EU Targets Supercell, Ubisoft and Playrix Over In-Game Purchases

Key Notes

• EU authorities have opened nine new company actions over paid in-game currencies, alongside an earlier Activision Blizzard case covering two mobile games.
• The CPC network wants clearer cash prices and fairer purchase practices, with particular attention to currency bundles and protections for children.
• Industry groups contest the legal interpretation behind the guidance, while the actions concern suspected breaches of existing consumer law rather than final findings.

European consumer authorities are stepping up scrutiny of in-game purchases at Supercell, Ubisoft, Playrix, and other major publishers, with virtual-currency pricing and purchase terms at the center of the action. Games including Clash of Clans, Minecraft, Valorant, and For Honor are among those under review.

The Consumer Protection Cooperation network, coordinated by the European Commission, set out the initiative in a September 30 joint statement. Authorities want companies to address practices they believe may breach existing consumer law, following discussions over guidance issued in March 2025.

Nine New Company Actions, With Activision Already Under Review

The Commission’s enforcement overview identifies nine new company actions. It separately describes an earlier 2026 case involving Microsoft and Activision Blizzard, covering Call of Duty Mobile and Diablo Immortal.

The joint statement counts eleven coordinated actions across ten named companies, reflecting the wider set of games under scrutiny. Playrix appears under the legal entity PLR Worldwide Sales Limited. The titles identified by the authorities span mobile strategy games, puzzle games, multiplayer shooters, and other major online releases.

The new actions begin with dialogue over suspected breaches. If companies do not resolve the concerns, national authorities may take enforcement measures. Being named does not establish that a publisher has broken the law, and the announcement does not impose an immediate ban on microtransactions.

What Authorities Want From In-Game Stores

The CPC network’s pricing principles call for the real-money cost of purchasable currencies and items to be clearly displayed. Their focus includes confusing conversion chains and currency bundles that push players to buy more than they need for a selected item.

The guidance also addresses understandable purchase information, fair contract terms, withdrawal rights, and protection for vulnerable players, especially children. The September statement singles out concerns around loot boxes, misleading countdowns, unsupported scarcity claims, and direct appeals to children to spend.

For players, the practical issue is whether an in-game store makes the cash cost of a decision understandable before checkout. A balance expressed in gems or credits can require an extra conversion; multiple currencies and mismatched bundles can make that calculation harder. Clearer prices could help players compare purchases without first working through a game’s currency system.

Our mobile revenue coverage shows how events and recurring content support spending across the industry. This regulatory debate concerns the purchase experience surrounding such monetization: how costs, conditions, and commercial prompts are presented to players.

Industry Groups Challenge the Legal Interpretation

Video Games Europe and the European Games Developer Federation disputed the authorities’ position in a September 30 industry response. They say they have worked on pricing transparency, refunds, bundles, and withdrawal rights, but still disagree with the CPC network’s classification of paid in-game currencies.

The associations argue that those currencies should not be treated as digital representations of value and say their requests for the legal basis of that interpretation have remained unanswered since spring 2025. They indicate a willingness to implement proposals once the legal uncertainty is resolved.

The guidance itself contains a qualification: failing to follow its recommendations is not automatically unlawful, and following them does not guarantee legal compliance. Competent authorities and courts ultimately decide whether particular practices breach the applicable legislation. The dispute therefore concerns how existing law applies to game currencies, alongside the details of store design.

The action also arrives after the Commission proposed the EU KIDS Act on September 17. That separate proposal includes online games among services used by minors and still requires examination by Parliament and the Council. The current CPC cases proceed under existing consumer-protection rules.