Update 44 is now available for testing on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/categories/pts
Maintenance for the week of September 30:
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 2, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 2, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 2, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 2, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
Lets get some facts out of the way. They are not gambling.
-
Yzalirk✭✭✭✭
Also - if that's the case, then purchasing a subscription is also a gamble.They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
You keep talking about this but the Dutch only linked 4 games, where the users could Re-SELL items for REAL money, to gambling.
smhOne day gambling laws will catch up. At the moment, it's not really obvious how destructive these practices are.
Collectible Card Games with randomized booster packs have been around for decades. They are, in every way except for being physical, the same thing as crown crates. (Well and the fact that I don't think you can actually sell stuff from Crown Crates for real money as dupes turn into crystals.)
NO laws have been made against them - Specifically look at Magic:The Gathering. There are cards that are worth thousands of dollars. They were obtained from buying randomized packs of cards.
The only difference is you don't have to leave your house to get crown crates. Although no you can just order most CCG's via websites and have stuff delivered to your door.
Well, that's the thing. Those cards are real and can't be taken away.
ZOS can shut you down anytime they want, and it's bye-bye virtual items.
But with ESO+ you know what you are paying for...1 -
Turelus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
As I said in post above. Facts are they found that the crates were designed to be manipulative, check the video linked above for an analysis of what their reports said.Istoppucks wrote: »They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
Lets use facts here. The Dutch body found 4 out of 10 needed to adjust their rules because....get ready for the fun part....the had items in their crates that could be sold for real money.
Please dont come here with stories you are going to twist to try and prove a point . Lets stick to the facts.
I never claimed ESO boxes would be effected by the events in the Netherlands and not twisted anything to prove any point, I merely stated what has been in their reports.
@Turelus - EU PC Megaserver
"Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves."0 -
Feanor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭As for the addiction part: It’s an invalid argument. Yes, people can get addicted if they have a predetermination for that. Just like with any other addiction, you solve that on an individual basis and not simply forbid the addictive event for everyone else (or you’d have to close all casinos, all distilleries and breweries, everything that can make people happy).
It’s the true paternalistic approach. It’s the nemesis of freedom, and on top, it never works (see alcohol prohibition in the 1930 US). People will always do what’s fun for them.Edited by Feanor on April 20, 2018 12:19PMMain characters: Feanor the Believer - AD Altmer mSorc - AR 46 - Flawless Conqueror (PC EU)Idril Arnanor - AD Altmer mSorc - CP 217 - Stormproof (PC NA)Other characters:Necrophilius Killgood - DC Imperial NecromancerFearscales - AD Argonian Templar - Stormproof (healer)Draco Imperialis - AD Imperial DK (tank)Cabed Naearamarth - AD Dunmer mDKValirion Willowthorne - AD Bosmer stamBladeTuruna - AD Altmer magBladeKheled Zaram - AD Redguard stamDKKibil Nala - AD Redguard stamSorc - StormproofYavanna Kémentárí - AD Breton magWardenAzog gro-Ghâsh - EP Orc stamWardenVidar Drakenblød - DC Nord mDKMarquis de Peyrac - DC Breton mSorc - StormproofRawlith Khaj'ra - AD Khajiit stamWardenTu'waccah - AD Redguard StamplarAll chars 50 @ CP 1700+. Playing and enjoying PvP with RdK mostly on PC EU.3 -
maroite✭✭✭They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
You keep talking about this but the Dutch only linked 4 games, where the users could Re-SELL items for REAL money, to gambling.
smhOne day gambling laws will catch up. At the moment, it's not really obvious how destructive these practices are.
Collectible Card Games with randomized booster packs have been around for decades. They are, in every way except for being physical, the same thing as crown crates. (Well and the fact that I don't think you can actually sell stuff from Crown Crates for real money as dupes turn into crystals.)
NO laws have been made against them - Specifically look at Magic:The Gathering. There are cards that are worth thousands of dollars. They were obtained from buying randomized packs of cards.
The only difference is you don't have to leave your house to get crown crates. Although no you can just order most CCG's via websites and have stuff delivered to your door.
Well, that's the thing. Those cards are real and can't be taken away.
ZOS can shut you down anytime they want, and it's bye-bye virtual items.
Maybe you've never heard of Decipher? You should look it up. Or even the devaluation of sports cards. You may have a "physical" card, but the value can be taken away.
Also - if that's the case, then purchasing a subscription is also a gamble.
Most physical things devalue over time. Some, like antiques, can go up in value.
A subscription is a paid service.
Is it? A subscription to a magazine, where you receive the physical product and can retain it is a paid service with "tangible" goods. A subscription to a game though is just as you describe. At the end of the day if the product you have a subscription for goes under, you've paid years worth of subscription fees and are left with naught. That is more a gamble than the loot crates imo.Edited by maroite on April 20, 2018 12:17PM0 -
Turelus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
I'm not trying to change anything. I am telling you what's in the reports covered in that video.Istoppucks wrote: »
Those are the only ones facing bans. Their reports went into their findings that these boxes did indeed have manipulative design.They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
You keep talking about this but the Dutch only linked 4 games, where the users could Re-SELL items for REAL money, to gambling.
smh
If you have the time there is a full diagnosis of what happened in this video.
Boy you are so desperate to change this story arent you. Why are you so desperate? Four out of ten were ordered to change because you could sell the items for real money. Those are the facts, stop try to peddle this as anything else you get called out by multiple people every time you do. This trick is up move on.
You seem very keen to disprove things I am saying when I am linking you citation though.
@Turelus - EU PC Megaserver
"Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves."1 -
Istoppucks✭✭✭✭
As I said in post above. Facts are they found that the crates were designed to be manipulative, check the video linked above for an analysis of what their reports said.Istoppucks wrote: »They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
Lets use facts here. The Dutch body found 4 out of 10 needed to adjust their rules because....get ready for the fun part....the had items in their crates that could be sold for real money.
Please dont come here with stories you are going to twist to try and prove a point . Lets stick to the facts.
I never claimed ESO boxes would be effected by the events in the Netherlands and not twisted anything to prove any point, I merely stated what has been in their reports.
Every ad on TV is manipulative. Restaurants make their menues to manipulate the consumer. Car manufacturing manipulate the pricing and extras.
I can go on and on what does your story you copy\paste multiple times on every thread have to do with ESO not being gambling? Well beside it helps prove eso is NOT gambling.0 -
Turelus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Yet here in the UK we have an advertising standard agency to make sure they don't cross any lines. Video games have no such agency which is why they're allowed to employ more and more questionable methods of monetisation.Istoppucks wrote: »
As I said in post above. Facts are they found that the crates were designed to be manipulative, check the video linked above for an analysis of what their reports said.Istoppucks wrote: »They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
Lets use facts here. The Dutch body found 4 out of 10 needed to adjust their rules because....get ready for the fun part....the had items in their crates that could be sold for real money.
Please dont come here with stories you are going to twist to try and prove a point . Lets stick to the facts.
I never claimed ESO boxes would be effected by the events in the Netherlands and not twisted anything to prove any point, I merely stated what has been in their reports.
Every ad on TV is manipulative. Restaurants make their menues to manipulate the consumer. Car manufacturing manipulate the pricing and extras.
I can go on and on what does your story you copy\paste multiple times on every thread have to do with ESO not being gambling? Well beside it helps prove eso is NOT gambling.
Also you're aware in my first post I agreed with you they're not gambling right? I just said they employ the same methods as gambling which is pretty clear for all to see.
@Turelus - EU PC Megaserver
"Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves."0 -
Tasear✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Good or bad it's definitely a form of gambling. We don't need a lawyer to tell us this. Though at least they offer something in return...compared say casino.Edited by Tasear on April 20, 2018 12:24PM0 -
Feanor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Yet here in the UK we have an advertising standard agency to make sure they don't cross any lines. Video games have no such agency which is why they're allowed to employ more and more questionable methods of monetisation.Istoppucks wrote: »
As I said in post above. Facts are they found that the crates were designed to be manipulative, check the video linked above for an analysis of what their reports said.Istoppucks wrote: »They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
Lets use facts here. The Dutch body found 4 out of 10 needed to adjust their rules because....get ready for the fun part....the had items in their crates that could be sold for real money.
Please dont come here with stories you are going to twist to try and prove a point . Lets stick to the facts.
I never claimed ESO boxes would be effected by the events in the Netherlands and not twisted anything to prove any point, I merely stated what has been in their reports.
Every ad on TV is manipulative. Restaurants make their menues to manipulate the consumer. Car manufacturing manipulate the pricing and extras.
I can go on and on what does your story you copy\paste multiple times on every thread have to do with ESO not being gambling? Well beside it helps prove eso is NOT gambling.
Also you're aware in my first post I agreed with you they're not gambling right? I just said they employ the same methods as gambling which is pretty clear for all to see.
Do you like getting told what’s good for you and what you can or can’t do? Because that is the principle question with all of this.Main characters: Feanor the Believer - AD Altmer mSorc - AR 46 - Flawless Conqueror (PC EU)Idril Arnanor - AD Altmer mSorc - CP 217 - Stormproof (PC NA)Other characters:Necrophilius Killgood - DC Imperial NecromancerFearscales - AD Argonian Templar - Stormproof (healer)Draco Imperialis - AD Imperial DK (tank)Cabed Naearamarth - AD Dunmer mDKValirion Willowthorne - AD Bosmer stamBladeTuruna - AD Altmer magBladeKheled Zaram - AD Redguard stamDKKibil Nala - AD Redguard stamSorc - StormproofYavanna Kémentárí - AD Breton magWardenAzog gro-Ghâsh - EP Orc stamWardenVidar Drakenblød - DC Nord mDKMarquis de Peyrac - DC Breton mSorc - StormproofRawlith Khaj'ra - AD Khajiit stamWardenTu'waccah - AD Redguard StamplarAll chars 50 @ CP 1700+. Playing and enjoying PvP with RdK mostly on PC EU.0 -
reiverx✭✭✭✭✭They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
You keep talking about this but the Dutch only linked 4 games, where the users could Re-SELL items for REAL money, to gambling.
smhOne day gambling laws will catch up. At the moment, it's not really obvious how destructive these practices are.
Collectible Card Games with randomized booster packs have been around for decades. They are, in every way except for being physical, the same thing as crown crates. (Well and the fact that I don't think you can actually sell stuff from Crown Crates for real money as dupes turn into crystals.)
NO laws have been made against them - Specifically look at Magic:The Gathering. There are cards that are worth thousands of dollars. They were obtained from buying randomized packs of cards.
The only difference is you don't have to leave your house to get crown crates. Although no you can just order most CCG's via websites and have stuff delivered to your door.
Well, that's the thing. Those cards are real and can't be taken away.
ZOS can shut you down anytime they want, and it's bye-bye virtual items.
Maybe you've never heard of Decipher? You should look it up. Or even the devaluation of sports cards. You may have a "physical" card, but the value can be taken away.
Also - if that's the case, then purchasing a subscription is also a gamble.
Most physical things devalue over time. Some, like antiques, can go up in value.
A subscription is a paid service.
Is it? A subscription to a magazine, where you receive the physical product and can retain it is a paid service with "tangible" goods. A subscription to a game though is just as you describe. At the end of the day if the product you have a subscription for goes under, you've paid years worth of subscription fees and are left with naught. That is more a gamble than the loot crates imo.
The ESO subscription is for a digital service.
You're creating strawmen.5 -
Istoppucks✭✭✭✭
Yet here in the UK we have an advertising standard agency to make sure they don't cross any lines. Video games have no such agency which is why they're allowed to employ more and more questionable methods of monetisation.Istoppucks wrote: »
As I said in post above. Facts are they found that the crates were designed to be manipulative, check the video linked above for an analysis of what their reports said.Istoppucks wrote: »They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
Lets use facts here. The Dutch body found 4 out of 10 needed to adjust their rules because....get ready for the fun part....the had items in their crates that could be sold for real money.
Please dont come here with stories you are going to twist to try and prove a point . Lets stick to the facts.
I never claimed ESO boxes would be effected by the events in the Netherlands and not twisted anything to prove any point, I merely stated what has been in their reports.
Every ad on TV is manipulative. Restaurants make their menues to manipulate the consumer. Car manufacturing manipulate the pricing and extras.
I can go on and on what does your story you copy\paste multiple times on every thread have to do with ESO not being gambling? Well beside it helps prove eso is NOT gambling.
Also you're aware in my first post I agreed with you they're not gambling right? I just said they employ the same methods as gambling which is pretty clear for all to see.
In my OP I linked an article that stated the UK ruled loot crates are not gambling.
My point is you continue to post that Dutch story out of context. Everytime you do you get called out. Im just suggestion maybe next post the full context of the story.Edited by Istoppucks on April 20, 2018 12:24PM0 -
Kalgert✭✭✭✭✭AjiBuster499 wrote: »So... They deleted the last thread you started on a similar subject and now you started this one...
:thinking:
Incoming another thread deletion...
This guy really should give up and face the music that lootboxes are considered gambling, only that the laws haven't caught up to them yet.
Just because they are a whale who can spend heaps of money on lootboxes/Crown Crates, doesn't mean that Lootboxes/Crown Crates can't be manipulative pieces of virtual gambling poo.4 -
DeadlyRecluse✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Gambling has a legal and a colloquial definition.
Loot boxes are obviously not the former, and they obviously are the latter.Thrice Empress, Forever Scrub7 -
AjiBuster499✭✭✭DeadlyRecluse wrote: »Gambling has a legal and a colloquial definition.
Loot boxes are obviously not the former, and they obviously are the latter.
I'm not trying to be mean or anything but can you tell me the definitions of each? I'm curious now.
tfw your sig gets wound back in time.
Pterenophobia is the fear of being tickled by feathers.0 -
Aebaradath✭✭✭✭✭
✭
And if you're implying only people who disagree with you are to blame for that, you are wrong. The tone and demeanor in your writing makes you just as much responsible.Istoppucks wrote: »PelinalWhitestrake wrote: »
Well isn't that nice... Anyone who doesn't agree with your opinion on gamble crates (or on any subject) is a toxic person.Istoppucks wrote: »AjiBuster499 wrote: »Istoppucks wrote: »AjiBuster499 wrote: »So... They deleted the last thread you started on a similar subject and now you started this one...
:thinking:
According to the comment it was deleted because those like you turned it into your personal toxic play ground.
I didn't even post on it...
I didnt say you did. Read my comment again and get back to me. (Hint "those like you")
Didnt say that either. There was something like 300 comments on it not all were toxic. There was some good discussion just like there is here.
Its normal for the vocal minority on all game forums to spam threads they disagree with until it gets closed. Thats what happened there and obviously going to happen here . Im assuming you are very aware of this.
5 -
DeadlyRecluse✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭AjiBuster499 wrote: »DeadlyRecluse wrote: »Gambling has a legal and a colloquial definition.
Loot boxes are obviously not the former, and they obviously are the latter.
I'm not trying to be mean or anything but can you tell me the definitions of each? I'm curious now.
@AjiBuster499
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gamble
"Definition 1a: to play a game for money or property." That's what people mean when you take "gambling" in the legal sense.
"Definition 1b: to bet on an uncertain outcome." That's the more colloquial/informal meaning. Along the lines of "I don't know if I am going to like this sandwich, so ordering it is a bit of a gamble," or "I'm going to gamble on this pickup line working" or "I'm buying crown crates for an apex mounts, even though it's gambling and nothing is guaranteed."Edited by DeadlyRecluse on April 20, 2018 12:35PMThrice Empress, Forever Scrub3 -
Turelus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
When it's based on scientific evidence and around the idea of protecting people who can't protect themselves I am a little more willing of it.
Yet here in the UK we have an advertising standard agency to make sure they don't cross any lines. Video games have no such agency which is why they're allowed to employ more and more questionable methods of monetisation.Istoppucks wrote: »
As I said in post above. Facts are they found that the crates were designed to be manipulative, check the video linked above for an analysis of what their reports said.Istoppucks wrote: »They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
Lets use facts here. The Dutch body found 4 out of 10 needed to adjust their rules because....get ready for the fun part....the had items in their crates that could be sold for real money.
Please dont come here with stories you are going to twist to try and prove a point . Lets stick to the facts.
I never claimed ESO boxes would be effected by the events in the Netherlands and not twisted anything to prove any point, I merely stated what has been in their reports.
Every ad on TV is manipulative. Restaurants make their menues to manipulate the consumer. Car manufacturing manipulate the pricing and extras.
I can go on and on what does your story you copy\paste multiple times on every thread have to do with ESO not being gambling? Well beside it helps prove eso is NOT gambling.
Also you're aware in my first post I agreed with you they're not gambling right? I just said they employ the same methods as gambling which is pretty clear for all to see.
Do you like getting told what’s good for you and what you can or can’t do? Because that is the principle question with all of this.
We already have laws for gambling because we know the effects it has one some people, with how these are set up to exploit the same vulnerabilities I think I would be fine with that as well.
@Turelus - EU PC Megaserver
"Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves."0 -
Aebaradath✭✭✭✭✭
✭
You can copy paste from a dictionary all you want; it's not gonna take away the underlying insinuation.Istoppucks wrote: »PelinalWhitestrake wrote: »
Did you just say "boy"? What a way to go from being capable to have a discussion to using terms that suggest the opposite.Istoppucks wrote: »
Those are the only ones facing bans. Their reports went into their findings that these boxes did indeed have manipulative design.They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
You keep talking about this but the Dutch only linked 4 games, where the users could Re-SELL items for REAL money, to gambling.
smh
If you have the time there is a full diagnosis of what happened in this video.
Boy you are so desperate to change this story arent you. Why are you so desperate? Four out of ten were ordered to change because you could sell the items for real money. Those are the facts, stop try to peddle this as anything else you get called out by multiple people every time you do. This trick is up move on.
Yeah read that again. A little helper for you...
interjection Also boy.
an exclamation of wonder, approval, etc., or of displeasure or contempt.
2 -
Turelus✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Yes and once again... I agreed with you they're not gambling. Not under the definitions we have for gambling.Istoppucks wrote: »
Yet here in the UK we have an advertising standard agency to make sure they don't cross any lines. Video games have no such agency which is why they're allowed to employ more and more questionable methods of monetisation.Istoppucks wrote: »
As I said in post above. Facts are they found that the crates were designed to be manipulative, check the video linked above for an analysis of what their reports said.Istoppucks wrote: »They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
Lets use facts here. The Dutch body found 4 out of 10 needed to adjust their rules because....get ready for the fun part....the had items in their crates that could be sold for real money.
Please dont come here with stories you are going to twist to try and prove a point . Lets stick to the facts.
I never claimed ESO boxes would be effected by the events in the Netherlands and not twisted anything to prove any point, I merely stated what has been in their reports.
Every ad on TV is manipulative. Restaurants make their menues to manipulate the consumer. Car manufacturing manipulate the pricing and extras.
I can go on and on what does your story you copy\paste multiple times on every thread have to do with ESO not being gambling? Well beside it helps prove eso is NOT gambling.
Also you're aware in my first post I agreed with you they're not gambling right? I just said they employ the same methods as gambling which is pretty clear for all to see.
In my OP I linked an article that stated the UK ruled loot crates are not gambling.
My point is you continue to post that Dutch story out of context. Everytime you do you get called out. Im just suggestion maybe next post the full context of the story.
However they use the same methodology as gambling to get people playing more which is why I feel they should be looked into and potentially regulated if the industry keeps finding more scummy ways to manipulate its consumers.
I keep going back to the Dutch thing because in the video I linked you (have you watched it all yet?) Yong shows how their investigations found similarities between the methods used in gambling and those used by some in the gaming industry.
Edited by Turelus on April 20, 2018 12:39PM@Turelus - EU PC Megaserver
"Don't count on others for help. In the end each of us is in this alone. The survivors are those who know how to look out for themselves."0 -
Feanor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
When it's based on scientific evidence and around the idea of protecting people who can't protect themselves I am a little more willing of it.
Yet here in the UK we have an advertising standard agency to make sure they don't cross any lines. Video games have no such agency which is why they're allowed to employ more and more questionable methods of monetisation.Istoppucks wrote: »
As I said in post above. Facts are they found that the crates were designed to be manipulative, check the video linked above for an analysis of what their reports said.Istoppucks wrote: »They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
Lets use facts here. The Dutch body found 4 out of 10 needed to adjust their rules because....get ready for the fun part....the had items in their crates that could be sold for real money.
Please dont come here with stories you are going to twist to try and prove a point . Lets stick to the facts.
I never claimed ESO boxes would be effected by the events in the Netherlands and not twisted anything to prove any point, I merely stated what has been in their reports.
Every ad on TV is manipulative. Restaurants make their menues to manipulate the consumer. Car manufacturing manipulate the pricing and extras.
I can go on and on what does your story you copy\paste multiple times on every thread have to do with ESO not being gambling? Well beside it helps prove eso is NOT gambling.
Also you're aware in my first post I agreed with you they're not gambling right? I just said they employ the same methods as gambling which is pretty clear for all to see.
Do you like getting told what’s good for you and what you can or can’t do? Because that is the principle question with all of this.
We already have laws for gambling because we know the effects it has one some people, with how these are set up to exploit the same vulnerabilities I think I would be fine with that as well.
If you have a gambling addiction casinos are closed for you specifically. Not for everyone else. Besides, scientific evidence is whacky in that field. Brain research can explain only 5% of what’s going on in a human brain and how thats affecting decision making, emotions, etc. (at least a nobel peace prize winner in that field once said so in an interview).
Everyone has the right to be unreasonable. It’s not for another person to decide that.Edited by Feanor on April 20, 2018 12:41PMMain characters: Feanor the Believer - AD Altmer mSorc - AR 46 - Flawless Conqueror (PC EU)Idril Arnanor - AD Altmer mSorc - CP 217 - Stormproof (PC NA)Other characters:Necrophilius Killgood - DC Imperial NecromancerFearscales - AD Argonian Templar - Stormproof (healer)Draco Imperialis - AD Imperial DK (tank)Cabed Naearamarth - AD Dunmer mDKValirion Willowthorne - AD Bosmer stamBladeTuruna - AD Altmer magBladeKheled Zaram - AD Redguard stamDKKibil Nala - AD Redguard stamSorc - StormproofYavanna Kémentárí - AD Breton magWardenAzog gro-Ghâsh - EP Orc stamWardenVidar Drakenblød - DC Nord mDKMarquis de Peyrac - DC Breton mSorc - StormproofRawlith Khaj'ra - AD Khajiit stamWardenTu'waccah - AD Redguard StamplarAll chars 50 @ CP 1700+. Playing and enjoying PvP with RdK mostly on PC EU.1 -
Cpt_Teemo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
It is gambling though
verb (used with object), gambled, gambling.
3.
to lose or squander by betting (usually followed by away):
He gambled all his hard-earned money away in one night.
4.
to wager or risk (money or something else of value):
to gamble one's freedom.
5.
to take a chance on; venture; risk:1 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
You keep talking about this but the Dutch only linked 4 games, where the users could Re-SELL items for REAL money, to gambling.
smhOne day gambling laws will catch up. At the moment, it's not really obvious how destructive these practices are.
Collectible Card Games with randomized booster packs have been around for decades. They are, in every way except for being physical, the same thing as crown crates. (Well and the fact that I don't think you can actually sell stuff from Crown Crates for real money as dupes turn into crystals.)
NO laws have been made against them - Specifically look at Magic:The Gathering. There are cards that are worth thousands of dollars. They were obtained from buying randomized packs of cards.
The only difference is you don't have to leave your house to get crown crates. Although no you can just order most CCG's via websites and have stuff delivered to your door.
Not quite the same. One thing with ALL collectible, randomized card games is you are guaranteed a certain number of classifications in each pack. For example, in a 15 card pack you may be guaranteed 8 commons, 5 uncommons and 2 rares. Meaning, you do know somewhat what you are getting, but not exactly what you are getting.
Loot crates work no where near the same way. You get four or five things, which can be anything, with a slight chance at getting a rare but the more likely outcome of getting commons and uncommons. If you were guaranteed a rare (but random at what rare), that would be one thing.
Furthermore, cards can be resold for something of value. Loot crates leave usually little chance you can do that.
Loot crates, in function, by all intents and purposes follow all of the same mechanics as gambling. The only difference is they do it for digital goods rather than real cash and you always get something. There is a reason the laws were established to have a minimum age for gambling - because it is well know they create addictive tenancies which the laws are meant to keep children from being exposed too.
People do not get addicted to gambling because of the money - they do because of the mechanics. They are chasing that night when they can win big. The same can be said of the ultra-rare digital items in loot crates (they are the big win).
This is why they are pursuing legislation that will not stop loot crates, but rather require any company that has loot crates in games to carry an Adults Only rating (which in itself will kill a massive amount of sales for a game).
Until that legislation is passed, however, you can expect gaming companies to try and maximize as much as they can from loot crates. One of the worst things anyone can face in any industry is a politician on a crusade to get laws passed - they usually succeed eventually - and that is exactly what is happening now with loot crates. I expect the legislation to eventually pass (and so does EA, which is why they are starting to evolve to other practices), but until then, I am sure the gaming industry will keep pumping out the loot crates as fast as possible.
Finally, to the OPs definition you didn't complete it. Here is the full definition:
1.to play at any game of chance for money or other stakes.
2.to stake or risk money, or anything of value, on the outcome of something involving chance.
Gambling is simply using money or anything of value (digital coins, etc.) on a game of chance. Loot crates fit both of those Oxford definitions of gambling. So, yes, they are gambling.Edited by Wayshuba on April 20, 2018 12:47PM0 -
Merlin13KAGL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
No, the implication is your own assumption.Merlin13KAGL wrote: »In the U.S. it's definined like this:
A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value (true)
...upon the outcome of a contest of chance (RNG of crates)
... or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, (Still RNG, so still true.)
..upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.- Your definition of "something of value" doesn't matter.
- Your definition of "gambling" doesnt' matter.
- Yours is the only recent thread about this topic.
- Your declaration that it's not is no more useful than threads that declare that it is.
The govt. will be the one making the call in the long run, and your feelings or interpretation on the matter will be as relevant then as they are now. (HINT: They aren't.)They're not gambling directly no.
However they take a lot of the methods and manipulations used in gambling to create the same effect.
Even the Dutch body looking into them agreed on this during the week.
You keep talking about this but the Dutch only linked 4 games, where the users could Re-SELL items for REAL money, to gambling.
smhOne day gambling laws will catch up. At the moment, it's not really obvious how destructive these practices are.
Collectible Card Games with randomized booster packs have been around for decades. They are, in every way except for being physical, the same thing as crown crates. (Well and the fact that I don't think you can actually sell stuff from Crown Crates for real money as dupes turn into crystals.)
NO laws have been made against them - Specifically look at Magic:The Gathering. There are cards that are worth thousands of dollars. They were obtained from buying randomized packs of cards.
The only difference is you don't have to leave your house to get crown crates. Although no you can just order most CCG's via websites and have stuff delivered to your door.Merlin13KAGL wrote: »In the U.S. it's definined like this:
A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value (true)
...upon the outcome of a contest of chance (RNG of crates)
... or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, (Still RNG, so still true.)
..upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.- Your definition of "something of value" doesn't matter.
- Your definition of "gambling" doesnt' matter.
- Yours is the only recent thread about this topic.
- Your declaration that it's not is no more useful than threads that declare that it is.
The govt. will be the one making the call in the long run, and your feelings or interpretation on the matter will be as relevant then as they are now. (HINT: They aren't.)
Contest of chance implies that you're competing against other people, not randomly opening packages. There is no "contest" in buying a randomized package of goods and opening it. You're also cutting up the statements to fit your argument. "future contingent event" is critical to "not under his control or influence."
You're also not staking anything. You're purchasing a crate that has random loot. You're trading your money 1 for 1. There is no chance that you will pay ZOS, and end up getting 0 crates. (outside of bugs but I'm sure ZOS usually corrects this OR your CC/Bank will.)
Let's look at it two different ways. You'll be wrong in both cases.- Slot machines: Clearly gambling, though you are not competing against other people in this game of chance. So your assumption does not apply.
- Unless... you wish to argue that you are playing against "the house." In this case one could argue that with Crates, you are also playing against "the house." "The house," in such an instance is ZoS.
You're choosing to interpret the second half of the statement as one continuous section. Again, you're making an assumption. Reading the entire part, taking the "or" in to account, that portion reads as ("A" or "B") and "C."
You're choosing to interpret it as "A" or ("B" and "C.") With "A" being "outcome of contest of chance," "B" being "future contingent event," and "C" being "not under his control or influence."
Crates are most certainly a contest of chance with the outcome not under the player's control or influence.
And you're not staking anything? You are most certainly staking crowns, a virtual item that arguably has value, as it has to be purchased with IRL currency, on chance of a result.
Your argument that there is no chance you'll end up with no crates is flawed on two counts, yet again.- The obvious one, which you're choosing to ignore, is that no one buys crates just for crates' sake. They buy them for the potential contents.
- There is absolute chance that you'll end with no crates, because if the items produced are unused, the net result is that you did not receive value-in-kind for your $$ (even after $ to Crown conversion).
- The second can be taken even further if you end up acquiring items of value (in that they can be purchased with crowns, which are purchased with currency) because the typical outcome will yield less value than if the items were purchased outright.
- If you want to take it a step further still, based on your own definition of "value." These are all virtual goods with no intrinsic value, therefore you are spending IRL currency for crowns, for crates, which are guaranteed to translate to zero value.
The great thing about things that eventually become law, is that they end up being in a form that does not need to imply anything. It's why they're written to the level of detail that they are. It's why lawyers get paid so well to find the missing places in between that have yet been clarified enough to not be subject to implication or interpretation.
It is not a direct exchange of goods/services at a predetermined value. It's random. Chance. Neither the outcome nor the value of the outcome is guaranteed. The cost, however, is guaranteed.
(If you disagree, I would love to see you purchase a single crown crate and predict the contents, or do whatever you like under your control to guarantee the content (outcome.)) Be sure to stream it, and I'll happily concede. For good measure, and not dumb luck RNG (because it's not a game of chance, right?) you'll have to do it two times in a row.
I don't think it could fit the very definition of gambling any more perfectly.
I am a firm believer in peoples' right to make their own choices, provided they are capable to do so and it does not directly impact another's. Regulation and oversight is there to keep, in large part, to keep people safe, even if it's from themselves in some cases.
I've seen no such safeguard in place regarding crown crates. Just as a bartender is legally obligated to "cut you off," the same potential shared responsibility should have to be present for the one supplying the product.
It's still everyone's god-given right to wreck themselves in the fashion they see fit, if they choose to. It doesn't make it common. It doesn't make it right. And trying to argue grammatical semantics doesn't change the fact that it still fits the definition to a T.
TL;DR; Legally, at present. It is not gambling. If you were to interpret the definition as the average person would, it absolutely is.
Edited by Merlin13KAGL on April 20, 2018 12:55PMJust because you don't like the way something is doesn't necessarily make it wrong...
Earn it.
IRL'ing for a while for assorted reasons, in forum, and in game.I am neither warm, nor fuzzy...
Probably has checkbox on Customer Service profile that say High Aggro, 99% immunity to BS2 -
TequilaFire✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭US Legal defines gambling as following:
"A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome. "
"Gambling is accepting, recording, or registering bets, or carrying on a policy game or any other lottery, or playing any game of chance, for money or other thing of value. Title 18, U.S.C., Sec. 1955, makes it a federal crime or offense for anyone to conduct an 'illegal gambling business."
A legal definition and a dictionary definition are quite different things.Edited by TequilaFire on April 20, 2018 12:51PM0 -
Istoppucks✭✭✭✭TequilaFire wrote: »US Legal defines gambling as following:
"A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome. "
A legal definition and a dictionary definition are quite different things.
Loot crate items cant be sold and have no value.0 -
Wayshuba✭✭✭✭✭Crown Crates are a form of gambling. You buy them in the hopes of getting what you desire. Just because they do not have a definite monetary value does not exclude them as gambling.
They may not exactly have a real life monetary value however; but certain items do. For example, the Dragon Priest Costume was being sold in the Crown Store a while back for 1000 Crowns, or something like that. Regardless, that has an equivalent of like $10. I have a chance of buying the 4-pack of crates to get that costume, which would be cheaper in actuality assuming I get it, or the 15-pack of crates which would be more than what it is worth. When it comes down to it, it is up to a determined algorithm to give me that specified item out of all items in the crates on top of duplicates.
So by your definition, happy meals are a form of gambling? I buy it in hopes of getting that one toy I want. You just described RNG, not gambling. You could buy 15, worth more, but you get other items and the chance to get the one you want. If you don't get the one you want, ZOS doesn't come along and take ALL of the other items away from you. If they did, THAT would be closer to gambling.
Wow, is this one so far off base. A Happy Meal? Have you bought one lately? If the toys are cycled by the week you get the one they have that week. If not, you can just ask for the toy you want when you buy it for your kid and that's what they will put it. No chance at all.
Finally, even if it is random, your are buying the food and it comes with a toy and none of the toys have any more value than the other one. It is like a loot crate that only has commons. There are no ultra-rares you are chasing in a happy meal.Edited by Wayshuba on April 20, 2018 12:51PM1 -
Cpt_Teemo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭TequilaFire wrote: »US Legal defines gambling as following:
"A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome. "
A legal definition and a dictionary definition are quite different things.
I go by global definition of gambling
Taking a risk is basically what gambling is2 -
AjiBuster499✭✭✭
Bolded is key here. Turelus said that they aren't directly gambling, however they are still (based on his second paragraph) indirectly gambling.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think he's saying that they are a form of gambling, just not an obvious one.tfw your sig gets wound back in time.
Pterenophobia is the fear of being tickled by feathers.0 -
Stewart1874✭✭✭✭✭https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-04-19-the-netherlands-declares-some-loot-boxes-are-gambling
Literally says its gambling FACT (as the OP likes to put things
)
I'm kinda at a loss on why folks are so keen to justify this practise anyway, imo the crown store quality has suffered since the introduction of crown cratesPS4 - Europe - Aldmeri Dominion4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hb8ssMDbmrw