CS:GO controversy

[Chindie]

Anyone been following the Counterstrike:GO stuff going on the moment?

The scam side of things isn't that surprising, especially since at this point I tink anyone who isn't viewing YouTube personalities as hilariously dirty and compromised is not paying enough attention (and ultimately it's this kinda thing that will get legislation passed soon enough), and the reaction by the Youtube guys involved is hilarious in a caught red handed kinda way, but I was astounded that Valve had basically been promoting a gambling side track to Counterstrike. Ugh. Makes me feel a bit dirty somehow. 

[Risso]

Could you explain what all this means Chindie.  There always used to be chat from Chinese gold sellers in the trade channel about CS:GO skins, but I was always completely unaware of what it all means.  Still am tbh.

[AVFCDAN]

Your best bet is watching the h3h3 video on it all.

I personally thought Syndicate was a good guy, he does work with charities and having seen his daily vlogs he comes across as a decent guy but its slimy to say the least.

[Chindie]

1 hour ago, Risso said:

Could you explain what all this means Chindie.  There always used to be chat from Chinese gold sellers in the trade channel about CS:GO skins, but I was always completely unaware of what it all means.  Still am tbh.

Sorry I would have explained last night. Very roughly (and no doubt wrong in some respects)...

CS:GO has a system where you can gain skins and items. Valve introduced a system to that where you can gamble those skins to potentially win more or better stuff. This is dodgy as those items have in effect a monetary value (in some cases significant money), making the system effectively true gambling, which has the authorities breathing down Valve's neck, especially as the impression is that CS:GO has a fairly young audience despite age ratings etc. In essence Valve are teaching teenagers the wonder of gambling.

Meanwhile loads of other sites have sprung up on the back of the CS:GO lottery system. Enter 2 'big' YouTube personalities. They published videos claiming to have found a CS:GO lottery site that was really good and they'd had great returns. Turns out those YouTubers are actually behind the site they 'found' and potentially manipulated the payout terms for their videos to show greater chances of winning. They've subsequently tried to hide the fact they didn't make it clear they were schilling their own site, changing descriptions in videos etc, and their reaction varies from tantrum-esque we totally weren't scamming you to very low key apologies and shutting down comments etc. Especially poor form as I understand both have previous for non-disclosure of their interest in things they've schilled which obviously the powers that be look very unkindly on...

The whole thing is really grim and is just another chapter in the long running story of YouTube being used for shady marketing with backhanders all over the shop, particularly galling as the audience for this is generally well below the age range of the likes of general TV marketing and the like.

[Risso]

Thanks Chinders.  I always wondered, so thanks for the concise explanation. To me, it sounds like another downside of the murky world of in game transactions, which for me are almost tantamount to fraud.  It all seemed to start off in the world of smartphone games, but has now made the leap to console games as well.  In a few years, we've gone from the position where you could buy a brilliant and fully fledged game like the original Angry Birds or Plants v Zombies for £2 and have nothing extra to pay, to absolutely dismal shit like Candy Crush, where the very strong suspicion is that the game is ripping you off and is impossible to complete without downloading expensive extras.  

Similarly, in consol games, microtransactions seem to be rearing their ugly head.  I don't mind paying for extra content in the form of DLC, and the recent Witcher Blood and Wine expansion is a case in point.  Absolutely brilliant game, that promised at least 30 hours extra content, but on which I've probably put in at least 100.  Better than any other full price game released on the PS4 in my opinion.  But then you have MGS Phantom Pain, and a large part of that is hard to play without spending real life currency to gain coins to access different bases and weapons.  It spoiled an otherwise superb game which I'd have neck and neck for game of the generation with Witcher 3.

(PS it's 'shilling' by the way!)

[The_Rev]

 

This is actually a really good bit of journalism considering it's YouTube. I do wonder if the police are looking at anything here, it seems to me that what they did cannot go unpunished. 

[Stevo985]

29 minutes ago, Risso said:

Thanks Chinders.  I always wondered, so thanks for the concise explanation. To me, it sounds like another downside of the murky world of in game transactions, which for me are almost tantamount to fraud.  It all seemed to start off in the world of smartphone games, but has now made the leap to console games as well.  In a few years, we've gone from the position where you could buy a brilliant and fully fledged game like the original Angry Birds or Plants v Zombies for £2 and have nothing extra to pay, to absolutely dismal shit like Candy Crush, where the very strong suspicion is that the game is ripping you off and is impossible to complete without downloading expensive extras.  

Similarly, in consol games, microtransactions seem to be rearing their ugly head.  I don't mind paying for extra content in the form of DLC, and the recent Witcher Blood and Wine expansion is a case in point.  Absolutely brilliant game, that promised at least 30 hours extra content, but on which I've probably put in at least 100.  Better than any other full price game released on the PS4 in my opinion.  But then you have MGS Phantom Pain, and a large part of that is hard to play without spending real life currency to gain coins to access different bases and weapons.  It spoiled an otherwise superb game which I'd have neck and neck for game of the generation with Witcher 3.

(PS it's 'shilling' by the way!)

Said the same myself numerous times.

If microtransactions are present in games where the game is free or 99p or something then it's kind of fair enough (although it can be exploited)

But to pay £50 for a console game and for it to rely on further microtransactions is absolute bollocks imo. I don't think it exists much, if at all, in the console world, but I'm sure it's only a matter of time.

If the transactions are purely additional content, like the DLC you mentioned, or aesthetic stuff like a new hat in GTA or whatever, then it's fine. But if a game requires you to buy extra stuff in order to compete (or complete!) then it's really really poor form.

[AVFCDAN]

I was browsing through the XBOX one marketplace yesterday and all of the games you can buy now seem to have a super deluxe version which all range from 70-85 quid. What you get for your extra cash appears to be pointless packs of some kind or an extra level, so essentially things that have been held back to then charge more for, its all as bad as each other imo.

[Daweii]

I will start quickly with my thoughts on Valve as I actually don't care much about their side in all of this. 

Valve are guilty solely of not governing their API better. Valve need to make applying for access to the API to be an actual procedure complete with what a website wants to use the API for. If Valve had done this then CSGO skins would have stayed within Steam as a purely platform exclusive ecosystem. Yet they didn't govern their API allowing 're-sellers', 'gambling' and 'external skin' sellers to have a "link your account" feature on their site. The API was created for sites like howlongtobeat.com where you link your Steam account to see just how many games you have in your backlog. Yes it will eventually be down to a governing agency to decide if the crates system is gambling, but for now my main issue is that Valve didn't police their API or their platform well enough allowing for a grey market to materialise. 

Now onto what I consider to be the main issue here as it pisses me off when YouTubers use their power and popularity for nefarious means.

Syndicate is not new to "controversy" he has been caught out by the Federal Trades Commission on two occasions prior to this one. The first was in 2014 where he was paid $30,000 for two videos endorsing the Xbox One. This actually isn't illegal but it is if like Syndicate you don't disclose to your viewers that it is a bought and paid for endorsement of the brand, this was the first case of Syndicate abusing his position for financial gain. The second came in 2015 with a game called 'Dead Realm'. Syndicate made dozens of videos about this game showing himself having lots and lots of fun playing it, the issue is he worked on and had financial ties linked with the games financial success. Did he disclose this to his viewers? No so they all bought it thinking it was a game he had found that looked damn cool. Now we are here with the 'CSGO Lotto' fiasco.

My thoughts are simple;

• They (Syndicate and TmarTn) deceived their audience claiming that CSGO Lotto was a site they had found.
• They advertised said website to their audience comprised of viewers as young as 8 or 9 years old lured into gambling on the site.
• Showed higher than average win percentages in videos (YouTube) and on stream (Twitch.tv) 
• Gambled on their own gambling site which is hugely illegal in its own right.

This situation is a legal goldmine. There must be so many attorneys in the US right now licking their lips in anticipation of what is such a clear cut legal case. TmarTn and Syndicate may have broken dozens of gambling laws as the US is tough on gambling with it being illegal in many states. They may have broken countless laws by promoting gambling to viewers that are far too young to gamble. They have certainly broken laws when it comes to not disclosing any ties to CSGO Lotto in these videos, and lastly they have broken the law by gambling on their own gambling site. If this goes unpunished I will be shocked as there are far too many things they have done wrong here, not to mention as I said earlier this is now the third time Syndicate has deceived for financial gain.  

There are lots of things wrong with the gaming industry but for all my hate of microtransactions in full price games and shady DLC practices, this kind of thing makes all that seem like a small issue that can be tackled on another day. This whole CSGO fiasco from Valves neglect to YouTubers exploiting their power, this is something that has to stop. 

[The_Rev]

I guess Valve saw it as free marketing until now, it's the classic "it's not a problem until it's a problem" situation as far as I can tell. 

[Risso]

In MGS Phantom Pain, you can actually buy insurance for your base.  What next, microtransaction council tax and electrcity bills?

[Chindie]

This isn't quite the same as DLC or the MGS stuff. It's much more grim, and quite likely illegal on a number of levels.

But on DLC and the like. I'm not a huge fan of DLC, but I will support games I like with proper expansions and additions to the game, the Witcher being a perfect example. I'm not a fan of cosmetic stuff and I don't really like the pay for advantage stuff. But it's consumer choice I guess. The nastier side of things, the pay to win stuff which had evolved out of mobile gaming should probably be legislated against.

With MGS the multiplayer element evolved the game got older and became more onerous and unpleasant, but it's a completely optional part of the game. If you are prepared to use it it can help you with small parts of the single player, but you don't have to. That's not so bad, even if the thing itself gradually became more and more of a cash cow.