-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Polygon: CDPR responds to sexualized trans advertisement in CyberPunk 2077 (Read Staff Post Before Posting)
- Thread starter BAD
- Start date
I think one thing that's important to understand is that when we're criticizing a game's marketing, we understand that it may not properly represent the game. Which is, you know, a 100% valid criticism to aim at something's marketing. Whether it's this or how Marvel's Avengers was presented to us, those represent a companies decisions. Those decisions are in these cases telling people the game is not for them, and that might not even be true.
But the answer isn't to stifle the discussion about the marketing and tell people to judge the final product. If the marketing misrepresents the final product and portrays something as exclusionary or problematic that isn't, the sooner that marketing is called out the better.
Think about this criticism as akin to 'why aren't they showing gameplay in this trailer?'
However the game turns out, marketing can and should be discussed and criticized. Just as technical problems in E3 builds should be discussed now, rather than waiting with fingers crossed that said issue might be gone by release.
If I take CDPR's comments on face value (and I see no reason not to), this image needed to be presented with context so as not to alienate and hurt people. It wasn't. And that certainly isn't on the people alienated or hurt.
But the answer isn't to stifle the discussion about the marketing and tell people to judge the final product. If the marketing misrepresents the final product and portrays something as exclusionary or problematic that isn't, the sooner that marketing is called out the better.
Think about this criticism as akin to 'why aren't they showing gameplay in this trailer?'
However the game turns out, marketing can and should be discussed and criticized. Just as technical problems in E3 builds should be discussed now, rather than waiting with fingers crossed that said issue might be gone by release.
If I take CDPR's comments on face value (and I see no reason not to), this image needed to be presented with context so as not to alienate and hurt people. It wasn't. And that certainly isn't on the people alienated or hurt.
Women are hypersexualized in advertising, whether it is showing tight fitting clothes around nipples or a penis.
That said, there's a difference between this game simply recreating those conditions and actually commenting on them.
Ah yeah I forgot the 48-minute demo wasn't censored, but they definitely censored the E3 stuff
User Warned: Hostility
Fuck out my face, nigga.
I asked a question about them treating people of color and their vernacular as stereotypical. Which isn't off base given what we saw of V's friend in the trailer last year (I forget his name). His dialogue was cringeworthy and seemed to indicate they didn't have a ton of diversity in the room when they wrote it.
I know one article doesn't tell us anything, hence me saying I needed an explanation from them. There's nothing "up in arms" about my post. Take your weird ass defense elsewhere.
I mean yeah, but this dude approached her right after he saw it pop as an issue.
I don't think that's true. Just quickly scrubbing through the gameplay footage you can see a lot of ads and clubs
Interesting so to show how absurdly sexualized ads are they use an overly sexualized minority group to get the point across. Because this group is seen as a vile and disgusting group of people by most men in the world and what better way to depict it then to use this group of people.
Because it's hard to show a vile and disgusting depiction of an ad by using overly sexualised women to get the point across. Since most men would just find it socially acceptable and ok because it's a beautiful woman.
The irony in this is fucked up.
Because it's hard to show a vile and disgusting depiction of an ad by using overly sexualised women to get the point across. Since most men would just find it socially acceptable and ok because it's a beautiful woman.
The irony in this is fucked up.
So they defended the issue of why there's a sexualised trans or NB model in the gameworld, the bit that didn't bother me so much...
But did i miss the bit where they addressed how the text of the pinup ("chroManticore") seemingly alludes to the the "secret masculinity" of trans women and the fetishisation of "best of both worlds" type associations with trans women?? Cause that's the bit I thought was the bigger issue.
Anyway I hope their definitely woke sexualisation of all genders fairly will include some gigantic visible erections on male coded bodies and some masculine models with vaginas.
But did i miss the bit where they addressed how the text of the pinup ("chroManticore") seemingly alludes to the the "secret masculinity" of trans women and the fetishisation of "best of both worlds" type associations with trans women?? Cause that's the bit I thought was the bigger issue.
Anyway I hope their definitely woke sexualisation of all genders fairly will include some gigantic visible erections on male coded bodies and some masculine models with vaginas.
I think it's a stretch to insist previous instances of hostile PR statements toward trans people (that went unaddressed) are tangential to a trans representation discussion like this.
I think it's a well reasoned response. It's just a tough sell in the world we live in today with representation, struggles that comes with that, we kinda have to step back a little and not see everything as a win or a loss or pushing reality one way. Still, remains to be seen what the game is like as a whole, you can have things like this but there needs to be other viewpoints, stories that don't conform to that corporate reality push.
It is a serious suggestion. I don't want to read someone who may or may not have good intentions giving their spin on a thing they did. I want to hear from the people who actually might be impacted.
Eh...the intentions were good, but it still doesn't pass the look test. Maybe in-game it's given more context to avoid this kind of blowback?
I really hope that Cyberpunk will get back to the Witcher 1's roots in terms of uncomfortable threads when it comes down to social commentary. To this day, this game is easily unparalleled in its depiction of minorities going to the extremes to feel heard aswell as pure racism and whatnot, while also hard judging the main character for embracing too closely the apolitical nature of his status
Fully hoping that Cyberpunk will gun for feelings of disgust regarding the actions you'll make / not make. I was also very happy to know that its fully possible to do an entire non lethal run. Will make for some multiple level of readings depending of the choices people will make
Fully hoping that Cyberpunk will gun for feelings of disgust regarding the actions you'll make / not make. I was also very happy to know that its fully possible to do an entire non lethal run. Will make for some multiple level of readings depending of the choices people will make
Folk are really splitting hairs on this blankly being okay because it's intended to be offensive, when there's a difference between something being offensive because it reinforces and encourages prejudices vs. providing commentary and perspective to help dismantle said prejudices. It's worth digging into the nuance that divides the two.
And I think it's a stretch to say a pr person running a twitter account for a different company than CDPR posting transphobic tweets and getting fired over it has any influence on the CDPR's artist's vision.
That's a good response that makes me feel better about the game.
However, I can't help but have the feeling that this isn't the worst we are about to see. I hope I am wrong but I just can't shake the feeling. Especially after the stereotypical minority representation we saw earlier.
Prove me wrong CD Project Red, because I want to believe in you.
However, I can't help but have the feeling that this isn't the worst we are about to see. I hope I am wrong but I just can't shake the feeling. Especially after the stereotypical minority representation we saw earlier.
Prove me wrong CD Project Red, because I want to believe in you.
I understand the intent, and the idea that they are going for, but to me it just seems like the execution is maybe a bit off. It seems like it's played for jokes.
But for now I guess I'll reserve judgement until I see the game as a whole and how it's handled in the broader context.
Sometimes it's hard to portray sensitive ideas in snippets.
I just hope the person interviewed is being earnest and this isn't just someone's posthoc justification for some artists cheap laughs.
But for now I guess I'll reserve judgement until I see the game as a whole and how it's handled in the broader context.
Sometimes it's hard to portray sensitive ideas in snippets.
I just hope the person interviewed is being earnest and this isn't just someone's posthoc justification for some artists cheap laughs.
Agree all the way.
We need explanations on the stuff in the RockPaperShotgun preview. I'd prefer to have them like soonish as well since this advert-issue was covered so quickly.
This. Now we wait to see if the game actually makes any sort of commentary on this.
So what would be your version of the same ad that does what you're proposing?
I'm not trying to be all "debate me" at all, I'm genuinely curious how they could do this in a way that would satisfy all parties.
I was about to post this in the old thread when it got locked.
In a situation like this, where there are multiple potential valid reads on the poster and how it's being used, I don't know how much we can gain by extrapolating from it without the context of the rest of the game behind it. It's a tiny part of a much larger whole. How it reads will depend on the entire world surrounding it.
I appreciate how this discussion has highlighted how trans bodies can be fetishized in a way that harms the community, which I hope has opened some people's eyes. The rest seems to be filling in gaps based on assumptions about the rest of the game's world informed by CDPR's social media controversies.
For me personally (and as someone with a much lower stake in this conversation), I don't believe the actions of their social media people have a particularly strong relationship to the actions of the writers and art directors responsible for this material. But I have no way of knowing, and if people feel differently, that's their right.
Ultimately, no game is owed your preorder. If you're skeptical, then it's easy to sit back and wait until the work comes out. It will speak for itself. I'm sure plenty of people are going to play it who care about LGBT issues, and if it has problems, they'll write about it and let the world know. We'll see in the end. But it's tough to judge a tiny slice (in this case, a single art asset) in a vacuum.
For instance, Red Strings Club faced some controversy when Waypoint reacted to the deadnaming without fully considering how it fit in with the larger context of the game, or with the experience of its three developers, one of whom was trans and was very involved in the decision to include it. That led to a wider conversation on the game and this choice, which I'm glad they attempted. Similarly, I'm also reminded of people's reactions to the reveal of Far Cry 4's cover art, assuming that Pagan Min was white or gay based on his appearance and on Far Cry 3's past issues. When the game came out, it was clear that these concerns did not reflect anything in the final game.
When the final game comes out and we can see it in its entirety, we'll be able to have a much more informed and interesting discussion about its treatment of marginalized communities.
In a situation like this, where there are multiple potential valid reads on the poster and how it's being used, I don't know how much we can gain by extrapolating from it without the context of the rest of the game behind it. It's a tiny part of a much larger whole. How it reads will depend on the entire world surrounding it.
I appreciate how this discussion has highlighted how trans bodies can be fetishized in a way that harms the community, which I hope has opened some people's eyes. The rest seems to be filling in gaps based on assumptions about the rest of the game's world informed by CDPR's social media controversies.
For me personally (and as someone with a much lower stake in this conversation), I don't believe the actions of their social media people have a particularly strong relationship to the actions of the writers and art directors responsible for this material. But I have no way of knowing, and if people feel differently, that's their right.
Ultimately, no game is owed your preorder. If you're skeptical, then it's easy to sit back and wait until the work comes out. It will speak for itself. I'm sure plenty of people are going to play it who care about LGBT issues, and if it has problems, they'll write about it and let the world know. We'll see in the end. But it's tough to judge a tiny slice (in this case, a single art asset) in a vacuum.
For instance, Red Strings Club faced some controversy when Waypoint reacted to the deadnaming without fully considering how it fit in with the larger context of the game, or with the experience of its three developers, one of whom was trans and was very involved in the decision to include it. That led to a wider conversation on the game and this choice, which I'm glad they attempted. Similarly, I'm also reminded of people's reactions to the reveal of Far Cry 4's cover art, assuming that Pagan Min was white or gay based on his appearance and on Far Cry 3's past issues. When the game came out, it was clear that these concerns did not reflect anything in the final game.
When the final game comes out and we can see it in its entirety, we'll be able to have a much more informed and interesting discussion about its treatment of marginalized communities.
if anything you're too quick to judge based on snippets of infos. Its quite clear that the goal of the game is to take down mega corporations and give consciousness back to the human race, now being augmented, living in society as a whole. Its what the base material always has been about
This sounds like a case of the latter, at least the way she describes it here.
Sorry, I guess I misunderstood you. Because it seemed like everyone that said the advert was OK said so because they knew the actual model was not intended to be offensive and sort of understood it's underlying use as social commentary on adverts in general (a major theme of nearly every cyberpunk piece of fiction) rather than trans-issues. But it was the people that were offended (which was fair enough, I can see why they might be given CDPR history) by it that didn't really buy that and thought CDPR were basically mocking trans-people.
This was pretty much my takeaway from the advert when I first saw it.
"Gender non-conforming is now a social norm, but unfortunately so is commercial hyper-sexualization."
Or, " in the corporate ran future, equal representation means equal exploitation."
"Gender non-conforming is now a social norm, but unfortunately so is commercial hyper-sexualization."
Or, " in the corporate ran future, equal representation means equal exploitation."
It's important to remind people that the year this issue is coming to light, 2019, has been an incredibly tumultuous time for trans folk.
Numerous rights reductions, political turbulence, and violence against trans people.
Portraying a vulnerable minority group in this way is damaging regardless of the context.
In a time where trans people are being murdered for being trans, fetishization to this degree shouldn't be handwaved.
Numerous rights reductions, political turbulence, and violence against trans people.
Portraying a vulnerable minority group in this way is damaging regardless of the context.
In a time where trans people are being murdered for being trans, fetishization to this degree shouldn't be handwaved.
True, you're right, with e3 going on atm I think it is not reasonable to expect them to respond immediately. Although sometimes it happens.
It is pretty fucked up but people are taking this response at face value. This response does nothing to ease my concerns, it just shows they're extremely ignorant with the subject.
There are already other comments that say what I would write why I think that original comment was wrong
God, I hope this is what comes across in the tone of the final game. My fear is that it won't actually make that statement clearly enough to do more than come across as critical of trans people, because they're taken as an emblem of social and moral decay in the dystopia.
Last edited:
I still don't buy it. If this is enough for some people to justify buying the game so be it. But not for me.
And even if it were, one correction doesn't magically erase all the unapologetically hateful stuff GOG and CDPR have spouted. Sorry, but I'm not giving this company a cent anymore.
And even if it were, one correction doesn't magically erase all the unapologetically hateful stuff GOG and CDPR have spouted. Sorry, but I'm not giving this company a cent anymore.
Like it or not, a PR firm fucking up will color the rest of the company's output even if it later things are unintentional.
My thoughts exactly when reading her response. It also makes me think this isn't the only image in the game that makes people feel a certain way.
This game takes place in a cyberpunk dystopia. The trailers and demos have already featured various sexualized posters. In the other thread most people defending this issue already guessed the statement provided was the artist's intent. How much more context we needed for a background poster in an alleyway found within gameplay in these game previews?
If it does then I'm happy to consider my initial suspicions wrong, and praise CDPR for putting themselves on a better path. As of right now, their history speaks to me more than just her response in the context of this controversy.
however, this is not the only seemingly insensitive thing about this game. they have a lot of work to do to convince me.
Do you think that generalizing an entire company based on one person is a good thing? It sounds like you do.
Sanitized of sexuality? What about in the gameplay demo when your character wakes up after casually fucking some random dude?
How "The Game Is" doesn't really make a difference with regards to how "The Game Is Being Sold."
This is the sort of commentary that requires extra.
On the surface level it's probably gonna just simply shock and repulse more of the target audience than its gonna get to think about the social commentary.
They need to have a positive protrayel of a trans character to bring attention to the intended commentary she's describing.
I feel otherwise the commentary is gonna be buried under surface level impressions and twitch influencers feignging disgust and trap memes over it.
On the surface level it's probably gonna just simply shock and repulse more of the target audience than its gonna get to think about the social commentary.
They need to have a positive protrayel of a trans character to bring attention to the intended commentary she's describing.
I feel otherwise the commentary is gonna be buried under surface level impressions and twitch influencers feignging disgust and trap memes over it.
The setting is a dystopian future where corporate power exceeds the power of the state. I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that CDPR's stance on representation is communicated by the presentation by that ad. The exploitation of people by sociopathic mega-corporations is what cyberpunk is all about. The punk part is railing against that machine.
Nailed it.
I think the explanation is crap. For the message here to be "Wow, look how even when trans identity is publicly accepted, it gets commercialized!" you would expect ads glamorizing the bodies of trans people in a way suggesting fashionability. The "Mix it up" slogan and obvious visual punchline of the ad instead makes the subject of the ad into a joke. If anything the intended takeaway initially read to me as "Wow, a woman with a penis, watch out for the horrors of the world that's coming!"
pretty sure the apology to said tweet involves more than one person. "sorry to all those offended" by generalizing an entire company i guess.
Let's stop jumping to conclusions about a company with a past against a group of marginalized people. I should just pray that these straight white people are going to do right by my community.