So if you gamble with real money you can sue the state?

Correct me if I'm wrong. The initiator where lootboxes in CS which give these skins their rare status which in turn gave them a $ tag, which is gambled on.

In the end I'm just curious if that leads to Chaos, Drama and Entertainment (reading about the Chaos that is :D ) on other unexpected sides or nothing at all. Especially how gaming studios react if all of the sudden they are not allowed to these boxes anymore; at least not in the profiteering ways they are now.

Those said non-adults would need a credit card or debit card to not only buy the game but use the in-game market at all.

This is true, however from the start Valve has always said any of the items you get remain property of Valve and are not to be sold for money. There is no way to do that within Steam, it's all done outside the Steam ecosystem. (The pachinko parlours are actually a good comparison there, although I don't know but wouldn't be surprised if the pachinko parlours are run by the same people)

So all Valve is guilty of is creating game items that are harder to get than others. It's pretty much the same concept CCG games use when you buy boosters which contain a random rarity of cards.

Yes, everything starts with lootboxes, but please correct me likewise if I'm wrong (really, I was vaguely aware of the trading part of it, just tried to learn about the gambling today), it costs 2.5$ or something like that to buy a key and "gamble" by opening the box?

(I'm just keeping a lengthier part of my post for later, in case I'm really wrong about this.)

Not specifically for creating this type of video.

So Google was paying them money for the videos they were making, in some of which they were promoting an (illegal?) gambling site they owned?

I don't know what t has to do with what I said, but I think gambling without age restrictions is illegal in many countries / states. You can't sue the state, but this all started out with the h3h3 guy's expose video where he said there was a class action lawsuit by parents against valve? This was the original video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8fU2QG-lV0 I'd take what he says with a grain of salt though since he seems to be intent on producing shock value.

What a waste of time to nitpick at arguments. These scammers are using the Steam API just like they are using YouTube. The money in your Steam Wallet can be used only on Steam Store and you can't take your money out of your Steam money (at least not from Valve).

They weren't paying them because of that specific type of video. What is this argument even about again? Ah yes. Steam / Valve gave more apparent endorsement to these sites than google did with the videos advertising these sites. Steam gave steam login option (which is easy to get as pointed out in this thread) and allowed the use of their marketplace items.

But yeah, I don't think illegality is established yet either since crates still haven't been ruled by any court to be gambling, but seeing as how these sites just aggregate the (expensive) items from the steam inventory and coin flip them, it probably will be regarded as it.
Yes. I used to look forward to the day one of the games I play would allow marketplace trading (it also has crates with random drops) and to buying CSGO itself this has dulled my enthusiasm for both.

Youtubers need to be held to account more. The old ''paid IGN 10 /10'' jokes are getting old and everyone knows them. But now, youtube's underbelly is clearer than ever and we find more and more people being exposed as two faced racketeers every day. Keep in mind also that many youtubers still partner with G2A. Even pewdiepie.

Actually using third party tools + valve API you can trade the cosmetic stuff for real money.
Valve has definitely some blame on this. The CSGO skin trade system just needs regulation.



Oh and this rabbit hole keeps on giving. (You can read much more on the thread)

No more than I can trade a person for his items and pay him paypal for it, how does that make it Valve's fault beyond Valve allowing people to trade items?

I think 2.5 is a good overall assumption. Some might be more, some less. Its quite some time when I last got some in a game. And while I can indeed feel the "just one more" pull to try again if I pull a dud I'm "stable" enough to just try a certain fixed amount just for the sake of trying.

The problem is that a big deal of ppl don't stop. Search the web, you'll find examples everywhere where ppl had their negative experience for either their own or worse the their family members lack of restraint. And since it is based on a game of chance it does has its pull on ppl.

Just 2.5; sometimes even cheaper when they sell it in bulk ;)

Polygon posted an article.

http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-virtual-guns-counterstrike-gambling/