Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but not the same level of destructive activity as gambling for cash ... are you sure?
Yes, I am very sure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed_odds_betting_terminal Buying Pokemon cards in the hope of getting a specific rare one is a pretty niche form of addiction. Compared to walking into a shop, putting in £100 and getting nothing back, then another £100, then another, in the hope of getting £500... it's a lot more accessible, and can easily wipe out your life savings. Perhaps it's like arguing "whi…
Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
111–120 of 208 posts
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#112"Lootboxes", "cases", "packs" and other chance-based systems that involve spending real money or an in-game currency that could be obtained by spending real money should be banned completely, all of those systems exploit brain vulnerabilities for profit. Also, prediction markets, sports betting, online casinos, shitcoin exchanges.
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, kids should be able to wander into bookies and place bets as they please. Let's let them buy cigarettes too while we're at it.
I don't know, maybe I'm an old fart, but I hadn't held a sum of money large enough to buy a pack of cigarettes until I turned 16. I presume my parent knew what they were doing, so, yeah, nanny state.
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
Needing a secondary market to cash out is not the same as the vendor providing both the game of chance and the winnings. You can sell/trade MTG and Pokemon cards, but that doesn't make them "casinos"
Doesn't stop people from treating them as one, with all the corresponding issues. TBH I think a comparison with CCGs should make people question the CCG model itself, which tends to get far too easy a pass in most people's minds.
That said, when you have a deck of, say, Pokémon cards in your hand, there’s nothing about it that encourages a gambler’s mindset.
My 8yo has a bunch of Pokémon cards and he just likes playing with them, he has no idea of any monetary value they might have. There’s nothing about the physical product or game itself that betrays that.
It’s the culture created around it that’s poisonous.
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I am very sure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed_odds_betting_terminal Buying Pokemon cards in the hope of getting a specific rare one is a pretty niche form of addiction. Compared to walking into a shop, putting in £100 and getting nothing back, then another £100, then another, in the hope of getting £500... it's a lot more accessible, and can easily wipe out your life savings. Perhaps it's like arguing "whi…
And having a smaller addiction rate makes it any more moral?
The USA tried that out with Prohibition, and only after years of misery and gangsters taking up power did they realise their mistake. Moral absolutism doesn't work, problem management does.
Per the Gambling Commission in their call for evidence from a few years ago:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-the-gam...
> Gambling is a popular leisure pursuit in Britain. Last year, 47% of adults surveyed had taken part in at least one form of gambling in the previous four weeks [...] Gambling can be entertaining and sociable, and enhance enjoyment of other activities, and the vast majority of gamblers take part without suffering even low levels of harm. [...]
> However, gambling does come with risks, and problem gambling can ruin lives, wreck families, and damage communities [...] approximately 0.5% of the adult population are problem gamblers [...] this rate has remained broadly steady around or below 1% for the past 20 years and now equates to about 300,000 individuals whose gambling is also likely to cause harm to those around them
> This Review seeks to ensure that people can continue to gamble but that the legislation and regulation we have in place addresses as many factors as possible to give the necessary safeguards [...]
Evidence tells you plainly that different forms of gambling are not equal, and don't have the same power to trigger problem gambling in individuals. Coin pushers at seaside amusement parks with a maximum "bet" of 10p are not in the same league as fixed-odds roulette in a run-down high street with a £100 maximum bet. Lootboxes have some level of risk of causing harm, but not that level of risk.
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#116"Lootboxes", "cases", "packs" and other chance-based systems that involve spending real money or an in-game currency that could be obtained by spending real money should be banned completely, all of those systems exploit brain vulnerabilities for profit. Also, prediction markets, sports betting, online casinos, shitcoin exchanges.
Brain vulnerabilities? So ban alcoholic drinks and thrill rides too?
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know, maybe I'm an old fart, but I hadn't held a sum of money large enough to buy a pack of cigarettes until I turned 16. I presume my parent knew what they were doing, so, yeah, nanny state.
Regulating gambling is not "nanny state", esp in relation to kids. Your personal experience as a kid, about whether you had money or not, is completely irrelevant as an argument.
But if you insist on having a regulation, okay, I'm fine with it. What about the following regulation: each time a minor is found gambling or smoking, his/her parents are fined 100x times the stake/the price of cigarettes?
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#118"Lootboxes", "cases", "packs" and other chance-based systems that involve spending real money or an in-game currency that could be obtained by spending real money should be banned completely, all of those systems exploit brain vulnerabilities for profit. Also, prediction markets, sports betting, online casinos, shitcoin exchanges.
Brain vulnerabilities? So ban alcoholic drinks and thrill rides too?
Alcoholic drinks? History of bans like that suggests that it's not a good idea. However that doesn't mean that nothing can be done. Addictions to alcohol, drugs, smoking, gambling damage both the person suffering from them and the friends/loved ones around that person. It is most likely impossible to drive the harm down to 0, but it can be reduced by denormalizing casual alcohol intake and sitations where people are peer pressured into consuming alcohol to fit in (especially in young adults), etc. People addicted to those substances/behaviors need a safe environment, a society that won't prompt them to relapse over and over because everyone around them is a casual user. Those are my thoughts, but I'm no expert.
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Differ all you want. No child will bankrupt a family at a trading card game store. These are physical goods paid in bulk with provisioning and there are laws for returning them. Another point of contention is the randomness of packs. The way you play is: You save up to buy the entire set of boosters and already get almost all cards you need for competitive or fun play. The rest you need to trade for or buy individual…
>No child will bankrupt a family at a trading card game store. Let the child use a separate debit card? Bank cards are personal and work as an authentication factor.
I remember that cartoon. Was it Richie Rich?
Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but not the same level of destructive activity as gambling for cash ... are you sure?
Yes, I am very sure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed_odds_betting_terminal Buying Pokemon cards in the hope of getting a specific rare one is a pretty niche form of addiction. Compared to walking into a shop, putting in £100 and getting nothing back, then another £100, then another, in the hope of getting £500... it's a lot more accessible, and can easily wipe out your life savings. Perhaps it's like arguing "whi…