Yes, risk is what is required for it to be gambling. Now, where is the risk?
There is a risk involved, the explanation will come with the things which have been spoken after your post, so here:
...
Study into loot boxes - A treasure or a burden?
Some points raised in the study:
- players pay for boxes
- rewards are random
- consumer cannot influence the outcome
- prizes are transferable
- prizes can be sold for real money
- can be addictive
- integral elements that are similar to slot machines (visual and sound effect)
- game goods from a loot box could have an effect on how other players in the game value the player
- in-game goods are always obtained when these loot boxes are opened
- the loot boxes are part of a game, but can also be played as a game in their own right
Even if lootboxes are not considered all of the above..
"As these loot boxes could nevertheless foster the development of addiction, these games are at odds with the objective of preventing addiction to organised games as much as possible."
Does Entropia check all the boxes?
Payed for Boxes - check
Reward is random - check
Outcome cannot be influenced - check (or at least no viable possibility to do so - yet)
prices are transferable - check, there are SOME in it.
prices can be sold for real money - check, since PED have a direct exchange rate with USD
can be addictive - a given, so check
similar effects to slot machines - check
value perceived by other players - check, rings fall in that category
goods are always inside - check
can be played as a game by itself - check
So, all those parts fall into the relevant category. Which means by definition those will be outlawed under the current writing.
Now, if we even take this further which will be discussed quite soon we can also divide those parts of 'immediately gained value' and 'secondary value'. This would effect universal ammo. Universal ammo can't be sold directly, it is therefore worthless in a real value sense, simply having a perceived value of the players rather then a real one. Shooting mobs with it turns it into an actual value, which in itself is a sort of gambling by definition. You could get a HOF, you could get out with 70% return in TT as well though.
Now the question is: will those secondary effects be discussed by law or not? As soon as any sensible person brings it to court, it'll definitely be, and therefore outlawed as well. This is definitely dangerous for the whole concept of the game as it stands right now, as it implies hunting and mining in general since those systems are tightly knitted with universal ammo at the moment, especially hunting, which can be seen as the major impactor of the game.
It wouldn't pose any sort of problem if the existing systems would be focused around a thriving market instead of the initial gamble of TT return for specific hunts, but that's one thing MA has never actually focused on yet.
All of those systems pose an existing risk for addiction which can be considered 'gambling' by the standards imposed by this, something I've spoken about happening 5 years ago already, now finally arriving. The question isn't if it'll affect Entropia rather then how. This leads to the question how MA will react on those things as their revenue will definitely take a major hit, especially if those systems I've described as 'secondary value' will fall under suspicion easily.
So, there's an easy way for MA to do it and a hard way, both have ups and downs.
The hard way is to fight with the court for every existing system which will dwindle their resources allocated to the game even more because of existing lawsuits, as well as shutting down more and more paths where they can get revenue, that's time intensive, expensive and dangerous for upholding the existing system.
The easy way is to remove every part which involves gambling by definition, which is due time. Meaning fixed TT returns instead of variables for any sort of activity, making the game boring but keeping them out of lawsuits which they would've to deal with and most likely loose. So their choice there is to change the game into a way to make it a thriving market instead of a thriving slot machine, a thing they've shown to be miserable at, so it's unlikely.
As it stands those laws imply not only the removing of loot-boxes, but also further limitations on game mechanics which are in place, actually putting the game into serious trouble should it go through. They've managed to milk the community since ages, and that's slowly coming to an end. I just wonder which way they'll go, disband and say 'ok, it's over', or actually take the effort to lead it to a good system in the future which isn't at the brink of being unlawful as it always was.
If you.. in game to another "player" choose to pay for something that have no value, it is up to you ! MA is only selling a key for 1 usd that guarantees you items worth 10 ped.
it's called market value! this is player vs player and that's what this game's economy is based on!
Or do you mean that if I buy a game and we sit in the park and play about money, it's the company that sells the game's responsibility ?
That's what this law is meant to prevent though, got a skin? Is it worth something in itself? No? Well, it is for another player, or even a large portion of the player-base. That's what those laws are meaning to prevent.
Skin-sales for CS:GO, Sales of randomized loot for real currency like in Battlefront 2, the 'ring-hunting' like in Entropia. All those things count for the same category, so what you're saying has no standing in front of a court, therefore it's false in the context of the law in the respective country. None of those things mentioned have initial value, ALL of them account for market value, that's why it took so long to get the decision out in the first place, otherwise Entropia and MA would still be fine.
I see two sides here right now, one side is reasonable and questions 'is it falling under the current laws or not?" while the other is blinded by emotion and yelling 'No, it isn't! I don't want to hear it if it might be otherwise', which.. sorry to say it bluntly, is a very dumb move. It might ruin your timeframe for chipping out of the worst comes to pass, and actually impede your fun in the future if you're not able to expect some major changes to happen.
If you don't want to look at the facts and implications... that's fine, but don't bother other people with mindless screams, keep them to yourself, they don't further any sort of discussion. As for those actually discussing things:
I'm curious as to how you guys see it going? Optimistic in the direction of 'MA will be able to handle it?' or rather towards 'It'll finally collapse as many have foreseen for so long'?
But lets stop to pretend the situation is new,it come out of nowhere,stop making all those big ayes "omg is EU gambling site i dint know that, its not my foult,what can I do now?".
