The defence secretary, Liam Fox, has launched a stinging attack on the forthcoming first-person shooter Medal of Honor, requesting that retailers refuse to stock the game. EA's relaunch of its hugely successful series is set amid the war in Afghanistan and the single-player campaign follows US troops as they seek to defeat the Taliban. However, the multiplayer online mode allows players to take part as terrorist operatives, gaining points for killing allied soldiers, and this is the element that Fox objects to.

The Press Association quotes Fox suggesting that the game should be subject to a retail ban: "It's shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban. At the hands of the Taliban, children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands. I am disgusted and angry. It's hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game. I would urge retailers to show their support for our armed forces and ban this tasteless product."

Meanwhile, the news site al-Jazeera has a video report on the story, showing some in-game footage of a Taliban soldier using a mobile phone to set off a remote explosive device.

EA has reportedly responded to Fox via the Sunday Times with the following: "The format of the new Medal of Honor game merely reflects the fact that every conflict has two sides. We give gamers the opportunity to play both sides. Most of us have been doing this since we were seven: someone plays the cop, someone must be robber. In Medal of Honor multiplayer, someone's got to be the Taliban."



Of course, this was always going to happen. Video games based around current conflicts have often provoked controversy in the past, with opponents suggesting they exploit the suffering of real-life soldiers and civilians. The Call of Duty: Modern Warfare series has always avoided similar accusations by using fictional settings – even though the titles clearly employ contemporary Middle Eastern environments and protagonists.

It's not clear, however, if Fox is aware of the distinction between a narrative-led single-player campaign and a "deathmatch"-style multiplayer mode in which players are able to take on both enemy and allied roles in essentially context-free shootouts. It could be that this distinction is irrelevant to him.

Whatever the intricacies of this particular case, it once again opens the debate about whether it is acceptable for video games to portray and explore current conflicts and other news issues. While it is generally accepted that linear media such as books, films and TV series' are "allowed" to use contemporary warzones as settings, games tend to be viewed differently – mostly because of their interactive nature, and the belief that "game" content trivialises serious subject matter.

It is extremely unlikely, however, that retailers will follow Fox's suggestion. The game, due out on October 15, has already received BBFC and PEGI certification and has secured an 18+ rating. It will be a key title in the Christmas line-up, alongside the rival shooter Call of Duty: Black Ops.

UPDATE 1: the video game news site Eurogamer has quoted a source from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, describing Fox's comments as "a personal view". The culture minister Ed Vaizey has been keen to show his support for the games industry since the election.

UPDATE 2: Electronic Arts is preparing a statement to address several alleged inaccuracies in Fox's characterisation of the game.