no.

I think they shouldn't give into pressure for the sake of pressure, but at the same time incorporating and properly representing different ethnicities, religions, sexualities, genders, etc. can lead to cool new game ideas that haven't been done before and actually increase diversity and creativity of games.

So it's not a matter of appeasing Tumbler SJW's, but instead allowing MORE freedom and creativity to experiment with new gaming ideas.

...

Word is also that Tanya was chosen as a DLC character because of the male/female ratio of the game.

We hear this nonsense when people want to pressure game developers into it with FFXV aswell. I totally agree. 

... I don't know man. While i don't really have interest on playing as a gay caracheter or also don't feel any need to have gay character on my game so i can enjoy, this doesn't mean that the one that appreciate it should just shut up and wait till someone decide to include them.

If consumers want to voice over what they want in their games, let them. Companies are not govnerment. They are not entiled to serve anyone, but nor is the consumer entitled to support everything that get on the market.

Besides, there is a misintrepertation on your part on what actually happened back there. First, the game had a bug that let people of the "same sex" marry. Them, nintendo fixed that bug(because that bug caused another problems too, like save data corruption). Them, people started complaining, but yet very litghed. Everything was doing ok so far, but them bill trinen gave a declaration saying that they didn't intended to make any social comentary with the game. That was when shit hit the fan.

In short, nintendo was like "not my problem" and on the internet all that people want is a reason to either praise or attack nintendo, so...

I agree on the comentary that bill gave, its not really nintendo's or any other gaming comany's responsability change the world were they launch their games, even because they put those everywhere, and since they are all independent nations, i think that they know what is better for them. But since nintendo is trying to go to all kinds of markets, them and theirs developers should know that if they want people to buy their games, they should respond to theirs inquires. I mean, they are selling it, after all, is not a monument on a park, is not a artpiece, it is a comercial product. They want money on all this. If they want to stick to their vision, fine, they have this freedom, but so do I to say what i want. If you are not really ready to put your creation out there so it can be judged if its worth it or not the money, its the consumer fault for criticzing so much?

Remenber, a while ago nintendo was under conservative parents pressure for letting rare launch the game conker bad fur day for N64, but they did anyway. In the end, dev and publisher are responsible for what have theirs names on it. Step on what you belive. What the point to work in the enterteiniment business if in the end, you are not putting out something that you want?

i concur with this

I think not including minorities, homosexuals and/or women in games shows a lack of creativity imo. Devs that put a lot more different personalities and character types into games show how observative of the world they are. Games used to cater mainly to white males because it was mainly white males/japanese males doing games but todays shows a different perspective.

If all of your characters have to be hetero white males because of the story then why not? But if all of your games portray no diversity of any kind then I think your imagination is very limited.

"On the other hand, if the developer is not discriminating, one can simply make a request or a suggestion to the said developer to include your group in their game. The game developer still retains their creative freedom and as such, could choose to accept or respectfully decline your suggestion. There should be no coercion."

Catering to an often small vocal minority of the subsets mentioned in the op and others IS an issue as some of your expamples in this post highlight-

People and companies want to be so quick to distance themselves from the "discrimination" tag, it does not matter if they agree or any actual discrimination is involved-   In todays reactionary social media, the only thing that matters is the "appearance" of discrimination or some oter flash point subject.

Or maybe it's just their creative decision to have white males as characters. And what does including homosexuals mean? Explicitly saying that character x is gay? As for women in games, I think there's plenty of representation. The only people not being represented are the non-white or non-black minorities.