Why PEGI’s Decision Feels Unfair
PEGI has made some strange calls over the years, but the recent 18+ rating for Balatro feels particularly off. The game features poker-inspired mechanics but lacks any microtransactions or gambling systems. Meanwhile, titles like EA Sports FC 25, with lootboxes masquerading as “surprise mechanics,” maintain a PEGI 3 rating. Even Eve Galaxy Conquest, which I reviewed recently (read the review here), is rated 12+ — not because of its lootboxes, but due to mature innuendo. It’s frustrating and raises questions about whether these ratings truly protect consumers or benefit companies with teams of lawyers finding loopholes. That doesn’t sit right with me.
Cards Aren’t the Problem, It’s the Context
In fact, it reminds me of how I first learned card games—not from a video game, but from my grandmother. She taught me poker and a dozen other card games when I was a kid, just like my son now learns from his grandma during weekend visits. Cards are a compact, versatile way to play strategy games, often with family or friends. They’re on par with Monopoly, UNO or Snakes’n’Ladders—tabletop games meant for fun. The idea that teaching kids about poker hands somehow equals gambling feels absurd to me.
Another personal experience comes from my teenage years when I played games like Magic: The Gathering and Spellfire. My friends and I often gathered in cafés or parks to play. More than once, we were asked to leave because someone assumed we were gambling. They saw cards in our hands and jumped to conclusions. I see the same pattern here with PEGI’s decision—it’s a misunderstanding that unfairly stigmatizes card games.
Some irony from Balatro developer Local Thunk:
The Real Issue: Lootboxes and Misplaced Priorities
Gambling isn’t about the cards themselves—it’s about the conditions around them. You could gamble on anything, from Mario Kart to Whack-a-Mole, if the stakes were there. The problem lies in systems like lootboxes. When you open a pack, flip cards, see a shiny reward, and feel the urge to try “just one more time,” that’s gambling. Connect your credit card to a kid-friendly game with lootboxes, and you’ll see how quickly the bills add up.
So why is Balatro, with zero in-game purchases, slapped with an 18+ rating while games like Clash of Clans and Pokémon TCG Pocket are rated for kids despite their monetized mechanics? It doesn’t add up. I agree with Balatro’s developers—it’s disappointing and unfair.
Don’t get me wrong—I firmly believe gambling is harmful. It exploits vulnerable people, ruins lives, and creates financial and emotional instability. But gambling isn’t the game; it’s the business model around it. And in this case, PEGI’s decision to penalize Balatro while letting other games slide feels like a failure to recognize the real problem.
That ignorance is disappointing, especially since it has been scientifically proven numerous times that lootbox mechanics are rooted in behavioral disorders, much like gambling. Back in 2019, David Zendle published his results from a large-scale survey, Video game loot boxes are linked to problem gambling. The study highlighted how these mechanics exploit the same psychological vulnerabilities, yet they continue to slip through rating systems designed to protect consumers.
As much as I’d love to see change in this multi-billion-dollar industry of misleading terminology, I know my voice alone won’t tip the scales. That’s why it’s on us, as parents and gamers, to evaluate games ourselves and teach our kids how to recognize these tactics.
What do you think?
Do you believe card games inherently promote gambling? Should lootboxes be rated differently, especially for kids?
Let me know your thoughts—I’d love to hear how others feel about this!
Leave a Reply