So? That's not the point.
They just regulate stuff that some of these f2p game companies don't advertise their games under false flags.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
EU to ban labeling games as free-to-play unless they are actually free
- Thread starter Zabant
- Start date
So? That's not the point.
They just regulate stuff that some of these f2p game companies don't advertise their games under false flags.
Minsc
Gold Member
I agree, but I'm curious to see how this plays out. I'm not convinced there will be any difference if the game which sells virtual currency or whatever else some 4-year-old wants to play is $0 but in a paid section of applications, vs a free one.
I don't think the parents who are downloading these games really care if there's potential costs within the game, just that it shuts their kid up for 10 minutes and costs nothing to get upfront.
We had similar thread last month:
28.2.14 neogaf.com / European Commission considering renaming f2p in EU, put in child protections
28.2.14 neogaf.com / European Commission considering renaming f2p in EU, put in child protections
UnluckyKate
Member
But it's free AND premium, mom ! Don't you get it ? That is why I need that 49,99$ sword !
Wait say wut? America doesn't have universal healthcare, high speed internet isn't considered a right, and being poor is considered evil in 'merica.
Anyways, these ordinates(?) mean basically nothing to American companies, or actually I guess nothing to most foreign companies that have products that would most definitely be banned under this rule.
They'll just make up a new marketing term like "Pay to Win!" or "Free to download!"
Weltall Zero
Member
I believe the best side effect is that it will segregate the games that are truly free from those with microtransactions. With any luck they will end up in different store sections, so that people looking for a new free game will get exactly that. This will be a huge boon for developers of truly free games.
People saying this won't stop people from playing Candy Crush are missing the point entirely. It's not about games people already play, it's about how people find out about new games.
I would also like to think this might give an incentive for some developers to go for an ad-supported model rather than microtransactions, which in the end benefits everyone.
People saying this won't stop people from playing Candy Crush are missing the point entirely. It's not about games people already play, it's about how people find out about new games.
I would also like to think this might give an incentive for some developers to go for an ad-supported model rather than microtransactions, which in the end benefits everyone.
All devs will need to do is introduce a warning at the start that states that the game has microtransactions. Just making it transparent thats what the actual game entails and what costs, if any are attached to it.
I feel all will benefit and the games themselves won't need to change, just clearly stating what free to play actually means for each specific title.
Yes, but the above legislation will not count it as free because it gives you the 'option' of buying stuff, even if it's completely gameplay irrelevant.
It's a good start, but they should also:
- Enable a cooling off period of 24 hours or so for digital purchases that haven't been used/downloaded/whatever with a full refund if requested.
- The right to access your paid for digital content and limits on being banned from your account for ancillary reasons.
- Allow the consumer ombudsman (or local equivalent) for your country jurisdiction to mediate any disputes over digital content.
- Enable a cooling off period of 24 hours or so for digital purchases that haven't been used/downloaded/whatever with a full refund if requested.
- The right to access your paid for digital content and limits on being banned from your account for ancillary reasons.
- Allow the consumer ombudsman (or local equivalent) for your country jurisdiction to mediate any disputes over digital content.
The EU commission has always wanted to make everything clear to the consumer, to help a consumer make well formed and full educated choice and not be tricked by decietful wording or shady tactics. If you think it is a nanny state then you miss the point.
Banks used to hide charges and act very shady. EU Commision states they must clearly show hidden charges. Why? To help the consumer have all the information they need before making a choice.
It isn't about telling you what to do, but more about telling what a product actually entails. They just want clarity of information.
Banks used to hide charges and act very shady. EU Commision states they must clearly show hidden charges. Why? To help the consumer have all the information they need before making a choice.
It isn't about telling you what to do, but more about telling what a product actually entails. They just want clarity of information.
Which was elected by people we in the EU elected.
Yup, it looks to be a kind of knee jerk reaction though. Seems like this was a real quick decision after that big story of the UK teen killing himself over accidently downloading a bunch of stuff on the Xbox Marketplace. The new rule is kinda sloppy and allows a lot of workarounds, but also it seems like it doesn't necessarily prevent accidentally spending money in the online stores that would have games like f2p titles.
There needs to be more restrictions on the basic functions of how these stores work. I'm sure companies do it on purpose, but there seems to be maybe one wall between your bank account, and an online service having access to it.
Yeah, but that is not happening right now, so regulations can come in and maybe help so the situation gets better. I am all for Nanny State if it comes to reining back advertiser's free reign over technically illiterate parents and children with access to their parent's credit cards.
Exactly, there are a lot of people who would seem electronically impaired to the people of GAF. But in todays world you need a smartphone, a computer, and depending on your job a laptop or tablet.
People don't appreciate technology, or really care to understand it. They just see how much it costs, and how new it is.
The difference here being that agreeing to buy a 20-hour expansion during a game usually kicks you out of the game and into the store, where you make the actual purchase. At least that's how it is on PS3 and 360; I couldn't tell you what it's like on Android or iOS, since I don't buy IAPs or DLCs for those formats.
I'm not too fond of the concept of Trial & Unlock demos, either, but at least they have a practical reason for existing, and they seem to work well. But at least then you're buying a full game, rather than a useless XP Boost for whale-hunting harpoons like Candy Crush and its ilk.
Besides, if you're abusing IAPs in your game, you've already thrown any pretense of good game design away in the pursuit of greater profit. Look at Dead Space 3 for proof (though I'd actually argue that making that game co-op was a bigger blunder). Shit's just disrespectful to gamers as a whole, and players of hardcore games where they appear (ie, Dead Space fans) in particular.
Besides, we're getting sidetracked here. The EU isn't banning anything - they're just telling these sharks to come clean about the true cost of their beg-ridden apps.
Very good. That's why we need the EU Commission & Parliament to stick around.
No, it isn't. The parlament is.
Metallix87
Member
I don't understand why people are cheering about this. Nothing will really change. The games will be re-labeled as "free to download" or "freemium", parents will continue to be irresponsible, and the world will continue to turn. This isn't going to stop these games.
Yeah this doesn't benefit consumers in any way.
It's a first step. Stop being so pessimistic.
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
You didn't hear about the Bananas then?
What makes you think they will be able to associate "free" with games using microtransactions at all if this comes in effect?
wait, so doing nothing about it is somehow better?
The commission is made by the governments of the member states, in short elected by elected officials.
If you want to blame the election of a member of the commission, blame the governments of the member states.
Unless you meant that the governments of the member states aren't legitimate or something.
First step to what, exactly? Doing a whole lot of nothing?
Metallix87
Member
If they can't, they'll find some other name for them. The free price point will still remain for these titles in the app store. This is not a solution to a problem, this is changing the name of the symptom instead of trying to cure the problem. The problem is that parents today are careless and irresponsible, and need to wake up and take action to ensure their kids aren't spending money on app stores. Honestly, I'd even argue that parents need to reconsider whether their kids really need mobile devices.
Triggerhappytel
Member
Unfortunately true.
Probably also true. Hopefully other regions will follow this trend, but it probably won't really change anything.
Metallix87
Member
This IS doing nothing. Changing something's name doesn't change what it is or the fact that it exists.
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
Pay to play it's then.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
How is forcing companies to label what micro transaction are in their game doing nothing? As stifling advertising goes a long way since that's the whole point of the model. There's a reason why advertisements in general used the word free so often it's not a random coincidence.
no, it's not simple name changing, it's stopping false advertisement.
Doing nothing is leaving it in current state.
Wont this affect Apple more than any of the app creators? They'll have to change the App store download button for F2P games to something else, right?
I suggest 'Ripoff'.
Seriously though, don't must companies regard these EU rulings as basically toothless?
Labelling and naming things can have a huge impact on our attitudes towards them.
I suggest 'Ripoff'.
Seriously though, don't must companies regard these EU rulings as basically toothless?
Labelling and naming things can have a huge impact on our attitudes towards them.
Metallix87
Member
These games will still look free in the app store. As long as parents aren't keeping tabs on what their kids are up to, the problems will persist. You can't treat the symptom (treat being very generous; rename is more appropriate) and hope the problems disappear. You need to address the fact that parents are becoming irresponsible and not educating themselves as to what their kids are playing and experiencing.
What false advertising? The games ARE free to play, but you have the option of spending money, either on cosmetic items or on game enhancing content. It's essentially DLC.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Th won't look free if the information microtransaction are forced to be positioned centre in their advertisements and the app store. That's the purpose of this move
That's precisely the point and why the model is considered misleading.
Metallix87
Member
Unless they completely eliminate the 0.00 price tag on the page, which they won't, this solves nothing. They'll add some warning labels that most parents won't read, rename the category to something like "freemium", and everything continues as before.
not in my book, no
When you include game mechanics that interfere with gameplay and can be avoided only buy paying real money, that's not free to play game, even if technically it is, it's actually a trap.
wait are you by chance a dev of such games?
Aizu_Itsuko
Member
Good, but they will just use some other term.
Metallix87
Member
No, absolutely not. I'm very much anti-mobile games in general. I just see this as an utterly meaningless change, and not a victory. I AM an educator, though, and I see this as big government telling parents it's okay to be irresponsible and not be active in their kids upbringing, because the government is here to make things okay.
I've been working with kids for five years now, and the LAST thing parents need is more reasons to care even less about what their kids are playing and watching.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Saying $0.00 but it costs money to level is far better for the consumer and everyone involved (aside from the business), than saying free
I don't think you understand how importunate advertisements and perceptions are important to these games. How can you possibly think the consumer being able to filter games based on stated micro transactions is a bad thing.
It literally blows my mind. Do even play and enjoy those games?
It's not pointless far from it.
Most awful reasoning I've ever heard. we shouldn't do more to prevent paedophilic assaults, It's the parents fault they should be looking after their children
Metallix87
Member
Wow, what a ridiculous and moronic comparison. I was going to reply to the rest of your post, but I'm absolutely flabbergasted by this comparison. Wow. Like, just wow.