The latest instalment of the blockbuster video game Call of Duty has ignited a political firestorm for its depiction of a fictional invasion of North Korea, prompting intervention from UK gaming regulators. The game, set in a near-future conflict, tasks players with repelling a North Korean assault on the Korean peninsula, a storyline that critics argue trivialises real-world tensions and risks inflaming geopolitical sensitivities.
Trade unions and worker groups have also expressed concern, with the Broadcasting, Entertainment, Communications and Theatre Union (BECTU) highlighting the potential for the game to desensitise players to the human cost of war. “This is not just about pixels and entertainment,” said a BECTU spokesperson. “The glorification of military conflict, especially in a region with a volatile history, can have real-world consequences for the workers who produce these games and the communities that consume them.”
The UK’s Video Standards Council (VSC), which oversees age ratings and content classification, has launched a review following complaints from parents and campaigners. The regulator is examining whether the game breaches guidelines on the portrayal of real-world nations and conflicts. A VSC spokesperson stated, “We take our responsibility to ensure that content is appropriately labelled and does not incite hatred or misrepresent sensitive geopolitical issues very seriously. We are engaging with the publisher and relevant stakeholders to assess the situation.”
Activision, the game’s publisher, has defended the title, arguing that it is a work of fiction and part of a long tradition of military-themed entertainment. In a statement, the company said, “Call of Duty has always been a fictional depiction of modern warfare, and this storyline is no different. We work closely with historians and advisors to ensure our content is respectful while providing an engaging experience for players.”
However, the backlash has been swift. The North Korean embassy in London condemned the game as “a malicious slander against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” while UK-based Korean community groups have called for a boycott. “This game reduces a complex and tragic history to a cartoonish villain narrative,” said Ji-yoon Park, a spokesperson for the Korean Resource Centre. “It fosters prejudice and misunderstanding at a time when diplomacy is already fragile.”
The row has also reignited debates about the impact of violent video games on behaviour and the responsibilities of entertainment companies. Labour MP for Bradford West, Naz Shah, has written to the culture secretary urging a review of the classification system. “Our children are not just playing games; they are absorbing narratives that shape their view of the world,” she wrote. “We cannot allow corporate profits to come before social responsibility.”
Economically, the controversy could have ramifications for the UK’s thriving gaming industry, which contributes over £2.5 billion annually to the economy. Analysts warn that regulatory action or a consumer backlash could impact sales and investor confidence. “While Call of Duty remains a cash cow, prolonged controversy might force publishers to think twice about future settings,” said games industry analyst Kate Jennings. “That could affect jobs and investment in UK studios.”
For the workers on the ground, the debate is personal. Developers at studios in Manchester and Guildford have anonymously reported feeling uneasy about the project, with some citing moral objections. “We are told to just code and not think about the bigger picture,” one developer told the Guardian. “But you can’t separate the labour from the product. We create these worlds, and we have to live with the consequences.”
As the VSC deliberates, the controversy shows no signs of abating. For a nation grappling with its own military entanglements and a cost-of-living crisis, the fuss over a video game might seem trivial. Yet for those on the frontlines of the culture wars and the kitchen-table economy, it is a stark reminder that what we consume is never just entertainment.
“It’s about power, who gets to tell stories, and who pays the price,” said Park. “That is a battle worth fighting.”
