Legislation Introduced in the USA to Ban Loot Boxes & Pay to Win Microtransactions

thedude33

UrQuan wrote: »

DirkRavenclaw wrote: »

Simple, if this Ban gets throught, ZOS has to return to a Subscription Model. Be carefull what you wish for

No, it doesn't look like that at all. Did you read the link? It's specifically talking about gambling mechanics in games aimed at children (ie. under 18, which doesn't apply to ESO), and at pay to win microtransactions (which also doesn't really apply to ESO).
At most ZOS might have to introduce some system to ensure that parents can restrict crown crate purchases on their kids' accounts if they've let their kid play this game that's rated 18+

Well apparently ESO is p2w according to all the posts on these forums.

Goregrinder

thedude33 wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

DirkRavenclaw wrote: »

Simple, if this Ban gets throught, ZOS has to return to a Subscription Model. Be carefull what you wish for

No, it doesn't look like that at all. Did you read the link? It's specifically talking about gambling mechanics in games aimed at children (ie. under 18, which doesn't apply to ESO), and at pay to win microtransactions (which also doesn't really apply to ESO).
At most ZOS might have to introduce some system to ensure that parents can restrict crown crate purchases on their kids' accounts if they've let their kid play this game that's rated 18+

Well apparently ESO is p2w according to all the posts on these forums.

It's weird...I bought a bunch of mounts from the Crown Store, and sometimes I still don't WIN....it's a fraud, I feel cheated! This supposed to be Pay to Win...I paid...so where is my guaranteed WIN!!!

Genomic

I can't believe people are actually defending the inclusion of manipulative, casino-like monetization in computer games. Just shows how easily the gormless can be led by the nose.

NordSwordnBoard

Be sure to stop at your local supermarket/mall on the way to Bethesda with your pitchforks and torches!



"I spent $9.50 to get the apex item purdy gums that's tantalizing me from the display. Now I can't afford lunch, my gums ain't purdy, and instead of blaming myself I'll call my senator. Something must be done, this is outrageous."

The fake example above would actually get more sympathy if it involved an actual child. You don't even need a subscription or to pre-purchase anything for a chance to win purdy gums at the market for a quarters.

I can't find the user's name, but a Belgian player told us they could still buy crates. If anything, the naivete' is hilarious.

Cortimi

UrQuan wrote: »

I don't expect this will really impact ESO much, as last I checked ESO is rated 18+, a

Incorrect.



There are no "18+" games available on console. Rated M (17+) is a VASTLY different thing than Rated AO (18+).

Yes, that extra year makes ALL the difference.

Sahidom

I foresee many problems with enforcement after reading the Protecting Children Abusive Gaming Act one-pager - should this legislation pass.

For example, how does this legislation encompass overseas software gaming companies that market to the USA?

Even with classes behind the ESO pay wall; it doesn't violate the context of the legislation intent.

Glurin

Genomic wrote: »

I can't believe people are actually defending the inclusion of manipulative, casino-like monetization in computer games. Just shows how easily the gormless can be led by the nose.

Actually for many of us it's less about defending loot boxes and more about keeping politicians from getting their grubby little claws into it.

Elsonso

Glurin wrote: »

Genomic wrote: »

I can't believe people are actually defending the inclusion of manipulative, casino-like monetization in computer games. Just shows how easily the gormless can be led by the nose.

Actually for many of us it's less about defending loot boxes and more about keeping politicians from getting their grubby little claws into it.

Yeah. Politicians running in to save us usually indicates that things are about to get way worse.

Imperial_Voice

Dont fret guys, Zenimax Media will just donate to some key lobbyists

SFDB

This is difficult to discuss given that ZoS doesn't want us discussing politics. Mods, I'm being vague to try to avoid crossing any lines.

The thing to remember is that bills are being submitted all the time, for any number of reasons, but that the number that become law are very small. For instance, the last Congress (the 2 year period from Jan 2017-Jan 2019) enacted 443 laws, out of 10,750 that were submitted. That's less than half of a percent success rate, and in a case when congress and the president were both controlled by the same party. The Congress before that one, when the parties were different, had a success rate that was substantially worse than that.

Thus, there's no reason to conclude that this bill has a chance to get past the committee, succeed in a vote in one house, repeat that success in the other, and get the president to sign it.

Also, factor in that control of Congress is mixed, and that a number of influential legislators are attempting to secure the nomination for their party for president. Their interest, then, is to galvanize the support of their party's base, which is done by associating themselves with current major activity attempting to advance the base's agenda. The candidate wants to be able to give speeches about issues X, Y, and Z that their power base is passionate about, whether for or against, but other issues aren't going to draw the kind of interest you want.

Sure this can be framed as "think of the children!" but lots of things can be so framed, and these days the big headlines about children are not exploitation by video game companies. There are simply far more powerful narratives that could be of help to those trying to appear as the compassionate legislator.

Submitting a bill like this can be done for any number of reasons completely unrelated to having the desired outcome in the bill. It could be a push by lobbyists, or by a special interest group, that the legislator is trying to appease (anyone can write a bill, you just need a legislator to introduce it to Congress); if they're the one that introduces it, they can show that group they made the effort even if they didn't care in the slightest about it. It can also be to shore up one's position against challengers. It's also sometimes done to exert pressure upon entities so they might voluntarily make at least some effort to change even without the bill.

Personally, my money is on this guy just trying to get in cozy with an SIG and maybe get a couple column inches with a move unlikely to engender much risk in blowback.

Glurin

Cortimi wrote: »

There are no "18+" games available on console. Rated M (17+) is a VASTLY different thing than Rated AO (18+).

Yes, that extra year makes ALL the difference.

That it does. Most people think the AO rating is reserved exclusively for the kind of stuff you used to see behind the magic curtain at video rental stores. (You know, when video rental stores were still a thing.) So much so that many retailers refuse to carry them and the big console manufacturers have made it a policy not to allow them on their platforms. At least in the U.S.

That line can get pretty darn thin at times though. For example, Conan Exiles has a lot of topless women in it, along with blood, gore, alcohol, etc. (Hey, it's Conan. What did you expect?) It is available on Xbox and PS4 with an M rating, but if you have a non-U.S. account which would then be under the PEGI system, you can download the patch that allows both men and women have no underpants. There's also a slider on character creation to enhance your "charisma". If you have a U.S. account and are thus subject to the ESRB though, then you're stuck with your character having underwear that is surgically attached to his or her skin. The PC version already has full nudity with no need for a patch, in case anyone was wondering. Not to mention mods.

Dark_Lord_Kuro

Casdha wrote: »

ManwithBeard9 wrote: »

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO wrote: »

what does it mean if it passes? NA gets free from loot boxes finally? but what about the rest of us?...u know...the poor children from the EU?

Nothing would happen because the bill is aimed at games that cater to minors, so not M rated games. So ESO would be free to have crates.

For this to be true ZOS (or any developer) would have to prove that no one under the age of 18 is allowed to play their game, which is all but impossible for any game released to consoles.

Again go back and read the wording on my previous post concerning the quote, or any of the articles.

Don't go by what is said here, go look up the stories and articles for yourself.

It is the responsability of the parent to prevent their child for playing a m rated game not the came companies

It like buying a beer the givig it to your child then blaming the beer company if someting wrong happen

So i dont think they would need to give proof that no one under 18 play eso but im no us law expert so...

Dark_Lord_Kuro

Ardaghion wrote: »

Casdha wrote: »

ManwithBeard9 wrote: »

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO wrote: »

what does it mean if it passes? NA gets free from loot boxes finally? but what about the rest of us?...u know...the poor children from the EU?

Nothing would happen because the bill is aimed at games that cater to minors, so not M rated games. So ESO would be free to have crates.

For this to be true ZOS (or any developer) would have to prove that no one under the age of 18 is allowed to play their game, which is all but impossible for any game released to consoles.

Again go back and read the wording on my previous post concerning the quote, or any of the articles.

Don't go by what is said here, go look up the stories and articles for yourself.

I created a new account yesterday on Xbox and to activate I had to state that I was over 13 years old, there's currently no requirement to be over the age of 18 to play ESO. Therefore ZOS would be under the requirement "knowingly allow minor players to engage in microtransactions"

Rso is m rated game sales man in store a tequired to advise paren about 18+age recomendation and the parent is responsible to make his kid follow it

Glurin

Dark_Lord_Kuro wrote: »

Ardaghion wrote: »

Casdha wrote: »

ManwithBeard9 wrote: »

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO wrote: »

what does it mean if it passes? NA gets free from loot boxes finally? but what about the rest of us?...u know...the poor children from the EU?

Nothing would happen because the bill is aimed at games that cater to minors, so not M rated games. So ESO would be free to have crates.

For this to be true ZOS (or any developer) would have to prove that no one under the age of 18 is allowed to play their game, which is all but impossible for any game released to consoles.

Again go back and read the wording on my previous post concerning the quote, or any of the articles.

Don't go by what is said here, go look up the stories and articles for yourself.

I created a new account yesterday on Xbox and to activate I had to state that I was over 13 years old, there's currently no requirement to be over the age of 18 to play ESO. Therefore ZOS would be under the requirement "knowingly allow minor players to engage in microtransactions"

Rso is m rated game sales man in store a tequired to advise paren about 18+age recomendation and the parent is responsible to make his kid follow it

It should be noted that the salesman requirement is a store policy. There's no law that says they have to as far as I know. The ESRB system is completely self imposed by the industry, and it was done so for the express purpose of discouraging the federal government from stepping in. Which, if they had, we'd be lucky to see anything more mature than the NES Mario Bros. right now.

UrQuan

Acrolas wrote: »

OP already admitted as much so the thread seems more intended to bait than to inform.

So presenting the facts without any editorializing, including pointing out that even if this passes it's not likely to have much impact on ESO, is considered baiting now. OK, then.

UrQuan

Cortimi wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

I don't expect this will really impact ESO much, as last I checked ESO is rated 18+, a

Incorrect.



There are no "18+" games available on console. Rated M (17+) is a VASTLY different thing than Rated AO (18+).

Yes, that extra year makes ALL the difference.

I guess you missed my later post where I said that I was mistaken and ESO is actually 17+

Here it is for your reference (posted a full day before your post):

UrQuan wrote: »

DenMoria wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

Other countries have taken steps against loot boxes (some banning them outright, and others taking softer approaches), and now a bill is being introduced in the USA as well to address them:
https://www.hawley.senate.gov/senator-hawley-introduce-legislation-banning-manipulative-video-game-features-aimed-children
I don't expect this will really impact ESO much, as last I checked ESO is rated 18+, and when it comes to loot boxes the bill seems to be aimed at protecting minors, but if the bill passes they may need to put some additional controls in place to prevent kids playing with their parents' permission from buying crown crates.

I was particularly interested to read about the part of the bill aimed at pay to win microtransactions, but I don't think that piece would have much of an impact on ESO either, aside from giving ZOS a legal incentive to not push the envelope with convenience items and be extra careful about possibly crossing from convenience to pay to win.

Since when is ESO 18+?

We've go so many prepubescents playing ESO, there's no way it's 18+.

I was wrong about that - it's actually rated 17+
Check out the rating at the bottom of this page:
https://account.elderscrollsonline.com/store/product/eso_elsweyr_edition

Ankael07

Zacuel wrote: »

We need the whales to support this game so that the rest of us can enjoy it sub free.

I am sorely against this.

https://wccftech.com/eso-boss-says-his-devs-have-been-killing-it-confirms-the-studio-is-working-on-a-new-game-with-a-new-engine/

Still think they need crates to keep the game up? @Zacuel

Sylvermynx

rfennell_ESO wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

Other countries have taken steps against loot boxes (some banning them outright, and others taking softer approaches), and now a bill is being introduced in the USA as well to address them:
https://www.hawley.senate.gov/senator-hawley-introduce-legislation-banning-manipulative-video-game-features-aimed-children
I don't expect this will really impact ESO much, as last I checked ESO is rated 18+, and when it comes to loot boxes the bill seems to be aimed at protecting minors, but if the bill passes they may need to put some additional controls in place to prevent kids playing with their parents' permission from buying crown crates.

I was particularly interested to read about the part of the bill aimed at pay to win microtransactions, but I don't think that piece would have much of an impact on ESO either, aside from giving ZOS a legal incentive to not push the envelope with convenience items and be extra careful about possibly crossing from convenience to pay to win.

The problem with legislation like this is that when you draw a line somewhere in the sand, you make everything not over the line legal and protected.

At a certain point you have to just let people be stupid. If gambling is such an evil thing, why is it legal in some form everywhere in the USA (and expanding)? Personally I think gambling, in general, is foolish... but they opened the gates to hell when they brought it into legality claiming it would pay for the roads, the schools and what not (obviously that didn't work, did it?).

Heh. No gambling is legal in Utah. And no, I don't get dinged for buying crates....

barney2525

Siohwenoeht wrote: »

WolfingHour wrote: »

Goregrinder wrote: »

The problem with this is that the US has already defined what it considers "gambling". And since a user can't make a profit from the seller, and there is no intrinsic value from the items that come from the cases or crates, they aren't counted as currency, so this doesn't count as gambling.

Otherwise people who buy MTG packs, loot a rare card, can go up to Wizards of the Coast and demand the "black market" trade value in return for "winning". But Black market or 2nd hand values aren't counted as an actual value, and don't give an item intrinsic value.

Playing a slot machine at a casino is gambling because you use currency with intrinsic value to gamble for more currency with intrinsic value. You can put $1 in a machine, and get absolutely nothing back. Or you can put a $1 in, and get 100x times that value back from the house in the form of intrinsic currency. The fact that the house can make money off you, or that you can make money off the house, with real currency makes it gambling.

When you buy a case or crate, you aren't betting your money against something, you are paying for a service with no intrinsic value, but with the value of the cost of said service. The service is access to their server, and adding XX items to your online account or characters. There is no intrinsic value to them. How much you could make selling your account on ebay is a 2nd hand value, and does not count. The rare items you could get from the crates or cases have no real value outside of the game, they are items that can only be used within that said game.

The fact that there is a chance you could get an item, or a chance that you might not get an item doesn't inadvertently make it gambling. You're paying XX dollars for XX crates that give you something in return. You're never going to open a crate or case and get absolutely nothing. You're going to get SOMETHING. Whether or not that item is valuable to YOU or not is not what determines the line between gambling or not.

Like I said, narrow, so if we get to revisit that definition as well then great. Time has move on from the days of the good ol' one armed bandit.

Except no one is forcing anyone to purchase crates at gunpoint. I'd rather not have any MORE government regulation of individual choice. People need to learn to control their own impulses if buying crates has become an addiction. There are many programs available to help them regain control. Folks need to take personal responsibility, not pass the buck.

weeeelllllll.... not exactly entirely correct.

Some unique items in the crown shop can ONLY be obtained by either the luck of the crate OR spending gems - which Requires purchasing crates.

If you want that item - you MUST buy crates.

Sylvermynx

barney2525 wrote: »

Siohwenoeht wrote: »

WolfingHour wrote: »

Goregrinder wrote: »

The problem with this is that the US has already defined what it considers "gambling". And since a user can't make a profit from the seller, and there is no intrinsic value from the items that come from the cases or crates, they aren't counted as currency, so this doesn't count as gambling.

Otherwise people who buy MTG packs, loot a rare card, can go up to Wizards of the Coast and demand the "black market" trade value in return for "winning". But Black market or 2nd hand values aren't counted as an actual value, and don't give an item intrinsic value.

Playing a slot machine at a casino is gambling because you use currency with intrinsic value to gamble for more currency with intrinsic value. You can put $1 in a machine, and get absolutely nothing back. Or you can put a $1 in, and get 100x times that value back from the house in the form of intrinsic currency. The fact that the house can make money off you, or that you can make money off the house, with real currency makes it gambling.

When you buy a case or crate, you aren't betting your money against something, you are paying for a service with no intrinsic value, but with the value of the cost of said service. The service is access to their server, and adding XX items to your online account or characters. There is no intrinsic value to them. How much you could make selling your account on ebay is a 2nd hand value, and does not count. The rare items you could get from the crates or cases have no real value outside of the game, they are items that can only be used within that said game.

The fact that there is a chance you could get an item, or a chance that you might not get an item doesn't inadvertently make it gambling. You're paying XX dollars for XX crates that give you something in return. You're never going to open a crate or case and get absolutely nothing. You're going to get SOMETHING. Whether or not that item is valuable to YOU or not is not what determines the line between gambling or not.

Like I said, narrow, so if we get to revisit that definition as well then great. Time has move on from the days of the good ol' one armed bandit.

Except no one is forcing anyone to purchase crates at gunpoint. I'd rather not have any MORE government regulation of individual choice. People need to learn to control their own impulses if buying crates has become an addiction. There are many programs available to help them regain control. Folks need to take personal responsibility, not pass the buck.

weeeelllllll.... not exactly entirely correct.

Some unique items in the crown shop can ONLY be obtained by either the luck of the crate OR spending gems - which Requires purchasing crates.

If you want that item - you MUST buy crates.

But it's not a requirement - it's not life and death. If YOU want that item, YOU choose to buy crates. "Choose" being the operative word.

Acrolas

UrQuan wrote: »

So presenting the facts without any editorializing, including pointing out that even if this passes it's not likely to have much impact on ESO, is considered baiting now. OK, then.

You're baiting again. Pointing out, making comments, or otherwise expressing opinions is editorializing.
Jason Schreier writing "It begins." at the end of his tweet was editorializing.

Freshman senator proposes legislation to protect minors from game developers who knowingly exploit children.
That's the one fact so far.

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO

ManwithBeard9 wrote: »

xenowarrior92eb17_ESO wrote: »

what does it mean if it passes? NA gets free from loot boxes finally? but what about the rest of us?...u know...the poor children from the EU?

Nothing would happen because the bill is aimed at games that cater to minors, so not M rated games. So ESO would be free to have crates.

I see...so this entire thread is worthless then

ZOS_Ragnar

We have removed some non-constructive comments from this thread. Please ensure your posts follow the forum rules.

Iluvrien

Sylvermynx wrote: »

barney2525 wrote: »

Siohwenoeht wrote: »

WolfingHour wrote: »

Goregrinder wrote: »

The problem with this is that the US has already defined what it considers "gambling". And since a user can't make a profit from the seller, and there is no intrinsic value from the items that come from the cases or crates, they aren't counted as currency, so this doesn't count as gambling.

Otherwise people who buy MTG packs, loot a rare card, can go up to Wizards of the Coast and demand the "black market" trade value in return for "winning". But Black market or 2nd hand values aren't counted as an actual value, and don't give an item intrinsic value.

Playing a slot machine at a casino is gambling because you use currency with intrinsic value to gamble for more currency with intrinsic value. You can put $1 in a machine, and get absolutely nothing back. Or you can put a $1 in, and get 100x times that value back from the house in the form of intrinsic currency. The fact that the house can make money off you, or that you can make money off the house, with real currency makes it gambling.

When you buy a case or crate, you aren't betting your money against something, you are paying for a service with no intrinsic value, but with the value of the cost of said service. The service is access to their server, and adding XX items to your online account or characters. There is no intrinsic value to them. How much you could make selling your account on ebay is a 2nd hand value, and does not count. The rare items you could get from the crates or cases have no real value outside of the game, they are items that can only be used within that said game.

The fact that there is a chance you could get an item, or a chance that you might not get an item doesn't inadvertently make it gambling. You're paying XX dollars for XX crates that give you something in return. You're never going to open a crate or case and get absolutely nothing. You're going to get SOMETHING. Whether or not that item is valuable to YOU or not is not what determines the line between gambling or not.

Like I said, narrow, so if we get to revisit that definition as well then great. Time has move on from the days of the good ol' one armed bandit.

Except no one is forcing anyone to purchase crates at gunpoint. I'd rather not have any MORE government regulation of individual choice. People need to learn to control their own impulses if buying crates has become an addiction. There are many programs available to help them regain control. Folks need to take personal responsibility, not pass the buck.

weeeelllllll.... not exactly entirely correct.

Some unique items in the crown shop can ONLY be obtained by either the luck of the crate OR spending gems - which Requires purchasing crates.

If you want that item - you MUST buy crates.

But it's not a requirement - it's not life and death. If YOU want that item, YOU choose to buy crates. "Choose" being the operative word.

Oh, definitely. I doubt that there is anything illegal about putting certain items only in crates.

Of course banking on FOMO and the making things significantly harder to get by implementing artificial scarcity through RNG with low rates... that seems pretty immoral.

Either way it is clear to me that ESO has fallen far below the lofty aspirations expressed at launch.

Riejael

Since this is legislation in the US. I'm going to point out that the ESRB rating is irrelevant. That is an industry standard that has absolute no legal authority. In fact all forms of government in the US (Federal, State, County, Local, and UCMJ) are prohibited from making any law or regulation that doesn't allow minors to purchase any video game by a SCOTUS decision.

ESO would be hit by this law regardless of any changes to packaging or whatever ZOS does. The exemptions are for video games you find in casinos, cruise ships, and pornographic shops. Any mainstream gaming service such as things on Steam, sold by normal retailers, or on generalized websites would be subject.

For ESO to not be affected, ZOS would need to remove it from Steam, cease selling on consoles, and stop its website based shop and offer physical copies in adult only locations. That will never happen.

rfennell_ESO

ZOS has really done "crowns" the right way and kept it mostly unneeded for play stuff.

Take a look at EA games and there level of pay for stuff immersion. It's far FAR worse.

worrallj

DirkRavenclaw wrote: »

Simple, if this Ban gets throught, ZOS has to return to a Subscription Model. Be carefull what you wish for

That *is* what I wish for. I'm a subscriber and I would much prefer a solid base game to all the cheap tacky gimmicky crown store nonsense.

Edit: I know that makes me sound elitist, im sorry about that, but yeah I really do just think micro transactions are bad for the art of video games. ESO is pretty good overall, but even if the micro transactions didn't suck resources away from other quality maintenance, the constant pushing of all that junk makes me feel more like I'm in Vegas than Tamriel.

Zacuel

Ankael07 wrote: »

Zacuel wrote: »

We need the whales to support this game so that the rest of us can enjoy it sub free.

I am sorely against this.

https://wccftech.com/eso-boss-says-his-devs-have-been-killing-it-confirms-the-studio-is-working-on-a-new-game-with-a-new-engine/

Still think they need crates to keep the game up? @Zacuel

I think all of you are immune to sarcasm.

I'm actually not all that invested into this topic.

Glurin

rfennell_ESO wrote: »

ZOS has really done "crowns" the right way and kept it mostly unneeded for play stuff.

Take a look at EA games and there level of pay for stuff immersion. It's far FAR worse.

Well yeah. They're the ones that got us into this mess in the first place. A lot of people blame Overwatch, which has always had one of the least destructive models of loot boxes out there. But the fact is EA has been doing the p2(random chance to)w thing for years. Long before Overwatch was even an idea scribbled on a napkin.

Wanna play a certain character? Well you'd better buy some loot boxes. Oh, you wanna level up that character too? You know what to do. Buy more loot boxes for every level. And don't forget to buy more loot boxes to get better weapons, and even more loot boxes to level up those weapons. Also you'll need some loot boxes for your consumable items.

Goregrinder

lordrichter wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

Genomic wrote: »

I can't believe people are actually defending the inclusion of manipulative, casino-like monetization in computer games. Just shows how easily the gormless can be led by the nose.

Actually for many of us it's less about defending loot boxes and more about keeping politicians from getting their grubby little claws into it.

Yeah. Politicians running in to save us usually indicates that things are about to get way worse.

It's not saving "us". Don't include whales into "us". We don't want to be included, thank you.