Italy is leading an EU-coordinated consumer-protection investigation into Microsoft-owned Activision Blizzard over spending systems in Call of Duty Mobile and Diablo Immortal, extending European scrutiny of virtual currencies, parental controls and potentially manipulative game design.
Microsoft’s gaming empire is facing another round of regulatory scrutiny in Europe, with Italy taking the lead in a coordinated consumer-protection investigation involving Activision Blizzard and its mobile games Call of Duty Mobile and Diablo Immortal.
Italy’s Competition Authority, known as the AGCM, announced on October 8 that it is leading an action alongside consumer-protection authorities from Norway and Denmark, examining whether practices used by Microsoft-owned gaming businesses could violate European consumer-protection law across multiple countries.
The investigation concerns how games encourage players to spend money, particularly through virtual currencies, limited-time offers and purchasing systems that may make it difficult to understand the actual cost of digital items. Regulators are also examining parental-control settings, the collection of personal data and the rights of players whose accounts are restricted or blocked.
The development forms part of a much wider European examination of gaming monetisation. TalkEsport previously reported that EU consumer authorities had launched coordinated action involving nine gaming companies, including Riot Games, Mojang, Ubisoft and Supercell, over virtual-currency practices in titles such as VALORANT, Minecraft and Clash of Clans.
Activision Blizzard’s case is separate from those nine proceedings, but all form part of the same broader regulatory effort to determine whether gaming companies are providing consumers with sufficiently transparent information about spending real money inside video games.
Italy leads European action against Microsoft-owned Activision Blizzard
According to the Italian Competition Authority’s official announcement, the action is being conducted through the European Union’s Consumer Protection Cooperation Network, commonly known as the CPC Network.
The network enables national consumer-protection authorities to coordinate investigations and enforcement where commercial practices may affect consumers across several European countries.
Italy is serving as the lead authority for the Microsoft-related action, working with Norway and Denmark to determine whether the conduct under examination constitutes a widespread infringement under Article 3(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2394.
Under that framework, a widespread infringement can involve commercial practices contrary to European consumer-protection law that harm or are likely to harm consumers in three or more EU member states.
The Italian authority has not announced that Microsoft or Activision Blizzard has been found guilty of violating those rules. The proceedings are intended to establish whether the practices under examination breach applicable consumer-protection requirements.
Call of Duty Mobile and Diablo Immortal are at the centre of the investigation
The Microsoft-related proceedings focus particularly on Call of Duty Mobile and Diablo Immortal, two free-to-play games that generate revenue through optional in-game purchases.
Although players can download and begin playing these titles without paying an upfront purchase price, both games contain systems through which real money can be converted into virtual currencies and subsequently used to acquire digital items or other in-game benefits.
Italy’s competition authority is examining whether those systems provide consumers with sufficient information about what they are purchasing and how much they are ultimately spending.
The authority has identified concerns surrounding virtual currencies such as platinum, globes and diamonds, which may require players to convert real money into one or more in-game currencies before completing a transaction.
Regulators are concerned that such arrangements can make it difficult for consumers to understand the real-money value of individual purchases, particularly when currency bundles do not correspond directly to the price of the desired item.
Virtual currencies are becoming a major target for EU regulators
The investigation reflects a growing disagreement between European consumer authorities and the gaming industry over how virtual currencies should be presented to players.
In many modern games, purchasing a cosmetic item or another digital product involves an intermediate currency rather than a direct payment in euros. Players first purchase a bundle of coins, points, credits, or another virtual currency, then use that balance to complete the transaction.
The arrangement can become more complicated when currency bundles are sold in fixed quantities that do not correspond to the exact amount required for an item. A player may need to purchase more currency than necessary, leaving an unused balance within the game.
European authorities are examining whether such systems adequately communicate the real cost of purchases and whether the surrounding design encourages consumers to spend more than they otherwise intended.
The issue extends far beyond Activision Blizzard. On September 30, European consumer authorities announced coordinated action involving nine other gaming companies over the application of the EU’s key principles governing in-game virtual currencies.
That earlier announcement included Riot Games over VALORANT, Mojang over Minecraft, Supercell over Clash of Clans and King over Candy Crush Saga, alongside Ubisoft, Crytek, InnoGames, Plarium and PLR Worldwide Sales.
The Microsoft-related investigation is a separate proceeding within the broader European consumer-protection initiative, rather than a finding that all ten companies have committed the same alleged violations.
Regulators are also investigating potentially manipulative game design
Italy’s concerns extend beyond the exchange rate between euros and virtual currencies.
The authority is examining design mechanisms that may encourage players to spend more time playing or purchase additional content, including repeated prompts, push notifications and limited-time offers.
These practices can create a sense of urgency by suggesting that rewards or digital items may disappear unless a player acts immediately.
Consumer regulators are considering whether such mechanisms cross the boundary between ordinary commercial promotion and potentially misleading or aggressive practices, particularly when they affect minors or people vulnerable to problematic gaming behaviour.
Such techniques are often discussed under the broader term dark patterns, referring to interface designs that can steer users towards decisions they might not otherwise make or make particular choices unnecessarily difficult.
The existence of a limited-time offer or in-game notification does not automatically constitute a legal violation. The question for regulators is whether the design, presentation and surrounding circumstances breach applicable consumer-protection rules.
Parental controls and children’s spending are under scrutiny
Another significant part of the investigation concerns how games protect younger players.
Italy’s competition authority previously expressed concern that parental-control settings in the games under examination may default to options providing relatively limited protection for minors.
Those concerns include settings that may permit in-game purchases, unrestricted playing time, or interaction with other players without requiring sufficient active involvement from a parent or guardian.
Regulators are also examining whether children and other consumers receive adequate information when creating accounts and agreeing to the collection or processing of personal data.
The investigation therefore goes beyond whether a particular cosmetic item is expensive. It concerns how purchasing decisions are presented, who can authorise them and whether younger consumers are adequately protected when interacting with monetised game systems.
Account bans and lost digital purchases are another concern
One of the more unusual aspects of the Microsoft-related proceedings concerns what happens when a gaming company restricts or terminates a player’s account.
Italy’s authority is examining whether consumers receive adequate information about their contractual rights and whether companies can block accounts unilaterally without providing sufficient reasons, assistance, or an opportunity for the player to respond.
That issue can become particularly consequential when a player has spent substantial amounts of money on digital content associated with the account.
Unlike a physical product that remains in the buyer’s possession, many in-game purchases are tied to continued access to an account and the contractual conditions imposed by the game’s operator.
If that access is removed, consumers may lose the practical ability to use digital content for which they previously paid.
Regulators are examining whether the relevant contractual terms and account-enforcement procedures comply with European consumer law, rather than asserting that every account suspension or termination is inherently unlawful.
The Activision Blizzard investigation began before October
The October 8 announcement should not be confused with the beginning of an entirely new investigation.
Italy’s competition authority had already opened national investigations into Activision Blizzard’s mobile gaming practices earlier in 2026, raising concerns over allegedly misleading or aggressive commercial behaviour and potential violations of consumer contractual rights.
The authority’s earlier announcement identified Call of Duty Mobile and Diablo Immortal as the games under examination, including concerns over purchasing prompts, virtual-currency bundles, parental controls and account restrictions.
The latest development places the Microsoft-related action within a wider European coordination framework, with Italian regulators now working alongside authorities from Norway and Denmark.
That cross-border dimension is significant because it allows authorities to examine whether the commercial practices under investigation may affect consumers across multiple European markets rather than being confined to Italy.
How is this connected to the EU action against VALORANT and Minecraft?
The connection lies in the European Commission’s broader effort to enforce consumer-protection rules across the gaming industry, particularly where virtual currencies and in-game spending are concerned.
On September 30, the Consumer Protection Cooperation Network announced coordinated actions involving nine gaming companies whose titles use virtual currencies.
TalkEsport’s earlier investigation examined the nine-company action involving VALORANT, Minecraft, Clash of Clans and other major games, including regulators’ concerns over real-money pricing, unnecessary spending and protections for younger players.
Activision Blizzard was identified separately in that reporting because its Microsoft-related proceedings were already underway and covered a broader range of potential consumer-protection issues.
The European Commission’s official overview of coordinated consumer-protection actions distinguishes the Microsoft and Activision Blizzard proceedings from the separate actions involving the other nine companies.
October’s Italian announcement therefore provides additional detail about the cross-border investigation involving Microsoft-owned gaming businesses, rather than adding Activision Blizzard to the nine-company action as a newly identified defendant.
Have Microsoft, Riot Games or Mojang been fined by the EU?
No penalties have been announced as part of these coordinated actions.
The investigations and coordinated proceedings concern suspected practices that regulators believe may conflict with European consumer-protection requirements. They do not constitute findings that the companies have already broken the law.
The companies involved have opportunities to respond to the concerns raised by authorities, while regulators can pursue further enforcement measures if the issues are not resolved through the relevant procedures.
It is also important to distinguish between the European Commission’s coordinating role and the enforcement powers exercised by national consumer-protection authorities within the CPC Network.
Describing the proceedings as an EU-wide crackdown is reasonable in the context of coordinated regulatory scrutiny, but describing the companies as already fined or found guilty would be inaccurate.
Could Europe’s gaming investigations change how in-game purchases work?
The longer-term consequences could extend well beyond Call of Duty Mobile and Diablo Immortal.
Virtual currencies have become a fundamental part of the commercial model supporting free-to-play games, live-service titles and increasingly premium games with optional digital purchases.
For publishers, these systems provide a flexible way to price digital items, manage promotions and encourage spending within their ecosystems. For regulators, the same systems can create additional complexity between the amount of real money a player spends and the apparent price of an item displayed inside the game.
The European investigations are therefore likely to test whether existing consumer-protection principles can be applied more consistently to virtual economies, particularly around transparent pricing, purchasing prompts, unused currency balances and safeguards for younger consumers.
Any resulting changes could influence how games display prices, structure currency bundles, obtain parental consent or explain the consequences of losing account access.
Those outcomes are not guaranteed, and the current proceedings do not establish that virtual currencies themselves will be prohibited. The more immediate question is whether the methods through which companies sell and promote them meet the transparency and fairness standards expected under European law.
