MIAMI — A Broward County father has filed a federal lawsuit accusing Roblox Corporation, Epic Games, Microsoft Corporation, Mojang AB and up to 50 unnamed defendants of knowingly designing their video game platforms to addict children, alleging the companies failed to warn parents and users of the risks and instead engineered systems that intensified compulsive gameplay and increased profits.
The complaint, filed on behalf of a 10-year-old child identified as L.A.L., seeks damages under Florida law for physical, emotional, and economic injuries the family says resulted from years of exposure to Roblox, Fortnite and Minecraft beginning when the child was five years old, according to a complaint filed Nov. 25 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
The lawsuit is “not a war on fun,” but an effort to hold major gaming companies accountable for allegedly ignoring decades of scientific research on video-game addiction and instead implementing “manipulative programming,” operant conditioning and patented psychological engagement tools to keep minors playing for prolonged periods.
The suit is one of dozens that have been filed in recent months blaming these video games for the emotional problems of minors. A federal court panel recently decided they won’t be grouped into one multidistrict litigation proceeding but instead will be tried in various courts with “informal coordination.”
The complaint asserts that the companies purposely designed features known to trigger dopamine responses in developing brains, especially in minors and neurodivergent youth, ultimately causing behavioral changes, withdrawal symptoms, cognitive impairment and disruption to family life.
The suit alleges that Roblox, Fortnite and Minecraft are often among the first online video games children encounter, serving as “the catalyst to an addiction cycle” due to their availability, marketing strategies and integration of in-game purchases and reward-based systems aimed at children.
The plaintiff argues that each company was aware that increased playtime directly correlates with increased microtransaction spending and, therefore, prioritized engagement-boosting design choices over safety measures.
The complaint outlines a broad scientific foundation, citing decades of research indicating that extensive video-game use can alter dopamine pathways, reduce gray-matter volume, impair impulse control and produce symptoms comparable to substance withdrawal in developing brains.
The lawsuit states that minors, whose prefrontal cortices are still forming, are especially vulnerable to compulsive use when exposed to reward-based systems repeatedly over long periods.
The document further claims that the defendants consulted behavioral psychologists, neuroscientists and child-development experts, not to implement protective safeguards, but to refine game-design systems that maximize user retention.
The filing cites numerous patents allegedly used across the industry, including systems that match inexperienced players with more skilled users to encourage purchases, dynamically adjust pricing based on player behavior and tailor in-game offerings to a user’s spending habits.
Roblox receives particular scrutiny in the complaint, which asserts that more than 45% of its player base is under the age of 13 and that the platform historically has not required parental consent or age verification for minors creating accounts.
The lawsuit also claims Roblox allowed very young children to access broad content categories without safeguards until 2024 and that although the company recently expanded parental-control features, it did so only after years of knowing it could impose such restrictions but choosing not to because limiting access might reduce time spent in-game.
The complaint states that the child plaintiff developed a “disordered relationship” with gaming, exhibiting withdrawal symptoms such as rage, anger, diminished social interaction, loss of interest in other hobbies and addictive gameplay patterns directly attributable to the structure and design of the defendants’ products.
The filing contends that these injuries are ongoing and significant.
The court filing notes that none of the defendants warned consumers of risks associated with compulsive gameplay, despite allegedly knowing that their designs could cause physical, emotional and cognitive harm.
Instead, the companies marketed their platforms as safe for children, provided educational resources promoting their use in schools and encouraged creators to implement engagement-boosting features, such as season passes, achievement systems and microtransaction-driven progression, to increase revenue.
The plaintiff seeks damages exceeding $75,000 and asserts the court has jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and the alleged injuries occurring in Florida. He is represented by Joseph A. Osborne of Osborne & Francis in Boca Raton.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida case number: 0:25-cv-62420
