In January, Mt Wellington mother Cara Roberts told the Herald her “device-mad” son, Aaron Roberts, spent as much as eight hours a day playing Roblox on his Chromebook.
Roberts said she has had conversations with her son about adults posing as children on Roblox.
As of this week, there are two new accounts, Roblox Kids (ages 5 to 9) and Roblox select (ages 9 to 15).
Each account can only access games that are age-appropriate. The 5 to 9s, for example, will only see games rated “minimal” or “mild”. There’ll be no horror, violence or suggestive fare.
All communication is off by default for the 5 to 9s, while 9 to 15s have limits.
The parental controls include screen time limits, spending limits for in-game purchases, the ability to see and edit a friend list and the power to directly control chat settings. (Roblox has a matrix of settings by age for in-game, group and direct chat; see its full breakdown of new restrictions for each here).
This is a grace period for the controls, introduced on Wednesday, but all Roblox users will be required to prove their age, chief safety officer Matt Kaufman says.
Users of all ages who don’t complete the age check within the required time will be limited to games rated Minimal or Mild, and all communication will be unavailable.
One age check option is a visual test.
“We take a picture of you and, based on the structure of your face and our algorithm can give a fairly accurate estimation of your age – to plus or minus 1.4 years,” Kaufman said.
If someone wants to appeal, they can load a Government ID.
If that’s not possible, a verified adult can set their age on their behalf.
How does Roblox know if a verified parent is, in fact, a parent?
“We make sure that a parent or someone saying they’re a parent is over 18,” Kaufman said. They have to supply a Government ID or credit card.
“But to be super honest with you, establishing the link between the ‘parent’ and the kid is something that lots of people are working on to do a better job. We follow the applicable laws for determining that.”
The new Roblox controls are being rolled out in Australia, which instituted its under-16 social media ban on December 10 last year, and three countries that are lining up similar legislation: New Zealand, the Netherlands and Indonesia.
Here, there was confusion last week when National MP Catherine Wedd’s private member’s bill for an under-16 ban was put on hold. But National has always said Wedd’s effort would be superseded by its own legislation, driven by Erica Stanford.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has said New Zealand’s under-16 ban is being drafted but said: “We’re following very much the Australian model.” Luxon recently reiterated that the bill would be introduced before the election in November (leaving open the question of whether it will have time to pass). Stanford said she will update on progress in June.
Australia’s under-16 ban passed in December 2024 and was implemented in December 2025.
Gaming platforms were not ultimately included under the ban.
But there was a lot of discussion about whether to include them, which coincided with Roblox introducing new measures, including an age verification test – which was introduced in Australia and New Zealand in December 2025 and other territories from January.
Kaufman says 60% of Roblox users across New Zealand, Australia and the Netherlands have taken the age test since it was introduced.
He says the new measures are not in response to the Australian legislation, or the possible legislation here (where, as across the Tasman, there has been debate about including game platforms).
Green MP Tamatha Paul recently said: “Whether it’s social media, even whether it’s things like Roblox or Minecraft that young people are on, those are unregulated beasts.”
Kaufman said it was part of a long-running effort to increase safety, with the latest measures in the works for a year before the Australian legislation. The size and complexity of Roblox’ platform meant changes took time. New safeguards include increased use of artificial intelligence (AI) to monitor text and images.
Australia: 7 out of 10 under-16s still on social media
Luxon said earlier that, by holding off, New Zealand could learn from Australia’s experience with its world-first legislation.
Australia’s regulator responsible for implementing its ban, eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, said in her first compliance report, issued in March, that “a substantial proportion of Australian children under the age of 16 continue to retain accounts, create new accounts, or pass platforms’ age assurance systems”.
Her report said that of the parents who reported their child had an account on each platform prior to December 10, 2025, “around seven in 10 reported that their child still had an account on Facebook (63.6%), Instagram (69.1%), Snapchat (69.4%) and TikTok (69.3%). Around three in 10 reported that their child no longer had an account”.
Under-16s can use a VPN (virtual private network software, masking their country of origin) to skirt the ban. A parent can also set up an account that an under-16 subsequently uses.
There is no penalty for a parent or child who attempts to thwart the under-16 ban.
Social media platforms covered by the ban, however, face fines of up to A$49.5m ($59m) if they fail to take “reasonable steps” to determine a user’s age.
What constitutes “reasonable steps” is likely to have to be tested by a court case.
Inman Grant will decide next month whether her office will take enforcement option against Meta and its peers (it could be no coincidence that Stanford has pushed her update to June).
In the meantime, various contenders continue to introduce more controls. Earlier this month Meta introduced Family Centre – which it billed as a one-stop shop for parents to supervise a teen’s experience on Instagram, Facebook or Messenger, plus a new Your Algorithm feature that lets parents see which topics are influencing what their kids see.
Meta bites back
Meta says it has taken “all necessary steps” to remove access for under-16s.
“Australia had the opportunity to set a single, accurate standard for age assurance across the whole app ecosystem,” a Meta spokeswoman told the Herald earlier this week.
“Instead, the Government chose a patchwork approach that’s inconsistent across services and risks pushing young people towards less regulated, less safe corners of the internet.
“If the goal is genuinely safer, age‑appropriate experiences, we believe the best option is to raise the bar across the entire ecosystem, such as our Teen Accounts model, and give parents a simple, consistent point of control. App‑store level age assurance is the practical path that Australia missed.”
Chris Keall is an Auckland-based member of the Herald’s business team. He joined the Herald in 2018 and is the technology editor and a senior business writer.
