Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47
  1. #21
    Community Member Alrik_Fassbauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,792

    Default

    One word : Zynga.
    A very zynical company.
    They invented the concept of "fun pain".
    "Archbishop Dryden wants to talk to you to tapper this dale."
    "Archbishop Dryden wants to talk to you to tap on this dale."
    "Archbishop Dryden wants to talk to you to tap on this tale."
    English is not my first language - misinterpretations galore !

  2. #22
    DDO Players Council Renvar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,893

    Default

    The issue with applying these laws to DDO is that DDO is a PvE environment, for the most part. Thus, no player can purchase a "competitive advantage" over another player when you aren't actually competing with another player. You are cooperating with them. They might need to totally close down the PvP part of the game, just to be sure, but otherwise, I don't see where DDO has a problem here.

    Games like Game of War, Clash of Clans, or Game of Thrones are minting money on crazy big progression curves that can only be reasonably passed via spending money in large sums. We are talking 5-10k per account. Sometimes more. And those are PvP, so it's entirely about competitive advantage. DDO isn't within the same ballpark as those games. They aren't even on the same continent.

    What is funny is that "Loot Boxes" are basically just an extension of Pokemon, Yugiohm etc card packs from the 90's. (And the 70's and 80's going back further) Buy a pack. Overwhelmingly likely to get low value cards, with a small chance a good card is contained inside. Those are entirely marketed at kids and have existed for decades and nobody cared.


    "Protecting kids" is what parents are supposed to do, anyways. I agree with other posters. Kids can't buy stuff online if parents are not asleep at the wheel.
    Asheras - Velania - Renvar - Ventarya - Officer in Loreseekers and Officer of Lava Divers - Khyber

  3. #23
    Community Member Yamani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in the states
    Posts
    1,057

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Renvar View Post
    The issue with applying these laws to DDO is that DDO is a PvE environment, for the most part. Thus, no player can purchase a "competitive advantage" over another player when you aren't actually competing with another player. You are cooperating with them. They might need to totally close down the PvP part of the game, just to be sure, but otherwise, I don't see where DDO has a problem here.

    Games like Game of War, Clash of Clans, or Game of Thrones are minting money on crazy big progression curves that can only be reasonably passed via spending money in large sums. We are talking 5-10k per account. Sometimes more. And those are PvP, so it's entirely about competitive advantage. DDO isn't within the same ballpark as those games. They aren't even on the same continent.

    What is funny is that "Loot Boxes" are basically just an extension of Pokemon, Yugiohm etc card packs from the 90's. (And the 70's and 80's going back further) Buy a pack. Overwhelmingly likely to get low value cards, with a small chance a good card is contained inside. Those are entirely marketed at kids and have existed for decades and nobody cared.


    "Protecting kids" is what parents are supposed to do, anyways. I agree with other posters. Kids can't buy stuff online if parents are not asleep at the wheel.
    Yea the senator pretty much stated its for the games that make you pay to advance, like they have so many lives every 6 hours but if you pay you can have unlimited lives for an hour. Or for games that have "best deal" marketed and spammed in their face, but the cost is 149.99$. So if this where to pass it would have no effect on ddo at all.

  4. #24
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    26,576

    Default

    The ability to buy your way past earning progression in game is a competitive advantage. (yes people do "compete" in PVE games) This is the "artificial difficulty" they are talking about, because in order to get people to do this they need to have a time sync in front of them which entices them to do so. I know players will try to parse the words and lawyer the terms to create the illusion of minimizing the impact, but objective observers (people who do not play the game and look in from the outside) got past this some time ago, and did not buy into the "it can be earned in game at a rate orders of magnitude slower than just paying for it, so all is fine" mentality.

    People will also cite games and companies who are by degree practicing this far more blatantly than SSG/DDO is, but that does not address that objective observers (again, folks having no emotional attachment to gaming, looking in from the outside) will NOT buy into any of the subjective definitions of what is and is not p2w, what is or is not gambling, etc...parsed out by the players and other folks who are emotionally attached to the game system in question, or by those who have a vested interest to protect the game system in question. Objective observers will use the definition in the bill (law) when it comes time to enforce. Make no mistake about it, according to the way those are worded currently, there are game mechanics in DDO which fall under those.

    This does not mean DDO would have to close up shop or even stop selling X, Y, and Z in their store. They may have to add disclaimers, show odds of acquiring the most rare items on every transaction, add daily/weekly purchase amount limits, and take other such actions to protect from extreme compulsive behavior in order to comply.

  5. #25
    Community Member Yamani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in the states
    Posts
    1,057

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    The ability to buy your way past earning progression in game is a competitive advantage. (yes people do "compete" in PVE games) This is the "artificial difficulty" they are talking about, because in order to get people to do this they need to have a time sync in front of them which entices them to do so. I know players will try to parse the words and lawyer the terms to create the illusion of minimizing the impact, but objective observers (people who do not play the game and look in from the outside) got past this some time ago, and did not buy into the "it can be earned in game at a rate orders of magnitude slower than just paying for it, so all is fine" mentality.
    You cant say others are parsing the words and lawyering the terms while you take 2 words from the one sheet and go with that. For everyone else here is the: One sheet

    Also here is the senators Twitter post Where he mentions this is to stop companies from explicitly exploiting on children's addictions to make profits

  6. #26
    Community Member NemesisAlien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Look up, way up, in space.
    Posts
    1,183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamani View Post
    You cant say others are parsing the words and lawyering the terms while you take 2 words from the one sheet and go with that. For everyone else here is the: One sheet

    Also here is the senators Twitter post Where he mentions this is to stop companies from explicitly exploiting on children's addictions to make profits
    How about 2nd childhood?


  7. #27
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    26,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamani View Post
    You cant say others are parsing the words and lawyering the terms while you take 2 words from the one sheet and go with that. For everyone else here is the: One sheet
    I sure can, because the definitions people are parsing and lawyering here are not congruent with how this is defined per legislation, both this bill, and legislation in other areas.

    Are you claiming DDO does not fall under this description:
    Manipulation of a game’s progression system – typically by building artificial difficulty
    or other barriers into game progression – to induce players to spend money on
    microtransactions to advance through content supposedly available to them at no additional cost
    DDO literally implemented a progression system, into a setting that uses "artificial difficulty" (nerfing DPS and self healing on a per skull basis)

    Example: The claim of "its not competitive because its a PVE game" will hold precisely and exactly zero water if it ever needs to be arbitrated, due to the above.
    Example2: The claim of "it can be earned in game so all is fine" will also not hold up to arbitration against the above.

    I use these examples as both were used quite often when people supported the current monetization methods hand over fist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamani View Post
    Also here is the senators Twitter post Where he mentions this is to stop companies from explicitly exploiting on children's addictions to make profits
    “When a game is designed for kids, game developers shouldn’t be allowed to monetize addiction,” Hawley said in a press release. “And when kids play games designed for adults, they should be walled off from compulsive microtransactions.
    If anyone believes it will stop here, they arent being objective (and/or have done little/no research on laws in other areas). The language of helping the children is used to pull the heart strings in order to get the bill passed without having to engage in heavy debates which will end up in analysis paralysis. Once it is passed it will be followed up with other measures, as similar laws have in other areas of the world. This is essentially the first step in bringing the US current with other "western" countries in how this is handled. First its the children, then its people with compulsive gambling habits, then its...yeah you get the picture.

    Keep in mind I am not predicting gloom and doom, just stating that the parsing of terms seen often on these forums to dismiss that any harm is done with any of this will not hold water when arbitrated against the wording of the legislation objectively. And by objectively I mean by enforcers who have no emotional attachment to the game system and no vested interest in protecting the system or how it is monetized.
    Last edited by Chai; 05-09-2019 at 02:45 PM.

  8. #28
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    801

    Default

    Yeah, seems to me if you pass this and interpret it consistently, you basically outlaw all business models EXCEPT:

    paid by advertising or
    Paid by monthly subscription, with NO premium types of subscriptions that give extra benefits (because that would be 'pay to win'), or
    Paid in a lump sum

    So no astral shards or chest rerolls or even DDO store items. The ability to roll ddo dice for shards would be straight out too.

  9. #29
    Community Member Yamani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in the states
    Posts
    1,057

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    I sure can, because the definitions people are parsing and lawyering here are not congruent with how this is defined per legislation, both this bill, and legislation in other areas.

    Are you claiming DDO does not fall under this description:

    DDO literally implemented a progression system, into a setting that uses "artificial difficulty" (nerfing DPS and self healing on a per skull basis)

    Example: The claim of "its not competitive because its a PVE game" will hold precisely and exactly zero water if it ever needs to be arbitrated, due to the above.
    Example2: The claim of "it can be earned in game so all is fine" will also not hold up to arbitration against the above.

    I use these examples as both were used quite often when people supported the current monetization methods hand over fist.





    If anyone believes it will stop here, they arent being objective (and/or have done little/no research on laws in other areas). The language of helping the children is used to pull the heart strings in order to get the bill passed without having to engage in heavy debates which will end up in analysis paralysis. Once it is passed it will be followed up with other measures, as similar laws have in other areas of the world. This is essentially the first step in bringing the US current with other "western" countries in how this is handled. First its the children, then its people with compulsive gambling habits, then its...yeah you get the picture.

    Keep in mind I am not predicting gloom and doom, just stating that the parsing of terms seen often on these forums to dismiss that any harm is done with any of this will not hold water when arbitrated against the wording of the legislation objectively. And by objectively I mean by enforcers who have no emotional attachment to the game system and no vested interest in protecting the system or how it is monetized.
    Seeing as this is the 5th time a bill like this has been proposed it will most likely fail again or be extremely limited in its power due to $. At best COPPA laws will limit it to the games that target the ages 13 and under as that is their jurisdiction. Probably the only way it will pass, is to "protect the children" in the parents stead.

    I personally don't see DDO praying on kids addictions as the player base is generally much older then 13 so I see this as to have little effect that will happen at all. Micro transactions aren't shoved in your face, they aren't needed or even giving real progression at all besides time saving.

    I'll go find the quote later but the senator did say they where more looking towards the games that have a limited amount of play times with the ability to spend money to get unlimited lives to skip the time for lives to refill.

  10. #30
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    26,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamani View Post
    Seeing as this is the 5th time a bill like this has been proposed it will most likely fail again or be extremely limited in its power due to $. At best COPPA laws will limit it to the games that target the ages 13 and under as that is their jurisdiction. Probably the only way it will pass, is to "protect the children" in the parents stead.

    I personally don't see DDO praying on kids addictions as the player base is generally much older then 13 so I see this as to have little effect that will happen at all. Micro transactions aren't shoved in your face, they aren't needed or even giving real progression at all besides time saving.

    I'll go find the quote later but the senator did say they where more looking towards the games that have a limited amount of play times with the ability to spend money to get unlimited lives to skip the time for lives to refill.
    No such wording exists on the bill however.

    You are reading what the Senator says. He can talk about protecting the kids all he wants to lobby it in. That doesnt mean the law is limited to this.

    I am looking at the One Sheet directly. While there is language there about the intent, the actual definitions they have listed for p2w are not limited by age.

    Microtransactions offering randomized or partially randomized rewards to players
    Pay-to-Win
    • Manipulation of a game’s progression system – typically by building artificial difficulty
    or other barriers into game progression – to induce players to spend money on
    microtransactions to advance through content supposedly available to them at no
    additional cost
    • Pay-to-win - Manipulation of the competitive balance between players of multiplayer
    games by allowing players who purchase microtransactions competitive advantages
    over other players

  11. #31
    DDO Players Council Renvar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,893

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    Example: The claim of "its not competitive because its a PVE game" will hold precisely and exactly zero water if it ever needs to be arbitrated, due to the above.
    Sure it will hold water. You can't claim competitive advantage is being sold in a game without competition.

    The games that are egregiously exploiting youth are MOBA and mobile strategy games like League of Legends, Overwatch, Battlefield, Clash of Clans, Game of War, and Game of Thrones.

    Your personal, regularly voiced and documented, opinion for years has been that DDO's progression systems are excessive and a revenue model designed around bypassing them is detrimental to the game. You talk about setting personal bias aside and looking at this objectively. Give it a try.
    Asheras - Velania - Renvar - Ventarya - Officer in Loreseekers and Officer of Lava Divers - Khyber

  12. #32
    Community Member voxson5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamani View Post
    Where has ddo not disclosed the odds of chance of loot? Chests have been disclosed openly in a forum post awhile back, daily dice its right their as you hit the roll button, and collectables crates are based on the tier they represent.
    Has the % chance for mythic tiers & reaper bonuses been disclosed?

    Adding to that, consider the carrot of treasure hunters potions from the store & daily dice, and elixers of discovery which are exclusive to daily dice.

  13. #33
    DDO Players Council Renvar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,893

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamani View Post
    Seeing as this is the 5th time a bill like this has been proposed it will most likely fail again or be extremely limited in its power due to $. At best COPPA laws will limit it to the games that target the ages 13 and under as that is their jurisdiction. Probably the only way it will pass, is to "protect the children" in the parents stead.
    The video game industry is a 18 billion dollar a year industry in the US alone. Plenty of money for lobbying.
    Asheras - Velania - Renvar - Ventarya - Officer in Loreseekers and Officer of Lava Divers - Khyber

  14. #34
    Community Member Yamani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in the states
    Posts
    1,057

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    No such wording exists on the bill however.

    You are reading what the Senator says. He can talk about protecting the kids all he wants to lobby it in. That doesnt mean the law is limited to this.

    I am looking at the One Sheet directly. While there is language there about the intent, the actual definitions they have listed for p2w are not limited by age.
    Straight from the one sheet:
    This would be determined by subject matter, visual content, and other indicators
    similar to those used to determine applicability of the Children’s Online Privacy
    Protection Act (COPPA)
    Only reason I mentioned 13 and under is literally because thats is what the COPPA laws protect. Ages 13 and under, while this bill may say 18 and younger, the senator mentions children and minors in other sources.
    I expect the gaming industry to try its best to keep its highest source of income protected so they will be against this bill and it will most likely fail again.

  15. #35
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    26,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Renvar View Post
    Sure it will hold water. You can't claim competitive advantage is being sold in a game without competition.
    Cant claim "no competition" simply due to PVE status.

    There are quite a few game first and server first accomplishment threads where hilarious arguments ensued which can be cited by any lawyer worth their salt when that time comes.

    All of which are archived.
    Last edited by Chai; 05-09-2019 at 04:16 PM.

  16. #36
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    26,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yamani View Post
    Only reason I mentioned 13 and under is literally because thats is what the COPPA laws protect. Ages 13 and under, [b]while this bill may say 18 and younger, the senator mentions children and minors in other sources.[b]
    I expect the gaming industry to try its best to keep its highest source of income protected so they will be against this bill and it will most likely fail again.
    You quoted the first stipulation only, heres the second.

    Games with wider audiences whose developers knowingly allow minor players to
    engage in microtransactions
    We can talk about other sources all we like, but what will be enforced is the bill (law) itself.

    All this "children must be protected" language is to lobby in step 1. After that it will be to protect those with compulsive gambling/spending mindsets. this is what happens when they cant pass a blanket statement version. They start chipping away at different groups and different conditions.

    It doesnt stop at step 1.
    Last edited by Chai; 05-09-2019 at 04:18 PM.

  17. #37
    The Hatchery Enoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    9,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    Cant claim "no competition" simply due to PVE status.

    There are quite a few game first and server first accomplishment threads where hilarious arguments ensued which can be cited by any lawyer worth their salt when that time comes.

    All of which are archived.
    True there are the accomplishments and bragging rights from progression.

    But at least in DDO, that and a couple bucks can get you a cup of coffee at the local diner.

    There will have to be a clear definition on what is being competed as well as what advantage being top in the competition grants you. I'm pretty sure that without a tangible gain for being at the top it will be a rather difficult argument to make - But my client can't post about being really really good at...

  18. #38
    DDO Players Council Renvar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,893

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post

    There are quite a few game first and server first accomplishment threads where hilarious arguments ensued which can be cited by any lawyer worth their salt when that time comes.

    All of which are archived.
    Yeah. That's going to fly, legally. You can't hold the developer accountable for how players choose to act on internet forums. The game developer does not provide any in game leader boards, scoring or tracking systems or support competitive play in any way. The game systems do not even support friendly fire. The game, as designed by the developer, is cooperative in nature. Sure, there is an outmoded PvP component that has not been supported by the developer in 10 years. Not a single mod or update. The PvP forum section has two threads created in 2019 and less than 10 posts in 2019. 2018 saw 3 threads all year. Clearly it is not a PvP game.

    A handful of individual players acting like competitive children amongst each themselves on internet forums does not, in fact, make the game a competitive game, by definition. The intended design of the developer is relevant and instructive.

    Objectivity is the goal here. I don't like a progression based revenue model either, but this isn't the smoking gun.
    Asheras - Velania - Renvar - Ventarya - Officer in Loreseekers and Officer of Lava Divers - Khyber

  19. #39
    Community Member Chai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, birthplace of D&D
    Posts
    26,576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Renvar View Post
    Yeah. That's going to fly, legally. You can't hold the developer accountable for how players choose to act on internet forums. The game developer does not provide any in game leader boards, scoring or tracking systems or support competitive play in any way. The game systems do not even support friendly fire. The game, as designed by the developer, is cooperative in nature. Sure, there is an outmoded PvP component that has not been supported by the developer in 10 years. Not a single mod or update. The PvP forum section has two threads created in 2019 and less than 10 posts in 2019. 2018 saw 3 threads all year. Clearly it is not a PvP game.

    A handful of individual players acting like competitive children amongst each themselves on internet forums does not, in fact, make the game a competitive game, by definition. The intended design of the developer is relevant and instructive.

    Objectivity is the goal here. I don't like a progression based revenue model either, but this isn't the smoking gun.
    Competition cannot be claimed to "not exist" simply because the players arent trying to kill each-others characters. People are racing to complete content first. Not only is there evidence of this, there is evidence of people arguing about it for many pages, in enough threads. This is not simply some players behaving poorly on forums. It goes well beyond that.

    Even if you were somehow to win on that...which is not likely...

    This is not even the thing that described DDO the most in this bill, per one of my previous posts:

    • Manipulation of a game’s progression system – typically by building artificial difficulty
    or other barriers into game progression – to induce players to spend money on
    microtransactions to advance through content supposedly available to them at no
    additional cost
    Attempting to parse lawyer or wordsmith that this doesnt happen in DDO, would be laughable.

    Note there is no language of "forcing" players to spend - something many folks who justified this in the past seemed to get hung up on regularly.

    Just about every microtrans game would have to make some adjustments. There are some which sell cosmetics only, which would not have to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Renvar View Post

    A handful of individual players acting like competitive children amongst each themselves on internet forums does not, in fact, make the game a competitive game, by definition. The intended design of the developer is relevant and instructive.
    With objectivity being the goal, those who have a vested interest in defending their own monetizing model will not be among those labeled as objective.
    Last edited by Chai; 05-09-2019 at 05:03 PM.

  20. #40
    DDO Players Council Renvar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,893

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai View Post
    Attempting to parse lawyer or wordsmith that this doesnt happen in DDO, would be laughable.

    Note there is no language of "forcing" players to spend - something many folks who justified this in the past seemed to get hung up on regularly.

    Just about every microtrans game would have to make some adjustments. There are some which sell cosmetics only, which would not have to.
    You are assuming that language in the bill can even get to law level. Good luck with that. With XP pots or otto's boxes, there is no uncertainty or gambling or chance or addiction component. Just consumers making informed choices. Maybe you have to do something about underage players, but adults choosing to buy known quantity goods? You think that is something the government should be legislating? I don't think it is good for the health of the game, but that is a far different discussion from whether it should be illegal.

    You are talking about killing entire market segments out of existence. What is Game of War, Clash of Clans, or Game of Thrones (or any of that genre)'s revenue model? Just about every PvP game monetizes player power/progression and combat boosts as their core concept. I don't enjoy any of those games or play them but a lot of people do and they generate a lot of money. None of which is randomized or chance. It is just informed decisions by, mostly, consenting adults. Any consumer can make the choice to just not play those games. That's what I do.

    What problem are they even trying to solve here?

    I get the issues with loot boxes and gambling in games where the odds are not posted and consumers might be making un-informed decisions. That should be addressed. Especially as related to children engaging with those game components.
    Last edited by Renvar; 05-10-2019 at 09:35 AM.
    Asheras - Velania - Renvar - Ventarya - Officer in Loreseekers and Officer of Lava Divers - Khyber

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload