Italy vs. Microtransactions: What the Activision Blizzard Probe Means for Mobile Gaming

Hook: Why every gamer — and every studio — should care about Italy's move

If you've ever been unnerved by surprise charges, bundles that don't add up, or design tricks that keep you grinding for one more reward, you're not alone. In January 2026 Italy's competition authority, the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), opened formal probes into Activision Blizzard's Diablo Immortal and Call of Duty Mobile. Those probes target alleged misleading and aggressive monetization practices — and they could change how mobile games make money worldwide.

Executive summary — the most important takeaways first

The AGCM's action is more than a national investigative headline. It crystallizes a global regulatory trend: authorities are no longer content to leave mobile monetization to platform storefronts and self-regulation. Key points:

• What happened: AGCM launched two parallel investigations in early 2026 into Activision Blizzard’s top mobile titles, alleging dark-pattern design to induce long play sessions and purchases, opaque virtual currency and bundled pricing, and tactics that can disproportionately influence minors.
• Legal claims: The regulator frames these as unfair commercial practices and consumer-protection violations tied to transparency, aggressive marketing, and potential targeting of minors.
• Why it matters: If AGCM forces UX changes, fines, or mandated disclosures, other EU states — and regulators in the UK, US states, and beyond — are likely to mirror or reference the findings.
• Industry impact: Expect accelerated shifts toward clearer pricing, subscriptions and battle passes, more robust parental controls, and technical audits for dark patterns. Small studios must adapt quickly or face compliance costs.

What the AGCM actually alleges — unpacking the formal claims

In its January 2026 press release, the AGCM framed the probes around several concrete issues. The regulator singled out design elements that appear crafted to extend play and push purchases, and called out the opacity of virtual currencies and bundle pricing.

"These practices, together with strategies that make it difficult for users to understand the real value of the virtual currency used in the game and the sale of in-game currency in bundles, may influence players as consumers — including minors — leading them to spend significant amounts..."

Translated into legal claims, the AGCM is evaluating whether Activision Blizzard:

• Engaged in misleading commercial practices by advertising games as "free-to-play" while concealing the true cost to progress or compete.
• Used aggressive practices or dark patterns (e.g., timed scarcity, reward-chaining, loss aversion mechanics) that impair consumer decision-making.
• Failed to provide clear pricing and value disclosure for virtual currency and bundles — making it hard to calculate real-world spending.
• Applied mechanics that could be construed as targeting or unduly influencing minors, raising child-protection concerns.

How this aligns with existing legal frameworks

The AGCM's claims draw on EU consumer-protection principles that prohibit unfair commercial practices and require clear price information. Within the EU, national regulators apply those rules locally — and AGCM's action is consistent with precedents where Belgium and the Netherlands scrutinized loot-box mechanics as potential gambling or unfair practices. The difference here is the AGCM is probing two major mobile titles from a major publisher, which magnifies the stakes.

The evidence and mechanics regulators are watching

Regulators rarely pursue investigations without patterns of user complaints, internal documents, or behavioral evidence. In this case they appear focused on several mechanics common to both titles:

• Virtual currency opacity: Multiple tiers of currency with conversion rates that are difficult to calculate back to euros or dollars, and bundles that present the best per-unit value in a way that nudges players to purchase larger, more expensive packs.
• Time-limited events and FOMO: Events and reward timers that create artificial scarcity and pressure quick purchases to avoid missing out.
• Progression gates: Systems that slow progression unless you purchase acceleration items or powerful gear, creating the perception that purchases are necessary to meaningfully progress.
• Targeted messaging: Personalized sales offers and limited-time discounts, often surfaced during moments of user frustration or near-miss RNG outcomes.

Why Activision Blizzard is under special scrutiny

Two contextual facts make this probe especially consequential:

1. These games are global, high-grossing mobile titles with tens of millions of users — changes would ripple across markets.
2. Activision Blizzard is part of Microsoft, a major platform player since the 2023 acquisition, which increases regulatory attention on corporate responsibility and cross-jurisdictional compliance.

Immediate consequences for players and parents

If you're a player or parent, the AGCM probe provides both risk signals and opportunities. Here are practical, actionable steps to protect wallets and children:

• Set strict spending limits: Use store-level parental controls (Google Play, Apple App Store) and platform wallets to cap purchases. Disable in-app purchases where possible.
• Use payment barriers: Require biometrics or passwords for any purchase and keep cards off devices used by minors.
• Monitor activity: Check purchase histories and receipts monthly; most app stores provide downloadable receipts for disputes.
• Report abuses: In the EU, consumers can file complaints with national authorities; in Italy the AGCM portal accepts consumer tips related to unfair commercial practices.
• Claim refunds where warranted: EU consumer law and national rules sometimes allow refunds for undisclosed costs or misleading practices. Document everything when requesting chargebacks.

What developers and publishers should do now — compliance playbook

For developers the AGCM action is a wake-up call. Even if you don't operate in Italy, regulators elsewhere may adopt AGCM's reasoning. Practical steps:

1. Audit UX for dark patterns: Commission independent UX and behavioral audits focused on scarcity mechanics, friction points, and persuasive triggers. Remove or clearly label mechanics that leverage addiction-like loops.
2. Show currency in real-world terms: Always display conversions between virtual currency and euros/dollars, and show per-item pricing outside bundles.
3. Rationalize bundles: Limit large, high-priced bundles that appear targeted at impulse buys. Offer clear, lower-cost alternatives.
4. Strengthen age verification: Implement robust parental-consent flows and age gates where purchases are available to younger users.
5. Policy reviews & disclosures: Update terms, store listings, and in-game paywalls with transparent disclosures on expected spend to reach typical progression milestones.
6. Regulatory monitoring: Add compliance checks for European consumer rules and country-specific laws (Belgium, Netherlands, Italy have precedent).

How this could reshape mobile monetization models

Expect at least four big shifts if enforcement broadens:

• Greater transparency: Standardized labels for games that use randomized rewards, a visible "expected cost to reach X" metric, and explicit currency conversions will likely become best practice — or mandatory.
• Subscription acceleration: Publishers may pivot toward subscriptions and battle passes that offer predictable revenue and fewer charge surprises for consumers.
• Fewer pay-to-win mechanics: Competitive integrity concerns will push developers to separate competitive advantage from purchases or risk regulatory pushback and reputational harm.
• Designing for trust: UX that respects player time and income — clear timers, reasonable progression rates, and voluntary cosmetic purchases — will be rewarded by regulators and communities alike.

Global regulatory ripple effects — beyond Italy

Regulatory action rarely stays local in the digital era. AGCM's findings could influence:

• EU-wide policy: Other EU consumer bodies and the European Commission could use the probe as evidence for harmonized rules on virtual currencies and loot-box-like mechanics.
• National enforcements: UK and select US states, already attentive to loot boxes and microtransactions, may cite AGCM outcomes when drafting their own actions or legislation.
• Platform policy: Apple and Google may tighten their app-store rules to reduce regulatory exposure — expect clearer in-app purchase labeling and optional spending limits baked into OS controls.

Precedents that matter

Belgium's 2018 stance declaring certain loot boxes gambling and subsequent actions in the Netherlands set early regulatory markers. The AGCM probe is the most visible enforcement against a major publisher's top mobile titles in the EU in the mid-2020s — and it comes amid growing consumer complaints on social media and class-action filings in several jurisdictions. That combination makes policy shifts more likely now than in previous years.

Potential outcomes and what each means

Regulators can take a range of actions. Here's what to expect and how each outcome affects stakeholders:

• Formal warnings or mandated UX changes: Publishers must change designs, reduce dark patterns, or add disclosures — immediate compliance costs but preserves revenue in the long term via trust.
• Fines: Financial penalties can be significant and set precedents for other regulators; companies may allocate more budget to compliance and PR damage control.
• Legal challenges: Activision Blizzard could litigate the findings, prolonging uncertainty but keeping current monetization in place temporarily.
• Industry-wide settlements: Collective agreements or codes of conduct could emerge, driven by trade groups to avoid fragmented national rules.

Predictions for 2026–2028: five advanced strategies to watch

Based on current trends and the AGCM probe, these strategies are likely to shape the market:

1. Standardized "cost-to-progression" metrics: Publishers may adopt a common metric showing how much a typical player spends to reach certain milestones.
2. Independent UX audits: Third-party certification for "consumer-friendly" monetization could emerge, similar to accessibility badges.
3. Regulatory sandboxes: EU regulators might offer sandboxes where new monetization models are tested with oversight to balance innovation and protection.
4. Shift to meaningful cosmetics: To avoid pay-to-win scrutiny, more games will monetize through purely cosmetic items that don't affect competitive balance.
5. Privacy and algorithm audits: Scrutiny of recommendation engines and targeted offers will increase, linking microtransaction tactics to data use and consent.

What investors and publishers should do today

Investors and executives must factor regulatory risk into valuations and roadmaps. Practical moves include:

• Stress-test monetization assumptions under stricter disclosure and age-verification requirements.
• Prioritize user trust metrics (retention driven by satisfaction, not forced spend) in KPIs.
• Preemptively engage with regulators and consumer groups to shape workable rules favorable to both industry and players.

Closing analysis — why this matters to gaming culture

The AGCM probe into Diablo Immortal and Call of Duty Mobile is a signal that regulators are moving from theoretical debate to enforcement. For players, it promises greater transparency and protections; for developers, it mandates smarter design and clearer communication. For the industry as a whole, it's an inflection point: monetize responsibly, or risk losing the trust of both consumers and policymakers.

Actionable takeaways

• Players: Lock down in-app purchases, monitor receipts, and report unfair practices to consumer agencies.
• Parents: Use parental controls, require passwords, and educate kids about in-game marketing tactics.
• Developers: Audit for dark patterns, display currency conversions, and separate cosmetic from competitive purchases.
• Publishers & investors: Model regulatory scenarios, invest in compliance, and prioritize long-term user trust over short-term revenue spikes.

Further reading and reporting

Read AGCM's January 2026 press release for the regulator's statement and follow local consumer authorities for complaint procedures. Keep an eye on ongoing responses from Activision Blizzard and Microsoft; their defense or settlements will shape how broadly these rulings apply.

Call to action

Stay informed and defend your wallet: review your app-store purchase history today, set or tighten parental controls, and if you've experienced confusing charges, file a complaint with your national consumer agency. If you make games, start an internal UX audit this quarter — policymakers are watching, and the age of opaque microtransactions is rapidly ending.

Related Reading

• Batch Editing Poster Catalogs with AI: Maintain Color Fidelity Across Hundreds of Files
• How to Make Bun House Disco’s Pandan Negroni at Home (Step-by-Step)
• Evidence-First Skincare in 2026: How Transparency, Telederm Policy, and Indie Scale Strategies Are Rewriting Skin Health
• Micro-Influencer IP: Turning a Signature Look into a Transmedia Product Line
• DIY Microwavable Pet Warmers: Materials, Safety and Step-by-Step Guide