Microtransactions continue to be one of gaming’s prominent and consistent controversies. There are now so many ways in which games bleed their consumer base dry. While doing a bit of digging, I found out about the issues Luck be a Landlord is currently suffering from when it comes to accusations of simulated gambling.

Luck be a Landlord is a game with a simple premise but complex mechanics. It’s a roguelike deck-builder where you use a slot machine to make enough money to pay your rent and “defeat capitalism.” You click “Spin,” you collect and line up symbols with varying effects and synergies after every spin, and you try your best to avoid eviction.

Videos by VICE

Imagine my shock when I found out Luck be a Landlord was banned in 13 countries in 2023. Reportedly, it was violating Google’s (and later, Apple’s) gambling policies. As of this writing, only South Korea lifted its ban on the game. But only after a reclassification of its rating. Initially, Dan DiIorio, the game’s developer, paid for a 12+ rating reclassification to satisfy South Korea’s Game Rating and Administration Committee. However, that was later changed by the committee to 19+.

gambling and the art of ambiguity

DiIorio, understandably, resented the hurdles he had to jump through to attempt to sell Luck be a Landlord in certain regions. He made a fantastic point about his game’s issues against other titles with similar “gambling-adjacent” objectives. In The TrampolineTales Newsletter, DiIorio made his stance clear.

“It is so horribly backwards that games with literal real-money gambling like Genshin Impact and Madden NFL 25 don’t have an ESRB or PEGI rating higher than the ’13+’ equivalent,” he wrote.

“This is the case while games that contain no actual real-money gambling like Balatro have an ’18+’ rating and have to go through all this garbage. Simply because someone on a ratings board saw a screenshot of a poker chip and said ‘Hey! That looks like gambling!’”

How terribly fitting that gaming franchises with deeper pockets get to skirt by on technicalities. But an innocuous Luck be a Landlord suffers consequences greatly affecting its ability to earn revenue and stay afloat. It’s endlessly frustrating when the rules seem to only apply selectively.

Where does that leave us?

Ratings Boards often get to make decisions without fully explaining the why of the matter. Creatives are given a list of things they have to fix and tweak and are sent on their way. Rejections boil down to “Well, that’s just what we’ve decided” with no follow-up. Sadly, the answer as to why the system often works like that is straightforward. Because if the rules were clearly defined, people could point to them and say, “Wait, that’s not fair!” and be entirely justified.

You know, Monopoly started out as a game that was meant to spit in the face of capitalism. It was designed to show players just how unfair the system was. How you can work so hard to build something and all it takes is one unknowing, wrong step to leave you with nothing. Today, you can go to a Barnes & Noble and buy Monopoly variations featuring your favorite properties!

Game of Thrones Monopoly! Stranger Things Monopoly! Monopoly Go! — which definitely doesn’t promote and glorify capitalistic greed. Unfortunately, with situations such as Luck be a Landlord‘s, the game is rigged. The instant you think you understand the rules, they change. The House Always Wins.