Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Microsoft Nintendo Sony Games

Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony To Require Loot Box Odds Disclosure (polygon.com) 73

Posted by msmash from the marching-forward dept.
All three major console manufacturers -- Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony -- have agreed to require games with paid loot boxes to include the chances of winning randomized in-game items from them, the Entertainment Software Association announced Wednesday. From a report: Michael Warnecke, the ESA's chief counsel of tech policy, made the announcement during a workshop on loot boxes hosted by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission. "I'm pleased to announce this morning that Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony have indicated to ESA a commitment to new platform policies with respect to the use of paid loot boxes in games that are developed for their platforms," Warnecke said. "Specifically, this would apply to new games and game updates that add loot box features, and it would require the disclosure of the relative rarity or probabilities of obtaining randomized virtual items in games that are available on their platforms." Warnecke said that in addition to the major console manufacturers, "many of the leading video game publishers" who are members of the ESA, the trade body that represents the gaming industry, will "implement a similar approach."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony To Require Loot Box Odds Disclosure More

Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony To Require Loot Box Odds Disclosure

Comments Filter:

  • Where's Google & Apple? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    This is needed more for Google & Apple on mobile, but I don't see them on the list.

    Hmm...

    • Re:Where's Google & Apple? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anubis IV ( 1279820 ) on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @11:58AM (#59057756)

      That's because they're already doing it. Apple started requiring that the odds be disclosed in late 2017 [theverge.com] and Google followed suit in May of this year [theverge.com]. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are the ones playing catch up. The ESA spokesperson even acknowledged as much when he said:

      This approach would also be compatible with the Apple and Google approach on the mobile platform. We believe that, taken together, this provides a comprehensive approach to ensuring that consumers get the information they need so they can make informed purchasing decisions when it comes to paid loot boxes.

    • I am not disagreeing with you.
      However Having the big three console makers on board, usually will put the big game titles inline, and they will often just follow the same rules for their mobile port of the App, because it would be less work to do the right thing, then having to remake artwork and change more code, just because that environment would allow it.

      Also the Console Makers have more of what we consider serious Gamers, who will be more apt to spend a lot of money on stuff for a chance to improve thei

  • What are the odds? (Score:3)

    by sinij ( 911942 ) on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @11:59AM (#59057760)
    What are the odds? 100% chance of gambling by minors without explicit parental consent.

  • To put on a good show for meaningless appeasment? Most developers open provides data like this. Or at least most of the games I have played do, I have found it pretty easy to find them.

    Why are people so bent out of shape over this issue? Have a little self control, the industry reacts to its customers, if people just stop buying them it's over and done with. People need to be able to handle problems like this better. This is just one small symtom of a deep and problematic issue.

    • Other than legally if loot boxes are defined as gambling, they are required to disclose odds in multiple overlapping jurisdictions? For example at the US federal and state levels, all forms of gambling must tell you the odds whether it is a lottery or a contest like McDonald’s annual Monopoly game.

      • But that still falls under the pointless appeasement.

        If there is a legal requirement already in place why do they just repeat the law and act like they are the ones doing something when the are actually just asking for what the law already says they require?

        And getting back to the other issue. If players would just not buy this crap it never would have been an issue.

        • Are you calling legal requirements “pointless appeasements?” Do you tell that to a police officer who pulls you over for speeding? I’d love to see that conversation. “Fine, I will not speed 20 over in a school zone if that appeases you officer”. I am not sure you are aware but the ESA is fighting loot boxes to be classified as gambling at every turn. One of the exact criticisms of loot boxe systems is that the consumer doesn’t know the odds of winning. By disclosing odds,

          • Damn you missed the point bad. I guess there is no reason to keep talking to you. Not only do you not get it, you are hell bent on twisting what I am saying to put me on the defensive or win some argument I am not even making.

            Maybe that is why you people get so pissed off when I start calling you morons. When you wonder why you cannot get ahead in life I want you to remember this post and this next line.

            Life is hard, it is even harder when you are a moron!

            • Let me summarize: you asked a question. I answered it multiple ways covering the scenario/places where a loot box is considered gambling and the scenario where they are not considered gambling yet. You respond with no points but name calling. Did I correctly summarize your last post?

      • Other than legally if loot boxes are defined as gambling, they are required to disclose odds in multiple overlapping jurisdictions? For example at the US federal and state levels, all forms of gambling must tell you the odds whether it is a lottery or a contest like McDonaldâ(TM)s annual Monopoly game.

        All forms of gambling beyond raffle tickets are also closed to minors.

        • Hence half-steps like this in hopes to appease people concerned over child gamblng with real money.

          • But knowing the odds doesn't make it not gambling. It just makes it gambling with known odds. The odds are known and/or can be calculated for most forms of gambling, except things like sports betting.

    • The point is to be seen as doing something before nations start to outlaw the practice altogether and everyone loses their cash cow business model.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Why are people so bent out of shape over this issue? Have a little self control, the industry reacts to its customers, if people just stop buying them it's over and done with.

      Congratulations, you are not a gambling addict. This policy is not directed at you. The uproar over loot boxes is that there's a portion of the population for which they are very effective at manipulating. And they're annoying to everyone else.

  • Sure these companies can disclose probabilities but without verification of actual drop rates, it is only their word. And there’s not many that would trust that word.

  • Government overreach (Score:3)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @12:10PM (#59057814)

    ”Michael Warnecke, the ESA's chief counsel of tech policy, made the announcement during a workshop on loot boxes hosted by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.”

    Why is the European Space Agency making these announcements? Why are they even involved? Is this the start of the gamification of space? /j

    • Pffft. Tardigrades. Obviously.

    • The FTC accidentally invited them to the workshop and the ESA didn't realize the mistake until they got there. Rather than embarrass the FTC in front of everyone else, they were hoping they could stay quiet, but the workshop has been going on for nearly a week at this point, so their continued silence was getting a bit awkward.

  • ... I watched the FTC lootbox workshop. It was a real shitshow. No one mentioned the fact lootboxes and mtx can only exist in a world where game companies have succesfully used to internet to successfully undermine game ownership and steal games and run them on the mainframe dumb client model. That they sell the public incomplete software and steal games from the point of production by holding files and game code hostage inside their companies computers and all them "services" and can nuke your game with

    • the servers situation is the worst in my opinion.

      Back in the quake 3 era: server was packaged with the game. you're free to setup your own server with your friends.

      Nowadays, company keeps it. okay technically, it's their stuff, they get to decide which software they sell or not. BUT:

      - the software they do sell (the game client) is broken by design as it is incapable to work as such, it can only work when connected to server that isn't avaible to the users (and which might get shut down, as it often happens

  • I am sure a lot of kids will learn statistics about independent events and how 1 out 100 doesn't mean you will definitely get an item after purchasing 100 packs. I guess this will promote improved math literacy.
  • Didn't RTA, so don't bite me cause this is the norm.

    It isn't going to help if there are class/tiers of item - such as Legendary, Ultimate, etc. Because if each of those classes have tens to hundreds of possible items, you haven't really told anyone much. Instead, you've told them the odds of winning another slot machine.
    • Forgot to mention that I think there have been games that do this already. You have a 10% chance of getting the "Ultimate" drop. But then the ultimate drop could be any of 25 weapons, for example.
      If anyone knows some current examples, do share.

  • "chances of winnning..."??? (Score:3)

    by mark-t ( 151149 ) <markt AT nerdflat DOT com> on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @12:40PM (#59057980) Journal
    So in other words, it's gambling, right?

  • Even better ideas: (Score:3)

    by hiroshimarrow ( 5489734 ) on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @12:59PM (#59058100)

    What would be better to see is if a publisher needs to use lootboxes, put a requirement that the lootbox will contain at least 1 non-consumable item that is not already owned by the account. Making each lootbox worth something more than a large chance to get x# in game currency and then a small chance at something useful. Eventually one can purchase all items through lootbox with a sure shot at getting the whole game, finally, within a finite amount of attempts (aka... a finite amount of money).

    Or... just sell the user the full kit of software for a bit more and do away with lootboxes. I understand inflation exists, and games haven't gotten as expensive as they should be when considering inflation.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sinij ( 911942 )
      Why not skip all the intermediate and misdirection points and just sell crack directly to kids? Maximum profit!

    • >>Or... just sell the user the full kit of software for a bit more and do away with lootboxes. I understand inflation exists, and games haven't gotten as expensive as they should be when considering inflation.

      The size of the market has also drastically increased since the era when the $50/$60 price was set. That, and the increasingly cheap access to markets meaning most companies have been getting an increased cut of sales across time too.

      $60 times 100,000 today for a decent selling small product is

    • > put a requirement that the lootbox will contain at least 1 non-consumable item that is not already owned by the account. Making each lootbox worth something more than a large chance to get x# in game currency and then a small chance at something useful. Eventually one can purchase all items through lootbox with a sure shot at getting the whole game, finally, within a finite amount of attempts (aka... a finite amount of money).

      You can only get all of the items in the game this way if your account has th

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      They should be forced to publish the average amount spent on the game, especially for free games.

  • To make a difference they really need to be displayed in-game every 10 runs or so. They also need to be in terms children can understand.

    Most likely you will get garbage

    a change at lengendary items will cost over $50 in loot boxes

    • The companies will hide that though. Even among legendary equipment most is crap and only a few things are highly desirable. They will say "chance of legendary" is 10%", and not "chance of the one of three things people are actually gambling on is 1 in 74, so you will have to spend $74 on average to get it."

      • $1 each? LOL, more like $50 each. I saw one game from South Korea that was wanting $100 per try, in fact.

  • from 0 to 1, guess and win! ...
    awww too bad, i was thinking of the other one... you were unlucky this time, try again!

  • Gambling for game items is just robbing people, seriously. Enough.

Slashdot Top Deals

No spitting on the Bus! Thank you, The Mgt.

Close