Internet Gaming Disorder Lawsuit Alleges Roblox, Fortnite and Xbox Caused Structural Brain Changes

Complaint cites neuroimaging research linking internet gaming disorder to brain changes tied to decision-making and emotional regulation.

A Louisiana mother has filed a lawsuit alleging that prolonged exposure to popular online video games and platforms may have caused structural changes in her child’s brain, leading to compulsive behavior, emotional dysregulation and potentially even long-term neurological harm.

The complaint (PDF) was brought by Descheca Jackson and her minor child, identified only with the initials “MA”, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on December 30. It names Epic Games Inc., Roblox Corporation, Microsoft Corporation and other unnamed entities as defendants.

Internet Gaming Disorder

Internet gaming disorder (IGD) refers to a pattern of video game use that becomes difficult to control and increasingly dominates a person’s daily activities. Those affected may see serious impacts on school, work, relationships or family life, with symptoms often including persistent preoccupation with gaming, an inability to reduce playtime, irritability when access is restricted and continued use despite negative consequences.

Research has suggested that gaming disorder may affect one out of 10 adolescent boys. These kinds of concerns have contributed to a wave of lawsuits against major gaming platforms in recent years, in which plaintiffs allege companies behind popular games such as Minecraft and Roblox intentionally employ design features that encourage excessive and compulsive use by minors.

Separate legal actions involving Roblox lawsuits have also raised additional child safety concerns, with families alleging the platform has become a target for sexual exploitation due to inadequate protections. According to those complaints, predators have used the platform to contact and groom children, leading to incidents involving sextortion, explicit content exchanges, in-person abuse and lasting psychological harm.

Jackson contends that MA developed internet gaming disorder after years of exposure to games such as Roblox and Fortnite, played primarily through Xbox consoles. She alleges her child’s compulsive gaming behavior was driven by reward-based design features that exploit dopamine pathways in the developing brain.

The complaint states that MA began playing online video games at a young age and gradually exhibited escalating symptoms consistent with internet gaming disorder, including loss of impulse control, withdrawal symptoms, irritability, anxiety and difficulty disengaging from gameplay.

Jackson further cites neuroimaging studies indicating that individuals with IGD experience structural changes in areas of the brain associated with decision-making, emotional regulation and reward processing, and alleges similar alterations likely occurred in MA due to her addictive use of these gaming products.

The lawsuit claims the defendants knew or should have known that prolonged exposure to their games could cause these types of effects, particularly in children and adolescents whose brains are still developing.

The filing also alleges that Roblox, Fortnite and Xbox platforms employ features designed to maximize screen time and engagement, including variable reward schedules, social pressure mechanisms, progression loops, in-game currencies and time-limited events. Jackson contends these mechanics encourage extended play, override natural stopping cues and displace school, sleep and real-world relationships, while companies allegedly used behavioral data from young users to refine systems that reinforce compulsive use.

The complaint further accuses the defendants of failing to adequately warn parents about the risks of excessive gaming, despite growing research linking heavy screen exposure to neurological and psychological harm in children.

The lawsuit also argues that any contracts the defendants claim were formed with MA are invalid and unenforceable. According to the complaint, the companies’ terms of service are non-negotiable contracts of adhesion offered without a meaningful opportunity for modification. The lawsuit further alleges that MA, as a minor, lacked the legal capacity to enter into those agreements, including any arbitration provisions.

“MA never agreed to be harmed or exposed to an addictive Product. Neither Plaintiff nor MA ever entered into a contract with any of the Defendants, and/or to the extent that any Defendant claims MA attempted to accept an electronic terms and conditions clause by clicking buttons on a screen which included language Plaintiff did not understand, read, or language which was conscionable, and has been made void by virtue of its unconscionability and the power of disaffirmance. This unconscionability and disaffirmance is demonstrated and secured by the filing of this Complaint.”

— Descheca Jackson v. Epic Games Inc. et al

The lawsuit raises allegations of negligence, design defect, strict product liability, failure to warn, statutory negligence, intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, fraud, and violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law. It is seeking general and punitive damages, as well as injunctive relief.

Sign up for more health and legal news that could affect you or your family.