Behind the South Korean President's effort to rehabilitate the reputation of video games

Recently, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung attended a "K-Game On-site Symposium." At the meeting, he said something very simple and straightforward:

"Games are not addictive substances but a core component of the cultural industry."

What he said is not new. What's new is that the person who said it is the President of South Korea.

What's even newer is that just a few years ago, the South Korean government regulated games in the same category as alcohol.

So, if we have to find an analogy for this scenario, the first picture that comes to my mind is this:

A doctor, holding a scalpel and carefully examining the patient's electrocardiogram and other indicators, suddenly exclaimed:

"Oh no! This isn't a tumor; it's the pulmonary artery!"

Yes, for a long time before, South Korean society had a rather strict attitude towards games. The government even imposed many bans on the game industry.

Finally, they've woken up and realized their mistake!

Then the question arises: What exactly happened behind South Korea's 180-degree turn?

In my opinion, this is certainly not a whim of Lee Jae-myung.

I specifically looked for some materials and found that there are many things worth discussing, which involve the value of games, industrial policies, and social perception.

Now, let me share some of Wei Xi's thoughts:

I. Besides Justifying Games, Lee Jae-myung Also Introduced Many New Game Policies

Lee Jae-myung's statement indeed justified games. He then went on to say:

"In the past, the government listed games as one of the 'Four Addictive Substances,' alongside drugs, alcohol, and gambling. This repressive management method severely inhibited the development vitality of the South Korean game industry and indirectly led to China overtaking South Korea in this field. We can't deny the value of the entire industry just because a few people have problems."

You can clearly see the anxiety of the South Korean government in his words.

Judging from the series of actions of the South Korean government since this year, the newly elected president is not just speaking empty words. They have carried out a series of relaxations for the game industry:

First, they abolished the controversial pre - review system of the Game Rating and Administration Committee (GRAC).

In the past, the game review and launch process in South Korea was long, complex, and opaque.

For example, in October 2022, GRAC suddenly raised the age rating of the mobile game "Blue Archive" from 15 to 18 without giving a clear explanation, which triggered large - scale protests from game players, and thousands of people petitioned the National Assembly.

Therefore, GRAC has always been criticized by game developers. Now, in a sense, it's a correction of the wrong.

The underlying message is also clear: Stop treating games like a scourge. Let the market test them.

Second, they are providing real financial support for the expansion of new areas in the industry. The South Korean government has set up a special budget to strongly support the development of artificial intelligence games and the overseas business of small and medium - sized game enterprises.

Moreover, at the policy level, they are also cooling down the old topic of "game addiction":

In a government proposal this year, it was clearly stated that the plan to include "gaming disorder" in the disease code should be postponed.

The purpose is to avoid the continuous stigmatization of the industry due to the "addiction" label and start to justify games at the official level.

Furthermore, the Democratic Party of Korea established a special game committee this year, and Lee Jae-myung personally serves as the chairman.

Actually, as early as May 2025, when Lee Jae-myung was still a presidential candidate, he held an e - sports themed campaign event in Gwangju and played "League of Legends" on the spot.

At that time, he said:

"One important thing now is not to treat games as drugs."

It's certainly good news that the government has come forward to justify the game industry.

But this also leads to a more interesting question:

South Korea has been suppressing games in the name of addictive substances for over 20 years. Why now?

Why has South Korea, which has always had an ambiguous and even strict attitude towards the game industry, made such a rapid turn?

II. The Core Logic Behind South Korea's Policy Turn

To understand South Korea's sudden turn, we first need to understand how much pain they are in.

In the past two decades, the South Korean game industry has not had an easy time:

From the "Youth Protection Act" in 2011, the famous "Cinderella Law" (mandatory game curfew), to a lawmaker's proposal in 2013 to classify games as one of the "Four Addictive Substances," and then to South Korea's active follow - up after the WHO listed "gaming disorder" as a mental illness.

The South Korean government's series of actions left the South Korean game industry a bit dazed.

As a result, the number of suppressed game companies in South Korea was halved, the number of employees decreased significantly, and the growth rate of revenue and export volume dropped sharply.

However, a lean camel is still bigger than a horse. South Korean games still earned a large amount of foreign exchange for South Korea in the past decade.

It wasn't until 2022 that South Korea's GDP dropped out of the top ten in the world. One of the former Four Asian Tigers began to face difficulties.

The reason is that the changing global economic situation has challenged South Korea, which has always relied on exports for economic growth.

Games are the most important pillar industry in South Korea's cultural export economy, far exceeding the film, music, and K - pop industries.

Let's look at some data.

The "2023 South Korean Game White Paper" shows that the proportion of South Korean game users dropped significantly from 74.4% in 2022 to 62.9%, even lower than the pre - pandemic level.

What's even more serious is that the growth engine of the entire industry has started to stall.

In 2023, the South Korean game industry even experienced its first recession in 14 years.

According to the latest survey, more than 40% of game companies are not profitable at all, and the annual operating profit of the entire industry has even shrunk by nearly 60%.

While South Korea's game industry was shooting itself in the foot, the outside world has changed dramatically:

The most direct stimulus comes from its neighbor, China. Lee Jae-myung himself admitted that the South Korean game industry has been overtaken by China.

This is not just a polite remark.

Data shows that as early as 2012, the total revenue of the Chinese game market exceeded that of South Korea. By 2015, China's game export volume also surpassed that of South Korea.

South Korea's game export volume decreased by 6.5% year - on - year in 2023. Although China still holds the position of its largest export destination, its share has been declining, dropping from nearly 40% at its peak in 2012 to 25.5% in 2023.

This is just one aspect. Looking at the world, you'll find a new trend:

Countries that used to be indifferent to games are now starting to attach importance to the game industry, which can enhance national soft power and competitiveness.

Saudi Arabia is a typical example.

This Middle Eastern country has directly included games and e - sports in its national Vision 2030.

They established the Savvy Games Group and are aggressively acquiring game companies globally. They've acquired EA, with the goal of making Saudi Arabia the world's game and e - sports center.

India's government directly encourages the game industry to become a platform for "Indian culture to go global."

India has a large young population and an engineer dividend, providing good conditions for game development.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi once gave an instruction:

"India must utilize its rich ancient relics and literature to create Indian - made game products. Indian professionals must lead the global game market. We in India also need to produce our own good games."

Even the EU, which has always had strict regulations, passed the "EU Game Act" in 2022, strongly supporting the development of the local game industry from multiple aspects such as funds, policies, and talent.

European Parliament member Laurence Farreng said in her speech before the vote on the act:

"Video games are the most dynamic part of our cultural economy and the only sector with positive growth during the COVID - 19 pandemic."

After understanding the above information, it's not difficult to understand why the South Korean president and the South Korean government are eager to reflect on their past actions of suppressing games.

After all, the whole world is in a fierce competition.

If other countries regard games as a strategy and South Korea still holds on to the old idea that "games are drugs," it's like shooting itself in the foot.

South Korea's hard - won position as the world's fourth - largest game - producing country will soon be lost.

Regarding the long - debated issue of "game addiction," I want to make a point: There is nothing new under the sun.

In fact, the addiction argument always hovers around at the beginning of the emergence of each new medium. For example, Neil Postman was also very worried about the harm of television in his book "Amusing Ourselves to Death."

But in fact, television, as a medium, has greatly enriched human spiritual life objectively. History has finally given television a fair evaluation.

In 2019, when the WHO included game addiction in the category of diseases, it triggered social backlash and protests.

A study by Oxford University on more than 1,000 teenagers found that excessive gaming is more likely to be caused by external pressure.

More and more academic studies have also shown that addiction is not an inherent attribute of games but rather the result of the interaction of social, psychological, educational, and family environment factors.

It's increasingly untenable to magnify the problems of a few people into the original sin of the entire game industry. It's like throwing out the baby with the bathwater and is a sign of logical and mental laziness.

So, South Korea's current turn is actually an inevitable result of internal decline and external competition. When these two forces converge, changing the concept and justifying games become the only choice.

III. Spill - over Effect: The Positive Externalities of the Game Industry Have Been Underestimated

In my opinion, most people, including some in the game industry, have a narrow view of games.

Let's understand this from several perspectives:

Let's start with the most straightforward aspect: GDP, that is, revenue.

What's the scale of the global game industry?

It's 170 billion US dollars. What does this number mean? It's about twice the combined size of the global recorded music industry and the global box office.

You might say, "Games are indeed a big business, but isn't it just an entertainment industry?"

If we think so, we're wrong.

When the United States experienced economic take - off in the 19th century, Europeans still regarded the US as a nouveau riche and a cultural desert.

But today, the US is the global hegemon of popular culture. Movies and games are two important pillars. As early as 2000, the output value of the US game industry exceeded that of the movie industry.

How many young people around the world grew up playing CS, Command & Conquer, Dota, and World of Warcraft? These are no longer just simple commodities but important components of a country's cultural competitiveness.

When Harvard professor Joseph Nye proposed the concept of "soft power," he was talking about this. Besides economy, military, and politics, national capabilities are also reflected in cultural output.

The Japanese understand this better. Super Mario, Contra, and Pokémon have become the common memories of countless people around the world.

Recently, India has also made Indian culture a global hot topic with its "Head - Pat Dodge" 3A game.

This is the output of national soft power.

On another level, games are essentially a technological ecosystem.

In 1972, when the world's first home game console, Odyssey, was born, personal computers hadn't been invented yet. Steve Jobs' first job was at the game company Atari.

John Carmack, the American genius game programmer and the father of 3D games, released "DOOM," which has been the main tool for NVIDIA to test the performance of new graphics cards for many years.