No, it’s not the same. I’ll be explaining exactly why in pedantic detail, but let’s start off with that.
In the ever-circuitous debate over sexualized video game characters, or entertainment media in general, a false equivalency is often thrown upon the table as a means of ending the debate. Whenever a complaint is raised about some suggestive character art of female with an ample bosom, sooner or later another person will label a male character with gratuitously exposed musculature as the exact same concern in reverse.
Superficially, the logic holds water. More often than not we see roided up beefcakes wearing just as little – if not less – clothing than their female counterparts. No matter the size of Lara Croft’s polygonal breasts, she has at least two more articles of clothing on than over half the cast of Altered Beast. The amount of proportions skewed in both cases broadcast unattainable ideals of their gender. He-Man is more naked than any Barbie doll, so there totally isn’t an issue here; it’s just game developers playing to the lowest common denominator of sex fantasies on both sides, right?
Simply put: no it is not. That’s not to say women and gay men are not perfectly capable of finding these unrealistic behemoths to be attractive, but that is not the prime (or even secondary) purpose of their having such figures. Both the dominant, muscle-strewn Warrior and the over-endowed Sorceress play to similar thrills in the mind of the straight male audience before anyone else. To help clarify, let’s take a look at the hyper-masculine video game icon: God of War’s Kratos.