• JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Don’t regulate actual gameplay which is entertaining, but regulate strongly microtransactions and the like.

    • Ilflish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Not sure I totally agree. The idea of researching and applying addictive traits to anything feels like something to be regulated. It’s not literally brainwashing but applying pressure to these topic can make anything positive into a negative. Even something like getting people to exercise could turn into someone collapsing if addictive qualities were applied.

      • Ummdustry@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Ok, but you can’t actually isolate ‘knowledge of addictive behaviour’ into a regulatable thing without an absurd amount of government oversight i.e. examing every employees work to check they aren’t using that pesky psyschology degree.

    • Ummdustry@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Ok, but what would be the legal precendent there? We regulate tabacco precisely because of it’s psychological and medical effects, not because it’s bad for your wallet. This lawsuit depends upon a claim of addiction because you can’t just regulate something for annoying you.

      • minibyte@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Call it what it is. At the very least, loot boxes and the like should be considered outright gambling – which is highly regulated.