But at least something like aesthetic loot crates are a sideshow to the actual game. Some games are good at keeping the separate and you can understand that it's just how they choose to fund the game. When the whole game is just a loot crate/gambling mechanism it's just a sad outcome.
A step worse too: they are being trained that being bombarded with adverts is acceptable. Genuinely heard (couldn't avoid hearing, the voices were fairly loud) on a train the other week a dad explaining to his charge how he should “watch the adverts all the way through because he'd get an extra coin to spend in the game” and that if he went to a particular screen he could find more adverts to watch. No idea what game it was he was playing.
Pay-to-win is winning, and people are encouraging kids to pay by opening themselves to a little light brainwashing.
[Not a parent myself, intending to never be, before anyone weights in with “you don't know how hard it can be to keep a child entertained”: I know full well, and it is one of the many reasons I'm planning to stay childless, my position on this is an informed one!]
We have all been trained that way. The cities in the developed world where you can step outside and walk around for a bit without seeing billboards can be counted on one hand.
Current screen policy: only "his" laptop, only videos I've picked out for him (currently, he's into Alphablocks and Numberblocks), laptop gets closed and put up for the rest of the day the instant he whines about having to stop watching for whatever reason.
They can more easily watch with headphones, they can even watch in private if they're introverted, and I'd feel a lot better knowing they won't switch channels without my knowledge or watch adverts for stupid plastic trash.
At what point this becomes necessary is a matter of much argument. They certainly don't need it in the first few years, but I'd suggest they need to be at least aware by the time they are going to school.
It is difficult to separate this from entertainment, because being entertained/interested/curious is largely how our brains do some of their best learning at early ages.
> Kids lived that way for a very long time.
Be careful with appeals to tradition.
The world doesn't exactly work the way it did a long time ago, so we are not preparing kids for the same life they were expected to experience back then.
She quickly capitulated when she learned that iPads are magical nannies that will totally occupy your child and give you precious time to get other stuff done.
So "screen but only with approved content in moderation" became the norm.
If I had a child and I wanted to make sure that they could only watch the videos I chose for them then I would have a laptop for them to use, and I could absolutely see myself calling it "their laptop" in casual conversation.
For now, it’s a small TV that receives one channel run by a station manager who has a thing for counting and the alphabet.
No, this is illegal use of casino algorithms and payoff psychology / slot machine psychology, outside of regulation, restriction from exposure to children, without disclaimers for gambling problems and hotlines.
The middle-tier issues I have: the same issues that used to exist with gambling and introducing it officially: moral concerns over degeneracy, the family impacts of gambling addictions, the regressive cost nature on poor/middle class.
What I'm really concerned about: outright cheating. There is implied probabilities involved here, and the apps are not doing the implied distribution. Sure, go ahead and point to the fine print. There is a reason gambling is so heavily restricted and regulated. These games are acting like they aren't subject to these laws.
What I'm really really really concerned about: the use of gambling payoff/reward psychology/neurotransmitter biology in games that CHILDREN are being subjected to, or even worse, they are ACTIVELY targeted by the "free to play" games, by the "click/watch ad to keep playing" ads in the FTP games.
This is OUTRAGEOUS. This has to end. This has to be strictly regulated. Many of these free to play games, which even cursory experience educates you to a world where "whales" that are paying thousands of dollars a month or more. These games are among the most popular/heavily downloaded games in the app stores, with hundreds of millions of revenue, which Apple and Google are feasting at the trough on.
Absolutely outrageous. Apple and Google should be ashamed of themselves, and fined billions of dollars over this. Why Europe has not woken up to this, which is the only real hope in the short run for substantial fines, is beyond me.
Thing is, regulations do exist but as long as Apple and Google are not forced to comply at least partially in these regulations, nothing will ever change.
Take the GDPR as an example:
- Europe says: "Your app must comply with the GDPR if you want to be in the European market."
- Apple says to app developers: "It's up to you to comply with local laws."
Obviously, Europe can only go after companies, which have a presence in the EU, such as the big tech ones.
Now how would anyone ever enforce regulation such as the GDPR for app devs from China, Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa, ...? There's simply no way. There is no one responsible for that. There is no customs office checking goods (apps) imported to the EU. And the same is true for casino apps.
So, the solution might be to force Apple/Google to comply with all local laws for all apps in the stores. Sounds like a lot of work, but that's the only way. After all, if you buy in-app-items, Apple/Google are the sellers, not the app developers. If you think about it, it's odd that Apple and Google get away with this, because they effectively "sell" these apps to end customers.
See online casinos. They exist since the 90s, before apps. In the USA apparently you can only run a casino in Las Vegas or some places with a soecific license. Yet the online casinos still exist, but operate from jurisdictions that are off limits from the FBI or whatever (something like Cayman Islands or whatever). However the owners are identified and will be detained when entering US soil.
The internet is not some loophole to break the law. If you are taking a relevant amount of money, even in small payments, they can get back to you or at least block you.
It might be worth noting that Brazil has a law similar to GDPR: Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados (LGPD). It's not as strong as GDPR, though.
Perhaps EU hopes that sideloading would address issues like this.
Toy adverts push the same buttons. I don't know how you regulate this effectively except (as toy adverts are) retroactively.
> Many of these free to play games, which even cursory experience educates you to a world where "whales" that are paying thousands of dollars a month or more
I think whales are usually adults, though. They're wasting their money, just as they waste it paying for a superchat so an influencer will say 5 words to them, but as far as I know this isn't a kid thing, unlike the other points you make.
No, they are very much a part of the experience. The anticipation of the reward and the tension build while the opening animation plays is an addiction mechanism. This is why we wrap presents and why “blind bags” are so successful (and also why toddlers will watch “surprise egg” videos for hours).
Is this why BG3 has this extremely annoying and unskippable dice-rolling animation (technically, the rolling of the dice is the only thing you can actually skip)? Because other people somehow enjoy this?
It’s so bad, that the dice thing popping up induces a feeling of dread and annoyance in me.
The underlying system comes from D&D so is full of quite crunchy randomness where results are usually rolled in front of everyone so you get a much more social experience and failure isn’t quite so bad (usually).
But you are missing what I said. The information is great, the unskippable animations are not.
One clear demonstration of this I have seen is the lootbox screen in a pay-once game Vampire Survivors[1], which developer has background in casino software. This one is rather absurd that I almost believe it's intended for cultural preservation.
Discrepancy between perceived and mathematical expectation is a big factor in keeping us hooked. So techniques to exaggerate the former are used.
The thing with content is that it costs money to produce, and so you (generally) have to pay money to get it.
I know some parents who have super strict "screen time" rules but let their kids watch (during the allotted time) any random dumb youtube show, or play those shitty iPad games. Those parents are not tech savvy, and they assume that all digital experiences are shit.
In contrast I pay lots of money for Nintendo first-party games because I know (I play them too!) that they are engaging digital experiences with good screenwriting. I pay recurring subscription to streaming services and apps because real storytelling for children DOES exist on devices with screens!
With mobile gaming you have a free for all that is intentionally exploiting the same neuroanatomy of addiction, but it’s wrapped up in pretty pixels and you can do it anywhere, privately. The industry is too big for gaming commission type controls to work.
I think that mobile game monetization is populated by morally deficient actors and we should consider banning the whole thing.
If the croupier used sleight of hand or secret e-ink cards to turn your card into the "you lose" card after you'd picked it, that would be fraud.
The dark patterns and dopamine manipulation are bad enough, but isn't it fraud in this case? They're using a visual metaphor that is a straight-up lie.
I find this to be a very naive perspective. It’s not how addiction works, and even people who want to stop sometimes cannot. And even if you buy into the belief that we shouldn’t help them, what about their kids? What about the communities around them that are worse for having addicts who are pouring money from their jobs into a black hole?
> I personally don't care.
I’m sorry to hear that, and I hope you can change your mind one day. We’re all going to die one day, and life is better if we care about each other