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 microtransactions”.
Loot boxes are clearly gambling, and ought to be treated as such. I’m by no means enough of a lawyer to determine if this specific proposed bill does enough – or possibly too much – to curtail the predatory practices in games, but it’s a good sign people are paying attention.
We sure won’t be able to count on Google or Apple, since both of them profit greatly from these predatory practices.
[disclaimer: I work for Google, however am a lowly employee, not in charge of these matters].
I too find random loot boxes very similar to gambling, with item probabilities, and the addiction component. However I think they came as an indirect way to enable “game subscriptions”.
I have friends who play some sort of “royale” game, and they have spent over $100 by their admission. When I asked whether they would pay such an amount up front, the answer was of course negative.
The root cause is that with the $1 and free offers, we have lost the ability to pay for apps and games. When the same game were to charge $10 (1/10th of what they have spent) there is little chance they would get enough buyers. (I think there is only MineCraft that can still sell at full price).
We also do not do direct subscriptions. World of Warcraft is one of the older relics that can still sustain that model. But even then, they peaked, and shrinked over time.
Ads did not work as well either. And especially in mobile devices the stolen screen real estate is more significant.
So companies went after alternative models. For one reason or another loot boxes became the successful one, while other kinds of monetization failed.
The problem with loot boxes is the gambling element. This can lead to an unpredictable and even exponentially rising “subscription amount”.
Loot boxes don’t enable “game subscriptions” any more than slot machines enable “casino subscriptions”.
Not heavily opposed to the “pay as you play” model, as long as it doesn’t mess up the game too much, but the practice of putting a slot machine to every game is annoying. Some games like Need For Speed No Limits have a feature that will do the driving for you on stages you ‘ve won before so you can get to meat of the game (the slot machine part at the end of the race) without having to drive.
If people want to waste their money on loot boxes, I don’t have a problem with them doing so. I don’t support or encourage the `loot box` model because I won’t pay for a loot box. At this point, anyone I know who did is no longer willing. I don’t see a problem that requires a legislative fix. There’s plenty of money to be made in gaming and once the loot box cow is dead, the industry will find some other way to keep you opening your wallet.
The problem is that kids are often the one gambling… with their parents credit cards. The first the parents learn about this is when they get a $2K to $10K bill from VISA. If you check the bills closer, you’ll see that they’re banning MINORS from games with loot boxes and P2W, not everybody. Companies with LB/P2W will have to verify ages before letting players join.
In that scenario the problem is the parents and their lack of parenting & oversight. It’s pathetic that a game company has to step in because the parents don’t bother protecting themselves. Xbox has a feature to require approval from a parent before anything can be purchased by a minor. As a parent who uses it, I can say it works great and I’ve never gotten any unexpected charges on my card. I’d imagine the other gaming platforms have something similar.
I wish I knew how dedicated this guy is to this proposed law. I can see the gaming lobby PAC throwing funds at him, bill suddenly dies, then he claims he did all he could (fingers crossed behind his back).
I am betting on e-gambling companies doing whatever they can so the unregulated competition in the app stores is either regulated or banned.