Forums

Here's a more level-headed article that is not only more relevant to this thread topic but also talks about this so-called "publicity stunt" that you are apparently so interested about

https://kotaku.com/u-s-senator-says-his-anti-loot-box-bill-has-the-video-1834905639

Jason Schreier, a highly reputable journalist, actually went out to get in touch with Hawley to address the rumours instead of relying on speculations from the doomsayers and lootbox lobbyists

ESA and EA sweating bullets alright °l||l° Modest Skillers T7 Citadel | Skilling clan recruiting players. °l||l°
•ï¡÷¡ï• Cwar United for CW games/Ardy task/Trim req. •ï¡÷¡ï•
120 Summoning Familiar ideas .

24-May-2019 12:07:48 - Last edited on 24-May-2019 12:09:48 by UrekMazino

24-May-2019 12:12:29

UrekMazino said :
Strange, I swear this thread was talking about how the bill will affect TH, if it will at all, and not about data security or collection or whatever.

Strange, I swear I have clearly shown you the intention of Hawley and where would this Bill lead to, if it would ever passed in who know when, and that would be - Parental Control and Data Collection requirements in video games instead of banning of TH and pay-to-win MTX.

24-May-2019 15:40:25

The actual bill is here:

https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2019-05/Loot-Box-Bill-Text.pdf

Everybody can see it is 100% about children under 18 and 90% of it is about pay-to-win MTX. Gambling and such is not even addressed.

Oh, the Bill also extended the scope of coverage from game developers to publishers and distributors including individuals who accept virtual items/currencies. So if this Bill ever passed, don't promote any such "abusive games" if somebody receive just virtual items in return as gift for their efforts, or else these people would also be subject to a fine.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘‘add-on transaction’’ means, with respect to an interactive digital entertainment product, a payment to the game publisher of an interactive digital entertainment product, an affiliate of the publisher, or any other person who accepts such payment for the benefit of the publisher, of either money or an in-game proxy for money such as a virtual currency, that can be purchased with money

Oh yes, a lot of people would be sweating bullets but all the actual real game developers would just have to label and market their games as Mature or implement Parental Control which lets the parents to ban their own children from playing.

24-May-2019 15:46:13 - Last edited on 24-May-2019 15:49:17 by Dilbert2001

24-May-2019 16:37:21

UrekMazino said :
So you're saying that the bill could in fact affect TH then? What's the problem then?
Dilbert2001 said :
Oh yes, a lot of people would be sweating bullets but all the actual real game developers would just have to label and market their games as Mature or implement Parental Control which lets the parents to ban their own children from playing.
Wow what a simple solution! Who'd have thought? Oh wait, the reason they're worried is due to the potential loss in revenue.

---
Flawed bill being discussed and improved on.

The sky is blue.

More news at 9.

Thanks for reporting something that happens in every democratic nation everyday.

The Bill could affect ALL "abusive" MTX including bonds and even subscription and its derivatives that may give advantage to children too. Why does Jagex only have to worry about TH if they also have to worry about bonds, premier club, etc among a lot more other MTX which cover 90% of the context of the Bill?

Oh, Jagex have to worry about "losing revenue" from just TH, but not bonds and other MTX? The hell no. Either they have to worry about every MTX or they don't have to worry about anything at all.

In fact, loot boxes can be adjusted easily to comply with the bill. They can just give random buffs or armor enchantments among other boosts but bonds will certainly fail this bill since it directly gives pay-to-win benefits to everybody.

Oh does Jagex even have to care when only 2% of their players are children... and how many of them live in the USA? Or they can simply implement parental control which stops children to play Runescape in the USA once. That'll be extremely easy.

The video game community is more worried of this bill, not just the developers and publishers because it would certainly affect the marketing channels, distributors and promoters including even forumers and streamers.

24-May-2019 17:23:33 - Last edited on 24-May-2019 17:26:01 by Dilbert2001

26-May-2019 16:42:19

Sorry if you think Bond not pay-to-win and the Bill doesn't affect it you are completely dreaming. Unless gp can only be used to buy cosmetics, Bond is absolutely pay-to-win. The Bill doesn't allow pay-to-win, it doesn't say a company can implement pay-to-win mechanism to combat gold farming.

What? Nobody cares how many of a game's players are children? How come the UK Parliament asked Jagex about it? And jagex said 2%. Of course, Mr. Hawley cares and that's why this Bill is completely about protecting children. If a game has only 2% of child players, obviously it is not a child oriented game. If Jagex needs to put a "M" label on its game in the USA, so be it. What's the big deal when GTA and many CoD titles are rated "M" or even "R" in some contries? It doesn't bother their mature players, in fact most of them. It doesn't hurt Jagex at all if Runescape and OSRS are rated "M" in the USA.

What? I never said the bill will affect the game developers more than the individuals who make a living out of the games like streamers, bloggers or fansites, or vice versa. The Bill simply say these individuals will also have to carry the same responsibilities as the game developers and penalized the same way if these games violated the terms of the Bill. In fact, ESA said their 220,000 employees in the industry may be affected too, but certainly all kinds of game related companies and individuals not employeed by the game developers will be EQUALLY affected.

26-May-2019 17:47:22

26-May-2019 18:26:30 - Last edited on 26-May-2019 18:26:55 by UrekMazino

UrekMazino said :

Sorry if you think Bond not pay-to-win and the Bill doesn't affect it you are completely dreaming.

lol I didn't say that, I made a statement that is the exact opposite of that. Do you need to keep lying in order to make the winning argument?

What? Nobody cares how many of a game's players are children? How come the UK Parliament asked Jagex about it? And jagex said 2%. Of course, Mr. Hawley cares and that's why this Bill is completely about protecting children.If a game has only 2% of child players, obviously it is not a child oriented game.

They won't look at that number, they will only look at the maturity rating. And if its not a child oriented game, then why does Jagex need to censor npc puking and a brutal beat up. To protect our virgin 21 year old eyes? lol

What? I never said the bill will affect the game developers more than the individuals who make a living out of the games like streamers, bloggers or fansites, or vice versa.

Then why would they be more worried if it won't affect them more? A little self contradicting, no?

So what are you trying to say? Bond is definitely pay-to-win and will be outlawed by the Bill if it passed.

Whether a game is a child oriented game is already defined in the Bill. They used the COPPA standard. Nothing Jagex doing is defined as targeting children obviously. Did Jagex censor the dismemberment of the Skeletal Horror? Sometimes Jagex just want to make some content funnier, not that it has anything to do with children. The Bill said nothing about censoring whatever. Making up your own definition of COPPA obviously won't change how THE LAW works.

What? Who is worried mor about what? It won't matter anway because the Bill call for EQUAL standard and EQUAL punishment to developers and individuals like bloggers receiving money or pixels from the games too.

26-May-2019 19:06:29