Ludological analysis reveals how Call of Duty depicts the Soviet period in history, suggesting propaganda effects on player perceptions.
This study examines the positioning of the Soviet period in Russian history in the Call of Duty series using a ludological approach. The methodological strategy is based on a synthesis of case studies, I. Bogost's procedural rhetoric method, and elements of structural-functional analysis. The author concludes that in the Call of Duty series, the Soviet social, political, and economic systems are modeled primarily within the context of the Great Patriotic War. Most games in the series encourage gamers to normalize the mass deaths of Red Army soldiers and officers as a result of sending them into frontal assaults on fortified enemy positions and abandoning flexible tactical strategies. Most games in the franchise also normalize the perception of the relatively low quality of Soviet weapons, which were functionally designed specifically for close-quarters combat during the assault on enemy positions. The game rewards actions involving the total annihilation of the enemy, including prisoners. Its procedural aspects also punish those who refuse hyper-aggressive offensive tactics or attempt to disobey orders. In most games in the series, the winning behavioral model is built on minimizing character agency and strictly following external instructions. To succeed in the game, the player is forced to conclude that there is no alternative to the imposed hyper-aggressive tactical model and the practice of killing prisoners of war or wounded enemies. Based on this, it can be concluded that these games, through their procedural features, shape gamers' perceptions of the Soviet period that are substantively consistent with the memorial regimes that emerged in Western countries during the Cold War, as part of the politicization of historical scholarship and its use for propaganda purposes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sergey Belov (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: