EA is just heading to suicide route. I like it. I hope Belgium can kick their D***s for what they had did to Mass Effect, Dungeon Keeper, The Sims, Battlefront, and C&C Franchise as excuse of low quality($$$) than “C&C Rivals”.
EA nutshell in Belgium court
Little elaborated nutshell
More examples:
Good for the ditch government, about time one country stands up to this. I hope EA burns for this, as they have gone too far. We seen lootboxes getting removed from some titles recently, (other publishers) but it seems EA still hasn’t got the message.
They are probably getting desperate for cash these days if they still think that lootboxes aren’t gambling. Sure they turn out a lot of games, but not all are qualty titles, and generally more of the same.
So yeah, I really hope EA loses, and this sends a clear message to other publishers, “don’t put lootboxes or any form of gambling in computer games”
The thing is, gambling is becoming a pretty big issues, especailly with sponsorship, and names of the said sponsors plastered on kit uniforms and billboards etc.
Its not a good message towards kids, who will use real money to gambling.
Things are clearly going over the edge, its just not right at all.
Gambling isn’t a problem. A-moral/Illegal gambling is a problem. If they’d just admit its gambling and make the needed adjustments everything would be fine. This is also why, in the Netherlands, its looked at on a case by case situation. Not every lootbox implementation thusfar has been illegal.
However, in the Netherlands, there is a precursory forum taking place next month. We’re, just as many EU nations, trying to have our laws catch up with the digital developments. Meaning many companies have gotten away with a lot of stuff, because LAW was always 10 steps behind. During this forum many digital gambling related issues will be discusses. Ranged from Digital Casino’s and slot machines, betting on sports and what not, lootboxes etc. That will lead to more stricter, new laws and regulations as well.
There are people who claim that it is just Belgium. What can they possibly achieve as such a small country? Even if they just make it illegal for (digital) shops to sell EA’s games… EA would hardly lose any money out of those few 100.000 gamers. Not to mention a fair amount of such gamers would just cross the border to Germany/Netherlands and buy their physical copies there.
Here is the thing. Belgium is not operating on its own behalf, well not completely anyway. It is being monitored by the rest of the EU. This lawsuit will set a precedent which will cause the other EU nations to follow. It’ll take a year or two for the new laws to be implemented, but it’ll happen. EA will feel the lack of sales across all of the EU.
Funny thing is that EU has no problem fining and jail sentences for big companies like Apple, Google, Facebook… You really think they’re bothered and intimidated by an EA? American practices don’t work over here. You can’t send lobbyists and get the governments to do whatever you say. EA even has the nerve to tell the lawmakers that their interpretation, of their own made laws, is wrong o.O How delusional are you when stating that.
The possible fines however won’t be that big. Only 3-5% of their global income that the game makes that has broken the law. There will also be the risk of several years jail time. For that the belgium government has to sent a expedite request to american government. Seeing how americans in general are assholes, thinking they’re better then the rest of the world… I doubt that will happen. In the end its still only a request and never a demand.
I can understand what your saying, but I would say gambling is the problem, and its getting worse.
While this might be a tasd bit off topic, I still think its relevant.
Recently, the UK government changed how much money people can spend on slot machines in betting shops, it was £100, but they reduced that by a lot, £2 max for stakes. as gaming is a bit of an issue in places. However, this doesn’t apply to digical online places yet.
But like I mentioned, the big football clubs depend on gambling sponsorship, andsome people think we are going over the edge by allow this. because research is revealing, that children as young as nice are starting to gamble, and that will lead to more serious problems in the future.
So gambling full stop is a problem, and I’m also sick to the back teeth of seeing adds for bingo sites on TV.
But these lootboxes are just another form of gambling, and I think it;s good that one country is at least trying to deal with it. But yes, I do take your point about what can Belgium achieve with this? they are small, EA could simply stop selling games to that country, and people will be forced to get games else where. But if one country can stand up to EA, then maybe others will follow. Something needs to be done, And I hope something good will come from this.
But this has been one slippery slope, as things have been getting steadily worse and worse for some time. So unless we do try and deal with gambling full stop, its just going to continue to encourage young children to gamble, which in turn become full time gamblers, which will lead to bigger problems.
In your case its a problem of upbringing and education…and partially cultural. The Brittish always loved gambling to begin with. Its part of the culture. Same reason you can’t get american’s to give up their guns.
The other part of influencing children is part of upbringing. There need to be more methods to actually block children of from certain content of the internet. A simple age rating is not sufficient. Even if a parent does their best to stay informed and involved with the child… they can’t be around 24/7 and police the child.
Believe it or not, even mighty Blizzard removed paid-loot boxes for Belgian Players in August this year ^^:
Blizzard removing paid-for loot boxes in Belgium (August 2018)(mcvuk.com)
Also here’s the official statement from one of the Community Managers on the Blizzard Forums:Here
Edit: I mean even mammoth Valve backed down on this subject on Shadow of War and Forza (not because of Belgium regulations though). I don’t know, maybe EA is playing with fire. 
But your still missing the point, when children go to football clubs, they get bombarded with sponsorship adds from gambling sites. And what kind of message does to say to children? its not just education, or upbringing, sure this will help, and I agree that the UK loves gambling. but to me, things are going way too far. because the big clubs are dependent on this income, they can’t make enough from ticket sales anymore.
More needs to be done, lootboxes are the next level of gambling, and publishers took advantage of that. But many games now are removing lootboxes, the recent one been middle earth one. and when lootboxes were finally removed, people could clearly see that the game was totally balanced around this, and nt sure if the game been rebalanced now? but anyway, a lot of games are getting or have lootboxes removed. but seems that EA won’t follow suit. But they need to realise that lootboxes are wroung. So this court case may have a positive impact. I just want to see EA go under, it won’t happen, but I would love to see that happen.
But all forms of gambling is wrong, illegal or legal, especailly in computer games. or adverts on TV or sports clubs pepper or in your face. And this is the problem. and people are saying this is a step too far.
About time something is done about this.
I disagree that all forms of gambling is wrong, etc… I like to gamble, but I also set limits and stop when I reach it. It’s also a low limit, like $20.
Gambling is a form of entertainment, if people want to gamble, let them. The problem comes when people have a gambling problem, aka addiction. Then they need to get help. Gambling addiction, like all other addictions, don’t affect everyone.
Also, if people stopped buying EA games because of this issue, then EA would stop doing it. At some point the consumer(s) need to decide that if a company is a problem, stop buying their products or services, aka loot boxes.
I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be some sort of oversight, but let’s look at that before banning things. After all, some people feel that computer games are addicting and bad, wrong, illegal - maybe they’ll try to ban them.
Almost everything could be addictive (with negative effects). TV, games, xxx, drugs including alcohol, cinema, even sport activities… One cannot ban everything. There is something called FREE WILL, And tools like RESPONSIBILITY, EDUCATION, ETHIC etc. are able to handle free will. Of course just my opinion.
That’s purely your opinion and not a statement of fact in the slightest. There’s nothing wrong with gambling and not all gambling involves real cash.
People being deceived into gambling with real cash IS a problem, gambling itself isn’t wrong or evil in the slightest.
As for saying the UK is the country that loves gambling…that’s rather overlooking a small place called Las Vegas, which sure as hell wasn’t here in the UK when I last looked at a map :rolleyes:
Majority revenue from EA digital is about 67%. But in my opinion, those majority digital revenue are from lootboxes, minority are digital copies sold. If you had watched YongYea video, he already explained why Battlefield V and Anthem will not have lootboxes, but why FIFA 18 & 19 still insist having lootboxes. He already gave us a very clear picture where all the money and revenues are come from: Not normal games, but from sports games platform.
He also told us EA true face by mentioning forget all “Moral Compass” bulls***s because EA playing with fire on Belgium government. If majority digital revenue not from lootboxes you might say, then why EA is so desperately taking huge risk to fight Belgium government on lootboxes ban. As already mentioned by Rerez 2, if EA fail this court case, EA will lose majority digital revenue on lootboxes alone an have to pay criminal charges from their lootboxes revenues and it might lead to EA stock price drop even further. Although this is just my opinion, but I can guess everyone already have the clear picture on what really happens.
EA games, “CHALLENGE EVERYTHING” (In a very abhorrent way)
does this mean you would legalize heroin, meth, etc. or is there some line you draw between ‘exercising free will’ and ‘things are addictive, so free will is not really all that free’ ?
If you draw a line, then this is no longer about free will but about where that line should reasonably be… I am also not sure a 12 year old is in a position to properly exercise free will here, there is a reason why we (ie not the US) do not trial kids for things an adult would be trialed for
Clearly some things should be banned as they are/can be quite deadly. Things like meth, heroin, etc. But even banning things or making them illegal also doesn’t stop it from being used/done etc. It does reduce its availability to the public at large.
As for the kids issue, well that’s where the parents come in and should be watching them, and educating them. Some things kids shouldn’t have access to, but banning them for everyone? (Note: except for those things mentioned that can cause immediate death, etc., e.g. hard drugs) Also, certainly kids shouldn’t have access to certain things, i.e. alcohol, cigarettes.
This is a complicated issue, so any and all generalizing is not a good place to start. (note: intended hyperbole and irony?) Clearly this is a case by case basis on identifying things that should be banned and why.
Lootboxes shouldn’t exist in 60 bucks games, the end. Not to mention the lootboxes are predatory because they want to entice people into buying them by making them random or making the grind so unbearable that you have no choice but to buy them.
This fine, to an extent, in free to play games but in 60 bucks games is a disgrace. How about letting us buy the stuff directly instead of resorting to RNG?
should being the operative word here…
Some things kids shouldn’t have access to, but banning them for everyone?
not necessarily, but making sure they are not available to kids, just like tobacco and alcohol, might be an option. If every game with lootboxes would be abailable to 18+ year olds only, that would be one option…
This is a complicated issue, so any and all generalizing is not a good place to start. (note: intended hyperbole and irony?) Clearly this is a case by case basis on identifying things that should be banned and why.
I agree, which is why I objected to the ‘there is such a thing as free will, so let’s not regulate’ approach 
Then don’t buy the game. Don’t buy the loot boxes. If the game is so grindy it’s not fun, why are you playing it?
Seriously, until people stop supporting this sort of activity, IT WILL NOT CHANGE.
Maybe you should be banned from playing video games?
I agree; however, there’s only so much you can regulate realistically. At some point, people need to make a choice on whether or not to do an activity. Others (family?) should be able to step in and say “Hey you’ve got a problem.” That’s the tricky part because people are good at hiding things.
As usual, it’s a combination of things and finding a good balance. It will never be perfect.
What kind of stupid logic is this? How about the game not being grindy in the first place? The “don’t buy the lootboxes” “argument” needs to burn in hell.
And why you do you think people are complaining about this? For companies to remove this bullshit because it is utter bullshit.
And who the hell said i was buying these games? Nice blind assumption, but wrong.
The problem i and many people is that they EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE. Why are they even there? It doesn’t matter that no one buys them, the mere fact companies put this shit in their games just tells a lot about these companies.
Stupid logic? It’s simple. Don’t buy it, they won’t make it because they don’t make any profit on things they don’t sell.
If you don’t like and you are not playing it, then why do you care?
Sure you may not like it, but does it really need regulating? You aren’t buying it, or playing it.
If no one buys the game, loot boxes, etc. then the companies have to change or go out of business.
The only reason they continue to do it, is because they profit from it, because people buy it. They (the consumer) must like it, so why should the company change?
This is basic economics and capitalism, hardly stupid logic.
“If You Don’t Like it, Don’t Buy it” from Patrick Soderlund
Best for your reply 