Howdy folks, Kelvoran Gaming here again and I apologize once more about the lack of posts, life catches up to all of us and between that and not actually being able to get my hands on some of the games I wanted to review, I know content has been a bit sparse, but today I wanted to talk about something that many folks on the internet are talking about, which is the ESRB and their response to the game NBA 2K20.

Now many folks out there, especially gaming YouTube channels like YongYea and AngryJoe have covered this topic and I expect many others too as well, and they’re all hitting this issue from one particular angle, which is one of anger and outrage. But lets go over some of the facts first before I get into my opinion here. So let’s begin, what are the facts?

• 2K Games released a trailer for their newest entry into the NBA 2K series earlier this year. This trailer highlighted the MyTeam mode, which is identical in many ways to the Ultimate Team system EA uses with their FIFA and NFL games.
• Within this trailer there were mini-games being shown which look like games you would find in a traditional casino or bar. A slot machine was displayed, alongside a ball-drop pachinko machine and a prize wheel (some folks have called it a routlette wheel, it isn’t, it’s a prize wheel similar to what you find at a carnival)
• The ESRB, which is the Entertainment Software Ratings Board gave this game a rating of ‘E’ which means it is suitable for all ages. This caused outrage on sites like Twitter and Reddit with calls for the ESRB to rate it higher due to the inclusion of ‘simulated gambling’
• As of today the ESRB has released a copy-pasted email statement which details that they stand by the rating they gave to NBA 2K20, which has prompted another wave of outrage.

So that’s where we’re at now. Folks on the internet are outraged, the ESRB is sticking to their guns and don’t want to budge and comments are flying around declaring the organization to be corrupt or out of touch, etc etc.

Now if you came here expecting me to rant about this decision, and now the ESRB are scum, and how all these folks getting outraged are spot on, well, I’m sorry to disappoint, but I’m not going to be doing that. Instead I’m going to be tackling this from a different angle, using additional facts that not many of these outraged folks are considering when they cover this topic. What other facts are they? Glad you asked! To start with, we need to know two things:

1. As the ESRB is an American regulatory body, we need to know what the legal definition of gambling is in the United States.
2. We need to know what the ESRB consider to be simulated gambling and real gambling.

So let’s go over those two things. First, the legal definition of gambling in the United States. This is detailed on this website https://definitions.uslegal.com/g/gambling/ which says the following:

A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome.

Note the first few words there. A person engages in gambling if he states or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance…

Now the second thing, what the ESRB consider to be simulated gambling and real gambling. This is actually very easy to discover as it’s available on the ESRB’s own website, specifically this page: esrb.org/ratings-guide and there really isn’t much too it. In fact their definitions for both types of gambling are short and to the point:

• Real Gambling: Player can gamble, including betting or wagering real cash or currency.
• Simulated Gambling: Player can gamble without betting or wagering real cash or currency.

Now it seems pretty simple, but let’s get one more fact based nugget of information out there just to clarify, and this is also a simple one. What does gambling require? According to the book Blackjack and the Law 1st Edition, written by I. Nelson Rose and Robert A. Loeb gambling requires the following:

• Consideration (also known as a wager).
• A form of risk or chance.
• A prize.

Simply put, if you do not have all three of those elements, then you are by definition not gambling and this lines up with current US law as well as the ESRB’s rating guidelines.

So how does this factor into the current situation? The trailer shows gambling games yes? So clearly it is gambling and should be rated as such correct? Well, no, not correct. See what many folks who are getting angry about this either don’t mention or only mention in passing is that none of the games featured in that trailer can be played for any form of currency. Access to the mini-games is earned by playing the game or redeeming codes and you can’t pay currency to get more spins or chances at the game. What you get from winning is all you get and that’s it.

Now recall what I just covered in regards to the legal definition of gambling, what gambling requires and the ESRB’s rating guide. What is the one thing that all three sources have in common? There needs to be a wager or bet for something to be considered ‘gambling’. And in NBA 2K20 none of the mini-games that folks are outraged allow you to bet, therefor, according to all definitions of gambling that are currently available and recognized, what is available in NBA 2K20 is not gambling, simulated or otherwise.

And think about it for a moment. I am sure if you’re reading this and grasping what is written, you’ve played a card game or two as a social activity. Poker or Blackjack, just for fun, without betting cash, tokens or clothing. Now both Poker and Blackjack are games that can be found in casinos, in fact casinos often host major Poker tournaments with hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars on the line for the winner. So are you gambling if you play Poker with your friends without betting anything? No, of course not. You’re playing a card game.

So why is this any different? If you’re not betting any form of currency, all you’re going is playing a game.

Now I’ve heard a few folks argue that the ‘visual representation’ of the game should be enough to classify it as simulated gambling. And maybe that’s true. Maybe the ESRB should update its rules. But if they did, a lot of other games would be caught in the crossfire. Games like the Sonic the Hedgehog series, all of which have featured a casino zone, and sure enough while traversing this zone you can find slot machine mini-games which when you jump into them, spins the slots and if you’re lucky, you get a lot of rings, but if you’re not, you can lose your rings. The risk and prize are present here, but not the wager, as it doesn’t cost rings or lives for you to jump into the game.

And yet, despite the appearance of this level in every major sonic game, I do not hear a single person on YouTube or the internet calling for the ESRB to change the rating on sonic games to reflect the fact that there is a ‘visual representation of gambling’.

Regardless of how you feel about the visual representation of gambling in video games however, the current stance of the ESRB does not factor visual representations into its rating decisions, so until they change their stance, no game will be rated as having gambling simply because of how it looks.

But what about the card packs? The loot boxes! You pay for those with currency right? The wager is there, so is the chance since what you get in the pack is random, and the prize is there. So are they gambling? According to the legal definition? Yes, yes they are. However neither US law nor the ESRB recognize either as being gambling devices. There have of course been moves in legal circles to change this within the US. But until those laws pass the current stance that they are not gambling applies, which finally covers the last piece of this chaotic puzzle.

So there you have it folks. What is on display in NBA 2K20 is NOT gambling. Neither by the legal definition (in the case of the mini-games) or the ESRB’s definitions (the card packs and mini-games).

Take from that what you will.

Until next time.