Australia’s eSafety Commissioner has released a detailed comparison of the child-safety systems used by Roblox, Fortnite, Minecraft and Steam, and the most useful lesson for families is that the four services do not manage risk in the same way. Some review content before it becomes available, some rely more heavily on reports after publication, and their approaches to age assurance, chat and information sharing differ substantially.
The October 2026 report, based on information eSafety compelled the companies to provide, looked at how the services protected users from serious online harms between 1 October 2025 and 31 March 2026. It is not a ranking of which game is “safe” or “unsafe”. Instead, it exposes the practical differences parents need to understand before treating one set of parental controls as interchangeable with another.
Why this report matters to Australian families
Gaming is part of everyday life for most Australian children. eSafety’s earlier research found that 89% of people aged 8 to 17 had played online games, 79% had played multiplayer games and 40% had played with people they did not already know. That makes safety design more than a niche technical issue.
The important question is not simply whether a child plays Roblox, Fortnite, Minecraft or Steam. Parents also need to know whether the child can communicate with strangers, create or enter user-generated spaces, follow links outside the game, join private servers, make purchases and change age or privacy settings without an adult noticing.
Fortnite: review before an Island becomes accessible
One of the clearest differences identified by eSafety concerns user-generated experiences. According to the regulator, Epic Games reviews every Fortnite Island before it can be made accessible. That is a proactive control: content is checked at the point before broad access rather than relying only on users to report a problem later.
That does not mean inappropriate material can never appear. Moderation systems can make mistakes and an experience may change after approval. Parents should still review communication settings and understand whether voice or text chat is enabled. The useful distinction is that pre-publication review creates an additional barrier before a user-generated experience reaches players.
Roblox: more age assurance, but moderation is not perfect
Roblox has strengthened age-assurance measures, including changes introduced from December 2025 that restrict access to some higher-risk features unless a user is verified as an adult. eSafety notes this as a stronger approach than simple self-declaration for some functions.
At the same time, the transparency report shows why automated moderation should not be treated as a complete safety net. eSafety reported that one Roblox image-moderation system had a recall figure of 51% for certain categories including violent and child sexual exploitation material. In plain language, a detection system can miss content, so parental settings, user reporting and conversations with children remain relevant even when a platform uses sophisticated automation.
Minecraft: the difference between the game and third-party worlds
Minecraft creates a different challenge because the ecosystem includes official services as well as third-party servers and worlds. eSafety found that some third-party worlds can be self-declared as 18+ and that Mojang does not proactively moderate every piece of third-party content before it appears.
For families, this means “my child plays Minecraft” is not enough information. Ask where they play. A private world with known friends is a different environment from a large public server with open chat, user-created rules and links to outside communities.
Parents should check the server name, who controls it, whether chat is public, whether strangers can send direct messages and whether the community expects players to move conversations to Discord or another external service.
Steam: a storefront and community, not just a game launcher
Steam is often treated as software for buying and launching PC games, but it also has community and communication functions. eSafety found that during the reporting period Valve relied heavily on user reports for some unlawful material and did not use all of the proactive detection and industry-sharing approaches seen elsewhere.
Steam also relied on self-declared age during the reporting period. eSafety says Valve is now conducting age checks through credit cards and that the regulator is discussing additional age-assurance choices with the company.
For parents, the practical point is to review the Steam account itself, not only the individual game. Friends, chat, community pages, workshop content and store access can create different exposure than the gameplay screen a parent sees.
Age assurance is not the same as a birthday box
A service that asks a user to type a date of birth is using a form of age declaration, but it has limited value if nothing tests whether the answer is credible. Stronger age assurance can involve additional signals or verification before higher-risk features become available.
eSafety found that Fortnite and Minecraft continued to rely substantially on self-declared age for parts of their services, while Roblox had moved further toward stronger checks for some features. No age system is a substitute for supervision, but the difference matters because account age can control chat, discovery, content and purchasing settings.
Chat is often where the risk changes
A child may be comfortable and capable in the game itself while still being vulnerable in an open communication channel. Voice chat can feel informal and temporary, which makes it easy to reveal a school, suburb, real name or social account without considering how those details can be combined.
A useful household rule is that a player should not move a conversation with an unknown person from a game into a more private messaging service. Another is that no online friend needs a child’s full name, school, phone number, private photos or live location in order to play together.
What parents can check in 15 minutes
- Confirm the birth date and age category recorded on the child’s account.
- Review who can send friend requests, direct messages and voice-chat invitations.
- Check whether public or third-party servers are permitted.
- Review purchase controls and whether a stored card can be used without approval.
- Ask which external apps the child uses to talk with gaming friends.
- Make sure the child knows how to block and report another user.
- Agree that unexpected requests for images, money, secrecy or a move to private chat should be shown to an adult.
What to do when something uncomfortable happens
The first priority is to stop the interaction and preserve enough information to report it. Block the account where appropriate and use the platform’s reporting tools. Screenshots can help document usernames, messages and the time of an incident, but avoid unnecessarily copying or sharing illegal material.
If the issue involves threats, sexual exploitation, coercion or an immediate safety risk, parents should use the appropriate Australian reporting and law-enforcement channels rather than trying to investigate the person themselves. eSafety provides reporting pathways and practical guidance for families.
What the report does not prove
The report does not show that every user of a particular service will encounter serious harm, nor does it mean that a service with more moderation tools has eliminated risk. It is a transparency exercise showing what systems exist, where they differ and which gaps the regulator wants companies to address.
It also captures a defined reporting period. Services can change quickly, so families should recheck controls after major app updates, new consoles, a child’s birthday or the introduction of a new communication feature.
The practical takeaway
The safest approach is not to memorise one “good” platform and one “bad” platform. Treat each gaming account as its own environment. Understand the age setting, communication features, public spaces and reporting tools. Keep purchases controlled and make it normal for children to talk about strange interactions without fearing that the immediate response will always be to take the game away.
The source for this guide is the eSafety Commissioner’s 2 October 2026 release and the regulator’s transparency work on major gaming services. More practical digital-safety coverage is available in Technology.
