Can I modify this query slightly? Because woke games don't bill themselves as woke, they just *are* woke. So the counterpoint would be a game that is self-evidently not woke in its setting, though it never talks about that per se. Imagine you discovered *that* game. Would the average RPGSite reader support it for that reason alone? I think the answer is "no". In general our crowd doesn't go out of its way to support product on ideological grounds. Whereas the other team does.
I get why the individualistic and meritocratic right does what it does; we put quality ahead of ideology. However, taken as a whole, when fighting a culture war, it results in an outcome that's not good for our crowd. Mathematically this has been modeled as "ethnocentric" vs "humanitarian" competition:
https://www.jasss.org/16/3/7.html"Recent agent-based computer simulations suggest that ethnocentrism, often thought to rely on complex social cognition and learning, may have arisen through biological evolution. From a random start, ethnocentric strategies dominate other possible strategies (selfish, traitorous, and humanitarian) based on cooperation or non-cooperation with in-group and out-group agents. Here we show that ethnocentrism eventually overcomes its closest competitor, humanitarianism, by exploiting humanitarian cooperation across group boundaries as world population saturates. Selfish and traitorous strategies are self-limiting because such agents do not cooperate with agents sharing the same genes. Traitorous strategies fare even worse than selfish ones because traitors are exploited by ethnocentrics across group boundaries in the same manner as humanitarians are, via unreciprocated cooperation. By tracking evolution across time, we find individual differences between evolving worlds in terms of early humanitarian competition with ethnocentrism, including early stages of humanitarian dominance. Our evidence indicates that such variation, in terms of differences between humanitarian and ethnocentric agents, is normally distributed and due to early, rather than later, stochastic differences in immigrant strategies."
Simplified, imagine two groups of consumers, colored red and blue, who encounter games coded red or blue and good or bad.
Red consumers buy games coded good, regardless of color. They prefer red but not enough to buy red bad.
Blue consumers buy games coded blue, regardless of quality. They prefer quality but not enough to buy red good.
Run an agent-based simulation and you'll end up with a market dominated by good blue games. The blue consumer gets everything he wants while the red consumer only gets half of what he wants. That's the state we are in today.
EDIT: While I was writing you said the same thing I was saying about how the game would be presented.