> I agree with you. In fact, I didn't buy Overwatch because of the way they were shoving gay stuff into it.
I fail to see how this could be your takeaway from his statement. His point is that they will pander to whatever cause makes them the most amount of money.
LGBTQ+ content in a game should not be the reason you don't want a game. There are games that handle it very poorly and are just trying to virtue-signal. They make the point of the game that the character is gay (generally a lesbian as that hits more checkboxes) and as a result these games suffer quality wise. Being non-binary isn't a good story, your media should have a good story. The character having "being gay" as one of their character traits is fine. "Being gay" isn't (far from it) the only thing that defines a person (or character)
Games have been political for as long as games have had stories. It's just that in 1981 killing nazis in Wolfenstein was a completely non-controversial topic. We fought in WWII. Shooting nazis is the American thing to do.
Bioshock? Fallout? The worlds portrayed in those are intensely political topics.
But the "keep politics out of my games!" crowd only shows up when it turns out one of the characters is gay.
There's a reason Metal Gear rewards players for avoiding a head-on fight at least as often as engaging one (and rewarded players significantly more often in the original games).
Hell, there's a reason there are bishops on the board in chess and they move diagonally.
If you simply played the game, you wouldn't know or care that the gays infiltrated it. You didn't play it because you researched a reason to not play it, and that reason just so happens to be homophobia.
