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

Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 208 posts

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#71

Post by ekianjo »

shevy-java wrote: post #52
benoau wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in real life the store clerk won't let a child spend $1000 on their parents card making purchases again and again and again and again and again, but a video game will let a child do it in less than an hour and consider that a success and try to understand how to stimulate another child to do so.

But that is still a strange argument, because IF the argument is that loot boxes are so dangerous and addictive, why can, say, a 19 years old do it but a 18 years old can not? That makes no logical sense. One year is a magical difference suddenly?

Not just that, but this assumes that the average 18 years old has the same mental capacity as the others more or less. Bell curves clearly show the opposite

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#72

Post by ffsm8 »

mikkupikku wrote: post #5

Do they let 16 year olds gamble in casinos in Europe? Odd to ban it for kids but only some kids.

You can still buy mystery boxes etc in brick and mortar stores. Most of these are targeted at I strongly believe that this is mostly performative, honestly

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#73

Post by notrealyme123 »

mikkupikku wrote: post #5

Do they let 16 year olds gamble in casinos in Europe? Odd to ban it for kids but only some kids.

You can buy trading cards in lots of stores. Pokémon, soccer and so on. It's hard to draw a line without banning those as well.

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#74

Post by pjc50 »

duskwuff wrote: post #29
koshergweilo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like labeling is probably the best approach here. While I personally hate the business model of "Gatcha" type games and wouldn't mind if we banned lot boxes, it is a model does seem to work for a lot of people. I also think the odds should also be not only disclosed, but made prominent

> "Gatcha" type games Typically spelled "gacha", although I have to admit that "gotcha" seems apt.

From ガチャ; the "t" is not really there in the Japanese pronunciation, although it is used for transliteration of English words with T like チケット (chiketto, from ticket)

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#75

Post by saulapremium »

ekianjo wrote: post #71
shevy-java wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that is still a strange argument, because IF the argument is that loot boxes are so dangerous and addictive, why can, say, a 19 years old do it but a 18 years old can not? That makes no logical sense. One year is a magical difference suddenly?

Not just that, but this assumes that the average 18 years old has the same mental capacity as the others more or less. Bell curves clearly show the opposite

Clearly they do and many people can safely do things that are illegal and many people should be prevented from doing things that are legal.

However, we can't set up a force of psychoanalysts to assess every member of society and run chmod on them, so we go with a compromise.

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#76

Post by Ekaros »

notrealyme123 wrote: post #73
mikkupikku wrote: post #5

Do they let 16 year olds gamble in casinos in Europe? Odd to ban it for kids but only some kids.

You can buy trading cards in lots of stores. Pokémon, soccer and so on. It's hard to draw a line without banning those as well.

So much that could be done with those. Mandating age checks. Covering at least 80% of them with warnings about gambling. Maybe plain packaging and only allowing them from behind counter or unmarked automated systems. Treat them as tobacco products.

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#77

Post by debugnik »

delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #39
jcranmer wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The term "loot box" has, since I want to say the early 2010s, referred to the mechanic described in the quote. It's hard for me to say what the earliest games were to create this mechanic, especially since its origin seems not to be in the traditional Western games but in East Asian games. The model is very strongly associated with the rise of "live service" gaming, with Overwatch and Battlefield being some of the mo…

I was under the impression Eastern games preferred the loan word 'gacha'.

Yes, but they're the same mechanic really, so the earliest popular "loot box" game is probably some gacha game.

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#78

Post by saulapremium »

rincebrain wrote: post #14
steele wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same argument Valve is presenting.

(Opinions my own, naturally.) I think they're right, really. Obviously you need to require enough friction that the experiences are comparable (e.g. no letting someone impulse buy 100 times in half a second without having to re-type their "I am an adult" payment info or something analogous, possibly just a hard ceiling for everyone), but I don't think you can ban everything that touches the same sharp edge, and you c…

>I don't think you can ban everything that touches the same sharp edge

Why not, though? Is this a general stance against banning anything, or do you think loot boxes, video games and/or kids are different?

Re: Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

#80

Post by hkt »

notrealyme123 wrote: post #73
mikkupikku wrote: post #5

Do they let 16 year olds gamble in casinos in Europe? Odd to ban it for kids but only some kids.

You can buy trading cards in lots of stores. Pokémon, soccer and so on. It's hard to draw a line without banning those as well.

Pokémon can probably have it's immense (and insane) secondary market attributed to its gambling-esque qualities. It'd be perfectly fine if people could play with decks they chose and cards were sold at a uniform price, provided the game itself is balanced - which is to say gambling elements in these things are probably by design.
Post reply on HN