Actions with conseqeunces?

 What is this, a Telltale game?

For years games have been affixing themselves with the lofty tag of 'Your action will have consequences' to completely oversell the narrative complexity of the story that they've weaved. Through which they've managed to instil the lie that the same is true throughout real life, without remembering the rather hefty asterisk which appends how such is true only with a certain number of people who aren't rich/ big enough to completely go consequence free. And within the gaming sphere this is demonstrated no more aptly in the rampant and irreverent way in which EA has conducted itself for as far back as anyone can remember without a single lick of consequence. (It's like they choose the 'Linear' option in the setting of life.) This has been true as they've assaulted their audience time after time with crappy policies and practises that should have pushed folk to the breaking point, but which they always get away with because they are EA and nothing they ever do can or will be punished. Or at least, that's they way things were. (It seems that maybe the consequences of this story have done a little catching up.)

Of recent years one of the more controversial stories to come out of everyone's favourite mega-conglomerate has been the lootboxes which work to ruin gaming in what I'm steadily understanding to be the most defensible way possible. (That's the only way I can rationalise the sheer quantity of folk who stand up for EA's shenanigans and argue "it's the people's choice, let them spend their own money!") Of course, such defenders seem utterly oblivious to the fact that the more they are allowed to get away with their crap the further such transgressions will be pushed into the rest of gaming, but I doubt any of those folk are capable of basic deductive reasoning anyway so elucidation is a little bit of a lost cause. Meanwhile, more and more of EA's consumers are falling prey to the allure of their Lootbox driven games which randomises the chance of receiving new items in order to entice players to throw away huge sums of money for the most special prizes. All of which is protected under the assertion that, as long as folk are incapable of winning money back it isn't gambling. (Funny as technicalities work, huh?)

If you've been following the cycle of Lootboxes then you'll know that this is an issue that gamers managed to bring in front of various governments in their ire, and such a bold move even managed to get EA full-on banned in one country for their antics. That alone was a huge victory, showcasing that gamers aren't willing to sit and take whatever slop that EA wants to feed us without something of a fight up our sleeves. Unfortunately, this wasn't as lasting as one might hope because EA just decided to change that one country's rules and double down on their tactics elsewhere, like a cornered rat they wanted to get as much out of the situation as they could before their cold desperation came back to bite them. Nothing short of a worldwide ban would force EA to rethink their ways, but of course the biggest markets for gaming move in the most lethargic manners so Electronic Arts have managed to dance around consequences for so very long indeed.

The US initiated conversations about the similarities of lootboxes to gambling and toyed about whether or not to update their laws, until they just forgot about that and let the issue disappear. Similarly, here in the UK we've raised some concern about the effect of these mechanics, and even managed to summon EA to testify for themselves, but whilst their defence has been legendarily pitiful in our circles, I guess the government thought it was decent enough because they sure are dragging their heels about acting on it. The most we've heard from our people about the issue is a call to testify which I can only hope received enough evidence to go to trial, but I literally have no idea. If only we were a little more like The Netherlands in this matter, then there would be some sort of retribution headed EA's way.

For as you've likely spied in the news, over in the Netherlands EA has been hit with a rather starling ultimatum; for every single week that they continue to sell Lootboxes through their number-one cash cow Fifa, EA can expect to rack up an extra 500,000 euros on a bill. It's not exactly the largest slap on the wrist that EA could receive, but it punishes inaction rather substantially to the point where EA would be foolish not to consider giving up their lootbox efforts over in that region for the time being. (Or they could take the hit under the realisation that their astronomical profits could likely swallow such a relatively small fine, but that would be literally placing themselves in direct violation of court orders, I can only imagine even EA aren't that brazen)

All of this comes after the shocking ruling that EA's lootboxes are, in fact, a violation upon their gambling restriction laws. Now that's a real surprise to me because I imagined that their team had successfully managed to bury that argument under a mountain of suppositions and technicalities. It doesn't matter that they specifically designed their lootboxes to feed the same neural pathways that slot machines do, no one cares that they literally hired a psychologist to teach them how to make systems which mirrored gambling, (something they begrudgingly admitted to in front of Parliament) nor does it matter that they intentionally marketed these lootboxes towards kids several times. Only today, apparently it does matter, at least in the Netherlands, because EA are slowly starting to learn the lesson that if their grift is so good that it should be illegal, than it probably is and no one important enough has realised it yet.

As for EA's response to this order, well you can imagine how vapid it is. "Electronic Arts is deeply committed to positive play. We seek to bring choice, fairness, value and fun to all our players in all of our games." I swear, just reading these statements month after month are enough to give me deep trust issues for the rest of my life. I've heard so much crap and lies out of these folk's PR mouths that I'm starting to loose all recognition of what a truthful statement sounds like. (At least I can rely on CDPR to tell me truth, like when they say that the release date for Cyberpunk 2077 is definitely in November and will not cha- oh wait.) If there's one part of all of these toothless press statements that always trips me up is the part about 'choice'. Why do they always harp on about 'choice'? How pathetic is your argument if one of your leading points is "well the consumer always has the choice not to buy our game"; of course they do, that's how commerce works! (Covering these stories is going to slowly drive me insane.)

Just like with the Van der Linde gang in Red Dead Redemption 2, the noose is slowly tightening around the outlaws over as EA and it won't be long before their way of life is completely extinct. And just like Dutch himself, EA are desperate to paint themselves in the light of the glorious saviours of morality, rather than the two-bit thugs they really are. How much further can EA push this until they have to give up Lootboxes altogether and move onto something much worse to make their dues, (Which I suspect to be skyrocketing up the price of the game by another £10) only time can tell. One thing is for certain though, they will not come out of this encounter as wiser and kinder people, just more desperate and sleazy, as always.