70
Valve compares its loot boxes to Labubus in lawsuit defense
(arstechnica.com)
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
Gambling systems always play into human psychology, and are always not in your favor.
CS loot boxes in particular have many systems designed to catch human pyschology.
Even the most simple single shot gambling like roulette is not in your favor. Any content box randomizes what you get, incentivizing more pulls, duplicates and unwanteds.
So is poker not gambling? Mahjong? When it's 4 people playing together (not at a casino, for instance), how can it always be you who has worse odds? That's of course rhetorical; you actual have equal odds, barring cheating or simple skill differences.
And once you make "playing a game that you are likely to lose" as the litmus test for what is gambling, why would you play any competitive games? Half of a competitive bracket has to lose more than they won, by definition.
You are conflating gambling as it happens within controlled, predatory, capitalist institutions, with Gambling as a concept. Gambling is not immoral or harmful intrinsically, but gambling institutions that intentionally exploit addiction to Gambling, are. Institutions that intentionally exploit addiction to alcohol or cigarettes or hoarding or whatever, also are. But it doesn't make alcohol as a chemical compound itself, immoral. And just in case it needs to be stated, merely enjoying Gambling doesn't equate to gambling addiction.