The Regressed Game Director Is Too Competent

Probability Item Regulation Bill.

Frankly, it wasn’t an issue that resonated with me much.

Even without the regulation bill, the probabilities had been fully disclosed anyway.

In fact, because we were the only ones in the industry who disclosed all the probabilities, we were actually in favor of the Probability Item Regulation Bill.

With a light heart, I sent a letter of support for the Probability Item Regulation Bill to the congressional aide who was gathering opinions.

Little did I know just how big of a storm this action would stir up.

***

Recently, support for the regulation of probability items on internet communities had noticeably increased compared to pre-rebirth times.

The reason was simple—Enson GT, a prime example to the contrary.

When the gaslighting that probability item regulation would stifle the growth of South Korean game companies and the market was disproven by Enson GT, the long-suppressed anger of users began to boil over.

[Nickname: Anonymous]

[Title: Not like we were asking for anything outrageous, were we?]

We don’t need anything else; we’re just asking that they tell us the probabilities of the probability-based items we pay for when we spin them.

Stop rambling about how it’s necessary for game operations and other nonsense, lol.

Just look at Enson GT. They disclose all their probabilities and are still running their business user-friendly, yet they’re doing just fine.

Looks like these companies still think users are total suckers, lol lol.

[Comment List] [Registered Order]

– lmao

– Seriously, why are they so adamant against disclosing the probabilities?

– Of course they won’t disclose them; they’re rigging the probabilities, lol.

– Unconscientious bastards, lol.

– Enson Korea < Subsidiary also rips off users by refusing to disclose the exact probabilities, so they're just JOAT too.





[Nickname: Anonymous]

[Title: Game companies keep parroting this "self-regulation" nonsense...]



So what exactly is this self-regulation you're always talking about?



Is there anyone, apart from Enson GT, who actually follows self-regulation properly?



With the exception of Reverse Arcadia, every other game company just lumps their rates together, like SSR: 10%, SR: 30%, Normal: 60%, and expects us to believe this nonsense—who's even going to trust that? lol.



If companies are annoyed by users' suspicions, they could simply disclose the individual probabilities like Reverse Arcadia does.



Who knows if there might be a scammy 0.1% for the desired pickup characters and 1% or 3% for the junk SSRs? lol.





[Comment List] [Registered Order]

- Now that you mention it, you're right, lol.

- These guys are just pretending to cover their eyes and bleat. Ridiculous, lol.

- Self-regulation: Pretending to follow rules while they just plunder, lol.





[Nickname: Anonymous]

[Title: Why Game Companies Are Worse than Casinos... Fact]



【Offline Casino Probability Statistics Site】



Even casinos clearly disclose that bettors have a disadvantage against the house, and yet these game companies have none of that basic conscience.



Watching these companies make money without any integrity makes me think that even I, who was against regulation, now want to see some imposed.



Absolutely supporting any legislator who proposes a probability item regulation bill.





[Comment List] [Registered Order]

- omg lol

- Support!

- Haven't heard? Industry professionals are collecting opinions for just such a probability item regulation bill.

- rlly? lol

- Sitting here ready with the popcorn.





Back in pre-rebirth times, these issues would have quietly died out, but now they were bubbling up and ready to explode.



At that moment, an email arrived for me.



The sender was the same congressional aide I'd sent the opinion letter to.



Opening the email, it was a request to attend a discussion panel concerning the Probability Item Regulation Bill.



More specifically, the email was inviting me to serve as a panelist on the "for" side of the Probability Item Regulation Bill.



It seemed they had invited me as a proponent because I had sent an opinion letter in support.



No matter how I looked at it, it was sure to be a headache, but I reconsidered and decided to participate.



It seemed like a good opportunity.



There were apparently several people in the industry murmuring criticism in private because we operated in a user-friendly manner. This felt like the perfect moment to settle some scores.



If I ignored the whispers, it was likely I’d just end up with more headaches.



Having made up my mind, I quickly checked the attendance box and sent a reply email to the aide.



Now there was no turning back—thorough preparation was the only way to crush the discussion.



***



Time flowed, and soon it was the day of the discussion.



I arrived at the lecture hall of a certain university, dressed neatly for the event.



Even though I was busy enough to pull my hair out managing the preparation for the CCProject and this discussion, I managed to get everything ready somehow.



Although, this was possible only because the extreme profit-driven structures of gaming companies left little to discuss currently.



Stopping my thoughts, I glanced around and saw some familiar faces.



A certain congressman and a young man who appeared to be his aide—I'd seen them a few times on TV as proponents of the Probability Regulation Bill.



Looking beside them, there were two elderly professors slated for both the for and against sides, along with some representatives from game companies I had occasionally seen around.



Finally, there were a couple of young men wearing name tags suggesting they were representing users on the pro side.



The exact lineup I had expected.



The participants seemed to cover all the bases, but it was hard to predict how it would go.



As I sipped a cup of coffee from a table set up at one side of the hall, the discussion time quickly arrived.



Upon sitting on the pro side as arranged earlier, I could feel the gazes of those seated on the opposing side.



It was the kind of look that said, "What are you doing over there?"



They must have assumed I would be seated on the opposition side as the head of Enson GT.



The representatives from the opposing side, looking flustered, whispered to each other.



Observing this, I turned my gaze to the sides.



On either side of me sat an elderly professor and a young man with a user representative badge.



The professor, seemingly unconcerned, was gazing at his smartphone through reading glasses, while the young user representative appeared nervous, muttering while looking at his script.



It seemed like he had gathered potential questions from the opposition and was concentrating hard not to be disturbed, so I decided not to interfere.



After waiting for about five minutes, the doors of the university hall were closed.



The sound of the moderator's voice holding a microphone soon followed.



"Ah, ah. Microphone test. Can everybody hear?"



After everyone responded that they could hear, the moderator nodded.



"Alright, let us begin the discussion on whether or not there should be regulation on Probability Items."



The applause from the moderator's opening announcement.



As the applause subsided, the moderator continued, nodding,



"Today's discussion will follow the frame discussion format. It will proceed in a 1:1 Q&A style with each individual being given responses lasting 30 seconds at a stretch—."



Frame discussions…



Essentially, it was a battle under the guise of discussion—beating the other into submission in a 1:1 style.



"The discussion today will begin with the proponents. Mr. Kim Jae-hyun, congressman, please present your perspective."



After nodding at the moderator's prompt, the congressman, holding the microphone, explained to the opposing panelists why he drafted the bill.



The discussion then began.



On the pro side, they talked about user's rights to know and examples of probability manipulation, as well as the harmfulness of game companies' profit structures.



On the other hand, the opposing side focused on the negative effects these regulations would have on companies and the necessity of the current self-regulation.



It seemed on the surface like the pro side had the upper hand, but as the discussion progressed, the opposing side gained the upper hand.



This was due to the effectiveness of the dog-fighting style of discussions where logic was abandoned and they had prepared relentlessly.



"Users should be able to confirm the probabilities of Probability Items, which is their basic right and the obligation of game companies."



"Where in the world do consumers demand that businesses disclose all their core trade secrets? It is certain that the cost to the industry will be greater than the effects of regulation."



"Claiming that industry damage cannot be avoided is absurd, isn't it? Even casinos disclose probabilities clearly!"





"Casinos and games are different. The conditions in which each operates are vastly different. Moreover, please acknowledge that our gaming industry operates under the most stringent self-regulation of any in the world, setting up policy organizations to implement it."



As the discussion became increasingly heated, the personal exchange became more passionate as well,



and it only stopped after the moderator intervened.



After a five-minute break, the discussion resumed.



The opposition, now seemingly having listened enough, started addressing their questions to me, who had so far been passively sitting by.



"So, Mr. Jihojin, the Head of Enson GT, may I ask one question?"





"Go ahead."





"You mentioned that the games you offer, Girls' Memorial and Reverse Arcadia, generate revenue through gacha systems, also known as 'lotteries,' right? I would like to understand why you are on the pro side."





After finishing with a smirk and a slight bow toward me, the industry representative seemed clearly skeptical of my neutrality.



The best way to handle someone like this is to crush them outright.



"Are you implying that because my games generate revenue via gacha or lotteries, I should naturally be on the opposing side?"





"Isn't that obvious?"





"Why is it obvious?"





"Well, it's obviously—."





At the point where the representative seemed to realize something, he faltered, clearly flustered and clammed up.



Of course, you wouldn't have an answer for that.



"In our industry, where probability disclosure is so concerning, we have been implementing it from the start. Unlike most other games where they either lump probabilities together or don’t disclose them at all—essentially operating as a game of chance."





"Y…ou mean game of chance?!"





Caught off guard by the unusually blunt, high-tone statement, I pushed further.



"How else would you describe that? Consumers have a legitimate right to know the winning chances even when they pay, and they cannot verify what companies are doing with their products from their standpoint. If this isn't a game of chance, what is?"





"You're being too extreme! Calling it a game of chance…we do have self-regulation…."





"Self-regulation?"





When I responded with a mocking tone at the mention of self-regulation,



the representative, clearly feeling guilted out, avoided my eyes and shifted the argument.



"Even so, asking all small and medium-sized developers to keep up with the regulations of Enson GT—a cash cow—is—."





There it is—your usual pre-fab shield of small developers.



"Do you happen to know when I started at Enson GT?"





"No…."





"I started in 2011, just around this time, five years ago. Do you know what the general opinion of Enson GT was at that time?"





"……."





"At that time, Enson GT was rated as a funeral home for games that Enson Korea was about to close down, and a place of exile for employees of Enson Korea to visit before they retired."





"Th…."





"At that time, the game I developed was Girls' Memorial, and the system we pioneered was the cap and cap carryover. The competing Japanese developer had no such protections for users at the time."





"……."





"I hope you've realized how absurd it is to say small developers can't comply with regulations. That concludes my remarks."





A moment of silence encompassed the hall after my speech.



Stunned by the impact, no one spoke, whether from the pro side or the opposition.



…Maybe my wording was a bit excessive.



Well, the waters are already muddied, so there's nothing that can be done about it.