I can't seem to get along with GOG's quoting system no matter what I do.
Please, bear with me.

In response to the first part:

I see I should have expanded on this point.
I'm not familiar with the other examples and I haven't played Nier, I've only got a general idea about its story from Youtube videos and reading about the plot.

Would it work if it were a mom and her daughter? Yes.
Would the mother be presented the same way as Nier? Probably not.
I imagine she would be a magic user or a support character rather than a frontline fighter.

I'm happy with the game as it is.
Nier is the western version of the game (dad-daughter relationship was easier to sell in the west), the Japanese version had a brother-sister relationship.
The developers choose the story to be put into game form the way they did, that's their right and the game does not suffer for it.

The point wasn't about having a male or female lead.
It was about how the shadows the player fought had their own problems and were "human" emotion-wise despite humans thinking they were monsters (the final boss drove the point home by the game telling you that he's another dad trying to save his kid, the same thing the player was trying to do as Nier, especially after the boss' daughter released Nier's telling her father she wants the human girl to be able to live with her dad).

Arguing a "mandatory" gender swap on story basis is somewhat like going to a novel author and saying: "Why didn't you make the male lead a woman?!".
You don't have a problem with the game, you've got a bone to pick with its story.

(I remember seeing a review on GOG, I don't remember which game it was for, but if I remember right its title was "Women beware!" I hurried to read it excepting torture, rape or something else gruesome. Instead, someone complained about the character only being male without a female as an option. I had to laugh because it was a pompous title that made an elephant out of a molehill for no good reason.)

Let's try the opposite example, a game where a gender swap wouldn't work.

The Great Tournament had a mandatory male character.
The plot was that the player's character would go from a squire to a knight.
Sticking to at least a minimal amount of realism makes that impossible for a female.

And there's a scene where your mentor is trying to inspire ill-prepared soldiers for a longer battle and his speech goes along the lines:
"I know you're frightened and that you'd rather be doing something else. I'd much attend a tournament, fuck and drink so much I'd forget what I did by morning.
...
But as we were ordered by the king on this mission, we have to fulfill it.
So: fight for your families, your lives and the life of the man next to you.
Tonight might be the last time you see your home. Take a moment to remember it."

Would that speech work in a different context and not with male farmers turned into soldiers overnight? I doubt it.

I'm not arguing that not having the basic character customization of picking their sex is not a good thing, it is.
And I'm not arguing that fighting for equality and equal representation is bad either.

However, I did find being too extreme about small things (that are unimportant and besides the point), laughable.

Even if the sex choice of a character is locked, it can still be a good game and if there's a game I don't like I'll just go and play another I do like. There's no need to get super vocal about a tiny detail that isn't even the game's main point.

In response to the second part:

Sorry, but I'll have to laugh at that one. XD

If you meant to replay to the user I replied to I get it, but otherwise, it makes 0 sense.

Okami is a game takes a bunch Japanese myths and tales and builds its own story based on that cocktail.
You play as a wolf that happens to be the god of the sun (according to the hints in the game and the original lore of Amaterasu - the goddess of the sun, the PC is a she-wolf).

You occasionally fight demons that look literally like imps with paper masks instead of faces.
Mostly you use you divine brush to restore nature, feed wild animals and help people (the famous game mechanic is drawing in the game world to influence it, e.g. drawing a circle in the sky causes a sunrise).

To address another point, I think we can agree that at least 90% of video games are pure fiction.
They have almost no connection to reality.

Plus it's every player's right to play their (single player) game however they want.
Want to test the possible responses of a NPC, the may level if you've got the time? Why not?
Want to cheat if it's just your game and not multiplayer where you'd be hindering another player? If you like, go for it.

Extreme example: if someone plays as a sociopath for role-playing reasons (or just because they find it fun), it doesn't make them a sociopath in RL.

To be clear: I'm not defending or attacking anyone, I'm just presenting arguments.