If there is a demand from feminists that this or that sort of female or male character archetype to appear in games, then I think that's a good thing if games reflect those demands.
However, what is wrong when they demand the removal of certain character archetypes. The author is the owner of those characters. To say that the creation of another person is your property simply based on that character's gender is bizarre.
It is those who are mentally entrapped by the genders presented by reality which are demanding that gender representation in video games must be regulated.
Characters of that gender at not solely the possession of those who were assigned that same gender in reality.
To say that fictional male characters are the sole property of real males, and that fictional females the sole property of real females, is wrong.
Why do fiction need to become entangled in the genders of reality?
I can accept feminists' desire for this or that type of character to be presented. But they have no right to dispossess others of their own cherished fictional characters for reasons based on gender.
Even if a real man in the real world were to dress up as a transvestite and look incredibly sexy when doing so, he is not robbing real women of their sexuality in the process thereof.
Similarly, even if a real man creates a sexy woman in a game, he is not robbing other real women of their sexuality.
In video games, everyone can be any and all genders.
To believe that an individual's subjective sexuality should be limited to whatever gender they were assigned to in real life is nothing short of an attempt to limit the boundaries of sexual expression.
A woman depicting her ideal male in fiction is just one example of subjective sexual expression.
Furthermore, the expression of sexual attraction towards fictional characters is of merit in relativistically considering the subjects of sexualization within our own reality's culture. In our reality, in Japan, within the group of people who view fictional persons as subjects for sexual attraction, there are many persons who express little sexual desire for other real people.
The short path to sexual equality is not the one which burdens its travelers with the preconception that the ultimate subject of all persons' sexual desires is the "other" which exists in reality.
Rather, the shortest path to sexuality is to cultivate an understanding that not all people seek sexual and romantic fulfillment from reality and the "other" which exists in it, as well as a recognition that sexuality and human affairs (and love) are separate entities.
If one follows the sources of gender discrimination and gender roles to their cause, one will find that they are based in the cultural belief that we, as humans, must seek to satisfy our sexual and romantic needs through other individuals.
To say that one's creation is a depiction of another sex, and therefore consider it a depiction of the "other", is an expression of gender binarism.
The opposite sex = The "other"
The subject of sexual desire = The "other"
These are criteria established by none other than the heterosexual cultural norms of our own reality.