Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Loot boxes are obviously gambling

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 171 posts

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#71

Post by ygra »

siddboots wrote: post #6
warcher wrote: post #2

Hey uh, I don’t do a lot of mobile gaming, but what’s a loot box and why should I care if it’s gambling or not?

The article is talking about competitive multiplayer games, rather than mobile games. DOTA 2 and CS:GO are the examples used. Theres a few elements that, together, make it extremely problematic in my opinion. Using CS:GO as the example: 1. Items are dropped randomly, or you can buy randomised "crates". By design, plain looking drops are common, while visually impressive drops are rare. 2. When you buy crates and unlo…

It should be noted that most items in CS:GO cannot be obtained as a normal drop, only from a crate, so it's not so much that good-looking drops are rare, it's that good-looking items can usually only be obtained by paying money to open a box (AWP Dragon Lore being one of the few exceptions).

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#72

Post by usrusr »

jmiserez wrote: post #40

The same arguments could apply to physical card packs (e.g. MtG cards) sold at tabletop gaming stores. Yet nobody seems to mind there?

But card packs are random at least. The very rarest card will be equally rare for every buyer, any time. Loot boxes can be much worse than gambling on a random number generator: game servers know the inventory of a player and can tailor box contents to always keep the inventory close to one of the many thresholds that are usually designed into game rules. Maybe some operators are voluntarily staying away from these dark patterns, maybe using them could theoretically get you into legal trouble, but it would be very difficult to prove anything.

Basically my point is this: it can be perfectly reasonable to allow one form of gambling-like transactions where it is easy to ensure that the house is playing fair while outlawing a superficially similar one were making sure that the house is not cheating would require enormous regulations and oversight efforts.

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#73

Post by bsder »

pavlov wrote: post #44
jmiserez wrote: post #40

The same arguments could apply to physical card packs (e.g. MtG cards) sold at tabletop gaming stores. Yet nobody seems to mind there?

I guess buying physical cards is not so addictive that anyone would pay attention. In mobile games, everything is set up for you to make repetitive purchases in the hope of winning bigger: your credit card is on file, the design of the boxes echoes casinos, etc.

> I guess buying physical cards is not so addictive that anyone would pay attention.

Ummmm, they call Magic the Gathering "cardboard crack" for a reason ...

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#74

Post by alwaysdoit »

Cub3 wrote: post #66

I still haven't heard anyone take on physical vs digital card games as part of this. Typically cards are sold in random 'packs' (see Hearthstone, Gwent and Valves 'up and coming' card game) which should fall under this definition. But blind card packs (Magic the Gathering, Pokemon) physically are not banned by any government, nor, have I ever heard them talked about in the same umbrella as gambling?

For skins or other purely cosmetic items with no effect on gameplay, to me it's equivalent to a gumball machine where you might not get your favorite color.

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#75

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

> "Loot boxes work like gambling, and they're designed like gambling. They're designed to provoke compulsive reward-seeking behavior."

Just because A has some properties of B doesn't mean that A is B.

I think both gambling and loot-boxes could be categorized as subsets of the set of things that are "compulsive reward-seeking behavior".

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#76

Post by SmallDeadGuy »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #60
m12k wrote: post #57

I think there's a pattern here: 'Highly talented company makes highly praised product but eventually realizes there is much more money in exploitative products instead'. Valve made the amazing Half-Life series, then later seems to have come to the conclusion that their return on investment is just much higher if they focus on multiplayer games with loot boxes (plus selling other people's games and taking a cut). Bliz…

I would easily argue Blizzard has the most generous/least exploitative loot box models. Cosmetic only with a fairly regular/healthy rate of freebies, not to mention the currency you get that lets you acquire the ones you actually want without relentlessly "rolling". Heroes of the Storm steps it up even further with a reroll mechanic you can use for disappointing boxes. Compared to the others in the industry, Blizzard…

HotS and Overwatch really aren't exploitative sure, but Hearthstone is incredibly exploitative. Unless you are so good you can go "infinite" in arena (always make your gold entry fee back and then some, on average), you have to buy packs for every expansion that comes out. Or you have to play with lower-tier cards, which some people do successfully, but to get the most out of the game or be "competitive" they will need the best cards eventually.

Out of the 3 games, I probably played Overwatch the most, followed closely by Hearthstone, but the amount of money I invested in Hearthstone is easily 3-4x the initial price I paid for OW. I got fed up of the "pay or fall behind" nature of Hearthstone and stopped playing a long time ago though.

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#77

Post by manicdee »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #75

> "Loot boxes work like gambling, and they're designed like gambling. They're designed to provoke compulsive reward-seeking behavior." Just because A has some properties of B doesn't mean that A is B. I think both gambling and loot-boxes could be categorized as subsets of the set of things that are "compulsive reward-seeking behavior".

Gambling is defined as the activity of playingva game for stakes or betting on an uncertain outcome.

Playing poker for matchsticks is just as much gambling as playing poker for a $50k pot. The only thing changing is the stakes of the gamble.

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#78

Post by zumu »

Cub3 wrote: post #66

I still haven't heard anyone take on physical vs digital card games as part of this. Typically cards are sold in random 'packs' (see Hearthstone, Gwent and Valves 'up and coming' card game) which should fall under this definition. But blind card packs (Magic the Gathering, Pokemon) physically are not banned by any government, nor, have I ever heard them talked about in the same umbrella as gambling?

From what I understand, Magic and other card games are not gambling because the cards are considered to all be of equal value despite rarity. If the company that sells Magic (Wizards or the Coast / Hasbro) were to acknowledge that the cards DO have a secondary market value, it would qualify as gambling. Especially so, if they acknowledged they knew the relative values of the cards during the design / planning phases (which they absolutely do). Though I love magic, I have no doubt, if all the facts were to come to light in court, the law would stipulate drastic changes to their model, which is part of the reason why Wizards of the Coast is run like a cult.

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#79

Post by pavlov »

bsder wrote: post #73
pavlov wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess buying physical cards is not so addictive that anyone would pay attention. In mobile games, everything is set up for you to make repetitive purchases in the hope of winning bigger: your credit card is on file, the design of the boxes echoes casinos, etc.

> I guess buying physical cards is not so addictive that anyone would pay attention. Ummmm, they call Magic the Gathering "cardboard crack" for a reason ...

Perhaps, but it's a very niche audience. What's the revenue of the company that makes MtG?

Some mobile game companies do billions per year. That kind of sales attract regulatory attention.

Re: Loot boxes are obviously gambling

#80

Post by irishsultan »

pfisch wrote: post #10
JasonSage wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couple things: 1) This is very prevalent in high budget desktop/console games as well, not just mobile games. 2) These games typically do little to nothing to abide by laws that prohibit gambling by minors. There are definitely concerns of whether this is ethical or legal.

You seem to have accepted that loot boxes are a form of gambling even though that is not really the agreed upon legal definition of gambling.

The question was "why should I care whether it's gambling". Answers that point out the (legal/moral) consequences of it being gambling are entirely appropriate, even if they don't give any consideration to the possibility that it might not in fact be gambling.
Post reply on HN