Games with loot boxes to get minimum 16 age rating across Europe

Comparison with physical cards and mystery products

• Ongoing debate whether loot boxes are meaningfully different from Pokémon / trading-card packs and mystery boxes.
• Arguments they are different: instant repeat spending with little friction; strong casino-like audiovisual hooks; often no trading or resale; vendor fully controls rarity and cannot be bypassed by direct purchase; items locked to accounts with no restitution.
• Counterpoints: physical packs are also random, vendor-controlled, unrefundable once opened, and can feel like low‑stakes gambling; many people see both as gambling-like.
• Resale/trade options in physical cards mitigate harm somewhat by providing residual value and social interaction, though resale usually recovers only a fraction of cost.

Age limits and whether loot boxes are “gambling”

• Many commenters call loot boxes gambling and think 18+ would be more consistent with casino rules; others note regulators in some countries classify them differently.
• Several point out all age thresholds are arbitrary proxies for maturity but necessary in law.
• Some argue kids should not learn “risk/reward” via real-money gambling mechanics at young ages; a minority claims such exposure builds later-life instincts.

Effectiveness of age ratings and verification

• Mixed views on impact: some say they or other parents use age ratings seriously; others recall personally ignoring them.
• Concern that parents will simply click through age checks, especially if designed to be annoying.
• Some see this as mainly industry self-regulation to avoid stricter laws.

Alternative or stronger regulatory approaches

• Suggestions include:
  • Prominent odds disclosure and mandatory labeling for games with loot boxes.
  • Price caps, limits on frequency/amount of purchases, and cool‑off or refund periods.
  • Hard bans on real‑money chance-based items (loot boxes, gacha, certain betting / prediction markets).
  • Aligning loot-box regulation with existing gambling rules.

Nanny state, surveillance, and civil-liberty concerns

• Some fear this will justify broader mandatory age verification at OS or platform level, increasing tracking and surveillance.
• Others see age ratings as a low‑impact parental aid, not a serious liberty restriction.

Broader views on gambling and addiction

• Several commenters are broadly anti‑gambling, citing personal or national experience with expansion of betting and slot machines.
• Others argue gambling (incl. low‑risk forms) is widely used with limited harm and should be managed, not morally abolished.