There's probably at least one asshole or racist somewhere working on a game that I don't know of, so I don't see the value in this level of boycotting.
If I see a game I'm interested in, I play it.
If I see a game I'm interested in, I play it.
I didn't have anything to bring in to the discussion as the previous answers I got were clear. I understand that there would be huge doubts from anything coming from a company with that history. Personally I only knew about some of their previous actions on this. I just wondered about the reception of the respons from the company on the ad that was used since it kind of looked like something well thought instead of anything related to their previous actions. But that's just from my point of view.Breaking down the "one person" mantra for CDPR, since OP has chosen to not actually join any of the numerous discussions on these points and wants to relate to it.
It amazes me that a maybe 100 people dev team is more important to some "gamers" than millions of people affected by sexism, racism and many other bad things. But it's a bad argument anyway to begin with.
Basically this.It's literally the same as any other reason to not purchase something. It all boils down to "I don't want to buy that". That's it. That should be the end of it. Sure, maaaayybe if they actually played the game they'd have a good time, but I could say the same thing to anybody skipping a game for any reason. And yet, no one seems to ever take issues to the same degree for those reasons.
Same people will be "sad" if nobody buys the game because of that person and the other hundreds of people lose their job.
It's just another factor that affects my purchasing decisions. Maybe it'll be the deciding factor, maybe it won't, depends on the circumstances. No one's entitled to me buying their product, so I can decide based off whatever stupid reasons I want.
What I find to be more strange than that are the people who seem to be genuinely frustrated with other people making purchasing decisions for ethical reasons. I often get the sense that they feel like they're being compelled to do the same even if no one has actually asked them to or suggested that they should.
Honestly....never heard of him.
More likely cause I dont follow threads about developers/publishers that much.
I just had to google him to find out.
I only come here for announcements and information for new games and games I play lol.
Edit: Oh I heard about the controversy surrounding the game but not familiar with this specific person.
Same thing with the THQ thing, I heard about what happened but dont really know the names of any one who was involved.
There's probably at least one asshole or racist somewhere working on a game that I don't know of, so I don't see the value in this level of boycotting.
If I see a game I'm interested in, I play it.
A bigot / racist / homophobe / whatever is involved in a game but it's also possible a LGBTQ+ / PoC / Minority might also be developing the same game.
If I don't support the former's game then at the same time I don't support the latter who actually needs it.
Pretty succinct explanation, I pretty much do the same thing. I forget what the term is but what you describe in the second paragraph is similar to the reaction people who are vegan or don't drink alcohol get when they abstain from eating animal products/drinking, it's somehow seen as a judgement on the other person's decision, when it could just be totally independent.
Its stupid, buying games that go to companies like THQN who tacitly approve of places that are bigoted and have child porn.
It's a shitty comparison. Not buying a game because of a high level company decision is different vs not buying a game because a single developer is a shithead
The VP of THQN is not a "single developer shithead"Oh lawd, we still upset about that? lol
It's a shitty comparison. Not buying a game because of a high level company decision is different vs not buying a game because a single developer is a shithead
I did respond on this point earlier, quoted it below:I didn't have anything to bring in to the discussion as the previous answers I got were clear. I understand that there would be huge doubts from anything coming from a company with that history. Personally I only knew about some of their previous actions on this. I just wondered about the reception of the respons from the company on the ad that was used since it kind of looked like something well thought instead of anything related to their previous actions. But that's just from my point of view.
Still comes off as tone deaf if all this is is another large corporation abusing people's bodies for profit; they are a large company selling a video game to make a load of money. If there doesn't pan out to be some wider nuanced theme surrounding trans and non binary people then they're literally enacting that which they claim to hate.
As they've not earned any good will - rather the opposite - and seem to have zero care in reaching out to the community to reassure them and dive into how "Gender in Cyberpunk 2077" really is. They even declined to elaborate further on the design with the trans woman writer of the Daily Dot piece, just forwarding her to the Polygon article.
If you're known for mocking a sensitive topic and then claim to care deeply about it, maybe you should actually make some effort in showing that care and how you're handling it. So this whole "we're trying to show how bad companies are" reasoning becomes a little questionable when you don't seem to be doing anything to distinguish yourself from them.
Yes, I didn't have any further things to add as it was clear. I wasn't a 100% aware about the whole CDPR situation, only about the wont erase tweet.
Ah, alright. Just wondered if there was anything else causing confusion around people choosing not to buy some games.Yes, I didn't have any further things to add as it was clear. I wasn't a 100% aware about the whole CDPR situation, only about the wont erase tweet.
.I just play what I want to play. The only thing I lookup is if the game is good or not.
If I skipped games because of piece of shit people that worked on It, I wouldn't have played the amazing Kingdom Come: Deliverance.
Wow, who said that?
I believe that would be Jonathan Aryan Jafari, or "JonTron", the YouTube personality of Hungarian-Persian explaining why he sympathizes with white nationalism against people like his own parents.
Oh that guy. Never liked him anywayI believe that would be Jonathan Aryan Jafari, or "JonTron", the YouTube personality of Hungarian-Persian explaining why he sympathizes with white nationalism against people like his own parents.
I can understand people doing this but also, kinda can't. Games are made by hundreds of people, just because you can name one kinda shitty, or extremely shitty person doesn't mean they should represent the whole imo. At worst there are multiple ass-hats even on games without controversy.
I respect peoples decision to skip out on a game though if they think it makes a difference or they really are just that offended by a person being involved. I'm all for voting with your wallet in these situations. Personally have not had this happen yet, but if I had a game I was excited for have some dude, I dunno spouting the N word or something I'd hard out on it most likely.
At the same time I don't follow individual devs or dev teams enough to really know who many of these people are.
Really easy:
Do I want to support shitheads? No, so I'll skip it.
Let me quote you this fantastic post, whichs explains why your argument might not work in most cases.So you don't play any video games then? Or even buy any mass produced products?
Because I can guarantee you there is at least one "shithead" that has worked on every game and every product you own.
Put me in the the camp of "this puritan self righteousness is insane", because if you actually consistently apply the logic then you wouldn't buy a single mass produced product.
Honestly it seems kinda petty and vindictive to me, and as pointed out above completely illogical. If you don't buy products that shitty people have worked on you simply don't buy any products then, so why would it matter that you know who the "shitty" person is and what they've done specifically? So you can crow about how moral and righteous you are, and also name and shame?
I don't think anyone expects people to, like, go out of their way & look up credits to a Ubisoft game with 1500 people who have worked on it and check out that no one involved in the making of the game/product has ever done anything condemndable. Just maybe consider acting on information you DO have. It's up to you if you let a single sexual assaulter or racist VA affect your purchase.
Personally, I have too many things (games, movies/TV series, books, music, manga/comics) to buy so it's not all that painful for me to drop individual releases even for what others might feel are fairly light reasons, if I feel there is reason to. Not buying Dragon Quest XI because a relatively significant portion of my purchase would go to support a war crime denier & massive bigot who actively uses his money & influence to opress minorities & spread his hateful ideology is really nothing too significant away from my life when I can just spend that on thousands of other pieces of art/entertainment that I can enjoy which are made by people who aren't such massive shitgibbons (based on my current knowledge).
So you don't play any video games then? Or even buy any mass produced products?
Because I can guarantee you there is at least one "shithead" that has worked on every game and every product you own.
Put me in the the camp of "this puritan self righteousness is insane", because if you actually consistently apply the logic then you wouldn't buy a single mass produced product.
Honestly it seems kinda petty and vindictive to me, and as pointed out above completely illogical. If you don't buy products that shitty people have worked on you simply don't buy any products then, so why would it matter that you know who the "shitty" person is and what they've done specifically? So you can crow about how moral and righteous you are, and also name and shame?
So you can crow about how moral and righteous you are, and also name and shame?
Let me quote you this fantastic post, whichs explains why your argument might not work in most cases.