Comment by cratermoon | Hacker News Reader

Comment by cratermoon | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Consistency is not Google's strong suit, but I will put this out there: games that involve real gambling with real money can be aimed at adults and presumably age-gated to discourage minors from playing. Games that simulate gambling but don't involve real money aimed at minors and not age-gated are the problem. Much like the FTC in the US bans tobacco and alcohol advertising that could be interpreted as encourage underage use. For example, Joe Camel. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/1997/05/...

There's a reason you don't see toys and merchandise for kids, even completely free of actual tobacco or alcohol content, carrying branding for those products.

Is it completely consistent or good that Google gives an award to a game intended for adults while banning a similar game pitched to kids? No. Is it at least consistent the legal and social conditions in the US? Yes.

If you want to make an argument that it's fine to target minors with products that simulate or appeal to similar interests as gambling, smoking, or alcohol, by all means make it. But don't conflate entertainment provided for adults with games for kids.

The game in question is rated E for Everyone (following the Random Card link from the parent comment https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.Doca.Rando...) - I don't know if the two specific games in question are mechanical copies, but the most successful gacha games are specifically marketed as kid-friendly so target audience is definitely not the issue.

As I said, no points to Google for consistency. What about the rest my points?

The legal theory you’ve proposed doesn’t match the facts. My understanding of your theory:

1. US law doesn’t say adult gambling is illegal

2 US law does make it illegal to give gambling mechanics to minors

Since random card is only for adults, it’s legal. Since balatro gives gambling mechanics to minors, it’s illegal.

But Random Card _isn’t_ only for adults! It’s E for everyone (ie no age restriction!) By your own reasoning, random card should have been banned. This isn’t an issue of consistency anymore, since according to your theory this should be illegal.

I think either your theory of how the law applies here is incorrect, or Google seems to be breaking the law by allowing random card to persist.

> Google seems to be breaking the law by allowing random card to persist.

This isn't a lack of consistency, it is policy. The biggest games on mobile are gacha games which are all gambling with cutesy characters. You are giving Google the benefit of doubt when they don't deserve it.

Should Luck be a Landlord be banned from the Play Store? I don't care but pick a side. If you're against it then be against all of it and not just the part of it that doesn't make you a ton of money.

> it is policy.

So address the policy implications of the rest of my points and don't get hung up on the consistency issue. I agreed no points to google for that.

The lack of consistency is the entire point. The rest of your points don't matter to me in this discussion because whether or not games that have mechanics that look like gambling should be age gated doesn't matter when companies are playing both sides.

Meanwhile: Windows ships with a simulated-gambling app called "Solitaire".

How is that simulated gambling?

There is a history of solitare and gambling. https://greatbridgelinks.com/how-to-play-canfield-solitaire/

There is a version of Solitaire that is a gambling game. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poker_squares

It's as much simulated gambling as Balatro is

You are gambling your time (essentially the same as money) on the hope of a dopamine rush experienced upon winning (also worth money).

> Much like the FTC in the US bans tobacco and alcohol advertising that could be interpreted as encourage underage use.

This is an advertising regulation for actual specific products, not a general restriction for things redolent of things that are bad for children.

In the same year, they made it legal to advertise Oxycontin on television, direct-to-consumer.

> branding for those products.

French suited playing cards aren't advertisements for gambling. Gambling isn't a product. Gambling at Bally's Casino is a product.

Random Card is rated E.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com