Support NeoGAF

[Caffeine]

Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) today announced a bill that would ban loot boxes and pay-to-win microtransactions in “games played by minors,” a broad label that the senator will include both games designed for kids under 18 and games “whose developers knowingly allow minor players to engage in microtransactions.

Going after micro harming children from predatory practices should be looked at and now they are.

Update:

The Entertainment Software Association sent us the following statement in regards to the US Senator’s new bill:
“Numerous countries, including Ireland, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, determined that loot boxes do not constitute gambling. We look forward to sharing with the senator the tools and information the industry already provides that keeps the control of in-game spending in parents’ hands. Parents already have the ability to limit or prohibit in-game purchases with easy to use parental controls.” – Stanley Pierre-Louis, Acting President and CEO, Entertainment Software Association

Sources:

U.S. Senator Introduces Bill To Ban Loot Boxes And Pay-To-Win Microtransactions

Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) today announced a bill that would ban loot boxes and pay-to-win microtransactions in “games played by minors,” a broad label that the senator says will include both games designed for kids under 18 and games “whose developers knowingly allow minor players to engage in...

kotaku.com

US Senator introduces bill to ban loot boxes and pay to win microtransaction in video games - Charlie INTEL

Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) has announced that he is introducing a bill to the Senate floor that will ban loot boxes and pay to win microtransaction in video games that are “played by minors.” This bill targets games that are played by those under 18. The bill is called “The Protecting Children...

charlieintel.com

Game studios would be banned from selling loot boxes to minors under new bill

“There is no excuse for exploiting children through such practices.”

www.theverge.com

Senator Hawley to Introduce Legislation Banning Manipulative Video Game Features Aimed at Children - Josh Hawley

“Social media and video games prey on user addiction, siphoning our kids’ attention from the real world and extracting profits from fostering compulsive habits. No matter this business model’s advantages to the tech industry, one thing is clear: there is no excuse for exploiting children through...

www.hawley.senate.gov

 

[Mugatu]

Idea is good but it’s politics so execution will probably be bad.

 

[Meowzers]

About bloody time!

 

[Ceadeus]

Wow now that's surprising. Very good idea

 

[Pejo]

US Senator wears big flag that says "EA Pay me to stop"

 

[Handy Fake]

I'm mostly astounded that it's a Republican pushing for it.

 

[ZeroGravity]

People who don't even understand how the Internet works want to start legislating video games. They will absolutely screw this up and you'll probably regret cheering for this.

 

[BlackTron]

I agree with the cause bit the motives behind it and the process has me skeptical.

In any case though it's a good thing that this is being talked about.

 

[TeamGhobad]

the succeed here their next bill is to eliminate violence and nudity from games. this is why this bill needs to fail.

 

[Handy Fake]

I agree with the cause bit the motives behind it and the process has me skeptical.

In any case though it's a good thing that this is being talked about.

*much nodding*

 

[Hellblueboy]

waiting for someone to cried "Noooo! Government regulation bad! Self regulation good!"

 

[Majukun]

waiting for someone to cried "Noooo! Government regulation bad! Self regulation good!"

it ahs already been said, well not with those exact words,but close.

 

[zeorhymer]

The harder question is to define "lootbox." If it's just half assed, then a publisher would chime in and say, it's not a lootbox, it's a box of loot.

 

[SonGoku]

The harder question is to define "lootbox." If it's just half assed, then a publisher would chime in and say, it's not a lootbox, it's a box of loot.

Anything that requires payment and uses RNG

 

[Bkdk]

Completely disagree with the ban, makes absolute no sense to ban something this optional for human life. Also if people are buying it it means there is a market for this type of service, some people are enjoying it.

 

[GAMETA]

Completely disagree with the ban, makes absolute no sense to ban something this optional for human life. Also if people are buying it it means there is a market for this type of service, some people are enjoying it.

It's basically a gamble. You don't want kids gambling. It's as simple as that. Note that it applies to "games for minors" only.

You'll still get your super duper useless weapon skins on your so adult games, relax.

 

[zeorhymer]

Anything that requires payment and uses RNG

A pack of Magic/Pokemon cards are that, but it sure isn't a lootbox.

 

[SonGoku]

A pack of Magic/Pokemon cards are that, but it sure isn't a lootbox.

That falls on physical stores regulation

 

[zeorhymer]

That falls on physical stores regulation

Moving the goal post.

 

[SonGoku]

Moving the goal post.

Just after you did

 

[demigod]

I hate lootboxes. I had 9 characters in EQ trying to get a horse, no luck. Someone with 1 account gets a horse, really bs.

This isn't going to change much imo, devs/publishers are just going to change the ToS to require 18+.

 

[zeorhymer]

Just after you did

Huh? I gave you a counter example from within your definition.

 

[rabbity-thing]

People who don't even understand how the Internet works want to start legislating video games. They will absolutely screw this up and you'll probably regret cheering for this.

The need for government regulation is a reflection of industry's inability to properly handle this on their own. The government may screw this up, but when compared to the complete inaction (and often times full steam ahead greed train) from game creators/publishers, I'm not sure it'll much matter. They had their chance to self impose some moderate regulations/guidelines and they basically chose to not care and screw consumers who suffer from gambling addiction (see: whales) so that they could score limitless profits.

Lootboxes are a predatory business practice. Full stop.

Relevant reading: https://www.pcgamer.com/behind-the-addictive-psychology-and-seductive-art-of-loot-boxes/

 

[SonGoku]

Huh? I gave you a counter example from within your definition.

We were talking about gambling in videogames.

 

[zeorhymer]

It's basically a gamble. You don't want kids gambling. It's as simple as that. Note that it applies to "games for minors" only.

You'll still get your super duper useless weapon skins on your so adult games, relax.

This is another crux of the problem. If the game is rated "M" and you knowingly bought it for your kid, the publisher's hands are basically washed clean. In a casino, the business can enforce if minors are gambling.

 

[zeorhymer]

We were talking about gambling in videogames.

No. I was talking about how the government will need to define "lootbox" to prevent publishers from finding loopholes to get around the law.

 

[SonGoku]

This is another crux of the problem. If the game is rated "M" and you knowingly bought it for your kid, the publisher's hands are basically washed clean. In a casino, the business can enforce if minors are gambling.

Right... just like if you bought your kid a pack of cigs or beer

No. I was talking about how the government will need to define "lootbox" to prevent publishers from finding loopholes to get around the law.

I assumed this bill will cover video games only, the definition is simple: Anything that constitutes gambling on a videogame banned from non M games.

 

[Saber]

If somehow helps to stop this stupid predatory practices, then sure.

The only thing is going to be careful just to not backfires.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Hands off. Let these companies ramp off a cliff. The ones left behind will find plenty of financial success.

 

[sublimit]

Eh even if this happens the greedy executives will find other scummy ways to "seduce" those who are weak enough to give in (minors or not).

But it's something.

 

[Petrae]

Nobody to blame but the video game industry and its greed-driven lack of restraint. When you police yourself as an industry, you invite less governmental interference— but with video game publishers always wanting more cash, the industry tried to normalize it and think that everyone would bend over.

That said, I expect the industry to try and fight it... and, given how business first and consumer last the United States has become, I expect this bill to die a quick death.

 

[manfestival]

It is a step in the right direction. It may finally allow for creativity to flow in the mobile market since it is the biggest practitioner of these predatory tactics. However, I wonder if this would have any major implications for games like Hearthstone or MTGOnline

 

[Caffeine]

added to op

Update:

The Entertainment Software Association sent us the following statement in regards to the US Senator’s new bill:
“Numerous countries, including Ireland, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, determined that loot boxes do not constitute gambling. We look forward to sharing with the senator the tools and information the industry already provides that keeps the control of in-game spending in parents’ hands. Parents already have the ability to limit or prohibit in-game purchases with easy to use parental controls.” – Stanley Pierre-Louis, Acting President and CEO, Entertainment Software Association

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

added to op

Update:

I didn't know who Stanley Pierre-Louis was before this quote, but I'm glad he told the gov't to back off.

 

[The Cartographer]

I didn't know who Stanley Pierre-Louis was before this quote, but I'm glad he told the gov't to back off.

Yep.
This Josh Hawley guy thought it was his turn to be on the take but his plan will hopefully fail.

 

[Fake]

RIP EA.

 

[Petrae]

Big surprise that the ESA is playing the damage control game. "We can continue to be predatory as an industry because consumers don't HAVE to buy these things, even though they really want to. We like to turn the psychological screws, because we're assholes. But you knew that."

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Big surprise that the ESA is playing the damage control game. "We can continue to be predatory as an industry because consumers don't HAVE to buy these things, even though they really want to. We like to turn the psychological screws, because we're assholes. But you knew that."

I kinda want to see how big this AAA tower of Babel can get, because when it crumbles it will ensure the practices do not resurface for x number of years, in direct proportion to how much damage it does to the big publishers.

Kids buying lootboxes on their parents' credit cards is not a social woe.

If we're going to do something for the children, let's pick some better ones first like revamping our child-custody laws, investing more attention and money into programs aimed at keeping families together, etc.

 

[spandexmonkey]

I'm fine with restricting gambling in video games to just ones for adults.

 

[Zannegan]

No shock to see the ESA come out to protect their turf, while also completely not mentioning in their statwment that this is targeted at games kids can play.

 

[Caffeine]

I personally don't like the idea of broad government regulation being done by someone who can't correctly define what he is doing. On the other hand I don't like the ESA corporate shilling and throwing the issue under the rug as a non issue.

clearly it is easy to target young minds and target people who do have addictions to rng systems.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

US Gov't and various opportunists tried to get a grip on videogames by appealing to laws over "distasteful content".

Don't let them do it over "gambling".

I'm not saying the predatory practices aren't predatory, but it's almost like there is some kind of role in our society for someone who watches over children and prevents them from being suckered by corporations.

 

[iconmaster]

A pack of Magic/Pokemon cards are that, but it sure isn't a lootbox.

Loot box odds can be tweaked at open time for maximum manipulation. Games can machine-learn your behavior to tempt you in just the right way at just the right time. This is why devs don’t publish the fixed odds: they don’t exist.

Physical packs are like hurled rocks compared to the Predator drones that are video game loot boxes.

 

[Sub_Level]

I've played 4 games that were heavy with loot boxes

- Mass Effect 3
- Overwatch
- Quake Champions
- Mortal Kombat 11

Of those, MK11 is the only one where I felt it detracted from the game, and even then its like whatever. How about the parents don't let kids have access to their credit cards to make premium currency purchases?

 

[Jigsaah]

Really surprised this is coming from a republican to be honest. this follow calls for it by that democrat from Hawaii. Bout time we having some bipartisanship in this country again.

The US is a effin mess right now.

 

[zeorhymer]

Loot box odds can be tweaked at open time for maximum manipulation. Games can machine-learn your behavior to tempt you in just the right way at just the right time. This is why devs don’t publish the fixed odds: they don’t exist.

Physical packs are like hurled rocks compared to the Predator drones that are video game loot boxes.

Block chain can be used to prevent manipulation upon the creation of the lootbox. Unless the wording is specific to banning boxes which has no randomized mechanism or just flat out ban all randomized digital content purchases. The broadest way is to categorize that lootboxes is a form of gambling. That would put it under heavy legislation.

 

[HoldTheAir]

I love the idea behind it, but I'm afraid it could have horrible execution and have unintended consequences for gaming as a whole. The best way to make loot boxes go away? Stop buying any game that has them.

 

[iconmaster]

Unless the wording is specific to banning boxes which has no randomized mechanism or just flat out ban all randomized digital content purchases.

I would be totally cool with someone (preferably the ESRB) insisting on three restrictions:

- Odds are set permanently on the server, not at open-time
- Odds are public
- Games which feature for-pay random rewards are clearly labeled as such

(I do think if the government handles this they're going to end up killing a fly with a shotgun. There's a way to solve this surgically.)

 

[Mista]

Give me a US passport and i'll vote for him

 

[Jubenhimer]

I do think that there needs to be a check on these exploitative practices. However, I hope this doesn't lead to the government trying to regulate online elements in games because that'd be a disaster. Instead, I think it should be semi-regulated on a case by case basis. If and when loot box controversies, the FTC will investigate and if the publisher is guilty, they're forced to pay a fine, and remove those loot boxes.

I actually don't think loot boxes and micro-transactions are bad in and of themselves, but unfortunately they're often exploited and abused by publishers, which gives them a bad rep. A semi-regulated FTC system would allow publishers a chance to make a case for the better implementations of these elements, and so long as none of the guidelines are technically violated, they're free. For example, if the loot boxes are just for cosmetics, then the Publisher could technically get away with it since it doesn't effect the game-play experience and the player can mostly ignore it if they want.

The only problem with this, is the same problem that Congress and the rest of the goverment have, there aren't enough people well versed in Silicon Valley and the tech industry, a lot of congressmen and women along with politicians seem like old dinosaurs who don't know what a push notification is, or worse, cheerleaders for big tech. This is why Twitter and Facebook are allowed to get away with their shit despite numerous controversies and hearings. The White House needs to start bringing in people with a tech or entertainment background who know their way around Silicon Valley and big tech, allowing them to keep these companies in check.