Loot Crates Are Not Considered Gambling, Though It's Pretty Close

ESRB has weighed in on the Loot Crates system as not gambling, however if you look at the odds, you have a better chance of winning at actual gambling.

[Godmars290]

Isn't that very closeness the issue?

[nitus10]

From the following: http://wccftech.com/esrb-cl... "The comparison to collectible card games is apt, but the line remains rather blurry".

ESRB considers loot boxes as akin to collectible cards but whereas with collectible cards you have a physical result which can be personally traded or resold you don't have that with the nonphysical results of opening loot boxes. Seems different to me but hey what do I know.

From a legalize perspective, the comparisons are sort of blurry but most profession Engineers and Scientists will tell you that trying to read a paper or document that is full of legalese is almost guaranteed to give you a migraine.

[2600Thunder]

We've been beating this horse here the last few weeks and we are all very passionate about our positions because we all love our games. This ESRB response has already been thoroughly debated here, and unless new industry data has been introduced, I don't see the point of arguing this out again. If there is new data, then I stand humbled and will listen to fellow commenters, but otherwise I will not dignify this article with a click.

Our voices have been heard, and now the momentum has gained enough force to muster strong influencers. Gambling or not, the already widely untrusted industry must have very easily accessible and comprehensive details to thoroughly inform consumers written directly on the packaging/game details itself in large/highlighted print that "Additional charges are required to participate in the in-game RNG marketplace and in-game items cannot be directly purchased and are randomly generated. Participation results may very." Or whatever else they can lawyer up and refine vs my horrible grammar. This must be clearly seen AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE.

An out of nowhere, oddly scheduled PR video/stream pitch to "sell" an added loot crate marketplace 2 months after a game's reveal is unacceptable to anchor onto as a meaningful way to inform consumers when most people who purchase games do not care to see those videos/streams.

If publishers don't do this, then like every other industry unable to self-regulate and compromise with consumers, the FTC will inevitably get involved and that would be tragic. It will kill innovation. But at this point, what else can be done to stand up for consumers? Have we not already been very accepting and forgiving of rising costs through DLC, Season Passes, Special Editions, and other Microtransactions?

I would argue we have been very flexible with publishers with their skyrocketing pricing models and lesser product quality in return, yet unfortunately for gamers, it seems like we are far beyond negotiating with publishers given the clear unwillingness of industry leaders to compromise and self regulate with consumers - which are paramount in keeping the gov out of the business. As it stands, these avarice GaaS models introduced bring in 3x as much profit and seem to be worth more to them than the risk of the government getting involved. If we don't vote with our wallets, then this will hit the FTC.

This is how greed always destroys art.