31 thoughts on “We will LOSE the FTC Loot Box Battle if we do not prepare ourselves and here's why”

  1. Please do like and share this video. It is extremely important that we not allow ourselves to be trounced by the Triple A Corporations. We cannot rely on the recently proposed bill and we must operate under the assumption that it will fail as if it does, the FTC will be our only path forward. I know, scary thought.

  2. While it might look like the loot box's are opened on your Pc, they are not, they are opened on the companys server. If they were opened on your Pc (& then feed back to the company server) you would be able to hack them & get whatever reward you wanted every time, no chance it happens like that. All the opening's (random selection) are going to happen in the secure controlled location on the company server

  3. I know of an interesting legal precedent in the Netherlands two. Two kids attacked another kid with knives and forced him to hand over online items in the game Runescape.

    Their lawyer argued that since no money was taken, it was not robbery. The court crushed this argument, reasoning that it had value both for the perpetrators and the victim and thus the ingame items had value.
    The two robbers were found guilty and sentenced to the ridiculously lenient sentences our system is infamous for. (€ 140 fine for a terrorist plot of murder, commited out of racism, currently being the record-holder)

  4. @SidAlpha I think one place you're making a mistake is your assumption that they are opened our our devices. I'm willing to put money that the determination of if what is "in" the "box" is actually done server side. You may push the button on your machine, but I find is highly suspect that they would leave determining the RESULT to your client side machine… with a PRNG that you have the potential to manipulate.

    I certainly wouldn't.

  5. The precedent with the argument it was skill based doesn't really apply if people can pay for loot boxes. I don't think it would cover monetized loot boxes. To have virtual currency you can buy with real money is just an extra step. The way to combat it, is to just make it monetized loot boxes. Making it monetized loot boxes won't help with the addiction argument, but there would be no incentive to build an extra system around the game, if they can't make money off it anyway.
    It will also get rid of the problem where people lose all their money to it.

  6. I have a slight concern. What happens with loot based rewards like you would in loot shooters like Borderlands, rpgs, or MMOrpgs? They have chests too. Maybe the legislation should be more clear in that. Randomized is a broad term, I don't want just regular loot drops to be included without monetization. Perhaps make a distinction between loot drops in game vs outside of it in a separate "space", for lack of a better term, like what happens now. Maybe going after paid for loot boxes would already be good enough. If they can't monetize it anyway then there is very little incentive to develop a separate system for it.
    That said I still think loot boxes and pay to win should go. Cosmetic microtransactions should stay.

  7. i don't want government involved in games cuz then you get shit like china and germany where symbols, blood etc are banned by law.

  8. This fight wasnt about using CURRENT laws. It was about CREATING NEW laws to protect users cause if this stuff was on the user end then it would be stupidly simple to hack in and change the odds. The results are server based. They are taking place off of our devices.

  9. Just a question, how did you get such consistent high frames on Fallout 76? Got the game for $5 and it runs like ass for me.

  10. I doubt very much that the algorithum that determines the outcome of opening a loot box is being handled at the end users side. This is due to the fact that it would be very easy for the end user to cheat the system and gain whatever they want. No this almost exactly is how the system is set up:
    – User opens loot box in game
    – Game sends signal to server
    – Server runs appropriate algorithum
    – Server sends reply signal with the outcome of said algorithum
    – Game informs user of outcome

    Remember that these companies are behaving almost exactly like casino's now and will have absolutely no trust in gamblers not trying to cheat, after all the odds they have set for winning "high value" rewards are so ridiculously small why wouldn't they want to just cheat.

  11. Here's my critique. Mainly just copypasting here to increase engagement in the comment section.

    I had a hard time retaining anything during that "Tokenization" segment.

    The issue I had with this video was the confidence on the matter. Felt like someone who wasn't a lawyer trying to explain the significance of legal court cases.

    You admitted that you weren't a lawyer, and it did kind of feel like you were lacking the authoritative voice on such legal matters.

    For another poor example of such a video, remember
    @AccursedFarms ' video on "Games as a Service is a fraud", which I also felt uneasy about his legal reasoning while listening, and I felt I got a stronger sense of the situation when listening to lawyers rebut his assertions.

    So my critique of this video is probably that I think I would have felt better about the video if you had first consulted a lawyer specializing in this field and see what he thought, and relayed it to us.

  12. i fought this bill isn't really about it being Gambling under the law or not.
    But how Lootboxes effects little kids regardless if you call it gambling.
    Whilst its good to give the Gambling definition a go again, i think that is just one means to en end out of more. i think idl be equally to even more important to look into and research the researches about how kids are effected.

    That said i didnt read the bill.

  13. Well structured video! I will have to comment out that the other youtuber who wants loot boxes main argument was "but if you regulate lootboxes my PRECIOUS games may not exist anymore because the investors will not give their 'moneys' to support gaming companies". Your personal feelings about gambling is NOT a valid argument. It's only argument if you're 5 years old.

  14. I think there is not much point in looking at the current laws/regulations as they are clearly not working on protecting those who should be protected. Thus the point is simple: do we want to protect the children? Yes. Are we doing a good job at protecting the children? Absolutely not. So we better figure out some new methods to protect the children, no matter it's writing new laws, or burn down that MF EA's headquarter.

  15. The issue now isn't winning just a legal case, it's about creating brand new legislation, because many laws have not caught up to the internet at all.

  16. We never EVER had a case for making Lootboxes legal gambling. We needed NEW laws. The exceptions created within Gambling laws were created with the intent of protecting things like pinball machines, carnival games, and "Friday night with the boys"… Lootboxes are an instance where the laws have not caught up with technology and we need new legislation to deal with it.

  17. Damn Semantics and Damn the smallest holes where the rats can scatter to avoid their destruction while scraping together their hordes. Unfortunately my understanding pertains to cyber security and not gaming but I suppose I could look for something that might be related.

  18. That law about transporting gambling equipment like slot machines has potential. If you were to ship vital parts of a slot machine to be assembled and used it could easily be argued to be violating that law. Modern gambling devices are largely electronic and the software that runs them would be a vital part. Providing software and an online structure that allows a user's device to be used for the same purpose etc. etc.

  19. One thing sidalpha lootboxs are serverside usually.
    You see the animation locally but the generation of odds and results are done serverside to avoid hacking/modding.

  20. Sid while I love you optimism, I will point out that you are asking the federal government to disrupt a 135 billion dollar industry. You can bet that our elected representatives have already cashed checks from EA, Activision and Bethesda. Prove me wrong, but logic is gonna have the same traction as baby oil on a slip and slide. Good luck.

  21. I would argue that while the command to do so and the DISPLAY of the outcome from opening lootboxes happens on a local machine, the data, calculation, and result computation itself happens on their servers. The lootbox's file does not actually exist on the local device.

  22. I would like to point out that though you say these things take place on out devices and not online. Cloud gaming, streaming games, and digital live services makes a point of them not being exclusively on our devices anymore.

  23. So you actually read the law? Though I am not verse in law, but I can get a decent understanding of what it does…and it's too broad. The language is bad, taking whole sections of other rules and injecting them into law, definitions are either unclear or too broad and could bard adults from paying for these transactions, and could be unconstitutional. If you think companies are your only enemy, then you might have an issue with people like me who hate the gaming industry and lawyers that went through the proposed law text. It's bad, period. There is one major loop hole! The implication of one section of the law can easily get away with loot boxes and micro-transactions. The way they will use this loop hole is to no longer put their games on digital store fronts.

  24. Part of me is currently thinking that it may be necessary to prove that current legal definitions regarding loot boxes and "harm"(as relating to the internet) may not be accurate at this time and redefine them into something more accurate. Basically, stop trying to put a square peg into a star shaped hole. The rest of me suggests that researching arguments that they have already used (in Hawaii for example)may help prepare you but should not be a strict focal point of your preparation.

  25. Nothing will change, the companies involved could throw pocket change at the problems until they go away with the amounts they make.

  26. It's evident that the law is going to have to change somewhere eventually. Consumer backlash doesn't work often enough because these systems have the monetary policy of Nigerian prince scam emails. As long as there's one sucker, lootbox systems make their money back.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *