Senator calls for gambling legistaion against CS:GO

[nomotog_v1legacy]

People made real money off of it.

Like anything else someone wants and is willing to give things for.
I really don't see an issue here apart from the sites violating the API's terms of use.

Because it was gambling.

 

[Trunkage]

snip.

No I mean, I don't understand what the fuss is about anyway. Why do they have any kind of value beyond being just stupid chuffa to make your character look a certain way?

Isn't Iphones the same. In my country they are about $500-700 dearer than their nearest competitor. No matter if you think Iphones are better, they aren't that much better. Apple doesn't sell you a phone though, it sells you a "lifestyle." So much of the extra cost of the phones comes from good advertising convincing its worth more than it really is.

I think you are getting mixed up between price signalling and what things are actually worth. These values are both made up. Like the value of money I previously explained. Or gold.

 

[Trunkage]

People made real money off of it.

Like anything else someone wants and is willing to give things for.
I really don't see an issue here apart from the sites violating the API's terms of use.

The gambling part is dodgy at best because...
1. There was a group a three guys advertising this great new site to gamble your skins on. They did it by streaming their wins and showing how many thousands of dollars they won. A casino can't advertise in this way, especially when you consider...
2. These guys owned the gambling site and could have change the results in their favour. No casino owner is allowed to bet in their own casino, let alone advertised how much they won. Worse still...
3. A large part of the streamers audience was minors. You can't allow minor to gamble because they don't understand the consequences (I submit that most adults don't because they lie to themselves about the odds. But they are over the legal age and can choose for themselves.)

They got away with this because you have to go around about ways to cash out, they were skins and not chips and no one knew who owned the website until it was revealed a few weeks ago. One of the three streamers verified the misdeeds including that minor were targeted.

Valve let these guys run amok because they made Valve a mint. They didn't verify what they were up to because money.

If you want an industry to be self governed instead of the government regulating, you actually have to do some self governing. This applies to things like Greenlight and Early Access too. Sure, you can just let people do whatever they want on your platform or game but if the last couple of years has taught us anything, you will be punished if you don't moderate or curate. Your self interest is in stopping illegal and dodgy things happening on your programs.

Another problem is that this gambling is a multibillion dollar industry and I don't think they were the only dodgy people. Because there is no line, no rule or regulation, its hard to tell who is being dodgy.

 

[Fat Hippo]

So, card packs? This all just seems like a lot of hubbub on Valve being greedy and people gambling with virtual goods, just now with an idiot senator thinking he should stick the cold defiling hand of government into the mix and that it'll be better, with people supporting this because any regulation must be good regulation.

I don't think most people here support this regulation. We just think it's Valve's own damn fault for letting things progress for so long, and that if Valve doesn't step in (forcing some of these sites to close down was a first step) then shit like this is going to happen. You may be fine with keeping gambling a 100% unregulated area in general, in which case it's obvious you don't think this is a problem, but many people do want to keep gambling under a certain amount of control. In which case seeing something like Valve skirting the laws with their game pisses us off. So if regulation was introduced, it shouldn't be this shitty one, but if it happens and Valve loses money from it, I don't really care either.

 

[Leg End]

Because it was gambling.

I don't quite see the point.

The gambling part is dodgy at best because...
1. There was a group a three guys advertising this great new site to gamble your skins on. They did it by streaming their wins and showing how many thousands of dollars they won.

At this point sirens should have been going off in the minds of everyone seeing on how stupid and totally not on level this was.

2. These guys owned the gambling site and could have change the results in their favour. No casino owner is allowed to bet in their own casino, let alone advertised how much they won.

Again, red lights.

3. A large part of the streamers audience was minors. You can't allow minor to gamble because they don't understand the consequences

My experience with Pokemon growing up says otherwise in regards to understanding consequences but, point valid.

(I submit that most adults don't because they lie to themselves about the odds. But they are over the legal age and can choose for themselves.)

And in this case it sounds like kids would have zero ability to actually participate without buying keys to open these crates which requires real money which typically requires a parent's credit card. A lot of this is still sounding like parents being stupid.

They got away with this because you have to go around about ways to cash out

How exactly can you "cash out"?

they were skins and not chips and no one knew who owned the website until it was revealed a few weeks ago. One of the three streamers verified the misdeeds including that minor were targeted.

Now that's just shitty.

Valve let these guys run amok because they made Valve a mint. They didn't verify what they were up to because money.

Sounds like basic greed or just apathy.

If you want an industry to be self governed instead of the government regulating, you actually have to do some self governing.

Isn't this what they're doing right now?

This applies to things like Greenlight and Early Access too. Sure, you can just let people do whatever they want on your platform or game but if the last couple of years has taught us anything, you will be punished if you don't moderate or curate. Your self interest is in stopping illegal and dodgy things happening on your programs.

Which again isn't that what's happening here?

Another problem is that this gambling is a multibillion dollar industry and I don't think they were the only dodgy people. Because there is no line, no rule or regulation, its hard to tell who is being dodgy.

Rule of thumb is that everyone is dodgy and you gamble at your own risk. But thanks for explaining as I had no real information as to the big details of what's been behind this hubbub.

I don't think most people here support this regulation.

That's somewhat at odds with the end of your post.

We just think it's Valve's own damn fault for letting things progress for so long, and that if Valve doesn't step in (forcing some of these sites to close down was a first step) then shit like this is going to happen.

Without gutting the ability to trade these skins, this shit is going to keep happening.

You may be fine with keeping gambling a 100% unregulated area in general, in which case it's obvious you don't think this is a problem

I'm a bit biased on that front but minimal regulation is better in my mind, yes.

but many people do want to keep gambling under a certain amount of control. In which case seeing something like Valve skirting the laws with their game pisses us off.

Only Valve? A lot of skirting happens in general. The name of the game is wiping your ass with the law in the form of loopholes. In this case, Valve is apparently managing to profit by just shuffling around items that don't even exist. I call that hilarious!

So if regulation was introduced, it shouldn't be this shitty one, but if it happens and Valve loses money from it, I don't really care either.

That kind of thinking is how a lot of bad laws end up on the books and harm freedom irreparably. If you want something done, you get it done directly and not through hoping it spites what you hate. It'd be directly dealing with how these sites and services are classified and nothing to do with having a game declared as a gambling game that it clearly fucking isn't. In this case I'm siding with Valve because calling CS:GO a gambling game is just flat out wrong and the senator should be ashamed at how retarded he's shown himself to be.

But in the end, this whole thing is pretty retarded.

 

[Trunkage]

A large part of the streamers audience was minors. You can't allow minor to gamble because they don't understand the consequences

My experience with Pokemon growing up says otherwise in regards to understanding consequences but, point valid.

(I submit that most adults don't because they lie to themselves about the odds. But they are over the legal age and can choose for themselves.)

And in this case it sounds like kids would have zero ability to actually participate without buying keys to open these crates which requires real money which typically requires a parent's credit card. A lot of this is still sounding like parents being stupid.

They got away with this because you have to go around about ways to cash out

How exactly can you "cash out"?

they were skins and not chips and no one knew who owned the website until it was revealed a few weeks ago. One of the three streamers verified the misdeeds including that minor were targeted.

Now that's just shitty.

If you want an industry to be self governed instead of the government regulating, you actually have to do some self governing.

Isn't this what they're doing right now?

This applies to things like Greenlight and Early Access too. Sure, you can just let people do whatever they want on your platform or game but if the last couple of years has taught us anything, you will be punished if you don't moderate or curate. Your self interest is in stopping illegal and dodgy things happening on your programs.

Which again isn't that what's happening here? So you don't need a credit card to get into the action. You can use steam wallet money. Now, how you get that money is the question, because its probably linked to a credit card but you can use vouchers. I can purchase vouchers with normal currency five minutes down the road. You can buy Steam wallet money via PayPal which can be linked to a savings account or Bitcoins. So there is a way around it, but clearly credit cards are easier. As a kid, I was usually paid in cash, and it was only McDonald's that forced me to open a bank account. Also, it could end up like that kids playing FIFA who stole the parents credit card and rack up a few thousand dollars. That's all the things I can think of, but there are probably plenty of others that I don't know about.

The problem is gambling is like smoking and is "addictive." So, in the old days (and still in many countries), cigarette companies target teenagers because leaving til 18 is too late. You have to convince them well before then. Same with gambling.

To cash out, you can sell these skins on the Steam market which gives you Steam wallet money. Third party sites will give you real cash for that Steam wallet money, for a significant cut (i.e. like money laundering.) I'd also liked to point out that you can buy games with the wallet. Not really cashing out but still.

The reason I have issues with Steam's "self regulation" is that Steam knew gambling was going on (but maybe not to the extend but that's their responsibility to investigate if they are keen to self-regulate.) Steam never did anything about it until these guys were caught. That's not self-regulation, that responding to possible class actions (there are class actions already place about this against Valve so it didn't work. They also have other class actions for other issues as well.) I brought up Greenlight and Early Access because there are been blatant plagiarism that they don't police until they get caught. I don't think responding to being caught is self-regulation.

Now, it seems this comes down to your expectation of self-governing. I would like to see people on the Steam platform being scrutinized before they are allowed to sell (or use API to gamble). It seems that you want them to respond after someone else has report the issue. I think it should (usually) be Steam who's reporting these issues (I can understand if someone was sneaky but this was blatant.)

 

[Vigormortis]

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!

It's not even like I'm saying Valve is infallible, nor that they've never made bad decisions. Fuck knows both of those are untrue. Oh boy, are they ever. But the hyperbole I've seen in response to this whole situation just boggles the mind.

People were resorting to 3rd party sites to trade items for real money. In response Valve created the Marketplace to allow users to trade items in a safe, officially-sanctioned system. Then, users started taking part in item gambling through 3rd party sites. Legally, Valve can't do anything about these gambling sites. However, when it was discovered some of them were violating the terms of use for the OpenID API, Valve was able to step in and levy cease-and-desist orders on those sites. Some shut down, but not all. Those that didn't are now being pursued by Valve's lawyers.

The legislator from Australia (and most of those commenting on the situation) seem to have no idea what's actually going on. They just hear "gambling", "video games", and "kids being exploited" and instantly point fingers, regardless of whether they're pointing at the real culprits.

 

[Vigormortis]

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.

You and I have very different definitions of 'gambling'.

And I sincerely hope they don't enact some law on systems like CS:GO's Case/Key system. Given the nature of the system, such laws would open the doors for governments to step in and regulate and tax things even as innocuous as MTGs Booster Packs.

It's a slippery slope.

 

[Vigormortis]

Rational? I must be losing my edge.

Just take the compliment, damn it. You're making this harder than it already is...

 

[Saelune]

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.

You and I have very different definitions of 'gambling'.

And I sincerely hope they don't enact some law on systems like CS:GO's Case/Key system. Given the nature of the system, such laws would open the doors for governments to step in and regulate and tax things even as innocuous as MTGs Booster Packs.

It's a slippery slope.

Maybe if games stopped having shitty ways to squeeze money out of people, it would be less likely to catch the eyes of law makers.

Sometimes abuses of power need to be met by laws and regulations. Sure, it could end up going bad, but it could crazy as it sounds, actually be beneficial to us as consumers.

Plus don't they already tax those?

 

[Strazdas]

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).

How do you know? Have you seen the proposal? Can you show it to me? There is no denying that the create system in CS:GO is gambling by legal definition of gambling. So yes, that videogame may not be about gambling, but it includes gambling.

I'm sorry but... these are skins were talking about, right?

They have no baring on the gameplay whatsoever?

Look I understand wanting a character to look a certain way, but it's not like I've gone out and bought Loot Crates for Overwatch.

Do you think advertising gambling to kids and encouraging them to gamble as a companion mechanic to a videogame something that should be regulated under current gambling laws or not? The senator thinks that it should. I agree.

You and I have very different definitions of 'gambling'.

And I sincerely hope they don't enact some law on systems like CS:GO's Case/Key system. Given the nature of the system, such laws would open the doors for governments to step in and regulate and tax things even as innocuous as MTGs Booster Packs.

It's a slippery slope.

Then you are wrong, because under current definition of gambling under law the case/key system IS gambling. They dont need NEW regulation, they just need to enforce existing ones.

 

[CaitSeith]

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).

How do you know? Have you seen the proposal? Can you show it to me? There is no denying that the create system in CS:GO is gambling by legal definition of gambling. So yes, that videogame may not be about gambling, but it includes gambling.

Is CS:GO a videogame? Yes. Therefore it's inherently gaming regulation. End of story.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

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).

How do you know? Have you seen the proposal? Can you show it to me? There is no denying that the create system in CS:GO is gambling by legal definition of gambling. So yes, that videogame may not be about gambling, but it includes gambling.

I'm sorry but... these are skins were talking about, right?

They have no baring on the gameplay whatsoever?

Look I understand wanting a character to look a certain way, but it's not like I've gone out and bought Loot Crates for Overwatch.

Do you think advertising gambling to kids and encouraging them to gamble as a companion mechanic to a videogame something that should be regulated under current gambling laws or not? The senator thinks that it should. I agree.

You and I have very different definitions of 'gambling'.

And I sincerely hope they don't enact some law on systems like CS:GO's Case/Key system. Given the nature of the system, such laws would open the doors for governments to step in and regulate and tax things even as innocuous as MTGs Booster Packs.

It's a slippery slope.

Then you are wrong, because under current definition of gambling under law the case/key system IS gambling. They dont need NEW regulation, they just need to enforce existing ones.

Yeah that's nice, I don't care if you think it's gambling or should be regulated.

I was talking about not understanding how these skins have any kind of monetary value when they don't affect gameplay at all.

 

[Areloch]

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).

How do you know? Have you seen the proposal? Can you show it to me? There is no denying that the create system in CS:GO is gambling by legal definition of gambling. So yes, that videogame may not be about gambling, but it includes gambling.

I'm sorry but... these are skins were talking about, right?

They have no baring on the gameplay whatsoever?

Look I understand wanting a character to look a certain way, but it's not like I've gone out and bought Loot Crates for Overwatch.

Do you think advertising gambling to kids and encouraging them to gamble as a companion mechanic to a videogame something that should be regulated under current gambling laws or not? The senator thinks that it should. I agree.

You and I have very different definitions of 'gambling'.

And I sincerely hope they don't enact some law on systems like CS:GO's Case/Key system. Given the nature of the system, such laws would open the doors for governments to step in and regulate and tax things even as innocuous as MTGs Booster Packs.

It's a slippery slope.

Then you are wrong, because under current definition of gambling under law the case/key system IS gambling. They dont need NEW regulation, they just need to enforce existing ones.

Do you have a link to any of the gambling law stuff you're referencing? For the life of me I can't find anything that sounds like it'd match up(usually finding stuff pertaining to betting). It doesn't help that the US has federal and 50 state's separate laws, so the whole thing is a mush of conflicting info anyways to say nothing of another country's handling of it.

 

[Leg End]

So you don't need a credit card to get into the action. You can use steam wallet money. Now, how you get that money is the question, because its probably linked to a credit card but you can use vouchers. I can purchase vouchers with normal currency five minutes down the road. You can buy Steam wallet money via PayPal which can be linked to a savings account or Bitcoins. So there is a way around it, but clearly credit cards are easier. As a kid, I was usually paid in cash, and it was only McDonald's that forced me to open a bank account. Also, it could end up like that kids playing FIFA who stole the parents credit card and rack up a few thousand dollars. That's all the things I can think of, but there are probably plenty of others that I don't know about.

The easiest way is just selling Steam trading cards and the like. No need to even leave your house.

The problem is gambling is like smoking and is "addictive."

Yeah but one is a chemical addiction and can actually kill you.

So, in the old days (and still in many countries), cigarette companies target teenagers because leaving til 18 is too late. You have to convince them well before then. Same with gambling.

Yes but one can kill you and the other you do when you're 9 in the back of the bus over Pokeymans.

To cash out, you can sell these skins on the Steam market which gives you Steam wallet money. Third party sites will give you real cash for that Steam wallet money, for a significant cut (i.e. like money laundering.) I'd also liked to point out that you can buy games with the wallet. Not really cashing out but still.

But how exactly can you transfer the funds? To my knowledge you can't directly exchange funds unless you're buying and selling on the market, which I assume is the case.

The reason I have issues with Steam's "self regulation" is that Steam knew gambling was going on (but maybe not to the extend but that's their responsibility to investigate if they are keen to self-regulate.) Steam never did anything about it until these guys were caught. That's not self-regulation, that responding to possible class actions (there are class actions already place about this against Valve so it didn't work. They also have other class actions for other issues as well.) I brought up Greenlight and Early Access because there are been blatant plagiarism that they don't police until they get caught.

I have no idea about the class actions so I cannot comment there.

I don't think responding to being caught is self-regulation.

Well, by definition it kinda is but not in the most optimistic of ways.

Now, it seems this comes down to your expectation of self-governing. I would like to see people on the Steam platform being scrutinized before they are allowed to sell (or use API to gamble). It seems that you want them to respond after someone else has report the issue. I think it should (usually) be Steam who's reporting these issues (I can understand if someone was sneaky but this was blatant.)

I just want to know how this is a big thing and the other examples I've seen of other games aren't. I'm used to the idea of using funny money(that can loosely be tied to real money) in order to gamble. Seems the issue here is that these people are particularly scumbags? Or just hate that Valve is implicated. That's basically why this seems insane to me.

I was talking about not understanding how these skins have any kind of monetary value when they don't affect gameplay at all.

I heavily assume it's related to idiots giving them such a value. Virtually anything has a dollar value if someone is willing to shell out for it.

The issue is really how that valuation holds up to people that have different definitions of value, and that's where this becomes a roller coaster.

Maybe if games stopped having shitty ways to squeeze money out of people, it would be less likely to catch the eyes of law makers.

Saelune, we both know that politicians on average don't actually care about anything more than staying in their chair. Shows in this case when the senator didn't even do research.

 

[Elijin]

Saelune, we both know that politicians on average don't actually care about anything more than staying in their chair. Shows in this case when the senator didn't even do research.

You keep saying this. Want to actually source it? Because while the articles go on to mention that gambling on e-sports is also picking up momentum and skirting Australian law in the process...it does so as a separate topic. It is very clear in its condemnation of the weapon case system present in CSGO.

Though the large impression you seem to be giving off is that you're oh so clever and would never fall for gambling, and anyone who does is an idiot, so its not a real issue. Which, great, you're entitled to your opinion. Its kind of ass backwards, but everyone gets one. Here in Australia, regulating slot machines to limit the impact they have on society is a big deal. CSGO cases are digital slot machines.

Is CS:GO a videogame? Yes. Therefore it's inherently gaming regulation. End of story.

Honest question: Are you completely ignorant of online slots, poker, etc? Gaming and Gambling are not exclusive from one another as you're repeatedly suggesting. Lots of gambling is straight up gaming. They're not in magical bubbles that don't touch.

 

[Leg End]

You keep saying this. Want to actually source it? Because while the articles go on to mention that gambling on e-sports is also picking up momentum and skirting Australian law in the process...it does so as a separate topic. It is very clear in its condemnation of the weapon case system present in CSGO.

Are we still talking about the senator? I feel like this isn't in relation to my point on him.

Though the large impression you seem to be giving off is that you're oh so clever and would never fall for gambling, and anyone who does is an idiot, so its not a real issue.

No, my impression is that gambling in association with a very shady website and company you know nothing about should naturally give off some red lights. I do in fact gamble with funny money that can technically be bought with real money, so I am no stranger to the concept here.

Which, great, you're entitled to your opinion. Its kind of ass backwards, but everyone gets one.

Opinions are indeed like assholes and I am by most definitions, probably an asshole.

Here in Australia, regulating slot machines to limit the impact they have on society is a big deal.

...Roughly the same here in the states but Gaming regulations in general are such a jumbled trainwreck, I honestly couldn't even give specifics beyond maybe the federal level. I still think it's a stupid mess but eh, what're you gonna do?

CSGO cases are digital slot machines.

They're also like TCG packs, so TCG packs are like slot machines by that logic. Unless you have an argument on how they're not. They are basically TCG packs you hand out and can't open without shelling out money.

 

[CaitSeith]

Is CS:GO a videogame? Yes. Therefore it's inherently gaming regulation. End of story.

Honest question: Are you completely ignorant of online slots, poker, etc? Gaming and Gambling are not exclusive from one another as you're repeatedly suggesting. Lots of gambling is straight up gaming. They're not in magical bubbles that don't touch.

No. I'm ignoring them on purpose because CS:GO isn't a freaking online slot, poker, etc. It's a FPS game. Legislation on a FPS game is gaming legislation. But if the semantic difference is important to you, ok. Gambling legislation. My point is: Australia has bad antecedents when it comes to legislating videogames.

 

[Fat Hippo]

I heavily assume it's related to idiots giving them such a value. Virtually anything has a dollar value if someone is willing to shell out for it.

The issue is really how that valuation holds up to people that have different definitions of value, and that's where this becomes a roller coaster.

There are many things that get traded every day even though they have no inherent value. It's a simple question of supply and demand. The only reasons people valued gold and used it as currency for millennia was because it was shiny and rare. It wasn't actually useful for anything. The same things are true for CS:GO skins. They're purely cosmetic, but because people BELIEVE they have value, they do. And once you have an electronic market, then similar in the way that stocks end up having one particular market value which updates globally with instant speed, then the same thing will happen with these skins.

You might think they SHOULDN'T have a value, and that only idiots think they do, but what you think about their worth doesn't matter. All that matters is that people are buying and selling them for specific amounts of money. For the purposes of gambling, they're essentially casino chips with values that can fluctuate over time.

 

[Leg End]

There are many things that get traded every day even though they have no inherent value.

An assload.

It's a simple question of supply and demand. The only reasons people valued gold and used it as currency for millennia was because it was shiny and rare. It wasn't actually useful for anything.

Not for most folk at least. Thankfully, it turns out that shit was pretty useful in practical terms.

The same things are true for CS:GO skins. They're purely cosmetic, but because people BELIEVE they have value, they do. And once you have an electronic market, then similar in the way that stocks end up having one particular market value which updates globally with instant speed, then the same thing will happen with these skins.

Yes.

You might think they SHOULDN'T have a value, and that only idiots think they do, but what you think about their worth doesn't matter.

Not what I said nor what I think.

All that matters is that people are buying and selling them for specific amounts of money. For the purposes of gambling, they're essentially casino chips with values that can fluctuate over time.

A concept I totally understand and I believe stated in my post.

...I honestly don't even know what we're arguing about anymore. Regulation in regards to people giving monetary value to items that are inherently without dollar value? I think I have a headache.