Imagine a football game whose age rating changes not because of harder tackles or stronger language, but because of what might be inside a virtual pack. That is the striking difference between EA Sports FC 25’s PEGI 3 rating and FC 27’s PEGI 16—and it reflects a shift in what European ratings consider important.
The rating is about the economy around the match
PEGI’s updated criteria cover interactive risks including in-game purchases, paid random items, communication features and systems that encourage players to keep playing. The changes were announced in March; since June, newly submitted games have been assessed under the expanded framework. The UK’s Games Rating Authority, which administers PEGI in the UK, has also begun applying the criteria to selected existing digital products.
Under the new approach, games containing loot boxes receive a PEGI 16 rating by default. FC 27’s rating information breaks out several purchase options, including FC Points, a season pass and player packs. Those are not all the same kind of transaction: a season pass is a defined progression offer, while a player pack can involve paying for a random outcome. The rating brings those systems into view rather than treating them as incidental to the game.
That distinction matters. Football matches are the visible centre of FC, but a collectible-player economy can give the game another rhythm: acquire currency, open a pack, assess the result, then decide whether to try again. Randomness is part of the appeal—and part of the risk. A player may be chasing a particular footballer, but the purchase does not promise that result. The rating does not tell us the odds, or establish how any individual player will spend; it signals that the mechanic itself now counts in PEGI’s assessment.
FC 27’s rating does not mean FC 25 suddenly changed
The contrast with FC 25 is easy to read as a verdict on a new game, but the rating shift is also a verdict on the rules used to classify it. FC 25 and earlier entries were rated PEGI 3, while FC 27 is PEGI 16. That jump does not, by itself, show that FC 27 has become more violent or that its football has changed. It shows that PEGI is weighing a different part of the experience.
Nor is an age rating a ban. PEGI’s label gives parents and players a clearer warning about the kinds of interactions involved; it does not remove the feature or judge whether every purchase is worthwhile. It also cannot, on its own, explain the details a player might want before spending—such as the precise odds for a particular item. That leaves room for clearer in-game disclosures and parental conversations alongside the rating.
Different regions are drawing different lines
North America’s ESRB has taken a more cautious position on bringing non-content features into age ratings. A representative said in March that its research suggested such additions could confuse parents. FC 27 is rated E for Everyone by the ESRB, with notices for user interactions and in-game purchases.
The contrast is a reminder that a rating is not a universal measurement of a game’s suitability. PEGI is making paid random items a direct part of its age classification; the ESRB’s label keeps the game at Everyone while flagging purchases and interactions separately. Families may encounter different guidance depending on where they live, even when considering the same title.
For players, the practical consequence is less dramatic than a locked door, but more useful than silence: a label that makes the game’s spending systems harder to overlook. A PEGI 16 rating does not settle the debate over packs, passes or player choice. It does, however, make one point unmistakable: in modern football games, the experience being rated is not only the match on the pitch, but also the economy waiting after the final whistle.