A Shanghai court has rejected a lawsuit from an online gamer who demanded a full refund of more than 56,000 yuan ($7,800) after repeatedly losing matches despite spending heavily on virtual equipment to boost his character's combat power.
According to a case report published Wednesday by state broadcaster China Central Television, the plaintiff, identified only by his surname, Chi, logged into the online game more than 1,700 times between November 2024 and October 2025. During that period, he completed over 240 separate in-game recharge transactions to purchase equipment promoted during company sales campaigns.
Despite upgrading his virtual gear, Chi continued to suffer frequent defeats against rival players. Dissatisfied with his gaming experience, he applied to the game operator for a refund. When the company denied his request, Chi filed suit in the Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Court, seeking to terminate his service contract and recover his entire expenditure.
In court filings, Chi alleged that the developer engaged in misleading advertising by explicitly or implicitly promising that purchasing equipment would rapidly and significantly increase combat strength. He argued that because the actual gameplay results fell short, the company had committed a serious breach of contract.
The gaming company countered that Chi is an adult with full civil capacity who made autonomous decisions. Attorneys for the developer pointed out that over 240 separate payments demonstrated deliberate consumption rather than a single impulsive purchase. The company also noted that its store pages clearly listed level requirements, combat power metrics, and base attributes without concealment or coercion, adding that competitive game outcomes depend heavily on player skill and opponent strength.
The Pudong court ruled in favor of the developer and dismissed all of Chi's claims. Judges determined that a valid online service contract existed between the parties and that the company had fulfilled its legal obligations by delivering the virtual items and providing adequate product disclosures.
The court emphasized that online games are inherently interactive and competitive, meaning a player's experience is shaped by personal operating skill, network conditions, and the strength of opponents. While buying equipment increases certain character attributes, it does not guarantee victory or subjective satisfaction. Demanding a refund solely because gameplay failed to meet personal expectations lacked factual and legal basis and violated the principle of good faith, the court ruled. Neither party appealed the decision, and the judgment has taken effect.
In accompanying commentary, judges noted that while Article 127 of China's Civil Code protects network virtual property such as game accounts and digital items, that legal protection safeguards legitimate property rights rather than guaranteeing competitive performance. Judicial officials urged adult players to understand game rules and spend rationally within their financial means, while reminding gaming companies to uphold transparent disclosures and avoid deceptive marketing practices.
