Italy vs. Activision Blizzard: What ‘Misleading and Aggressive’ Game Design Means for Child Mental Health

How Italy's AGCM probe of Activision Blizzard reveals what 'misleading and aggressive' game design means for child mental health

Hook: If you’re a parent, caregiver, clinician or school leader struggling to keep up with why a “free” game quickly turns into repeated charges—and household fights—you are not alone. In early 2026, Italy’s competition authority (AGCM) opened two formal investigations into Microsoft-owned Activision Blizzard, alleging that the company used misleading and aggressive design tactics in Diablo Immortal and Call of Duty Mobile to push players, including children, into costly in-game purchases. This probe is a wake-up call for families and public-health professionals: the mechanics behind microtransactions aren’t just marketing—they intersect with addiction risk, anxiety, and family stress.

Top takeaways (inverted pyramid)

• AGCM alleges
• These design elements map onto known behavioral addiction mechanisms—variable reward schedules, loss avoidance, and frictionless payments—that increase vulnerability in children.
• Consequences: increased anxiety, impulsive spending, family conflict, and financial harm; clinicians should screen for gaming-related distress.
• Actionable steps for parents: audit devices, enable parental controls, set spending limits, and use clear conversations and structure to reduce harm.
• Policy direction 2026: expect tighter EU and national rules requiring transparency, age checks, and spending safeguards informed by AGCM's probe.

What the AGCM is investigating

In January 2026 the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM) announced two investigations into Activision Blizzard focused on smartphone titles Diablo Immortal and Call of Duty Mobile. According to the regulator, the probes target a range of practices that may be misleading and aggressive, particularly for minors.

“These practices… may influence players as consumers — including minors — leading them to spend significant amounts, sometimes exceeding what is necessary to progress in the game and without being fully aware of the expenditure involved.” — AGCM press release, January 2026

The alleged tactics include:

• Design elements that prolong play: reward cycles and event-driven content that encourage repeated log-ins and extended sessions.
• Scarcity and time pressure: limited-time offers and countdowns that prompt impulsive purchases to “not miss out.”
• Obfuscated currency value: selling bundled virtual currency whose real-money value is unclear, making cost per item opaque.
• Progression walls: pay-to-skip or pay-to-accelerate mechanics that create monetary barriers to advancement.

Why these mechanics matter for children

Designers know what keeps players engaged. The same behavioral levers—variable rewards, near-miss feedback, and social status cues—also make games more persuasive. For children and adolescents, whose decision-making and impulse-control systems are still developing, these features can be particularly potent.

Behavioral science: the mechanics behind the pull

Several well-established psychological principles explain why microtransactions and loot-based systems can lead to problematic patterns:

• Variable-ratio reward schedules: intermittent reinforcement (like unpredictable loot outcomes) is among the most powerful drivers of persistent behavior.
• Loss aversion and scarcity: countdown timers and limited offers trigger urgency and fear of missing out (FOMO), increasing impulsivity.
• Endowment and sunk-cost effects: time invested in progression makes players more likely to spend to protect that investment.
• Monetary dissociation: when transactions use virtual currency or bundles, real spending feels abstract—heightening overspending risk.

Clinical outcomes observed and reported

Health professionals and researchers have repeatedly documented links between aggressive monetization and harms in young people:

• Gaming-related anxiety and stress: pressure to keep up with peers in-game and fear of missing events can increase worry and sleep disruption.
• Problematic or addictive behaviors: sustained play driven by microtransaction mechanics may meet criteria for Internet Gaming Disorder (DSM-5 conceptualization) or ICD-11 gaming disorder in vulnerable individuals.
• Financial harm and family conflict: impulsive purchases by minors—often using parental payment methods—trigger household disputes, debt, and loss of trust.

Real-world examples: composite case studies from clinicians

To respect privacy, these are composite scenarios representative of cases clinicians and school counselors have reported since 2024:

• Case A — The $800 season: A 13-year-old with high school pressures logged hundreds of hours across a season-long event to unlock cosmetics. After a streak of limited-time offers and “sprint” rewards, the parent discovered repeated charges totaling $800. The child reported panic at missing rewards and sleeplessness to be online during event windows.
• Case B — The progression trap: A 15-year-old invested time crafting an in-game item. When a new update created a faster progression path purchasable with virtual currency, the teen repeatedly bought bundles to avoid losing progress. The family's budget strain led to arguments and the parent temporarily removing internet access, increasing the child's anxiety.

What parents and caregivers can do now: practical, immediate steps

Families do not need to wait for regulators to act. Here are concrete actions that can limit exposure to harmful mechanics while supporting children’s mental health.

1. Audit and limit spending

• Disable in-app purchases at the device level (iOS: Screen Time & Content & Privacy Restrictions; Android: Google Play parental controls).
• Set store-level spending caps or require password/biometric approval for purchases.
• Convert stored payment methods into low-balance options or remove them entirely from child accounts.

2. Strengthen parental controls and communication

• Use platform parental dashboards (Apple Family Sharing, Google Family Link, Microsoft Family Safety) to set playtime limits and bedtimes.
• Discuss in-game economies openly: show the real-world value of virtual currency bundles and explain scarcity marketing.
• Establish household rules: scheduled gaming hours, spending allowances, and an explicit process for asking to buy items.

3. Create spending friction

• Introduce deliberate delays before purchases: a 24–48 hour “cooling off” period can reduce impulsive buys.
• Use joint approval for purchases above a set threshold (e.g., $5).

4. Track behavior and mental-health signals

• Watch for sleep disturbances, withdrawal from family and school, mood changes, and intense preoccupation with in-game status.
• If concerning patterns emerge, consult a pediatrician or mental-health professional familiar with gaming-related issues.

5. Pursue refunds and report abusive practices

• Contact app stores for refund requests for unauthorized or misleading purchases; document dates and screenshots.
• Report practices to national consumer protection authorities—AGCM in Italy or equivalent agencies elsewhere—if you suspect deceptive tactics are at play.

Clinical guidance for healthcare providers and school counselors

Clinicians should incorporate gaming monetization into screening and treatment when relevant.

• Screen routinely: Ask about time spent gaming, whether purchases are made, and whether gaming contributes to sleep problems, anxiety, or family conflict.
• Use brief assessment tools: Instruments derived from Internet Gaming Disorder criteria and validated scales can identify problematic patterns.
• Offer evidence-based interventions: Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) adapted for gaming disorder, family-based interventions, and financial counseling are effective elements.
• Coordinate with schools: Counselors and teachers can help monitor academic impact and provide structured alternatives to event-driven gaming cycles.

Regulatory context in 2026: why this matters beyond Italy

AGCM’s actions reflect a broader regulatory trend in 2024–2026: authorities across Europe and other jurisdictions are scrutinizing loot boxes, microtransactions, and dark patterns that target young users. Several factors are shaping policy momentum:

• Consumer protection enforcement: National regulators are using competition and consumer laws to challenge non-transparent pricing and aggressive design.
• EU digital policy: The Digital Services Act (DSA) and related frameworks have elevated transparency and risk mitigation requirements for platforms and apps; member states are increasingly applying these rules to gaming monetization.
• Public health framing: As research accumulates linking certain monetization strategies to gambling-like behaviors in minors, regulators treat these practices not just as commerce issues but as child-protection concerns.

What to expect next (2026 predictions)

• Mandatory transparency: Clear, standardized disclosure of virtual-currency pricing and odds for randomized rewards will expand across the EU and beyond.
• Age-verification and parental consent: Stronger age checks and explicit parental opt-in for purchases above low thresholds. Some countries may ban certain loot mechanics for minors.
• Spending limits for minors: Regulatory or platform-imposed monthly caps and default parental control settings will become more common.
• Industry shifts: Developers may pivot to subscriptions, cosmetic-only monetization with strict controls for minors, or clearer “pay-to-skip” labels.

Policy recommendations: what effective regulation should require

AGCM’s probe highlights the policy levers that can reduce harm while preserving legitimate creative business models.

• Transparent pricing: Require display of real-money equivalent for all virtual-currency bundles and single items.
• Odds disclosure: Mandate clear odds for randomized rewards and treat loot boxes like regulated lotteries for minors.
• Default protections for minors: Automatic spending caps, explicit parental consent flows, and stronger age verification for purchases.
• Design safety audits: Oblige child-impact assessments and external audits of game mechanics marketed to or accessible by minors.
• Complaint and refund pathways: Fast, transparent mechanisms for families to dispute charges and obtain refunds when practices are misleading.

Industry responsibility and best practices

Developers and platform holders can adopt concrete changes now rather than wait for enforcement:

• Design monetization with friction for purchases by minors: require cooling-off, co-approval, and clear cost displays.
• Eliminate manipulative dark patterns (countdowns, false scarcity) in child-facing contexts.
• Provide robust parental dashboards showing exact real-world spend history and pending offers.
• Support research by granting researchers access to anonymized purchasing and engagement data to study impacts.

When to involve authorities or seek help

Families should escalate when games use clear misrepresentations or when purchases cause significant financial or mental-health harm.

• File a complaint with your national consumer protection agency (AGCM in Italy for Italy-based complainants).
• Request refunds through app stores and keep records (screenshots, transaction receipts, communication logs).
• Seek clinical help for children showing persistent anxiety, depressive symptoms, or functional impairment related to gaming.

Final assessment: why the AGCM case matters for public health

AGCM’s investigations aren’t just a commercial dispute—they refract the intersection of digital design, child development, and public health policy. The core allegation is that some monetization techniques intentionally exploit young users’ cognitive vulnerabilities. That matters because when persuasive technology crosses into coercive or deceptive territory, the harms recorded are real: financial loss, increased anxiety, sleep disruption, school problems, and, in some cases, clinically significant addictive behaviors.

Public-health responses must be layered: empower families through tools and education, equip clinicians to identify and treat gaming-related harm, and push for regulatory standards that create safer default environments for children online.

Practical checklist for parents and clinicians (quick reference)

1. Audit device and app store purchase settings today—turn off in-app purchases if needed.
2. Set and enforce household gaming rules with clear spending allowances and a co-approval model.
3. Monitor mental-health signals: sleep, mood, school performance, and social withdrawal.
4. Document and dispute suspicious charges immediately; contact app stores and your consumer authority.
5. Refer for clinical care when gaming-related distress or impairment persists.

Call to action

If you’re a parent or clinician, start by auditing game settings and payment methods on devices in your home. If you suspect a game uses misleading monetization, report it to your national consumer protection agency—AGCM has shown that regulatory review can shine light on these practices and prompt change. For professionals: integrate gaming-monetization screening into routine assessments and advocate locally for stronger age-verification and spending protections.

Join the conversation: Share this article with school leaders, pediatricians and parenting groups. The next wave of child-protection policy will be shaped by informed families and clinicians who demand safer defaults in digital entertainment.

Related Reading

• Tested: Which Disposable Heating Packs Actually Keep Delivery Pizza Hot?
• Syllabus Supplement: Contemporary China Through Memoirs and Essays
• Sourcing Low-Cost Electronics: Red Flags and Quality Tests When Buying from Marketplaces
• How to Pitch a Beauty Line to a Transmedia Studio: Lessons from The Orangery
• Can Blockchain Aid Protesters Under Blackouts? Lessons from Iran on Censorship-Resistant Tools