EA Stock loses £3 billion in value - The Lootbox debate

[Fixer]

http://www.pcgamer.com/electronic-arts- ... lefront-2/

This news story has been brewing from a while. From the pay to win lootboxes in Battlefield 2 and the exploitative mechanics based around them to the most downvoted reddit post in history by a very, very large margin.

Anti-consumer practises have been the norm for a while with EA, along with their vampiric devouring of beloved studios and IPs. This appears to be a turning point in consumers opposing them.

However there's concern with governments now looking into regulation, with the Representative from Hawaii calling Battlefront 2 a Star Wars casino for children. Many other games have implemented free to play and loot box items without being anti-consumer. Warframe and most MOBAs for example.

While there is now the potential for reversing the disheartening trend in titles having their gameplay become a distant second to the publisher's monetisation strategy, there now also lies the possibility to regulation shutting down other legitimate studios.

What's everyone's thoughts on this?

[Morgaine]

I think that this had to happen eventually, and EA/Activision/Ubisoft/etc knew it. They kept pushing and pushing and pushing, seeing what they could get away with and how much money they could milk before regulation clamped down and took their toys away.

Of course, I don't think EA quite anticipated it would blow up in their face like this, and I remain hopeful this will not only speed up the death of these predatory practices but will convince Disney to pull their Star Wars game exclusivity from them.

As for regulation itself, I don't like governments overseeing the content of my videogames. But on the other hand, like I said this had to happen. There's no way these companies will let go of this bottomless pit of money they found for themselves unless they're forced to.
It's very easy to say "Well I won't buy any microtransactions!" but there will always be people that will, and as we've seen with Battleground 2 these high priced premium games are now being warped around the microtransactions so anyone who doesn't participate will have an objectively worse time.
Then we have Activision and others patenting new even more predatory ways to make people want to spend. They are in fact running casinos targetted at children and other vulnerable people, and just because there's no chance of a monetary payout doesn't change the fact that it triggers the same gambling impulses.

[Admiral X]

Even assuming I found gambling to be something that should be illegal (I don't), the micro-transactions are not representative of gambling. Gambling always involves putting something of yours up on the line in order to win, and micro-transactions do not do that - they simply ask you to pay for something you "won" in the game with real money to enjoy it. If anything, I feel they represent fraud and think that if the government does anything about it, it should be on those terms. Instead we have the makings of an '80s Christian moral panic, which just happens to be popping up soon after a recent resurgence of Jack Thompson types claiming video games are making people into mass shooters, or sexist depending on what side of the political spectrum they're on. No, I'd rather tell the government to piss off out of this one and let the market sort it out, which it seems to be doing if EA's stock is tanking.

[Robovski]

Relevant video by Superbunnyhop:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ3qv6fc6ts

I don't have a problem with adults gambling in a regulated gambling venue (loads of betting, gambling and online poker in the UK) but in the UK gambling is regulated to require only adults and the odds need to be posted for non-skill based games. Loot boxes have no odds or value indications, and I doubt EA has been paying the taxes on those gambling profits.

This is above and beyond the reprehensible nature of targeting children and addicts, the hamstringing of product to introduce this pseudo gambling, and how despite record profits these companies fail to pay employees and contractors fairly.

[Morgaine]

Even assuming I found gambling to be something that should be illegal (I don't), the micro-transactions are not representative of gambling. Gambling always involves putting something of yours up on the line in order to win, and micro-transactions do not do that - they simply ask you to pay for something you "won" in the game with real money to enjoy it. If anything, I feel they represent fraud and think that if the government does anything about it, it should be on those terms. Instead we have the makings of an '80s Christian moral panic, which just happens to be popping up soon after a recent resurgence of Jack Thompson types claiming video games are making people into mass shooters, or sexist depending on what side of the political spectrum they're on. No, I'd rather tell the government to piss off out of this one and let the market sort it out, which it seems to be doing if EA's stock is tanking.

Does it occur to you that part of the reason EA's stock is going down is because of these government investigations? If it's one thing that spooks investors over everything else it's the government starting to stick it's nose in.

It *is* in fact gambling. It triggers the same impulses and behaviours. You're putting up money into a game of chance to get what you want.
In actual casinos, what you want is more money. With lootboxes, what you want is whatever prize they're offering up.
This is hardly the equivalent of a moral panic, people are being bilked out of money by predatory publishers, and games are directly suffering as a result.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

I think it would be nice if we could consistently whip up this kind of large-scale pushback for things like overcharging on life-saving drugs and price-gouging groceries on Alaskan native reservations, but it is nice to see corporate greed occasionally being punished instead of rewarded.

[PerrySimm]

The EA model worked in the day when retail was king and getting things published and on shelves was a major pain, but these days anyone can be a digital publisher.

An EA buyout preyed on the traditional uncertainty of the small developer worried about paying the bills until the next hit came. But now there's Kickstarter.

So if EA can't buy talent, what does it do instead?

[Antiboyscout]

is this gambling?
it works on the same principal

[Admiral X]

Bingo and raffles are a form of gambling, but you don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of those.

[Fixer]

The prime difference as I see it, it you don't see anyone betting their last few bucks on a loot box in a game in the hope of recouping their gambling debts.

Having money and real life consequences hanging on the outcome of whatever random number generator you're using adds an edge that betting on virtual items doesn't have. You have all the serious problems tied to gambling including violent crime and families torn apart Vs. terrible monetisation strategies making video games suck.

The worst we've seem from microtransactions is kids running up massive phone bills for their parents.

Edit: As if to counter this last post, this popped up in my YouTube subs today.


youtu.be/aUXpTBM1vMM