Clash of Clans Game Class Action Lawsuit Says Loot Boxes Are Gambling

A Clash of Clans game player says that, though Supercell Oy’s video games are “free to play,” they come with dangerous and addictive in-game purchases. In the eyes of the customer, these purchases are a form of gambling and should be prohibited. 

The Supercell Oy Clash of Clans game loot boxes class action lawsuit was filed by California resident Peter Mai who says he plays Clash Royale and, since 2016, has spent more than $150 on in-game loot boxes. He says that these in-game Loot Boxes are exploitative of customers. Allegedly, they inspire the same addictive reaction as gambling.

Mai explains that Clash Royale is a game made by Finnish game company Supercell Oy. He says that he has played the game since at least 2016, when he downloaded the game onto his iPhone from the Apple App Store. Allegedly, he has made more than $150 worth of in-game purchases in the hopes of gaining valuable virtual items to use in the game. 

He explains that these items are not sold outright. Instead, they come in the form of Loot Boxes. A gamer reportedly has the option to buy a Loot Box, which has an undisclosed item inside. These boxes reportedly sometimes contain very valuable items in the game, but more often than not, contain less valuable items.

Allegedly, the Loot Boxes are set up so that a customer seems to get a random-chance possibility at more valuable prizes. However, the more valuable prizes are reportedly less common than the less valuable items.

Mai goes on to note that though these items are supposedly purchased with an in-game currency, the in-game currency only serves to separate the gamer from the true cost of the Loot Boxes. Allegedly, they do cost real money, but the cost is expressed via an imaginary, in-game currency to allow a gamer to not fully connect with the reality that they are spending real money.

Mai says that, because of this set-up, he and other gamers end up spending more money than they otherwise would on comparable items. The Clash of Clans game loot boxes class action lawsuit says that Supercell Oy deliberately uses techniques akin to gambling to encourage customers to purchase Loot Boxes.

He explains that the random-chance design of the loot boxes, and the excitement that comes with the possibility of gaining a valuable Loot Box, is akin to the experience of playing a Las Vegas slot machine. He says the supposedly random nature of the Loot Boxes include the “psychological aspects to encourage and create addition.” 

Because of these similarities to slot machines, Mai asserts that these Loot Boxes are illegal under California law prohibiting slot machines and devices. 

He also says that the Loot Boxes and the currency used to purchase them further imitates gambling. He notes that casinos often let customers gamble with chips, as opposed to money, because the chips disconnect users from the fact that they are spending real money. Allegedly, research indicates that gamblers spend more when playing with chips than playing directly with money. 

The Clash of Clans gambling class action lawsuit argues that Supercell Oy uses this strategy in requiring gamers to make in-game purchases via “gems,” an in-game purchase. Mai notes that gamers are prompted to purchase gems with real money, and they then use the gems in the game. 

The Clash of Clans game loot boxes class action lawsuit says that to make matters worse, Supercell Oy targets children to buy in-game purchases. According to Mai, this tactic is used because children are especially vulnerable to the psychological effects of gambling and are not likely to be able to understand the costs and risks of gaming.

He notes that Clash Royale and Brawl Stars, made by Supercell Oy, are rated as appropriate for players ages nine and up. This game reportedly includes in-game purchases made with gems, and includes Loot Boxes. As a result of loot boxes and other in-game purchases, Clash of Clans game makers reportedly earned $727 million in 2019 – a 27% increase from 2018.

In concerns similar to those in this recent legal news, Mai also notes that California lawmakers are attempting to protect children from gambling in games, with proposed litigation like “The Protecting Children From Abusive Games Act,” created in response to a worry that more and more games exposed children to gambling and in-game purchases.

Have you ever made an in-game purchase? Were you aware of how much you were spending? Share your experiences in the comments below.

Mai is represented by Timothy G. Blood, Thomas J. O’Reardon II and Craig W. Straub of Blood Hurst & O’Reardon LLP; and by Andrew J. Brown of the Law Offices of Andrew J. Brown. 

The Clash of Clans Game Loot Box Gambling Class Action Lawsuit is Peter Mai, et al. v. Supercell Oy, Case No. 5:20-cv-05573, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

Cancer Patients Seek OK For $8M Data Breach Deal

Retrial Date Pushed Back in Catholic Church Sex Abuse Scandal Due to Coronavirus

Former Chipotle Employee Claims She Was Denied Breast Pump Breaks

How to Apply for Social Security Disability