I'm kind of confused about your message in the first part.

You're saying that the recent trend of making female characters less attractive doesn't actually exist?  Are you saying that it's an illusion?  You're maybe implying that the technology isn't as good now as it used to be so it's a lot harder to make a character that looks good?  Is that what happened to Concord?  Perhaps the event where people were upset because the main character of Stellar Blade didn't look "realistic" despite being based on an actual model didn't happen at all?

The fact that there ARE many characters popping up who seem to be made intentionally unattractive means that there ARE people who are opposed to attractive characters, or at least think that's what other people want.  I don't know how you can possibly get around that fact when these examples exist.

As far as historical inaccuracies in completely fictional universes go, I'm pretty sure people are okay with that.  After all, I've never heard developers claim anything about "ensuring an immersive and respectful representation" of a post-apocalyptic world or a fantasy kingdom with magic in it.

I get that you were trying to score some points there with another reference to something I didn't mention and haven't talked about but, honestly, that was kind of a silly attempt, especially since I don't have a problem with intentional deviations for the sake of the story.  You and whataboutisms are like Rick & Morty at this point.

You clearly are confused, because nothing in here has anything to do with what I've said.

1.) I didn't say anything about trends or technology.

2.) I didn't say anything about any character looking unrealistic.

People aren't generally taking issue with Eve's character model in Stellar Blade. They're taking more issue with how she is dressed and how the game trailers treat her. 

The people you're complaining about don't take issue with this:

They take issue with this: 

Examples of X existing is not proof of reason Y being fact.

Examples of X existing is also not proof of someone being opposed to Y. 

The existence of one thing is not opposition to another. 

The existence of ugly characters isn't proof of someone disliking attractive characters.

There's tons of room for different things. 

Maybe you want your city game to feel more grounded, so instead you have a more diverse range of characters - some skinny, some bigger, black and white. Maybe you intentionally make some characters look like models and some of  intentionally are made ugly. 

Maybe you want to tell the story of an ugly duckling. 

Maybe you intentionally want your character to feel more average. 

Maybe you just want more variety, maybe you think most characters are too attractive, and you want to stick out and make your character look a bit more average.

Again, there's room for all kinds of experiences. There is room for characters that are more sexually confident (Stellar Blade, Nier Automata), there's room for ugly characters, there is room for everything in between. There's room for goofy characters like Astro Bot. 

A lot of those games already do that. Those devs don't have to explain "this is why we made those choices".

I was just throwing out a rhetorical question, not aimed at you. I thought it was funny to think about, there seems to be a lot of overlap of people who take issue with unrealistic historical characters (even when they're actually wrong about those things), but never seems to have any issue with very obviously unrealistic dressed woman characters who happen to be attractive.

Also you still pretty clearly have no clue what a "whataboutism" is. 

The internet seems to be filled with "alternative takes" on concord characters, frankly, all the takes I have seen so far look lame, including this one. It doesn't mean that I think Concord characters are defensible, it just means that it's easy to criticise but it's not easy to create. Also, sexy =/= good. 

Last part first--no, you're just a liar.  I thought so before when you claimed that you only messed up because you were "tired" or something along those lines but it's clear after you keep doing the same thing over and over that you're lying through your teeth.  You keep quoting people then trying to change the conversation to something else.  What I said had absolutely nothing to do with Assassin's Creed but that's where you wanted to take this.  You are intensely dishonest.  You don't try to discuss a topic, you try to win imaginary points.  

"B-but ... historical inaccuracies!  The other side was talking about historical inaccuracies!  That has nothing to do with this but I'm going to use it shift the attention to where I want it to go!"

Yeah, right.  People know about your bullshit.

As for the first part, maybe you're right and this isn't a particular path developers are taking.  Only time can answer that question. However, there is no technical reason that I can see that characters in western videogames should get less attractive--and yes, we're talking about videogames, OF COURSE we're talking about technology--unless it's by design.

As for Stellar Blade, people were literally complaining about the model being too pretty, that it resulted in unrealistic beauty standards.  You can't pretend that didn't happen or that it has nothing to do with this topic.

I apologized for being exhausted for writing a post where I gave an inappropriate comparison. 

A "whataboutism" has nothing to do with "changing the subject".  Is that seriously what you think that word means? 

A whataboutism is where you basically respond to an accusation, with another accusation. 

For example: 

A: "Donald Trump raped someone"
B: "Yeah what about the time Joe Biden sniffed someone's hair".

It's a whataboutism, because you're completely deflecting criticism instead of addressing anything. Person A has done nothing to address the point about Donald Trump being a rapist. If person A had thrown out some reasonable doubt about Trump being rapist, before bringing up Joe Biden, that wouldn't be a whataboutism anymore. 

Do you feel that I'm not addressing your points? I'm certain you disagree with a lot of my points, am I deflecting away from your points?

I was not talking about Assassin's Creed. You're literally the one that brought up Assassin's Creed.
I actually had Battlefield in mind, when I brought up historical accuracy. 

If bringing up other topics is dishonest in itself, then most people here are being dishonest and trying to win imaginary points. 

That's what the whole conversation about ugly western video game characters is. We've gone to a different topic much broader than the one that we started from (talking about Concord failing).

Well yes, but it is not driven by technology. 

These are artistic choices being made, and there are tons of valid reasons for it. 

I haven't seen this. On ResetEra and Reddit, I mostly saw people talk about her being overly sexualized.

Is there a particular website/thread where you saw someone talk about "unrealistic beauty standards"? 

And is it a common issue you've seen expressed? People are going to say anything about anything, that doesn't mean those are widespread enough to be worth talking about. I'm sure I could find someone somewhere complaining that Eve is too ugly. That doesn't mean it's a common opinion.

Didnt the guy from IGN Italy literally say the character didn't look anything like a real woman? And the guy from digital foundry said she looked unrealistic? I never actually heard people complaining about the outfits, thought I suspect they did. But I think to say people weren't complaining about how she looked is not accurate. This is really the only forum I get on (I read comments on IGN and PushSquare I guess) so I'm probably not a great witness to the larger audience.

As for the debate on how to make characters look. I dont mind different looks. I think Kay Vess (may not have that name right) looks totally fine, except she is uncanny valley'd. They just, from a technical standpoint, didnt seem to make her face right. I dont think its because she was made to look unattractive, I think it was a technical failure. I can understand that players want to play people that look like themselves, hence, character creators. Which I love. I usually make an idealized version of myself (younger, skinnier, more muscular). Or for a 2nd character one that looks like my wife. Sometimes i see people on videos playing as completely wild, crazy beings...thats...not for me.

Its rare that I see characters I wouldnt want to play as, even in fighting games where there are like 20 options. I think there was an extremely overweight guy in the mortal kombat games who was drunk? I did kind of avoid him. And I've stated my thoughts on the character designs in Concord already. My guess is everyone has thier own threshold for how people are allowed to look.

Oh, Battlefield!  Yeah, Battlefield, THAT'S what we were talking about, wasn't it?  Yeah ... no.  We weren't talking about Battlefield at all.  Were we?  Do you remember us talking about Battlefield?  No, seriously, were we talking about Battlefield AT ALL?  Nah.  Then why did you bring it up?  What did it have to do with the conversation?  Go ahead, I want to hear about it. 

And, yes, I've seen people talk about unrealistic beauty standards for Stellar Blade, though, amusingly enough, those comments stopped after IGN France had to apologize and it was revealed that Eve was based on a real model.

"PLEASE don't support Stellar Blade.

The game is an insult to women and feminism, setting unrealistic beauty standards that we as a society should not encourage."

"The game's creator adds to this by expressing his desire to see characters much more beautiful than himself in video games, reinforcing sexist stereotypes and unrealistic beauty standards."

And there you are being dishonest again.  I talk about how you QUOTE people then change the subject but of course you leave out where I said "quote" and pretend that I'm talking about people bringing up different topics in the thread at large.  Bloody hell.  Stop it.

I hadn't seen these comments beforehand. 

It was apparently Eurogamer, not Digital Foundry. 

This gets to what I saying in the last sentence in my post above though. Is it a common issue? Or is it just a few cherry picked people expressing it? 

Like I said before, you can find someone saying literally anything. That doesn't mean those are widely expressed views. 

And vice versa. The fact that I haven't seen people/have seen very few people make those complaints also doesn't mean it's not a common complaint people have. It's just not my understanding of the issue at hand here. 

We are all in our own bubbles. Its pretty easy for stuff to be missed and it's also pretty easy for misunderstandings to happen. 

I do try to get out of my bubble, and check to see what r/conservative and other conservatives groups think of things. And sometimes it seems like they make a big deal out of things I don't think are important, or they have a wildly different interpretation of what something meant. (Like how someone could argue that "eat the rich" literally means they want to eat Bill Gates and co. Even though the vast majority of left wingers would understand that it's not literal). 

Did you know people can respond to multiple people in the same post? I can also put stuff directly in the comment that is unrelated to the quote. 

You do pretty much the same thing as me here. This comment is not directed at Curl, you're obviously not asking him why there's a "war on attractive female characters".

Curl didn't say anything about Bayonetta. So why do you get off on bringing up unrelated subjects?