Yeah, I am talking about the gambling elements. All of these different monetizing methods are at their core attempts by devs and publishers to bring in a profit. The cost of a traditional videogame has been locked at $60 since ~2005 when the game industry raised the collective MSRP from $50 to $60 (save for Nintendo who stuck with $50 through the Wii's life).
$50 had been in place since the late 90's when they all agreed of a standard, before that it was a lawless wasteland where games ranged from $20-$80 depending on publisher, tech used, and store pricing. With most other goods and services, prices have gone up with inflation, but game prices tend to stay the same. This is also not speaking of the mobile space, where even $0.99 is considered too much for a game and there has to be some way to monetize a game that is cheap-as-free.
Because consumers have recoiled at raising prices, devs had to come up with other creative ways to bring in extra cash from DLC to micro transactions to special editions, to subscriptions. But it is clear that certain models have become more lucrative than they deserve and devs are taking advantage of human's addictive natures to profit.
It starts with a small country like Belgium, but it sets a precedent and once one person does something it can be easier for others to adopt, especially in Europe where the EU can catch on to something and spread it more rapidly.
If devs don't come up with acceptable methods to monetize, they could be forced to do it via laws and that may severely limit their options for how to do it.