A Canadian judge has rejected a plaintiff’s claim thatEA’s loot boxes should be considered “unlawful gaming,” but has allowed the class-action lawsuit to continue due to a separate accusation. The implementation of loot boxes in gaming has faced increased scrutiny in recent years, withEAoften finding itself at the forefront of such legal disputes.
Mentioning loot boxes around gamers is likely to leave a sour taste in their mouth, as the practice has been thoroughly condemned by the general gaming community. The discourse surrounding the supposed predatory nature of the monetization practice reached a fever pitch in 2017following the release ofStar WarsBattlefront 2, a multiplayer title published by EA that (at launch) included what is widely considered one of the most egregious versions of loot boxes yet seen in the industry. Many dubbed the experience pay-to-win given that iconic characters such as Princess Leia and Darth Vader were effectively stuck behind a paywall. The backlash was so intense that Belgium banned loot boxes, making it illegal for them to be purchased with real-life currencies. EA has consistently opposed such moves.
RELATED:New FIFA Game is Happening Without EA
So EA was understandably pleased to see judge Justice Fleming claim that loot boxes in its video games do not constitute “unlawful gaming,” believing that the accusation was “bound to fail.” Mark Sutherland has filed a class-action lawsuit on the behalf of all residents in British Columbia who havepurchased loot boxes in EA gamessince 2008, the first of many legal proceedings due to go ahead against video games companies in the province. Sutherland alleges that EA is guilty of “deceptive and unconscionable acts or practices,” as outlined by British Columbia’s Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act.
While Fleming concluded that the accusations about “unlawful gaming or gambling” had “no reasonable prospect of success,” he has allowed the lawsuit to proceed regarding the allegation thatEA may have utilized “deceptive acts or practices"with its loot boxes. EA has since provided a statement that detailed its satisfaction with the court’s decision, which it believes to have reaffirmed its position that neither loot boxes nor any other form of monetization in its titles constitute gambling. EA did not opt to comment on the fact that the lawsuit was granted permission to proceed.
Since theStar Wars Battlefront 2fiasco, loot boxes have been perpetually mocked and denounced by gamers and developers alike, and in 2019 EA seemingly sought to rebrand the maligned form of monetization when testifying before the UK government. Loot boxes were described by EA as “Surprise Mechanics,” which only furthered the disdain that many held against them and no doubt fueled the transition towards other forms of microtransactions, such as a Battle Pass and items that only change cosmetic properties.
MORE:Why A Dead Space 2 Remake Could Focus on Psychological Horror
