KRAFTON faces multinational boycott calls after banning 2 Vietnamese PUBG stars

KRAFTON on Wednesday imposed a lifetime ban on the two Vietnamese PUBG players following an incident at PUBG Asia Stars 2026.

The punishment has triggered calls for a boycott in Vietnam, while players and esports followers elsewhere have questioned whether an incident at an exhibition event justified effectively ending the players’ professional careers.

Boycott calls grow in Vietnam

The backlash in Vietnam quickly moved beyond social media criticism.

Several prominent streamers have publicly announced that they were removing PUBG from their computers or would no longer create content related to the game.

Among them was streamer Do Mixi, who said he would delete PUBG and stop producing content associated with the title.

Following the suit, other well-known streamers, including Rambo and DjChip, have also expressed opposition to the punishment, while streamer PewPew said he would support and assist Himass and TanVuu.

Images of players uninstalling PUBG have appeared widely across Vietnamese social media.

Some Vietnamese esports-focused platforms have also voiced support for the boycott.

The reaction has extended to gaming cafes.

Several owners of these gaming venues said they had removed PUBG from their computer systems despite the potential impact on their businesses.

KRAFTON on Wednesday announced permanent bans on the PUBG: Battlegrounds accounts of La Phuong Tien Dat, known as Himass, and Tran Tan Vu, known as TanVuu

The company also barred both players from participating in any PUBG Esports events organized or sanctioned by KRAFTON.

According to the game publisher’s decision, the players used information obtained from outside the match while competing at PUBG Asia Stars 2026.

The two players retain the right to follow the appeal process concerning the decision.

Criticism spreads to China, Thailand and international forums

In Chinese PUBG communities, including discussions on Hupu, users have debated whether the punishment imposed on the two Vietnamese players was proportionate.

Some commenters agreed that using outside information should be punished, but argued that a lifetime ban was excessive for an incident at an exhibition-style event.

Others questioned the event’s operational procedures, particularly why a live broadcast was permitted without sufficient safeguards against information from spectators reaching players during the match.

In Thailand, PUBG-related pages such as King of Gamers and Subzidite have closely followed the backlash.

Responding to a King of Gamers post about the incident, commenter Natthapol Chaiseetib expressed support for the two Vietnamese players and criticized what he considered an excessively severe punishment.

Another user, Bas Wissawa Srisaard, wrote that while the Vietnamese players had made a mistake, it did not warrant a permanent account ban.

Other Thai players voiced concerns about the precedent the case could create for competitors from other countries.

The debate has also reached international PUBG esports forums.

On CompetitivePUBG, users have posted messages supporting Vietnamese players’ objections to KRAFTON’s decision while acknowledging that Himass and TanVuu remain responsible for their conduct.

Some commenters have called on KRAFTON to provide greater clarity about the relevant rules, the investigation process and the circumstances that led to the punishment.

The controversy began on September 17, when South Korean female gamer Soopi accused Himass and TanVuu of cheating during PUBG Asia Stars 2026.

One commenter questioned why the Vietnamese players received such severe sanctions for conduct that, in the user’s view, was unrelated to online attacks directed at the streamer.

Criticism has also emerged in South Korea, KRAFTON’s home market.

South Korean outlet News1 reported criticism of PUBG’s handling of the tournament, including claims that the company’s response came too late.

A central point of contention is the apparent tension between KRAFTON’s findings against the two players and the company’s own acknowledgment of shortcomings in how tournament rules were communicated and enforced.