Italy investigates Activision Blizzard for pushing in-game purchases • Hacker News Board

Re: Italy investigates Activision Blizzard for pushing in-game purchases

#51

Post by jajuuka » Wed, Jan 21, 2026, 3:21 AM UTC

justinclift wrote: post #49

jajuuka wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm talking about the above comments argument that this kind of overreach is a healthy government regulatory framework. I am not talking about the argument from the person above them. You seem to be forgetting a crucial part of this. The parent. If a parent is buying their child a gambling game then that's on them. Not on the government to force everyone to submit their IDs and face scans to play a game for adults. P…

> I'm talking about the above comments argument that this kind of overreach is a healthy government regulatory framework. Which government's way of doing things would you suggest is "healthy"? Hopefully you're not serious saying the US [appears to be healthy]?

No, I'm not saying the US appears to be health. I can't name any governments that are healthy. I haven't really spent the time to check all the governments of the world.

Re: Italy investigates Activision Blizzard for pushing in-game purchases

#52

Post by NorwegianDude » Sun, Jan 25, 2026, 5:25 AM UTC

swiftcoder wrote: post #27

NorwegianDude wrote: post #16

As a game developer myself, I think young kids should not be able to make purchases on their own. But some of the ideas on what needs to be done is just silly. Here is some of the ideas the Norwegian Consumer Council suggested: - All things in games should be shown in real money value, not in game currency that you have to but for real money, and the price should reflect the most expensive way to get the currency. -…

> I sell bundles of in game currency. I don't allow users to select just how much they want to buy. I don't do this as part of an evil plan So if I look at your in-game purchases, I’m going to find that they aren’t all priced to make the user buy the next-larger increment of currency… right?

Didn't I just say that it wasn't part of some evil plan? Prices of things have no relattion to that the different bundle sizes are. In-game prices are constant to ensure that people get what they pay for. The price in real money for the in-game currency is adjusted for inflation every now and then.

Re: Italy investigates Activision Blizzard for pushing in-game purchases

#53

Post by NorwegianDude » Sun, Jan 25, 2026, 5:51 AM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #40

NorwegianDude wrote: post #16

As a game developer myself, I think young kids should not be able to make purchases on their own. But some of the ideas on what needs to be done is just silly. Here is some of the ideas the Norwegian Consumer Council suggested: - All things in games should be shown in real money value, not in game currency that you have to but for real money, and the price should reflect the most expensive way to get the currency. -…

> Bigger purchases give more, because the percentage lost to fees are lower. Tiny amount can not be bought, as it would not make sense considering the per transaction cost. This is a solved issue in basically any real life commerce. (Depends on the country if it's enforced) You say what your transaction fee is and add it on top. Then people can decide for themselves.

It's not solved if you're not allowed to bill for fees seperatly. The end result is the same, so it's a dumb rule. It just makes it less clear what you're actually paying for.

Re: Italy investigates Activision Blizzard for pushing in-game purchases

#54

Post by NorwegianDude » Sun, Jan 25, 2026, 5:55 AM UTC

autoexec wrote: post #30

NorwegianDude wrote: post #16

As a game developer myself, I think young kids should not be able to make purchases on their own. But some of the ideas on what needs to be done is just silly. Here is some of the ideas the Norwegian Consumer Council suggested: - All things in games should be shown in real money value, not in game currency that you have to but for real money, and the price should reflect the most expensive way to get the currency. -…

> As a game developer myself, I think young kids should not be able to make purchases on their own. As a gamer, I don't think they should ever feel the need to purchase anything with real world money in a video game, even with a parent. Purchasing the game should be the last time a parent ever has to worry about spending actual money on it.

A one time payment for an ongoing service is not sustainable. Infrastructure and content isn't free, the same way you don't pay a one time payment for netflix.

Re: Italy investigates Activision Blizzard for pushing in-game purchases

#55

Post by NorwegianDude » Sun, Jan 25, 2026, 6:21 AM UTC

fainpul wrote: post #32

NorwegianDude wrote: post #16

As a game developer myself, I think young kids should not be able to make purchases on their own. But some of the ideas on what needs to be done is just silly. Here is some of the ideas the Norwegian Consumer Council suggested: - All things in games should be shown in real money value, not in game currency that you have to but for real money, and the price should reflect the most expensive way to get the currency. -…

In game purchases are a dumb thing in itself and need to go away. You can sell add-ons for your game as additional packages, like DLC. Users go to the store (e.g. Steam) and buy an add-on to the game. It's priced like a normal article and you can offer discounts if you want. If you offer something that cannot be handled like that and absolutely has to be "in game", it's probably because you're trying to extort the pl…

You do have some weird takes on why I'm doing things. The game is free. Not because I'm trying to exploit someone, but because it's much harder and more expensive to market a paid game. I don't have DLCs, cause all content is free for everyone, and forcing players to pay to play by putting content behind paywalls is not something I want to do, and also something the same Norwegian Consumer Council says should not be allowed in games.

Re: Italy investigates Activision Blizzard for pushing in-game purchases

#56

Post by NorwegianDude » Sun, Jan 25, 2026, 6:58 AM UTC

rendaw wrote: post #46

NorwegianDude wrote: post #16

As a game developer myself, I think young kids should not be able to make purchases on their own. But some of the ideas on what needs to be done is just silly. Here is some of the ideas the Norwegian Consumer Council suggested: - All things in games should be shown in real money value, not in game currency that you have to but for real money, and the price should reflect the most expensive way to get the currency. -…

I'm not sure the legislation is good, but I'm not sure I follow some arguments. FWIW the ideas you're referring to are these I think: https://www.forbrukerradet.no/report-on-virtual-currencies-i... > Bigger purchases give more, because the percentage lost to fees are lower. Encouraging bulk purchases seems like an orthogonal problem to allowing users to choose the amount. You could always allow users to choose the am…

> You could always allow users to choose the amount and just include the transaction fee.

I'd be happy to do that, but it's not really as simple as it seems. Multiple of my payment providers have fees I'm not allowed to disclose, and the same Norwegian Consumer Council has also repeatedly stated that they do not want payment fees to be passed on to the consumer as that might be unfair to those who can't use specific payment options. They are passed on to the consumer either way, so... That's the only reason I don't provide tiny purchases, as the fees will result in negative value of the sale. But again, I'd be happy if I could just add fees to the price so that people could just buy exactly the amount they want.

> If card networks are operating in the country, they'd have to abide by the country's rules too. Yes, but currently the laws are not compatible. You can't follow one without breaking the other.

The problem isn't displaying a price, but how to do it in a way that makes sense. It doesn't really make anything more clear when it's called the same thing as the currency in game and has no fixed conversion because of fees making up a larger cut for small purchases. The Norwegian Consumer Council want's users to be able to buy the smalles unit of currency if thwy want, but that must be relatively very expensive because of the fees. They alsy want prices to reflect the most expensive method of acquisition of the currency. This will 100 % result in totally unrealistic prices, that are easy to confuse with the in game currency. It's clearly easier if you buy a fixed bundle of 1000 "gold coins" for $10, and the price is listed as "Buy a $500 paiting for 100 gold coins" instead of "Buy a $500 paiting for 100 gold coins($50 real money)".