People do probably need to stop reading into PR statements as being blanket realities about what political statements a game may or may not make, and also what kind of political framing the game has. Like, I get it, it's the easy thing to do to say that it's transitive; the PR line *is* the company line, and the company line *is* everything. But it's not, and a critical analysis of a work sort of demands that we don't take their word for it on any of this stuff.
That being said, it may actually be important to listen to the writers. Listen to the authors of the work, the designers, the people actually spending years of their life doing the work -- if they say that it's not political, what they're actually saying is "we didn't think about this hard." That does have implications. That does change some of the interpretation. It's a hell of a lot more meaningful than some PR face doing the "nothing to see here" routine. Likewise, if someone says the work is political and, moreover, it has something to say about the politics that frame it, then that's even more additional context to draw conclusions.
Everything is political. But not everything is actually, you know, thought about. Not everything is meant to change your mind. And that's an important distinction to make, I think -- it may not affect the actual outcome of the work, politically speaking, but a lack of intent or a carelessness towards the framing politics at least allows us to see the work under a lens where people can talk with each other rather than past each other.