Federal Loot Box Inquiry Delays Report To Late November

The Federal loot box inquiry has been pushed back for a second time, with the Senate granting the committee a second extension before it is due to report.

Originally due to report back by mid-September, the Senate initially bumped that date to October 17. At the start of this week, that deadline was pushed back to November 27.

41 submissions have been made to the inquiry already, most of which came from industry, academia and various government departments and stakeholders. The most prominent responses from industry and government can be read below.

NSW And Victoria Push For Loot Boxes To Be Classified

With just under a month until the Senate inquiry into "gaming microtransactions for chance-based items" - loot boxes and such - reports back, more submissions to the inquiry have been made public.

Read more

The Major Responses So Far Into The Senate Loot Box Inquiry

The Senate inquiry into loot boxes isn't due to report back until mid-September. Ahead of their deliberations, members of industry, academia and the public have made submissions to the panel. Here's what they had to say.

Read more

The Netherlands Gambling Authority (NGA) also provided supplementary information on how they've approached loot boxes. While stressing that loot boxes were not banned there, the NGA wrote that "the integration of loot boxes into games of skill" was "inconsistent with Dutch gaming policy to limit the negative effects of games of chance as much as possible".

"According to our analyses, loot boxes have, on average, an addiction potential between moderate and high," the Dutch authority explained. "A lot of loot boxes have integral elements that are similar to slot machines. Loot boxes with a higher score are often comparable with blackjack or roulette in terms of addiction potential."

The executive manager of the Australian Communications and Media Authority, Jonquil Ritter, also told the committee by letter in early September that automatically winning a virtual item "does not determine whether the service" - loot boxes in this case - "is a 'gambling service'".

"The issue is whether the item that will be won is 'money or anything else of value'. Consequently, offering small prizes in traditional interactive gambling would not necessarily evade the application of the [Interactive Gambling Act, 2001]."


Comments

    Is this due to the gambling...cough, cough game publishing lobbyists wanting more time to raise cash to "incentivise" the government to see their point of view?

      "It's ok to gamble while white."

        ... but you want your loot box to be full of coloured skins. Orange is the legendary.

    What if its delayed cause they were playing... I mean researching games and list track of time and didnt finish their report. "I swear I finished my report, but could I have a couple more weeks to examine Overwatch and COD"

    Probably just by-election freeze or their circulating it for legal opinion... game industry lobby seems cynical of US politics as they arent organised likevthatvin Australua and most publishers tend to be rogue and confrontational to politics and critics on loot boxes.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now