Blackface was done to ENTERTAIN white people by degrading black people.  It was appealing to a white demographic to make them feel superior.  It wasn't done out of spite.  It wasn't done specifically to degrade black people.    

White people didn't think enough about black people back then to intentionally.   If it didn't make white people laugh it wouldn't of existed.

The MSG5 character was done to appeal to men, by objectifying women.  If that woman was dressed like a regular soldier, in a soldier outfit, people wouldn't find it offensive, and the woman would still be attractive as hell and appeal to the male demographic.

I mean

Works just as well as

With the added benefit of not looking stupid. (or offensive.)

Blackface performances were feeding of the spite that some white people held towards black people because of their own notion of superiority. Blackface appealed to this by degrading black people to create a gap enabling some white people to feel superior. And yes of course some people were entertained by it, if no one was then they would have been unable to do so, and therefore I did not feel the need to specifically mention that fact.

And as to your example, I agree with you 100% and think that if anything having to many over sexualized characters not only takes away from the narrative by being over the top but takes away from the impact that sexy characters or scenes can have. But some people like over the top sexy designs more than normal more realistic one's.

Also in regards to your comparison, despite being more clothed do you not appreciate the women in the picture for their objective characteristics? I mean what do know about their peronalities or individuality? What is the difference in appreciating a sexy character who wears more or less clothes? How can you claim to know the MGS5 character have been objectified as you have not been able to play the game and determine if they failed to provide her with characteristics and individuality beyond her design?

I just don't understand why we can no longer appreciate the objective characteristics that people have, without being accused of disregarding their personality?

Did you actually watch the video.. because it gave way different definitions of idealization and objectification then that.

As for waiting for MGS5... I mean i think we can make some guesses based on MGS general writing of female characters in the past and in general, the juvenile undertones of the series. (In dealing with sex.)

And the oversexulized character designs like in MGS5 feed on men's feelings of superiority towards women and the believe that men are superior and a woman's looks should be based soley on what men find attractive by giving her ridcuilious pointless clothing that doesn't make sense.  See also female armour in fantasy.

Fistly, I obviously meant that they were going a subsection of the male demographic, the one's who appreciate sexual appeal in their games. Not all games appeal to everyone and some choose to go for a smaller demographic in exchange for a higher percentage of said demographic.

And yes some men do sometimes want different things from female characters then they do from male characters. I can honestly say a women in a bikini appeals to me more than a man in a pair of swimming trunks, and many men would say the same. Do I always want sexy female characters? No I don't.

If a game company said that they wanted to appeal to the Korean demographic by releasing a new MMORPG over their, would you then say "not all Koreans like MMORPG therefore you are descriminating against Koreans? I guessing you would not start talking in absolutes like you did before.

And the reason why the sexy cosplay sells is not because some women (NOT ALL) want to look scantily clad, but want attention from men who like how they look, or identify with a character that happens to be sexy.

I agree.  There's nothing wrong with appealing specifically to one demographic even if it offends another.

Lets bring back some of the old character designs that were deemed offensive to specific groups.

For example.

(note.  Sarcasm!)

And the oversexulized character designs like in MGS5 feed on men's feelings of superiority towards women and the believe that men are superior and a woman's looks should be based soley on what men find attractive by giving her ridcuilious pointless clothing that doesn't make sense.  See also female armour in fantasy.

1) How can we claim to now MGS5 has been objectified without playing it?  I already explained this.  Do you not read posts fully because you keep asking for stuff that's been already provided.

Previous Kojima works make it more then reasonable to guess that to be the case.  If someone has a history of writing of sterotypically racist characters, and you suddenly see a desciription from his next book that takes the notch up to 11... i'd say it's fair to think.  "uh oh."

2)  You can totally appreciate people physical charactersitics.  It's just a matter of doing it in a way that's not objectifying.  Aka reducing them to an object.  That's what objectifying means.  Seriously, actually watch the link earlier.

A character who fights a war in Bikini's and pantyhose is going to be objectified no matter how fleshed out their character is.  

Not nessisairly.

While captialism is extremely efficent at refining products to mass marketability.  Things that don't matter can persist, just because they don't matter and used to matter at some point.

A sexy character might not cause anyone to buy a game anymore, or at least not a large amount of people, but it wont turn anyone off from a game either.  Or at least not many, because even with the gigantic amount of female gamers around now a days they sort of grew up with this, in this culture, so while it annoys them and they roll their eyes, they still buy it because they want to play a videogame.