Gayathri Kallukaran is a Junior Journalist with Eastern Eye. She has a Master’s degree in Journalism and Mass Communication from St. Paul’s College, Bengaluru, and brings over five years of experience in content creation, including two years in digital journalism. She covers stories across culture, lifestyle, travel, health, and technology, with a creative yet fact-driven approach to reporting. Known for her sensitivity towards human interest narratives, Gayathri’s storytelling often aims to inform, inspire, and empower. Her journey began as a layout designer and reporter for her college’s daily newsletter, where she also contributed short films and editorial features. Since then, she has worked with platforms like FWD Media, Pepper Content, and Petrons.com, where several of her interviews and features have gained spotlight recognition. Fluent in English, Malayalam, Tamil, and Hindi, she writes in English and Malayalam, continuing to explore inclusive, people-focused storytelling in the digital space.
Helldivers 2 has experienced a dramatic surge in negative Steam reviews, with over 2,600 posted on 29 May alone, representing a 40-fold increase compared to just two days earlier. The sharp rise in complaints comes amid accusations from players, particularly in China, that the game developer Arrowhead Game Studios is manipulating the in-game Galactic War narrative and misleading players through mistranslation in the Chinese version of the game.
Prior to the review spike, Helldivers 2 had maintained relatively stable feedback, with just 62 negative reviews logged on 27 May. However, tensions escalated as players began to question the integrity of the ongoing in-game conflict, specifically the defence of a strategic city called Equality-On-Sea. This city has been dubbed "Super China" by the community due to its resemblance to Shanghai (which translates as "upon the sea").
The controversy centres on the city’s reported defence level of 99.9783%, a figure which has since become a rallying cry among frustrated players. Despite near-total success in defending the location, the game did not register it as fully liberated, leading many to accuse Arrowhead of scripting the outcomes to push the Galactic War storyline in a pre-determined direction.
Further fuelling the discontent is a widely reported mistranslation in the Chinese version of the game. According to multiple sources, including a detailed post from a level 150 Chinese player known as Valkyri_Yukikaze, the Chinese localisation mistakenly suggested that the city could be completely reclaimed through player effort. In reality, game mechanics require the city to remain contested as part of the larger Illuminate invasion narrative. The confusion has led to feelings of betrayal among some Chinese players who believed they had been misled.
Arrowhead has introduced a dynamic war system in Helldivers 2, with player actions supposedly shaping the direction of the game’s storyline. However, some community members are now questioning whether outcomes are genuinely influenced by collective performance, or if major narrative beats are being enforced regardless of player actions. One theory posits that the game was always designed to culminate in a climactic battle for Prosperity City, regardless of earlier mission outcomes.
The controversy also sheds light on the broader challenge of managing a global gaming audienceArrowhead Game Studios
This theory is supported by patterns observed in the game’s progression, where despite significant player contributions, key objectives appear to remain just out of reach. While many players understand that a game master (GM) figure may guide the story to maintain pacing and drama, the suggestion that developer interference is overriding actual player results has caused backlash, particularly when it appears to conflict with transparent game design.
The 99.9783% figure has become symbolic of this debate. Although the number initially represented the defence progress of Equality-On-Sea, it has since been used in numerous reviews and forum discussions as evidence that the game is not accurately reflecting player effort. In Chinese gaming forums and across Reddit, players have accused Arrowhead of "cooking the numbers" to fabricate tension.
Some commentators, however, have pushed back against the criticism, suggesting that the misunderstandings stem from a lack of familiarity with how war mechanics function within the game. They argue that Helldivers 2, like many live-service titles, incorporates elements of persistent conflict, where cities can remain under threat despite overwhelming success, in order to preserve gameplay longevity and narrative tension.
As of now, Arrowhead Game Studios has not issued a formal response to the review spike or the allegations of misleading translations. The lack of communication has left portions of the player base feeling ignored, while others await clarification. Meanwhile, the Steam reviews continue to pour in, many of them referencing the contested nature of Equality-On-Sea and the perceived manipulation of the war effort.
Despite the controversy, Helldivers 2 continues to maintain a substantial player base, and many users remain engaged with the game’s cooperative missions and evolving warfront. Still, the incident highlights the fragility of player trust in live-service games, particularly when localisation errors and perceived narrative interference converge.
The controversy also sheds light on the broader challenge of managing a global gaming audience. Miscommunications arising from localisation mistakes can escalate quickly in tightly-knit gaming communities, especially when combined with high emotional investment and competitive in-game stakes.
The developer's next steps could prove crucial. Whether through improved communication, transparency about narrative direction, or localisation updates, Arrowhead’s response will likely shape the future relationship with its player base. Until then, the 99.9783% saga continues to be a point of contention, emblematic of broader concerns about authenticity and fairness in player-driven storytelling.
UK life sciences sector contributed £17.6bn GVA in 2021 and supports 126,000 high-skilled jobs.
Inward life sciences FDI fell by 58 per cent from £1,897m in 2021 to £795m in 2023.
Experts warn NHS underinvestment and NICE pricing rules are deterring innovation and patient access.
Investment gap
Britain is seeking to attract new pharmaceutical investment as part of its plan to strengthen the life sciences sector, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said during meetings in Washington this week. “We do need to make sure that we are an attractive place for pharmaceuticals, and that includes on pricing, but in return for that, we want to see more investment flow to Britain,” Reeves told reporters.
Recent ABPI report, ‘Creating the conditions for investment and growth’, The UK’s pharmaceutical industry is integral to both the country’s health and growth missions, contributing £17.6 billion in direct gross value added (GVA) annually and supporting 126,000 high-skilled jobs across the nation. It also invests more in research and development (R&D) than any other sector. Yet inward life sciences foreign direct investment (FDI) fell by 58per cent, from £1,897 million in 2021 to £795 million in 2023, while pharmaceutical R&D investment in the UK lagged behind global growth trends, costing an estimated £1.3 billion in lost investment in 2023 alone.
Richard Torbett, ABPI Chief Executive, noted “The UK can lead globally in medicines and vaccines, unlocking billions in R&D investment and improving patient access but only if barriers are removed and innovation rewarded.”
The UK invests just 9% of healthcare spending in medicines, compared with 17% in Spain, and only 37% of new medicines are made fully available for their licensed indications, compared to 90% in Germany.
Expert reviews
Shailesh Solanki, executive editor of Pharmacy Business, pointed that “The government’s own review shows the sector is underfunded by about £2 billion per year. To make transformation a reality, this gap must be closed with clear plans for investment in people, premises and technology.”
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold £20,000 to £30,000 per Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) — has remained unchanged for over two decades, delaying or deterring new medicine launches. Raising it is viewed as vital to attracting foreign investment, expanding patient access, and maintaining the UK’s global standing in life sciences.
Guy Oliver, General Manager for Bristol Myers Squibb UK and Ireland, noted that " the current VPAG rate is leaving UK patients behind other countries, forcing cuts to NHS partnerships, clinical trials, and workforce despite government growth ambitions".
Reeves’ push for reform, supported by the ABPI’s Competitiveness Framework, underlines Britain’s intent to stay a leading hub for pharmaceutical innovation while ensuring NHS patients will gain faster access to new treatments.
By clicking the 'Subscribe’, you agree to receive our newsletter, marketing communications and industry
partners/sponsors sharing promotional product information via email and print communication from Garavi Gujarat
Publications Ltd and subsidiaries. You have the right to withdraw your consent at any time by clicking the
unsubscribe link in our emails. We will use your email address to personalize our communications and send you
relevant offers. Your data will be stored up to 30 days after unsubscribing.
Contact us at data@amg.biz to see how we manage and store your data.