The ‘AAA’ Industry Can’t Be Trusted To Regulate Its Gambling Problem (The Jimquisition)

The ‘AAA’ Industry Can’t Be Trusted To Regulate Its Gambling Problem (The Jimquisition)

– Please like and subscribe.
I need YouTube to validate my existence.
What’s it gonna take to get
you to like and subscribe?
Do I have to drink jewels?
‘Cause I’ll drink jewels,
I’ll drink jewels all day!
(“Born Depressed” by Drill Queen)
♪ Born different ♪
♪ Born innocent ♪
♪ Born perfect ♪
♪ I’m not like you ♪
♪ I’m a born lover ♪
♪ Born living and I know ♪
♪ I’m not like you ♪
♪ I was born clever ♪
♪ Born knowledgeable ♪
♪ Born better ♪
– Jewel.
Anyway, I’m looking at my phone today.
Got this article up about
the risks of loot boxes.
A study has been published
in the July issue
of “Royal Society Open” magazine,
which talks about the startling risks
associated with loot boxes.
Those gambling mechanics
that the game industry
tells us aren’t gambling mechanics
even though they’re gambling mechanics
because they look and
behave exactly like gambling
and they are gambling, they’re gambling!
They’re gambling is
what they are, gambling.
They’re gambling.
“We would argue that regardless
“of the profitability
of the loot box trade,
“the risks associated with
them are worryingly high.”
According to this report,
what I am doing a reading of,
the risks with loot box
spending and problem gambling
are more than twice as
strong as the relationship
seen recently in a similarly
recruited adult population.
Now, any long time viewers of this show
will know that there are risks associated
with aggressive
monetization of video games.
I’ve talked to the victims,
I’ve talked to the targets,
I’ve talked to the people that
the game industry preys upon.
I’ve published their
stories, and it sickens me.
The video game industry,
the AAA mainstream video game industry,
makes me sick to my tummy wummy wummy!
Why do I have to undermine my own points
by saying things like tummy wummy wummy?
Anyway, that aside,
let’s talk about the video
game industry’s recent attempt
to wallpaper over the cracks
of the loot box debacle.
As loot boxes face a more
and more credible criticism
and the practice of in-game gambling
comes under investigation
across the world,
the video game industry has revealed
that major platform holders
are working on policies
that’ll require more disclosure.
In future publishers will be
required to reveal the odds
of winning on their little
premium poison boxes
with Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft
all working together to enforce it.
This announcement was made
by the Entertainment Software Association,
the game industry’s trade association
that specializes in
lobbying, astroturfing,
and incompetently leaking
the personal information
of thousands of E3 attendees.
“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 platform,”
said the ESA’s Michael Warnecke.
“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.”
Policies are expected to go
into effect by the end of 2020
and a number of major
publishers have agreed
to reveal their loot box odds by then.
Such companies include
Activision Blizzard,
Bethesda, Bungie, Electronic Arts,
Take-Two Interactive,
Warner Brothers Interactive,
Ubisoft, and others.
A number of publishers have not
thus far committed to comply
including Gearbox, Square
Enix, Capcom, and THQ Nordic.
But certainly, in THQ Nordic’s case,
the company said it’s never
had loot boxes in its games
and doesn’t pan to
implement them in future.
The publishers who have
pledged their commitment
are certainly the ones notorious
for exploiting gambling mechanics.
Epic Games, for its part, has
already been making changes,
revealing the exact items
found inside loot boxes
in “Fortnite: Save the World”,
and promising to remove them
entirely from “Rocket League”.
That last move, the removal of them
entirely from Rocket League,
is the only move that’s
actually worth a shit.
The ESA may now express how pleased it is
to announce this extra transparency,
but it’s worth noting
that it’s come only after
the Federal Trade Commission got involved.
Amidst controversy and
criticism surrounding
the game industry’s
predatory business practices,
the FTC promised it would
start looking into loot boxes
which has borne fruit
with a recent workshop
titled “Inside the Game:
“Unlocking the consumer issues
surrounding loot boxes.”
Here the FTC learned about
video game monetization
from a variety of academics
and industry figures
and it was at this workshop where the ESA
was so pleased to make its announcement.
Before now however, the
ESA, which, by the way,
recently docks thousanded
of games media members,
has been pretty adamant
that in-game gambling
mechanics aren’t a problem.
In November 2018,
when the FTC first promised
to look into loot boxes,
the ESA preemptively
rushed to their defense,
seemingly way more
protective of loot boxes
than of people’s private data.
“Loot boxes are one way
that players can enhance
“the experience that video games offer,”
said the ESA at the time.
“Contrary to assertions,
loot boxes are not gambling.
“They have no real-world
value, players always receive
“something that enhances their experience
“and they are entirely
optional to purchase.
(comical giggling)
“They can enhance the experience
“for those who choose to use them,
“but have no impact on those who do not.”
Just the same weak, tired,
long debunked excuses
for loot boxes that
game industry defenders
have been pedaling for years with no plan
or stated intent to
tackle them whatsoever.
And yes, the ESA used
“enhance the experience”
that many times, fucking cretins.
Before then the ESA was even
more dismissive of concerns.
In May of 2018, the trade
association wrote off
in-game gambling criticism
as a mere over-reaction,
something it wasn’t planning
to take seriously at all.
“In the U.S., loot boxes are not gambling
“for more than the reason
I put here,” the ESA said,
referencing the same tired old bullshit.
“The other one is it’s not
converted to value in the world.
“It can only exist in the digital world”
No, that’s the premise of “Reboot”.
“That’s the component that many
“of these definitions look at.
“There’s not an exit path to turn that
“into something outside of the game.
“We have both of those reasons present,
“predominantly for loot boxes
“and in-game transactions
around this industry.
“So going to the one or two
isolated over-reactions,
“seeing how those over-reactions
“play to one or two governments,
“and then making that the standard
“and doing that industry-wide?
“That’s not going to be productive
“for the industry, or for gamers.”
In this statement, the ESA,
which cannot be trusted to
protect your private data,
also said that self-regulation
was the only viable solution,
adding “Let’s inform first,
“continue to self-regulate,
and move ahead that way.
“It’s worked great for us
over the last 20 years.
“That’s the prescription we
should use going forward.”
Yeah, self-regulation has worked great
for you over the last 20 years.
For you and you alone, game industry.
You see self-regulation
sounds great in theory,
but in practice it only really works
for the businesses doing the regulating.
Expecting a corporation to
affectively self-regulate
is like expecting Jason Voorhees to say,
“Oh, that’s enough murdered
teens for me tonight, thanks.
“I’m gonna have a sit
down and a sandwich.”
This shifty fucking industry
has proven time and time again
that it will do anything to make money
if it can get away with it.
It will indulge in any
toxic business model,
sink to any depth of avarice,
no matter how unethical,
and will only stop after
enough public outcry
makes such behavior untenable.
Something most clearly demonstrated
with the backlash to “Star
Wars Battlefront II”.
And the industry’s own regulatory bodies
are woefully, often
deliberately, defeasible.
The Entertainment Software Ratings Board
is the game industry’s self-regulation arm
when it comes to appropriately
age rating content.
And they have been just as dismissive
as the ESA in the past.
Also using the same pitifully
transparent excuses.
Despite this, the ESRB did eventually
try to cover the industry’s tracks,
once the political
climate around loot boxes
got a little bit too hot,
by adding an in-game purchases
content label for games
containing loot boxes, micro-transactions
and any other premium content
purchasable within the software.
It was an all encompassing move, however,
lumping together loot boxes
with other less
gambling-oriented transactions.
This obfuscating move was by design.
The ESRB’s stated reason
for lumping all transactions together
inadvertently betrayed
the sneaky motive at play.
“I’m sure you’re all asking
“why aren’t we doing something
more specific to loot boxes,”
said ESRB President Patricia Vance.
“We’ve done a lot of research
“over the past several weeks and months,
“particularly among parents.
“What we’ve learned is that
a large majority of parents
“don’t know what a loot box is.
“Even those who claim they do,
“don’t really understand
what a loot box is.
“So it’s very important for us
“to not harp on loot boxes per se,
“to make sure that we’re
capturing loot boxes,
“but also other in-game transactions.”
Quite how Vance thought this would make
the ESRB look justified is beyond me,
as it’s basically the ESRB admitting
they won’t explain things to people
who need that explanation the most.
I mean, we’re not explaining
what loot boxes are
because parents don’t
know what loot boxes are
is a hell of a stance to take,
but it effectively demonstrates
exactly what the ESRB is doing.
Deliberately failing to effectively inform
the public about in-game monetization.
Just offering a blanket label to cover
the game industry’s tracks
and provide the appearance of regulation,
without doing anything of
actual substance, note or use.
Very much like the ESA and
its new loot box disclosures,
the ESRB’s in-game purchases
label was only implemented
after years of willful
ignorance on the issue,
of hand waving concerns away
until the political
pressure got real enough
that it was time to put
on a show of proaction.
And even with the ESRB
going out of its way
to protect publishers’ interests,
those very same game publishers
are making a mockery of the effort.
Thanks to post-launch micro-transactions
adding premium currencies
weeks or months after launch,
companies like Activision
are getting their games rated
without the appropriate warnings,
totally undermining the very thing
that was instituted to cover their asses.
Activision gets to enjoy weeks
of suckering customers into its economy
before anyone realizes
that’s what’s happening.
And the ESRB ratings can’t reflect it,
because the ESRB doesn’t
know it’s coming either.
They can only digitally
re-rate it after the fact.
And, in the case of physical boxes,
those already out there can’t be amended.
“Crash Team Racing” could be
bought in a store right now
and the appropriate labeling
isn’t on the package
despite micro-transactions
getting added in.
I cannot get over how
fucking weaselly that is.
The in-game purchases
label was fucking designed
to protect publisher interests
and they still can’t help undermining it.
Even with the ESRB looking out for them,
they still can’t see past
their own greed-fueled
short term gains enough
to consider for a moment maybe
not fucking with the system
that’s designed to work in their favor.
I mean, how addicted to
being a sneaky rat fuck
do you have to be?
God dang it, Bobby!
That, and that alone, demonstrates
how woefully inefficient game
industry self-regulation is.
I’d almost call the regulation inept,
if I didn’t suspect that it’s doing
exactly what it’s meant to be doing.
Which, is to say, not very much.
EA was ahead of the curve on this one,
revealing “FIFA Ultimate
Team” prize odds as of 2018.
The odds themselves
showed just how brutally
in favor of Electronic Arts they were,
with the most desirable prizes
having a less than 1% chance of dropping.
But knowing the odds has never stopped
people with spending
addictions, problem gamblers
and it’s never stopped children.
The very people companies like EA
have been making their money from.
And, EA will continue to unethically
sucker money out of people with “FIFA”.
Which, by the by, is rated
suitable for young children,
which leads to stories of kids
cleaning out their parents’ bank accounts,
unless given more adult supervision
than is needed for “Wolfenstein”.
The fact that odds are disclosed
has done jack squat for families impacted
by the duplicitous nature of loot boxes.
Unlike with sticker
packs and trading cards,
which the industry loves
to compare to loot boxes,
video games are constantly updated
and publishers have 24/7
access to their end users.
Odds can always be shifted.
We already know that in-game
purchases are fiddled with,
thanks to companies
like Scientific Revenue,
which uses tactics like dynamic pricing
to alter digital storefronts
on a per player basis.
All with the goal of psychologically
manipulating people into spending money.
Given the inherently raptorial
nature of micro-transactions,
I am simply not one to trust
the game industry here on any level.
At what point have
publishers ever done anything
to deserve trust, especially by now,
when they’ve fucked so many people over
so many times over so many years.
Moreover, odds can
always be misrepresented.
For example in casinos, the common promise
of a 95% slot machine
payout can be misleading.
Not all slot machines have
the same odds of payout,
with some paying out 95%
and others paying out practically zero.
The casino just takes a
select sample of slot machines
and uses them to arrive at its
average chances of winning.
That’s just one way that
odds can be misrepresented.
But, at least at a casino
when you win something,
there’s financial value.
When you buy a Panini sticker pack
or a collectable card game pack,
you get a physical good that
could be traded or sold.
The industry loves to hide behind the fact
that you can’t benefit
financially from a loot box prize.
But what are they really admitting there?
They’re just saying that loot boxes
are like gambling, but shit.
And, as I’ve said in the past,
if I go to the Beau Rivage casino,
they’ve go that sweet crab buffet
with that sweet buffet crab.
I don’t even need to have
a go on the slot machines,
I’ll just head straight to the buffet
and eat all that crab,
thank you very much.
All crab all nice up in my tummy.
Sweet buffet crab is
better than loot boxes.
Every time.
Playing “Call of Duty” has never once
given me the sweet taste of crab.
Instead, it just makes me
feel like I’ve got crabs.
Odds disclosure is wallpaper over a crack,
a newspaper put down over
a puddle of cat piss.
It’s the illusion of something being done
without anything actually being done
to address the fact that gambling
is part of the AAA game experience now.
If something were to actually
solve the issue of loot boxes,
EA, Activision and their trash brethren
would be fighting it,
not pledging to comply
with it for appearances.
They’ve resisted any legitimate attempt
at regulation in the past.
And this self-regulatory grand-standing,
that’s just more resistance,
swaddled in the sheep’s
clothing of compromise.
Loot boxes are gambling.
Gambling, but shittier.
It’s gambling and should
be regulated as such.
“FIFA” has zero business
marketing itself toward kids,
not when it needs such
intense parental supervision.
By the very strict legal
definition of gambling
in most countries, loot boxes are not,
no, they’re not, technically gambling.
But, that’s all it is.
Game publishers are getting
off on a technicality.
That’s what they’re exploiting.
Psychologically and mechanically,
these things are not
different from slot machines.
And that’s why you never see EA,
Activision, the ESRB or the ESA
talk about the mechanical
implementation of loot boxes
or the psychological
impressions they make.
No, they sweep all that
shit under the rug.
They only stick to legal definitions,
weak comparisons to sticker albums
or the disingenuous claim
that it’s all just optional.
They do this because they
know damn fucking well
that loot boxes are comparable
to gambling in every way
except that strict technicality.
And, more than any other point,
odds disclosure isn’t
enough for the simple fact
that micro-transactions of any stripe
shouldn’t be in a paid
game to fucking begin with.
The game publishers raking
in billions of dollars
off the back of predatory business models
is wholly unethical and
that the very real harm
these sneakily incremental
purchases could inflict
is fucking abominable.
Loot box odds disclosure isn’t
enough because, ultimately,
premium loot boxes need
to fuck off and die.
The only regulation that matters
is regulation that
strangles the entire concept
until it’s nothing but a
twitching goddamn corpse.
Loot boxes are vile, they
should be eradicated,
the game industry has a
clear gambling problem
and it cannot be trusted
to regulate itself.
I realize not everyone takes me seriously
when I go on my tangents.
I mean, I don’t know what
about this whole setup
isn’t to be taken
seriously, but, for reals,
people dismiss me as rambling and ranting
and getting all angry over
the video game industry.
But, I truly do mean it.
I’ve said this in other videos,
I’ve said this in the addiction video,
that I really would like
people to still share
and put out there, because
of the testimonies in there
and the research in there,
you know, it needs to be seen.
And, as I’ve said there, I’ll say it here,
it’s not an act when I get furious
at the AAA game industry.
I know I throw in little catch phrases
and there’s some humor in what we do.
We like to have a laugh
on the show where we can,
a bit of levity, if you will,
but that doesn’t mean that I’m insincere.
I’m genuinely concerned about
what aggressive monetization
has done to the game industry,
to the quality of video games themselves.
And, more importantly, to
the people they target.
To the so-called whales,
to problem gamblers,
to people with spending
shopping addictions,
people with compulsive personalities.
Just all the people that
the video game industry
is raking in tens of
billions of dollars from.
I use to stress a lot that
I am not fully in favor
of government regulation
of the game industry,
but it is quite clear by now,
that self-regulation is a crock
of shit for the most part.
It’s something the industry
wants to do to avoid scrutiny,
to avoid accountability, to
avoid taking responsibility
for the harm that the industry is doing.
And that can’t carry on.
And at this point, I
just don’t give a shit
if the government steps in or not.
The industry had its chance,
it had multiple chances.
And these little things
they’re trying to do,
the in-game warning labels
that the industry is actually
just ignoring and undermining,
this new thing about
loot box disclosure odds,
it’s a farce, it’s a performance,
it’s grand standing and it means nothing.
It’s just the game industry
trying to cover its own tracks
so it can continue exploiting people,
preying upon people, generally
being a massive pile of wank.
And, at this point, if
they do get slapped down,
I won’t weep for them.
I won’t even bother getting a tiny violin,
they’re not even worth that much.
Thank god for me and all
that, but, more importantly,
thank god for people who are
still coming forward to me,
telling me about their
stories and their experiences
with aggressive video game monetization
and what it’s done to them.
I still have lots more,
many more stories to share in that regard,
and hopefully I’ll get to do that soon.
More testimonials, or another
“Jimquisition”, who knows?
I’ve got so much to share
and it’s heartbreaking and despicable
and at some point, one day,
the so-called AAA video game industry
is gonna have to answer for it.
I’ve just noticed one of the jewels
went into my actual water.
I’m literally drinking jewels.
(“Stress” by Jim’s Big Ego)
♪ Everybody’s thinking about me ♪

100 Comments on “The ‘AAA’ Industry Can’t Be Trusted To Regulate Its Gambling Problem (The Jimquisition)”

  1. Lootbox is the terrorists of the gaming industry. The government needs to kick the door down on these scandals scammers.

  2. I don't like where this is going. Within a decade, we will see plain packaged video games within the US, and eventually, the rest of the world. The game industry as a whole will likely die 2 to 5 years afterwards.

    I mean, I dislike the lootbox practices as much as everyone else does. But is going scorched earth really worth it just to metaphorically kick Bobby Kotick in the balls?

  3. If a drop has less than 1% you will never get it. Unless you are insanely lucky. I known people who played World Of Warcraft since Vanilla and to this very day, who have done Stratholm run for the Deathcharger mount and still to this very day have not gotten it. I believe it's droprate is 0.8% or something like that.

  4. my main problem with the few games I've played that had loot boxes, is not they are addicting, it's that they're boring. "loot" is supposed to be fun, something that you discover whilst exploring, but loot boxes are not real "loot" they're artificial loot, or they're loot that's been pushed into the UI, which is the boringest f**ing concept in the universe. why don't we just push the whole game into the UI? (Play Game) -> You Win!, (Play Game) -> Game Over, Try Again, (Play Game) -> You Win!. games are supposed to be (though it's open to argument) simulations. pushing things into the UI is always the result of the developers *failing to simulate that portion of the game. IMO good game design takes as much stuff OUT of the UI as possible and puts it organically into the game world.

  5. This horse has been beaten to death, man. Surely there are other topics for you to cover. Revisit loot boxes in 2020. C’mon.

  6. I remember the times when Jim made Jimquisition episodes about game design, storytelling and games art direction. Days long gone…

  7. Just a note on Rocket League. They wrote that they will be " replacing them with a system that shows the exact items you’re buying in advance." Comparing it to Fortnites changes. So they didn't say that they will be gone for good.

  8. I loved the look of hesitation and despair right before the jewels hit your mouth as you know just how annoying it's going to be to pick them all up again

  9. So.. loot boxes have no impact on those who do not take part? Except in the dozens of situations where loot boxes contain exclusive content. I can name a number of games who box up everything from exclusive mounts to skins. I seem to be missing the lack of impact in this?

  10. Everyone: you know what lootboxes are, don't you?

    ESA: we do.

    Everyone: loot boxes may or may not have something good in them, correct?

    ESA: correct.

    Everyone: and you can buy these boxes with real money?

    ESA: indeed you can.

    Everyone: and a definition of gambling is taking a risk i.e paying money, to receive a positive result?

    ESA: makes sense to me.

    Everyone: naturally, it's all luck based in the end and regardless of how much money you spend, you might not get anything good in return. Just like with gambling.

    ESA: can't argue with that.

    Everyone: so buying lootboxes is gambling!

    ESA: lootboxes are completely different.

  11. It really shouldn't matter if loot boxes are by the hard definition "gambling". They are HARMFUL and therefore need to be REGULATED. END OF STORY.

  12. For a good example of how the fact that you can't convert loot from boxes to cash is a terrible defense, listen to the episode of Reveal (podcast) called "Harpooned by Facebook". An elderly woman from Texas ended up spending $400,000 on a "free"' casino app. When she tried to get her account canceled because she maxed out her card multiple times playing the app, the company instead assigned her a "VIP manager" who got her to keep playing the app by sending her free chips and encouragement. The reason they were allowed to do this is because the app is "not technically gambling" as you can't actually cash out your casino winnings in the app. So yeah, preying on peoples addiction in the most vile way possible is A-OK as long as the money they spend is fully wasted and cant actually ever benefit them.

  13. Lol soon drug dealers be like: 'I never made anybody buy crack and heroin, it was entirely optional for anyone choosing to hang out with me'…

  14. 13:16 Wouldn't dynamic pricing like this by definition be fraud? – ie obtaining money through deception (not a lawyer)

  15. But Jim – don't you remember how businesses regulated their child labor problem? Or their disposal of hazardous wastes problem? Oh wait… neither do I…

  16. every time i watch a new jimquisition i feel like im watching the same episode over and over, not to say i dont like the show or jim, its more that the toxic issues that the industry is keeping alive arent being fixed any time soon, its kinda sad ):

  17. I don't get the defense of "Unlike real gambling there is no real money value to be gained, just a ingame economy". THEN WHY THE FUCK DO PEOPLE HAVE TO PAY WITH REAL LIFE MONEY FOR IT? Could have sticked to ingame currency you can only earn ingame now. As soon as RL money is needed to buy devices that might give you a great price, or not…it's gambling. That simple, hell it's even gambling if it was only ingame money but atleast you wouldn't go bankrupt in RL if you have a adiction or your child somehow managed to steal you credit card and plunder your bankaccount.

  18. I'd argue that if your product is now mislabelled you now need to issue a recall to all stores and to republish the product again correctly labelled. I'd go so far as to say that a store/publisher selling a product that is mislabelled, regardless of whether that label was correct before, is committing a crime. It may even already be a crime (misleading consumers).

  19. Loot boxes are worse than gambling because you dont get anything in return. You dont own anything you get from the boxes. You are litterally playing a slot machine just to potentially have the opportunity to rent better looking monopoly money

  20. They have to tell the users the odds NOW? I thought they had to do that already!

    Also 'they aren't forced to buy lootboxes' is all the defense they could muster? I'm not forced to go to a casino or to buy drugs either… at first.

  21. They’re not loot boxes they’re treasure buckets so we don’t have to disclose anything.

    And no, they will not have to answer for them someday, you forget what world we live in.

  22. by the end of 2020? dang

    that's a really long time away. an unnecessarily long time away. if they're serious, do it right now. it does not take much dev time to tabulate out some odds and add them into a game. and, lets face it, they have the fucking money to pay to do it fucking fast. so, I can only assume they aren't really serious, and in a year and 3-4 months, they'll suddenly have this requirement be forgotten about.

  23. You literally monetize the same fucking talking point over hundreds of videos ~ offering zero value besides appeasing the cult like lemming outrage followers. You are equally pathetic with the "service" you offer on YouTube.

  24. If you are using real currency to purchase virtual currency or items, it does affect the "real world" and your spending habits

  25. Serious question, would adding Mt's in games post launch constitute false advertising/fraud? Such games have inaccurate descriptions in games purposely and it can mislead potential buyers both before and after their introduction

  26. I found out I had a tendency for gambling while playing that Badge Arcade on the 3DS. Seemed harmless but I dropped $100 in that thing in a week before I came to my senses. Now I don’t buy any game with micro transactions or loot boxes. Unless it’s a Nintendo first party game I also usually wait months after release just to be sure now too.

  27. The AAA industry cant even be trusted to create quality games, why would anyone trust them to do anything else competently.

  28. Okay, so I'm glad you kept your mouth partially shut for the gem drinking. I once tried to catch a baby carrot it my mouth. And I did it, and it promptly went down my throat and choked me.

    Choking to death on a bunch of plastic gems isn't a good look.
    …to be fair, if I saw the headline "Youtuber Jim Sterling suffocates on plastic gems." I wouldn't be surprised, but it's still not a good look.

  29. If loot boxes have "no real-world value", then why the fuck are players charged real-world money to receive them in game?

  30. I highly doubt it should be even needed to make a video like this one. It should be obvious for everyone. It's like letting the Sinaloa Cartel to let them regulate the drug trafficking

  31. Wait… regardless of the profitability of the loot box trade…? What kind of sentence is that, in ANY context?! Just think of the "profitability" of smashing someone's head in with a wrench and stealing their bloody wallet! See, that's not swearing, so it shouldn't be censored. It's "bloody" because it's literally covered in blood. Because their head was smashed in. With a wrench. By a SURPRISE M-……! Oh, wait, is that copyrighted now? Are we even allowed to use the words surprise and mechanic in a sentence anymore? More importantly, this ridiculous problem is simply resolved the exact same way as violence or nudity in video games and films; by compliance with the same ratings system that even has DRUG USE in many of said games and films noted on the front cover, under the appropriate rating. All the industry is trying to do is weasel their way out of any penalties for not complying with the regulations that already exist and are in place in every region on the planet. Chiefly, that some regions seem to have an absolute ZERO tolerance for gambling, and the rest have mandated an age restriction for the willful engagement with any and all forms of gambling. A rating system that would already have absolved the publisher and developer of any responsibility, as said rating system exists for the parents convenience, as it is one of their roles as a parent or guardian, until their child reaches the legal age of consent, which also varies from one region to another, barring any circumstances of foul play. I'd call enough of a similarity between the microtransaction/lootbox combo and ACTUAL gambling close enough to fall into the category of deliberate and protracted foul play. I wish they'd just take their medicine and be grateful the penalites aren't any worse… then let's face the facts, it would all fall into obscurity in no time at all and it would be right back to business as usual.

  32. Removing loot boxes from Rocket League after 265 years of cashing in on them, that announcement is worth nothing at all and doesn't deserve any amount of praise.

  33. Doesn't matter… The mainstream media says Electronic Arts causes Gun Violence and we should all avoid their products as they may cause us to shoot up a School, or a Hospital, or a Workplace, or a Household, or a Casino with a sweet Crab meat buffet when the batteries in our gameboy's all die.

    Disco will eat itself, again.

  34. So lootboxes haves no "real value"? Then why do "people" like Android Wilson defend them by saying that they "bring value" for players?

  35. Well of course you can't trust the ones that benefit from it directly. If you need someone to tell you this, your brain is probably not functioning properly…is this video for 70 IQ people? Why do people not understand this? I guess Jim just wants to send an obvious message, because things can never be obvious enough.

  36. I feel that if a publisher decides to proactively add lootboxes they should have to initiate a product recall since the packaging no longer reflects the product accurately.

  37. "Loot boxes are the only good thing about videogames."

    All game companies 2019

    "Violent videogames cause realworld violence.
    Ingame gambling isnt real gambling"

    American government 2019

  38. Remember When the financial industry said they can self-regulate themselves and then caused, let's not sugarcoat it now, a "depression," not a "great recession." Pepperidge Farms remembers!

  39. For people with a gambling addiction and children with low impulse control, gambling bestows a powerful chemical reward in their brains. Their brains, it must be remarked, exist in the real world. So, the excuse that loot box gambling doesn't confer rewards in the real world really isn't accurate.

  40. I'd believe a homeless man telling me a sandwich is a rocket ship before I'd ever believe Bobby "Devil Horns" Kotick has my best interests at heart.

  41. I’d love to see a video teaching parents how loot boxes work by having them purchase them in $60+ games. I’m sure they’ll react well.

  42. Loot boxes are “optional” in the same way running water in your home is optional. You can make it work but you’d be miserable

  43. If loot boxes have "no real-world value", then why the fuck are players charged real-world money to receive them in game?

  44. So basically, "Loot boxes are okay and not gambling because they offer no measurable, tangible benefit to the customer, whatsoever."

    That's some good legaling there, games lawyers. Good good legaling of words. You have big smart brains, you deserve that gigantic retainer. THE SYSTEM WORKS!!!

  45. You know what would be a great thing to list? When looking at a specific item you should see the exact odds of receiving an item from a loot box and the average number of loot boxes purchased before you get that specific item.

    Like for a 3% drop rate the average number of loot boxes required would be 33-34 with a minimum number of 1 and a maximum of infinite.

  46. Jim, you should probably just make a video exclusively about buffet crab, if only to get it all out of your system.

  47. How can EA commit to showing odds on their lootboxes if their games don't use lootboxes? 🤔

    Also, it should be required of publishers to recall all physical copies to amend the ratings on the boxes when they modify a game in a way that significantly alters it.

  48. The fifa pack odds are still complete bullshit and dont actually disclose what the real odds are for the rarest things, if anything I would say that they are using even that to mislead people in to thinking the odds are better than they actually are.

    "Less than 1%" might lead people to assume the odds to be around a 1/100 chance when in reality it could be 1/100000 or even more.

  49. What gamer out there thinks that loot boxes enhance the gaming experience. Cause I'm pretty sure they would be a John carpenter alien from "They Live."

  50. Surprise Mechanic … Makes me think like I take my car to a garage. I give 50 bucks to the guy who takes a look under the hood and tells me "Sorry I couldn't fix it. Do you want me to try it again for another 50?"

  51. The industry regulating itself. Is that a joke ? Its like letting a meth addict regulate his drug abuse problems. Lmfao.

  52. The esa isn't telling us why loot boxes aren't gambling, they're telling us why they shouldn't be regulated and pretending that's the same as telling us they are not gambling.

  53. If the government intervenes, then they'll go after DLC too! The government is stupid enough to do so! They'll stop additional content to games because they'll think it's microtransactions! They won't attack DLC will they Jim?

  54. I stopped buying shit video games saved me a lot of stress and hassle with all this bullshit they try and scam gamers with.

  55. Warframe's DERebecca on paying money to randomise colours of your pet back in 2014:
    "Real world: putting a quarter in a gumball machine, wanting a pink one, and getting a blue one. You still have a gumball, but it's not the exact flavour you wanted. Put in another quarter to get a chance at a different gumball, but you're paying for the gumball every time.

    Warframe's case: You're getting the gumball, and the gumball machine, for free, with wait times on delivery. If you think you want one free gumball to look different, you can throw a few quarters in the machine."
    – They removed this option several days later. Was some good mental gymnastics though.

  56. we will not even go into casual games that groom underage player's to be recrptive to online Slots, Loot boxes and click-to-earn sites. Legal yes, morally Dark grey…

  57. This doesnt really change anything though, you can tell a Poker addict EXACTLY what the odds are that they win on each hand and they will still continue to gamble. People still use Pachinko machines or Slot machines whilsts being fully aware that the Percentage change of getting something is insanely low. Telling people the odds on gambling does not remove the chance of kids getting involved in gambling or worse, people with actual gambling issues getting caught up in them in a video game, somewhere they arent supposed to exist.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *