I think that game companies should be free to voice their opinions. If the company representatives have strong beliefs and are willing to accept the potential consequences of speaking on those beliefs, then I think they should be free to espouse those beliefs in public. Creating art is an inherently political act - it is really difficult to create a narrative without some kind of political message. Even the earliest games were representative of the people who made them and what they cared about. If you don’t believe me, Missile Command is an excellent example of an arcade game from 1980 that was built out of fear of nuclear annihilation.
That isn’t to say that game companies should be allowed to make public-facing statement with impunity or without consequences. Other people like shareholders, players, etc. may not agree with those public-facing statements and, as a result, can choose to sell off their shares or stop playing those games. If enough pressure is put on the company, those in charge may change the company opinion. This is a natural part of dealing with a group of people who are not afraid of voicing their opinions on things that they care about. I respect the decision of a group of people that care more about their principles than about sparing the feelings of their customers who might disagree. It is a valid choice. They weighed the potential consequences and made the choice.
I am generally in favor of creators being free to speak their minds in public as long as they are willing to accept the consequences of what they say. I might not always agree with them but I don’t think that silencing them is the right solution. I am also generally in favor of the public’s right to choose their interpretation and have their opinion on the company’s opinion. You don’t have to like what they say, and they don’t have to listen to you. We all have to make choices and must live with the consequences of those decisions.
Got a burning question you want answered?