I'm not good to eng so I use a translator and fix it

The under script is all of petitioning

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We petition for disclosure of probability and full regulation of probability items and disclosure of all in-game information.

petition period

​

21-02-15 ~ 21-03-17

This petitioner raises this petition for fear that the revision of the Game Industry Act, which will be reviewed by the National Assembly's Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee from February 17, will not fully address consumer deception in the current game industry.

​

The contents of the petition for the revision of the Game Industry Act are about two issues.

​

​

​

1. Full regulation of probability type items and full disclosure of probability are required.

​

With the implementation of the probability-type item self-regulation code implemented by the Korea Game Industry Association, the game industry began to clearly disclose the probability of ambiguous disclosure, and in 2019, the Fair Trade Commission made it mandatory to disclose the probability. However, the move to prevent gambling remains a shell-shaped regulation, which has been made famous by the game industry's continued expediency.

​

For example, if you take advantage of self-regulation to deceive consumers,

​

- 'Lineage 2M' has a double Gacha, which makes you acquire items through two draws. They only disclosed the probability of the first draw due to self-regulation, but did not disclose the probability of the second draw, saying it was not open to the public.

​

- "Mabinogi" did not guide the probability by creating a free reinforcement item with a significantly different probability, although it functions like a paid reinforcement item using probability. When consumers asked the Korea Game Industry Association if they were subject to disclosure under self-regulation, they answered that they had no obligation to disclose items that function the same way.

​

- 'Bleach: The Way of the Manhae' consumed certain items to open the gift box and proceeded with the event by providing random rewards. On the event screen, all rewards seemed to have the same probability, but in fact, the probability of each reward appearing was set differently.

​

In this way, the game industry did not disclose the detailed probability of stochastic items to consumers by using various expedients, including introducing double-triple multi-picking with self-regulation, creating expedient items and content to exclude from the probability disclosure.

​

Korean game consumers can no longer trust the self-regulation of the game industry. In order to prevent fraudulent acts of consumers by expedient means, "the probability of all types of probability items and probability-enhanced items" should be disclosed.

​

​

​

1. All in-game information required by the consumer in the process of using the service shall be digitized and the game company shall be obliged to disclose the information clearly.

​

Compared to the amount of information that game companies have, there is significantly less information that consumers can know. Unless game companies disclose information, consumers have to buy and consume products without knowing what they will get. This is one of the fundamental causes of unfair trade in the game industry.

​

Recent cases of unfair trade include:

​

- 'Professional Baseball H2' describes product information in terms of 'fall', 'broad fall', 'increase', 'rise', 'broad rise', and 'broad increase', so consumers do not know the specific performance of the product. Users could not determine which product was more valuable, and after protesting against the game company, they could hear the product description in detail such as "increase (B)," "increase (A)" and "increase (S)."

​

- Magumagu 2020 suggests a hidden start. It was a hidden option that was applied when a product's capability exceeded 120, but it was not informed to consumers in advance, which completely reversed the value of the product that consumers knew, and the goods they had invested to enhance their capabilities were wasted.

​

- 'Lost Ark' did not disclose the final change in the damage caused by the attack to the consumer. After the controversy over the legendary avatar in September 2020, many users learned from their own experiments that legend avatars (paid products) are essential to meet the final destination to enjoy certain content. The game company belatedly removed the damage limit from the new content.

​

In addition to the above-mentioned cases, there are cases where consumers were not informed enough by game companies, such as Nexon's controversy over capability changes (problem of correction) of FIFA Online 4 or item hidden option issues in Pearl Abyss' Black Desert.

​

In these cases, the game company ignored the consumer's right to know about the customer's product information request, citing such answers as 'business secrets' or 'no obligation to disclose'.

​

A desirable market economy presupposes equality between sellers and consumers. Fair market transactions can only be established if the two parties have equal information. Consumers must receive sufficient information about the product they are purchasing.

​

​

​

In 2015, Kang Shin-chul, president of the Korea Game Industry Association, said in his inaugural speech, "I would like to prove that freedom is better because legal regulations to hold companies accountable only encourage irresponsible behavior in the form of 'I don't know because I did it according to the law.' As a result, consumers believed in the purpose of self-regulation and hoped that the game industry would develop in a positive direction on its own. However, Korean game companies continued to break their faith and barely responded to consumers' demands for improvement only when sales were directly disrupted.

​

In this situation, the Korea Game Industry Association said on February 15, 2021, "We are concerned that there will be a negative impact on the development of the domestic game industry by adding a number of provisions to strengthen regulations rather than promoting the industry." On the same day, the association claimed that "balance, such as limiting high-end items to a certain percentage, is one of the most essential parts of the game's fun," and that the probability of item selection is "a representative trade secret that operators invest a considerable amount of money to study." He also said, "Currently, probability-type items are 'variable probability' structure, so the probability always changes depending on the user's game progress, and developers and operators often do not know the probability exactly." After seeing this, can you say that self-regulation in the game industry has been successfully established? What is the difference between these games that sell probability items from "Sea Story," which hit Korean society in 2004?

​

This is a deception to consumers and a significant challenge to economic ethics. It is a statement that turns the cultural content of game into a gambling content. It is a vicious act to take advantage of consumers' rights. While gamers believe in self-regulation, the gaming industry is transforming themselves into gambling house operators.

​

In October 2020, Rep. Yoo Dong-soo proposed mandatory disclosure of information on stochastic items to protect the rights and interests of game users, citing regulatory cases from overseas countries as examples. Beyond the examples of China and Japan that regulate stochastic items, Europe and the U.S. are moving to consider themselves as gambling. Applications that provide stochastic items not only in the country but also in Apple and Google require a clear announcement of the probability of obtaining individual items. Now, Korea also needs to regulate probability-type items that turn games into gambling in line with the trend of the times.

​

Articles 4 and 19 (the basic rights of consumers) and 19 (the responsibility of operators) state the obligation of operators to provide consumers with the information they need in selecting goods. It is against our economic ethics that the game industry abandons these obligations and rights. It is an act of destroying economic common sense that sellers and consumers respect each other and trade in a fair condition. Just as allergy-causing substances can be seen when purchasing food, when purchasing probability-type items in games, you must guide them in advance what can be obtained and what can happen.

​

​

In response, this petitioner strongly emphasizes that 1. full disclosure of probability and probability of probability items and 2. obligation to digitize and disclose all in-game information required by consumers.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

LINK IS DESCRPITON

​

date start feb 15 and now participate person more than 2500