Let me simplify it for you then since you're having trouble understanding the ongoing discussions that went on for pages.
Nier is a well-designed, good game with a sexy protag and said protag did not harm game sales and therefore redesigning her to be nonsexual serves no benefit to the game other than to appease those who find her offensive. And if you had been following this thread for a while you'd know that argument has come up before from myself and others (so kindly dispense with the logic nonsense), how there are other, bigger factors at play to a game's financial success beyond reskinning or covering her up.
Do I still hold the general sentiment that "sex sells" and it played some factor with Nier? Of course, not in the simple sense that some have been repeating ad nauseuam, but in the sense that basic attractiveness of a character or cast subconsciously nudges and draws us all into to want to see more and is hardly ever a hindrance to sales: it often just exists in a game and people consume it without a problem as they move past to the meat of their purchase. Throughout this thread, the argument has come up that games like DOA don't sell very well compared to highly marketed blockbusters as a sort of proof that "see! sex doesn't sell," with implications that getting rid of all that, redesigning the characters to be more PG-friendly, etc, would greatly improve matters. Games like Nier are proof that this is complete BS... that genre, niche, developer reputation, who's directing, gameplay refinement, so much more is at play.