Comment on Steam :: About the New York Attorney General lawsuit against Valve
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 day agoI think lots of people have a problem or could get a problem with that, and don’t realize it. I mean it is similar to the shitty microtransactions situation on smartphone games. I say similar in the sense, that most people don’t have a problem with it, compared to the population and how many have a problem. This should not be an excuse for exploitation of the weak ones.
But besides that, I don’t even think its a problem with a few only. Even the potential of getting addicted is bad. There are reasons why children (i mean under 18) are not allowed in casinos. Are these games and the gambling with CS:GO and Team Fortress 2 for 18+ only? Whatever it is, we all know younger people play these games too. If not the microphone is a good indication… but I digress here. I hope the market place in Steam will go away. There is no good reason for, other than Valve making money. There is not benefit for humanity or the people.
BTW the situation with my bro was not that too bad, just saying. It was a slight problem, but one that showed me first hand (or is it second hand?). I am also glad you made it through your difficult times.
rmrf@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
I appreciate your message at the end :) One of the things I appreciate about lemmy is the conversations are not assumed adversarial like they are on most socials.
I see what you’re saying, and I agree microtransactions deserve to burn in hell. I also realize that people have an issue with realizing an addiction, even their own, and even when they’re “aware” of it. I don’t want to point the finger at other larger societal issues as a default strategy, but we do have hard evidence from other countries where these issues get caught earlier because of public campaigns combating the stigma around such problems in tandem with the social safety net required to truly fix them.
I don’t think gambling is good, I’m not even fully convinced that the csgo cases should persist, and my intent is not to convince you they should. My stance is purely philosophical/logical in the sense that limitations should not be placed on the public with the sole justification of protecting a subset, especially children, since it is the parents’ entire role as guardian to protect them from the hardships in life. I’m sure I’m ignoring the nuance in my stance by saying that, but the general idea is there; something being bad for some people should not be the only reason nobody can have it, and that goes for drugs, art, communication, bed times, expression, etc. I know they’re problems worth protecting the affected subsets from, but legislative blanket bans are not the correct tool.
Glad to hear all is well, by the way. Addiction is a hell of a disease and gambling especially can have quite the blast radius. I hope you don’t see me as an enemy