don't seem nearly as interesting as Kaine or Weiss from the 1st game so I passed on Automata.

The issue i took, and the reason i quoted you, is because you said the skinner box system is as bad as, or worst than lootboxes. That however cannot be true, since regular skinner-box models don't cost you money. Of course this practice was popularized in Subscription based MMOs which then bled into games with microtransactions ( not including lootboxes), but that's an entirely different conversation .

Then battlefront 2 took the practice of, lootboxes and tied it to progressions and thats where the controversy comes in.

Now i agree , that lootboxes cannot exist without skinner-boxes. But to put them on the same category of exploitiveness just isn't fair.

One of the most important things with regards to anything is time because your time is really your most precious resource. So if a game is wasting my time / not respecting my time, then there's something majorly wrong with the game IMO. I know this will sound like I'm pro lootbox/microtransaction, but they at least give you the option of using money to bypass something that sucks. And saying that I'm guessing you're thinking of that Jim Sterling voice of him quoting a publisher/dev/PR guy saying such and such monetization only gives the consumer more options. I'm just anti of anything that I feel wastes my time and it's the Skinner box that's the culprit. It's like the backlash of the Shadow of War Orc thing, it was no different than say Arkham Knight making the player do all that bullshit to see the "real" ending; Arkham Knight just didn't let you pay to go faster basically. Also why does it even matter much when there's Youtube and you can just watch the "real" ending of Shadow of War on Youtube when that's what everyone did with Arkham Knight anyway? Lots of games have "gated" bonus/true endings behind 100%ing the game that like no one does and watches on Youtube anyway. But throw in some monetization that can be bypassed by just going to Youtube and gamers get pissed for very little reason. Why not demand the core element that is the cause be fixed instead? It's not even completely to do with time either, every element of a game should be good. Barely anyone 100%s Arkham Knight because the collectible Riddler trophies are shit content that's not engaging or enjoyable along with most of the sidequests, why put content in any game that isn't good? It's there just so gamers are like "this game takes 50 hours to complete so it's worth $60". So some amazing 10 hour game is either rented or bought when it drops in price but a game that's 100 hours with only 10 good hours is worth $60. See how we gamers have caused this ourselves basically?

?Something that sucks? is pretty subjective here, but I think you solved your own dilemma. Just don?t put filler content in games.

Trickling out new items/upgrades/abilities/gear/etc at a snail's pace (to get people to pay to speed it up) objectively does suck though, Skinner box's are never good. The stuff locked behind the Skinner box is subjective of course.

But yeah, everything in a game or movie or song or book should be there for a very specific reason and not there just to pad it out.

I'm just anti of anything that I feel wastes my time and it's the Skinner box that's the culprit. It's like the backlash of the Shadow of War Orc thing, it was no different than say Arkham Knight making the player do all that bullshit to see the "real" ending; Arkham Knight just didn't let you pay to go faster basically. Also why does it even matter much when there's Youtube and you can just watch the "real" ending of Shadow of War on Youtube when that's what everyone did with Arkham Knight anyway?

Because reaching the end isn't the point in Shadow of War gameplay. The nemesis system is; which was changed from the one in Shadow of Mordor to be less rewarding, in order to incentivize buying lootboxes. In other words, they turned the "Waste time" dial several notches up for the sake of lootboxes (they intentionally made the game to suck).

I hope this example can show the real point here: in order to sell lootboxes, they break the core elements.

I haven't played the game because I'm just done with Arkham combat at this point. But I've heard things very similar to what BabyfartsMcgeezaks said. I even heard that playing the game normally allows you to get to the "real" ending faster than buying Orcs did (if you know what you're doing obviously). What it seemed to me was the dev put in the end-game stuff due to criticisms with the 1st game for not having anything to do at the end, then the publisher was like how could we add monetization and paid orcs were added. So if you really like the game doing the end-game should still be fun. If you don't like that game that much, then just go to Youtube basically. I haven't heard anything about the Nemesis system being worse prior to end-game, which is most important IMO. That's my take on Shadow of War looking in basically, you're welcome to refute any of my ignorance. Only the really hardcore fans or completionists/trophy hunters care about 100%ing really any game because few games have extra content that stays engaging for the average player to do everything.