LogFAQs > #937540508

Personally, I'm tempted to say that any game containing loot box mechanics (even thinly-veiled ones) should automatically get a required "Adults Only" rating. They're bullshit even beyond the "won't anyone think of the children?!" argument, but if you're going to hide behind obfuscation and technical ignorance to run what is effectively an unregulated casino that even children can opt into, maybe we should be putting the clamps on to at least keep younger people from having any kind of access.

I'd settle for just a "Mature" rating, but we're all fully aware that the Mature rating is pretty much horseshit in the marketplace. At this point AO is more or less the only meaningful restriction on access.



ChaosAzeroth posted...

I'm just not sure they're big on doing what they were created to do.

They're doing exactly what they were created to do.

The ESRB doesn't exist to protect consumers or regulate the gaming industry in any way. It exists more or less solely to give plausible deniability to publishers so that governments don't step in to regular gaming. That's what it's doing right now - impinging on the borderline criminal behavior of publishers to the absolute minimum degree, so that they can point to the ESRB and go "Hey, gaming is regulated, and consumer protections are clearly in place, so you can stop pestering us now governments."

The ESRB didn't step in until governments became involved because they don't actually give a shit about consumers in any way, and didn't want to rock the boat for the publishers who are now making more than 50% of their annual income on in-game transactions rather than actual game sales.
---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family