Micro-transactions in Video Gaming: Gambling?

[Going Commando]

19 minutes ago, Destino said:

Ok now I feel stupid for not seeing the gambling angle last night when I replied.  I agree that is gambling.  They're paying real money for a chance to win something they value.   It's very much like any other game of chance.

 

Yep.  But it's sneakier because it's new and people don't realize the psychological manipulation that's going on with new forms of games until long after they've been had.  Slot machines have a deservedly terrible reputation and most people know what they're getting into with them.  But a video game you play in your own home seems innocent.  And then you realize you've spent two or three hundred bucks on a game before you finally get out of its grip.  I am speaking from experience, I played a micro-transaction fueled game for a little over two years before the developers abandoned it for console versions of the game and its player community died.  It was a little different than a blockbuster publisher money-grab though, it was an indie developer whose team regularly interacted directly with the player community and the basic game was free and the stuff you gambled for was cosmetic.  I felt like I was helping to keep their lights on, or at least that's what I told myself at the time.  Now I wish I hadn't spent all that damn money on it.  But that's the psychological mechanism of gambling and addiction for you.

 

It occurs to me that the generation growing up in this Wild West era of the internet/social media/online gaming landscape are going to be so ****ed up when they're older because of how they've been preyed upon by all kinds of sources.  Sorry kids.

[Spaceman Spiff]

8 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

I agree with this.  There is no monetary gain to be had for the person buying a loot box or whatever trendy name that EA gave it.  It DOES use the traditional methods for triggering a gambling addictive personality, but I wouldn’t describe it as gambling, per se.  Ultimately, the player is just wasting their parents money, gaining nothing in return.

 

Right, no monetary gain.  Also fixed that.  If we're talking about kids gambling and spending money, is it really THEIR money?  maybe their parents shouldn't be plugging their mastercard into their kids playstation and letting them run wild with it.  I understand that's probably too much of a conservative viewpoint for some of you but are we really equating a Loot Box being the gateway drug to have these kids going to Atlantic City and ending up broke and destitute?

 

I mean, I blew a lot of my allowances on baseball cards and other dumb **** when I was a kid.  Part of growing up, IMO, is learning about money and how you should spend it, or more importantly, save it.  

[Springfield]

I bet there are plenty of kids in the 18-25 demo that are wasting their own money as well.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Just now, Springfield said:

I bet there are plenty of kids in the 18-25 demo that are wasting their own money as well.

 

You're probably right.  But that's their prerogative.  If someone can't pay rent because of Battlefield II, well, learn a lesson.  

 

 

[PeterMP]

14 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Right, no monetary gain.  Also fixed that.  If we're talking about kids gambling and spending money, is it really THEIR money?  maybe their parents shouldn't be plugging their mastercard into their kids playstation and letting them run wild with it.  I understand that's probably too much of a conservative viewpoint for some of you but are we really equating a Loot Box being the gateway drug to have these kids going to Atlantic City and ending up broke and destitute?

 

I mean, I blew a lot of my allowances on baseball cards and other dumb **** when I was a kid.  Part of growing up, IMO, is learning about money and how you should spend it, or more importantly, save it.  

 

I would warn not to ignore the psychological aspect that Steve has touched on.  Companies are much more tuned to the psychological nature of people and even kids and how to appeal to the deeper levels of the brain.  And as compared to something like baseball cards, video games and internet technology allows you to identify traits and characteristics in the individual person you want to appeal to.

 

There is a fundamental difference between appealing to a broad set of people where I have limited data on an individual consumer vs. what we see today where (even more broadly beyond video games) companies can identify individual consumers, their history, collect data on that person, and realistically if one approach to getting them to spend money does not work change tactics.

 

The same thing is true for the standard arcade/carnival games (e.g. Chuckee Chesses). 

 

I'm not sure we need government regulation, but there certainly has to be a re-calibration in people's awareness that companies today in what you are seeing in many cases is designed to appeal directly to your individual non-rational side.

 

(And what is going to happen as VR becomes better and more widespread actually scares me.)

[Spaceman Spiff]

8 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

I would warn not to ignore the psychological aspect that Steve has touched on.  Companies are much more tuned to the psychological nature of people and even kids and how to appeal to the deeper levels of the brain.  And as compared to something like baseball cards, video games and internet technology allows you to identify traits and characteristics in the individual person you want to appeal to.

 

There is a fundamental difference between appealing to a broad set of people where I have limited data on an individual consumer vs. what we see today where (even more broadly beyond video games) companies can identify individual consumers, their history, collect data on that person, and realistically if one approach to getting them to spend money does not work change tactics.

 

Right, but this ties into the psychological aspect of video games in general.  Being able to increasingly get better at something in a relatively short amount of time is addictive by human nature and that's why video games are addictive in the first place.  Didn't we see people severely harm their lives by playing Warcraft?  I'm not sure if that game had anything like micro-transactions but there's an inherent addictiveness to games in the first place that have had some severe effects on people.

 

https://kotaku.com/5917635/former-nfl-player-recovers-from-video-game-addiction-returns-to-pro-football This guy essentially threw away an NFL career for Call of Duty.  

 

Opening a pack of baseball cards doesn't have that inherent trait, but it does give you the satisfaction of trying to build towards something like completing a set.  I would argue that checking off a checklist and the rewarding feeling of building something complete is addictive and keeps people engaged, too.  It's certainly a simpler thing to keep people engaged but it does.  

 

 

[GoDeep81]

Probably need to regulate the packaging a bit, put some warnings about possible added fees/in game purchases. Also separate passwords when you register for online usernames (for gaming and for spending $) So you can still log into the network and play the game, but you need mom or dad's ok (password) to actually "buy" something.

[No Excuses]

1 hour ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

If buying a "loot box" is gambling...

 

then I'm gambling buying a 3 pack of discounted underwear and not knowing what colors I'm getting. 

 

This isn’t as straightforward.

 

These companies have access to a lot of personal data and information on the behavior of their customers.

 

The reason I think we need regulations is because game developers are actively engaged in predatory and deceitful behavior.

 

For instance, Bungie was recently busted by the community for employing a system that lies to its player base about the rewards system. It was intentionally designed to frustrate people into buying loot boxes.

 

http://www.gamesradar.com/bungie-cancels-destiny-2-curse-of-osiris-livestream-after-xp-drama-to-address-feedback-instead/

 

If you have companies engaged in deceitful behavior using methods that eerily resemble gambling, then I see a really strong claim for regulations that allow people to at least hold these companies accountable in court.

[Springfield]

Maybe have the ESRB rate any game that is includes pay for play items a “M” or “AO”.  That will possibly change things.

[dchogs]

i don't know that i'd call it gambling, per se, but i despise games where people can pay for something that gives them an advantage over you in multiplayer games or to unlock characters or players. 

 

there is a real psychological effect here, and peter's mention of the companies using data to make the offers more appealing to you on an individual level is chilling.  scary stuff.

[Going Commando]

2 minutes ago, GoDeep81 said:

Probably need to regulate the packaging a bit, put some warnings about possible added fees/in game purchases. Also separate passwords when you register for online usernames (for gaming and for spending $) So you can still log into the network and play the game, but you need mom or dad's ok (password) to actually "buy" something.

 

I think that there should be age limits on games built around the lootbox/micro-transactions in the same way we put age limits on the other forms of gambling.  Not sure how you enforce that though.  Probably have to come up with a new technology for passing ID checks on the internet.

[bearrock]

I think it's gambling (and would fall under the definition of gambling jn many states.  Ever wonder why Google and Apple are so eager to roll over when people dispute their in app purchases?)  I don't know that total prohibition is necessarily the best answer, but at minimum, each loot box purchase should spell out the odds of each item.  If you want to throw your money away even after being told how stupid the odds are, that's on you.  

[PleaseBlitz]

9 hours ago, Springfield said:

I don’t think the government should step in.  Ideally, people wouldn’t support games that include micro transactions.  Let consumers speak with their wallets.  Battlefront 2 is one of the most universally panned games out there, I’d hope that social media continues to call out these game makers.

 

This is my take as well.  Battlefront 2 is not selling well, probably almost entirely due to the in-game price structure.  EA just dropped a whole lot of money into developing a game, and then their greed backfired very publicly.  The market will fix this.

 

Also, I don't understand how microtransactions are gambling.  You are paying to receive stuff right?  (I have not played Battlefront).   "Gambling" is defined differently in different jurisdictions, here is the definition from VA (just b/c i live there).  I added the bolding. 

 

Quote

“Illegal gambling” means the making, placing or receipt, of any bet or wager in this Commonwealth of money or other thing of value, made in exchange for a chance to win a prize, stake or other consideration or thing of value, dependent upon the result of any game, contest or any other event the outcome of which is uncertain or a matter of chance, whether such game, contest or event, occurs or is to occur inside or outside the limits of this Commonwealth. “ (From 18.2-325)

 

In Battlefront, you pay your $ and you get your thing.  No chance involved.  Not gambling.  

[Going Commando]

1 minute ago, bearrock said:

but at minimum, each loot box purchase should spell out the odds of each item.

 

I think this is a good idea too.

[No Excuses]

1 minute ago, PleaseBlitz said:

In Battlefront, you pay your $ and you get your thing.  No chance involved.  Not gambling.  

 

You pay your $ and you get a lootbox. And the lootbox has a random chance of dispersing some combination of items from a large pool. 

 

You are basically paying for a virtual slot machine. 

[PleaseBlitz]

5 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

This isn’t as straightforward.

 

These companies have access to a lot of personal data and information on the behavior of their customers.

 

The reason I think we need regulations is because game developers are actively engaged in predatory and deceitful behavior.

 

For instance, Bungie was recently busted by the community for employing a system that lies to its player base about the rewards system. It was intentionally designed to frustrate people into buying loot boxes.

 

http://www.gamesradar.com/bungie-cancels-destiny-2-curse-of-osiris-livestream-after-xp-drama-to-address-feedback-instead/

 

If you have companies engaged in deceitful behavior using methods that eerily resemble gambling, then I see a really strong claim for regulations that allow people to at least hold these companies accountable in court.

 

This is helpful.  Almost every state already has regulations that prohibit "unfair or deceptive acts and practices" (UDAPs).

 

Quick primer:  https://www.nclc.org/issues/unfair-a-deceptive-acts-a-practices.html

 

Quote

Every state has a consumer protection law that prohibits deceptive practices, and many prohibit unfair or unconscionable practices as well. These statutes, commonly known as Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices or UDAP statutes, provide bedrock protections for consumers. In billions of transactions annually, UDAP statutes provide the main protection to consumers against predators and unscrupulous businesses. Yet, despite their importance, UDAP statutes vary greatly in their strength from state to state.

 

 

[No Excuses]

2 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I think this is a good idea too.

 

Funny enough, we can actually get this information somewhat indirectly because China made it mandatory for games with lootboxes to specify the odds of receiving items in the pool. 

[PeterMP]

In terms of the psychological aspect, there is also the added ability today to actually change what they are doing as the person changes.  If you adapt to become "resistant" to what the company/game was doing, today companies have the ability to alter what they are doing.

[bearrock]

3 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

Funny enough, we can actually get this information somewhat indirectly because China made it mandatory for games with lootboxes to specify the odds of receiving any product. 

Only problem is, there is strong suspicion that developers use different odds for countries that require disclosure.

 

 

Just wanted to add that @No Excuses is on the money about loot box still being a random prize.  Suppose I made a slot machine that gave out a envelope per pull with varying amounts of cash, from a penny to a million dollars.  I couldn't claim that it wasn't gambling because everyone gets an envelope.  It's what's inside that counts.  

 

UK gaming authorities sidestepped this issue by saying that prize in loot box couldn't be converted to cash, so not gambling.  I don't know the specifics of UK gambling laws, but Virginia includes prizes in its definition of forbidden payout.  Contents of loot boxes are certainly prizes and very much randomized.  

[No Excuses]

2 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

This is helpful.  Almost every state already has regulations that prohibit "unfair or deceptive acts and practices" (UDAPs).

 

Quick primer:  https://www.nclc.org/issues/unfair-a-deceptive-acts-a-practices.html

 

 

 

 

I don’t know how you would prosecute about in game reward systems that are crafted to deceptively trick people into purchasing loot boxes. 

 

A company like Bungie can just wipe their hands clean by saying that their algorithms were not working as intended (this is the excuse they used). 

[Going Commando]

I wonder if people 100 years from now aren't going to look back at loot boxes and children's prescriptions for adderall the way we look back on stuff like this:

 

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

23 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

This isn’t as straightforward.

 

These companies have access to a lot of personal data and information on the behavior of their customers.

 

The reason I think we need regulations is because game developers are actively engaged in predatory and deceitful behavior.

 

For instance, Bungie was recently busted by the community for employing a system that lies to its player base about the rewards system. It was intentionally designed to frustrate people into buying loot boxes.

 

http://www.gamesradar.com/bungie-cancels-destiny-2-curse-of-osiris-livestream-after-xp-drama-to-address-feedback-instead/

 

If you have companies engaged in deceitful behavior using methods that eerily resemble gambling, then I see a really strong claim for regulations that allow people to at least hold these companies accountable in court.

 

I was being a bit of a smartass.  I do see where you're coming from.  

 

Kind of like that guy in Wayne's World, you can't get to the next level so you keep pumping in quarters.  I would be inclined to agree that it needs to be regulated (not by the gov't) to keep companies honest if there's a company like Bungie where you can't advance without purchasing.  

 

Yes, these companies do have a lot of access to peoples spending habits, etc.  However, there's an entire industry based on this, just not with video games.  There are literally dozens of companies that create software to make sure companies like Bungie or EA can track what you're doing and how you're spending your money and how to keep you engaged and influenced.  When that crosses a line and that becomes predatory, I am not sure.  

[PleaseBlitz]

15 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

I don’t know how you would prosecute about in game reward systems that are crafted to deceptively trick people into purchasing loot boxes. 

 

A company like Bungie can just wipe their hands clean by saying that their algorithms were not working as intended (this is the excuse they used). 

 

I don't know how you would either, because I don't think it's deceptive.  You know you are buying a loot box, not a particular thing.  You pay your money, you get your loot box.  Nobody ever represented to the gamer that they anything in particular was going to be in the loot box.  For the article you posted about Destiny 2, I may not understand all of the issues or lingo, but it seems to me like they adjusted a game setting, they didn't try to trick anyone into buying anything?  

 

Again, I think the market addresses this kind of thing pretty well.  Games are too expensive, well, there are a thousand other games.  Sorry if someone got excited for a particular game and it wasn't what they were expecting.  Nobody is entitled to a game that is exactly what they were hoping for.  Let your feeling be known, don't buy from that developer anymore, or wait until there is some market feedback on how good a game is before you purchase.   

[PleaseBlitz]

21 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

UK gaming authorities sidestepped this issue by saying that prize in loot box couldn't be converted to cash, so not gambling.  I don't know the specifics of UK gambling laws, but Virginia includes prizes in its definition of forbidden payout.  Contents of loot boxes are certainly prizes and very much randomized.  

 

Yea, but you get a prize no matter what.  It may just not be the prize you want, and, unlike money, different prizes have different value to different people. 

[No Excuses]

4 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I don't know how you would either, because I don't think it's deceptive.  You know you are buying a loot box, not a particular thing.  You pay your money, you get your loot box.  Nobody ever represented to the gamer that they anything in particular was going to be in the loot box.  For the article you posted about Destiny 2, I may not understand all of the issues or lingo, but it seems to me like they adjusted a game setting, they didn't try to trick anyone into buying anything?  

 

The in game output on progression was intentionally lying to players on how much they were earning through playing.

 

I don’t think we can expect the market to correct this. Microtransactions and lootboxes are the holy cash cow of gaming at the moment. 

 

There may be pushback against some games but for the most part, major developers are pushing forward with microtransactions. 

 

They are even listing it as a requirement on hiring ads for senior game developers. They specifically want people who engineer addictive lootbox chasing mechanisms into games.

 

I see this ending in a scenario where a huge chunk of the gaming industry is propped up through the exploitation of addictive behavior. And companies will use increasingly sophisticated ways of doing this.