Australian Study Faults Video Game Loot Boxes

The purchase of in-game “loot boxes” is being called predatory gambling by an Australian University of Adelaide Study. The study found that the purchases are designed in such a way that “disguise or withhold the long‐term cost of the activity until players are already financially and psychologically committed.”

Australian Study Faults Video Game Loot Boxes

A new study is calling the in-game purchase of loot boxes in video games “predatory” and similar to gambling.

The study from the University of Adelaide’s School of Psychology was published in the journal Addiction.

Researchers found that loot boxes—undisclosed caches of in-game items and gameplay features—posed long-term financial risk to vulnerable players. Loot boxes have been widely criticized because their contents are not revealed until after purchase, meaning that players are “gambling” on receiving desirable features when they purchase them.

The study found that the purchases are designed in such a way that “disguise or withhold the long‐term cost of the activity until players are already financially and psychologically committed.”

“These schemes may entice some players to spend more money than they may have intended or can afford, especially when using credit cards or virtual currency that makes it hard to keep track of spending,” said Dr. Daniel King, senior research associate at the school. “Since loot boxes require no player skill and have a randomly determined outcome or prize, they function similarly to scratch tickets or gambling slot machines.”

The sale of loot boxes is often accompanied by “predatory monetization,” in which the system might exploit its knowledge of the player to adjust the prices of virtual items depending on their spending habits, the study said. The study also makes note of “pressuring tactics,” such as limited time offers to push people into spending more money than they can afford.

The study concludes that more consumer protections are needed.

“The main concern isn’t simply protecting the vulnerable, but the impressionable younger players that “may be particularly less equipped to critically appraise the value proposition of these schemes,” King said.

Meanwhile, a study released in the UK by the group Now Parent zone found that as many as 400,000 British teens have been into under-aged gambling through video games. The study focused on the direct gambling and trading of “skins”—the same type of in-game items found in loot boxes.

The study found that many UK teens are using money made from trading the virtual items to play on more conventional gambling sites.

The group—an advice service for parents and schools—is demanding action to block skins being used to serve as a digital currency that can be gambled and cashed out.

The studies also come as French regulators have also criticized the use of loot boxes in video games but stopped short of announcing regulations for their use.

The regulator ARJEL discussed in its 2017-2018 activity report its findings on loot boxes and how the regulatory authority for online games planned to respond to them.

The report acknowledges that loot boxes are worth particular attention since there are no age control on their use and that they normalize gambling behaviors in young people, but stops short of calling the trading of the boxes gambling. The report also notes that French law does not currently require that odds for gaining desired items be posted.

The report, however, does not call for regulation, but does call for better analysis of loot boxes by financial regulators and a combined consensus across Europe.

Finally, Daryl Holt a vice president for game maker EA Sorts recently told the website gamesindustry.biz that the company feels its loot box features are legal and sustainable, especially as the company has begun posting odds for gaining valuable items.

 

“You know exactly what you’re getting, you have disclosure on the assets that you buy. It’s not gambling; we provide the pack odds so you know what might pop up in a pack, there is no real-world currency value to any of the assets,” he said. “There’s a distinct disconnect between what’s being said, what’s being asked about and what’s being thought about versus what’s actually in the industry… I can’t answer the question on where it might go or what might happen, we can just continue to make the best experience for players.”

EA Sports game Star Wars Battlefront II was one of the main games to draw the attention of regulators and problem gambling advocates due to its use of loot boxes. EA temporarily suspended the use of loot boxes in the game in response.