Yeah, I'm aware of that. Bayonetta is what I'd call sex-positive feminism. But the same can't apply to Quiet, they are completely different characters. Bayonetta is a strong, sexy female character. Quiet is a candy for the male masses. I think you'd notice the diference if you play both. 

EDIT: And no, I didn't say every women in every videogame is portrayed with sexism, don't put sentences in my mouth that I've never said, thank you ;)

@ your edit, you referring to my second paragraph? I said "hopefully you see that a naked woman isn't sexism" you even quoted it? If you wouldn't mind explaining where I suggested that every women in every videogame is portrayed with sexism, would love to know where that has come from.

"Because yes"? You either haven't played the game, you are very early in the game, you have missed some very important cutscenes, or you are turning a blind eye of the reason of why she wears little to no clothes to claim "sexism".

Quiet is a candy for the masses that like women (there are lesbians, you know) and there's nothing wrong with that. And to imply that Quiet is not a strong character, just leads me to believe you haven't played the game at all. She is badass, and if you think she is weak just because she's "Quiet", there's a cannon reason for that too, which leads her to act on her own plenty of times.

I liked the days when "sexism" meant to discriminate according to someone's sex. Emphasis on "discriminate". Today the word has lost all meaning to "what might make women uncomfortable"

Nope, sorry, that was an answer to another user above, it's just that I don't know how to quote twice :(.

@Derek89, yes, I've played the game, and yes, I know the reason why she has to be naked. I just don't mention it because of spoilers. And it's a stupid reason, if you ask me. I love the game, but that was silly. Let's make a reason to have her naked in the game, it's got nothing to do with the fact that a hot chick with a sniper gun semi-naked sells videogames, isn't it? 

but semi naked women have nothing to do with sexism...

Gamergate was a scandal where people argued that the dev of depressionquest (I think that's what it was called) had sex with reviewers in order to get good review score on her games. This was sparked when her ex-boyfriend, who she had just broken up with, took to reddit and claimed that she did this while they were dating. There was no evidence that this happened at all. The campaign was hijacked by mysoginists who hate women, and called for this dev to kill herself repeatedly. It made gamers look terrible, despite the fact that it was just a very loud, and very small minority of gamers. By the end of it, a lot of the people yelling weren't even gamers, just random terrible people that piggybacked off a perverted cause in order to yell at women. 

Of course not, it's the way the characters are portrayed and why are they portrayed in that way. 

Correction: Quinn/Gjoni were part of the #Quinnspiracy, #Gamergate was adopted to separate that out, and focus solely on Grayson's (and other journalists) transgressions in this regard.  And no, it wasn't about review scores, because Grayson never gave it a review.  He referred to it positively on two separate occassions, while never disclosing his relationship (per Lynn Walsh of the SPJ, actual editors would never assign a person in a relationship or even a remote connection to a story, on said story, and she actually helped write the SPJ code of ethics which is recognized worldwide), he also failed to disclose financial contributions, and, last but not least, that his name appears in the credits of Depression Quest.

Gameragate is a movement for "ethics" in games journalism in the misguided belief that games journalism isn't just an extended marketing arm of the game industry.

Seriously, some people take video games way too seriously. If you live in the US, go after the real news journalism instead, they have real problems that are actually damaging to society.

Not sure if you're from the US or not, but I'm going to go ahead and assume the latter.  The problem with tackling news journalism, in the manner you speak is there's no real recourse but boycotting the publication, writing to advertisers etc...  Or, on the very very extreme end, amending the US Constitution (1st Amendment), to ensure News Broadcasters/Corps are held to a higher standard than the rest of the populace.  The reason is, due to Free Speech (which is generally a good thing), it's actually possible for News Orgs to publish/report on absolutely bogus horseshit, with zero rammifications.  Boycotting/Advertiser campaigns however, won't be as effective due to the wide partisan divide in the US.  News Orgs enjoy a pretty healthy viewership, and it's nearly impossible to get all of one side, or the other, or both to work together.

With gaming, on the other hand, it's much easier to force change(and make no mistake, it has been effective, and it has forced change.  Most gaming sites have updated their ethics policies at this point).  While there's a ton of infighting between gamer's regarding many different things,  it's much easier to have these kinds of consumer revolts be effective.  When Intel receives an onslaught of complaints from one of their core demo's, that someone they support through ad revenue is basically attacking that demo group, that makes Intel, or BMW, or Mercedes etc... pause.  Additionally, the use of the archiving tool, completely destroys all ad revenue from any site at all, which is actually a pretty neat idea.  Archive the link, share it on social media, and people can read the offending article, without contributing clicks to their ad-stream.

That same kind of strategy simply hasn't been achievable with mainstream journalism.