>>713731575 (OP)
Do you want an honest answer?
This is, and have always been, a retarded argument. Politics have always been in entertainment because politics is an instrumental part of humanity ever since the birth of civilization.
However, there's a difference between politics for the sake of entertainment (such as writing a story or a believable world) and politics for the sake of "spreading awareness" if we're being generous or propaganda if we're being harsh.
It's ridiculously hard to create a story without ANY politics -like zero mention of any governmental and societal structures or any implication of such of any kind- and I'm not quite sure it's even possible.
Political messages have also been often done in any entertainment but it's often balanced by its focus on being entertaining primarily (see MGS with its anti-nuclear themes but still focusing on a story/gameplay/characters instead of constantly saying "nukes bad").
The player focus, understandably, will be different if the game is made for primarily spreading some sort of message and constantly putting that in the limelight instead of focusing on the entertainment part.
The real question isn't whether the game has politics or not but the intent of the developers and while many may not be able to articulate why they dislike this shift in focus their pattern recognition will. Furthermore, people often play games to escape from the modern world. A game that's supposed to be high-fantasy then constantly dragging you back to real world politics will ultimately sour the experience as it's no longer as detached from reality as the player wanted it to be.
