Lootbox is not gambling, according to the New Zealand gambling regulatory group. Its Department of Home Affairs Gambling Compliance Department told Gamasutra this week that “the Department is of the opinion that loot boxes do not fit within the legal definition of gambling.”
In a statement, DIA’s Trish Millward said she was aware of the international discussion surrounding lootboxes in video games following the controversy surrounding Star Wars: Battlefront II. The reason lootboxes don’t fit into the legal definition of gambling, he said, is because “gamers don’t buy loot boxes looking to make money or something that can be turned into money.”
Spending real money on lootboxes that just give you a chance to get something might “seem a gamble,” Millward admits, but they don’t meet the legal definition. As such, DIA “does not have the ability to regulate activities under the 2003 Gambling Act.
Millward ended his note by saying DIA will continue to monitor discussions around lootboxes in the game. This is an expected response, considering the problem is relatively new.
New Zealand is only the last country to consider the topic of loot boxes in games, as EA itself spoke on December 6th. In Australia, gambling regulator Victoria says loot boxes are gambling, according to Kotaku. The Battlefront II lootbox contains groups of random items, some of which can affect gameplay, rather than being cosmetic in nature as in Overwatch. For a period of time, Battlefront II players were able to spend real money on these loot boxes, which gave some the impression that Battlefront II was a gambling machine.
