[actually_a_dog]

Yeah, I think what you say definitely has some merit, but you & I both know that the law doesn't always work the way non-specialists think it does. While there's certainly a common sense argument (completely apart from the parody angle) that goes something like "@actually_a_dog's truthful review didn't harm $COMPANY's mark; $COMPANY did so by providing a consumer experience that enabled @actually_a_dog to write such a review truthfully," I don't know if or how that comports with the law or not.

So, sure, if I opened up a Swedish-themed store that sold cheap furniture and Swedish meatballs, then called it MyKEA or something, and had the employees wear shirts with yellow vertical stripes on them, I'd be an idiot not to expect a nastygram from IKEA legal regarding my infringing use of their mark in commerce. The question seems to be "Does depicting a store and using recognizable elements of its brand identity in a commercial video game count as 'use of the mark in commerce?'" To that question, you & I may answer "no," but IKEA, and possibly the law, might answer the other way.