Hate to say it, as I used to enjoy casual gaming before everything went into the cloud, but the WHO is right here. Modern games are pay to play with a rental license, microtransactions, loot boxes, DRM, basically there isn't much difference between paying a drug dealer and paying one of these modern game companies. As far as I'm concerned, the same thing exists with Hollywood and streaming-only videos.
When you actually own a copy of the game/movie, it is actually possible to tire of playing it / watching it, or you're using it as a social activity with friends (which lessens the addictive properties quite a bit). When you're limited in gameplay or views by money, it does increase the addictiveness factor a tremendous amount. Why do you think the arcades in the '80s made so much money with "insert quarter to continue" type stuff, or why video gambling is so popular? It's exploiting a relatively serious bug in the human psyche*, and that's why addictive products are regulated and/or outright banned in many countries.
The game studios (and Hollywood, when their turn comes) have no one to blame but themselves. Make your business model most closely resemble a drug dealer or casino, and you will be regulated as such.
* The bug is multifaceted, but for a real eye opener look up the "Rat Park" drug experiment. Isolating the rats made them use more drugs to compensate -- what is modern media doing? Isolating each individual viewer / user with pay per play and pay per view on individual accounts, thus taking them away from the group that would otherwise moderate the behaviour. It's a simple exploit, but quite powerful.