Changes are on the horizon for video game age ratings across Europe. The Pan-European Game Information (PEGI) system, which assigns age ratings for games in most of Europe outside of Germany, is preparing for what may be the most substantial reform in its history.

This June, PEGI will introduce four new categories to its age-rating framework, targeting issues such as addictive game mechanics, unregulated online interactions, and the presence of paid content like loot boxes.

As a result, titles like EA Sports FC—which currently receives a PEGI 3 rating but features in-app purchases warnings for its Ultimate Team card packs—may see their ratings adjusted to PEGI 16.

PEGI’s director general, Dirk Bosmans, shared insights regarding these modifications, emphasizing that they have been anticipated for some time and have drawn inspiration from Germany’s USK rating board, which previously implemented similar measures.

Criterion 1: In-app Purchases

If a game includes paid features that are time-sensitive or limited in availability—such as a paid battle pass that requires regular engagement for rewards—it will receive a PEGI 12 rating. While titles like Fortnite already hold this rating, further descriptors will be added to clarify such features.

Bosmans noted, “We have detailed information internally, but we are not ready to disclose it publicly until we see how these changes perform.” Games that offer settings to disable spending by default could potentially lower their rating to PEGI 7. Although such settings are not yet commonplace, they aim to encourage development in this area.

“This initiative is experimental,” he remarked. “We will evaluate its effectiveness in a year. The main concern is whether this encourages the implementation of these controls, as currently, few games utilize them.”

Moreover, any games featuring mandatory NFT purchases will be classified with a PEGI 18 rating, primarily impacting mobile titles.

Criterion 1b or 2: Paid Random Items

This section addresses loot boxes, including systems like card packs and gacha games. Titles that offer these features will be rated PEGI 16, with mobile social casino games rated PEGI 18.

Bosmans indicated that while there’s potential for games incorporating effective in-game controls to lower their rating to PEGI 12 in the future, such options are not currently available.

Criterion 3: Time-sensitive Play

This criterion seeks to address games that encourage or pressure players to log in consistently. Bosmans explained, “If children feel they must play to maintain a streak or complete daily quests, it’s a concern.”

He noted that while some may see these features as enhancing engagement—similar to a cliffhanger in a series—PEGI aims to inform parents without imposing excessively high ratings. For example, Animal Crossing will remain at PEGI 7 but will include descriptors to clarify this design element.

Should a game penalize players for failing to return in time, its age rating may increase to PEGI 12.

Criterion 4: Online Community Safety

Addressing the issue of online toxicity in gaming, this criterion applies to games lacking moderation or protective measures. Games permitting unrestricted communication will receive a PEGI 18 rating. Bosmans stated, “If a game lacks control over chat features, it would face significant release challenges, especially under regulations like the UK Online Safety Act.”

Implementation Timeline

These changes will take effect in June, with new submissions expected under the updated system around that time. However, ratings cannot be revealed until games are officially released or announced. The first titles reflecting these new criteria may emerge late summer, around Gamescom.

“Feedback from developers and companies will undoubtedly arise as they learn about these changes,”

Many in the gaming industry will first hear about these adjustments today, and it’s likely to spark discussions. Bosmans underlined the importance of these updates, stating, “This marks possibly our most significant update ever. We recognize that our original approach to these issues was insufficient, and it was essential to make progress.” He added that collaboration with USK was invaluable in enabling rapid change.