News Analysis

Why Regulators are Treating Games Like Social Media

The latest clash over EU gaming regulation raises a bigger question: are games increasingly being treated like social media?

A growing lobbying effort by Europe's games industry may point to a broader shift in digital regulation - one that focuses increasingly on how products influence behaviour rather than what industry they belong to.

This week, industry newsletter Video Games Industry Memo reported that some of Europe's leading mobile games companies are pushing back against provisions in the EU’s proposed Digital Fairness Act.

What is the EU Digital Fairness Act?

The Digital Fairness Act is a proposed European Union law aimed at strengthening consumer protection in digital environments. Expected to be formally proposed by the European Commission in late 2026, the legislation is intended to address issues such as dark patterns, addictive design, influencer marketing and unfair personalisation practices.

To make its case more persuasively, King recently published its Mobile Matters: The Impact of Mobile Games for Europe report, highlighting the sector’s contribution to jobs, economic growth and European competitiveness.

The Financial Times also reported this week that the bosses of Finland's Supercell, Sweden's King and Denmark's Sybo have voiced concerns about the potential damage the proposals could do to one of Europe's few global technology success stories.

The message from European games industry is clear: mobile gaming is not simply a source of entertainment, but one of the continent's most successful digital industries.

How the Digital Fairness Act Impacts FTP Games

At the heart of the dispute lies the tension between protecting consumers from aggressive monetisation techniques, particularly those operated by free-to-play (FTP) games, while also supporting innovative technology businesses on European soil.

Mega-hits such as Supercell's Clash of Clans and King's Candy Crush Saga, have generated billions in revenue through FTP, which allows players to download and play for free while offering paid upgrades later.

Critics of the proposed legislation argue that some of its provisions could restrict the use of virtual currencies, time-limited offers and other monetisation mechanisms commonly used by FTP games. Supporters, meanwhile, contend that greater transparency and consumer protections are needed where digital products are designed to encourage spending. The precise impact will depend on the final shape of the legislation, which remains under development.

Sectors vs Systems: The Shift in EU Digital Regulation

However, the latest clashes over EU gaming regulation suggest a wider dynamic has emerged: it seems legislators are increasingly focusing on digital systems rather than digital sectors.

Traditionally, regulation followed industry boundaries. Games were regulated as games. Social media platforms were regulated as social media. Different industries, different concerns, different rules.

Today, that distinction appears less clear-cut. Importantly, the Digital Fairness Act is not primarily a gaming law. Instead, it forms part of a broader effort to address behaviours and design practices that can appear across many different types of digital product.

Digital Design in the Spotlight

Many of the features attracting regulatory scrutiny are not unique to any one industry. For example, the following features can all be found across different types of digital product:

• Recommendation algorithms
• Virtual currencies
• Daily engagement incentives
• Social interaction systems
• Personalised content
• Spending prompts

While the specific implementation may vary, these systems share a common goal: encouraging users to return, remain engaged or spend money. 

From a policymaker’s perspective, the focus on systems designed to influence behaviour appears to matter more than the industry category in which they appear.

Earlier this year, a Guardian opinion piece argued that including online games within proposed social media restrictions would be both unworkable and potentially harmful, and warned against treating them as interchangeable categories.

If this is indeed the direction regulation is taking, it helps explain why the games industry is increasing its lobbying efforts. 

Future Outlook for EU Gaming Policy

The current debate may ultimately be less about mobile games or virtual currencies than the lens through which governments understand digital products more broadly. In the coming months, the games sector is likely to intensify its efforts to distinguish itself from social media platforms.

Yet these developments indicate regulators appear increasingly focused on underlying design patterns rather than traditional industry boundaries. If that trend continues, the question may not be whether a product is a game or a social platform, but which systems it employs to capture attention, influence behaviour and drive spending.

In that environment, only time will tell how successful the games industry’s argument proves to be.