Victory for EA: Austrian High Court Declares “Packs” as Not Gambling

In a landmark decision, the Austrian Supreme Court has officially ruled that loot boxes, specifically those found in FIFA, or EA Sports FC as it’s now called, do not qualify as “gambling” under the national Gambling Act.

Even if you’ve never played the game, the chances are you’ve heard all about their loot box system.

The Appeal of “Packs” for Both Players and Electronic Arts

It’s easy to see the appeal of “packs” for players. With just one reasonably-sized purchase, you could gain immediate access to some of the best players ever to grace the pitch, and give yourself a massive advantage competing against other players.

As such, it’s not surprising that this model has generated billions in revenue for EA. In 2024 alone, EA reported making $4.4 billion just from “extra content” live services, which accounted for around 60% of their total net revenue for that time period.

Electronic Arts definitely aren’t the only video game developer to make this a feature of their game, but they may be the most well-known. After all, the money generated from “packs” in the Ultimate Team mode were a driving factor in the game developer’s widely-publicised decision to part ways with FIFA, as the organization wanted a larger sum to continue to allow EA to licence its name for commercial use.

The “Skill” Loophole: Why the Court Sided with EA

The main issue surrounding the legal debate was whether winning was driven primarily by luck or skill. Although players can make an educated guess as to what prizes they may receive based on the price of the “pack” they pay for, the contents of a “pack” are randomised.

Ultimately, the court decided that “…despite the random nature of digital items in loot boxes, the player ultimately controls the game through their own tactics, strategy, and physical dexterity with the controller.”

As individual ability was deemed to be the overriding factor, the loot box mechanic was deemed a secondary mechanic rather than illegal gambling.

The Counter-Arguments

Despite the legal wins that EA has enjoyed in multiple countries besides the US, the loot box model continues to come under heavy criticism as players and those in the wider gaming community have claimed that EA was essentially encouraging gambling due to the randomised nature of “packs”.

By extension, many critics of the loot box system argue that it targets underage children. Although they may be too young to set foot in a casino, they are still presented with a means to engage in gambling through buying “packs”.

Finally, the loot box model employed by many companies including EA has been criticised for creating a “pay to win” model, where you can simply buy your way to victory rather than being good at the game. Again, the argument goes that this forces players to engage in gambling if they want to have any chance of competing.

What This Means for the Industry

The Austrian Supreme Court’s ruling will have a major impact on the video game industry, as the ruling has acknowledged the randomised nature of loot boxes while ruling that they are ultimately a help rather than the deciding factor in emerging victorious.

By focusing on the skill of the player after the loot box is opened, courts are making it very difficult for regulators to categorise these microtransactions as gambling. As such, it looks as though the loot box mechanic is here to stay for the time being.

This could have wider implications, too, as shooting and fishing games could exploit this loophole to get round Austria’s famously tough gambling laws. At the moment one casino, win2day, holds an effective monopoly on the online gambling scene in the country. This ruling might not change that, but it might tempt an operator or two to try their luck with fishing and shooting games that are a combination of luck and skill.