[Op-Ed] The Never-Ending Game Regulation Debate

When I was a teenager, there were times when I could no longer play games once midnight struck, like Cinderella. That was because of a system designed to guarantee adolescents’ right to sleep and prevent game addiction. It was the “shutdown policy,” which prohibited those under the age of 16 from accessing online games from midnight to 6 a.m.

The shutdown policy, which caused considerable inconvenience for young gamers and the gaming industry, faded into history after 2022. However, regulations on games such as the shutdown policy branded games as something “negative and in need of control.” Of course, there have been social efforts to improve perceptions of gaming. Even so, negative views of games remain entrenched throughout society and continue to trouble us.

With the negative image of gaming still not fully dispelled, the gaming industry once again faces the risk of being held back by regulations related to “game addiction.” This is because in 2019 the World Health Organization (WHO) classified excessive gaming as a disease and recommended that its 194 member states adopt the classification. Some may ask what the big issue is. But once excessive gaming is classified as a disease, it can become grounds for various regulations—just as there are various sin taxes on tobacco, gambling, and drugs, which can cause social problems because of addiction.

I reviewed the 2022 report published by the Korea Creative Content Agency, titled “A Study on the Ripple Effects of Introducing a Disease Code for Gaming Disorder.” In that report, experts in the gaming industry expressed serious concern about changes in social perceptions resulting from the introduction of the disease code. They worried that, as before, the stigma created by the disease code would spread negative perceptions of game users and further stigmatize them. Sociocultural experts likewise said that introducing the disease code would not only hinder people’s enjoyment of culture, but would also likely lead to a contraction in creative activity. In their view, “cultural addiction” is clearly different from substance or behavioral addictions such as tobacco and gambling.

The “metaverse,” which has been attracting attention as a new business area for domestic game companies, is also under threat. Many game companies, including Com2uS’s “Com2Verse,” Netmarble’s “Grand Cross: Metaworld,” and Nexon’s “MapleStory Universe,” have launched and are operating metaverse platforms. The metaverse has game-like characteristics. For that reason, voices of concern have emerged in the gaming industry that game-related regulations could also be applied to metaverse projects that have already received significant investment.

The Ministry of Science and ICT and the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism also concluded that a situation in which game-related regulations could be applied to domestic metaverse platforms and content would burden the industry. Accordingly, they decided to establish guidelines for distinguishing games from the metaverse. This allowed the gaming industry to breathe somewhat easier, as it suggested at least minimal regulation that would not undermine the growth potential of this new business area.

There is a major contradiction at the heart of this situation. The metaverse industry, only just entering its introductory phase, has game-like characteristics, yet a foundation has been laid for it to take off as various regulations are loosened. Meanwhile, the gaming industry—an annual market worth 20 trillion won—continues to have its growth obstructed by all kinds of regulations, not only over “game addiction” but also over gambling elements and discriminatory treatment compared with foreign games.

Statistics Korea has, in the process of drafting the Korean Standard Classification of Diseases, tended to reflect international classification standards as they are. In other words, if the current classification standard is maintained, there is a high possibility that when the Korean Standard Classification of Diseases is revised in 2025, the WHO’s disease classification that treats gaming disorder as a disease will be incorporated 그대로.

Of course, the WHO’s International Classification of Diseases is merely a recommendation to member states and cannot be enforced. Given the scale of the gaming industry and the possibility of reduced sales if the disease code is introduced, it would be desirable to make any decision on whether to reflect the international standard classification only after conducting an in-depth analysis of domestic gaming industry statistics and assessing the industry’s overall condition.

The government, too, is seriously considering the harmful effects that would follow from recognizing gaming disorder as a disease, including the stigma effect, at a time when the gaming industry is developing rapidly. Only if the government consistently pursues deregulation in the gaming sector can the gaming industry, together with the metaverse, drive advances in new technologies. For the true development of the gaming industry, regulations on games themselves must also be relaxed. I look forward to the day when creative, high-quality games emerge in Korea and expand into a new cultural industry.

Minyoung Lee, Intern Researcher, Center for Free Enterprise (CFE)

---

Original title: [칼럼] 풀어도 풀어도 끝나지 않는 게임규제

Author: Min-young Lee

Date: 2024-02-20

Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=free_opinion&idx=26458