Less bro-centric or more LGBT friendly? Which is it? Surely not both at once?

I feel many good experiences are being denied to LGBT people when others automatically brand a game anti-diversity without context or reason. They often fail to make a connection between relatable or well thought out and well written experiences as opposed to just making it an LGBT-positivity contest or mandatory quota obedience test. This kind of logic is absurd in that a badly written LGBT character in a bad game mechanics and narrative wise can be considered LGBT friendly while a positive experience no matter what caliber will be rejected because of the logic that LGBT people can understand only LGBT people in media.
People are following this dogma that focusing on one particular set of traits such as sexual orientation or skin color make good characters or make characters that are more welcoming. This also assumes people not being able to play as a certain type of character in a story regardless of context is still bad. People making such arguments seldom realize they may be asking the artists to alter the original work itself. They also never open their mind to the possibility that the current way people are represented are good AND the very thought that an LGBT friendly experience may come from a game without a playable LGBT lead character.
I also see a fixation on particular characteristics and insistence without proof that the inclusion of these characteristics into a playable character will be somehow a magic formula for bringing in more people. This I believe to be false considering no characteristics of humans are so different enough that the exclusion or inclusion of those will ever add anything to the inclusiveness. Most commonly this is gender. To people who think so, I cite the following examples :

1.Alien movie franchise: it has a female lead character but it is a cult classic most people enjoyed because people were able to relate to the protagonist's characteristics. The emphasis being the fact that the protagonist could've very easily been someone with the personality characteristics Ada Wong or Jill from the RE movies, hence still be of the same gender but wouldn't have created the same emotion as the original character.
2.Tomb Raider 2013-despite the only playable character being female of unknown sexual orientation and no sexual content to exercise the player's own, the game was enjoyed by people of all genders.
3.Candy Crush- fucking retarded casual bullshit that is played by mostly everyone despite gender not being in the game at all.

From such and many other examples, I have become to believe that gender in games does not matter unless the game deals with aspects that concern gender in the story. I find the delusion that having an evil LGBT character is bad to be a completely off the rails crackhead barinfart considering the fact that they do not take into consideration whether the particular characters are evil because of them being LGBT or for more common and grounded reasons and gender is just thrown in.

Also; considering gaming has a mechanical side and a narrative side with varying interplay between both from individual game to game, I find the notion of demanding something in one aspect of the narrative component, in this case, a character conforming to an idea that is held to be diverse by the people making the demands; to be utterly retarded and infantalization of the minority the game is being demanded to cater to.

My 2c even though I will probably post more.
In some games? What about TW3? It is set completely in a different universe where such people may not even exist. Why dogpile on TW3? I don't see people campaigning for more disabled people in shadow of mordor. So please respond as to what ''some games'' mean and why you think no game can have a universe without such stuff as gender or race.

Far Cry 4
You play as Ajay. He is not white and he is from Asia. Does that qualify or are you implying there needs to be certain purity of race that people need to be able to see to be fully immersed?