In 2025, South Korea is a bit different. President Lee Jae-myung not only personally attended an e-sports match but also appeared in a game scene, openly stating, "Gaming is not an addiction."

But if you look back at news from ten years ago, the South Korean government had previously classified gaming addiction alongside alcoholism as a "disease" to be treated.

This president also admitted that "South Korean games have been surpassed by China," and in 2024, self-developed Chinese games earned 1.63 billion USD in South Korea, up 13.39% year-on-year. Meanwhile, nearly half of South Korean game companies didn't make a profit in 2023.

In the early days, South Korean games were the "benchmark" in Asia. The game "Lineage" was so popular that many players stayed up all night to complete quests. In 2012, PC online game revenue accounted for one-third of the global market. Once a "game power," why does South Korea need the president to "rescue" it ten years later? What major fall has happened in between?

One: The Industrial Disparity Behind the President's Support

President Lee Jae-myung's series of actions in 2025 are not just a passing trend or "showing off." Long before 2021, he had already said that games are legitimate cultural products. Addiction is not the fault of the games themselves, but rather a side effect caused by psychological pressure and educational issues.

However, this statement would not have been heard in South Korea ten years ago. After all, at that time, the South Korean game industry indeed had the "arrogance" to justify itself: At the beginning of the 21st century, it relied on the "Cultural Nation Building" strategy, specifically implementing the "Five-Year Plan for the Development of the Cultural Industry" to support the game industry.

During the mid-2000s, the release of "Lineage" attracted tens of millions of players across Asia, including Chinese and Japanese players who stayed up all night to form teams. By 2012, data from the South Korean Cultural and Creative Economy Institute showed that PC online game revenue alone accounted for one-third of the global market.

46.4% of South Korean game companies were in loss in 2023; in contrast, according to the "2024 China Game Industry Report," self-developed Chinese games earned 1.63 billion USD in South Korea, and the figure is still rising.

On one hand, the president is supporting the industry to "save face," while on the other hand, there is a real performance gap. How did the South Korean game industry fall from its peak?

Two: A Extreme Case That Triggered a Chain Reaction

The downfall of the South Korean game industry began with an extreme case, followed by a series of "one-size-fits-all" measures.

In 2002, a tragedy occurred at a net bar in Dong-gu District, Gwangju, South Korea. A 24-year-old unemployed man spent several days without sleep, surviving only on instant noodles, and finally died of overwork at his computer.

This news was magnified, and the South Korean government seized it as "ironclad evidence," immediately launching a "Professor Yang-style" management approach, opening the first internet addiction treatment center, and enlisting a psychiatrist to endorse it.

This doctor did not do much scientific research and simply stated that "20% to 40% of South Korean teenagers have the risk of gaming addiction," even considering symptoms such as "not being able to control gaming time and arguing with parents," suggesting hospitalization for treatment.

Once this theory came out, the South Korean government immediately followed suit: In 2007, the "Game Industry Rectification Act" was enacted, introducing "gaming curfews" and regulating the probability of gacha in games. On the social level, it was even more extreme, with the game review agency GRAC almost "crushing every game."

The most typical example was the game "Run Run Wind," which was so popular that one-third of Koreans played it. Whether students or office workers, they all enjoyed playing it during their free time.

However, GRAC claimed it was "too addictive," directly removing it from the GooglePlay store in South Korea. For players, it was losing a source of entertainment, and for developers, it was a disaster, as the user base they had just built disappeared overnight.

From the end of 2011 to 2014, the gaming curfew system alone cost the industry 11.6 billion KRW; the number of game companies dropped from 30,000 to 14,000, and the number of employees fell from 92,500 to 87,300. Between 2013 and 2018, only 800-900 companies survived, nearly half fewer than the peak in 2009.

Even NEXON, once ranked 12th globally, could not withstand the impact: In 2019, its revenue dropped by 24%, forcing it to shut down more than a dozen games, including "HiMoe" and "The Best Africa," and even suspending its key project "Pellia Chronicle," eventually planning to sell it at a low price to overseas companies.

In 2019, South Korea's ranking in the global game market fell from 4th to 5th, overtaken by the UK; that same year, South Korea's exports declined by 10.3%. Although there were reasons such as crude oil and Japan-South Korea trade tensions, the "winter" in the game industry definitely dragged it down.

Three: Global Scientific Conclusions and South Korea's "Late Realization"

While South Korea was "messing around" with its industry, the global perception of games had already changed.

After 2020, American neuroscientist Kelly C. S. Wang and Ned R. Weber published a paper in "JAMA Network Open," clearly concluding that gaming addiction is unrelated to the games themselves. It is the players' own mental state and social factors that cause it. For example, some people use games to escape real-life pressures, making games the "scapegoat."

This was not an empty claim. The development of the global game industry also proved this point: In 2024, the global electronic game revenue exceeded 180 billion USD. Games are no longer just "toys," but also tools for cultural dissemination.

For example, the Polish "The Witcher" series made many players start to understand Eastern European fantasy culture. The Chinese game "Genshin Impact" brought traditional Chinese architecture and music overseas. These games became popular, but no country regarded them as "floods and tigers."

However, South Korea continued to classify gaming addiction as a "disease" in its "Comprehensive Mental Health Strategy" until 2016. It wasn't until 2021, when President Lee Jae-myung proposed a scientific viewpoint, that it gradually shifted. This was nearly five years behind the global awareness.

By the time South Korea realized this, China had already surpassed it: In 2012, the size of China's game market was nearly seven times that of South Korea. By 2015, even export revenue had overtaken it, and even sold games to the South Korean market itself.

Four: The True Meaning of the Industry Earned at the Cost of Ten Years

At the beginning of 2025, South Korea finally started "catching up": Abolishing GRAC's pre-review system, setting aside special budgets to support game development, postponing the classification of gaming addiction as a "disease," and enacting policies to protect developers' rights.

However, this "fixing after the fact" is difficult. Now, the global economy is not doing well, and the game industry is one of the few "profitable" fields. China, the US, Japan, and the UK are all competing to provide policies and invest money. It's not easy for South Korea to catch up.

Actually, South Korea's ups and downs over the past decade are not just about the rise and fall of an industry, but more like a "cognitive lesson."

For South Korea, the ten-year loss stemmed from "replacing science with prejudice." Because of an extreme case, the entire industry was labeled as "addictive," and solved social problems using a "medical" approach. In the end, it destroyed its own advantages.

The current remediation is not just about changing policies, but also changing the "black-and-white" mindset. For all countries, this is a reminder: Games are not "either addictive or useless." They can create economic value and serve as cultural ambassadors.

When it comes to such cultural industries, what should be feared is not "risk," but "abandoning due to a single incident." Instead of strictly suppressing, it's better to use prevention and guidance to let them develop properly.

South Korea has proven through ten years of experience that cognitive bias toward cultural industries can destroy an industry more than any market competition.

This lesson may help more countries avoid taking detours. After all, a good industry is not "regulated" into existence, but "guided" into existence after understanding it.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7566539988599374363/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author. Please express your opinion below using the [Like/Dislike] buttons.