did you just compare solitaire to gambling?
Comment on PEGI gives Balatro an 18+ rating for gambling imagery
Skullgrid@lemmy.world 4 days ago
this is starting to be horseshit. Every windows computer has a version of fucking solitare on it , there are other card based games that don’t get this treatment, and the lootboxes are actual gambling.
I thought at the start it was a type of beurocratical problem, but it’s been too long.
1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca 4 days ago
ech@lemm.ee 4 days ago
It’s as much related to gambling as Balatro is.
frezik@midwest.social 4 days ago
That would be the point, yes. Balatro has cards and chips, but chips are just there for keeping points. If Balatro is 18+ for gambling imagery, then so should Solitaire. That would be stupid, so Balatro shouldn’t get it, either.
RedAggroBest@lemmy.world 4 days ago
I think the important note is it’s not just the cards in Balatro. Is it right? Not in my opinion. You have to admit tho, that it uses waaaaay more gambling imagery (you make antes for fuck’s sake)
wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 days ago
The term Ante in the game is used instead of “round” or “level”. It’s a measure of how far you’ve gotten. Each “ante” is made up of three “stakes”, point totals you need to beat in a set number of hands played and cards discarded.
There’s no aspect of choosing how much you risk, or how much you “ante up”. You either beat the points goal (called “chips”) or you lose. There’s no playing of your hand against other hands, bluffing about how good your hand may be to convince others to fold, etc. It’s just you against the score goal.
The game has no elements where you stake chips for rewards or anything like that. It borrows basic elements of scoring mechanics from poker, and uses a lot of poker terms for other purposes, but the closest part to gambling is the ability to buy random card packs between rounds (to customize your deck instead of just having the standard 52 card deck).
You can learn most of this in about 5 minutes with the demo, or by taking some time to watch someone else play on youtube.
damnedfurry@lemmy.world 4 days ago
You literally do not make antes in Balatro, in any way.
You should know that you’re talking about before drawing conclusions.
JackbyDev@programming.dev 3 days ago
It’s near the line, I agree, I see your point, but it’s just the terminology and no gambling mechanics. You don’t set the ante, you just play. They could change the name ante to level and it would be the same. It’s not like you look at your stuff and decide how much you’re willing to risk. (You could argue skipping blinds is this sort of risk analysis like gambling but that’s hardly unique to Balatro.) There is no benefit from stopping earlier because if you lose on ante one or lose on ante seven it’s the same outcome. Also, if you choose to restart one ante one or ante seven it’s the same outcome. Because it’s just a score keeping mechanism. Nothing more.
Arcka@midwest.social 4 days ago
Agreed, gambling doesn’t have to be for money or even anything tangibly real.
tb_@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Not entirely sure about the European PEGI, but the American ESRB is funded by the same companies that it regulates. It was created after the outcry about violent games and was the industry self-regulating to avoid the government getting more involved.
It is a lobby group for the industry, for better and in this case very much for worse.
I assume PEGI is little different.
saltesc@lemmy.world 4 days ago
PEGI and many other groups are private groups. They’re not an authority of any form. They’re not associated with government, public regulation, or public election. They’re a group of people that create their own standards outside of the ISO or any actual regulation representing the public.
Some countries do have actual public systems, but many just have these private groups that know best.
2pt_perversion@lemmy.world 4 days ago
They’re private groups that do the ratings but ESRB is enforced by laws in some Canadian provinces for instance and PEGI is enforced by law in some European countries. They do have a de facto authority in those places as a publisher can’t just decide to disregard their ratings and sell to minors anyway or something.
LorIps@lemmy.world 4 days ago
In Austria PEGI is “enforced” in Vienna while USK is “enforced” in Salzburg (and Germany, the reason why they buy all their games here). And PEGI might be shit, but USK is a million times worse.
Takumidesh@lemmy.world 4 days ago
This is all well and true, but it’s important to note that these organizations exist as a sidestep to regulation, they are formed by industry outsiders as a promise to the regulators that they will be honest about how they rate games (or movies or music) so that the government doesn’t actually get involved and do it’s job.
It’s a form of regulatory capture that allows the industry itself to decide what is harmful to us.
It’s basically the definition of conflict of interest.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
To clarify: the ESRB is the rating arm. The ESA that runs it? That’s the lobbying arm.
tlou3please@lemmy.world 4 days ago
In fairness, I would much rather that than governments directly controlling access, creating an additional form of direct censorship.
Not saying what we have now is great or anything though. I’m not exactly defending it.
HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 days ago
That’s basically why the ESRB was created, it was “Self-Regulate, or we’re just going to ban 80% of games on the market as a scapegoat for Columbine!”
JackbyDev@programming.dev 3 days ago
Luigi Mangione played Among Us, an assassination game!
tb_@lemmy.world 4 days ago
I largely agree, but the interests have gotten misaligned. Back then it was the threat of regulation which changed things up, I think the governments should do a little more of that.
ricecake@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Eeeeh, at least then there would theoretically be public accountability. The FCC has limited censorship power that they’re generally unobjectionable with.
I’m honestly more concerned with the censorship from private enterprises than with government consorship currently. Less accountability and less recourse.
It also really only becomes censorship if the rating system is used to prohibit speech. If we instead made it more like the nutritional guidelines on food it could instead give more of a content breakdown than setting an arbitrary age.
the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
i got curious and looks like PEGI is somewhat similar at least. The ISFE is a self-regulating/co-regulating (w/e that means) body. There seem to be some kinda independent audits but… Looks like they don’t audit so good, if this article is evidence
tb_@lemmy.world 4 days ago
That’s the whole issue with it being a lobby group. It makes them a ton of money, so they are incentivised against making a rating for it because that would draw more attention/limit sales.
And that’s where the whole government lobbying part comes in.
the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
Right i was just clarifying pegis setup for everyone as i’m a yank and didn’t know before looking either