I'm not saying not to ask for explanations - But that we should ask for them when we know what they are i.e what's the context they live in inside the greater narrative. Until then, in my opinion we should have a more mindful discussion - less demanding explanations and try having a more nuanced a conversation, because none of us have enough information to be sure of anything. If you see that as defense - Well, I guess we'll have to disagree.
-
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
Good response and what I was hoping the context was. It's so frustrating that we can't just assume they're handling these issues well because of their awful social media posts. I really hope they respond about the racial stereotypes too since those seem even more egregious and less likely to be more acceptable with the context. They still have a lot to prove before I can be fully comfortable being excited for the game.
You know what might send that message more strongly? Actually doing more to center trans and non-binary people in what they've shown of the game.
Because that's what the game is, supposedly, right? So is the lack of that in their messaging a "we suck at PR" thing, or is it a "we invented some bullshit because it turns out that people didnt like our 'she has a dick lol' joke" thing?
I think their response to it was succinct.
The in-game ad didn't resonate with me negatively, but I can see how CDPR's past actions would elicit such a strong reaction from many after it was shown off/discovered.
The in-game ad didn't resonate with me negatively, but I can see how CDPR's past actions would elicit such a strong reaction from many after it was shown off/discovered.
A team composed of predomantly white cis people is making a game portraying black men as thugs and trans women as sex objects, going so far as to mock accents and show them as offensive stereotypes, but said that it is supposed to be a portrait of how society treats minorities and that it is a commentary on social issues. Would that be acceptable? Mind you, I'm not even talking about what they did in other instances.
It's not exactly the same as what you're proposing, but BioShock Infinite is an example of a game that was swimming in blatantly racist imagery.
You can decide for yourself how successfully the game executed its message, but at the very least, depicting racist imagery is not the same thing as endorsing racist imagery.
How in the world are some of you accepting this response? It's spectacular how tone-dead and un-self-aware she comes off here.
If that really was their message, they should be fighting against their own game's existence. They are "the bad corporation doing bad things."
You can't expect to get a pass for claiming that you're trying to criticize something you consider to be harmful while indulging in and making money off of it.
The only difference between this fictional ad and their own marketing is that it portrays a trans person (or, to be more specific, that the fiction allows it to portray anyone but a cis-coded female character). There is nothing about it that would make it in any way more "dystopian" than the status quo CD Projekt helps perpetuate.
If that really was their message, they should be fighting against their own game's existence. They are "the bad corporation doing bad things."
You can't expect to get a pass for claiming that you're trying to criticize something you consider to be harmful while indulging in and making money off of it.
The only difference between this fictional ad and their own marketing is that it portrays a trans person (or, to be more specific, that the fiction allows it to portray anyone but a cis-coded female character). There is nothing about it that would make it in any way more "dystopian" than the status quo CD Projekt helps perpetuate.
Holy crap a proper response to an issue involving a trans topic from CDPR
Her explanation is about on par with my initial view of the ad
Her explanation is about on par with my initial view of the ad
The developers decided to showcase this specific footage and open themselves to criticism. If it requires context, supply the context. They have the opportunity.
I got the sense that's what they're going for; I mean it's a dystopian hyper capitalist future, why wouldn't there be ads like that? It's satirical in the sense that it's an abusive depiction, and we see ads like that every day now but not nearly as extreme.
Professionalism is what society will find acceptable. Seemingly in this case what other corporations deem acceptable. There will still be conservative norms, but where that line is will certainly be different to today.
Yeah this explanation is Bullshit. Now I got to deal with a bunch of people saying stupid shit like "Looks like outrage culture strikes again" and "you guys are overreacting" 😒
I wish the designer was able to answer simply, "our intent that this be sympathetic to trans people comes across clearly in the rest of the game, but it's easy to see why it could be seen negatively when taken separately." Hearing them say they think the figure is attractive or other statements about intent that are totally divorced from the content itself aren't convincing, especially given the background radiation of the company's bigotry on this exact topic in the past.
I want to be understanding, because dystopian fiction can be a minefield if you're using a specific group as part of your symbol to convey social decay, but that's why you tread lightly when you use a specific, real-fucking-world marginalized group as your symbol of social decay.
Exactly.
I want to be understanding, because dystopian fiction can be a minefield if you're using a specific group as part of your symbol to convey social decay, but that's why you tread lightly when you use a specific, real-fucking-world marginalized group as your symbol of social decay.
Exactly.
Last edited:
the worst thing that could possibly happen is that people might rush to judgment about a video game
If you are, and correct me if I am wrong, trying to compare this hypothetical to the topic at hand, I think the major difference is that one is an ad in the game that is, by the artist's words, meant to portray a disgusting misuse of a minority group to sell product. Whether that ends up being the case remains to be seen in the final game, and arguably it already has offended people so could certainly be considered in bad taste. So far, the game itself has not had a negative representation of trans characters though (at least in what I have seen, I haven't been following too closely).
That said, the game already apparently has some troubling racial stuff to discuss so there is that to consider.
if they care about authorial intent they could simply release it on GOG DRM free. but if they only care about profit perhaps we're already living in cyberpunk 2077
Love to thoughtlessly frame legitimate concern as "mob mentality".
Nope, I want to hear you explain what went through your head to think that was a meaningful response to what I posted.
Wait that's how you view this?
"Mix it up" is a joke punchline, okay. But how does that make it not commercialized? or reside within the context of a corporation co opting a stereotype in the form of a sexualized visual and suggesting certain elements to sell. Especially given the timeline.
Its like company still using obvious racist stereotype types as logo's. I highly doubt its about watching out for the horror of a woman with a penis.
If this is the case then the game should not be toothless and not tackle this issue in any way. I think its a fine thing to have this kind of topic in this game especially, but it wont make anything better if it doesn't bear out in the game that a stance can be taken. So, I really look forward to how the events in the game can play out in regards to the issues it brings up.
when real life is more cyberpunk than your cyberpunk. it's such an easy fix too.
You can ignore that dude, he obviously doesn't want to post that response on his main account.
What?
Sounds like you're under the impression the artist is feeling hard done by the ad wasn't nude. Unless you've read something wrong, just seems like you're trolling. So 🤷♂️
I'm honestly quite disgusted how easily people are handwaving the possibility that this has any negative connotations towards transgender people and saying everyone who had an issue with it was jumping to conclusions and looking for things to be bothered by. Trans fetishization is a real thing and without context, that's literally what it looked like. Satire requires it to be obvious enough that it's not being presented as something the writer/ creator believes, but something they're mocking. CDPR doesn't have a good history, with several "jokes" to the expense of the LGBT+ community and half-assed "apologies", and we're supposed to just believe this is in good faith from face value? Without context, it looks bad. With context, CDPR is horrible with representation. It's really not hard to see why people had a problem with it in the first place, and why people may still have problems.
Personally, I think "It's meant to be offensive" doesn't excuse why it's offensive. Are most people really gonna feel angry over the evil fictional company using fetishization of trans women to fuel their own sales, and not just like "eww woman with a giant dick"? This kind of satire requires our world to see transgender people in a good light BEFORE using them to satirize a fictional evil company, or else they fall into a situation where people actually think the same way as the "evil corporation" does.
Personally, I think "It's meant to be offensive" doesn't excuse why it's offensive. Are most people really gonna feel angry over the evil fictional company using fetishization of trans women to fuel their own sales, and not just like "eww woman with a giant dick"? This kind of satire requires our world to see transgender people in a good light BEFORE using them to satirize a fictional evil company, or else they fall into a situation where people actually think the same way as the "evil corporation" does.
I thought it as exactly this. The future is bad, it is what we have today, but worse. People are treated like merchandise.
I hope this signifies a better level of nuance about these matters by CDPR, and that we haven't seen much of how the game tackles these issues because it's harder (I would presume) to establish context for that sort of thing compared to shootybang. Did we even get a lengthy segment of world building yet?
This explanation makes sense to me and I'm happy to hear that at least one developer wants to give genderqueer people a prominent place in the game world. I'm not LGBTQ though, and I think still feeling concerned is perfectly understandable and valid, CDPR needs more than one (contentious) ad to make up for their track record, I think.
This explanation makes sense to me and I'm happy to hear that at least one developer wants to give genderqueer people a prominent place in the game world. I'm not LGBTQ though, and I think still feeling concerned is perfectly understandable and valid, CDPR needs more than one (contentious) ad to make up for their track record, I think.
I thought about chiming in with this take, but thought better of it.
To be fair, CDPR doesn't really deserve the benefit of the doubt with their history on the issue.
You are absolutely correct about Bioshock Infinite, even though it was way clearer about doing so because it was the entire theme of the game. Depicting racism is not the same as endorsing racism. What I am arguing, however, is the expectation that people should trust CDPR to do it.
Anyone can depict bigotry and criticize it. But when Charlie Hebdo depicts something offensive against christians is not the same as when it depicts something that offends muslims. There is an outsider element that makes satire way harder to do if you are not part of the oppressed group, and that makes it harder to trust the creation of said satire.
Such as:
Now, if someone from Eidos came up and said that it was intentional, maybe that would help. I have played the game, so I know it wouldn't because the rest of the game is not keen on those social issues. I have also not played Cyberpunk 2077, but I know CDPR, which is why it's so hard for me to trust them.
Especially so with Bloodlines 2 offering pronoun options separate from body type. They have no excuse.
One of the problems with Satire in video games is that you control a character. And if your character cannot express dismay at things like, in this case, transphobia, then the satire will fall flat. The developer can talk all day about intent, but as soon as you give control to the player you better make sure that it's obvious what is going on. And if you don't think you can hit that mark, don't do it or prepare to deal with the backlash.
To be honest isn't that what a lot of companies are already doing, taking advantage of pride and queer people? We talk a lot about this hyper masculine portrayal in gay culture and how its driving the 'sexy' norm in it. A lot of companies are behind this drive. So I'm not surprised it'd be the same in the future for trans people.
What is it about this supposedly inclusive future advertisement that makes it worse than the ones you see today?