adminThe proposed EU KIDS Act could introduce new requirements for online games available in the European Union, covering features such as login rewards, communication between players and in-game purchases. The draft is not final, and its wording leaves some questions open, but it signals areas that game providers may need to review if the proposal is adopted.
Image credit: Alexandre Lallemand
What the EU KIDS Act could mean for online games
The draft distinguishes between online games and social networking or video-sharing services. Its most widely discussed age-based restrictions— including a ban for children under 13 and limits for users under 15—are directed at social networks and video-sharing platforms, rather than online games. Other provisions, however, could apply to games offered in EU countries.
The proposal uses a broad concept of online games. Depending on how the text is interpreted, it could cover a range of products, from games built around online interaction to multiplayer modes included with a disc-based title. Providers should therefore assess the online features of a game, rather than assume that only games designed as online services are relevant.
Rewards and features that encourage extended play
Game providers would be expected to ensure that minors are not encouraged to play excessively. The draft identifies features such as login bonuses and the loss of benefits after a period away from a game as potential concerns. These mechanics may create pressure to return regularly, even when a player would otherwise take a break.
The proposal does not explain in detail how every feature would be assessed. Persistent online worlds may raise particular questions because their events, rewards or shared activities can continue while a player is offline. As a practical step, developers can review time-limited rewards and inactivity penalties, and consider whether they create an undue incentive for minors to keep playing.
Player communication, parental controls and age checks
The draft also calls for limits on contact between minors and other users. To meet the proposed obligations, providers may generally need to offer parental controls and age-assurance measures. The requirements appear less strict than those for social networks, and some games without features considered problematic for children may not need the same measures.
For families, it is useful to check whether a game allows adults to manage communication settings and other child-safety options. For providers, reviewing chat, messaging and user-to-user contact features can help identify where safeguards may be needed.
Virtual currencies and variable rewards
The draft refers to transparency about the real monetary value of transactions made through virtual currencies and variable reward systems, a term that appears to include loot boxes. This relates to wider discussions about helping minors understand what in-game spending represents in real money.
There is an important ambiguity in the text: this transparency language appears in the recitals, which explain the reasoning behind the proposal, but not in the operative provisions that set out the rules. Those provisions expressly apply the relevant economic-transaction requirements to social networking and video-sharing services. It is therefore unclear whether the omission for games is intentional or a drafting oversight, or whether transparency would instead be addressed through a code of conduct.
What happens next?
The proposal also refers to codes of conduct on age ratings and online games. It mentions PEGI, while suggesting an approach that could go beyond existing age-rating arrangements and have more binding force. The draft is intended as a regulation that would apply directly in EU member states, but it must still be approved by the European Parliament and EU Member States. Its final scope and requirements may change during that process.
For now, the EU KIDS Act should be treated as a proposal, not a final set of rules. Game providers can follow its progress and review how rewards, player communication and in-game spending are presented to minors, while waiting for clarification in the final text.
Dr Andreas Lober is a partner at ADVANT Beiten and advises leading games companies on youth protection and consumer law, among other matters.
