EA's loot crate infringing upon gambling? Could future changes to gaming impact GSIV?

[Yulis]

Not sure how many of you follow gaming outside of GSIV, but I'm sure some of you are aware of the whole issue with possible gambling (it's at least being investigated by Belgium) with loot crates in the BattleFront II game released by EA.

Quick recap for those not in the know:

EA gets the rights to handle IP of Star Wars to create the Battlefront (2015 game) and Battlefront II (BFII) that has released today. With BFII officially releasing today, it sells for $60, as pretty much any other triple AAA game releases for. However, the game makes use of loot crates that give out random items that impact gameplay and also sell in game currency purchased with real money so people can outright buy locked characters, such as Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker.

EA has the scales tipped to be in favor of people with money to spend and not wanting to sink thousands of in game play hours (yes, thousands) to earn enough credits to buy everything for free. They're hoping people will tire of grinding to get that locked character they really want and simply just spend real money on an in game currency. The loot crates, they can provide from real basic shit no one cares about to rare Star Cards and other things that impact special abilities/skills tied to the character(s) you play in the game, thus giving you a bigger advantage over others that haven't paid for loot crates.

A large boycott/out lash from the public over it all and some places even calling it a type of gambling with the loot crates. EA and a few other games/companies are under scrutiny in Belgium about how this is gambling and things are blowing up. EA has (as of this morning) pulled the ability to spend real cash in BFII for crystals and said they'll re-adjust how the microtransactions are currently handled and will allow the purchasing of crystals at a later time.

With all that said....

If things have gained enough traction and rules/regulations/guidelines start to get filled in for things such as these RNG loot crates being considered gambling, I wonder if they would carry over to a game such as this.... Essentially, folks are doing loot crates here in GSIV - the only real difference is this is a text based game and not a graphical one, but the ideas are the same. You spend real money to buy an in game currency (SimuCoins) and then you use those to purchase loot crates, (or as they're called in game) DSD or digging in DR or searching in DM or DR Sewers....these things are the same as buying a randomized loot crate in BFII. You don't know what you're going to get - it could be something awesome, but most likely it's just crap that's not worth anything.

So, what kind of impact do you think it would have upon Simutronics and GSIV if loot crates are classified as gambling? Would Simu find new and creative ways to get folks to throw more money at them for a paltry return in their investment?

[Gelston]

There is no monetary gain either way from crates so... No. People keep focusing on the "paying in real money". You do that on pretty much every product, it doesn't matter that there is RNG or not. What you get back is what the Government cares about. You aren't getting cash money back, it doesn't care. So it may be gambling in the sense of a risk, but that is where it ends. There won't be Government regulations, especially when the market just regulated the fuck out of EA with this recent case. So would it effect GS? No.

[Taernath]

By any realistic interpretation, loot boxes are gambling. As much as I would like to see Simucoins and DR-style digging removed from GS, I doubt there will be any real consequences or changes to US law from recent events. Only pressure from the consumer side has a chance of changing things, but as long as we have people who spend thousands at every single DR its a lost cause.

[Archigeek]

There is no monetary gain either way from crates so... No. People keep focusing on the "paying in real money". You do that on pretty much every product, it doesn't matter that there is RNG or not. What you get back is what the Government cares about. You aren't getting cash money back, it doesn't care. So it may be gambling in the sense of a risk, but that is where it ends. There won't be Government regulations, especially when the market just regulated the fuck out of EA with this recent case. So would it effect GS? No.

This must be why you don't pay taxes when you win a new car on a game show, or a slot machine in Vegas, etc etc, or just use the barter system. The government doesn't care unless it's cash.

[Gelston]

This must be why you don't pay taxes when you win a new car on a game show, or a slot machine in Vegas, etc etc, or just use the barter system. The government doesn't care unless it's cash.

A new car is a physical item made of valuable materials that can be counted as income and can also be resold, legally, for cash. Some pixels on a screen are not. They are not comparable items.

A game that allows in its TOS to cash out chips or whatever would be a different story. That WOULD be something the Government would look at (and they do).

[Winter]

Depends on the country, South Korea initially banned Diablo 3 for that reason.

[Gelston]

Depends on the country, South Korea initially banned Diablo 3 for that reason.

Sure, every country will decide whatever the hell they want to decide. A lot of the P2W/loot crate stuff is way more common in Asia.

What I'm saying is from a US perspective, the USG isn't going to take any regulatory action when the potential prizes are not cash or easily turned into cash. I'm not saying it isn't gambling, sure it is. It just isn't really anything that the Government cares about or can make money off of.

[Tgo01]

Depends on the country, South Korea initially banned Diablo 3 for that reason.

For what? There weren't any loot boxes in Diablo 3.

[Gelston]

For what? There weren't any loot boxes in Diablo 3.

There used to be a cash shop in Diablo 3 where you could sell your finds for cash.

[Archigeek]

I don't think the government cares if it's physical or not. I'm pretty sure EA pays taxes on their profit from the sale of games whether or not the buyer receives anything physical. Why would it be any different if I score a great RNG win and sell it for cash to another player? If a game company is selling the opportunity to win, and the player is essentially pulling a slot machine lever in the hopes of winning something that has monetary value, what's the difference if it's physical or not physical?

Personal opinion: I think the RNG games within the games are a much worse form of gambling than online poker ever was, and the US government killed that off, even though it was generating taxes. Don't be too shocked when, after a series of teenage suicides blamed on RNG failure, some legislation is introduced to curtail gambling games within games. I think RNG games are fine if they are confined to the currency of the game, but once the spin can be paid for with cash and the prize has a pretty easily definable cash value, that's gambling. With big games doing it and greatly increasing their profits as a result, it will draw the attention of regulators.