Senator calls for gambling legistaion against CS:GO

Recommended Videos

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
Amir Kondori said:
Politicians are so out of touch, and for reason that seems to go double in Australia.
Actually, the politician in question is so in-touch that his personal vote got three other people elected basically by just campaigning with him. Out of virtually nowhere, he got 21% of the vote in the House of Reps in South Australia (his state).
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Gorrath said:
Adam Jensen said:
Areloch said:
LegendaryGamer0 said:
Holy hell, I was not expecting to see some rational responses to this whole fiasco.

Given the hyperbole from nearly everyone else I was starting to think no one genuinely understood the situation nor the absurdity (and ramifications) of the senator's response.

Valve: The Pariah of the Escapist Community.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Rangaman said:
The problem there is that, as proven, Valve cannot get of their fat fucking arses and crack down on that shit. The fact that these websites are still operating, even after Valve stated their opposition to Steam gambling, really says it all.
That so, huh?


Yep. You're right. They're not doing a thing to those sites. Nope. Not a thing.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
9,370
3,163
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Bilious Green said:
It's worth noting that Nick Xenephon (the senator in question) has built his whole political career on an anti-gambling platform, so this is consistent with his established position on regulating other forms of online gambling, and not simply singling out CSGO cos vidyagames.
There's probably only one thing I like about Xenephon. He's taking a stance (on most things) and doesn't have to cater to a party (he's an independent senator). He's consistently been against gambling
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
9,370
3,163
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Vigormortis said:
Gorrath said:
Adam Jensen said:
Areloch said:
LegendaryGamer0 said:
Holy hell, I was not expecting to see some rational responses to this whole fiasco.

Given the hyperbole from nearly everyone else I was starting to think no one genuinely understood the situation nor the absurdity (and ramifications) of the senator's response.

Valve: The Pariah of the Escapist Community.
Look, I don't think there could be any other real response.

I hate that:
1. the government has to get involved because it usually turns out bad.
2. it's not just CG:G0 and the connected companies that are affect but it will be the whole industry.
3. When will people learn that just because it's not legally bad to do something, doesn't mean you should. You know, try using your own moral compass.

And to the first point, I don't think the government can screw it up worse than what has already happened. So they can have at it. I feel sorry for all the other companies that inadvertently get caught in the crossfire. Also, let's not scapegoat Valve. They did stupid things but there is plenty of blame to throw around (but definitely still blame Valve because one day they might wake up or, more probably, someone else will realise that treating customers well is a better way to service them and make a mint destroying Steam.)
 

Lykosia_v1legacy

New member
Feb 17, 2010
68
0
0
Vigormortis said:
Rangaman said:
The problem there is that, as proven, Valve cannot get of their fat fucking arses and crack down on that shit. The fact that these websites are still operating, even after Valve stated their opposition to Steam gambling, really says it all.
That so, huh?


Yep. You're right. They're not doing a thing to those sites. Nope. Not a thing.
Valve could easily fix the whole thing in one day if they wanted to. Just prevent any third-party site from using Steam. If a site wants to use/connect to Steam in future, have an approval process in place where someone at Valve goes through the site and gives a green light or no. This way they could easily control what happens on Steam, but so far they seem to care only when it actually is going to hurt them in a form of a lawsuit or a government intervention.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Lykosia said:
Valve could easily fix the whole thing in one day if they wanted to. Just prevent any third-party site from using Steam. If a site wants to use/connect to Steam in future, have an approval process in place where someone at Valve goes through the site and gives a green light or no. This way they could easily control what happens on Steam, but so far they seem to care only when it actually is going to hurt them in a form of a lawsuit or a government intervention.
That's not how it works, though. And that's not what happened with the CS:GO gambling sites.

Valve took action against the sites not because those sites hosted item betting. They have no legal precedent or right to do so. They took action against the sites because the sites violated the terms of use of the OpenID API.

I get that people are looking for something to lambast Valve over for this whole thing, looking for some reason to burn them on the pyre, but Valve is actually doing the right thing here. (for once) For them and the community.

Whatever issues people have with the Crate/Case system are ancillary to the issues at play here.
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,374
381
88
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Right. This has been warned several times. If you let these things keep going on wild in gaming for too long, some politician will want to regulate gaming and screw it for everyone.
Regulating crate system as gambling is not screwing it for everyone, its finally doing the right thing.
Politicians have lots of precedents of being clumsy when regulating gaming (not gambling) all around the globe. They may try to do the right thing, but they often do it the wrong way.
 

Gorrath

New member
Feb 22, 2013
1,648
0
0
Vigormortis said:
Gorrath said:
Adam Jensen said:
Areloch said:
LegendaryGamer0 said:
Holy hell, I was not expecting to see some rational responses to this whole fiasco.

Given the hyperbole from nearly everyone else I was starting to think no one genuinely understood the situation nor the absurdity (and ramifications) of the senator's response.

Valve: The Pariah of the Escapist Community.
I do find it all a little bizarre myself. Even if people want to very liberally use the definition of gambling, the notion that the loot crate system itself is what needs some kind of serious government intervention seems absurd to me. I paid money for Diablo 2, Diablo 2 offers randomized loot drops that I could then sell for real world money, therefore, Diablo 2 is a gambling game. You're just paying a flat fee to spin the wheel any number of times instead of paying per spin, right? So Diablo and other random loot games that offer the ability to trade equipment with other players are actually gambling games and intervention is needed post haste. As does the local church raffle, cause gambling!
 

Areloch

It's that one guy
Dec 10, 2012
623
0
0
Elijin said:
Areloch said:
Sure, but since everything has a value, that would mean that literally anything with a chance associated to an entry fee is gambling and - going off this thread - should face all the regulations and taxes gambling entails.

I would disagree with that. I don't feel that stuff like LootCrate, collectible card games or random drops or the like should be subject to gambling laws unless the exact same system offers a direct stuff-back-to-cash payout system like gambling establishments do.
TCG and other lucky dip style merchandising and toys are gambling for children, essentially. But because its toys or niche products, no one seems to care about the behaviour it encourages.

Also LootCrate isn't gambling, its a blind buy. The contents of your crate aren't going to be different than mine, and there will be a static value of goods within that crate.
Strazdas said:
Areloch said:
Sure, but since everything has a value, that would mean that literally anything with a chance associated to an entry fee is gambling and - going off this thread - should face all the regulations and taxes gambling entails.

I would disagree with that. I don't feel that stuff like LootCrate, collectible card games or random drops or the like should be subject to gambling laws unless the exact same system offers a direct stuff-back-to-cash payout system like gambling establishments do.
Not all value is easily expressed. It is in CS:GO case though. Though yes, there is a lot of gambling nowdays. Im not familiar with Loot Crate as i never use it but from what i understand it is not a lottery, it is buying a cat in a bad type of deal, where you pay before you know the contents of the "crate". There are no chance, everyone gets the same items though. And thats just a sale. A very poorly designed anticonsumer style of sale but still just a sale. Random drops are not gambling because you dont pay anything for it. Having a game monster having a chance to drop something is not applicable here. A big argument can be made is that you can roll the "Chance" in here as many times as you want as you own the game and therefore can replay that monster fight as much as you want at no additional cost (or just cheat the item in if its an offline game). I never thought about Collectible Card games but i suppose yes, the sales of cards are a type of gambling.

You may agree or disagree, but that is the current law in the western world. Its just not being applied to niche products because of "lol who cares about videogames" attitude. The legislators are busy trying to get online poker sites to adhere to gambling laws while the sites are doing everything in their power to pretend they arent gambling. There are bigger fish to fry i guess.
Firstly, I haven't gotten LootCrate before, just that by all descriptions, it's a random pile of merch you get each month for a fee.
So if the stuff inside is static, I guess it's probably not random enough to count, because everyone gets the same mech each month?

If so, then fair enough, I suppose.
Just struck me as similar due to you paying for a random assortment of stuff that WILl have some monetary value associated with it, which apparently was all that was needed to be considered gambling.

@Elijin You keep saying it's gambling for children, and while the broad scope of it may be similar (you pay for a random assortment of goods), I don't feel that it should be hit with gambling laws by virtue of the fact that at no point in the core loop of the system that the producers of the cards set up, can you turn it back into cash through them again.

You can turn around and sell those cards to another person, but you can't cash them in as PART of the fee->random acquire system that the card packs are set up with. I feel this is a pretty important distinction when it comes to slamming down new laws and regulations on something.

@Strazdas The ease in which the value is expressed doesn't seem like it should be the tipping point though, if the value itself doesn't come from, real actual cash back in your pocket. I mean, I remember back in grade school, where the second you pulled out a foil pokemon card, a dozen other kids wanted to trade various stuff with you to get it.
There was a very real value there, it just wasn't ever expressed in cash.

Also, when I said 'random drops', I was meaning the crates like in CS. I should've been clearer, sorry about that.

And again, I feel a VERY important distinction is that, inside the core system itself, without third parties, you need to be able to convert those random winnings back into cash to qualify as gambling. CCGs, CSGO/TF2's crates, those do not satisfy that because you need to go to some third party, separate from the actual game, to 'cash out'.

Online poker games, for example as far as I can tell, DO actually let you cash out real money back from playing the game, which is why they may be a target of gambling laws. They satisfy the 'pay fee-> random chance to win -> cash out back real money'.

Having said all that, I'm unfamiliar with gambling laws myself - especially ones in other countries, so it may well be true that CCGs, and random crates should qualify but don't.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
9,370
3,163
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Vigormortis said:
trunkage said:
(but definitely still blame Valve
For what, though?
So, one of common sayings of business people (or in particular Libertarians) is that businesses should be able to police themselves and governments shouldn't get involved. That regulations are unnecessary and costly (having regulations does increase compliance costs) and that the Rule of Law and Property Rights is enough.

The problem is that technically these guys might have not done something illegal. Because Rule of Law doesn't really cover this area (or gambling in general.) And the only way to stop this sort of activity is for someone to be able to prosecute.

Now Valve could have stopped the link between these gambling sites and their game. They could have reported it. But it was earning Valve a lot of money, so why would they?

Edit: Also, Valve response was that they weren't at fault. They created the game that was being used for gambling and they created an easy link for these websites
 

Satinavian

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 30, 2016
2,109
879
118
Vigormortis said:
I get that people are looking for something to lambast Valve over for this whole thing, looking for some reason to burn them on the pyre, but Valve is actually doing the right thing here. (for once) For them and the community.

Whatever issues people have with the Crate/Case system are ancillary to the issues at play here.
I at least have only a problem with the crate and key-for-money system, not with Valve. Can't speak for the rest of the community, but i think, you are wrong.

I have the same problem with all other companies that use the same system. And there are a lot. They use the system to tap into the profit potential of gambling without having to follow gambling regulations because it seems to be some kind of loophole - so far. If gouvernments close loopholes companies use to avoid regulations, that is a good thing.
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
CaitSeith said:
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Right. This has been warned several times. If you let these things keep going on wild in gaming for too long, some politician will want to regulate gaming and screw it for everyone.
Regulating crate system as gambling is not screwing it for everyone, its finally doing the right thing.
Politicians have lots of precedents of being clumsy when regulating gaming (not gambling) all around the globe. They may try to do the right thing, but they often do it the wrong way.
Indeed., quite often gambling regulations are too weak and give too many exceptions to the gambling institutions. Its better than nothing though.

Areloch said:
Firstly, I haven't gotten LootCrate before, just that by all descriptions, it's a random pile of merch you get each month for a fee.
So if the stuff inside is static, I guess it's probably not random enough to count, because everyone gets the same mech each month?

If so, then fair enough, I suppose.
Just struck me as similar due to you paying for a random assortment of stuff that WILl have some monetary value associated with it, which apparently was all that was needed to be considered gambling.

@Strazdas The ease in which the value is expressed doesn't seem like it should be the tipping point though, if the value itself doesn't come from, real actual cash back in your pocket. I mean, I remember back in grade school, where the second you pulled out a foil pokemon card, a dozen other kids wanted to trade various stuff with you to get it.
There was a very real value there, it just wasn't ever expressed in cash.

Also, when I said 'random drops', I was meaning the crates like in CS. I should've been clearer, sorry about that.

And again, I feel a VERY important distinction is that, inside the core system itself, without third parties, you need to be able to convert those random winnings back into cash to qualify as gambling. CCGs, CSGO/TF2's crates, those do not satisfy that because you need to go to some third party, separate from the actual game, to 'cash out'.

Online poker games, for example as far as I can tell, DO actually let you cash out real money back from playing the game, which is why they may be a target of gambling laws. They satisfy the 'pay fee-> random chance to win -> cash out back real money'.

Having said all that, I'm unfamiliar with gambling laws myself - especially ones in other countries, so it may well be true that CCGs, and random crates should qualify but don't.
Thats the thing though. The loot you get from LootCrate is NOT random. Its just undisclosed until certain time. Its like pre-ordering a game when you dont know what the gameplay actually will be like. Everyone that paid still gets exact same stuff. There is no "Chance" involved in LootCrate.

No, the requirement of it being a "game of chance" is an important one, you cant just skip that and call it gambling. At least as it is by current US law.

Its not. expressing the value is not a requirement for it to be called gambling. It does however make it far easier to prove and regulate. And it does not have to be cash in your pocket. It just has to be expressed in monetary terms. Something that Valve Marketplace does wonderfully. There are also sites (granted third party) that allow you to cash in the skins for paypal money or bitcoins.

The crates in themselves are not really a problem. Random drop for a monster in an RPG is not gambling. Its the requirement to purchase keys that makes it gambling because now you are paying money for a game of chance. This is why the microtransaction crate economy is so despised in videogames.

You may feel that cashing in is an important distinction, but the law does not feel that way. And neither do i to be honest. A lottery is a lottery regardless whether the winnings are money or digital items.

Online poker is kinda weird about cashing in. basically you have to become really good and high-better to be able to cash in and there is a million different systems on every site. I know a few guys that basically make a living out of playing poker online, but the system certainly isnt set up to make it nice to the user. Unless you are really good your not going to be cashing anything in regardless of winnings.
 

deadish

New member
Dec 4, 2011
694
0
0
Can't say I'm surprised that politicians are starting to get involved.

Game developers have only themselves to blame really.

A lot of games have slot-machine-like mechanics. The worst offenders are F2P games that rely on such tactics for monetization.

Countries like Japan have already started clamping down on such.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-05-07-gree-dena-stocks-plunge-as-japanese-government-cracks-down
 

Elijin

Elite Muppet
Legacy
Feb 15, 2009
2,095
1,086
118
Areloch said:
And again, I feel a VERY important distinction is that, inside the core system itself, without third parties, you need to be able to convert those random winnings back into cash to qualify as gambling. CCGs, CSGO/TF2's crates, those do not satisfy that because you need to go to some third party, separate from the actual game, to 'cash out'.
So you feel its not gambling because its not cash dollars in your hand, even though the primary form of trade is for a legal currency? I mean lets not be under any illusions here, not being able to take your $ out of the marketplace absolutely doesn't mean that steam wallets are not legal currency working on a straight 1:1 ratio. They're not dollar substitutions or pseudo currency. Its straight up just depositing actual cash into steam.
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,374
381
88
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Right. This has been warned several times. If you let these things keep going on wild in gaming for too long, some politician will want to regulate gaming and screw it for everyone.
Regulating crate system as gambling is not screwing it for everyone, its finally doing the right thing.
Politicians have lots of precedents of being clumsy when regulating gaming (not gambling) all around the globe. They may try to do the right thing, but they often do it the wrong way.
Indeed., quite often gambling regulations are too weak and give too many exceptions to the gambling institutions. Its better than nothing though.
Tell me when you're done with gambling, so we can talk about gaming regulations.

EDIT: Removed repeated quote
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
CaitSeith said:
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Right. This has been warned several times. If you let these things keep going on wild in gaming for too long, some politician will want to regulate gaming and screw it for everyone.
Regulating crate system as gambling is not screwing it for everyone, its finally doing the right thing.
Politicians have lots of precedents of being clumsy when regulating gaming (not gambling) all around the globe. They may try to do the right thing, but they often do it the wrong way.
Indeed., quite often gambling regulations are too weak and give too many exceptions to the gambling institutions. Its better than nothing though.
Tell me when you're done with gambling, so we can talk about gaming regulations.

EDIT: Removed repeated quote
Given that this topic is about gambling regulations (gambling that happens in a videogame in this case), i think youll have to wait for another topic, unless you want to point out where you see a gaming regulation here.
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,374
381
88
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Strazdas said:
CaitSeith said:
Right. This has been warned several times. If you let these things keep going on wild in gaming for too long, some politician will want to regulate gaming and screw it for everyone.
Regulating crate system as gambling is not screwing it for everyone, its finally doing the right thing.
Politicians have lots of precedents of being clumsy when regulating gaming (not gambling) all around the globe. They may try to do the right thing, but they often do it the wrong way.
Indeed., quite often gambling regulations are too weak and give too many exceptions to the gambling institutions. Its better than nothing though.
Tell me when you're done with gambling, so we can talk about gaming regulations.

EDIT: Removed repeated quote
Given that this topic is about gambling regulations (gambling that happens in a videogame in this case), i think youll have to wait for another topic, unless you want to point out where you see a gaming regulation here.
This regulation would be a fuse of gaming and gambling regulation. It's pretty much a gambling regulation on a videogame that isn't about gambling (it's a FPS).
 

Elijin

Elite Muppet
Legacy
Feb 15, 2009
2,095
1,086
118
For how hard this forum usually wants to argue that games can be anything, there is some amazing pushback here about acknowledging that CSGO/TF2 crates are gambling.