By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - 4 games found to be violating Dutch gambling laws, publishers will have 8 weeks to adjust their games or risk getting fined or having the sale of their game banned

Nem said:
VAMatt said:

People are responsible for themselves.  If you don't like loot boxes so much, don't play those games.  Or, do like I do (I don't like loot boxes), and just don't buy the boxes

 

That's not how it works. A country is a state, a society. It needs to protect it's citizens to be able to function properly. This includes protecting minors above all and protecting citizens from predatory behaviour. You are part of a society, you don't live "by yourself". People in society help protect each other. It's how we survived, and it's why they exist.

You're telling me that  in order for humans to survive, we have to tell each other what leisure activities were allowed to engage in? That's a load of crap.



Around the Network
VAMatt said:
Nem said:

 

That's not how it works. A country is a state, a society. It needs to protect it's citizens to be able to function properly. This includes protecting minors above all and protecting citizens from predatory behaviour. You are part of a society, you don't live "by yourself". People in society help protect each other. It's how we survived, and it's why they exist.

You're telling me that  in order for humans to survive, we have to tell each other what leisure activities were allowed to engage in? That's a load of crap.

And you're telling me that in order for capitalism to thrive, we need the state, the whole thing that upholds and maintains it, to be involved as little as possible?



VGPolyglot said:
VAMatt said:

You're telling me that  in order for humans to survive, we have to tell each other what leisure activities were allowed to engage in? That's a load of crap.

And you're telling me that in order for capitalism to thrive, we need the state, the whole thing that upholds and maintains it, to be involved as little as possible?

By definition, capitalism requires free markets. I think you're mistaking it for corporatism, like we have now,   where government and business conspire to control your life.



VGPolyglot said:
VAMatt said:

What win do you see?  I see only violation of property rights, and basic government overreach.  

Property rights? Whose?

The owners of the games, and the owners of whatever  items were talking about.



VAMatt said:
VGPolyglot said:

And you're telling me that in order for capitalism to thrive, we need the state, the whole thing that upholds and maintains it, to be involved as little as possible?

By definition, capitalism requires free markets. I think you're mistaking it for corporatism, like we have now,   where government and business conspire to control your life.

So, if the state doesn't enforce property laws, verdicts of disputes, etc. then how can it exist? In regards to this thread specifically, we have a video game that is in violation of a law. Now, why is that law in place? Unfortunately I don't know the roots of the law so I can't answer it out of anything more than speculation, but knowing that would really help us understand what is going on.



Around the Network
Immersiveunreality said:

First bolded : People cannot help themselves, thats also why our society teaches others about the dangers of all kind of addictions and invest money into it, its in a way selfish saying others should just make better choices instead of trying to help and give up that one game you like to play.

Second bolded : Again parents should be better parents but they arent and  this parenting fail results in children exposed to gambling, so thinking the children do not deserve protection against that comes over as selfish. It is wrong to allow people EVERYTHING they want to do because it would break down the structure of our society and things would turn into anarchy leading to violence .

Strawman much?  At no point did I say children do not need or deserve protection. They absolutely do. The only thing I said, is that government banning things is not an appropriate way to do it. It infringes upon the rights of others, and it does not help children develop the life skills that they will need to take care of themselves.  So, it hurts those same children in some respects, and hurts everyone else by limiting their choices and taking away their basic human right to do what they wish with their own property.



Bristow9091 said:
Well I found out what the games are;
https://www.playstationtrophies.org/news/news-24798-Dutch-Gambling-Legislation-Calls-For-Changes-to-Loot-Boxes.html

"The study deemed that FIFA 18, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds, Rocket League, and Dota 2 contravened the act, stating that the acquisition of loot boxes required no skill and contained items that had a market value outside the confines of the game. Should the developers fail to take action and implement changes by 20th June, they'll potentially face a fine or the possibility of the game being prohibited in Holland."

I guess CS:GO isn't one of them... shame lol.

 Those are all extremely popular games as is, and the publishers are likely not going to change the games over one small country’s laws. They might as well just walk away from this one lol 



0331 Happiness is a belt-fed weapon

VAMatt said:
Immersiveunreality said:

First bolded : People cannot help themselves, thats also why our society teaches others about the dangers of all kind of addictions and invest money into it, its in a way selfish saying others should just make better choices instead of trying to help and give up that one game you like to play.

Second bolded : Again parents should be better parents but they arent and  this parenting fail results in children exposed to gambling, so thinking the children do not deserve protection against that comes over as selfish. It is wrong to allow people EVERYTHING they want to do because it would break down the structure of our society and things would turn into anarchy leading to violence .

Strawman much?  At no point did I say children do not need or deserve protection. They absolutely do. The only thing I said, is that government banning things is not an appropriate way to do it. It infringes upon the rights of others, and it does not help children develop the life skills that they will need to take care of themselves.  So, it hurts those same children in some respects, and hurts everyone else by limiting their choices and taking away their basic human right to do what they wish with their own property.

Not a strawman at all and what an illogical thing to say when you are directing the blame to parents while not presenting a solution, it is almost like you are using that as a strawman . :p

You can never do what you wish with your own property, you can do what you want as long as it is legal.If you want to do what you want with you're own property you better go looking for a less rich country to live in, we in this society have rules to sustain our the good lifestyle , even company's . 

I only see positives for consumers in this and we will not agree on this so have a good day.



VGPolyglot said:
VAMatt said:

By definition, capitalism requires free markets. I think you're mistaking it for corporatism, like we have now,   where government and business conspire to control your life.

So, if the state doesn't enforce property laws, verdicts of disputes, etc. then how can it exist? In regards to this thread specifically, we have a video game that is in violation of a law. Now, why is that law in place? Unfortunately I don't know the roots of the law so I can't answer it out of anything more than speculation, but knowing that would really help us understand what is going on.

I have no idea why the laws in place. I assume it had some sort of stated purpose like protecting people from predatory organizations that seek to separate them from their money. In reality, it probably exist because the gaming industry, or the government, if they run the lotteries, decided they don't want competition.

 

Capitalism does not require a governmental structure to exist. Almost all disputes are settled privately right now.   Statistically speaking, it is only a very tiny percentage of property disputes that end up being adjudicated by the state. I don't see why we couldn't expand that to all of them.



VAMatt said:
Nem said:

 

That's not how it works. A country is a state, a society. It needs to protect it's citizens to be able to function properly. This includes protecting minors above all and protecting citizens from predatory behaviour. You are part of a society, you don't live "by yourself". People in society help protect each other. It's how we survived, and it's why they exist.

You're telling me that  in order for humans to survive, we have to tell each other what leisure activities were allowed to engage in? That's a load of crap.

 

We don't "have to" tell each other. People vote on representatives and assemblies/senates legislate on policy to protect the population. This is as basic as getting an army. We are in countries, we are not in no-man's land. None of us is. Your problem is you seem to only he capable of thinking of yourself, rather than the society you are in. Being responsible is one thing, protecting population from external attacks are another. Companies do not have the population's best interests in mind. They merely wish to make money at any cost (they would drug people if they needed. Some have done that in one way or another. Gambling is one such drug, used in the psychic level.). The state needs to protect their populations from such entities just like they protect them from unemployment with subsidies or from external invasion by having an army. Life in society. It's so part of you, you even forget it's there. Last edited by Nem - on 23 June 2018