The Interactive Gambling Act, in Australia, provides the framework within which companies can offer gambling services on-line. If money can be won or lost, then it's covered by the legislation, but only if the rewards are real world.
Jagex have dodged this bullet by ensuring that all of the potential prizes in Squeal of Fortune can only be used within Runescape. It may be an XP lamp, which boosts the player's skill abilities, or a weapon which gives an edge in combat. But they are all fundamentally pixels.
Anna Gordon continued, "The amendment proposed will mean that if actual money can be lost on the game it will be defined as a “gambling service” and therefore prohibited."
Jagex is likely to argue that no money is ever 'lost', because the player always wins something. It might be a relatively useless in-game item like a cabbage, but it's still a prize. This isn't a view shared by Federal Senator Nick Xenophon, who will be advising that these are precisely the kind of loopholes which have to be plugged.
These are big stakes for both parties. If Xenophon is successful, then it's inconceivable that Jagex will side-step the problem by making Runescape unavailable in Australia. That would be a massive player-base locked out and a hit to their profits which couldn't be absorbed. Nor would they simply stop Squeal of Fortune being available in that country only. The logistics of altering the game code would be very cost prohibitive.
In short, if the feature can't be run in Australia, then it's unlikely to be included anywhere else. It could well mean the end of the unpopular cash-cow for the whole of Runescape.
Comments
It sounds like it's all kicking off over there in Australia. That's one way to garner public support!
I don't know how the house reacted. However a guy called Tom Waterhouse could inadvertently help. He is a bookmaker who bet large on saturation TV advertising for his sports betting business. He even got onto football commentary panels to give his thoughts and odds. Public reaction has been extremely adverse, that may help Nick get the support he needs for the amendment.
Ah! Thank you very much for the heads up. I will certainly like to read that when I'm back off my holiday.
How was it received in the house?
Nick introduced his Interactive Gambling Amendment (Virtual Credits) Bill 2013 last week.
Contact Anna Gordon at his website for Nick’s speech and the explanatory memorandum. She should have some .pdfs laying around. Or I can attach and email them? Just need to advise which email you would like them sent to.
Ah! Thank you very much. :)
Jo - I'm not sure on the Quakers Hills story. Dr King is currently in transit abroad and may not have the study on him but can be reached here daniel.king@adelaide.edu.au
Fargy - An interesting study there. I'd quite like to read that one. Is the kid from Quakers Hill the same one you linked me to before? I thought the bill was higher on that story.
Simon - You speak for us all! They actually changed that rule to facilitate the SoF. I would also like to see it go away.
Just another media report on Runescape in Australia.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/natio...
One of the report's authors, Dr King mentioned this in an email to me,
""Our study asked participants to indicate the games they played that featured gambling. Runescape came up, as did games like Red Dead Redemption and GTA. Social media games like Slotomania and Zynga Poker were popular too."
I play this game and Squeel of fortune is one of the things that ruined the game experince for me. They have a strict rule that says that you aren't allowed to purchase in game curency for real money. But it's the exact thing they are doing but legit. What I hope to see is that Jagex removes this feature.