I’m mainly discussing AAA studios being risk adverse rather than actual innovation or take risks from addressing topics that are taboo, instead they regurgitate “diversity” just to appease a certain demographic (whom find this tiresome to hear all the time, why do FPS games for example refrain from depicting actual wars (Gulf war, Iraqi & Afghani conflicts) as they are from a historical standpoint?

The early Call of Duty titles discussed WWII before modern warfare while versions from today are mere fiction. Can I as a non-US developer create a FPS game that tackles real world conflicts with historiography (no sugar coating) and SAYING THE TRUTH in which US invades Iraq for instance as the main campaign (the only thing that makes it fiction are the characters but the setting itself is based on real events).

I could just region lock the game’s distribution if I were a developer (it’s already done by Japan on certain games) meaning Americans can’t access it unless they either imported a physical release or changed their steam account region (but they’re stuck with a language barrier, for example: Japanese only games are for Japan based players). How can there be backlash to something they can’t obtain?

Ignoring the backlash will be the only response I’ll use if there is, since the critics are American while the developer is a foreigner. For instance: the game will be praised across Asia for tackling a real story without sugar coating but on a Western market it’s hated for challenging and confronting their propaganda head on (as the synopsis portrays American troops as bad), so the game ends up as a mixed reception.