Real money loot boxes should be considered in a similar manner. The consumer should be made aware that he's buying a (usually) $60 game and is expected to pay more. And don't give me "but they're completely optional and only for those with less time"... bullshit! They are part of the publishers business model to get more money out of you. They may be optional for now (and we've already seen evidence that's not exactly the case anymore in some AAA games), but they'll certainly get worse in the future. If you're not spending the money, you're usually required to put in the extra time and publishers have a clear incentive to make it as uncomfortable as possible to play without paying more money, but making sure that it isn't so obvious that everyone revolts. They're still trying to find the line and we still have the time to stop this becoming the new "cool" norm.

We can stop this by being the norm, but we don't need government to do it. I draw the line where trying to get government involved is where I distance myself from the radicals here; trying to find every stupid reason ('e.g think of the children!') to try and get what they want. Because this is simply a power struggle between consumers and publishers. If the government does get involved; they need additional regulatory agencies to handle the paper work and draft/finalize the methods. Are you going to pay for it? Because I surely would rather my tax dollars go to places more important than gaming. I don't know...how about a relief fund to bail out victims of the Las Vegas incident? So they don't have to decide between death and death-by-debt? That's more important to me than trying to get government more involved with our lives.