Jump to content


The real death of Blitz


  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

Posit1ve_ #1 Posted 24 May 2019 - 10:42 PM

    Credits Master

  • Players
  • 52217 battles
  • 5,516
  • [_V_]
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

So thanks to ARandomGenieGuy's thread here: http://forum.wotblitz.com/index.php?/topic/103959-anti-lootbox-bill-moves-forward/ I've been informed of this.

 

Blitz could die...

 

And I don't mean all the snarky threads about how it's gone downhill or whatever.

 

I'm talking about Blitz literally being regulated out of existence in the US.

 

Meet "A bill To regulate certain pay-to-win microtransactions and sales of loot boxes in interactive digital entertainment products, and for other purposes. "

   -otherwise known as the "anti-lootbox bill"

 

Full text here: https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2019-05/Loot-Box-Bill-Text.pdf

 

You can read it yourself if you want; but the important thing to know, is that the bill doesn't just ban lootboxes. It also bans "pay-to-win microtransactions".

You know what it includes as "pay-to-win microtransactions"? 

 

Page 7 of the bill includes the following text: 

"The term ‘‘pay-to-win microtransaction’’ means an add-on transaction to a interactive digital entertainment product that  ... eases a user’s progression through content otherwise available within the game without the purchase of such transaction"

 

As of now, the only thing in Blitz that would be legal under this bill, would be WG's sale of camos for gold. EVERYTHING else, premium tanks, premium time, free XP, credits, boosters, etc..." would ALL be illegal. Not just loot boxes. 

 

That means if the bill passes, Blitz as we know it would essentially cease to exist. We all know that sale of premium time/tanks/free XP is where WG makes most of their money. If WG can't make money from these sources, then the only thing I can see is either A. Blitz is shuttered, or B. Blitz becomes a subscription service, likely higher than the cost of premium time now to make up for lost revenue from premium tanks/gold... But if Blitz were to become an exclusively subscription service, I can't imagine the server populations being higher than 10-20% for what they are now, which would also functionally be the death of Blitz.

 

I normally hate doom and gloom, but the fact is that this so-called "anti-lootbox" bill would essentially kill our beloved mobile tank game. Thanks for reading. 


311 tanks in the garage!

 

Your local friendly credits guru: http://forum.wotblit...__fromsearch__1  (Most upvoted post on the forums!!!!)

Certified Batignolles Chatillon 25t addict


Si1verBlood #2 Posted 24 May 2019 - 10:53 PM

    The Armored Garbage Truck

  • Players
  • 14670 battles
  • 736
  • [SR-71]
  • Member since:
    09-27-2015
And since all those reasons apply to almost every freemium game out there: Big doubt of it getting passed unless they want another recession...but then again article 13 passed....so now I am fkng worried....

j_rod #3 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:02 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20898 battles
  • 397
  • [CRU2L]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View PostPosit1ve_, on 24 May 2019 - 04:42 PM, said:

So thanks to ARandomGenieGuy's thread here: http://forum.wotblitz.com/index.php?/topic/103959-anti-lootbox-bill-moves-forward/ I've been informed of this.

 

Blitz could die...

 

And I don't mean all the snarky threads about how it's gone downhill or whatever.

 

I'm talking about Blitz literally being regulated out of existence in the US.

 

Meet "A bill To regulate certain pay-to-win microtransactions and sales of loot boxes in interactive digital entertainment products, and for other purposes. "

   -otherwise known as the "anti-lootbox bill"

 

Full text here: https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2019-05/Loot-Box-Bill-Text.pdf

 

You can read it yourself if you want; but the important thing to know, is that the bill doesn't just ban lootboxes. It also bans "pay-to-win microtransactions".

You know what it includes as "pay-to-win microtransactions"? 

 

Page 7 of the bill includes the following text: 

"The term ‘‘pay-to-win microtransaction’’ means an add-on transaction to a interactive digital entertainment product that  ... eases a user’s progression through content otherwise available within the game without the purchase of such transaction"

 

As of now, the only thing in Blitz that would be legal under this bill, would be WG's sale of camos for gold. EVERYTHING else, premium tanks, premium time, free XP, credits, boosters, etc..." would ALL be illegal. Not just loot boxes. 

 

That means if the bill passes, Blitz as we know it would essentially cease to exist. We all know that sale of premium time/tanks/free XP is where WG makes most of their money. If WG can't make money from these sources, then the only thing I can see is either A. Blitz is shuttered, or B. Blitz becomes a subscription service, likely higher than the cost of premium time now to make up for lost revenue from premium tanks/gold... But if Blitz were to become an exclusively subscription service, I can't imagine the server populations being higher than 10-20% for what they are now, which would also functionally be the death of Blitz.

 

I normally hate doom and gloom, but the fact is that this so-called "anti-lootbox" bill would essentially kill our beloved mobile tank game. Thanks for reading. 

 

Woah woah woah, easy with the doomsday thread there brother...

 

This bill, sponsored by Josh Hawley from Missouri, is specifically aimed at limiting the sale of loot boxes to minors - meaning that games targeted at children under the age of 18 would be prevented from selling loot boxes or P2W tactics. Realistically, this bill would likely mean that WG would simply have to be more transparent with their crate system and would have to put in to place mechanisms so that parents have more control over purchases. It also means that Apple, Steam, etc would have to be more diligent in what they allow in their stores as they'd have liability as well.



Si1verBlood #4 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:04 PM

    The Armored Garbage Truck

  • Players
  • 14670 battles
  • 736
  • [SR-71]
  • Member since:
    09-27-2015

https://www.polygon.com/2019/5/23/18637556/anti-loot-box-bill-microtransaction-ban-legal-analysis-esa

Feel that this is more informative of the bill itself...from my pov prem tanks are safe...unless considered as OP by authorities (credit making and xp grinding are not competitive)...if WG starts selling  tech tree tanks that would fall under the bill tho...and buying xp for gold is on the edge and a lot of things in blitz are in the same position....



j_rod #5 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:08 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20898 battles
  • 397
  • [CRU2L]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

Here's a summary - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5993693-Protecting-Children-From-Abusive-Games-Act.html

 

They key is the second point under the first sentence - WG is going to have to find a way to limit transactions by minors.

 

I have two kids myself - 6 & 4 and they are already finding ways to get in to stuff they shouldn't on apps (harmless stuff, but stuff that costs $$$). I don't see this as a bad thing at all and there is too much money at stake to just walk away from this market. 



Posit1ve_ #6 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:18 PM

    Credits Master

  • Players
  • 52217 battles
  • 5,516
  • [_V_]
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

View Postj_rod, on 24 May 2019 - 06:02 PM, said:

 

Woah woah woah, easy with the doomsday thread there brother...

 

This bill, sponsored by Josh Hawley from Missouri, is specifically aimed at limiting the sale of loot boxes to minors - meaning that games targeted at children under the age of 18 would be prevented from selling loot boxes or P2W tactics. Realistically, this bill would likely mean that WG would simply have to be more transparent with their crate system and would have to put in to place mechanisms so that parents have more control over purchases. It also means that Apple, Steam, etc would have to be more diligent in what they allow in their stores as they'd have liability as well.

 

Did you even read the bill?

 

Don't buy the simplified crap used to sell this crap sandwich. It targets more than lootboxes.

 

First, start by reading what is defined as "Minor-Oriented Game". The definition is very loose, can be applied in a very-heavy handed manner. Under sections B, H, and J1, one could reasonably argue that Blitz is a "Minor-Oriented Game" under this definition

 

Secondly, actually read my f***ing post, as well as the definition of "pay-to-win". 

 

Yes loot boxes are included under the bill, but it also happens to include everything else in the game.

 

View PostSi1verBlood, on 24 May 2019 - 06:04 PM, said:

https://www.polygon.com/2019/5/23/18637556/anti-loot-box-bill-microtransaction-ban-legal-analysis-esa

Feel that this is more informative of the bill itself...from my pov prem tanks are safe...unless considered as OP by authorities (credit making and xp grinding are not competitive)...if WG starts selling  tech tree tanks that would fall under the bill tho...and buying xp for gold is on the edge and a lot of things in blitz are in the same position....

 

No, Premium tanks are not safe. One thing Premiums do is give you increased credit earnings, which would make it illegal under sections B1 and B3 of the definition of "pay-to-win". They also allow you to train crew skills without having to train the crew to 100%, also making them illegal under section B1 and B3. 


Edited by Posit1ve_, 24 May 2019 - 11:18 PM.

311 tanks in the garage!

 

Your local friendly credits guru: http://forum.wotblit...__fromsearch__1  (Most upvoted post on the forums!!!!)

Certified Batignolles Chatillon 25t addict


Posit1ve_ #7 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:21 PM

    Credits Master

  • Players
  • 52217 battles
  • 5,516
  • [_V_]
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

View Postj_rod, on 24 May 2019 - 06:08 PM, said:

Here's a summary - https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5993693-Protecting-Children-From-Abusive-Games-Act.html

 

They key is the second point under the first sentence - WG is going to have to find a way to limit transactions by minors.

 

I have two kids myself - 6 & 4 and they are already finding ways to get in to stuff they shouldn't on apps (harmless stuff, but stuff that costs $$$). I don't see this as a bad thing at all and there is too much money at stake to just walk away from this market. 

 

Read the actual bill. When it comes to laws, the devil is in the details. 

311 tanks in the garage!

 

Your local friendly credits guru: http://forum.wotblit...__fromsearch__1  (Most upvoted post on the forums!!!!)

Certified Batignolles Chatillon 25t addict


j_rod #8 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:22 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20898 battles
  • 397
  • [CRU2L]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View PostPosit1ve_, on 24 May 2019 - 05:18 PM, said:

 

Did you even read the bill?

 

Don't buy the simplified crap used to sell this crap sandwich. It targets more than lootboxes.

 

First, start by reading what is defined as "Minor-Oriented Game". The definition is very loose, can be applied in a very-heavy handed manner. Under sections B, H, and J1, one could reasonably argue that Blitz is a "Minor-Oriented Game" under this definition

 

Secondly, actually read my f***ing post, as well as the definition of "pay-to-win". 

 

Yes loot boxes are included under the bill, but it also happens to include everything else in the game.

 

 

No, Premium tanks are not safe. One thing Premiums do is give you increased credit earnings, which would make it illegal under sections B1 and B3 of the definition of "pay-to-win". They also allow you to train crew skills without having to train the crew to 100%, also making them illegal under section B1 and B3. 

 

Thank you for the patronization and yes I did read it here - https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2019-05/Loot-Box-Bill-Text.pdf 

 

You're correct, in its current state, the definitions of "minor-oriented game" are overly broad and the likelihood of this being passed as-is is practically nil. This is as much a pandering to the constituent base as it is anything else. 

I get your concern, but I think your post is over the top and the fear is misplaced. If I'm wrong, I'll buy you a beer as I'll have quite a bit more disposable income at that point. 



j_rod #9 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:25 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20898 battles
  • 397
  • [CRU2L]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View PostPosit1ve_, on 24 May 2019 - 05:21 PM, said:

 

Read the actual bill. When it comes to laws, the devil is in the details. 

 

I agree....unfortunately I have to deal with contracts quite often. A simple move of the comma can cost thousands. 

 

Again, the way this bill is currently written is overly broad to the point of killing an industry. It's the same as a company writing a non-compete that essentially prevents employees from working in the industry at all - it's a scare tactic. 
 

Hawley is trying to get people's attention....he's got it. Beer bet says it changes drastically as it moves through the Senate and if passed, through the house. 



_UrgleMcPurfle_ #10 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:28 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12376 battles
  • 2,788
  • [HATED]
  • Member since:
    07-19-2016

This is one of the most idiotic proposals I've ever read. Senator Hawley is undoubtedly an educated and knowledgeable man, but clearly this is not the case in video games.



j_rod #11 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:32 PM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20898 battles
  • 397
  • [CRU2L]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Post_UrgleMcPurfle_, on 24 May 2019 - 05:28 PM, said:

This is one of the most idiotic proposals I've ever read. Senator Hawley is undoubtedly an educated and knowledgeable man, but clearly this is not the case in video games.

 

Think about it though - it's a great negotiation tactic. First rule of negotiation - never give rate. Second rule - if you're going to give rate, always go high.

 

If his goal is to limit predatory tactics online (as well as push his overall agenda), he starts with something that's overly broad and unreasonable and then backs it down to something that makes sense and is palatable to everyone. I don't think any reasonable person that knows how video game economics works would think this would pass as-is. But he's certainly set the stage and if he can limit the sale of random crates, sales to minors, etc it's a win for him. 



Blartch #12 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:35 PM

    Causer of Unrest

  • Players
  • 59988 battles
  • 8,157
  • [SPUD]
  • Member since:
    05-01-2015

View Post_UrgleMcPurfle_, on 24 May 2019 - 06:28 PM, said:

This is one of the most idiotic proposals I've ever read. Senator Hawley is undoubtedly an educated and knowledgeable man, but clearly this is not the case in video games.

 

I work frequently in DC shooting interviews with politicians, politicians' staff members, and the people that actually write most bills, lobbyists.

 

Trust me... you're often pretty safe to doubt.



ARandomGenieGuy #13 Posted 24 May 2019 - 11:50 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 18072 battles
  • 1,884
  • [CRUEL]
  • Member since:
    06-26-2014

View Post_UrgleMcPurfle_, on 24 May 2019 - 05:28 PM, said:

This is one of the most idiotic proposals I've ever read. Senator Hawley is undoubtedly an educated and knowledgeable man, but clearly this is not the case in video games.

Why is it idiotic? If the bill gets refined and some of the points are removed that’s a great initiative toward making the games less predatory.

View Postj_rod, on 24 May 2019 - 05:32 PM, said:

 

Think about it though - it's a great negotiation tactic. First rule of negotiation - never give rate. Second rule - if you're going to give rate, always go high.

 

If his goal is to limit predatory tactics online (as well as push his overall agenda), he starts with something that's overly broad and unreasonable and then backs it down to something that makes sense and is palatable to everyone. I don't think any reasonable person that knows how video game economics works would think this would pass as-is. But he's certainly set the stage and if he can limit the sale of random crates, sales to minors, etc it's a win for him. 

 

Exactly this. 

FussyRude #14 Posted 25 May 2019 - 12:27 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 4910 battles
  • 830
  • [AZUR]
  • Member since:
    02-14-2018

Win-Win, the game maybe change for good, or for bad...

 To destroy "pay-to-win" Wg will:

a) Make balance premium tank to be less powerful than tree tech lines.

b) Increase/decrease the premium certificate drop rate in daily mission boxes(with this can change prices in store for premium time).

c) Increase adds in game,but reduce the free gold adds.

 Those are a few changes...


#LoveLuchs

_UrgleMcPurfle_ #15 Posted 25 May 2019 - 12:55 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12376 battles
  • 2,788
  • [HATED]
  • Member since:
    07-19-2016

View PostARandomGenieGuy, on 24 May 2019 - 05:50 PM, said:

Why is it idiotic? If the bill gets refined and some of the points are removed that’s a great initiative toward making the games less predatory.

 

I somewhat agree. Pay-to-win really isn't an issue (look at Star Wars Battlefront 2) because if it really is causing problems, the company will feel it (and I'll elaborate on their definition of P2W below). However, I fully support the removal of crates—without them, I'd have gladly paid for the Amx 30B in gold.

 

The accepted definition of P2W is 7(A)(ii) found on line 14 of page 8. Pay-to-win is simple: as the name suggests, it entails a customer paying for in-game items so that they will win more. Pay-to-progress is not the same thing. Just because you can progress further does not mean you will win more. I mean, there's no better proof of that than Blitz; just look at how many morons there are who buy 20 premiums only to have their win rate remain at 39%.

 

It's pretty clear that pay-to-progress is how many free games keep their developers' lights on. As long as free progression is reasonable (as it is in Blitz), this system is not predatory and very customer-friendly. As long as customers can choose not to pay and still have an equal chance to win, a game cannot be labeled "pay-to-win".

 

View Postj_rod, on 24 May 2019 - 05:32 PM, said:

 

Think about it though - it's a great negotiation tactic. First rule of negotiation - never give rate. Second rule - if you're going to give rate, always go high.

 

If his goal is to limit predatory tactics online (as well as push his overall agenda), he starts with something that's overly broad and unreasonable and then backs it down to something that makes sense and is palatable to everyone. I don't think any reasonable person that knows how video game economics works would think this would pass as-is. But he's certainly set the stage and if he can limit the sale of random crates, sales to minors, etc it's a win for him. 

 

I would be perfectly fine if this was a negotiation tactic that only attacked crates and sales to minors, though I really don't think sales to minors are an issue at this point. What is really stupid to me is how they approach P2W—not only is their definition just incorrect, it simply isn't an issue in the first place. Look at the top 10 or 20 games on Steam. Look at all the big esport games. How many of them are P2W? 

j_rod #16 Posted 25 May 2019 - 01:06 AM

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20898 battles
  • 397
  • [CRU2L]
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011

View Post_UrgleMcPurfle_, on 24 May 2019 - 06:55 PM, said:

I would be perfectly fine if this was a negotiation tactic that only attacked crates and sales to minors, though I really don't think sales to minors are an issue at this point. What is really stupid to me is how they approach P2W—not only is their definition just incorrect, it simply isn't an issue in the first place. Look at the top 10 or 20 games on Steam. Look at all the big esport games. How many of them are P2W? 

 

Based on the definition in the bill, all of them. Which was my point - it's over the top. 

 

That said, I'm speculating. Who knows, maybe they do fully intend to push this through as-is. I'm not worried about it though bc $$$ talks and video games are a big industry. Between lobbyists, lawsuits, etc I don't believe this has a chance of going through without major changes.


Edited by j_rod, 25 May 2019 - 01:06 AM.


Absolute_Sniper #17 Posted 25 May 2019 - 01:11 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 35494 battles
  • 2,586
  • [CRU2L]
  • Member since:
    11-05-2015
If it happens, it happens. Life is too short to stress over things beyond our control.

Kiilu #18 Posted 25 May 2019 - 01:34 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20751 battles
  • 629
  • [JUVO]
  • Member since:
    08-26-2017

View PostSi1verBlood, on 24 May 2019 - 05:53 PM, said:

And since all those reasons apply to almost every freemium game out there: Big doubt of it getting passed unless they want another recession...but then again article 13 passed....so now I am fkng worried....

 

I have to go with this guy.^^^^^^^^^^^ How many Russian tools do you see in America. This one. Great game. Its not going any where. Help young players. Tell your friends. That how it gets better.

godzilla5599_warrior #19 Posted 25 May 2019 - 01:40 AM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 608 battles
  • 149
  • Member since:
    06-16-2016
So play on the EU server or Russia,hell I've got an EU account that I never use it was just an experiment to see if I could hook up and play or would ping kill me? It worked fine enough....

acrisis #20 Posted 25 May 2019 - 01:43 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20335 battles
  • 10,942
  • [III-X]
  • Member since:
    12-27-2014

Undoubtedly it will be watered down and then it remains to be seen if and how it would pass in which form.

 

I would be happy if there’s absolutely no more gambling / loot boxes / whatever interdependent schemes ... and only straight up sales. 


 

Forum essentials:  > Desktop mode 
Check recent threads. Check WG staff threads. Use search.
    > WG Bugs and current update     > Feedback     > Vehicle Bay     > Guides     > Videos 

 

     BE  (+)   

    Got lag issues ?  >> Pingplotter thread  << 
Blitz Community Coalition | Looney Tooners | Triarii | Blitz University | Basic Training  | Mentor
 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users