I didn't mean attacking and calling people who like something bigoted for liking it, I meant more along the lines of judging something as morally wrong and not liking it because of that, if you get what I mean.

See here's the thing, I really do not believe you are seperating the two. It seems to me that you are morally judging them, but just diplomatically deciding to say you are overlooking that. It seems overwelmingly like you're just humoring us because you know that if you attacked us more directly you'd be ignored outright. (I feel the need to right now state that by "you" I mean general moral's based artistic critique not necessarily you specifically)

People who like games with problematic depictions of women aren't necessarily sexist, they might just like the game for other reasons and be willing to see past its problematic elements, or not see/understand why those things are sexist.

And that's another thing that really chaps my ass. You assert that people who do not hold your views must be compromising on their morals, or are ignorant. You don't acknowledge someone who is perfectly familiar with the ideas used to condemn these works disagreeing with them; its the equivalent to a pastor saying that atheists just don't truly understand christianity.

The problem comes in when those elements are just thrown in there, where they don't feel like they belong - for example, to use the example of Street Fighter, nothing else would really be changed if the women in that game were less sexualized and the sexualization doesn't play into anything else in the game. It feels like a cynical attempt at marketing to adolescent boys, and sort of takes me out of the action mentally. Its in these cases, where sexualization is added "just because" that I feel like its wrong, as it sort of shatters immersion for me and many others while not really adding anything.

See here's the thing. I can understand this logic, but what makes me doubt the sincerity of it is its exclusivity. Nobody applies arguments of unrealism to massive pauldrons and armor spikes, just to boob plates. Nobody cares if a character's personality is one note, unless that person is a female whose one note personality is sexual. You don't care about any number of the plethora of things that are completely unnecessary in any number of games, unless its sexual in nature. You say its ok to have sexualization, but only if it is "important" but why does sexualization need to so uniqely justify itself. Every other form of gratuity is fully endorsed and allowed to be freely used. I can't take these arguments as much more than a facade over trying to justify a moral judgement.

The point I was making about what people on this subreddit "demand" was less "They demand things in the same way as us" and more "We demand things in the same way as them," if you get what I mean. I openly acknowledge that my desires are, in a sense, selfish (I don't think that's quite an appropriate word, as both I and the people on this subreddit want what they want on others' behalfs, not just our/their own), but I fell my desires, and the desires of people like me, should simply be catered to the same way that others are. Right now, it feels like a lot of the games industry ignores people like me in favor of exclusively pandering to young men, and that's what we'd like ended - that exclusivity.

And that really just cuts to the crux of the problem doesn't it? Unfortunately what I said above still pretty much applies. It's perfectly acceptable to use fanservice, but it is a problem when its everywhere. But here's the thing, if its established that no one individually is doing anything wrong, why would anyone change? I think that's why people have tried to make blanket statements that aren't so well held up, i.e. "it's inherently disrespectful to portray a female character primarily sexually" which is silly, we portray many, and in fact most characters as one dimensional things. The guards are just guards, the shop keeper just a shop keeper, the villain just a villain, but sexuality in women is uniquely forbidden from being one dimensional; fiction creators must justify their sexy women npcs, and I don't think that's really what most people want to be the case. They really want to prevent the entire medium from being entirely dominated by women's roles being nothing but sexual. They realize they can't really attack anyone individually so they try to wield a sledgehammer instead of a scalpal to make the double standards seen above (pauldrons/boob plates), in the hopes that will prevent that exclusivity. But I don't see that happening, you attack boob plates and the such and are dismissed as pedantic and perpetually offended. And ultimately what you're doing to remove the exclusivity isn't requesting works for yourself, you're demanding they stop making or alter works that don't "pander" (hate that word) to you. And I'm sorry but that's not ok, if I started demanding that rap music adjust itself because I felt alienated as a white man I would be rightfully told that I should either make my own, or learn to appreciate the works being created. Granted video games are an entire medium rather than a musical genre but the same applies. Games, at least currently are very much made by guys (with numerous notable execptions as this thread demonstrates) for pretty much other guys, and if you accept the fact that its ok for guys to make games for other guys, you can't really cry foul if they all do. It's an unfortunate situation where I think its justified to say that no one individualy did anything wrong, but it can have some unfortunate consequences.