Hacker News Reader

Comment by Cub3 | Hacker News Reader

I still haven't heard anyone take on physical vs digital card games as part of this. Typically cards are sold in random 'packs' (see Hearthstone, Gwent and Valves 'up and coming' card game) which should fall under this definition. But blind card packs (Magic the Gathering, Pokemon) physically are not banned by any government, nor, have I ever heard them talked about in the same umbrella as gambling?

View on HN

From what I understand, Magic and other card games are not gambling because the cards are considered to all be of equal value despite rarity. If the company that sells Magic (Wizards or the Coast / Hasbro) were to acknowledge that the cards DO have a secondary market value, it would qualify as gambling. Especially so, if they acknowledged they knew the relative values of the cards during the design / planning phases (which they absolutely do). Though I love magic, I have no doubt, if all the facts were to come to light in court, the law would stipulate drastic changes to their model, which is part of the reason why Wizards of the Coast is run like a cult.

Last time this topic was discussed I saw a very similar question so I had a theory: What if physical card packs is such a small market that government have simply not noticed enough to care to regulate it. I then went and look up the numbers and checked. If I recall right:

Magic the Gathering and Pokemon sat around $500k in realy global market sales. Sport cards a few millions. Game with lootboxes is estimated around a half a billion. Regular gambling estimated around $400 billions.

This make in my view a rather simple answer why Magic the Gathering might not be a big concern for government but why regular gambling really is and why loot boxes currently sit in the middle. To simplify: 1x, 1000x, 1000000x.

Yeah, but the question is: is gambling ramping up at the same rate as games with lootboxes?

Also, gambling is usually restricted, either by location or by age. Are games with lootboxes 18+?

I think the big reason that Magic never ramped up so much is because of the fact that it's a physical pack. You can only buy however much is in stock (at most) and even when you order a booster box or fat pack online, it still has a delay before it arrives. With the online model it's really easy to just keep pulling the lever over and over again and getting an instant response.

There were some legal rumblings many years ago about Magic being gambling, and assertions that the government should step in and stop Wizards from selling gambling to kids. I don't remember how it blew over exactly.

For skins or other purely cosmetic items with no effect on gameplay, to me it's equivalent to a gumball machine where you might not get your favorite color.

Randomized physical card packs can be gambling, but they also have non-gambling uses; in MtG, there are ways of playing (drafts) where the randomized packs are logistically important to how the game is played, and those ways of playing are legitimately fun.

Roulette is also "legitimately fun" to many people.

Apparently I didn't get the point across. MtG drafts remain fun and the randomization of the card packs remains necessary even if you remove the ownership element entirely, by agreeing to destroy the cards afterwards.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com