Entertainment: Mobile/app games

Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.

Mobile games are games that are primarily accessed on a mobile phone, often via an app, as opposed to Video Games, which are generally played on a computer or console. In addition to this guidance, marketers are advised to read our Entertainment: General guidance which provides an overview of the most common pitfalls in media ads with links to various pieces of guidance.

Sexual violence

The ASA has upheld a number of complaints in the recent past about ads for mobile game apps which condoned and/or encouraged sexual violence. This type of violence is unlikely to be acceptable in ads for mobile games, even if it features heavily in the game itself. The acceptability of any sexualisation and/or violence generally in game ads is likely to depend on the context of the ad.

In 2021, the ASA investigated an in-app ad for a game called ‘Producer: Choose Your Star’. The ad showed a woman asleep in a chair, and items such as a hook, knife and saw were presented to the player. Each item was picked and gradually removed more of the women’s clothing, until the hook was near her breasts and the woman woke up. The wording “FAILED” then appeared. The ASA considered that she was presented as a passive, voiceless and unresisting figure, and her sole purpose was to provide players an opportunity to remove her clothes. As the ad presented the woman as a sexual object and condoned the removal of clothing without consent, the complaint was upheld (Rangosious Public Holdings Ltd t/a Amrita Studios, 15 December 2021).

Another ad featured a woman stuck in a fence with her buttocks sticking out with a man watching in the foreground. The player was provided with options that stated “HELP” and “SLAP” whilst the woman was seen in distress and crying. The ASA concluded that the woman was presented as a sexual object, and that the ads trivialised and condoned sexual assault and violence. (OneSoft Studio, 6 July 2022).

Other ads that the ASA have ruled against in this area include encouragement of domestic violence (AppQuantum Publishing Ltd, 24 November 2021), sexual assault (Ayoomi Technology Co Ltd, 1 June 2022 and Play&Date Entertainment Zone, 29 November 2023), physical assault and sex acts (Dreame Media, 3 May 2023), depicting women as victims who could be sexually assaulted (Brightika Inc, 1 February 2023) and depiction of non-consensual sexual activity (SWAG Masha LLC,  19 May 2021) .

Nudity and objectification

Overt sexualisation and gratuitous nudity in game ads are likely to breach the Code. In 2021, the ASA upheld a complaint about an ad for ‘King’s Throne Game of Lust’ featuring two women wearing see-through lingerie, because they considered the use of female breasts was used to titillate the viewer, and therefore the women were objectified (GOAT Company Ltd, 19 May 2021).

Similarly, the ASA also investigated an in-game ad for game ‘Infinity 8 Ball’, seen within ‘Angry Birds 2’. The ad featured an image of an animated female character wearing a denim shirt which partially exposed her breasts. Whilst the image was only mildly sexually suggestive, because she was only included to promote an online pool game, the ad presented her as a sexual object to be objectified and exploited a gender stereotype, the complaint was upheld (Playorcas, 17 August 2022). A similar ad for game ‘Cube Master 3D – Match Puzzle’ was investigated the same year, and upheld for the similar reasons (Higgs Technology Co, 31 August 2022).

Another ad for mobile game ‘Brain Story: Tricky Puzzle’ was investigated in 2022. The ad featured two animated women playing rock, paper, scissors, and showed close-ups on their breasts and buttocks. These close ups were then presented as options on screen, and a mouse button appeared to click the buttocks option, which caused one of the women to slap the other’s buttocks. The ad then cut to another option which showed a woman with her arms tied to the ceiling with her bra exposed with a man tickling her feet, after which her breasts and buttocks were presented as options. The ASA considered that the female characters were stripped of any agency or personality, and were presented as objects for the purpose of titillating viewers. This, as well as the fact that the ad had not been targeted appropriately, meant the complaint was upheld (ABI Global Ltd, 6 April 2022).

Other ads have been upheld in this area, including for sexual voyeurism (Guru Smart Holding Ltd, 5 July 2023) and sexually suggestive content that also objectified the female character (Guangzhou Shimo Culture Media Co Ltd, 11 December 2024).

Marketers are encouraged to also see our guidance on Offence: Nudity, Offence: Sex,  Harm and Offence: Gender Stereotypes and Sexualisation and Objectification.

Other harm and offence

The ASA as also ruled against ads that had the potential to harm and offend through means other than violence, objectification and sexualisation, such as general gender stereotypes and body shaming (GM Unicorn Corporation Ltd, 15 November 2023).

In 2023, ASA ruled against an ad for mobile ‘Love Paradise – Merge Makeover’ because, along with condoning violence against a pregnant woman, the ad implied a woman was not pretty enough to be worthy of a pregnancy nor medical help, and invited the viewer to improve the woman’s looks to gain approval from a man (Rosecrab Ltd, 11 October 2023). See also Harm and Offence: Gender stereotypes.

The ASA also investigated another ad for an app in 2023 as it featured a potentially incestuous relationship between an uncle and his niece, and portrayed a child in a sexual way. The ASA upheld the complaint, as the ad suggested the child had been groomed by the uncle and the ad was therefore offensive and irresponsible (Gamehaus Network Technology Co Ltd - ASA | CAP, 24 January 2024). See also Children: Sexual imagery and Harm and Offence: General.

Weapons and violence

In untargeted media, advertisers should be careful to ensure that any violent imagery, even when reflective of the content of the game, is not excessive or graphic, and marketers should ensure they do not glamorise or condone the use of violence or weapons. As a general rule, marketers should avoid depicting weapons that are pointing directly or aggressively at the viewer because such images potentially can be seen as threatening and may cause unnecessary fear and distress.

Misleadingness and other rules

The content of ads for games should reflect the product and be representative of the gameplay. If in-play footage is shown, it should be footage from the game in question (Funplus Interactive, 6 February 2019, Funplus Interactive, 20 December 2017 and Rivergame Ltd, 16 November 2022). It is unlikely that ‘cinematic representations’ of the themes of the game will be acceptable (AppQuantum Publishing Ltd, 13 April 2022).

A qualification or small print such as “Not representative of actual gameplay” is unlikely to prevent an ad from misleading consumers.  In one ruling, the marketers had included a disclaimer which said that some of the gameplay featured in the ad actually was the gameplay that players would experience. However, the ASA found that the scenes only represented a very small portion of the overall gameplay, and that players had to experience a great deal of other undepicted gameplay before reaching that point (PLR Worldwide Sales Ltd t/a Playrix, 30 September 2020).  

Marketers are also reminded that care should be taken over the use of in-app purchases, and especially should be mindful of time-limited offers, random item purchasing (including “loot boxes”) and pricing. Our Guidance on Advertising In-Game Purchases contains more on this.