For me the only real issue with having an agenda is the same as being a fanboy or similar. Not being open with it or trying to deny you have.

If someone tell me he is a Xbox fanboy or an avocate for LGBTQI+ I'll take their opinion or facts at face value and may agree or not and will just discuss it. If a person say is neutral or similar but it is very clear that is a lie I know that the points are actually pretension so I can't take it at face value and have to double think on the intentions.

About your last paragraph, there is a confirmed transwoman in the game, but not what people thought due to the leaks.

Not a bad thing at all,almost everything has some political bias/agenda.

Execution is ofcourse important,how a character is written makes me like or dislike them no matter how they look or what sex they have and that is how many people see it but people see an agenda better now because it is attached to something more unknown to them and assume the creaters behind it found it enough to add diversity as a shallow layer without depth,does not make them all bigots against trans etc... but question why the directors thought it was enough to make characters so shallow.

Same people you might think are bigots did like this animation here that is filled with genders and difference in sexuality,difference is the writing that made them more likeable.

Where is the positivity about people liking this much diversity and where was the positivity about people liking diversity before,it existed but it is forgotten so soon and like moths to flames(dark souls,yes i'm a fanboy) the negative stands out more and gives people a twisted view at the quantity of the actual bigots.

Do you mean Lev? He's a trans-man, not a trans-woman.

Anyway, what I have found silly about the reaction to him actually comes from some members of the trans-community. Apparently, the character has been criticised for begin written by non-trans writers. I didn't realise that was a pre-condition, even though they seem to have gone to great lengths to do a fair portrayal.

They also got criticised for having the Seraphites using Lev's birth name. To me, this is realistic, as a hardcore religious cult isn't going to try to be respectful to Lev. It might not be pleasant, especially for trans-people, but it is realistic.

AAA games aren't the exotic cars of the gaming industry? What other types of games have more time and money spent on their development?

If you want to change it to sports cars, that's fine to. Maybe more realistic for you but it's the same result in the end either way.

Sports cars are not high end popular forms of travel/transportation. They are simply high end vehicles.

Reasonable metrics? So like because the majority of woman tend to find tall men sexier, that means all tall men are sexy at all times, period? Certainly doesn't sound reasonable. I wonder why tall men bother to bathe?

Yes I mean Lev, and yes he would be transman. Still people that think Abby is trans very clearly didn't play the game and even try to impose they have a great knowledge of it.

And you are right about the second paragraph. If Lev was expelled from Seraphites and sister was hanged to die then of course they have 0 acceptance for him so it would be ludicrous to expect they to call him Lev.

I guess you missed the point. It is about the public you want to reach and not how much you put in the development that define if something is popular or niche.

You are still trying to do big fallacies. You tried to use the biggest seller and say anything that doesn't sell like it isn't popular, how does that make any sense?

this is nothing like fanboyism. this isn't something superficial and stupid like preferring Marvel over DC or vice versa. This is literally a matter of normalizing things and making people's lives better. It's about ensuring marginalized groups aren't ostracized to the point of depression or suicide or that they aren't stigmatized enough to inspire murder or assault. 

This isn't some game analogy. This is real life, and that's where the difference lies. Politics are important becuase they literally are life-altering changes to people in need. So I repeat: what's bad about having a political agenda, especially when that agenda is 'normalizing LGBT+ members of the community for the sake of making them feel respected and included'?

So if any small dev team says they want to make a AAA game to reach that audience, with a budget of less than a million bucks, and a two year dev deadline, that game automatically becomes popular entertainment from that point forward? 

You mean Minecraft? I'd say it's popular entertainment but only because of it's positive reception and massive sales over time. Minecraft wasn't popular entertainment only weeks after it launched though.

I have been reading Stephen King a lot lately and i have been whining about him,he puts some sort of political agenda in his books but it is sometimes done in such a stereotypical way that it feels like he does not even try to understand the problems of some of the characters he is writing about.

It must be disheartening when it is rare to find yourself represented and when you do it is in an over the top stereotypical way,that is not normalizing but maybe the growing pains of ''culture'' still.

Not to speak about some of the straight relationships in his books were the female is scared alot,mostly is slower of mind,focussed on making sure the male eats good,and asks for the males confirmation to do some basic things while the male himself is the one just a bit better at most things and the bravest.

Intention is good ofcourse but please people, try to understand what you speak about or preach to really make sure people DO feel respected.

No it doesn't become popular because that is decided by the market, but it certainly is the objective of that dev. Not sure what kinda point you are trying to make that needs you making fallacies, distorting my point, reaching and making strawman all at once.

I won't enter this discussion on this because you really can't "normalize". Because being normal, is being the norm, being what is most common. And you just basically ignored the point made anyway.

That's what I already had pointed out earlier, that the market/audience/consumers/people decide popularity. They can't do that until they've experienced it, had a chance to think it over, and voice their opinion. Individuals, or groups of them, who just decide/feel they want something to be a certain way, doesn't make it so.