'Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4' (hereinafter 'Modern Warfare 4') was released on the 23rd. The campaign revolves around a North Korean invasion of South Korea as its narrative core. However, even before its release—starting from pre-release advertisements and early access—the game was brought up by politicians first. In effect, a single new title has become ammunition in a political debate over national security views.
People Power Party Representative Ahn Cheol-soo criticized President Lee Jae-myung's "weapon of last defense" remark from the 19th on the 20th, writing, "If you don't know the threat of North Korean provocation, at least try playing the game 'CoD4: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4'." People Power Party Representative Joo Jin-woo called the game on the 21st "the game that gets leftists most triggered these days," saying, "It doesn't deal with past events, but a scenario that could happen in the future." On the 23rd, the release date, independent Representative Han Dong-hoon stated as a premise that "of course it is a fictional story," but wrote, "If that day comes again, are we 'prepared'? This question is directed at the Lee Jae-myung administration's security policy."
Concerns from the exact opposite direction also emerged. Kim Sung-jae, Chairman of the Kim Dae-jung Peace Center (former Minister of Culture and Tourism), expressed concern in an op-ed for the Hankyoreh that the game turns war trauma into entertainment and could negatively affect inter-Korean relations.
Thus, one side suggests using the game for security education, while the other worries it will harm inter-Korean relations. Their conclusions are polar opposites, but their premise is the same: the premise that a game shapes players' security views. Politicians have targeted each other and picked up the game like an arrow.
However, having played 'Modern Warfare 4' directly, it is not a game that deserves to be called a controversy. A game becomes a real controversy when it is unfun. The 'Modern Warfare' series has always translated real-world tension into virtual warfare. This time, the setting simply happens to be the Korean Peninsula. Even North Korea in the game does not have a single face. It is difficult to read as propaganda portraying North Korea as a monolithic evil.
The developers' explanation aligns with this direction. Narrative Director Jeffrey Negus explained that this title is not intended to convey a specific political stance. He noted that in a place where gun barrels have been pointed at one's own country for decades, yet people take it for granted, he posed the question: "What if a war actually starts?"
Of course, one cannot erase the fact that some people feel uncomfortable. In a country under an armistice, there will inevitably be players who feel averse to seeing familiar streets crumbling. However, discomfort is different from controversy. Discomfort is an individual impression, while controversy is an issue for society to question and examine.
Ultimately, whether 'Modern Warfare 4' is a well-made game and whether it accurately depicts Korea are matters for players to play and judge for themselves. A game is neither a textbook for national security education nor a weapon that harms inter-Korean relations. What politicians should do is put down the game and debate policy instead.
