Virtual Weapons Are Turning Gamers into Serious Gamblers
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
The majority of items in CS:GO are initially generated by purchasing a key (for $2.75) to open a case. The game tells the user that the case contains one of a dozen possible items, but not which item. The act of opening the case generates an item that can be worth anywhere from $0.10 to $10,000. The in-game UI for this process even looks like a slot machine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpFlpyZ4eBM&t=1m45s
If you want a specific item, (rather than a random one from a case) you can buy it on the Steam Market. But that's a secondary market where the sellers are other gamers. The items themselves were still initially generated from playing Valve's slot machine game.
Valve has a vested interest in maintaining the perception that the items have zero value in real dollars. If the items had real dollar value, then the act of opening cases would make Valve a casino.
That's why when you sell your items on the Steam Market, you can only use the proceeds for other items on Steam. The money is steam dollars, not real dollars. There is no "cash-out" mechanism within Steam.
Of course, this perception is a farce because there is a large market outside of Steam for selling the items for real dollars. Two popular websites are https://opskins.com/ and https://bitskins.com/ . I don't believe that Valve can maintain their position that the items have a real dollar value of zero when lots and lots of people are trading them for real dollars. It's sort of like a casino saying the chips are worth zero because the cashier works for a different company.
I believe that this is at the root of why Valve is so comfortable with all the 3rd-party gambling sites. Valve has established their position that the items are worthless, so normal rules about money shouldn't apply.
It's sort of like a casino saying the chips are worth
zero because the cashier works for a different company.
This is exactly how pachinko gambling works in Japan. You win a prize (doll, medal, etc.) in the pachinko parlor, and sell it at the "we buy pachinko prizes" place next door.http://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2012/05/16/digital/japans-s...
That seems to form part of Valve's escape plan if they're called on this. They can claim that gamers can get the items through other mechanisms that do not require monetary input. In reality, it's vanishingly rare that it happens.
Valve gets fewer complaints because you only spend real money on cosmetic items, it's not pay to win. But I think Valve has a better reputation than every other company that makes money off of gambling in video games. I usually assume companies are exploiting their players if they have gambling with in-game currency.
Yeah, that appears to be the case. I unboxed a +$300 M9 Bayonet the other week. I think it looks pretty shitty, but hey, who can complain when you can resell it? I kinda get the impression that folks just kinda jump on the bandwagon on certain skins at this point, that they desire to have something valuable rather than something they think looks good.
Others in the thread have touched on this, but this is definitely ensnaring naive, young kids into gambling and taking risks with expensive items. Seems at least once a week I'll be in a match wherein a prepubescent kid will tell his team how he gambled away $100 worth of skins, or got scammed by a "friend" in some kind of gambling pool. Folks also are constantly trying to trade-up, to convince someone to take a skin with less value for one of greater value. I personally unboxed a +$300 knife skin, and at least once a day I get some telling me some sob story, trying to get me to trade it for whatever shit they have to offer.
The best part of that was how many of them wanted me to just give them my hats rather than trade anything for it, given my somewhat low playing stats I guess they assumed I was dumb enough not to realize the trading value of one hat in particular (which I actually do wear when I randomly play TF2, so hah). So many "Hey, I see you haven't played TF2 in a while. I like your hats, would you give them to me as I play TF2 a lot and want to look cool" messages...
Again, glad that my Steam Inventory is now private and I don't see that any more.
The things that people are buying with the "micro"-transactions are weapon "skins", which customize the ingame appearance of the weapons.
At this moment they are, in order of viewers: - Dota 2 (in-game gambling, 3d party sites for cashing out) - Heartstone (game revolves around in-game gambling, no 3d party allowed) - League of Legends (only 3d party sites!) - CS:go (in-game gambling, 3d party sites for cashing out)
So from only looking at the very top games 3/4 involves heavy use of in-game gambling. Them being popular competitive games it's natural that e-sports betting is available for all of them. In 2/4 it's trivial to cash out in the other two's you'd have to sell your account.
However, I would also distinguish the "in-game" gambling in Hearthstone from CSGO because there is no legitimate or practical way to monetize your card collection. Once (or if) you have all the cards, there is little incentive to keep buying packs as you can only play with cards. In CSGO however, there is always the potential to open a new valuable skin that can be sold.
I just found it highly interesting that 12 year old's gambling was such a recipe for success that 3 out of 4 of the most popular games out there have it as a core feature.
I tend to have a Bigger issue when it's in-game than out of game because do you really want the worlds best digital-heroin makers to run casinos where your kids are the guests?
To me, "gambling" is kind of an arbitrary concept. Would you say that universities are casinos as well? They let students assume risk with an unknown payout.
It might be that I'm not defining gambling properly. I'm curious, how would HN readers define gambling?
This is probably more because of Valve's management structure than it is about any policy. Valve is a flat company with no managers. People work on what they want to work on. Jobs like customer support and policing API use are akin to taking out the trash, nobody wants to do it but someone has to. It just isn't a priority.
Anyway, ignorant article with a dishonest attempt at trying to spin two things together "illegal betting!" "valve" and failing.
They're not directly involved in the sports betting aspect, but they'd be running an illegal lottery without the fiction that their digital goods have no real world value, which is the same fiction maintained by the betting houses.
It stretches credibility to say they aren't very involved.
A failed suite was brought against pokemon in 1999. [http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/24/nyregion/suit-claims-pokem...]
- They're available instantly in effectively unlimited quantity, as many as you want to buy.
- Although technically there are many gradations, the quality label of an item ("Factory new", "battle-scarred", etc.) is incontrovertible and easily verified.
- As a digital good, liquidation is extremely low-friction and virtually risk-free. In fact:
- You can click a button from within the game itself to see the current market value in USD -- sorry, in "Steam credit" -- and another to immediately offer the item for sale at that price.
- Maybe most relevant to this thread, even without liquidating they can be easily used as currency to participate in unregulated online roulette, slots, sports betting and more.
So, yeah, there are some differences.
[0]https://www.g2a.com/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2-steam-cd-k... ($7.23 USD vs Steam price of $19.99 USD)
[1]https://www.g2a.com/mass-effect-trilogy-origin-cd-key-global... ($13.66 for all 3 Mass Effect games or $34.99 on Steam)
The keys on those sites are generally sourced from physical copies in cheaper regions (as mentioned in a sibling comment), cheaply sold bundles (Humble Indie Bundle, and other similar sites), and other such sources.
You could possibly make an argument for gift-copies of games[0] being resalable, or games that can be added to third party systems (ME2 gives a CD key that can be added to Origin, for example) though the latter would be limited to one attempt per-game per-account.
[0]http://www.g2play.net/category/24773/factorio-steam-gift/
Valve makes money when people buy or sell skins, which in this case is akin to buying or cashing in one's poker chips. There's also no way that Valve doesn't know that this is going on. While they're not involved in the strictest sense, they continue to allow this gambling to happen (by not policing their API) and make money by doing so.
Valve is not only issuing the stock, but it's also acting as the stock exchange and taking exchange fees. It may not make them any more "responsible", but there is a whole lot of moral gray area there.
How is a system where you spend real money in the hopes of receiving a valuable item by random chance not considered betting/gambling? Because that's effectively what system like the skins in CS:GO is at its core.
There are two main gambling themes in CSGO which people here are conflating.
There's the slot machine like gambling of buying keys and opening cases.
But there's also sites which literally let you gamble on sports or even just virtual roulette etc using skins as currency.
Except you do play a game with them. (though they affect that gameplay aesthetically)
Valve is making untold millions on people gambling for items in the game itself. They're looking the other way as secondary markets allow for monetization. I respect Valve as a game maker, but I have no respect for this extremely dubious, gray-market gambling. Claiming that the article is "dishonest" when Valve is one of the largest beneficiaries of this seems dubious.
It's also worth noting that this is very real money. I can put $70 on my Steam account and buy a new triple-A game....or in the land of Valve I can sell some skins and buy the game. It is trading things in CS:GO for real world value, so comparisons to closed-systems (throughout this thread) seems deeply suspect. I can also use that CS:GO loot to "gift" a new game to a friend who then pays me in the real world. And so on.
The goals are easily defined: kill everyone, or defuse the bomb (usually kill everyone).
The available stats are pretty representative of how matches go.
There is a compounding effect between rounds, since you choose to buy weapons each round based on if you didn't die and still have weapons or how much money you have left.
The biggest issue I can think of is how many kids will lose their cash. There's no 18 year old requirement on the internet!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/03/01/why-its-sc...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteen_Million_Merits_%28Blac...
That is, I think it says more true things (that are more an analogy than an exaggeration) than we're generally able to admit or even process. Our plates are so full that our tiny spoons sometimes strike me as fig leaves rather than eating utensils.
http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2013/02/varoufakis_on_v.htm...
A bit unique to say the least.
My initial impression was rather negative - but I do concede that it has acted as a kind of 'Kerbal Space Program' for markets and gambling - including the spectacular explosions. He now has a far better understanding of supply, demand and timing, along with a healthy respect for probability and risk vs. reward.
It may have worked for him because of limited funds (have to go in thru' my card), and there were things inside the system (knife skin) that he really wanted to acquire.
I did, however, get him to name that knife 'SSD' in honour of what he could have bought if he cashed out.
I've mostly stopped playing the game because it's too depressing and sickening to talk to all of these kids, with undeveloped reasoning faculties, throwing away every cent they get into bets they're convinced they'll win, until it's all gone.
You have people who want the status symbol of owning a golden e-hat and are willing to pay for it on the open market. The gambling portion is largely separate situational.
Not to mention the unpleasantness when I read a tweet by a pro saying "sorry for letting our fans down today" after a loss, and the first reply is some random guy blaming them for the skins they lost. Maybe they're just trolls, maybe they aren't, doesn't really matter.
At least during LAN tournaments the casters and analysts almost never mention gambling, and would rather talk about the game and the players. Hope it stays this way.
Rather, I would expect the community/mods to either downvote/remove comments about betting, making it clear that betting should be discussed somewhere else, or upvote/tolerate them, making it clear that people who prefer not hearing about betting should go somewhere else.
Of course, going somewhere else requires effort, so my selfish hope as someone not interested in betting is that the communities I browse will pick the first option.
Not really that accurate; sure they access the valve servers, however most all of them use custom software made by reverse engineering the steam client called steamkit [1] and it's forks. Steam doesn't provide any public api's for trading. [1]https://github.com/SteamRE/SteamKit
Apparently, allowing players to gamble in game for real money, fine. Allowing people to gamble for them and then sell them through third party sites, fine.
But featuring a casino in a game causes the age rating to go up, even if it's non interactive (at least in Europe)? Letting people gamble with fake money that can't be exchanged for anything outside the game (in a casino esque) setting causes the rating to go up?
Yeah, some of the media watchdogs have really screwed up priorities. Apparently they find the Pokemon Game Corner more offensive than the mobile app 'freemium' content or CS:GO case gambling.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/bitcoin-gambling-sites-f...
The core question here ends up being 'how many hops' in two senses: how many hops will users tolerate & how many hops make it legal? Make A >= B and you have yourself an arb.
This isn't the only new area of law where levels of indirection matter; it's true with anonymization in online privacy as well.
Isn't it just a coincidence that the skins originate in CS? If I want to make a bet, does that matter to me?
Their pools aren't nearly as big as the DotA and CS pools though.
Since skins can be traded and sold it's effectively gambling for cash.
What? Why do they do that? Why not use normal currency?
From the gambler's side: People already own skins (from playing normally) or want skins that would be expensive to buy outright. Gambling provides an exciting way of exchanging them. This kickstarts the gambling market. This initial activity then attracts more serious gamblers looking to make a profit in this low-regulation gambling environment populated by many inexperienced gamblers. Cue feedback loop as more and more serious gamblers get involved.
It's slower than it used to be, but it used to be paying out > 100k/hour.
That's just one site, and I not the biggest.