• Severe blow to the international competitiveness of European games companies
• Same bans for 6- and 17-year-olds: Digital Fairness Act turns established youth protection systems on their head
• Vague terms such as ‘pay-to-progress’ and unresolved fundamental questions on in-game currencies create legal uncertainty
• German games industry association calls on the European Parliament and Council to fundamentally revise the Digital Fairness Act and KIDS Act
Berlin, 11 November 2026 – Instead of simplification and clarity, it brings legal uncertainty, double regulation and is a severe blow to competitiveness: the draft Digital Fairness Act (DFA) presented by the European Commission today falls well short of its own goals. game – The German Games Industry Association warns that it would in fact achieve the opposite. The current draft is unworkable and disproportionate. It would significantly weaken the competitiveness of the European games industry and leave millions of video game players across Europe with fewer games and less choice.
‘Rather than protecting consumers, the European Commission’s Digital Fairness Act creates confusion, double regulation, legal uncertainty and an unprecedented level of complexity for companies. With the DFA, the Commission wants to regulate business models down to the last detail. In doing so, it is putting at risk the competitiveness of European games companies, which are already struggling to hold their own globally. The European Parliament and the Council must urgently and fundamentally revise the draft,’ says Felix Falk, Managing Director of game. ‘If the draft DFA were implemented, the USK and PEGI age ratings, which have worked successfully for decades, would become meaningless, because every game rated below 18 would automatically count as a service aimed at children. On top of that, the KIDS Act and the Digital Fairness Act contradict each other: when it comes to social media, parents have a say, but with games the Commission takes that decision out of their hands. This patronises parents and children alike and hollows out Germany’s successful system of co-regulation – a system that the Federal Government and the federal states must now defend at EU level.’
Enforce existing rules
Games are already subject to strict youth and consumer protection requirements. Authorities enforce them primarily against providers based in the EU, while providers with no presence in Europe often fail to comply. New rules would therefore mainly place an additional burden on the around 8,700 games companies in Europe, most of them small studios. They would then have to compete with rivals outside the EU with one hand tied behind their backs. The games industry has put forward concrete proposals for greater transparency around in-game purchases. These include switching off purchases for children by default so that only parents can switch them on, display prices in real money when buying in-game currency, simpler refunds and smaller top-ups. The Commission has adopted only some of these and otherwise resorts to blanket bans.
In-game purchases fund many games
In-game purchases are a central pillar of the games market, generating five times as much revenue as traditional game sales. In 2025, they brought in around 4.1 billion euros in Germany, compared with around 800 million euros from game sales. Many games – especially free-to-play games, including many from companies in Germany and Europe – are funded exclusively through optional in-game purchases. Anyone who does not want to pay can play for free. The sweeping bans now proposed therefore threaten an entire market segment and many games companies in Europe. For players on a tight budget, free-to-play games are an important alternative. If the number of EU-based providers shrinks, Europe’s cultural diversity and technological sovereignty will disappear along with them.
Same bans for 6- and 17-year-olds
According to the Commission, the Digital Fairness Act is intended to complement the KIDS Act without duplicating it. For games, it fails to do so. Under the draft DFA, every game rated below 18 is treated as directed at minors. In these games, paid in-game currencies are blocked for minors by default, while loot boxes as well as pay-to-win and pay-to-progress mechanisms are banned outright. This uniform threshold of 18 takes into account neither the differing maturity of young people nor the decisions of their parents. By contrast, the KIDS Act’s restrictions on social media apply up to the age of 15, and parents can lift them. The draft also creates the wrong incentive: games rated 18 are largely exempt, so providers might seek higher age ratings. Young people would then have fewer games to choose from, and the successful age rating system would be hollowed out. Yet the Entertainment Software Self-Regulation Body (USK) and PEGI already take in-game purchases and paid random items into account in their age ratings, and parents can use parental tools on all major platforms to block or limit spending and playtime, among other things. The draft therefore undermines the protections that already work.
Vague terms create legal uncertainty
The draft defines a pay-to-progress mechanism as any in-game purchase that is necessary, or presented as necessary, for progress or success in a game. It does not specify which game elements this covers, meaning numerous common game concepts could be affected. For in-game currencies, providers would in future have to display the equivalent value in euros every time currency is spent. Where this value cannot be determined directly, it would have to be estimated without volume discounts. In many games, currency can be both earned through play and purchased, making reliable attribution almost impossible. The display could also lead players to believe they are making a purchase when they are only spending currency they have already bought or earned. The draft also leaves open the fundamental question of whether in-game currencies will continue to be classed as digital content. In addition, the Commission would be able to extend the lists of prohibited dark patterns and addictive features via delegated acts. Violations could result in fines of up to 6 per cent of global annual turnover. This lack of clarity creates massive legal uncertainty for companies – rather than the clarity and simplification promised.
game – The German Games Industry Association
We are the association of the German games industry. Our members represent the entire video game ecosystem, from development studios and publishers to esports event organisers, educational institutions and other related entities. We are co-organisers of gamescom, the world’s biggest event for video games. We are a shareholder in the Entertainment Software Self-Regulation Body (USK), the Foundation for Digital Games Culture, the esports player foundation, game events and the collecting society VHG, as well as co-host of the German Computer Game Awards. Serving as a central point of contact for media, as well as political and social institutions, we provide comprehensive expertise in areas including market development, game culture and media literacy, and address any inquiries or concerns. Together we are making Germany the heart of gaming worldwide. With games, we enrich the lives of all people.