I guess it's not gambling, or it'd be covered by the UKs existing laws around gambling that set the minimum age to 18.

edit: I'm pointing out the UK has apparently decided lootboxes are not gambling, because if they did classify it as gambling it'd be covered by existing gambling laws that restrict it to 18+.

Not that I personally hold that opinion, though I can see how I could have phrased my original message better.

It's a stupid decision by the government, they should be 18+ and recognised for being gambling.

▲

Razengan 8 hours ago | parent [-]

> I'm pointing out the UK has apparently decided lootboxes are not gambling

Wow, considering how the UK has been going full Taliban on everything why stop at lootboxes? Guess the politicians are getting some money/bribes from the lootbox companies.

	▲	alexfoo 20 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		There's a nuance here. Consider these two positions that both mean that the UK Government does not currently recognise lootboxes as a form of gambling: A: The UK Government has decided that lootboxes are not gambling. B: The UK government has not decided whether lootboxes are gambling or not. The current situation is a lot closer to B than A. The UK Government has decided not to extend the existing Gambling laws to cover video game loot boxes. The existing laws did not automatically cover them, so a decision has to be made whether to amend the laws or not. Instead it has asked the industry to self-regulate. In 2022 there was a review that asked for improvements, restricting some access and mandatory spending controls. There have been other reviews and studies. It seems quite clear that the industry is not doing enough (no surprise, it's a cash cow for them) so it's likely to mean the Government will crank up the legislation to force their hand, but the wheels of Government move slowly; way too slowly for many people who have been affected by this.