Incline The Death of Freemium? Microtransactions Under Global Scrutiny

[Zombra]

Trade issues, safety issues, environmental issues... none of this is relevant to the points being made here. That's the kind of shit the government actually should be regulating, rather than morals and behaviors.

Let's be clear here. Are you in favor of total deregulation of all gambling?

EDIT: I assume you're also in favor of completely deregulating all drugs. After all, if thousands of people become addicted to heroin being legally pushed in every convenience store (first dose is free!), that's their choice as adults, right? No problem there!

 

[c2007]

Wait! You mean not everyone agrees on what is good and bad?? QUICK!! DISMANTLE ALL DEMOCRACIES!!

Dismantle, no. Give them limited power over adult behavior, absolutely.

When you get out of middle school, let us know if you still agree with this retardation you're spewing. All laws are bad laws... You are likely still alive because of one of those bad laws.

Hmmm, maybe you have a point.

 

[Zombra]

All laws are bad laws... You are likely still alive because of one of those bad laws.
Hmmm, maybe you have a point.

Hey! Don't be mean. Regardless of dumb ideas about discouraging predatory behavior (or not), DalekFlay has good taste in video games which makes me proud to call him a bro.

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

You are likely still alive because of one of those bad laws.

I eager to hear how laws written buy elderly fat fuck in Kremlin/Congress/other government institution saved anyones life from attack of criminal (who kinda don't give a shit about laws), natural disaster (which don't give a single fuck about human laws anyway) and other dangers. I don't defend EA and their shitty practices, but if someone is wrong it doesn't mean that you can afford to be a biggest retard on Earth. If slowpokes from government did once a ok - it doesn't mean that system isn't shit. In your particular case laws killed much more people than saved, concentration camps/political prison is one of perfect examples.

 

[DalekFlay]

Let's be clear here. Are you in favor of total deregulation of all gambling?

EDIT: I assume you're also in favor of completely deregulating all drugs. After all, if thousands of people become addicted to heroin being legally pushed in every convenience store (first dose is free!), that's their choice as adults, right? No problem there!

My philosophy is honestly pretty simple: people should be free to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't have a direct and proven negative impact on their neighbor. Hardcore drugs are proven to cause dramatic increases in crime in surrounding areas to fuel the addiction, so I'm completely for them being illegal. Also as said above I am for regulating basic food safety and all that, and I think it would be pretty hard to get heroin past the FDA's safety guidelines, eh? I do think we should focus on treatment for users though, rather than jail time.

With gambling I think the objective impact on other adults is sketchier, less defined, so I'm much less enthusiastic there. I'm a-okay with the age requirement though (as I am with micro-transactions, pay attention Dexter), and with most states dramatically easing the restrictions on casinos and such I think I'm on the side of history there. If you have an issues with too many casinos in one area causing a dramatic downturn, that's more a zoning and permit issue than anything else IMO.

I'm nowhere near the crazy Libertarian you guys are seeing me as. I'm against moral laws... laws whose sole purpose is to tell adults how to live their lives when they're not hurting anyone but themselves. Idiots putting half their paycheck into Call of Duty skins aren't hurting anyone but themselves as long as they don't rob someone on the street to buy their next loot box. If we start seeing evidence of that becoming an issue, then get back to me. In the meantime I'm for the age limit and nothing else, and the bill talking about banning them in general in "minor-oriented games" bothers the shit out of me, because who knows who decides what those are and where they stop.

 

[Zombra]

I'm against moral laws... laws whose sole purpose is to tell adults how to live their lives when they're not hurting anyone but themselves.

I agree with you that "moral laws" are bad. I'm not interested in punishing or regulating users at all. I want to see pushing regulated, and I think it's clear that gaming companies are hurting someone besides themselves. They prey on the weak and susceptible, simple as that; using the exact same "first dose is free" psychology as a heroin dealer.

If you can say out loud "It's totally fine to prey on the weak as long as you're not ax murdering them", we'll have our battle lines clearly drawn. If you can't, I think you should take another look at the predatory behavior at play here.

 

[Wyatt_Derp]

Just for shiggles, how are loot boxes any worse than trading cards anyway? Loot boxes are gated behind a payment method and level of control (parents electronics, passwords, etc.) that far exceeds the ease of purchase MtG, Pokémon, sports, trading cards enjoy. I guess they’re not “annoying” enough for everyone to start virtue signaling and begging the government to come finger their prostates huh?

That's a good point. We're talking about a feature of modern hi-tech consumerism. This isn't like some Hasbro kids toy that's pokin' eyes out or baby crib that malfunctions and launches critters out the nursery window. Loot crates are a dizzying side effect of modern bizzaro land economy. With the implementation and wall of knowledge that we expect of tech, passwords, logins, credit card info, these should be the gatekeepers of big people world. IMO no government protection should be necessary, as replacing parental controls with nanny state bureaucracy only encourages more taxes, laws, and writs that tell you what you can and can't do. - Not to mention the fact that these companies will just slide over to new options to make profit. And who knows, those new money strategies might be even more insidious than loot crates and freemium services.

It appears to be predatory capitalism, and to many that's a bad thing. But like just about anything in life, it comes down to choice. If we're gonna put laws and block captains in place to safeguard us against bad purchasing decisions, well... I guess it's time we all headed off to the gulags to learn the fine art of rock breaking. If nothing else, bad purchases with valuable $$$ teaches one the value of $$$.

 

[DalekFlay]

I agree with you that "moral laws" are bad. I'm not interested in punishing or regulating users at all. I want to see pushing regulated, and I think it's clear that gaming companies are hurting someone besides themselves. They prey on the weak and susceptible, simple as that; using the exact same "first dose is free" psychology as a heroin dealer.

If you can say out loud "It's totally fine to prey on the weak as long as you're not ax murdering them", we'll have our battle lines clearly drawn. If you can't, I think you should take another look at the predatory behavior at play here.

I think you're exaggerating the effect these are having on people and society. The whales are all likely rich people who don't care, and Brad the Arby's cook can likely handle losing $20 to loot boxes here and there despite smacking his head and feeling like a dumbass who got played. Are there people significantly effected by their Candy Crush addiction? Probably, but enough to ban a whole method of sale? Ehhhh... I doubt it.

However I don't think we're really as far apart as you think politically though, and I respect your arguments.

 

[Irata]

I'd be more sympathetic if I thought the people against loot boxes really did "think of the children", but the truth is most of them just blame loot boxes as one of the the reasons games aren't being made the way they like. The market disagrees so their only option is to make it illegal. These people couldn't care less about kids. They just want their toys back. I'm not going to support making something illegal just because it might have some responsibility in causing my frivolous hobby to be less enjoyable.

 

[Delterius]

first they came for the lootboxes

and I said nothing

Spoiler

then I moved on because that was pretty sweet of them

 

[Dexter]

I'd be more sympathetic if I thought the people against loot boxes really did "think of the children", but the truth is most of them just blame loot boxes as one of the the reasons games aren't being made the way they like. The market disagrees so their only option is to make it illegal. These people couldn't care less about kids. They just want their toys back. I'm not going to support making something illegal just because it might have some responsibility in causing my frivolous hobby to be less enjoyable.

I don't really give much of a shit about "teh children" other than it being concerning that 5-7 year old are already being trained to respond to "loot boxes" and other gambling mechanics and what that will do to them, and because it's a pretty good argument to bring against the abusers: https://rpgcodex.net/forums/index.p...er-global-scrutiny.119268/page-8#post-5988863

My main concern is indeed exploitative games and making games less shit by removing predatory business practices. What better motivation could there be?

I believe South Park did an episode on that: https://www.ebaumsworld.com/videos/south-park-sums-up-freemium-games/84349408/

This is probably also one of the reasons why gambling is either outright outlawed or tightly regulated in most of the civilized world in the first place. Imagine if there were thimbleriggers and card trickster at every second corner of a street trying to trick people out of their money. Imagine if at every newsagent and supermarket there were one-armed bandits. Imagine that at every bar you go to there would be roulette tables and card games for money trying to fleece the drunk out of their drinking money. Now imagine they would go one step further and designed gambling machines with cutesy characters and Marvel cartoons on them and placed them near schools and the likes to fleece the food money off children. This is why gambling was generally banned and relegated to specific places like casinos and similar that need things like permits and don't allow the underage inside.

This is essentially what big publishers are doing right now, and it's a lot easier to access said "apps" on mobile phones/tablets/PCs etc. from everywhere than having to walk to a specific place designed with gambling in mind, since you have to go there with the mindset of gambling away your money in your head, while on a mobile phone someone is baited by cutesy "Free to Download" "Candy Crush" apps or similar and are suddenly prompted and pushed into buying "Coins" and "Gold Bars" or whatever to progress. I don't really see a negative from removing such practices from games and only positives, other than exploitative publishers crying about their decreased revenues (but that's a positive too). The problem would be pretty much solved if these practices disappeared from games in the mainstream, available on Steam/Android or the Apple App Store often even purporting to be "free to play" and were pushed into tightly regulated Online spaces where people only went with gambling and wasting their money in mind and also had to verify their age and whatnot like Casinos in the real world.

Also I'm going to question anyone's motivation going on a gaming forum, admitting that exploitative business practices are only making games as a hobby worse for everyone and even destroying entire franchises (look at Dungeon Keeper or Command & Conquer for instance), but positioning themselves against it as a contrarian by using arguments like "they just want their toys back" or "they want their frivolous hobby to be enjoyable" by standing against exploitative business practices wrecking them. If you don't want games to be enjoyable, what the fuck are you doing here?

 

[Swigen]

Yeah, that’d be pretty messed up if gambling was available at literally every store, especially if it was covered with colorful cartoon characters. Man that’d be soooooo fucked up...

 

[Goi~Yaas~Dinn]

Yeah, that’d be pretty messed up if gambling was available at literally every store, especially if it was covered with colorful cartoon characters. Man that’d be soooooo fucked up...

You do realize that's exactly the sort of shit he's talking about right? I got no love for the guy, but those goddamned scratchers were why state-sanctioned lottos were so controversial in the first place. That was exactly one of the more reasoned arguments employed by (what were then) largely finger-wagging Christian conservatives: that it would open the door toward legalizing that bullshit.

 

[Dexter]

Are you sure you wanna go there? Because there are no privatized lotteries in the United States, all are state run and heavily regulated with the revenues going back to the state and various restrictions. I guess we could compromise and have like 3-5 state-run heavily regulated Microtransaction games with the profits going to state benefits like education or criminal justice.

For that matter, not all states allow lotteries and the minimum age for buying them is either 18 or 21:
https://statelaws.findlaw.com/gambling-and-lotteries-laws/details-on-state-state-lottery-laws.html
http://www.gamblingage.com/state-lottery-minimum-age/

 

[Swigen]

No I agree! I’m saying it’s soooooo fucked up! It’s also fucked up that “exploitative business practices” have destroyed franchises that have sucked balls for years liek Command & Conquer and I’m sure that shitty mobile knockoff of Dungeon Keeper woulda been hella kool if it wasn’t for microtransactions. I’m also sure Assassin’s Creed, Forza, Fortnite, Destiny and Warframe would’ve made the Codex’s top 70 if it wasn’t for loot boxes! I mean these are the gaems we play or what are we even doing here, amiright?!

 

[Goi~Yaas~Dinn]

Are you sure you wanna go there? Because there are no privatized lotteries in the United States, all are state run and heavily regulated with the revenues going back to the state and various restrictions. I guess we could compromise and have like 3-5 state-run heavily regulated Microtransaction games with the profits going to state benefits like education or criminal justice.

For that matter, not all states allow lotteries and the minimum age for buying them is either 18 or 21:
https://statelaws.findlaw.com/gambling-and-lotteries-laws/details-on-state-state-lottery-laws.html
http://www.gamblingage.com/state-lottery-minimum-age/

If you're addressing me, use of the quote button would be appreciated.

 

[DalekFlay]

Also I'm going to question anyone's motivation going on a gaming forum, admitting that exploitative business practices are only making games as a hobby worse for everyone and even destroying entire franchises (look at Dungeon Keeper or Command & Conquer for instance), but positioning themselves against it as a contrarian by using arguments like "they just want their toys back" or "they want their frivolous hobby to be enjoyable" by standing against exploitative business practices wrecking them. If you don't want games to be enjoyable, what the fuck are you doing here?

So if I think MTV shows are horrible and give teens really bad role models that fuck up their social adjustment process and encourage them to drink to excess and fuck everything that moves, should I therefore want the government to ban MTV? Where does it stop?

 

[Dexter]

Wow look at that, back to misdirection by comparing Gambling and exploitative business practices with content again and claiming that this regulation will lead to content regulation once more, topped off with the emotional appeal of "Where does it stop?" while ignoring the First Amendment again.

What did you say again?

We're not even fucking debating the same shit here, so I'm not sure what to tell you. Come back to me when you have a basic understanding of the points being made.

 

[Swigen]

Wow look at that, back to misdirection by comparing Gambling and exploitative business practices with content again and claiming that this regulation will lead to content regulation once more, topped off with the emotional appeal of "Where does it stop?" while ignoring the First Amendment again.

What did you say again?

We're not even fucking debating the same shit here, so I'm not sure what to tell you. Come back to me when you have a basic understanding of the points being made.

But isn’t comparing content that’s really no different to trading cards or a claw machine to hardcore gambling with an instant monetary return silly as well?

 

[Delterius]

all those children lining up to play the lottery because of cartoon monkeys

makes me sick

 

[Jigawatt]

My philosophy is honestly pretty simple: people should be free to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't have a direct and proven negative impact on their neighbor. Hardcore drugs are proven to cause dramatic increases in crime in surrounding areas to fuel the addiction, so I'm completely for them being illegal.

The problem with simple philosophies is they inevitably collapse in on themselves, as yours has in just two sentences. We can infer from the second sentence (and a later quote from the same post "I'm against moral laws... laws whose sole purpose is to tell adults how to live their lives when they're not hurting anyone but themselves.") that you'd be fine with the "hardcore drugs" if there deleterious effects were localised to the user. For whatever reason a company offering for sale a highly addictive product that makes you claw at your skin, grind your teeth to dust, and develop lifelong psychological issues doesn't count as "direct and proven negative impact on their neighbor". I guess because they should have just said no to that first hit! Have some self control people!

Never mind the huge information asymmetry between a massive company creating and advertising designer drugs and your average pleb on the street. Yeah everyone knows meth isn't the best for you, what about that new product Examite released last week? It's probably fine. I mean it hasn't been proven to have a negative effect on third parties yet right?

Of course, gambling actually is proven to have a direct negative impact. A flutter here or there won't do much (except to your bank balance), but develop a compulsion, which is exactly what these games are designed to do, and your brain actively rewires itself to make you retarded, permanently. If intentionally inflicting that on someone to make a buck isn't harm to your neighbour I'd like to know what is.

 

[Swigen]

but develop a compulsion, which is exactly what these games are designed to do, and your brain actively rewires itself to make you retarded, permanently. If intentionally inflicting that on someone to make a buck isn't harm to your neighbour I'd like to know what is.

Gotta ban McDonalds!! Overeating is a compulsion that affects everyone and is making dem permently rataaarrrdeeed!!!

 

[Delterius]

but develop a compulsion, which is exactly what these games are designed to do, and your brain actively rewires itself to make you retarded, permanently. If intentionally inflicting that on someone to make a buck isn't harm to your neighbour I'd like to know what is.

Gotta ban McDonalds!! Overeating is a compulsion that affects everyone and is making dem permently rataaarrrdeeed!!!

to be fair it would be to your benefit

 

[Swigen]

but develop a compulsion, which is exactly what these games are designed to do, and your brain actively rewires itself to make you retarded, permanently. If intentionally inflicting that on someone to make a buck isn't harm to your neighbour I'd like to know what is.

Gotta ban McDonalds!! Overeating is a compulsion that affects everyone and is making dem permently rataaarrrdeeed!!!

to be fair it would be to your benefit

Ffffwhat? How!? McDonalds is a delicious treat and harmless when consumed once in a while! Why should retards ruin it for everyone else?

 

[Delterius]

Where does it stop?

gulags