• starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    The reading comprehension situation is crazy

    LaLuzDelSol does not think cosmetic loot boxes are comparable to porn. They were making an analogy, not an equation. “A is like B in that C” does not imply that A is morally equivalent to B, it means that they share a similarity. In this case, “putting 10 minutes of hardcore sex in an otherwise g-rated film” is like “incorporating gambling into an otherwise child-friendly game,” in that “even if the majority of the work is child-friendly, the not-child-friendly aspects make the work as a whole not child-friendly.”

    • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      The analogy only works if you believe gambling does the same relative harm as porn.

      That is the problem I have with their terrible attempt at an analogy. Not only does it imply it’s comparable, it has to be for the analogy to work as intended.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        ❌ Incorrect

        An analogy is not an equation. If most of a movie is G-rated, but it incorporates 10 minutes of hardcore sex, then the movie isn’t suitable for children. If most of a game is E-rated, but it incorporates gambling, then the game isn’t suitable for children.

        Most of the game isn’t gambling, to pretend otherwise is just silly.

        Just because most of the [game/movie] is suitable for kids doesn’t mean the [game/movie] as a whole is suitable for kids. Do you see how both of those things share that similarity, despite not being morally equivalent?

        *Edited to more precisely and concisely make my point

        • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          You’re explicity suggesting the thing is not suitable for kids, while also explicity calling something that isn’t gambling, gambling. That’s the point Cosmetic lootboxes are suitable for kids. Unlike porn or gambling.

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            It’s not gambling, it just happens to function literally exactly the same as a slot machine, except that instead of getting money back on a jackpot, you get digital clothes and player characters

            It is literally gambling you twit

            • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 hours ago

              By that logic all games with any random component is gambling… which would include pretty much every game ever published. If Diablo isn’t gambling, then neither is genshin.

              • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 hours ago

                If player characters in Diablo were locked inside a digital slot machine that you could pay real money to spin, and players were heavily incentivized to do so because you can’t reasonably expect to get all of the best characters without spending a bunch of real life money on spins, you would have a point.

                You should really try to seek out other viewpoints. Literally every discussion about this topic overwhelmingly agrees that gacha games are gambling.