MeitY consults gaming business; stakeholders elevate crimson flags over ‘stakes’ definition

On Monday, key business stakeholders from India’s quickly rising video gaming and on-line cash gaming sectors met officers from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to debate the draft guidelines for the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025.

The assembly, chaired by MeitY Secretary S. Krishnan, noticed lively participation from main business associations together with the Game Developers Association of India (GDAI), All India Gaming Federation (AIGF), Federation of Indian Fantasy Sports (FIFS), E-Gaming Federation (EGF), and IndiaTech.

Officials responded to a variety of issues raised by stakeholders, together with the definition of “stakes”, registration processes for social video games, the scope of “material changes” that set off re-registration, grievance redressal mechanisms, and compliance burdens on builders. The stakeholders will now submit contentions associated to the foundations which requires pressing consideration relating to the definitions.

The definition of “stakes” emerged because the central level of debate through the discussions. Under the Act’s present wording, “other stakes” embrace cash, tokens, credit, and digital objects bought in a sport. Industry representatives warned that this broad and ambiguous language dangers conflating normal video video games with real-money gaming, probably subjecting reputable builders to enforcement actions.

Developers cited well-liked titles comparable to Angry Birds, Subway Surfers, and Minecraft as examples of video games that permit customers to buy digital gadgets or upgrades — also known as “cash-in” transactions — however don’t allow any withdrawal, redemption, or conversion to real-world worth.

“This lack of clarity could lead to misclassification of harmless entertainment games as money games, exposing them to inappropriate regulation,” one affiliation consultant stated after the assembly. “It would create significant uncertainty for thousands of Indian game developers and studios.”

To deal with this, stakeholders proposed that the Act undertake a transparent and internationally aligned definition of “online social games”:

“Online social games shall mean digital and online games made available either at a cost or no upfront cost, which may allow users to purchase virtual items, features, or enchantments (‘cash-in’) but which strictly prohibit withdrawal, redemption, or conversion of any such virtual item into cash, monetary value, or real-world goods or services.”

This formulation, they argued, would clearly distinguish closed-loop digital economies—a cornerstone of most mainstream video video games—from on-line cash video games that contain financial stakes and withdrawals. The business confused that aligning with international greatest practices is crucial to stop overreach and supply regulatory certainty.

Beyond “stakes,” stakeholders additionally pointed to ambiguities within the definition of “material change”, which underneath the draft guidelines may pressure builders to re-register their video games even for minor updates comparable to bug fixes or UI enhancements. This, they argued, would create pointless administrative bottlenecks, significantly for small studios working dwell video games which might be up to date steadily.

On grievance redressal, the business steered that present app retailer mechanisms (Apple, Google, Steam, Xbox, PlayStation) be accepted as enough for many builders, as an alternative of imposing standalone grievance officer necessities on all studios. They proposed making use of further necessities solely to firms above a income threshold of ₹100 crore.

The business’s issues prolonged to regulatory overreach by means of broad definitions of phrases comparable to “stake” and “harm,” in addition to preemptive enforcement powers underneath Sections 12 and 13 of the Act. Stakeholders warned that uncertainty and subjective interpretation may discourage firms from incorporating or retaining IP in India, pushing them to relocate to jurisdictions with clearer and extra predictable guidelines.

The teams additionally advisable establishing a Social Games Advisory Council with majority business illustration, and aligning India’s terminology with international requirements by progressively integrating “online social games” underneath the broader “video games” class to keep away from worldwide confusion.

Stakeholders emphasised that India’s video gaming business is poised to develop into a worldwide hub if regulation is light-touch, predictable, and proportionate. They highlighted the cultural and academic worth of social video games, their potential for export progress, job creation, and IP possession inside India.

“Clarity in the definition of stakes is not a mere technical issue — it determines whether India will be a global leader in video games or remain a back office,” a developer affiliation consultant stated. “A balanced regulatory approach can help India retain innovation, investment, and IP creation within its borders.”