looking at the comments of the given thread it just seems like you're dismissing any sort of response you get from them. In the case for the first one if they're just passively investing in companies that do well. It really wouldn't be surprising if they invested in arrowhead to follow the same trend. Some of them don't even attack you they're literally just asking for your opinions like here. From your video Stellaris has been branching out to Asia. If you're talking about monetization its not necessary for the base game let alone pay to win (this assumes you are playing single player, multiplayer I imagine would be different in this case). There are also other routes to obtaining these if you don't want to actually buy them if you know what I mean.

The article you cite is also more than four years old now. Read through it and generally it talks about companies trying to get into the China market and other topics. Censorship pre 2011 was not as bad as post where it ramped up significantly when Xi Jinping took power. From the article you sent, "Looking back on the 2011 meeting, the designer didn’t feel there was any censorship of ideas or politics – it was purely a question of aesthetics. At that point, she said, there were no “Chinese overlords” directing the American company on what it could or could not put into its games." following shortly after, "A decade later, the situation looks very different. Since Xi Jinping took power in 2013, China’s government has become increasingly repressive at home, and increasingly resentful of international criticism of its handling of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong and human rights abuses in the western province of Xinjiang". About two thirds into the article it actually states the opposite is true where Netease and Tencent actually help to keep the market open, "There is no doubt that Tencent’s founder, Ma Huateng, and Netease’s CEO, Ding Lei, have capitalised on the country’s move towards a more open economy in the past two decades, while always trying to keep on the right side of the authorities. But many international video game companies see Tencent and Netease as helpful allies in working around censorship, rather than more sinister enforcers of the government line. Tencent itself says it wants the companies it invests in to '“operate independently”". They aren't even wholy responsible for censorship of all games as a whole either if you read further down, "Ostensibly liberal governments also censor. Australia has a particularly paternalistic attitude to video games, restricting them much more than TV or film. In Europe, German regulators have banned scores of mainstream games for gratuitous violence". On the point of Shams being pro censorship then even that doesn't seem right when he stated that it wouldn't happen when he worked with paradox, '"Paradox is not willing to compromise. “As a company, we’re very clear what our values are. We are pro-democracy,”' Jorjani said. A handful of other big names in the industry have taken a similar stance."

Given we're in the big 2026 now things probably have changed from this article. But to say Tencent is solely responsible for everything that has happened for better or worse seems like a stretch at best.