gaming NBA 2K20. Now with a casino. In a basketball game

[ShadOBabe 18,984]

OMG... I just searched “NBA 2k20 reviews” and got stuff like...

”My 12 year old son was so excited about the launch of this new game that we had to buy it on the day it was released!”

“Bought as a present for my son on his 12th bday the day it came out.”

”My son can't stop playing this game.”

“My kid loves 2K’s interactive play on XBox Live with his buds. Great game and graphics.”

And I’m just over here like, “No! Get that crap away from your kids! Do you even I know what is in it, because I’m not sure you do!”

Ugh... I’m conflicted with multiple feelings of, “Welp, it’s THEIR kids, not mine” and “Hope you raised a good/smart kid and/or hid your credit card” and “WHY IS THIS FOR TODDLERS, BUT POKÉMON RED IS FOR 12 AND UP?! ARRRGH!!”

[Pentium100 2,056]

On the other hand, hopefully the governments will end this practice - the game companies just got too greedy and got noticed. Even the UK may ban loot boxes, I mean, "surprise mechanics". Well, game companies, prepare for "surprise regulations".

All the other game companies can thank EA for the regulations, since Battlefield 2 is what started the ball rolling.

Put games with real-money casinos in them in the same category as online casinos - with the same license requirements, taxes etc, since this is what they are.

Edited September 18, 2019 by Pentium100

[Splashee 28,537]

This hurts to watch! A realistic slot machine in a basketball game?

 

I can only agree with everyone in this thread. This is horrible!

[Cyclone 1066 3,616]

Microtransactions aren't new. Gambling in video games isn't new. In fact it isn't the first NBA game with gambling. They started in mobile games that have always been marketed to kids. Raise your kids to know the value of money and none of this is a problem.

How about look at the fact they added the WNBA before the G League despite the G League having better ratings and viewership and more requests to have the full league added to the game.

Edited September 18, 2019 by Cyclone1066

[Brony Number 42 9,927]

4 hours ago, Pentium100 said:

On the other hand, hopefully the governments will end this practice - the game companies just got too greedy and got noticed. Even the UK may ban loot boxes, I mean, "surprise mechanics". Well, game companies, prepare for "surprise regulations".

All the other game companies can thank EA for the regulations, since Battlefield 2 is what started the ball rolling.

Put games with real-money casinos in them in the same category as online casinos - with the same license requirements, taxes etc, since this is what they are.

Do you not believe in free speech, free enterprise, and the rights of people to make their own decisions, even if they are bad decisions?

Am I missing something? Can a perons win real money in these?

I hope regulation of microtransactions on games leads to regulation on game violence.

[Pentium100 2,056]

3 hours ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

Do you not believe in free speech

Free speech does not really exist, try going to Germany (and some other EU countries) and waving a Nazi flag. Or going to my country and waving a USSR flag.

3 hours ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

free enterprise

Not really. I believe in a free market, but that means that the market must be "enforced free" - the government has to keep a leash on the large companies - the larger the company, the shorter the leash. Small companies can do whatever, since there are usually many of them competing, I can just go to a competitor.

3 hours ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

and the rights of people to make their own decisions, even if they are bad decisions?

Sure, on two conditions: 1) that we are talking about adults and 2) that those bad decisions do not affect other people. In my opinion you can dring a bottle of vodka and then drive at 200km/h, as long as you do not drive on a road that other people use. If you only risk killing yourself - go ahead.

 

Back to the topic topic:

3 hours ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

I hope regulation of microtransactions on games leads to regulation on game violence.

There already is regulation on game violence. A game like "Manhunt" cannot be sold to children.

There are also regulation on porn games - those also cannot be sold to children.

I do not want casino games to be banned - I want them put in the same restricted category as "Manhunt" and porn games. Adults would still be able to buy them.

 

3 hours ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

Am I missing something? Can a perons win real money in these?

That is a too narrow definition. What the player wins has value to them and, as such, triggers the same circuits in the brain as playing a physical slot machine. The problem with NBA 2K20 is that it is targeted at young children (rated ages 3 and up). Children are more susceptible to getting addicted. If it was restricted to adults only, there wouldn't be such a problem. But the company wants to exploit children, get them hooked on gambling. Just like cigarette companies used to advertise cigarettes to children.

[Brony Number 42 9,927]

21 minutes ago, Pentium100 said:

Free speech does not really exist, try going to Germany (and some other EU countries) and waving a Nazi flag. Or going to my country and waving a USSR flag.

Not really. I believe in a free market, but that means that the market must be "enforced free" - the government has to keep a leash on the large companies - the larger the company, the shorter the leash. Small companies can do whatever, since there are usually many of them competing, I can just go to a competitor.

Sure, on two conditions: 1) that we are talking about adults and 2) that those bad decisions do not affect other people. In my opinion you can dring a bottle of vodka and then drive at 200km/h, as long as you do not drive on a road that other people use. If you only risk killing yourself - go ahead.

 

Back to the topic topic:

There already is regulation on game violence. A game like "Manhunt" cannot be sold to children.

There are also regulation on porn games - those also cannot be sold to children.

I do not want casino games to be banned - I want them put in the same restricted category as "Manhunt" and porn games. Adults would still be able to buy them.

That is a too narrow definition. What the player wins has value to them and, as such, triggers the same circuits in the brain as playing a physical slot machine. The problem with NBA 2K20 is that it is targeted at young children (rated ages 3 and up). Children are more susceptible to getting addicted. If it was restricted to adults only, there wouldn't be such a problem. But the company wants to exploit children, get them hooked on gambling. Just like cigarette companies used to advertise cigarettes to children.

Free speech does not exist, but should it? The existence of one wrong does not justify another.

"Enforced free" is an oxymoron. 

We are talking about adults. I don't know any children that have credit cards. The government is not a substitute for parenting. Wasting money on games does not affect other people. 

Or maybe it does. Collectivist logic would state that your actions affect others and therefor the governmemt must intervene. If you waste money on a game it means you might need a hand out later. 

Woah woah wait! Are you telling me that simulated gambling can affect children's brains? But simulated violence cannot?

[Pentium100 2,056]

Just now, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

Woah woah wait! Are you telling me that simulated gambling can affect children's brains? But simulated violence cannot?

No. I would not want a 5 year old child playing "Manhunt" any more than a 5 year old child playing a slot machine. Both games should be for adults only.

NBA 2K20 is rated PEGI3 which means for children 3 and up. Maybe the 3 year old child should have an option of playing Manhunt too? Why is that game so restricted?

Or maybe give the 3 year old a porn game? Or do you draw the line at that?

1 minute ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

"Enforced free" is an oxymoron. 

Yes, I enjoy having true free market where I can choose from one option (well, in some cases two extremely similar options). So much freedom! I mean that's great. If smaller companies could enter the market it would be horrible, not only would the prices drop, but I would have too much choice. 

Completely free market has strong positive feedbacks and goes towards a monopoly. Because I do not want a monopoly, the government should make it easier for smaller companies to enter the market  and harder for large companies to dominate the market by buying out competitors etc.

By the way, in most countries people are "enforced free" as you cannot sell yourself into slavery, since, well, slavery is illegal.

13 minutes ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

We are talking about adults. I don't know any children that have credit cards. The government is not a substitute for parenting. Wasting money on games does not affect other people. 

The ratings, just like the ratings for TV shows and movies are there to inform the parents about the product. The parents can still let their 7 year old child watch a "N13" rated TV show but they know that this TV show is more suited for older children. Sometimes the ratings are more detailed, for example, indicate that the game contains violence or nudity since some parents may be OK, but with only one of those. In my country children are not allowed into the cinema if the movie is rated "N16" or "N18" ( a 7 year old child is allowed in the cinema to watch a N13 movie, but only with parents), but the parent can always buy/rent a DVD and show the movie to the child.

So, why is a game that literally has a casino in it rated as suitable for 3 year old children? I'm pretty sure some parents would allow their child to play this, but even they would most likely want to be informed. If the game companies are unwilling to correctly rate their products, then maybe the government should do it?

Again, not banning, but correctly rating the game to 18+. Adults would still be able to buy it, hell, even give it to their children. But they would be informed.

33 minutes ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

Or maybe it does. Collectivist logic would state that your actions affect others and therefor the governmemt must intervene. If you waste money on a game it means you might need a hand out later.

Speaking of the USA - that country originated so many warning labels on everything that make even me laugh - "do not put this plastic bag on your head or you will suffocate, do not give it to a child or he/she will put it on the head and suffocate", "do not put your dog in a microwave oven", "do not touch here - it's hot", "do not pour water on your TV", "contains small parts, small children can choke on them"  and so on. But putting a proper rating on a game that has a casino in it - no, that's free speech, no way, children should be able to gamble in a virtual casino, since they are not allowed inside a real one.

Anyway, in a socialized society, poor people get welfare. Addicts and people with mental problems are more likely to need it. Killing them so they are not a burden on the society went out of fashion in 1945. However, if you can save someone from addiction, he may even be a productive member of the society, so it's even better than killing him. Also, we would like that the children get the best chance they can to grow up to be productive members of society, even if their parents are not ideal (taking the children away should be reserved only for extreme cases, since growing up in a loving family is better for the mental health of the child, even if the parents are not ideal). So, the parents need some help, for example, the content rating system. Of course, the parents can ignore it, but it is there to help them make better decisions.

[Brony Number 42 9,927]

@Pentium100 I'm mostly trolling you.  

I agree in labeling and information, but not banning. Banning simulated gambling is a step toward banning something else.

Yes, killing people by the millions is so last century. Modern tyranny is the tyranny of the nanny state. Government knows best.

[Pentium100 2,056]

1 minute ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

Modern tyranny is the tyranny of the nanny state. Government knows best.

So, it didn't change then. Killing people by the millions was also because "government knows best".

Then again given a choice between this and "every man for himself" I'd choose the government as long as it does not actively try to kill me.

4 minutes ago, 2nd Amendment Brony said:

I agree in labeling and information, but not banning. Banning simulated gambling is a step toward banning something else.

I hate the bans on incandescent lightbulbs and the fuel consumption regulations for cars (and if I was building a new house for myself then I would hate the energy efficiency requirements for houses as well), so I would be a hypocrite if I wanted gambling to be banned. On the other hand, making it more difficult is OK in my book, for example, I am OK with a taxon gasoline - I burn more gas (either by driving more or having an inefficient car) I pay more tax. As long as the thing is not really dangerous by itself (cocaine, explosives, highly radioactive stuff etc) it should not be banned.

[Sir Hugsalot 8,621]

10 hours ago, Pentium100 said:

So, it didn't change then. Killing people by the millions was also because "government knows best".

Then again given a choice between this and "every man for himself" I'd choose the government as long as it does not actively try to kill me.

I hate the bans on incandescent lightbulbs and the fuel consumption regulations for cars (and if I was building a new house for myself then I would hate the energy efficiency requirements for houses as well), so I would be a hypocrite if I wanted gambling to be banned. On the other hand, making it more difficult is OK in my book, for example, I am OK with a taxon gasoline - I burn more gas (either by driving more or having an inefficient car) I pay more tax. As long as the thing is not really dangerous by itself (cocaine, explosives, highly radioactive stuff etc) it should not be banned.

Trust me, as soon as all the games like FIFA will be hit with +18 and simulated gambling warning labels the idea of loot boxes will not be so tempting anymore. Currently industry thrives on the fact that it can put simulated gambling in games and still sell these as products suitable for children. Take away that power and not only less people will buy loot boxes. Less people will buy the game itself. 

I am all for government forcing proper labels on games, but I would be careful with giving it power to ban. Right now loot boxes are so popular, because they are not regulated. Force gambling regulations on them and they will already become way less attractive as a way to milk players further after getting them to buy games. 

If government is allowed to dig its claws into the industry too deeply it will not stop on loot boxes. Times, when people blame game violence for troubles in the real world are not over and we better not forget that. Even Trump has proven it with his speeches just recently. 

[Pentium100 2,056]

4 minutes ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

I am all for government forcing proper labels on games, but I would be careful with giving it power to ban.

I dislike double standards. If a company wants to run an online casino, it should comply with the regulations and pay the taxes that apply. Some people try to be "clever" and find a loophole in the law that lets them do something that should not be allowed (say, market an online casino to kids or selling alcohol during the time when it is not allowed). However, government laws are not like the laws of physics - government laws can be changed and the loopholes can be fixed.

I do not really want to see the loot boxes banned. Physical and online casinos are not banned. Just apply the gambling regulations to them and you can have them. Of course it would lose the appeal since the whole idea is to market these games to children.

PEGI and ESRB ratings were supposed to be self-regulation by the game industry, pretty much like the movie industry. That is preferable to regulation by the government. However, if the industry refuses to do a proper job, then the government has to do the job for it.

By the way, the movie industry seems to do a good job of rating the movies. I mean I haven't seen a slasher movie (or porn) classified as OK for children.

35 minutes ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

If government is allowed to dig its claws into the industry too deeply it will not stop on loot boxes.

And the industry is to blame for this. The companies should have known when it was "too far". They flew too close to the sun and now bad things are going to happen.

NBA 2K20, to me, looks like the game company is mocking the government. I mean it may take some thinking to equate loot boxes (like in Battlefield 2) to gambling, but here you have a virtual casino. It's like the company saying "see, we even put slot machines in here, how long is it going to take you idiots to see that this is gambling?". Hopefully not very long.

 

Some companies tried this stunt with the sale of alcohol at night. "See, we have a table and a couple of chairs in the shop, so it's a bar now, and we can sell alcohol at all hours, oh and we cannot do anything if the client decides to take the bottle home even if we forbid it, we cannot physically prevent them from just taking the bottle and walking out". That loophole got plugged. Now you have to pour the alcohol to a non-disposable container like a glass. Somehow this made those "bars" start actually enforcing the rules (and in turn, stopping selling alcohol, since their whole idea was to sell alcohol 'to go' when it was not allowed to do so).

 

10 minutes ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

Times, when people blame game violence for troubles in the real world are not over and we better not forget that.

Still I am all for restricting the violent video games to adults. A 7 year old should not play Manhunt.

[Sir Hugsalot 8,621]

Just now, Pentium100 said:

I dislike double standards. If a company wants to run an online casino, it should comply with the regulations and pay the taxes that apply. Some people try to be "clever" and find a loophole in the law that lets them do something that should not be allowed (say, market an online casino to kids or selling alcohol during the time when it is not allowed). However, government laws are not like the laws of physics - government laws can be changed and the loopholes can be fixed.

I do not really want to see the loot boxes banned. Physical and online casinos are not banned. Just apply the gambling regulations to them and you can have them. Of course it would lose the appeal since the whole idea is to market these games to children.

PEGI and ESRB ratings were supposed to be self-regulation by the game industry, pretty much like the movie industry. That is preferable to regulation by the government. However, if the industry refuses to do a proper job, then the government has to do the job for it.

By the way, the movie industry seems to do a good job of rating the movies. I mean I haven't seen a slasher movie (or porn) classified as OK for children.

And the industry is to blame for this. The companies should have known when it was "too far". They flew too close to the sun and now bad things are going to happen.

NBA 2K20, to me, looks like the game company is mocking the government. I mean it may take some thinking to equate loot boxes (like in Battlefield 2) to gambling, but here you have a virtual casino. It's like the company saying "see, we even put slot machines in here, how long is it going to take you idiots to see that this is gambling?". Hopefully not very long.

 

Some companies tried this stunt with the sale of alcohol at night. "See, we have a table and a couple of chairs in the shop, so it's a bar now, and we can sell alcohol at all hours, oh and we cannot do anything if the client decides to take the bottle home even if we forbid it, we cannot physically prevent them from just taking the bottle and walking out". That loophole got plugged. Now you have to pour the alcohol to a non-disposable container like a glass. Somehow this made those "bars" start actually enforcing the rules (and in turn, stopping selling alcohol, since their whole idea was to sell alcohol 'to go' when it was not allowed to do so).

 

Still I am all for restricting the violent video games to adults. A 7 year old should not play Manhunt.

Gambling regulations will likely be applied. And that I support. I just don't support banning loot boxes. It is gaming industry, they'll just keep looking for another way to milk players. I never said anything agaisnt such regulations.

(tbh I feel like soon there will be a new way to milk us via monthly subscriptions. I don't even want to think about every way to scam us on these)

It is correct, gaming industry messed up big time and now they'll face consequences. The problem is I may suffer them too. If governments gets too involved then they may also attempt censorship, dictate what motives, stories etc are "proper" and limit artistic freedom in the name of agenda they pursue. I don't want to get shot by a ricochet. I want industry to suffer consequences and industry alone. And I want them to answer for attempts to push through simulated gambling as something that is acceptable for kids. 

It is also correct that PEGI failed miserably. And nothing new neither, they were always pretty corrupt and served as a shield to protect industry from regulations. 

I don't think anyone here supports idea of children playing Manhunt. Or any violent video games. Same for games with sexual themes, drugs or simulated gambling. The thread was never even about that (Except for gambling part of course). 

[Pentium100 2,056]

43 minutes ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

The problem is I may suffer them too.

Yes, and that is unfortunate. Just like after every shooting law-abiding gun owners may suffer the consequences of some idiot killing people. Or law-abiding airline passengers now have to suffer the increased security checks because of terrorist attacks. Some people mess up big time, the government gets involved, the guilty parties get punished but there is always collateral damage. There are a lot of banned things that can be used normally, but they are banned because some people abused them.

[Sir Hugsalot 8,621]

6 minutes ago, Pentium100 said:

Yes, and that is unfortunate. Just like after every shooting law-abiding gun owners may suffer the consequences of some idiot killing people. Or law-abiding airline passengers now have to suffer the increased security checks because of terrorist attacks. Some people mess up big time, the government gets involved, the guilty parties get punished but there is always collateral damage. There are a lot of banned things that can be used normally, but they are banned because some people abused them.

Difference between gun abuse and what gaming industry does is that the latter has a little bit smaller victim count. 

You keep missing one thing - I don't speak against involvement. I speak against too much of it. I will be more than happy to see forcing gaming industry to aknowledge that gambling law applies to loot boxes in any form as well. I speak against tempting government to go further than that and currently some gaming channels as well as gamers themselves do praise any kind of attack towards loot boxes VERY blindly. We should not applaud. We should thank for solving this.specific.problem (if it gets solved, that is) and then politely guide them towards the exit. 

If no collateral damage is necesarry for solving the issue then such damage should be avoided. 

[Pentium100 2,056]

12 minutes ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

You keep missing one thing - I don't speak against involvement. I speak against too much of it.

So we agree on this point. 

12 minutes ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

I speak against tempting government to go further than that and currently some gaming channels as well as gamers themselves do praise any kind of attack towards loot boxes VERY blindly.

This is a tactic that pretty much everyone use. Basically, let's say I want 100EUR for something, but I know that the other person likes to haggle and I'll never get what I ask, so I'll ask for 150EUR and then "reluctantly" agree to 100EUR. This is a practice that I personally really dislike, but have to do it (on both sides) because others do it.

Same here - ask for the executives to go to jail or be shot for loot boxes and then be OK with a compromise of different ratings. Because if you ask for what you want in the first place, you will get a compromise, which is, of course, when both sides are about equally unhappy with the outcome.

Edited September 19, 2019 by Pentium100

[Sir Hugsalot 8,621]

Just now, Pentium100 said:

So we agree on this point. 

This is a tactic that pretty much everyone use. Basically, let's say I want 100EUR for something, but I know that the other person likes to haggle and I'll never get what I ask, so I'll ask for 150EUR and then "reluctantly" agree to 100EUR.

Same here - ask for the executives to go to jail or be shot for loot boxes and then be OK with a compromise of different ratings. Because if you ask for what you want in the first place, you will get a compromise, which is, of course, when both sides are about equally unhappy with the outcome.

The difference is government is not doing anything outside loot boxes yet (btw for clarification I speak about UK one, Polish of course doesn't care xD). They don't try to negotiate. They get things done with loot boxes and that's it. Problem is people by praising involvement to this excessive level do tempt them to try to dig the issue even deeper. So where You manipulate price to get better deal after negotiations the gaming community tries to lower it even more, acting against its own interest. 

[Pentium100 2,056]

21 minutes ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

Problem is people by praising involvement to this excessive level do tempt them to try to dig the issue even deeper.

Yes, and the game industry is also egging the government on. I mean, if I was doing something I knew I was not supposed to and got caught (like they did), I would try to comply with everything the government says so as to avoid getting in an even bigger trouble. Except that the industry is not doing that, they keep adding the loot boxes and making them even more obviously gambling.

Reminds me of how ICANN had problems with the EU and the GDPR. It was so funny to read about it. In the end they had to comply with the regulation just like everybody else.

30 minutes ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

So where You manipulate price to get better deal after negotiations the gaming community tries to lower it even more, acting against its own interest. 

Or like Icarus seeing that his wings are starting to melt decides to fly even closer to the sun.

[Sir Hugsalot 8,621]

1 minute ago, Pentium100 said:

Yes, and the game industry is also egging the government on. I mean, if I was doing something I knew I was not supposed to and got caught (like they did), I would try to comply with everything the government says so as to avoid getting in an even bigger trouble. Except that the industry is not doing that, they keep adding the loot boxes and making them even more obviously gambling.

Reminds me of how ICANN had problems with the EU and the GDPR. It was so funny to read about it. In the end they had to comply with the regulation just like everybody else.

Or like Icarus seeing that his wings are starting to melt decides to fly even closer to the sun.

There is no question in that industry went fully Icarus way. Normally I would even laugh about it, because this is level of stupid that can be rarely seen in business world. 

And it is correct, industry is begging quite hard to get wrecked even more. It is mind blowing that everyone lashes out on it and all it says is "oh, we disagree with all the excessive research, because we disagree". It gets on my nerves a lot, because at this point they just point a Fat Man from Fallout franchise towards their heads and pull the trigger til they run out of mini nukes. 

But industry is merely a "victim" (or more like a criminal facing justice). It is gamers, who have deciding voice here - they are, who government listened to the most, disregarding industry almost right away as dishonest and secretive. It is we, who have the real influence on how deeply will government try to go. In many ways we are even regulating loot boxes now as information delivered by players heavily affects the investigation. Industry, for once has limited significance.  

Industry made itself a laughing stock. It has no room to negotiate and burned every bridge they possibly could with inconsistent lies and poor rebranding attempts. Now it is our task to ensure their mistakes will not cost us too much. With current attitude there's a risk that eventually it may. And when that happened it will be our fault as we made politcians too comfortable in our own, little world. 

[Pentium100 2,056]

1 hour ago, Floppy Pug-Bunny Star Wars Man said:

It is gamers, who have deciding voice here - they are, who government listened to the most, disregarding industry almost right away as dishonest and secretive.

The parents have the ear of the government. While the gamers are loud and are consulted on this issue, it's the parents that essentially initiated this response. If whatever stuff the game industry does just annoyed the gamers (a lot of industry practices annoy the gamers), the government would not care. On the other hand, the loot box controversy started because those loot boxes were in a child-rated game. That got the attention of parents (WHAT? MY kid is gambling and with real money no less? NO!). If the game was rated weakly-adult (ESRB rating M vs rating AO that gambling actually needs), the gamers would be annoyed just the same, but nobody else would care.

Of course the gamers latched on this and hope to push other thing (that may be annoying only to gamers) through at the same time.

And yea, the gamers need to not overdo it. The industry overdid it, let's not repeat its mistake.

[Elsiel 0]

Haha, well at least it sounds really interesting. Unfortunately, I don't play too much at the casino and I don't know what to say about it, but as far as I can remember, there are a lot of basketball games on gambling websites like แทงบอลออนไลน์. If you are interested, you can take a look on this website. They offer a lot of bonuses for the beginners, and you might find something for you there.

[DixonTheAdversary 1,631]

Gotta love sports games nowadays. Focus less on the sports and more on the giving 2K/EA money.

[ZiggWheelsManning 7,359]

14 hours ago, DixonTheAdversary said:

Gotta love sports games nowadays. Focus less on the sports and more on the giving 2K/EA money.

Do the sports games now have casino songs?