The European consumer watchdog wants you to be able to buy as much in-game currency as you need

Rock Paper Shotgun

A European consumer advocacy group have published an open letter to the European Union Commission expressing their concerns about video games that make use of premium in-game currencies – aka, make-believe money you can buy with real money, such as Minecoins in Minecraft’s Bedrock Edition.
They’re accusing the publishers of Fortnite, EA Sports FC 24, Minecraft, Clash of Clans and others of misleading people – specifically children – with their in-game premium currencies, and breaching European Union consumer protection laws.
On a press site that summarises the results of various longer studies, they offer the below broad complaints about the practice.
Consumers cannot see the real cost of digital items, leading to overspending: the lack of price transparency of premium in-game currencies and the need to buy extra currency in bundles pushes consumers to spend more.
Companies’ claims that gamers prefer in-game premium currencies are wrong.
Consumers are often denied their rights when using premium in-game currencies, tied to unfair terms favouring game developers.
Data shows that children in Europe are spending on average €39 per month on in-game purchases.
They add that of the 50 most-played games on Steam in 2023, 21 featured in-game premium currencies, and of those 21, eight had an age rating of 12 years or lower.
Or at least, the EU should prohibit their sale to people under 18 – The EU should amend consumer law to introduce stricter transparency requirements.
Many of the above arguments have been presented by other groups and authorities in the past, and individual examples of publishers doing cheeky things with premium currencies aren’t hard to find.

NEGATIVE

Concerns regarding video games that use premium in-game currencies—that is, imaginary money you can purchase with real money, like Minecoins in Minecraft Bedrock Edition—have been voiced by a consumer advocacy group in Europe in an open letter to the European Union Commission.

The organization in question is the Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs, or BEUC. Founded in 1962, the BEUC is the collective voice of 44 non-governmental consumer organizations from 31 different countries. They are claiming that the makers of games like Fortnite, EA Sports FC 24, Minecraft, Clash of Clans, and others have violated EU consumer protection laws by deceiving people, especially kids, with their in-game premium currencies. The following general criticisms of the practice are provided by a press website that compiles the findings of several longer studies.

Because they are unable to see the true cost of digital goods, consumers end up overspending because premium in-game currencies are opaque about their prices and purchasing additional currency in bundles forces them to spend more money.

It’s false for businesses to say that players prefer premium in-game currency.

When utilizing premium in-game currencies, users frequently have their rights violated by unfair terms that benefit game developers.

Youngsters are even more susceptible to these deceptive strategies. In-game purchases cost kids in Europe, on average, €39 a month, according to data. Despite being the most active players, they lack financial literacy and are readily influenced by virtual currencies.

Drawing from data from Statistia, Steam, and surveys conducted by the European Parliament, the BEUC notes that “more than half of EU consumers regularly play video games,” including 84% of 11–14-year-olds, and that “in-game purchases generated more than US$50 billion globally (approx. €46 billion), or roughly 25% of the video game industry’s total revenue. They also state that out of the 50 most popular games on Steam in 2023, 21 had in-game premium currencies, and eight of those 21 had an age restriction of 12 years or less.

The BEUC offers a number of recommendations throughout the entirety of their 35-page investigation and complaint document. For easier reading, I’ve rewritten and condensed them as follows:.

– While the findings of the ongoing Digital Fairness Fitness Check assessment of existing EU consumer legislation are being reviewed, the EU ought to think about outlawing the use of premium currencies in games and applications. EU should, at the very least, forbid selling them to anyone younger than 18.

– Stricter transparency requirements should be introduced by amending consumer law in the European Union. A clear indication of an in-game currency’s real value “should be shown to consumers before each transaction made with the premium in-game or in-app currencies, for example using the same font type and size,” according to this.

If the EU Commission is allowed to continue with its plans to prohibit in-game and in-app premium currencies, it ought to investigate the most “efficient” way to present them to users, particularly children.

– Publishers should be required by EU Consumer Law to “opt-in” and deactivate in-game payment mechanisms by default.

Every in-game transaction should be reported to users, who should also be prompted to confirm it and set a password to prevent unauthorized purchases.

– The strongest privacy settings in games ought to be activated “by default” to allow users to play “without having their economic behavior be influenced algorithmically.”.

It should be made legally clear by the European Commission that players who use in-game premium currencies have the same rights as those who use real money to make purchases in-game.

In particular, the Commission ought to revise the Unfair Contract Terms (UCTD) Directive’s Annex to explicitly mention that it is “presumably unfair” to deny refund requests for premium in-game and in-app currencies.

– Instead of purchasing predetermined amounts of premium in-game currency set by the publisher, users should be able to choose exactly how much they wish to spend.

The separation of premium in-game currencies from in-game currency earned should be mandated by EU consumer law in order to ensure that “consumers fully understand how much they are spending in-game.”.

– Enforcement agencies for various industries, such as data protection or financial services, should work together more to ensure that current consumer laws pertaining to in-game purchases are applied more consistently.

Since many people exposed to in-game purchases are children under the age of sixteen, investigating authorities should apply the “vulnerable consumer” benchmark of increased professional diligence set forth in the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD).

In summary, I agree that in-game premium currency systems are fundamentally deceptive and should be properly regulated, but I also mistrust the BEUC’s wording, which has a Helen Lovejoy-esque air of moral panic. Numerous authorities and organizations have previously made many of the aforementioned claims, and it is easy to locate specific instances of publishers acting impudently with premium currencies.

Given the past advocacy work done by consumer groups, I doubt that many of the BEUC’s recommendations will be put into practice. Nevertheless, they present a discussion point, and the more we discuss these issues, the less likely it is that we will be duped.

scroll to top