| By: |
Koeder, Marco Josef;
Tanaka, Ema;
Mitomo, Hitoshi |
| Abstract: |
This paper looks at the recent discussion on "Lootboxes" by regulators in
several countries referring to the case of Japan in the light of business
model revolutions. A game-of-chance mechanic which can be found in more and
more in digital games to acquire virtual items and to help monetize these
games. These Lootboxes have created several negative reactions and calls for
regulation because if their gambling like elements. Japan had similar
mechanics in games for a long time called "Gacha" and could serve as an
interesting insight into its regulation. Firstly as introduction, this paper
explains what Lootboxes are in comparison to "Gacha" in Japan and investigates
whether they would qualify as gambling using a gambling taxonomy. Lootboxes
and Gacha can be seen as very similar and comparable and both would not
qualify as gambling in traditional way as long as it could not be converted
into real world currency. Secondly, it reviews recent regulatory actions in
Western and Asian countries and their reasonings to regulate or not to
regulate "Lootbox" mechanism in games. Regulators approaches to "Lootbox"
differ from country to country, from very strict to tolerant, often depending
on their understanding and perception of Lootbox mechanis. Thirdly, this paper
introduces a player's perception on Lootbox elements and business models.
According to a third-party survey, players have a certain preferences and
expectation on how to pay for a game or in-game items in accordance with the
business model of the game. Several empirical cases showed that an
inconsistency or lack of transparency between game players and game companies
on how to pay for games could be a trigger for complaints by players, not
whether it gambling or not, Finally, this paper summarizes findings from
empirical studies and points out the necessity of further studies on "game of
chance" elements in games. In the case of so called free-to-play games, the
lack of winning probability could be a key issue while for full price games
the issue lies more in a lack of transparency of the business model. The
former suggests the importance to increase the transparency of "probability"
to give players more chances to calculate their chance of winning before they
paying for game of chance elements. The latter implies that business models of
the game industry have been transforming and games as well as their
monetization strategies could be expanded and modified interactively and
ceaselessly creating issues on the players side. Both user side and developer
side behavior needs to be studies more. But the focus should not only be on
gambling and addictive problems -which are important- but also on the issue of
business model transformation and the interaction between players and
developers in a networked environment. |
| Keywords: |
Free-to-play,Lootbox,Gacha,consumer protection,gambling,micro transactions,games,Japan,Europe,US,regulation,virtual goods |
| Date: |
2018 |
| URL: |
http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:itsb18:190385&r=all |