Belgium Declares Video Game Loot Boxes Gambling and Therefore Illegal (arstechnica.com) 176
The Belgian Gaming Commission has reviewed several big video games and found that randomized loot boxes in at least three of the titles count as "games of chance," and publishers could therefore be subject to fines and prison sentences under the country's gaming legislation. Ars Technica reports: A statement by Belgian Minister of Justice Koen Geens (machine translation) identifies loot boxes in Overwatch, FIFA 18, and Counter Strike: Global Offensive as meeting the criteria for that "game of chance" definition: i.e., "there is a game element [where] a bet can lead to profit or loss and chance has a role in the game." The Commission also looked at Star Wars: Battlefront II and determined that the recent changes EA made to the game means it "no longer technically forms a game of chance." Beyond that simple definition, the Gaming Commission expressed concern over games that draw in players with an "emotional profit forecast" of randomized goods, where players "buy an advantage with real money without knowing what benefit it would be." The fact that these games don't disclose the odds of receiving specific in-game items is also worrisome, the Commission said. The three games noted above must remove their loot boxes or be in criminal violation of the country's gaming legislation, Geens writes. That law carries penalties of up to 800,000EU (~$973,680) and five years in prison, which can be doubled if "minors are involved." But Geens says he wants to start a "dialogue" with loot box providers to "see who should take responsibility where."
Thank god (Score:2, Interesting)
absolutely agree, if you can't know what you're getting, it's a gamble. This is the stupidest trend in gaming that needs to end.
Re: (Score:1)
RIP Magic The Gathering in Belgium. I mean, you buy a pack of random cards -- some have value some don't. And CHILDREN play this game. Gambling must stop! Think of the #CHILDREN!
Re: (Score:2)
And why is that a problem? Trading cards should've been classified as gambling long ago.
Re: (Score:1)
So maybe everything should be illegal?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Totally irrelevant to the fact that it's still gambling. It's a slot-machine mechanic that allows people to put money in and get in return something that may or may not be worth anything at all. In the case of CS some of the rarer skins are worth thousands, which has created a whole economy of its own where people and streamers are not in fact playing the game itself at all but simply acquiring/opening boxes in the hopes of getting rare loot that can then be so
Re: Thank god (Score:2)
I think the definition of gambling is too literal. If I spend $2 because the lottery jackpot hit 500 million, or if I go to the Derby and place a wager of $2 for a horse to show, I really donâ(TM)t consider that gambling, Because I risked nothing.
People piss away, on average, $5/day on âstarbucksâ(TM) or other specialty coffees. I dont, but so many more do. Many more buy in-app purchaes that average out to $1/day. In some cases these, for lack of a better word, addictions, create a financial
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, what? You're saying the lottery, slot machines, and sports betting are all not gambling? What the hell is gambling then?
I think your method of gambling is a reasonable way to avoid losing more than you can afford at gambling, but it's definitely gambling.
Re: (Score:2)
for me its "the act or practice of risking the loss of something important by taking a chance or acting recklessly:"
since there is never any real risk, I really don't see it as gambling. Certainly not the kind that requires big brother to go around telling people what to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you don't consider $2 "risky" doesn't make it not gambling. Where do you draw your imaginary line? $10? $500? A million? I'm sorry, but if you're trying to come up with a "definition" for gambling, your arbitrary limits don't make a lot of sense.
Re: Wow, so much better now (Score:2, Insightful)
The Belgian government is actually elected, and in fact, enjoys a much better electoral system than say the United States where your authoritarian tyrant had fewer votes than his opponents, and his petty sycophants were often elected in rigged districts that make the entire process suspect, even aside from their own blandishments that millions of "illegal" voters exist which would make their own election suspect.
Of course, Trump and his ilk are quite dedicated to controlling peoples lives as well, notice ho
Re: (Score:1)
Belgium is the size of a large city. Replacing a mayor with a 4 governments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
and a bunch of other institutions maybe is a bit of overkill.
I think Trump being elected is not that much a fault of the electoral system but of many people voting for him. If you look in detail you could say ok he didn't get the majority of the votes, but it's close enough. When Al Gore lost in a close call to Bush a lot was made of the detailed count but the main issue should have been, why was it
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt if there is any similar sized country with this level of federalization.
Re: (Score:2)
The Belgian government is actually elected, and in fact, enjoys a much better electoral system than say the United States where your authoritarian tyrant had fewer votes than his opponents, and his petty sycophants were often elected in rigged districts that make the entire process suspect, .
Except parties put whatever disgusting asshole on top of their lists, and even if you carefully skip the disgusting assholes in the list, once the acceptable people have the necessary number of votes to be elected, the remaining nominative votes are devolved to the disgusting assholes on top of the list you didn't want to see elected.
Except for half of the politicians (Michel, Tobback, Whatelet, Lutgen, Van Den Bossche,...), including our prime minister, who are sons of the previous generation (some of whom
Re: (Score:2)
(not to speak of the election of Laurent Louis). Next to that, the electoral college is very straightforward.
Re: (Score:2)
Just to be clear, Gerrymandering is an abomination that both major US political parties actively engage in. As citizens we shouldn't tolerate it from either of them. However there isn't really a good way to clean up that mess without changing up our entire electoral system, so we're likely stuck with it.
Re: (Score:1)
Tell me more about this theory of Donald Trump not being elected.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Wow, so much better now (Score:5, Interesting)
Gambling has long been a protected area due to the social damage it causes beyond the immediate impact to the individual. Loot boxes are gambling without a doubt. They're fine as a game mechanic, so long as you never have to exchange real money to obtain them.
The sad thing is that companies will just move the point of payment. Buying "lives" or "health potions" or something like that, which lets you grind for currency to buy loot boxes and grinding without buying these things will be made impossible.
Actually, law already covers that. (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know about Belgium or the US, but here in Germany, we have "Geldwerter Vorteil" (non-cash benefits). And our taxing agency is *very* aware of people trying to use that to circumvent taxation since forever.
I bet pretty much any country will have a concept like that. Belgium copies most of its laws from the surrounding countries anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Absolutely. There are games designed to trap "whales" who will drop thousands of dollars on a single game. They'll design features tailored to their wants just so they'll keep dropping cash.
https://venturebeat.com/2013/0... [venturebeat.com]
Re:Wow, so much better now (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole loot-box thing started because gamers were beginning to complain and boycotting games. Politicians had nothing to do with that, they are just reacting to those complains now. And depending on how exactly the gambling laws are written, those games were already illegal to begin with, the law just wasn't enforced properly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Think of all the households destroyed by loot boxes, you insensitive clod !!
Good (Score:2)
Here's hoping they include the scum bags at Psyonix (Rocket League).
Re: (Score:1)
Hmmm I've played 1000+ hours of Rocket League, and I've never once needed to buy a loot box. Nothing in them makes it easier to win. They are purely cosmetic.
Now, loot boxes that make your game easier, or give you advantages, I'm ALL for getting rid of those.
Re: (Score:2)
You, I presume are an adult. The problem is they targeted minors in a manipulative fashion to scam them out of their pocket money, it could not be worse, except if they mugged passing prams for their milk bottle. It is really lame and socially ugly and custodial sentences should be appropriate, not long ones, just 90 days or so. The fine of course should be triple the estimated income.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is they targeted minors in a manipulative fashion to scam them out of their pocket money
You can get a credit card as a minor? If not, how do they accept cash over the internet?
Re: (Score:2)
You certainly needed a credit card attached to an account to purchase games from the App Store.
If they don't have one, it's probably their parents'.
I'm pretty sure minors can have credit cards if their parents/guardian co-signs.
Re: (Score:1)
That isn't where the regulation has to be to be effective.
Gambling is addictive and young people aren't able to evaluate the cost/reward as well as adults. That is why gambling is regulated.
If the award gives you and advantage or if it is cosmetic only doesn't have an impact on the addictiveness.
A law to regulate lootboxes has to be phrased so that games where you can pay to "roll the dice" should have an age limit/be regulated as gambling.
What the reward is is irrelevant since the addiction comes from the
Re: (Score:1)
That alone wouldn't protect Rocket League. Note that Overwatch is one of the 3 that were definitely slammed as having illegal gambling. From what I understand all of the lootbox crap in Overwatch is also purely cosmetic.
Re: (Score:3)
They are purely cosmetic.
Irrelevant. I don't understand why so many people don't understand this. Exchanging real money to give you a pull on the slot machine, even if the slot machine only spits out shitty hats, is still gambling.
Mmm Hmm (Score:2, Informative)
Re: Mmm Hmm (Score:1)
U need a permit for gambling dumbass
Re: (Score:1)
I do so I tried this and won. Now I have 3 dumbasses
Re: (Score:1)
The lotto isn't a video game.
Or they could still have their gambling boxes if they get licensed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Mmm Hmm (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
How often have the RNGs been independently audited in FIFA 2018? What are the complete odds of any output? Can children buy them? Are the licensed by the state?
Re: (Score:2)
'cause Lotto Belgium [thelotter.com] is a game of skill.
They have a permit and pay a shitload of taxes. Also they require the player to verify that they are 18 or over.
Slippery slope (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm, you have to send these guys money every month just to play the game. So we spend real money, and have a chance of getting a really "high value" piece of loot.
So, every MMORPG should qualify as gambling by that definition. Especially the ones that allow free-to-play options (such as an introductory ftp, which restricts what internal content is available till you start paying for the subscription)....
Re: (Score:2)
Not the same thing, even with your stretched logic.
The monthly fee is a subscription for access to the server. The loot drop is tied to a player activity based event, influenced by player skill in the group. So you'd have to be really deluded or stupid to think that they are the same thing at all.
Re: (Score:3)
No it's not a slippery slope: the fact it's "on a computer" makes no difference. There's a coninuous line between gambling and not and you can always make slight tweaks to make it more or less like gambling.
This has not prevented gambling from being regulated now or in the past. This is in fact the system working as intended. Gambline is regulated, but somone has to provide some judgement as to whether or not something close to the line is in fact gambling.
That's why judges exist.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, that there is a line that needs to be drawn. However, I this seems like a reasonable place to draw it. I don't see why it would lead to what you stated.
Monster drops aren't purchased, and even monster encounters that are part of a paid game aren't purchased like spins on a slot machine. But loot boxes are. They're pay per spin.
Re: (Score:2)
The definition of a "loot box" is simple. Its something where you pay real world money to a finite number of in-game items and where you do not have a way to know in advance what you are getting for your money.
If you know in advance what you are getting before you pay money, its not a loot box. (regardless of how many items you get for your money) If you pay a single price to get access to the item and then never need to pay any more money again (even if the chance to pick up the item is random), its not a
Re: (Score:2)
Compensation (Score:3)
I demand compensation. They can start by giving me all the loot, and maybe a few free chicken dinners.
Re: (Score:2)
If they just gave them away it wouldn't provide players with a sense of pride and accomplishment that they're there for.
Re:Jurisdiction? (Score:5, Informative)
No, it's not trying to regulate the company. It's regulating the business the company does in its own country.
You, the company, should act like this in my country, if you don't, you can't do business here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What is wrong with people- voluntary interactio (Score:4, Insightful)
everything here is a voluntary interaction and anybody who doesn't like it can stop playing.
If that were true, we wouldn't need to regulate gambling at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What is wrong with people- voluntary interactio (Score:4, Interesting)
when everything here is a voluntary interaction and anybody who doesn't like it can stop playing.
Unfortunately, that is not true. Loot boxes were designed to create positive reinforcement that a certain percentage of the population gets addicted to and can't just stop.
Loot boxes are slot machines. You put in real money for that 1 in 100,000+ chance of a jackpot. They use flashing lights, streamers, music to create that positive reinforcemt just like the slot machine. They dangle a few free ones in front of you hoping to grab you in so you put down some real cash. They hope to cash in on the Gambler's Fallacy and grab more cash from you. For some, this will become a compulsive behavior they won't be able to stop.
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't something that you are forced to buy. Nobody is making you gamble.
You're compelled to buy and gamble, though, through various psychological tricks. Not everyone's resistant to that, as a matter of fact most people aren't resistant to that at all. Also, there might not be an alternative to obtaining certain in-game items, which is also a scummy business model.
We should not be banning something just because some people might do bad things with.
Actually, yes, we should. Maybe you meant "We should not be banning everything just because some people might do bad things with" - to which I agree. But take each "something" separately, look at it, then decide if it
Kinder Surprise? (Score:1)
Anyone know what the status of Kinder Surprise are in Belgium...?
Re: (Score:3)
If, say, 1 out of 100,000 Kinder Surprise eggs had a toy worth quite a bit more than what was paid for the Kinder Surprise, then its gambling.
If the Kinder Surprise shoots out stars and streamers every time they open, with greater fanfare depending on rarity of item, then they are using psychological manipulation to get you to buy more. If they give out a few Kinder Surprises marketed heavily to children to get them addicted to the positive feedback loop and giving false hopes that the 1 in 100,000 prize wi
Re: (Score:2)
I am more curious in what will happen to collectible card games.
Technically these are gambling too: pay for a small chance to get a rare card with a high monetary value. But are people buying decks of cards just to play the game or start a collection? If there isn't enough pressure to keep buying packs, a judge might let it pass. However if people rush out and buy 5 more and 5 more again when the deck they got doesn't have a rare, like those idiots in "Charlie and the chocolate factory", it's a different matter. That golden ticket scheme would definitely be classed
Re: (Score:2)
No, it is not... because you are not paying for the toy inside of it. You are paying only for the chocolate egg that the toy comes inside of, and the value of the egg is a known and fixed value. The toy is then considered a free gift that comes with the treat, designed to motivate people to buy them.
CCG's with randomized packs are a bit more interesting, because I'm not sure if there's a known and fixed value that can be associated with them.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it is not... because you are not paying for the toy inside of it. You are paying only for the chocolate egg that the toy comes inside of, and the value of the egg is a known and fixed value. The toy is then considered a free gift that comes with the treat, designed to motivate people to buy them.
I doubt that argument would work. Once there's a 1-in-100,000 chance of getting something valuable inside the egg, people will start paying for the chance to get the valuable thing regardless of the chocolate.
The reason it isn't gambling is that all of the toys have the same value, so it doesn't really matter which one you get.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a father loot boxes piss me off (Score:5, Interesting)
I would not be overly upset if the thing she wanted could be outright purchased. I'd even bless it as knowing that she would get what she paid for. But last year, she got loot boxes and every one of them had something she already had. The result being that the money was entirely wasted.
My son and daughter stood by the computer while he prayed his baby sister would get what she'd wanted for so long. And while she was so happy he bought her the loot boxes, he was so disappointed that he wasted his allowance.
Loot boxes are shit. If you want to sell loot boxes, you shouldn't be able to put anything in them you can't outright buy in a store as well.
P.S. - I stopped spending an average of $800 a year on games when these shenanigans came in.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you can takeaway a positive life lesson for both your kids: gambling is a fool's bet, because it always favors the house in the long run.
I have to say, the exploitative nature of loot boxes in some games make me embarrassed to be a professional game developer. At least with creeps like Zynga, I could sort of pretend they weren't "real" developers making AAA games. I'm all for sale of cosmetic goods and fun consumables to enhance the game, and to allow people to voluntarily support an otherwise fre
Re:As a father loot boxes piss me off (Score:4, Interesting)
There are games against the house that fit that bill (e..g slot machines.) There are games against other players (with a house percentage) where the players as a whole lose, but you can win consistently (e.g. poker). However, loot boxes cost the house nothing regardless of payout. There''s no reason they cannot be a "winning" bet.
Except here the regulations already existed. This is just applying them to game companies trying to to avoid the regs. with the "but it's on a computer' excuse." But yeah, regulations sometimes go too far. That's when democracies change the laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the "whale" mentality (99% of the money comes from 1% of the players) is pretty common in F2P. It's evil, because those are the people with problems. I mean, they subsidize my gaming, but it's still evil.
And yes, I do get that they sell more boxes that way. There can be other benefits to both the company and players (for instance, helping the players see more content they may not have thought about getting.) However, those are usually outweighed by the "fuck it, let's milk the whales."
I would have t
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, that's almost how Hearthstone is already. I actually think it would be smart if they announced they were doing this for some card type (maybe Epics?), and the Legendaries are every N packs (or more frequently). The thing that misses is if you have 17 of a card and it gets nerfed, so you get extra dust.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just the latest in a long line of shenanigans including,
Multiple levels of DRM and online only for single player games.
Pre-order bonuses.
DLCs (I'm on the fence about mission DLCs)
Day-1 DLCs
Cosmetic DLCs
Weapon DLCs
DLC to allow you to buy save slots (yes really)
Gold, Platinum editions
In-game 'micro-transactions' That are anything buy 'micro'
Selling the cosmetic Items, Remember elder scrolls oblivion and all of the different costumes? - well that was before this 'cosmetic items' ****fest started.
Cosmetic
Re: (Score:3)
Well, no. Back then, if you got duplicates in an Overwatch loot box, you got credits which could then be spent buying the cosmetics you wanted (although you didn't get enough credits from one duplicate to buy one cosmetic, they did add up). Overwatch loot boxes no longer give duplicates.
shithouse summary (Score:2)
Trading cards (Score:3)
Packs of trading cards are random and, until bought, you don't know what you're buying. Somewhere a clear line of demarcation needs to be drawn.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck Pokemon.
That's why I used to purchase non-official card sets (unfortunately the kids are old enough to be able to see the difference now). Also about 10% of the real-thing price (which are stupid expensive).
Re: (Score:2)
CCG and sports cards are pretty much the definition of gambling if cards have different values for the same occurrence - In MTG all Rare cards have the same occurence, but they have vastly different values. This means boosters have different values, and gamble a fixed amount.
Worst case, it's a gray area, but clearly, we can't deny it's pretty similar.
Re: (Score:2)
Packs of trading cards are random and, until bought, you don't know what you're buying. Somewhere a clear line of demarcation needs to be drawn.
No, it doesn't. That's why we have courts, where rational people can decide these things. We look at situations and decide if it's detrimental to society. I haven't heard of anyone crying about the injustice of trading cards. I think we're good there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm honestly not sure what you're talking about. Every Kinder Surprise egg I've ever seen has a prize inside of almost the exact same monetary worth as any other prize in another egg*. The so-called "good" ones are of no better quality than the so-called "junk" ones. The only difference is whether a person likes that toy or not, and it happens to be the case that many of the "less valued" prizes just aren't interesting to most people.
Last time I checked, the price for a normal-sized KS egg with 20g o
They should forbid procreating (Score:2)
I mean, if genetics isn't a game of chance, then what is?
Islam forbids gambling (Score:1)
Out of control (Score:1)
Gambling !!
Now someone owes me a million euros.
Belgium Declares (Score:1)
Re: If you live in Belgium (Score:4, Funny)
We had a similar problem here in the states, hundreds of millions of dead bodies in the streets because they couldn't afford health insurance (not to mention actual health care)... we got Obamacare as a fix, and now the streets only have living homeless people in them.
Re: (Score:1)
But luckily Trump is here to bring back the good old times!
Re: (Score:2)