Monday, November 27th 2017
Industry Leaders and Experts Join Forces to Fight Against Loot Crates
As a result of the increasing external pressure for reform and regulation on the games industry, a group of industry leaders and experts has agreed to come together in a more permanent way, forming the National Committee for Games Policy (NCGP). We made this decision in response to the current crisis regarding the expansion of loot crate economies and concerns about unregulated online gambling, but also as an acceptance of a long in coming decision that we knew would eventually become necessary. Games are not represented or understood in the modern political and judicial world, and that needs to change.
Unlike the IGDA, we are not an association of game developers. We are a coalition of high level industry experts and influencers. Membership in the NCGP is by invite only. We will work on the behalf of games industry professionals of all political leanings. In order to do this, the NCGP has appointed a steering committee with significant political experience on both ends of the spectrum. Where video games, politics, and law intersect, you will be sure to find the NCGP.
The first action of the NCGP is its creation; a privately funded think tank known as the ITK. The work of the NCGP ITK is to represent itself as a group of consummate professionals from every part of the video game community. We seek to represent the entire industry, and as such will not release opinions on differences within the industry except as they relate to public policy. Members names will only be released if they give permission, and their writing reflects their own opinions. The NCGP will never take a position on policy; we will give policy makers the information the information they need to make informed decision. Our political connections will get this information to them.
The second and much more important arm of the NCGP is our establishment of the video game industry's first, and de facto, self regulatory organization. Independent of the think tank is the NCGP SRO. As an SRO, our purpose is to protect consumers from unscrupulous video game companies by investigating and bringing legal action against those companies that have damaged the public consciousness in some way, whether mental or physical. To do this we've enlisted the aid of game developer's employees as well. By establishing the first video game industry whistleblower center, we're able to help the video game industry fight things such as overtime pay.
As part of our work as an SRO, we will release a quarterly list of companies who we have cited and the reason for citation. While we do hope to help as many people as possible, a complaint doesn't become a citation without further investigation and action by the NCGP.
Unlike the IGDA, we are not an association of game developers. We are a coalition of high level industry experts and influencers. Membership in the NCGP is by invite only. We will work on the behalf of games industry professionals of all political leanings. In order to do this, the NCGP has appointed a steering committee with significant political experience on both ends of the spectrum. Where video games, politics, and law intersect, you will be sure to find the NCGP.
The second and much more important arm of the NCGP is our establishment of the video game industry's first, and de facto, self regulatory organization. Independent of the think tank is the NCGP SRO. As an SRO, our purpose is to protect consumers from unscrupulous video game companies by investigating and bringing legal action against those companies that have damaged the public consciousness in some way, whether mental or physical. To do this we've enlisted the aid of game developer's employees as well. By establishing the first video game industry whistleblower center, we're able to help the video game industry fight things such as overtime pay.
As part of our work as an SRO, we will release a quarterly list of companies who we have cited and the reason for citation. While we do hope to help as many people as possible, a complaint doesn't become a citation without further investigation and action by the NCGP.
50 Comments on Industry Leaders and Experts Join Forces to Fight Against Loot Crates
They are privately funded - thats a concern. Funded commissions tend to be self preservational. Their third action has to be the transparency of their funding sources. i.e. if EA gives them lots of cash we can expect loot boxes to be A-OK.
Earning money on games is fine, but becomes dishonest when people are tricked to pay more and more to unlock the game they've already purchased.
Edit: typo
Follow a simple rational before handing the cash:
Q1 - Does the additional content fall in your views as something that actually improves the original gameplay?
If yes:
Q2 - Do you feel it's worth the cash amount asked?
If yes, oh please do buy. If both or any of the answers are no, please find some sort of restraint and don't spend the money for fucks sake!
"Oh, but somebody think of the children!!"
Right, because parents aren't, so it seems. Or in the worse case, actually endorse the no self-restraint movement because they are no better. Be a parent, say "no".
The "but all my friends are playing it too" excuse is old by now. It wasn't the best when we were young and sure as hell doesn't hold ground today, with all the variety of stuff you can do to spend time.
Money is hard to get and spending it on a digital commodity doesn't entitle anyone to buyers remorse for the simple fact that 8h after a game release you can totally tell if it is any good and form an opinion.
This is assuming people can still form an opinion.
IMO, this "Joint forces" is just silly and unnecessary. It will just dwell down to something corrupt because money is involved and/or at stake.
Honestly gamers are partly to blame for the lootbox fiasco. Publishers are forced to keep the stale 59.99 pricing and yet the cost of gaming as skyrocked since the 1980's. 49.99 to 59.99 from 1986 to 2017 is hardly an adjustment for inflation. In fact they would be losing their asses at this point. Sprinkle in mass piracy and you have publishers paying gamers to buy their product. This is not fair to anyone.
IMO publishers should be charging a minimum of 100 bucks for a AAA game with EVERYTHING included at launch. No more DLC. No more loot crates and IMO that would be an amazing compromise between the supply and the demand. We have come a long way from 8-bit side scrollers. The price needs to reflect that.
I further disagree that games should cost $100 or more. If you buy a shit game you cant get a refund, or its extremely difficult to get one. Even Steam has a duration on game refunds so short that if you sneeze it becomes too late to try. Now if you buy 5-10 games, at $100 a pop, and dont like any of them, it now becomes a major hassle. And, TBH, there are no games worth the $100 price tag, that does not include special edition versions. IMHO game development is shit, so many games launch with shit ton of bugs and obvious incomplete content that they require a patch within the next 60 - 90 days, this isnt the games developer fault but the publishers (like EA) that do the pushing to pump out games left and right. Like that one developer that was determined to develop 100 games, he did it but every game I saw was pure shit, that Atari Pong was better than anything he made.
Yep if games cost $100 or more, I'd blow up my PC just to spite, because I would be extremely stupid to pay that.
skip to 3:15
But, if done wrong, like all EA games at the moment that sell Zero day DLC. It is a shitty way to make money, and, people buy half of a game....How will you define AAA games?
For me the only AAA game that should charge 100 Bucks is GTA V. There is no other game that comes near it.
And it doesn't stop there either: music, movies, games, everything that is strictly digital. It can be copied ad infinitum but it still needs a declared value. Why is this important? It goes straight into piracy. If someone has a copy of something they're not supposed to, that's how much money was "stolen." Declaring a value of a digital good then becomes a two sided coin: If they declare the value of something too high and they sue a pirate asking for 1000 times that much, the judge will ask what are they smoking. If they declare the value too low and someone is selling the product for less than that, the publisher can use that in court against the seller because they're technically selling at a loss, therefore, the item must be stolen or second hand (these are not-transferrable by nature).
Problem is, there's only two parties involved here: 1) lawmakers that don't understand it enough to regulate it and 2) the game publishers profiting hugely from it. I don't see a path to a good, permanent solution for everyone.
It's good they're cracking down on loot crates because it turns the above problem into gambling. It needs to be labeled as such. But to get at the heart of the problem.......not going to happen any time soon.
Never let the convicts run the prisons!!
"Loot-box" and other such concepts with nickle&dime a play to death are things I actively avoid.