scholarly journals Regulating loot boxes as gambling? Towards a combined legal and self-regulatory consumer protection approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-47
Author(s):  
Leon Y. Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Video Games ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Real World ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Approach ◽  
Psychology Literature ◽  
Harmful Effects ◽  
A Current

Loot boxes represent a popular and prevalent contemporary monetization innovation in video games that offers the purchasing player-consumer, who always pays a set amount of money for each attempt, the opportunity to obtain randomized virtual rewards of uncertain in-game and real-world value. Loot boxes have been, and continue to be, scrutinized by regulators and policymakers because their randomized nature is akin to gambling. The regulation of loot boxes is a current and challenging international public policy and consumer protection issue. This article reviews the psychology literature on the potential harms of loot boxes and applies the behavioural economics literature in order to identify the potentially abusive nature and harmful effects of loot boxes, which justify their regulation. This article calls on the industry to publish loot box spending data and cooperate with independent empirical research to avoid overregulation. By examining existing regulation, this article identifies the flaws of the ‘regulate-loot-boxes-as-gambling’ approach and critiques the alternative consumer protection approach of adopting ethical game design, such as disclosing the probabilities of obtaining randomized rewards and setting maximum spending limits. This article recommends a combined legal and self-regulatory approach: the law should set out a minimum acceptable standard of consumer protection and industry self-regulation should strive to achieve an even higher standard.

scholarly journals Regulating Loot Boxes as Gambling? Towards a Combined Legal and Self-Regulatory Consumer Protection Approach

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Y. Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Video Games ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Real World ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Approach ◽  
Psychology Literature ◽  
Harmful Effects ◽  
A Current

Loot boxes represent a popular and prevalent contemporary monetisation innovation in video games that offers the purchasing player-consumer, who always pays a set amount of money for each attempt, the opportunity to obtain randomised virtual rewards of uncertain in-game and real-world value. Loot boxes have been and continue to be scrutinised by regulators and policymakers because their randomised nature is akin to gambling. The regulation of loot boxes is a current and challenging international public policy and consumer protection issue. This paper reviews the psychology literature on the potential harms of loot boxes and applies the behavioural economics literature in order to identify the potentially abusive nature and harmful effects of loot boxes, which justify their regulation. This paper calls on the industry to publish loot box spending data and cooperate with independent empirical research to avoid overregulation. By examining existing regulation, this paper identifies the flaws of the ‘regulate loot boxes as gambling’ approach and critiques the alternative consumer protection approach of adopting ethical game design, such as disclosing the probabilities of obtaining randomised rewards and setting maximum spending limits. This paper recommends a combined legal and self-regulatory approach: the law should set out minimal acceptable standards of consumer protection and industry self-regulation should thrive to achieve an even higher standard.

scholarly journals Regulating Loot Boxes as Gambling? Towards a Combined Legal and Self-Regulatory Consumer Protection Approach

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Y. Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Video Games ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Real World ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Approach ◽  
Psychology Literature ◽  
Harmful Effects ◽  
A Current

Loot boxes represent a popular and prevalent contemporary monetisation innovation in video games that offers the purchasing player-consumer, who always pays a set amount of money for each attempt, the opportunity to obtain randomised virtual rewards of uncertain in-game and real-world value. Loot boxes have been and continue to be scrutinised by regulators and policymakers because their randomised nature is akin to gambling. The regulation of loot boxes is a current and challenging international public policy and consumer protection issue. This paper reviews the psychology literature on the potential harms of loot boxes and applies the behavioural economics literature in order to identify the potentially abusive nature and harmful effects of loot boxes, which justify their regulation. This paper calls on the industry to publish loot box spending data and cooperate with independent empirical research to avoid overregulation. By examining existing regulation, this paper identifies the flaws of the ‘regulate loot boxes as gambling’ approach and critiques the alternative consumer protection approach of adopting ethical game design, such as disclosing the probabilities of obtaining randomised rewards and setting maximum spending limits. This paper recommends a combined legal and self-regulatory approach: the law should set out minimal acceptable standards of consumer protection and industry self-regulation should thrive to achieve an even higher standard.

scholarly journals Regulating Loot Boxes as Gambling? Towards a Combined Legal and Self-Regulatory Consumer Protection Approach

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Y. Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Video Games ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Real World ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Approach ◽  
Psychology Literature ◽  
Harmful Effects ◽  
A Current

Loot boxes represent a popular and prevalent contemporary monetisation innovation in video games that offers the purchasing player-consumer, who always pays a set amount of money for each attempt, the opportunity to obtain randomised virtual rewards of uncertain in-game and real-world value. Loot boxes have been and continue to be scrutinised by regulators and policymakers because their randomised nature is akin to gambling. The regulation of loot boxes is a current and challenging international public policy and consumer protection issue. This paper reviews the psychology literature on the potential harms of loot boxes and applies the behavioural economics literature in order to identify the potentially abusive nature and harmful effects of loot boxes, which justify their regulation. This paper calls on the industry to publish loot box spending data and cooperate with independent empirical research to avoid overregulation. By examining existing regulation, this paper identifies the flaws of the ‘regulate loot boxes as gambling’ approach and critiques the alternative consumer protection approach of adopting ethical game design, such as disclosing the probabilities of obtaining randomised rewards and setting maximum spending limits. This paper recommends a combined legal and self-regulatory approach: the law should set out minimal acceptable standards of consumer protection and industry self-regulation should thrive to achieve an even higher standard.

scholarly journals Brief use of a specific gun in a violent game does not affect attitudes towards that gun

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (11) ◽  
pp. 160310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Hilgard ◽  
Christopher R. Engelhardt ◽  
Bruce D. Bartholow
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Video Games ◽  
Science Fiction ◽  
Real World ◽  
Political Party ◽  
Aggressive Behaviour ◽  
Product Placement ◽  
Gun Violence ◽  
Product Evaluations ◽  
Gun Ownership

Although much attention has been paid to the question of whether violent video games increase aggressive behaviour, little attention has been paid to how such games might encourage antecedents of gun violence. In this study, we examined how product placement, the attractive in-game presentation of certain real-world firearm brands, might encourage gun ownership, a necessary antecedent of gun violence. We sought to study how the virtual portrayal of a real-world firearm (the Bushmaster AR-15) could influence players' attitudes towards the AR-15 specifically and gun ownership in general. College undergraduates ( N  = 176) played one of four modified video games in a 2 (gun: AR-15 or science-fiction control) × 2 (gun power: strong or weak) between-subjects design. Despite collecting many outcomes and examining many potential covariates and moderators, experimental assignment did little to influence outcomes of product evaluations or purchasing intentions with regard to the AR-15. Attitudes towards public policy and estimation of gun safety were also not influenced by experimental condition, although these might have been better tested by comparison against a no-violence control condition. By contrast, gender and political party had dramatic associations with all outcomes. We conclude that, if product placement shapes attitudes towards firearms, such effects will need to be studied with stronger manipulations or more sensitive measures.

scholarly journals Towards an Ethical Game Design Solution to Loot Boxes: a Commentary on King and Delfabbro

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Y. Xiao ◽  
Laura L. Henderson
Keyword(s):  
Video Games ◽  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Video Game ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Design Solution ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Tax Relief ◽  
Game Industry

AbstractKing and Delfabbro (2019b) proposed the adoption of social responsibility measures to combat predatory monetisation in video games, such as loot boxes. This paper rectifies a game example mistakenly used by King and Delfabbro and provides further game examples to illustrate, critique and extend the proposed measures. This paper argues that the proposed measures are unlikely to be widely adopted by the video game industry, given the industry’s economic interests in the continued unhindered implementation of predatory monetisation, their preference for continued ‘self-regulation’ and their past resistance against potential regulation. With reference to South Korean law, this paper explores the possibility of codifying and enforcing the proposed measures as law and argues that overly paternalistic regulations are insensible and impractical. This paper recommends the use of regulatory nudging to encourage video game companies through incentives, such as discretionary grants and tax relief schemes, to adopt the proposed social responsibility measures and develop towards an ethical game design framework.

scholarly journals Towards an Ethical Game Design Solution to Loot Boxes: a Commentary on King and Delfabbro

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Y. Xiao ◽  
Laura L. Henderson
Keyword(s):  
Video Games ◽  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Video Game ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Design Solution ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Tax Relief ◽  
Game Industry

King and Delfabbro (2019b) proposed the adoption of social responsibility measures to combat predatory monetisation in video games, such as loot boxes. This paper rectifies a game example mistakenly used by King and Delfabbro and provides further game examples to illustrate, critique and extend the proposed measures. This paper argues that the proposed measures are unlikely to be widely adopted by the video game industry, given the industry’s economic interests in the continued unhindered implementation of predatory monetisation, their preference for continued ‘self-regulation’ and their past resistance against potential regulation. With reference to South Korean law, this paper explores the possibility of codifying and enforcing the proposed measures as law and argues that overly paternalistic regulations are insensible and impractical. This paper recommends the use of regulatory nudging to encourage video game companies through incentives, such as discretionary grants and tax relief schemes, to adopt the proposed social responsibility measures and develop towards an ethical game design framework.

Employing Co-Design in the Video Game Design Process

2012 ◽  
pp. 1048-1063 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg Walsh
Keyword(s):  
Social Behavior ◽  
Video Games ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Video Game ◽  
Real World ◽  
Game Design ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Intended Audience ◽  
Video Game Design ◽  
Design Techniques

Innovative and engaging video games can be created if the target audience is included in the design process. Co-design is the process of working with your intended audience as colleagues in the design of technology. Co-design requires techniques that bring together designers in a way to create new technologies. New design techniques are developed to be used in real-world situations, but they require refinement through their own use. Video games offer technique designers an abundant source of material to design and refine techniques in real-world scenarios. This chapter discusses co-design, and the use of co-design techniques in the design of a serious video game to explore history, to help children be more environmentally minded, and a virtual world that reinforces positive social behavior.

scholarly journals What are the odds? Lower compliance with Western loot box probability disclosure industry self-regulation than Chinese legal regulation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Y. Xiao ◽  
Laura L. Henderson ◽  
Philip Warren Stirling Newall
Keyword(s):  
Video Games ◽  
Harm Reduction ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Compliance Rate ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Protection Measure ◽  
Gambling Harm ◽  
Disclosure Rate

Loot boxes are purchased to obtain randomised rewards in video games. These mechanics are frequently implemented, including in children’s games, and are psychologically akin to gambling. Emulating gambling harm reduction measures, disclosing the probabilities of obtaining loot box rewards is a consumer protection measure that may reduce overspending. Presently, this has been adopted as law only in China, where a 95.6% disclosure rate was previously observed. In other countries, the industry has generally adopted this measure as self-regulation. This study assessed the compliance rate of self-regulation amongst the 100 highest-grossing UK iPhone games to be 64.0%, significantly lower than that of Chinese legal regulation. Additionally, only 6.7% of games containing first-party implemented loot boxes made reasonably prominent disclosures. Non-enforced Western self-regulation needs substantial improvements before it can be as effective as legal regulation: until then, uniform and prominent disclosures should be required by law to maximise their consumer protection benefits.

scholarly journals Probability disclosures are not enough: Reducing loot box reward complexity as a part of ethical video game design

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Y. Xiao ◽  
Philip Warren Stirling Newall
Keyword(s):  
Video Games ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Video Game ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Digital Goods ◽  
Protection Measures ◽  
Video Game Design

Loot boxes in video games provide randomised rewards that bear structural similarities to gambling. Current loot box consumer protection measures, such as requiring probability disclosures, have been inspired by similar approaches in gambling. However, current loot box rewards are too complex for consumers to be meaningfully protected by probability disclosures alone. But as digital goods, loot boxes can be redesigned in more ethical ways. Four reductions to loot box reward complexity are proposed: capping the maximum number of loot boxes per game and potential rewards per loot box, equalising ‘winning’ probabilities across rewards, and implementing ‘exhaustible’ loot boxes.

Critical Protocols in Indigenous Gamespace

2021 ◽  
pp. 155541202110053
Author(s):  
Joshua D. Miner
Keyword(s):  
Video Games ◽  
Real World ◽  
Game Design ◽  
Environmental Politics ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Ecological Values

This article examines Indigenous video games that critique mainstream environmental politics at the level of mechanics. An analysis of video games’ influences on ecological values requires looking beyond the representational to the mechanical relationships between player and software. As a cultural–computational medium, video games are embedded with ethics of interaction that inflect this representational dimension by requiring that players generate the text as participant. With the recent visibility of Indigenous rights movements, developers have embedded Indigenous cultural protocols in the mechanical interactions (or technical protocols) of gameplay. In the context of critique, their integration produces “critical protocols,” configurations of gamic action that encourage players to evaluate their treatment of real-world environments. Critical protocols emerge between the technical and cultural, where scripts for interaction in algorithmic spaces intervene in affirmative game design and work as an analog beyond the game. Indigenous developers call for new ways of computing and critiquing settler digitality through play. These games aim toward representational as well as computational sovereignty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document