• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

'My son spent £3,160 in one game' (A disturbing article by BBC)

I mean, yeah, some of those individuals need to be cared for more closely so this shit doesn't happen. Some of the predatory practices are shitty and should be ceased but things like a little girl buying the same apps over and over? Teach her or ban her from using the tablet or phone in that way. Maybe a solution can be an one-time complex procedure to enable purchases so people understand it's a damn big deal if you pass it around to random people in the household because even if you just want to buy this one cheap thing for yourself there are tons of expensive shit to buy on the same store so you should pay attention to avoid it happening without your consent? But you'd think people inputting their credit card details would pay enough attention to that shit anyway. If you wouldn't trust your credit card to that person why are you giving them a phone that can act as one?
In a family unit it's not always this obvious, and the tech keep changing, as one said, the option was disabled, but Google decided to re-enable it.

There are no surefire way to prevent this, I use PayPal and it keeps bugging me to enable one click pay or something, same with Amazon, the Play Store, etc. They really don't want any kind of friction to purchases on their systems, the only real solution is to never give them any access to your credit card (or worse bank account).

I think their solution was the best, plug the kids on systems that don't have that kind of predatory behavior like older consoles, but they will still beg for the phones/tablets and many parents don't have the will or don't understand the risk they pose (monetary or otherwise).

Companies can market all they want, but a kid can't spend money they don't have. If a parent can't handle the responsibility of keeping a card safe they shouldn't be trusted with the responsibility of raising a child.
Very few people should be parents - truth is what is the point of having those transactions in the games? They should not even be called games at this point, they are either shiny store fronts or slot machines in disguise that should not be available to kids. If you want to ruin your life as an adult more power to you, I just don't want these things around my kids any more than I want them to be on coke.
 

lock2k

Banned
I'll read the replies later because there is a lot of interesting discussion concerning this subject.

However, I felt sorry for the 5 year old.

I have a 5 year old child and I truly believe that the boy thought the money was make believe money.
 
Last edited:
Why do so many people use BBCs as sources is beyond comprehension, I mean if I was to speak out of my C**k nobody would listen for sure, but because they're black nobody is going back. 🧠
 

Blancka

Member
Very few people should be parents - truth is what is the point of having those transactions in the games? They should not even be called games at this point, they are either shiny store fronts or slot machines in disguise that should not be available to kids. If you want to ruin your life as an adult more power to you, I just don't want these things around my kids any more than I want them to be on coke.

So then don't pay for them for your kids? For a forum that complains about SJWs causing things to get censored just because they don't like it, there sure are a lot of people that want entirely optional stuff censored and regulated here.
 
This is a delicate subject and maybe I will not be so, but the parents have to control the activities of their children, disabled or not.
Using passwords, account with limitations is now whitin everyone's reach without having a to be IT experts, children have no income, they don't have credit cards, so these situations seems absurd to me,.
Being parents means being responsible for your children, not fucking them and then crying when the damage is done.
 
Why are we blaming the parents?

When was it OK and acceptable that you could even spend so much money in a game?

I mean for fuck sakes, a £50 game should be a £50 game. spending £1k on the playstation or xbox store on 200 games is one thing, but over 2 grand being spent ON ONE GAME and we blame the parents? Get the fuck outta here.

The only tighter controls we need is on these money-grabbing pricks that head the games companies that allow this shit to be put into games.

Games are a multi million dollar industry and a large amount of revenue comes from excessive monetization in the form of microtransactions. Whilst it's unethical, it's completely legal and parents should educate themselves about these potentional timebombs waiting to happen. You on the other hand take the stance of absolving the parents of all responsibility, which I find absolutely amusing lol.

Welcome to the harsh reality of gaming in this generation.

If you can't handle said reality, have your children take up birdwatching instead of Fortnite.
 

lock2k

Banned
If you go into a shop to buy a large amount of anything they would question it -- and at the very least would offer you a discount.
Best example is Alcohol. It's not served when it's considered that the person could cause harm to either themselves or someone else.

It's about being responsible on both ends, not just being a moneygrabbing little grub.

That's true.

When I had a gaming store, we did a lot of background checking on people who wanted to spend too much money in a row.

Once a guy came and he bought five game consoles (three 360s and 2 PS3s) and this was in Brazil, much more expensive than a console is in the U.S.

We did some checking on his name, credit card, etc, and it turned out that it was actually a rich guy that wanted to gift his nephews. But we were always on the lookout for frauds and stuff like that.
 

Claus Grimhildyr

Vincit qui se vincit
Why would you give your child access to these games in the first place? There are far better alternatives for incredibly cheap that don't run the risk of instilling a mindset of gambling in a young child's head. Hell, when I babysat my young nieces and nephews, they were perfectly happy to play the SNES and Super Mario World for hours on end.

Kids do not, have not, and will not need to play mobile games or high end graphical games. I would like to say I feel sorry for these parents, but it is entirely on them.
 
Then let them learn their lessons through their own fuckups. If a child touches a hot stove it'll hurt like hell, but you can bet your ass they won't be playing touch the stove again anytime soon. I'm absolutely against laws that idiot proof things while making the world less convenient for responsible people and would always vote against nanny-type laws. Wilful ignorance is just that. Wilful, it's a choice. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. In this case the price is a nice big "idiot tax"

True, but if it was a life changing burn, you should still get them to hospital whether it was their fault or not. (more a moral choice though)

I agree that we have a really bad nanny state, but you can bet that these idiots are likely to kill themselves without some restraint.

A middle ground would be better to stop the vulnerable (disabled, really mentally challenged) whilst educating the ignorant masses.

I don't think lootboxes should be in FIFA though (IMO), as its a game that should be accessible to everyone. Should EA need to add Lootboxes, lock it behind the DLC with a passcode if you are over X age, then if they add the code in and it happens...well tough titty.

I would say that we can't go extremely one way (let them fail and figure it out) or the other (protect everyone from it), but there needs to be a sensible regulation where the kids can't pay for anything without permission and the adults are given a TOS before they add a Credit Card with BIG RED LETTERS.

If it says you are liable once you add your Card on the console, then that is a warning saying "Don't bitch if your kid spends the money". I know Sony has it for PSN at least regarding losing your Account and games if you pirate or cheat.

Better having a middle ground that doesn't seem to harsh but at the same time doesn't hand hold.
 
Last edited:

Pidull

Member
So many of the replies in this thread sound almost exactly like what the Purdue Pharma executives/Sackler family were saying about the opioid epidemic.

"It's their fault for being degenerates."

"We had warnings, it doesn't matter that we were pushing providers to give prescriptions."

"They just want to place blame on someone else."
 

mcjmetroid

Member
Seems we get debate endlessly on end on whose fault this is but something needs to be done to protect people from this.

This is the real world and every parents let's their guard down once in a while.

This needs to stop.
 

yitz

Neo Member
Why are we putting the blame on the parents here? If you're not in the gaming world, why would you assume that gambling mechanics are being used in a game marketed to kids? We normally have laws against that, after all, and until the past few years, this was pretty much unheard of...
 
Games are a multi million dollar industry and a large amount of revenue comes from excessive monetization in the form of microtransactions. Whilst it's unethical, it's completely legal and parents should educate themselves about these potentional timebombs waiting to happen. You on the other hand take the stance of absolving the parents of all responsibility, which I find absolutely amusing lol.

Welcome to the harsh reality of gaming in this generation.

If you can't handle said reality, have your children take up birdwatching instead of Fortnite.

Me, Reality and parents. Yet no corporate responsibility is suggested in your post.

Suspicious? or just Obvious?
 
Yo Sterling junior, those games are not 50$/one-time purchase. There are plenty of them if you want. Those are f2p+mtx and it's pretty clear how they work. Don't play them if you have issues and don't let your kids mess around with your phone on your account.

Yes it's that simple.

Well, It's not clear how they work is it? That's why companies resort to using in game points and currency vs real currency, in order to obscure what the real amount is.

I don't have kids, so....yeah.
 
I know it's really easy to say it's the parents fault for not closely monitoring what their kids are playing so some of the blame does belong there. However, it used to be you bought a game and that was it. The concept of micro transactions is pretty new and not everyone is as tech savvy as your average poster on a videogame forum. I believe most parents are educated to an extent on videogames (violence, online play etc...) but the new trend of micro transactions hasn't been introduced to them yet. Hopefully articles like this will educate people on what their kids are playing and the risks associated with just letting your child do whatever.

As far as the credit card linked to accounts, 100% on them. I'm an adult and I don't even do that shit. You shouldn't have that linked to a device and then just give it to your kid. They'll go on a spree because they don't know any better.
 
Parents fault. They are the ones to be blamed by Allowing their kids to access credit card and saving their credit card details without monitoring all transactions on daily basis .

Consoles allow to parental control features to combat all these problems but they never bother to check it. My consoles payment options are password protected. It asks for password everytime you want to buy something .


Can't blame video game companies when parents act as completely stupid and illiterate.
 
Last edited:

Dural

Member
I had this thread open reading the first post and my 10yo says he wants robucks, my wife looked at me as she was reading it too. SMH, kids these days.
 

Kadayi

Banned
I feel sorry for many of these people, but at the same time, there has to be some accountability when it comes to giving over your CC details. Maybe just had an agreed limit in place per month/week and that's it, that your bank operates.
 

cryptoadam

Banned
Ya fuck predatory practicies and a lot of these games are created to suck money out of people. They aren't really games just sensory overload to push people into spending.

But, people need to be responsible. I mean if a kid had access to a CC and was put in a candy store what do you think would happen? Or a Toy store?

Children are children for a reason. We put child proof caps on over the counter drugs, but would you blame advil or tylenol if you left the cap off? The protections are there its up to parents to use them.
 
So then don't pay for them for your kids? For a forum that complains about SJWs causing things to get censored just because they don't like it, there sure are a lot of people that want entirely optional stuff censored and regulated here.
This has nothing to do with censoring content, you can all have your boobs (or whatever you are into). This is about a business model that has nothing worthwhile to offer, is predatory, and count on people basically giving away money by mistake.

You can have your casino slot machines, just don't put them with regular video games, they are something else, even if they are marketed as such, that type of games should be adults only, when you filter for family friendly material it should cut out all those immediately, just like any adult material. I see no reason why Walmart offers video games with that kind of mechanics, or devices that mostly offer unrestricted access to those (phones/tablets) and no actual internet connected slot machines.

I mean, we had online casinos for years, even tho they cause problems for those addicted to gambling, they aren't as much a problem since it's easier to manage how they access your hard earned money. On the Google Play Store or the Apple Store, or even the PS4/Xbox One, you have other good reasons to put your credit card in. Even if you put a password, some restrictions, the password may be given to the kids because parents trust the system not to be abusive and they trust their kids won't buy games (which is a lesser risk, and a possible teaching moment with trust and how it's earned).
 

GreenAlien

Member
Children are children for a reason. We put child proof caps on over the counter drugs, but would you blame advil or tylenol if you left the cap off? The protections are there its up to parents to use them.
If the game is advertised as "E" or "T", why would parents believe they need to do anything?

If I buy my kid bonbons in the candy store, I trust that they don't "hide" alcoholic candies that look like regular candies mixed in with the kid stuff.
 
Last edited:

V4skunk

Banned
I don't have any sympathy for any of these people except the disabled man and his parents.
At 11 years or older, should have a clear grasp on reality and the fact thst they are stealing their parents cash.
 

ROMhack

Member
I just asked my non-gamer friend and he said he doesn't know anything about micro-transactions in games but does consider it as having been a known issue since Apple first started letting you buy stuff easily.

Dunno it that helps. Thought it might offer some perspective.
 
Last edited:

Petrae

Member
If the game is advertised as "E" or "T", why would parents believe they need to do anything?

If I buy my kid bonbons in the candy store, I trust that they don't "hide" alcoholic candies that look like regular candies mixed in with the kid stuff.

Exactly. Force any game with odds-based microtransactions to be either M (17) or, more appropriately, AO (18+). Slap big warning labels on the front about containing said microtransactions. Regulate these like normal M/AO games, where ID is required.

It’ll never willfully happen, though, because the video game industry wants to keep pushing this shit onto kids as well as adults. Losing that kid money, which is easier to get in a world where parents are increasingly less inclined to say “no”, would put a dent in their revenue streams. So they, much like the battalion of corporate defenders in this thread, cite parental controls and “you should know better”. It’s easier to deflect all responsibility instead of taking a little yourself. That’s how business works.

There’s no argument that parents need to take more responsibility here, and that many of these cases demonstrate that lack of responsibility. The continued exoneration of the video game industry here is fucking disgusting, though. The industry absolutely bears some of the blame here and deserves condemnation.
 

yet_another_alt

Gold Member
Exactly. Force any game with odds-based microtransactions to be either M (17) or, more appropriately, AO (18+). Slap big warning labels on the front about containing said microtransactions. Regulate these like normal M/AO games, where ID is required.
This would be no help at all. The parents are giving full access to the device. What good will a warning label do when the kid can just straight up acquire by downloading without supervision?
 

Petrae

Member
This would be no help at all. The parents are giving full access to the device. What good will a warning label do when the kid can just straight up acquire by downloading without supervision?

If little Jimmy is stealing his dad’s credit card to download full games, that’s a separate issue. The focus here is cutting down on predatory microtransactions, which more strictly rating and regulating physical the sale of games that contain them should help to achieve, even to a lesser extent.

It would be something, as opposed to the current industry strategy of ignoring the situation.
 

brian0057

Member
If little Jimmy is stealing his dad’s credit card to download full games, that’s a separate issue. The focus here is cutting down on predatory microtransactions, which more strictly rating and regulating physical the sale of games that contain them should help to achieve, even to a lesser extent.

It would be something, as opposed to the current industry strategy of ignoring the situation.
It seems little Jimmy's parents have a more important issue than micro-transactions.
 
Last edited:

nkarafo

Member
On one hand, mobile game publishers are snakes, that's well known.

On the other hand, young children shouldn't have any access to that amount of money. That's on the parents.

Prepaid cards is a good solution i think. Let your child have a certain / capped amount and if spent, they will have to wait next month (or whatever your plan is) for the next refill. Maybe this way they will learn to spend responsibly.
 
Last edited:

radewagon

Member
Why are we blaming the parents?

When was it OK and acceptable that you could even spend so much money in a game?

I mean for fuck sakes, a £50 game should be a £50 game. spending £1k on the playstation or xbox store on 200 games is one thing, but over 2 grand being spent ON ONE GAME and we blame the parents? Get the fuck outta here.

The only tighter controls we need is on these money-grabbing pricks that head the games companies that allow this shit to be put into games.

Yep, apologists, be like: let's treat the symptom but not the disease.
 

Zog

Banned
Yep, apologists, be like: let's treat the symptom but not the disease.
We can't limit corporations who want to make money and getting kids into gambling early is important to future revenue. You would make a poor Ferengi!
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
The problem here aren't the microtransactions, these kids could have been done the same at Amazon or similar.

I think devs and platform holders must:
-Implement easier to use parental controls
-Make parental controls more visible to parents specially in phones
-Inform better the parents about parental controls and refunds
-Apple must bring back to the user the 30% revenue share of the purchase they got when it was paid, devs must stop paying to the user the 100% of a refunded payment, they only should refund their 70%

Parents must:
-Watch their kids more frequently
-Don't save credit cards in accounts in devices where kids play
-Basically don't give your credit card to a kid
-Use parental controls
-Teach better kids about being responsible when spending money
-Make a refund or talk with your bank if the kid spent money without your permission to get the money back, it's pretty easy

We can't limit corporations who want to make money and getting kids into gambling early is important to future revenue. You would make a poor Ferengi!
Gambling apps and games have a special regulation and kids aren't allowed there. A F2P game or a game with microtransactions isn't gambling. Gambling is when you pay real money for a change to earn real money. This is: betting apps, poker or slot machine games, etc. where you can earn real money.
 
Last edited:

Mattyp

Gold Member
Dumb cunt parents being dumb cunt parents. I have no idea why this is even an argument.

Remember all those gaming magazines we had growing up, that we read when we where 7? 'cheat codes hints charged at $8.99 per minute' in minuscule writing at the bottom? Remember how we knew not to ring these numbers because they would charge the shit out of our parents and we would cop a flogging?

I remember. Take some fucking responsibility, anyone with a kid young enough for this shit grew up with technology themselves ignorance will get you no where.
 
Tbh, It's been in the news for what, 6+ years?

Has it been in the mainstream news though? I've seen the odd report here and there but it's been ramping up over the past few months. I think the practices have been getting scuzzier over the past few years as well, it's starting to reach a tipping point.
 

Kenpachii

Member
Have a second check, the moment somebody tries to buy something it's not done with the press off a button but u need a extra code that constantly changes.

We got that over here.

Sure its extra hassle, there is no way to spend money without you knowing exactly that you spend it.





So when kid presses buy buy buy

He will get popup complete transaction.

Then he's MOOOOOM GIMME YOUR CREDIT CARD

Mom = fuck no.
 
Last edited:

Zog

Banned

YongYea pretty much speaks my opinion. At the very least, a game with MTX's should not be labeled E for Everyone.
 
Last edited:

Blancka

Member
This has nothing to do with censoring content, you can all have your boobs (or whatever you are into). This is about a business model that has nothing worthwhile to offer, is predatory, and count on people basically giving away money by mistake.

You can have your casino slot machines, just don't put them with regular video games, they are something else, even if they are marketed as such, that type of games should be adults only, when you filter for family friendly material it should cut out all those immediately, just like any adult material. I see no reason why Walmart offers video games with that kind of mechanics, or devices that mostly offer unrestricted access to those (phones/tablets) and no actual internet connected slot machines.

I mean, we had online casinos for years, even tho they cause problems for those addicted to gambling, they aren't as much a problem since it's easier to manage how they access your hard earned money. On the Google Play Store or the Apple Store, or even the PS4/Xbox One, you have other good reasons to put your credit card in. Even if you put a password, some restrictions, the password may be given to the kids because parents trust the system not to be abusive and they trust their kids won't buy games (which is a lesser risk, and a possible teaching moment with trust and how it's earned).

It has plenty worthwhile to offer. Overwatch is the prime example. Bought it for $20 and got a ton of added content like maps, modes and characters for free because it's supported by other people buying option loot boxes. Something not to your tastes isn't inherently evil. THAT is why I bring up the SJW comparison. It's the same logic of "I don't like this so instead of me personally avoiding it like a rational human being it needs to be made illegal".

People don't want slot machines. I'll spend hours grinding blades in xenoblade 2 hoping that eventually the "slot machine" gives me what I want, but I wouldn't play a slot machine. Gamification of things makes them enjoyable for people. Again, not to your tastes isn't inherently wrong.

Gambling is a different comparison when it comes to online casinos etc. Real money is at play. There's no doubling down to win back your losses in loot boxes. When your money is gone, it's gone, which eliminates a massive part of gambing, and its addiction.

If we get some studies up to show there is a link, and that this is genuinely harmful for kids I'll be all for getting rid of it. Until then I'll see this for what it is. People getting pissy and asking for legislation because of game mechanics and business models they don't want instead of just buying different products that suit their tastes.
 

Blancka

Member
True, but if it was a life changing burn, you should still get them to hospital whether it was their fault or not. (more a moral choice though)

I agree that we have a really bad nanny state, but you can bet that these idiots are likely to kill themselves without some restraint.

A middle ground would be better to stop the vulnerable (disabled, really mentally challenged) whilst educating the ignorant masses.

I don't think lootboxes should be in FIFA though (IMO), as its a game that should be accessible to everyone. Should EA need to add Lootboxes, lock it behind the DLC with a passcode if you are over X age, then if they add the code in and it happens...well tough titty.

I would say that we can't go extremely one way (let them fail and figure it out) or the other (protect everyone from it), but there needs to be a sensible regulation where the kids can't pay for anything without permission and the adults are given a TOS before they add a Credit Card with BIG RED LETTERS.

If it says you are liable once you add your Card on the console, then that is a warning saying "Don't bitch if your kid spends the money". I know Sony has it for PSN at least regarding losing your Account and games if you pirate or cheat.

Better having a middle ground that doesn't seem to harsh but at the same time doesn't hand hold.
Absolutely, and then that idiot who burned themselves through their own fault will either pay for the hospital visit, or is paying insurance which covers it.

Let them. I long for the day that common sense becomes common again.

Fair enough on vulnerable people. Though IMO that should be handled at a platform level and not game by game. I.E. PSN, STEAM etc having account settings. Genuinely this would be a great update and I'd be very happy to see options to protect those who are genuinely vulnerable and make things easier on those caring for them.

Eh, Fifa and kids having lootboxes is no different in my eyes than Yu-gi-oh or any given TCG or gacha based game that kids were into when I was younger. Completely the same, if not more like gambling as you could pull cards with a lot of real world value (for example I pulled a plaguespreader zombie as a teen, worth $80 and near shit my pants because it was like I pulled straight money out of the pack)

Kids already can't pay for anything without an adult. We obviously see differently here and I don't expect to change your mind on this specifically, but in this day and age I don't have sympathy for wilful ignorance of technology with how easy and friendly it's become. To be completely honest though, in this day and age of so many online purchases and subscriptions, I feel like businesses that keep your card details on file should be required to report it to banks, who can then provide an up to date list of these things online.

All in all, I'm against nannying people, but I'm all for solving genuine issues, which there are some here. I do feel that there is a lot of extra backlash on this topic that's less to do with it being harmful, and more to do with people not liking these sorts of things in their games because they feel it affects quality, so they'll jump on anything to be rid of it
 

420bits

Member
Has it been in the mainstream news though? I've seen the odd report here and there but it's been ramping up over the past few months. I think the practices have been getting scuzzier over the past few years as well, it's starting to reach a tipping point.

I don't live in the US so can't say how the media-coverage has been, but as a Swede i can say it has been covered here multiple times. Not like the murder of a president-coverage but the topic has been covered in the regular news. CNN has this article from early 2013: https://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/26/tech/mobile/apple-game-settlement/index.html so i would assume it has been in the news all around the world at somepoint between 2013-now.

Before ingamepurchases there was the topic of using your cellphone abroad and people got bills by the thousands because they didn't actually check with their provider how it worked. WHAT, IT COST MORE MONEY TO USE THE INTERNET ON MY US / UK / WHATEVER CARRIER WHEN IM IN AFRICA? WHAT THE FUCK!?

Some things are, or at least should be common knowledge but by todays standards people refuse to accept that they have done something wrong, it's always someoneelses fault.

Now I agree that ingame purchases where you can spend 3000% of the "traditional gameprice" is stupid, but I as a consumer have a choice.
I can say "fuck that" and just not spend money on developers that supports this / makes this their businessmodel or I can accept it and pay for ingame stuff where i think it's worth it.
 
Gambling is a different comparison when it comes to online casinos etc. Real money is at play. There's no doubling down to win back your losses in loot boxes. When your money is gone, it's gone, which eliminates a massive part of gambing, and its addiction.
This is where you are wrong, people paying real money to essentially spin some randomizer repeatedly in order to get whatever item it is they are looking for is the same thing for a player as for someone who is trying to recoup their money from the casino machine. It hooks you in the exact same manner, by hijacking your reward circuits, and making sure you pay for it. Your argument is equivalent to saying that if a lottery gave away a car or a travel it could not be problematic at this level because you can't "win back your losses".

They can do it, I just want these things to be marketed and sold or made available on a restricted way so that those who are too young or somehow unable to control themselves don't just get sucked in without any friction. Too bad if it means less wales in fortnight or some other games like it.

I know we had random drops and grinding since the dawn of gaming, these were part of gaming, and I don't think that they should go (I don't buy the"there is too much grinding or backtracking argument" but I don't trust publishers to not link the two wherever they can. Like you don't see that if there is an income vector some managers will push for its use and optimization, then they will add revenue targets to it, growth targets, etc. This in tge the end will push for games to be more and more designed and the store front + slot machine model, as opposed to the core game.
 

Blancka

Member
This is where you are wrong, people paying real money to essentially spin some randomizer repeatedly in order to get whatever item it is they are looking for is the same thing for a player as for someone who is trying to recoup their money from the casino machine. It hooks you in the exact same manner, by hijacking your reward circuits, and making sure you pay for it. Your argument is equivalent to saying that if a lottery gave away a car or a travel it could not be problematic at this level because you can't "win back your losses".

They can do it, I just want these things to be marketed and sold or made available on a restricted way so that those who are too young or somehow unable to control themselves don't just get sucked in without any friction. Too bad if it means less wales in fortnight or some other games like it.

I know we had random drops and grinding since the dawn of gaming, these were part of gaming, and I don't think that they should go (I don't buy the"there is too much grinding or backtracking argument" but I don't trust publishers to not link the two wherever they can. Like you don't see that if there is an income vector some managers will push for its use and optimization, then they will add revenue targets to it, growth targets, etc. This in tge the end will push for games to be more and more designed and the store front + slot machine model, as opposed to the core game.

You're right. I'm totally wrong. I just spoke to my landlord and he says that I don't have to pay rent this month because I rolled a hextech annie from a crate in league and it makes him feel honored to have me as a tenant. Damn doubling down on those lootboxes after I couldn't afford rent was a good choice.

They are restricted. A child can't access this without a parents card. Which requires a parents permission. Literally how 18+ games are sold. Making it 18+ because of protecting kids from a feature they literally cannot physically use without an adults help is a textbook example of redundancy.

Games being designed in that way isn't a problem. We don't need censorship of content in any art form. Either people are happy with it and pay for it, and you need to get over the fact that it's not to your taste, or they won't, the business model will tank and we'll move on to the next marketing trend. Just because you don't like something isn't justification for it to be made illegal
 
Absolutely, and then that idiot who burned themselves through their own fault will either pay for the hospital visit, or is paying insurance which covers it.

Let them. I long for the day that common sense becomes common again.

Fair enough on vulnerable people. Though IMO that should be handled at a platform level and not game by game. I.E. PSN, STEAM etc having account settings. Genuinely this would be a great update and I'd be very happy to see options to protect those who are genuinely vulnerable and make things easier on those caring for them.

Eh, Fifa and kids having lootboxes is no different in my eyes than Yu-gi-oh or any given TCG or gacha based game that kids were into when I was younger. Completely the same, if not more like gambling as you could pull cards with a lot of real world value (for example I pulled a plaguespreader zombie as a teen, worth $80 and near shit my pants because it was like I pulled straight money out of the pack)

Kids already can't pay for anything without an adult. We obviously see differently here and I don't expect to change your mind on this specifically, but in this day and age I don't have sympathy for wilful ignorance of technology with how easy and friendly it's become. To be completely honest though, in this day and age of so many online purchases and subscriptions, I feel like businesses that keep your card details on file should be required to report it to banks, who can then provide an up to date list of these things online.

All in all, I'm against nannying people, but I'm all for solving genuine issues, which there are some here. I do feel that there is a lot of extra backlash on this topic that's less to do with it being harmful, and more to do with people not liking these sorts of things in their games because they feel it affects quality, so they'll jump on anything to be rid of it

I do agree that ignorance to technology is no longer an excuse, but I do think certain people struggle with it even if you teach them. Just how some people are.

Fair enough regarding that. I am okay with them being in, but locked away from kids. Perhaps offer two versions one with and without lootboxes with age ratings. There are people who will spend money on them regardless.
 

FUBARx89

Member
What gets me, is they have these parents going well my 11 year upwards child didn't make the correlation between buying it with real world money!

Get the fuck out of here, your kid knows full well they're spending money. Money isn't a foreign concept to them at that age.

The younger kids being blameless is fair enough, they don't understand what's happening every time they click that "het crystals!" Or whatever shit it is. As far as they're aware it's the same as when they downloaded that free game
 
Last edited:

Blancka

Member
I do agree that ignorance to technology is no longer an excuse, but I do think certain people struggle with it even if you teach them. Just how some people are.

Fair enough regarding that. I am okay with them being in, but locked away from kids. Perhaps offer two versions one with and without lootboxes with age ratings. There are people who will spend money on them regardless.

There needs to be (and in many areas already is) services in place to help these people then. Don't make things inconvenient for the masses because of a minority with issues. Local services should be in place to help people with issues like tech illiteracy, impulse spending etc. There's no reason to change everything at an industry level for the sake of a tiny group of people. In other words, don't tell me that I can't have steak because a baby can't chew.

They already are locked away from kids. Kids don't have bank accounts or credit cards. The barrier for entry is already that a kid has to go through an adult, changing age ratings doesn't change things here, especially since if a kid a potential threat with these things (I.E. Has some form of access to a parents card), they can just buy their games online and bypass any warnings from retail employees etc by downloading.

The solution is for parents to be parents at the end of the day. There's no other day to solve the issue without restricting others, and restricting some because others lack the ability to take some responsibility is completely objectionable in my eyes
 
Top Bottom