In 2018, a Senate inquiry recommended that loot boxes be regulated as gambling in Australia. It’s 2026 now. They haven’t been.

The gaming industry has spent the intervening years slowly reforming itself — sort of. Some publishers have adopted voluntary disclosure of drop rates. A few have moved away from loot boxes entirely. But the fundamental issue remains: games marketed to children and young adults contain mechanisms that are, by any reasonable definition, gambling. And in Australia, they’re completely unregulated.

I’ve been writing about this for years, and I’m running out of new ways to say the same thing: this is a problem, and inaction isn’t neutral.

The current state of play

Loot boxes still exist in some of the most popular games in the world. FIFA’s successor EA FC still has its pack system, even if it’s been mildly reformed. Many free-to-play games on mobile and PC use randomised reward mechanisms as their primary revenue model. Gacha games, which are essentially loot box systems wrapped in anime aesthetics, have grown enormously in popularity.

What’s changed is the framing, not the mechanics. Publishers have rebranded loot boxes as “surprise mechanics,” restructured the reward flow to feel less overtly like gambling, and added “pity timers” that guarantee a rare item after a certain number of purchases. These changes address the cosmetics of the problem while leaving the core intact.

You’re still spending real money for a randomised reward with variable value. That’s gambling. Adding a progress bar doesn’t change the fundamental transaction.

Why Australia specifically

Belgium banned loot boxes in 2018. The Netherlands tried to regulate them (though enforcement has been uneven). The UK’s gambling commission investigated them. Several US states have introduced legislation.

Australia has done precisely nothing since that 2018 Senate inquiry. The ACCC has not intervened. State gambling regulators have not claimed jurisdiction. The federal government has not legislated.

This is frustrating because Australia is a country that takes gambling regulation seriously in other contexts. We regulate poker machines, sports betting, and casinos extensively. The infrastructure for regulating gambling exists. The political will to apply it to video games does not.

The gaming industry lobby in Australia isn’t even particularly powerful compared to other countries. There just isn’t enough political pressure to act. Gamers are a large demographic but not an organised political constituency.

The impact on young players

The research linking loot boxes to problem gambling behaviour has grown substantially since 2018. Multiple peer-reviewed studies have found statistically significant correlations between loot box spending and gambling behaviour. The mechanisms are the same — variable ratio reinforcement, near-miss effects, social proof — as those used by poker machines.

Young Australians are particularly exposed. Mobile games with loot box mechanics are played by children who don’t need a parent’s credit card when prepaid gift cards are available at every servo and supermarket. The spending can accumulate quickly and invisibly.

I’ve heard from parents who discovered their teenager had spent hundreds of dollars on in-game purchases before they realised what was happening. The games are designed to make spending feel trivial. Each individual purchase is small — $2, $5, $10. But they add up, and the variable reward keeps people coming back.

What regulation should look like

I’m not arguing for a ban on all randomised mechanics. I’m arguing for regulation that brings these systems under the same framework we apply to every other form of gambling in Australia.

Classify paid loot boxes as a form of gambling. This brings them under existing regulatory frameworks and age restrictions.

Require clear disclosure of odds. Not buried in a terms of service document — prominently displayed at the point of purchase.

Enforce age restrictions. Games with paid randomised reward mechanics should not be accessible to minors without parental consent and spending controls.

Cap spending. Daily and monthly spending limits on randomised purchases, similar to those imposed on online gambling platforms.

These aren’t radical proposals. They’re the same protections we apply to other gambling products. The only reason we haven’t applied them to games is that nobody has forced the issue.

The waiting game

Every year I think this will be the year something changes. And every year, it doesn’t. The inquiry recommendations gather dust. New games launch with loot box systems. Young people spend money on randomised rewards. And politicians focus on other things.

It would be easy to blame the gaming industry for this, and they deserve blame for designing exploitative systems. But the regulatory failure is on government. The evidence exists. The regulatory tools exist. The international precedent exists. What’s missing is the decision to act.

I’ll keep writing about this until something changes. At this rate, I’ll have a lot of articles.