Gaming News

StarCraft pro and caster Geoff 'InControl' Robinson died last night. He was only 33. Seemed to be an unspecified illness.

Layoffs of Activision execs and details of it apparently verified in confidence to the quartering: https://youtu.be/SPm7mF7nDzA
Activision is denying it publicly.

UK GC says FIFA packs aren't gambling: https://nichegamer.com/2019/07/24/uk-gambling-commission-claims-fifa-packs-are-not-gambling/

Might effect Valve, since their inventory system and marketplace is integrated to a lot of games. As said 3rd party trading might be an issue, so can see that going.

Wonder about the steam cards too with the second bit about promotional raffles.

Robert ninja wrote: »

UK GC says FIFA packs aren't gambling: https://nichegamer.com/2019/07/24/uk-gambling-commission-claims-fifa-packs-are-not-gambling/

From that article:

“The Gambling Act tells us that gambling means playing a game of chance for a prize, and you can certainly see circumstances where a loot box might fall within that definition, but where things become a bit more complicated are when one looks at the definition of prize, and prize is defined as being money or money’s worth. What that means is that the prize must mean something that is equivalent to money.”

So the argument is that the things in loot boxes have no real "money's worth" therefore they don't count as gambling. But doesn't that only apply to loot box market places where you can't also buy the item you want directly for a set amount of money? Isn't the main defence for e.g. Overwatch that you can buy skins directly and bypass the loot boxes if you want to. Therefore those skins have a set "money's worth".

This argument really amounts to "it is gambling if you can avoid the gambling mechanics and it is not gambling if you can't"?



And of course that is leaving aside the question of "money's worth" in of itself. If some people are willing to spend money on the chance of getting something, that implies that thing is worth money to them.

Gunmonkey wrote: »

Yeah, you can only buy the loot boxes directly in Overwatch. Which is worse, as you can drop tons of cash and never get the skin you wanted, and the pity amounts they give for duplicates are pathetic (500 credits for a duplicate Legendary skin, they cost 3000 to buy outright).

I would bet more money and manpower in EA, Blizzard and Valve are being directed at how to weasel out of "lootboxes = gambling" than any game they've made in the past 4 years.

I don't play Overwatch that much anymore but you earn the gold/credits fairly quickly through games and then your get a loot box every time you level up.

Do you get them at the end of every competitive season as well?

Do you still get duplicates in Loot Boxes? I thought that was changed?

Mickeroo wrote: »

I presume the "money's worth" is more related to not being able to sell the contents for money after the fact rather than not being able to buy them directly in the first place. If you can't convert something to money it doesn't have any monetary value. By that definition any game that lets you sell the contents on the steam marketplace would be gambling though.

That "money" can never escape the steam market, though. It's more like store credit. Non-refundable... says it every time you interact with the market.

Deleted User wrote: »

Doom Trilogy released on Switch!!!!

Out today too....

https://gonintendo.com/stories/340926-original-doom-trilogy-getting-surprise-release-today-on-nintendo

Heard this

• Bethesda account required
• Internet required for multiplayernvm it's just DRM apparently
• CoC acceptance for online playapparently CoC even for singleplayer, there is no multi. jesus
• remade the game in a proprietary engine when the engine and all source ports are literally both libre and gratis and already been ported to the Switch by fans
• black bars at the side
• bugged aspect ratio with horizontally stretched graphics
• slowed down music

If even half of these are true then the original is still better. Astounding. Think I'll launch some gzdoom tonight perhaps.

gimli2112 wrote: »

Fortnite competition in New York this week, prize money US$30M BBC news really struggling to understand
Shouldn't have listened to adults when I was a child I might have made something of my life

Haha. I love it.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0727/1065587-irish-teenager-to-compete-in-fortnite-world-cup-final/

Ole ole ole..

Watching now. He finished 20th out of 100 in the first game. 5 more games to go.

Grumpypants wrote: »

A 15 year old from the UK came second in the duos final and is now a millionaire. Interview with his mam saying he started playing at 13 and she threw out an xbox because his grades were suffering.

Reckon she has had a change of mind now

For the little interest i have in Fortnite, this is great for the whole esports and gaming industry in general.

I heard her say that on BBC news this morning, also saying she broke one of his headsets. I suppose if I had a kid that had just won over $1m I might admit to my anger issues on TV as well.

"My son was playing too much football, so I punctured his ball and threw out his expensive kit..."

Any parent with half a brain would try to stop their 13-year old kid from dropping or neglecting school to concentrate on being a professional Fortnite player.

Mickeroo wrote: »

I presume the "money's worth" is more related to not being able to sell the contents for money after the fact rather than not being able to buy them directly in the first place. If you can't convert something to money it doesn't have any monetary value. By that definition any game that lets you sell the contents on the steam marketplace would be gambling though.

That makes sense as what they must mean, but it still doesn't support their argument. If I put up a prize for a slot machine as e.g. a real gold coin, but I have it as a winning condition that that coin cannot ever be sold, then by their presumed meaning of "money's worth" that slot machine is not gambling. Yes, someone could ignore the rule and just sell the coin anyway, but someone could just ignore the terms and conditions on a game and sell their account too (with all of it's lootbox items as selling point).

Also not being able to sell the contents of a loot box is a function of the developer/publisher not wanting you to be able to sell them, it's not inherently impossible. You already mentioned the steam marketplace, there is no reason why there can't be in game market places for all games that have lootboxes.

Saying there has to be a potential for financial profit for something to count as gambling misses the entire point of regulating gambling. It's regulated, not because you might win back a little bit of money, but because you can loose massive amounts of money and it can be as addictive as hard drugs to a lot people. These two issues both equally apply to lootboxes because they are designed to be.



RE Overwatch, I've never played it and was going by points (I clearly misread) made by others in it's defence against being gambling.

pixelburp wrote: »

Teenagers are idiots. We were all that age once, and if we're being totally honest, that version of us was a thundering plonker who knew f*ck all. Unless those reading still ARE teenagers, in which case ... ... uh.

So the idea of teenagers walking away with a million, before they have the emotional maturity to deal with that kind of money, is depressing. Can't be good for development of an adult with rational expectations. Presumably it's going into a trust mind you.

And before someone says it, I absolutely think the same of teenage Premiership footballers and their ilk. Rugby at least tries make its youngsters finish school (and professionals tend to peak later, given the specificity of positions).

Don't be jealous.
( I am jealous)

Still crazy amount of money for a kids game though.
I don't get the hype for it I think it's awful. I much prefer pubg
But I'm obviously in the minority haha

I think the Episodic release was terrible idea and they lost a lot of their legacy fans. Going back to full release kept me on reluctantly and only through deep sales with the entire S1/2 purchased pretty cheaply when they were finished. Their obsession to add DRM and always-online restrictions has been one of the biggest criticisms of the series. Needing internet to calculate the mission score and unlock weapons is insane for anything that's not a free-to-play like Warframe.

SBH does a great vid on it, too. Those who buy episodic or invest early get the worst deal. It pays not to be loyal.

Hitman 2 (trademark) has always-online requirements and launched with Denuvo (now gone). Wasn't that all IO and their new publisher Warner Bros? Although Warner have the same problems as SE. I remember a Valve moderator had to warn one of the Warner steam mods for deleting posts and saying it was against the rules to discuss DRM and online restrictions. That was years ago though and I think Valve would side with Warner these days now that their review bots discount anything that they detect brings up forbidden topics: DRM being one of them.