Activision Blizzard Inc., Rockstar Games Inc., Epic Games Inc. and other major video game developers have been sued in Arkansas federal court over allegations that popular titles like Fortnite and Call of Duty are addictive by design and ruined the life of a 14-year-old child.
Again? While I agree there is a problem, this is kinda like blaming the fork for making you overweight. Yeah, the cake is colorful or whatever, but you could just not eat so much of it so often? Or if you’re a parent, pay attention to what your child is eating?
Well, we have laws about what can/can’t be put in food, and we have laws requiring the nutrition information and ingredients on processed foods.
Games can be made as addictive as possible without revealing their odds, and can even make players pay for another “spin” without it being considered gambling.
It’s like putting a little bit of nicotine into your cake to make them addictive, but only putting it in every second cake or so.
Yes, as I said, I agree that there is a problem. But the problem can be solved by just not engaging with the addicting elements (and setting limits on your childs gaming, and ultimately by bringing this as a case to the FTC).
Video games and cake are not necessary for life. You can choose to eat other things; do other things. Additionally, video games are not like cake. For example, a person can choose to only engage in the multiplayer elements of a game and not engage with any other part, wheras you can’t decide that you only want to eat the egg whites in the cake. If you take a bite of that cake, you have to engage with every ingredient in that bite.
It may be better for games that include elements such as lootboxes or microtransactions to lock such features behind some sort of age gate, but this has the problem of the game requiring data on children, and that such a feature can easily be defeated or bypassed just like every kid that asked their grandma to buy them GTA.
Regardless, this is not really something that needs to be a lawsuit by private individuals, but rather is something that necessarily should be brought up to the FTC, which would have authority granted by the government to present the necessary arrangements for mitigation of the problem.
From another article on a similar lawsuit filed in Illinois last year (interestingly, the minor in this case is referred to as D.G, and in the Arkansas lawsuit the minor is referred to as G.D.):
The 9-year-old Illinois resident, who goes by D.G. in the complaint, “experienced severe emotional distress, diminishes social interactions, loss of friends, poor hygiene, and withdrawal symptoms such as rage, anger, and physical outbursts,” according to the complaint.
D.G. spends six to eight hours a day playing video games across multiple platforms including the Xbox, PS4, iPhone, and Android devices. The complaint points to a number of patents owned by the gaming companies that allegedly push users into in-game spending.
[…] The suit also named Apple Inc., Google LLC, Microsoft Corp., and Nintendo of America Inc. as defendants.
You know what this sounds like to me? A bad, irresponsible parent refusing to actually parent their child, and instead trying to blame literally the entire video games industry for their negligence. A person looking to try to make a quick buck, not a person that actually wants to change the industry for the better. In my opinion, this is a person that should not be a parent, because they obviously cannot handle that responsibility.
From an article about this lawsuit filed in Arkansas:
The filing claims G.D. plays games over a dozen hours a day and has spent thousands on microtransactions. The suit seeks damages for injuries related to G.D.'s addiction (pain in his hands, shoulders, and elbow), related health care costs, statuary and punitive damages, and legal fees.
This sounds like the same problem, the parent neglecting to set limits for the amount of time their child spends playing video games, and neglecting to limit the types of games their child plays. I mean, in this suit filed in Arkansas, the suit claims that “rubber-banding” is specifically designed to cause gaming addiction. “Rubber-banding,” which is a term from racing games to describe the behavior of other racers speeding up to the player, as if they were on a rubber-band, in order to present the player with challenging gameplay. It is not comparable to something like a lootbox microtransaction, but this suit claims they are the same.
Something that is known to be harmful like this should be regulated. I’m not saying video games should be banned, but maybe they should have to publish their drop rates. Or maybe they shouldn’t be downloadable on devices not owned by adults.
We don’t let kids buy cigarettes. We don’t let them into casinos.
We just need to put rules on what can and can’t be in games marketed to children, and make games marketed to adults more transparent.
Selling something that happens to be addictive is one thing. Specifically designing something to prey on addiction is another. It’s manipulation, and it takes agency away from consumers.
Again? While I agree there is a problem, this is kinda like blaming the fork for making you overweight. Yeah, the cake is colorful or whatever, but you could just not eat so much of it so often? Or if you’re a parent, pay attention to what your child is eating?
Well, we have laws about what can/can’t be put in food, and we have laws requiring the nutrition information and ingredients on processed foods.
Games can be made as addictive as possible without revealing their odds, and can even make players pay for another “spin” without it being considered gambling.
It’s like putting a little bit of nicotine into your cake to make them addictive, but only putting it in every second cake or so.
Yes, as I said, I agree that there is a problem. But the problem can be solved by just not engaging with the addicting elements (and setting limits on your childs gaming, and ultimately by bringing this as a case to the FTC).
Video games and cake are not necessary for life. You can choose to eat other things; do other things. Additionally, video games are not like cake. For example, a person can choose to only engage in the multiplayer elements of a game and not engage with any other part, wheras you can’t decide that you only want to eat the egg whites in the cake. If you take a bite of that cake, you have to engage with every ingredient in that bite.
It may be better for games that include elements such as lootboxes or microtransactions to lock such features behind some sort of age gate, but this has the problem of the game requiring data on children, and that such a feature can easily be defeated or bypassed just like every kid that asked their grandma to buy them GTA.
Regardless, this is not really something that needs to be a lawsuit by private individuals, but rather is something that necessarily should be brought up to the FTC, which would have authority granted by the government to present the necessary arrangements for mitigation of the problem.
From another article on a similar lawsuit filed in Illinois last year (interestingly, the minor in this case is referred to as D.G, and in the Arkansas lawsuit the minor is referred to as G.D.):
You know what this sounds like to me? A bad, irresponsible parent refusing to actually parent their child, and instead trying to blame literally the entire video games industry for their negligence. A person looking to try to make a quick buck, not a person that actually wants to change the industry for the better. In my opinion, this is a person that should not be a parent, because they obviously cannot handle that responsibility.
From an article about this lawsuit filed in Arkansas:
This sounds like the same problem, the parent neglecting to set limits for the amount of time their child spends playing video games, and neglecting to limit the types of games their child plays. I mean, in this suit filed in Arkansas, the suit claims that “rubber-banding” is specifically designed to cause gaming addiction. “Rubber-banding,” which is a term from racing games to describe the behavior of other racers speeding up to the player, as if they were on a rubber-band, in order to present the player with challenging gameplay. It is not comparable to something like a lootbox microtransaction, but this suit claims they are the same.
Something that is known to be harmful like this should be regulated. I’m not saying video games should be banned, but maybe they should have to publish their drop rates. Or maybe they shouldn’t be downloadable on devices not owned by adults.
We don’t let kids buy cigarettes. We don’t let them into casinos.
We just need to put rules on what can and can’t be in games marketed to children, and make games marketed to adults more transparent.
Just don’t become addicted lol
Selling something that happens to be addictive is one thing. Specifically designing something to prey on addiction is another. It’s manipulation, and it takes agency away from consumers.