I'm not reading through 200 pages of replies to see if this has been mentioned already, but at least I know none of what I am about to say is on the list of shitty counter-arguments. 1. Developers aren't "desperate for boobs," their job is to make a product that aligns with a specific creative design (to satisfy the guys that came up with it), make a game that will sell (to satisfy the publisher / investors), make it appealing and fun to play for the sector of the market the product is targeted at. Developers that can do all three make lots of games and have repeat successes. If you ask ANY developer who isn't wholly self-funded and has no obligations to anyone except their own creative vision whether they would rather sell to a majority of potential customers or a minority, you're going to get the same answer every time. That's why a great number of indie titles don't have this problem. Unemployment and potential poverty make excellent motivators. Personally, I'm utterly disgusted with how my employer does a great many things, but those things are done through me because it keeps my family comfortable. 2. If you want women to be treated like people, that's fine...encouraged, even. One of the things about video games that make them fun to play is the fact that none of the elements are treated like real people. In the body of your post, you want women to be treated like real people, but in the shitty counter-arguments you say that the women in the games have no agency and aren't real. The conviction someone has to buy a game because of trashbag bikinis is far greater than the desire to impose that same dress code on real women. Are there exceptions to this rule? Of course, very few. Those people aren't rational, decent human beings and wanting all of the women in the world to do what they want "just because" is less a sign of sexism but more a sign of serious mental illness. That illness manifests as sexist behavior in this instance, of course, and likely other awful behaviors (cruelty to animals, overall lack of empathy, etc). 3. "do you really want to objectify women that badly?" This is a bad talking point. 4. "Quiet breathing through her skin" this is also invalid. Quiet's presence on Motherbase is a problem for many reasons. First, none of the men trust her. Secondly, she's a woman set in a game that has already made it clear that it doesn't shy away from the topic of rape (see Ground Zeros). What's true for Ground Zeros is true for Phantom Pain. A woman in a predominantly male populated, isolated environment, where those men are combat trained is a dangerous place to be. Big Boss and Ocelot know this, which is why Ocelot mentioned that she . She can't refuse to wear clothes unless she was first offered them. Not only were they offered, the person who offered them was hospitalized. Quiet is also kept in a cage on the Medical Platform. This isn't to keep Quiet imprisoned, because her abilities allow her to come and go as she pleases. The cage is to keep her safe from being attacked by the men on Motherbase. While disciplined to the point of fanaticism, Diamond Dogs are still human, thus prone to human failure. Why am I going on about this since it's just some pixels and has no agency? That's an excellent question, since this is a second contradiction in the original post. But because you chose Quiet, I felt the explanation was needed. You also mentioned that a sports bra + shorts would be practical, when there's nothing practical about being in combat wearing shorts and a sports bra. Is there anything practical about what Quiet wear? No, but don't say that a sports bra and shorts is somehow practical. 5. I can remember a time when Final Fantasy games were "made for dudes" and the women in them were just "eye candy." That was back when they were sold in cartridge format, and if they didn't work, you blew into them. Yes, it's been that long. 6. This is actually quite hilarious and whoever said this is so utterly off the mark that it's not worth considering as a rebuttal. I feel like much of the anger you feel over this is because you're faced with such a large number of bad responses to your otherwise legitimate concern, and those are the ones you're choosing to base your response on rather than a larger picture. If games had a problem with sexualizing females, it's not a problem with games. Remember, their targets are consumers who want their products made certain way. It's the same as toys for kids, fashion magazines, sports drinks, fast food, cars, antidepressants, breakfast cereals, penis enlargement pills, shoes...literally everything you can market will be marketed outside it's practical use and made to invoke an emotional response because that's why people spend money on things they don't need. TL:DR, Take your hate out on consumers because they're the reason things are shitty, that goes for more than just video games. It goes for most everything wrong with life.