Ethan Crossfield 
The European Commission and the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network are preparing coordinated action against 11 video games over in-game purchase practices. Call of Duty Mobile, Minecraft, Diablo Immortal, Valorant, and other major titles are included, placing some of the industry's most visible live-service games under fresh scrutiny in Europe.
What happened
The action follows the EU's 2025 Key Principles on In-Game Virtual Currency. Developed through the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network, the principles focus on how games present and sell digital currency, rather than simply whether a title contains microtransactions.
The European Commission says several companies have not met those expectations. The developers and publishers connected to the affected games include Activision Blizzard, Mojang, and Ubisoft, whose portfolios include Call of Duty, Minecraft, and Assassin's Creed. The statement argues that some business models and design choices can harm consumers, with children and other vulnerable groups facing particular risks.
The games named in the coordinated action are Call of Duty Mobile, Diablo Immortal, Minecraft, Valorant, Clash of Clans, For Honor, Hunt: Showdown 1896, Forge of Empires, Candy Crush Saga, Mech Arena, and Gardenscapes.
Why it matters for players
The principles call for prices to be shown clearly in real-world money and for games to stop hiding costs behind layers of virtual currency. They also oppose forced bundle purchases, where players must buy more currency than they need to complete a transaction.
Other expectations include providing understandable purchase information before payment, honoring the right to withdraw, using fair terms, and protecting vulnerable consumers. These requirements could affect the presentation of premium currency, item shops, and other forms of digital spending across major live-service games.
The dispute is partly connected to how the EU views in-game currencies such as Call of Duty Points. The source indicates that European authorities consider these currencies digital representations of value, a position that publishers have not welcomed. The principles also touch practices associated with loot boxes, which are already banned or heavily regulated in some countries.
What to watch next
The Commission and the CPC Network have asked other games with aggressive microtransactions to review their policies before additional action is taken. That makes the current list important beyond its 11 named titles: publishers may change purchase flows proactively, or wait for more specific enforcement steps.
The European Game Developers Federation has challenged the process. It says the industry has requested the legal basis for the CPC Network's position since spring 2025 and has not received it. The organization also describes substantial disagreement between game companies and EU committees, despite efforts to develop alternative solutions.
For players, the immediate question is not whether these games will disappear from Europe. The more likely area to watch is whether publishers revise pricing displays, currency bundles, purchase disclosures, or withdrawal terms. Any changes would be especially visible in games built around frequent spending and long-term engagement.
Key takeaways
- The EU action covers 11 games, including Call of Duty Mobile and Minecraft.
- Authorities want clearer real-world pricing for in-game currency and purchases.
- Forced currency bundles and cost-obscuring exchanges are among the practices under scrutiny.
- Publishers are expected to provide clearer information and fairer purchase terms.
- Other games with aggressive microtransactions could face review or action later.
Expert View
This is more significant than a narrow dispute over virtual currency labels. If the EU follows through, publishers may have to redesign the purchasing layer that supports many live-service games, not just adjust a line of text in a storefront. The industry’s objection to the legal basis also matters: without clearer guidance, compliance could become inconsistent across publishers and titles. Even so, the pressure is likely to benefit players if it produces simpler prices, fewer forced bundles, and more transparent decisions at the point of purchase.
