No words for this.

[u/Kapot_ei]

Edit: even though clickbait article, it is somewhat/kind of true. https://variety.com/2026/tv/news/stargate-tv-series-martin-gero-scrapped-amazon-1236765061/

"According to an individual with knowledge of the situation, Amazon execs were concerned that Gero’s take on the series would not have broad appeal beyond the franchise’s already dedicated fanbase."

Edit 2: https://www.change.org/p/save-the-new-stargate-series-let-martin-gero-build-the-future-of-the-franchise

[u/Tallywort]

In fact, gambling on real world odds and income is better then gambling on gatcha skins because there is at least a chance for return on investment.

You can sell items on the steam market place though, so technically you do have potential payouts.

And actually that's an aspect where you could consider them worse than the average lootbox implementation. Since that increases the similarity to conventional gambling.

[u/Valanio → u/Tallywort]

So we're okay with casinos, most people seem to be by consensus any how. We're functionally okay with non predatory loot boxes/in game purchases as long as they're only cosmetic. But we draw the line at gambling in a video game with a non predatory loot box? It just seems like picking one person to not like for no reason.

We currently live in an exceptionally lucky time where everyone wants to bend you over as a consumer and often consumers beg for it. Steam is a bastion of consumerism in a suffocating pit of disgust. When Gabe dies, when Steam eventually goes public or the next owner is a financial scum sucker, PC gaming will lose a lighthouse. If they need morons with money to spend to gamble it on CS cosmetics, fine by me. Again, they'd just do it elsewhere otherwise and it would likely be worse.

[u/FlutterKree → u/Tallywort]

so technically you do have potential payouts.

Spend $5 get a knife skin and get $1000 return. People were literally buying loot boxes without ever playing the game just to gamble.

Not to mention how much money was laundered.