UK Government - loot boxes

I am completely baffled that there is a case against them, let alone a 'strong' case.

Having a Playstation is a luxury in my eyes, not a necessity, so I fail to see how any person or family can cry for compensation when they chose to buy one.

Must admit though, I am more and more baffled each day :)
I'd imagine it would simply take shape in the form of a code to redeem in their store, a few gratis months on Playstation Plus or even a downloadable game, something to that effect.

I'm not even sure what customers would actively pursue recompense, but in any case, Sony would likely do this beforehand.

Whilst companies have always been greedy, knowing that they've been purposely overcharged is most definitely going to peeve a lot of parents off, knowing e.g the game they just funded for £49.99 should actually have retailed at £39.99. That's a lot of potatoes :cool:
 
I think a more fair example would be comparing them to collectible cards like MTG, Pokemon, hockey/football cards etc.
If your daughter wants the rainbow colored beardog (its the best one so she obviously wants it) you dont have a 0.5% chance to get it when you go to the store to buy it, but if you want to get that same rainbow colored beardog from a lootbox you need to be prepared for a shitload of deadspins misses before you finally find the box that has 3 scatters a rainbow colored beardog in it.

Not exactly the same as gambling but imo the way lootboxes are used in many games is at the very least very similar to gambling.
But on the flipside, i dont see much difference between kids spending their allowance on Fifa card packs instead of pokemon card packs, and i agree that if parents dont want their kids to buy Fifa/pokemon cards they can/should be able to keep tabs on what their kids are spending their money on. You can also check Pokemon card princes
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
.

I dont think theres a need to outright ban lootboxes for people under 18, but i do think that some regulations surrounding implementation, price, & marketing for lootboxes would be a good thing.
Would probably make for better & more fun games if game companies cant rely on lootboxes/microtransactions to be their cash cow.
I think it would be a win for everyone except game companies.
It is indeed a topic of ongoing debate in the gaming industry. While the comparison to collectible cards like MTG, Pokemon, and sports cards is valid in terms of the element of chance and the desire to obtain rare items, the key difference lies in the monetization model and potential harm associated with lootboxes.

To address the issue, implementing regulations surrounding the implementation, pricing, and marketing of lootboxes could be a reasonable approach. Such regulations could ensure that the element of chance is disclosed to players, making them aware of the probabilities associated with obtaining desired items. Additionally, setting limits on the amount of money that can be spent on lootboxes within a specific timeframe could help prevent excessive spending.
 
It is indeed a topic of ongoing debate in the gaming industry. While the comparison to collectible cards like MTG, Pokemon, and sports cards is valid in terms of the element of chance and the desire to obtain rare items, the key difference lies in the monetization model and potential harm associated with lootboxes.

To address the issue, implementing regulations surrounding the implementation, pricing, and marketing of lootboxes could be a reasonable approach. Such regulations could ensure that the element of chance is disclosed to players, making them aware of the probabilities associated with obtaining desired items. Additionally, setting limits on the amount of money that can be spent on lootboxes within a specific timeframe could help prevent excessive spending.
Completely disagree. From it being an engaging topic to needing regulation. Let people have freedom of choice to spend what they want how they want.

I don't see what it's got to do with anyone else. if I want to have a lucky dip knowing full well that it could be a poor result, why shouldn't I be given the freedom to choose that risk?

Every spend we regulate is a step towards financial tyranny. Besides, the UK doesn't actually regulate anything without money taking precedence over genuine concern.
 
I don't see what it's got to do with anyone else. if I want to have a lucky dip knowing full well that it could be a poor result, why shouldn't I be given the freedom to choose that risk?

Every spend we regulate is a step towards financial tyranny.
Completely agree.

As long as the money is legit, people should be free to choose how they spend it. I’ve made the point a few times on here but if someone wants to gamble the last tenner they have, it should be their choice to do so.

Any restrictions on spending should be opted into voluntarily and with full consent.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top