But...
I find this type of discussion so amusing.
Quest about freeing slaves: Not Political
Quest about whether demons are like humans as opposed to being inherently evil and can overcome their "true nature": Not Political
General themes involving religion/faith, governing, nobility, etc : Not Political
Gay couple happens to exist: POLITICAL! WOKE! SCANDELOUS EVEN!
I don't have a partisan horse in this race, but I find this level of analysis to be extraordinarily incorrect. Again, my complaint is not a value-oriented one, but a technical one. When people refer to a piece of media being "political," they are not referring to the overarching political issues that
underlie our society, or to the major historical-political issues of our civilization. When people refer to a piece of media being "political," they are referring to the fact that the piece of media touches on a
contemporary cleavage in social and political ideology and takes a particular side. Now, regardless of whether or not they have good reasons to use the term "political," to argue that any mention of any matter that can even remotely be tied to the idea of the generic "political" automatically makes something "political" is a complete misreading of the complaint, and uses faulty argumentation to discard it. No one is seriously advocating for outright, overt chattel slavery in the democratic world. Hereditary nobility is not an issue in the overwhelming majority of democratic society. LGBT rights and representation
are contemporary ideological cleavages, regardless of whether or not they
should be in an ideal world. Freeing slaves wouldn't be political, but chopping the head off of a Trump-lookalike business owner paying poverty wages might be.
The idea that companies are taking a firm position on contemporary, local, ideologically close-to-home issues is what the anti-woke crowd is complaining about. Whether or not they have good reasons is not my concern, but this level of strawmanning is bullshit.
Edit: All of this to say that there are better critiques of the anti-woke crowd than that.
Edit 2: In my opinion, a better counter to the argument is to mention that the mere existence of a particular people in a video game is no more political than the mere existence of these people in our own reality. To argue that LGBT-people should not exist in media is to argue for a grievous anti-realism, one founded on the
delusion that the existence of a particular people, by itself and by mere virtue of itself, is a political statement, and a statement made towards some other amorphous in-group at that. The occurrence of homosexuality in a fantasy world is no more political than the occurrence of homosexuality in nature (and swans can be gay).
Edit 3: Added spoiler tags
