A regulatory action that broke in early October has spent the past two weeks moving from niche EU policy trackers into mainstream gaming coverage, and it’s worth catching up on: Europe’s consumer protection network has opened formal enforcement proceedings against ten of the industry’s biggest free-to-play publishers over how they sell virtual currency.

What the EU is actually doing

The Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network — which coordinates national enforcement bodies across EU member states and is itself coordinated by the European Commission — issued a joint statement opening 11 separate actions against 10 companies: Activision Blizzard UK, Crytek, InnoGames, King.com, Mojang, Plarium Europe, PLR Worldwide Sales, Riot Games, Supercell, and Ubisoft EMEA. According to coverage from GamingHQ and cryptonews.net, the games named specifically include Diablo Immortal, Call of Duty Mobile, Hunt: Showdown 1896, Forge of Empires, Candy Crush Saga, Minecraft, Mech Arena, Gardenscapes, Valorant, Clash of Clans, and For Honor — titles the network says it selected for their broad reach, cross-device availability, and range of player ages.

The action builds on consumer-protection principles the CPC Network published in March 2025, which call for real-money prices of virtual currency to be shown clearly rather than buried behind in-game coin conversions, plus a 14-day right of withdrawal that covers unused currency balances. Regulators are also reportedly looking beyond pricing transparency at how these companies collect player data, whether game design elements encourage compulsive spending, how default parental controls are configured, and the circumstances under which player accounts get suspended or banned — concerns that extend to loot boxes, countdown-timer pressure tactics, and marketing that appeals directly to children.

Crucially, this isn’t an automatic fine. Companies named in the actions can respond to regulators, and only after that process plays out could it lead to required changes or further enforcement.

The industry’s pushback

The named companies haven’t gone quiet. Trade groups Video Games Europe and the European Game Developers Federation (EGDF) issued a joint statement on September 30 rejecting the CPC Network’s core legal premise — namely, that in-game currencies function as “digital representations of value” comparable to crypto assets. The groups cited a European Court of Justice ruling involving RuneScape’s in-game gold to argue that framing doesn’t hold up, and said they’ve been asking regulators for the specific legal basis behind that classification since spring 2025 without getting an answer, according to mobilegamer.biz.

Rather than simply fighting the action, the trade groups offered six voluntary commitments: clearer real-money pricing for virtual currency, 48-hour refunds on entirely unused currency bundles even in cases where formal withdrawal rights don’t apply, 30 days’ advance notice before removing previously purchased content, and stronger child-safety measures including parental controls and reimbursement when minors make unauthorized purchases. The catch is that those commitments are conditional — the industry says it will only implement them once what it calls the “legal uncertainty” around the currency classification is resolved.

Why this matters more than the headlines suggest

Loot box and monetization criticism is hardly new in European policy circles — PEGI began flagging games with loot boxes as unsuitable for under-16s back in June, and a broader Digital Fairness Act covering loot-box limits for minors is still working its way through Brussels. What makes this different is that it’s a live enforcement action against named companies and named games, not a proposed framework or a ratings-board policy tweak. Chance-based monetization mechanics generated roughly $23 billion globally last year according to S&P Global research cited by Bloomberg, which is the scale of revenue now sitting across the table from regulators.

For players, the near-term outcome is unlikely to be dramatic — nothing changes in Valorant’s or Clash of Clans’ store tomorrow. But a successful action here would set a template EU regulators could reuse against any publisher selling virtual currency to European players, and the industry’s own conditional-commitments response suggests publishers see that risk clearly enough to negotiate rather than simply wait it out.

---

For more on how regulators are reshaping the industry, see our coverage of the EU Kids Act’s age-verification push and gaming’s record profits alongside record layoffs.