@avistew:
But by pushing the genders in codified categories like that, you’re saying I need to play as a female or as a tank guy, neither of which I have any interest in.
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that people understand that "male tank and female healer" is clumsy and simplistic, but then act like "female tank and male hunter" is something special.

People get hung up on this idea that if you say "women are different from men," you're prescribing behavior. I think it's because people like saying "nobody dares tell me what I can't do!" and patting themselves on the back for being unconventional and defying traditional roles. But you're never going to find anyone who fits the "traditional" definition of masculine or feminine 100% — not because it's an invalid definition, but because it's a generalization. It's not supposed to apply to everyone 100%.

Saying that there's no difference between women and men is just another, more subtle way of saying that "different" is bad. But there are biological differences, and those extend to the brain. How much of the difference is innate and how much is defined by society? It doesn't matter at all. Things will be a lot better once people understand that something can still be valid even if it's not innate.

If you're a woman who likes to hunt or a woman who likes to bake, so what? If you're a man who gets excited about race cars or a man who gets excited about shoes, big deal. Once you understand that, then there shouldn't be anything controversial about saying, "you know, an awful lot of guys like to blow shit up, and an awful lot of women like to talk about their feelings." And you should be able to say that without anyone saying "No I don't fit that description because I think outside the box and therefore your observation is wrong and sexist."

Anyways, I feel like we have drifted from your original point here. Which I think is “since male-oriented games should have male characters as default, to have more female characters, we need more female-oriented games”.
No, that's not my point. I don't say that male-oriented games should have male characters. I say that male characters are predominant in games because the majority of them are made by guys for guys doing what they think is guy stuff. And taking that overwhelmingly male template and just making a cosmetic change does nothing to bring genuine femininity to games.

I'm also not saying that to have more female characters, you need more female-oriented game. That kind of segregation is basically what we have right now. I'm saying make female characters genuinely feminine, however the developer defines that, instead of just stand-ins for male characters.

What would you consider “female-oriented”, though? A game that’s not about speed or fighting? A game that relies on things other than physical strength?
Would adventure games fit that bill?
But then, to be “balanced”, does that means adventure games should have female leads by default or have a good reason not to? Or does the “male = default” apply to all videogames?
No, unless you still live in 1969 and still believe the world is that simple.

Saying "this type of game is for men and this is for women" doesn't make sense. Shooters don't have anywhere near the level of variety in story that adventure games do — they are with very few exceptions all about running around shooting guys and blowing stuff up. And again, I didn't say that shooters should have male characters, I said why they do.

Most of the examples of good female characters have already been mentioned — Broken Sword, Beyond Good and Evil, No One Lives Forever. There should be more strong female characters in game, nobody here is arguing against that. But Portal, Metroid, and Tomb Raider don't make the list.

@Matt:
But you’re wrong about GLaDOS: she’s clearly written as a passive-aggressive, smothering mother (e.g., “the only thing you’ve managed to break so far is my heart,” or “we’ve both said a lot of things you’re going to regret”).
You know, I might have to concede that one on account of my own bias. The beginning of the game (the part I liked) is all generic mad scientist parody. Once she develops a personality (the part where they lost me), she delivers a line that is word-for-word what a person I don't get along with used to say all the time. Once I got that image in my head, it didn't go away. (So I heard it as a parody of passive-aggressive smothering mothers delivered by a smug dude in his mid-30s, which is way too meta to be valid).

So, I guess, take that, sexist publishers. We have proof that there are examples of strong female characters in best-selling games: an insane, multi-armed artificial intelligence that kills with passive aggression.