Yeah, i have no issue with Dark Souls, i have issue with masking what is a socio-political position, under a "practicality" guise.
Practicality is a design choice that may or may not be relevant to the game's design rules.
So pointing out that heels aren't battle practical in Bayonetta is dumb, saying the same in Ghost Recon is not, but that is an argument that goes beyond sexual stuff: A big ass Berserk-like sword in Dark Souls makes (design) sense, in Kindome Come it'd look stupid and out of place.
But somehow this only came up when discussing sexy designs (on GAF and REE, that is).
TL;DR: If someone wants to make the argument that sexy designs are harmful, they should just say that, not try and justify that position with bullshit arguments about "functionality" or "practicality" of the design, when the game clearly isn't going for that vibe.
TBF, while I agree with you that practicality is often used in lieu of a societal argument, occasionally you do see realism-aiming games where the men are dressed practically and the women are not. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but over the years, I'm pretty sure I've seen some examples. But generally speaking, yeah, you're right that the practicality argument doesn't hold much water.
Yeah, that falls within the argument i'm making i think, basically: Is it really the design you're criticizing, or the sexualization in itself?
For example i didn't like the sexy stuff in MGSV, because it looked out of place design wise, and it went against the "serious" tone they were trying (and failing, but that's another story) to build, it fit better in the older MGS, because they had a bit more levity.
So i certainly wouldn't argue that sexual elements fit in any scenario, i'm sayin that, like anything else, they're a design element that may or may not be appropriate within the whole; and practicality plays by the same rules, sometimes there's a place for it, sometimes there isn't.
