I agree with you. What I personally think is as follows:
The GPL is in place to ensure that everyone has equal rights to software. For example, if I were the creator of an open-source game engine, the GPL would ensure that I’m not ‘stepped on’ by someone else who downloads the engine, changes a few lines, and then relicenses it as a closed-source product and sells it. With the GPL, any changes to the engine that are published must be distributed back to the source (i.e. me) and are freely available for download. With a game made with the engine, though, while it is derived from or uses the engine, it doesn’t digitally alter the engine.
Something that was mentioned on the GPL’s website was that the point of the GPL was to ensure that everyone knows what software they have the rights to download, and that they understand that they’re downloading two separate portions of a game (i.e. the proprietary portion (the game), and the free portion (the engine)).
With the BGE especially, we’re looking at an engine that interprets blend files - where they’re physically (digitally) located shouldn’t really matter. I would gladly tell all of my customers that the game was made with the BGE and tell them where they could locate it, for free. Everyone would have the same right to the same software that I have.
As a side-note, according to the GPL:
The difference between this and “incorporating” the GPL-covered software is partly a matter of substance and partly form. The substantive part is this: if the two programs are combined so that they become effectively two parts of one program, then you can’t treat them as two separate programs. So the GPL has to cover the whole thing.
If the two programs remain well separated, like the compiler and the kernel, or like an editor and a shell, then you can treat them as two separate programs—but you have to do it properly. The issue is simply one of form: how you describe what you are doing. Why do we care about this? Because we want to make sure the users clearly understand the free status of the GPL-covered software in the collection.
Does it matter that the BlenderPlayer can be separated from the game post-compiling? It’s possible to make a plug-in that reverses the process and separates a compiled game into the blend file and the BlenderPlayer, which proves that they’re two separate programs - an interpreter, and a data file.