PEGI ratingAge classification revisionGambling

Joker Card Game Rating System “Rollercoaster”: Gambling Elements Assessment Sparks Controversy

小丑牌游戏分级 “过山车”:赌博元素评定引争议

January 19, 2026
7 views

Summary

In February 2025, PEGI announced that the age rating of the roguelike card game Balatro had been revised to PEGI 12, citing the use of fantasy elements that mitigate its perceived gambling aspects. This decision followed a turbulent rating history since the game’s 2024 release, during which Balatro was repeatedly reclassified—at times upgraded from 3+ to 18+—and temporarily delisted in several regions. Although the game’s core mechanics are based on deck-building roguelike gameplay rather than real gambling, rating authorities consistently focused on its poker-inspired presentation. PEGI’s latest adjustment, while still acknowledging the presence of gambling themes, reflects the ambiguity in existing rating standards regarding gambling-related content. PEGI has also recognized the need for more nuanced criteria going forward.

In February 2025, PEGI issued an announcement stating that the fantasy elements in Balatro, a card-based roguelike game, reduced its gambling content. Consequently, the game's age rating was revised to 12+.

Currently, the publicly displayed age rating for Balatro has also been adjusted to 12+.

PART 1

Balatro's Age Rating Faces Unexpected Setbacks

Balatro (commonly known as the Joker Card game) has experienced a series of unexpected twists in 2024. Within 72 hours of its release, the game surpassed 250,000 copies sold across all platforms. It continues to receive overwhelmingly positive reviews on Steam and has garnered multiple awards in the gaming industry.

However, shortly after its release, the game was abruptly pulled from console stores in regions including Europe, North America, and Japan. According to publisher Playstack, this removal stemmed from regulators deeming the game to involve gambling. Rating authorities abruptly changed its age rating from 3+ to 18+ without prior warning.

A closer look at Playstack's announcement reveals that Joker Cards was initially rated 18+ during its submission for review. Following Playstack's appeal, the rating committee stated that classifying the game as gambling-related was unfounded and ultimately set the rating at 3+.

Just when Playstack thought they could breathe easy, another blow struck: the rating agency once again changed the rating to 18+. The rating agency's back-and-forth changes on this game's classification are truly baffling.

PART 2

The “Awkwardness” of Gambling Elements in Rating Systems

PEGI's recent revision also represents a reassessment of its existing rating criteria. According to PEGI's official standards, content such as violence, profanity, fear, gambling, sexuality, drugs, and discrimination all influence a game's rating. Regarding gambling-related content, PEGI evaluates games that encourage or teach gambling activities (simulated gambling refers to games typically played in casinos or gambling halls). Since 2020, any game containing such content is uniformly rated PEGI 18. Prior to this, such games might have received a PEGI 12 or PEGI 16 rating.

Notably, while PEGI rated Joker Cards as 12+, its rating statement explicitly states: “This game is rated PEGI 12 due to gambling themes.”

Regardless of whether Joker Cards truly contains gambling elements, the rating body's justification for this classification likely fails to align with existing rating standards. After all, current guidelines mandate a PEGI 18 rating for any game incorporating gambling elements. It's unclear whether PEGI opted for a compromise rating under pressure from multiple appeals by Playstack and public scrutiny. In its “Specific Content” commentary, PEGI justified the rating by stating: “The game employs traditional gambling themes and elements. However, as gameplay progresses, it mitigates this by incorporating fantasy elements distinct from conventional poker mechanics, without glorifying or encouraging real-life gambling or betting.” "PEGI sought to rationalize the game's new rating while simultaneously highlighting its gambling-related content.

Of course, PEGI acknowledged in its announcement the existing issues with rating gambling elements under current standards. It also proposed developing a more detailed classification system to address gambling themes, simulations, instruction, and glorification of gambling across different age groups.


PART 3

Even if it merely borrows the shell of gambling mechanics, it will affect the game's rating.

Although Joker Card's rating has fluctuated, the one constant is PEGI's classification of its gambling elements. On the surface, Joker Cards appears to blend Texas Hold'em poker with tower-climbing roguelike mechanics. However, at its core, it merely borrows the shell of Texas Hold'em while retaining roguelike DBG gameplay as its fundamental mechanics. Despite this, the rating committee prioritized evaluating its gambling elements during assessment, which remain a significant factor influencing Joker Cards' classification.

This rating revision also reveals PEGI's stance: any game incorporating gambling elements or mechanics may be deemed to contain gambling factors. In other words, based on the game's external presentation, the mere presence of gambling elements—even if merely borrowing the shell of a gambling mechanic—will fall under the “gambling” category in ratings. However, future ratings may not necessarily all fall under PEGI 18.

Beyond PEGI, similar practices exist in other countries and regions. Previously, a limited-time guessing game event in a certain title was flagged by South Korea's GRAC for containing gambling elements, leading to a rating correction. This occurred even though user participation required completing tasks to earn access, and rewards consisted solely of virtual goods with no monetary value. This illustrates that even limited-time events with uncertain probability factors can attract regulatory scrutiny and trigger changes to a game's overall rating.

In certain jurisdictions, gambling elements directly impact game classification. For instance, the ESRB in the United States assigns games featuring simulated gambling mechanics a minimum rating of T (Teen), while conventional simulated gambling games are typically rated T. In Taiwan's rating standards, gambling mechanics primarily appear in ratings of 12+ and above. The key distinction lies in whether such mechanics involve the gain or loss of in-game currency. Therefore, game companies must exercise extreme caution when implementing gambling mechanics. Even the slightest misstep could result in an element being labeled as “gambling,” leading to an inappropriate rating classification.

中文原文

2025年2月,PEGI发布公告,表示Balatro这款卡牌肉鸽类游戏包含的奇幻元素降低了其中的涉赌比例,因此将该款游戏分级修订为12+。

目前,小丑牌游戏对外显示的游戏年龄分级也已调整为12+。
PART 1

小丑牌年龄分级一波三折

Balatro(俗称小丑牌)游戏在2024年可谓是一波三折。小丑牌游戏在上架72小时后,在全平台的销售就突破了25万份,至今在steam上好评如潮,获得了游戏领域的多个奖项。

然而,小丑牌发行没多久后,却突然在欧洲、北美和日本等地区的主机游戏商品被下架。根据游戏运营商Playstack的说法,此次下架主要是因为监管机构认为小丑牌游戏涉及赌博,评级机构在没有提前警告的前提下,将小丑牌游戏的评级从3+变成了18+。

细看Playstack的公告,小丑牌游戏在送审评级时就被分级为18+。在Playstack的申诉下,分级委员会表示将该款游戏认定涉及赌博是毫无根据的,并最终将游戏分级定在3+。

本以为可以放心的playstack,结果又迎来了当头一棒,评级机构再次将分级调整为18+。评级机构对该款游戏分级的反复变化,实属让人摸不着头脑。
PART 2

赌博元素在分级中的“尴尬”

而PEGI的此次修正也是对PEGI现有的分级标准的一次正视。从PEGI官方分级标准来看,暴力、脏话、恐惧、涉赌、性、毒品、歧视等内容都会影响到游戏评级。而PEGI在对涉赌因素的评定中,游戏中包含鼓励或教授赌博内容的(模拟赌博是指通常在赌场或赌厅中进行的赌博游戏)。自2020年之后,包含此类内容的一律评为PEGI 18,而在此之前,可能会被评为 PEGI 12 或 PEGI 16。

而特别微妙的是,虽然PEGI评级机构将小丑牌游戏评为12+,但在评级信息中却又再一次提出“这款游戏因涉及赌博主题而被评为PEGI 12”。
且不论小丑牌游戏是否真的包含赌博内容,评级机构对于评级的理由也恐怕难以符合现有分级标准。毕竟按照现有分级标准,只要包含赌博元素的一律评为PEGI 18。难说PEGI在playstack多次申诉和舆论关注下,选择了相对折中的评级,毕竟在“具体内容”评述时,PEGI给出了这样的理由,“游戏采用了传统赌博的主题和元素。 不过,随着游戏的进行,游戏通过使用与传统扑克玩法不同的奇幻元素来缓解这种情况,而不会美化或鼓励现实生活中的赌博或下注。”PEGI以期将该游戏的新评级相对合理化,但却又突出强调了游戏中包含的涉赌元素。

当然,PEGI在公告中也知晓现有评级标准下涉赌因素评级存在的问题,也提出后续将制定一套更细化的分级标准,以处理不同年龄段的赌博主题以及模拟、教授和美化赌博的游戏。

PART 3

哪怕只是借用赌博玩法的壳,也会影响游戏分级

虽然小丑牌的评级一直在变,但唯一不变的是PEGI对其涉赌元素的认定。从外显来看,小丑牌游戏是个德州扑克与爬塔肉鸽的结合体,但其本质只不过是借用了德州扑克的壳,其玩法核心还是肉鸽DBG游戏。尽管如此,评级委员会在评级时还是重点考虑了其中的赌博因素,赌博因素依然是影响小丑牌游戏评级的一大原因。

此次评级修正也透露出了PEGI的态度,游戏中只要借鉴了赌博元素或赌博玩法,都可能会被认定为具有赌博因素。也就是说,从游戏的外在表现来看,只要存在赌博元素,哪怕只是借用了某个赌博玩法的壳,都会落入评级中的“赌博”因素,只是未来评级可能未必全落入PEGI 18。

除了PEGI外,其他国家或地区也有类似的情形。此前,某款游戏内的限时竞猜玩法活动因被韩国GRAC认为具有涉赌元素,而指出评级不当。甚至用户参与该竞猜活动的投入是参与任务而取得的,且产出也是虚拟产品,而不存在任何经济价值。由此可知,游戏中哪怕限时活动带有不确定的概率因素,都可能引发评级机构的关注而触发游戏本身评级的变动

在部分国家或地区中,涉赌元素会直接影响到游戏的分级。如美国ESRB评级中,存在模拟赌博玩法的游戏至少分级为T级,常规的模拟赌博游戏一般均定级为T级。而在台湾地区的评级标准中,涉赌玩法主要存在于辅12级以上档位,差异点主要在于对涉赌玩法是否构成对游戏虚拟币的增减。因此,关于游戏内涉赌玩法的使用,游戏公司不可掉以轻心,稍有不慎,便会有哪个元素沾了 “赌” 的边,而被打上不匹配的分级标签。

分享文章

相关文章

General

【Weekly Gaming Law】Lawyers Comment on miHoYo’s Anti-Fraud Actions; Infringing “Reskinned” Game Ordered to Pay RMB 5 Million

【每周游戏法】律师评米哈游反舞弊;侵权游卡被判赔500万

This weekly update examines three recent legal developments in the gaming industry: miHoYo’s anti-fraud enforcement and supplier blacklist measures; a “reskin” infringement case involving a Three Kingdoms-themed card game resulting in a RMB 5 million damages award based on unfair competition; and Roblox’s launch of AI-powered interactive content generation tools. The article outlines the legal considerations arising from supply chain compliance, the boundary between public domain materials and protectable game design, and the intellectual property and compliance implications of AI-generated interactive content within UGC platforms.

1 views
General

How to Build Official Game Payment Systems in a Compliant Manner (Part II): Overseas

游戏官方支付如何合规搭建(二)海外篇

Against the backdrop of a global economic slowdown and evolving regulatory scrutiny over major app distribution platforms, an increasing number of overseas-oriented game companies are exploring the establishment of official website top-up platforms to reduce reliance on channel commissions. Building on the prior discussion of platform policies regarding payment redirection and third-party payment access, this article reviews practical cases of official website payment models adopted by several game companies, including their login mechanisms, purchasable content, regional availability, and qualification disclosures. Based on these practices, it outlines compliance considerations that overseas game companies should focus on when constructing official website payment systems, particularly in relation to account management, price display, promotional methods, and refund policy design across different jurisdictions.

6 views
General

EU’s DMA Enforcement Push: Apple and Epic Games Reach Temporary Truce

欧盟DMA强监管,苹果与Epic Games暂时握手言和

Since 2020, Apple and Epic Games have been locked in a global antitrust dispute over App Store policies. While Epic lost its U.S. lawsuit, it continued its resistance through noncompliance, resulting in a developer account ban. However, the dynamics shifted with the EU Digital Markets Act (DMA) coming into force on March 6, 2024. Epic reported that Apple, under pressure from the European Commission, agreed to reinstate its developer account in the EU. The DMA’s provisions, especially Article 5(3) and Article 6(4), require gatekeepers like Apple to allow third-party app stores and payment systems on iOS. Apple’s attempt to ban Epic amid DMA implementation triggered regulatory attention, leading to rapid Commission intervention. This incident not only highlights the DMA’s enforcement teeth but also signals a broader shift in platform governance within the EU. For global developers and digital exporters, especially those dependent on app store distribution, DMA compliance represents a strategic inflection point. Non-compliance risks include fines of up to 10–20% of global turnover, exemplified by the €1.84 billion fine Apple recently faced. As more third-party app stores (e.g., Mobivention, MacPaw) emerge, the EU’s digital market is poised for structural transformation.

5 views