Take-Two Interactive president Karl Slatoff has weighed in about the controversy over loot boxes and gambling, insisting that the firm shares the positioning of the Entertainment Software Association: “We don’t view that thing as gambling.”
Interestingly, Slatoff’s defense within the not-gambling position sounds less like it’s rooted from the legal definition of the word when compared to that experts claim people won’t care so if you don’t hose them too badly. “In terms of the consumer—the noise you hear already in the market right now—i might come across content and over-delivering on content,” he was quoted saying on the Credit Suisse 21st Annual Technology, Media & Telecom Conference (via Gamespot).
“It’s about forcing ensuring you’re aimed at engagement, and I think that’s been our strategy; which has been our focus. So that as long you your talent on that ball, you will find yourself okay. The consumer’s gonna be really happy with what we get.”
Despite an individual backlash against loot boxes in games and rumblings from legislators that something carried out, Take-Two’s stance isn’t whatsoever surprising. Not just for since it is falling in accordance with the ESA, but because it has big post-release monetization plans of its own: Chairman and CEO Strauss Zelnick recently said that the firm hopes to include “recurrent consumer spending opportunities” to all its games sometime soon.
“You can’t force the consumer to perform anything,” Slatoff said. “You try the best to produce the very best experience you probably you can drive an automobile engagement, and driving engagement creates value in franchises. That’s what it is forever been and the way it always is going to be.”
Microtransactions aren’t the same as loot boxes, this is likely more ad units versus the latter that Zelnick was discussing. But as we noted in this recent have a look at why legislation could be bad, government regulation may not be the best solution—the distinction being that our argument wasn’t a defense of loot boxes.