by a loose enough definition any game with any randomness is gambling - including tossing a coin for white/black in chess.
That definition is not just loose, it’s missing all of its screws completely at that point. Gambling is also assuming you’re putting something of actual value at stake. Nobody would use gambling for a bit of randomness in a game with no stake.
Are you gambling with yourself in a game of solitaire? Or if you hope the Pac-Man ghost will go left instead of right at the end of the corridor? In isolation, obviously not. I’m assuming you’re playing to have fun, and “losing time” or reaching a game over state earlier will not have a significant impact on anything.
However, if you’d bet $10 with someone that you’d win those games, yeah, it becomes gambling.
Aaaand that’s why microtransactions blur the line so much and gacha/loot boxes should be considered gambling adjacent. Not just any incursion of randomness.
Not that I’d exactly call it gambling per se, but I have friends who definitely scratch their gambling itch with high risk RNG game mechanics that don’t cost IRL money.
Path of Exile, for example, is great at this. You can invest a whole lot of time/resources into a craft, and then the final step, it either bricks or becomes a best-in-slot item. The game is littered with this sort of mechanic, and you definitely get a rush when you coin flip with several hours of your life on the line.
So while I agree with you, I can also kinda see their point.
I’m not particularly interested in getting into a deep dive on this, but couldn’t you argue that your time has a value and thus is a stake, or your feelings of success/failure in a given moment as response to a game state are “at stake,” or the given entry price (eg $15) of buying the game from Steam?
In a loose definition that is.
