General Gaming Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty (PC/PS5/Xbox Series) - Information Thread, update: Update 2.1 "Overview" trailer and patch notes

[Kal-El814]

20 minutes ago, atom631 said:

what's the TLDR on the controversy? I haven't really read up on it. I know they released that one image of an in-game ad of a girl with a huge bulging dick. But when I saw it, it didnt strike me as offensive. I thought people were being overly sensitive about it.

 

Did they do something else truly offensive?  

 

The impression I get from reviews, impressions, and the ad campaign is basically that the game misses the mark when it comes to a cyberpunk setting’s take on transhumanism as it pertains to gender identity. You can be a woman with a dick but if your voice is fem, your pronouns are. It largely seems to come off lazy and edgy as opposed to have actually thought about the topic or dealt with it in an interesting way.

 

Whether or not it’s “offensive” is largely going to be up to individual interpretation, but again... in the new COD if you make yourself a non-binary character, Ronald Reagan will respect your pronouns. The fact that COD did a better job of reflecting gender choice than a game in which bodies and gender can be literally hacked is just lame.

 

5 minutes ago, thedarkstark said:

No, people are still triggered that they let you customize your genitals.

 

No.

 

16 hours ago, thedarkstark said:

They're the buzzfeed of "gaming journalism"

 

Also no.

[SimpleG]

4 minutes ago, thedarkstark said:

No, people are still triggered that they let you customize your genitals. If you skim the GS review or the multitude of articles from polygon they all complain about lack of representation and/or cultural stereotyping/appropriation.

So people are upset that it’s to progressive and not progressive enough? 

[Keyser_Soze]

 

[Xbob42]

16 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

I feel like it comes off like that because almost every other word written about games might as well come from the developer’s marketing arm at worst, or at best just pretend that games exist in a political vacuum and spring up fully formed. It’s way less about Polygon looking for an angle as it is the whole industry being willfully ignorant of the politics of stuff like Call of Duty except when they derp with shit like making you press F to show respects. 
 

It wouldn’t be an issue if games criticism was actually criticism instead of just telling gamers where to spend money. 

I dunno. I typically find myself rolling my eyes at most Polygon articles, as it does seem like they're always fishing for problems that they want to make bigger than they actually are. I contrast this with Jim Sterling, who does similar work and whose work I find to be much higher quality, even when he's using Polygon articles as a jumping off point. I'm all for actual gaming journalism that isn't just regurgitating PR nonsense or defending these ridiculously rich companies when they pull shit like raising game prices "because they have to" or worse, being their usual TERF selves and promoting via edgelord nonsense while not caring who they trample over in the process.

I think the difference for me is someone like Jim comes across as someone actively fighting back, whereas something like Polygon just comes off as perpetually sniveling and calling things "problematic" without ever accomplishing more than whining. It's the difference, from my perception at least, between going "Hey fuck these guys, don't give them an inch for this shitty behavior" and "oh no, woe is me, I got my feelings hurt." Not that you can't ever have an article about how something made you feel shitty, but that's all I ever seem to see from Polygon.

[Ghost_MH]

3 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

So people are upset that it’s to progressive and not progressive enough? 

 

No, that's it tries to sell itself as being progressive, but actually isn't.

[TheLeon]

Putting flashing lights in your game that mimics those used to trigger seizures is pretty fucked up. 
 

There’s no one thing that I can point to and say “this is why I won’t buy this game” but there are a bunch of smaller things that have me asking “did I ever really want this game, or was I just looking forward to it because it was the Next Big Game?”

 

 

[Kal-El814]

2 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

So people are upset that it’s to progressive and not progressive enough? 

 

Nobody is bent out of shape that you can decide if V has a penis and if that penis is circumcised.

 

People are bent out of shape that the game, apparently, does a lazy job of recognizing the choices you can make about having V be trans, and apparently contains no trans characters, despite some of its marketing boiling down to, “look at the dick bulge on this woman!”

 

So I don’t think anyone’s saying it’s too progressive.

[thedarkstark]

2 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

So people are upset that it’s to progressive and not progressive enough? 

Yes, sjw want representation in video games but only if it paints underrepresented groups in the kindest possible light.

[atom631]

4 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

The impression I get from reviews, impressions, and the ad campaign is basically that the game misses the mark when it comes to a cyberpunk setting’s take on transhumanism as it pertains to gender identity. You can be a woman with a dick but if your voice is fem, your pronouns are. It largely seems to come off lazy and edgy as opposed to have actually thought about the topic or dealt with it in an interesting way.

 

 

i guess i could see that being bothersome (offensive though?) to trans people. I think at the very least even if it misses the mark, its a step in the right direction. not sure why they would garner such hate for at least attempting to be inclusive. if it comes down to them intentionally missing the mark and not following the lore due to them being against transgenderism, then ya... that would be some bullshit. 

 

also - based on what youre saying - allowing you to select the voice track for your character would solve the issue, no? seems like something that may be able to be patched in.

[CitizenVectron]

37 minutes ago, atom631 said:

 

what's the TLDR on the controversy? I haven't really read up on it. I know they released that one image of an in-game ad of a girl with a huge bulging dick. But when I saw it, it didnt strike me as offensive. I thought people were being overly sensitive about it.

 

Did they do something else truly offensive?  

 

22 minutes ago, thedarkstark said:

No, people are still triggered that they let you customize your genitals. If you skim the GS review or the multitude of articles from polygon they all complain about lack of representation and/or cultural stereotyping/appropriation.

 

If you want a rundown (of why thedarkstark is wrong) and about how CDPR is a transphobic company, check this thread out (first post, primarily): 

linear-gradient(310.77deg, #29AA9F 0%, #098EA6 100%)

CDPR is a transphobic company. It's time we stop making excuses for them. | ResetEra

WWW.RESETERA.COM

---

Preface: To avoid the usual suspects I want to start out by saying that you are not being shamed for your purchase of Cyberpunk 2077. If you feel slightly bad about buying the game as a result of...

 

 

They have a  history of insensitive messaging and treating the issue as a joke.

 

 

[Kal-El814]

13 minutes ago, thedarkstark said:

Yes, sjw want representation in video games but only if it paints underrepresented groups in the kindest possible light.

 

This is nonsense and completely misses the point.

 

11 minutes ago, atom631 said:

 

i guess i could see that being bothersome (offensive though?) to trans people. I think at the very least even if it misses the mark, its a step in the right direction. not sure why they would garner such hate for at least attempting to be inclusive. if it comes down to them intentionally missing the mark and not following the lore due to them being against transgenderism, then ya... that would be some bullshit. 

 

also - based on what youre saying - allowing you to select the voice track for your character would solve the issue, no? seems like something that may be able to be patched in.

 

I think (perhaps a dangerous assumption here as someone who is not trans) the larger issue is that it’s 2020, the internet is replete with research on trans issues, there are many trans figures in gaming, etc. So if CDPR’s goal was to make a game where playing a trans character was a viable option, they probably could have as there’s no shortage of information out there to guide them down the path of doing so and doing so well.

 

So I don’t think it’s that they tried and came up short, it’s that it seems like they really didn’t try aside from the thinnest veneer. I think whether or not that’s better than not trying at all is going to be a personal thing.

 

It’s likely compounded due to the source material, where one of the main themes of cyberpunk fiction is body hacking and transhumnanism. So to set a game in that world and not hit the target makes the miss more obvious.

 

14 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

I dunno. I typically find myself rolling my eyes at most Polygon articles, as it does seem like they're always fishing for problems that they want to make bigger than they actually are. I contrast this with Jim Sterling, who does similar work and whose work I find to be much higher quality, even when he's using Polygon articles as a jumping off point. I'm all for actual gaming journalism that isn't just regurgitating PR nonsense or defending these ridiculously rich companies when they pull shit like raising game prices "because they have to" or worse, being their usual TERF selves and promoting via edgelord nonsense while not caring who they trample over in the process.

I think the difference for me is someone like Jim comes across as someone actively fighting back, whereas something like Polygon just comes off as perpetually sniveling and calling things "problematic" without ever accomplishing more than whining. It's the difference, from my perception at least, between going "Hey fuck these guys, don't give them an inch for this shitty behavior" and "oh no, woe is me, I got my feelings hurt." Not that you can't ever have an article about how something made you feel shitty, but that's all I ever seem to see from Polygon.

 

That’s fair, even if I think that’s somewhat self selecting. I don’t think most of their articles are like that. But I’d agree that some of their more “tentpole” content is, though I’d argue that’s likely because the industry itself is so consistently problematic more so than Polygon specifically liking to pout. But who knows.

[thedarkstark]

Its literally progress, its representation, the only reason people are so vocal is because they know cp2077 will be huge and by criticizing it their voice will be heard by the most people. 

[Ghost_MH]

3 minutes ago, thedarkstark said:

Its literally progress, its representation, the only reason people are so vocal is because they know cp2077 will be huge and by criticizing it their voice will be heard by the most people. 

 

I don't think a Cyberpunk game being less progressive that Call of Duty is anything anyone should be proud of.

[thedarkstark]

1 minute ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I don't think a Cyberpunk game being less progressive that Call of Duty is anything anyone should be proud of.

This is an opinion, also there are 70 billion other games "less progressive" but nobody is attacking them because they're not as big as Cp2077.

 

It's weaponized clickbait

[atom631]

6 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I don't think a Cyberpunk game being less progressive that Call of Duty is anything anyone should be proud of.

 

i think that's a tough comparison. i played through the new COD campaign. I think it was about 5hrs long. Thats a big difference than a RPG with 100+hrs of content. 

 

When compared to other RPGs- are there any others right now that allow you to be a trandgender character? 

 

it might be a lazy implementation - but im not sure i can get on the side of boycotting them over it. as i said above, it seems that if they can patch in the ability to select your voice track, it seems like it might solve a chunk of the issue. 

[Ghost_MH]

1 minute ago, thedarkstark said:

This is an opinion, also there are 70 billion other games "less progressive" but nobody is attacking them because they're not as big as Cp2077.

 

It's weaponized clickbait

 

Yeah, but those 70 billion other games didn't promote themselves as progressive and set in a transhuman world.

[skillzdadirecta]

2 minutes ago, thedarkstark said:

This is an opinion, also there are 70 billion other games "less progressive" but nobody is attacking them because they're not as big as Cp2077.

 

It's weaponized clickbait

Those 70 Billion other games aren't pretending to be more progressive than they actually are which is the point.

[TheLeon]

Part of the problem seems to be that their whole take on trans/non-binary representation is “Look, you can make a hot chick with a huge dick! Isn’t that totally sick, bro?” Not exactly progressive. 

[Kal-El814]

8 minutes ago, thedarkstark said:

This is an opinion, also there are 70 billion other games "less progressive" but nobody is attacking them because they're not as big as Cp2077.

 

It's weaponized clickbait

 

It really isn’t. This isn’t difficult to understand.

[skillzdadirecta]

26 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

 

If you want a rundown (of why thedarkstark is wrong) and about how CDPR is a transphobic company, check this thread out (first post, primarily): 

linear-gradient(310.77deg, #29AA9F 0%, #098EA6 100%)

CDPR is a transphobic company. It's time we stop making excuses for them. | ResetEra

WWW.RESETERA.COM

---

Preface: To avoid the usual suspects I want to start out by saying that you are not being shamed for your purchase of Cyberpunk 2077. If you feel slightly bad about buying the game as a result of...

 

 

They have a  history of insensitive messaging and treating the issue as a joke.

 

 

That was a great read thanks for posting. 

[Xbob42]

19 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I don't think a Cyberpunk game being less progressive that Call of Duty is anything anyone should be proud of.

To be fair, I don't want Ronald Reagan calling me by my correct pronouns, or at all.

[Ghost_MH]

4 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

To be fair, I don't want Ronald Reagan calling me by my correct pronouns, or at all.

 

That's easy enough to do. I don't think I've played a CoD in like fifteen years.

[Bloodporne]

3 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

Crunch doesn't help. Crunch only helps management that has a vested interest in games releasing on time. Too much crunch leads to unhappy workers and, frankly, shit work. Nobody does their best work on the wrong side of a 90hr week. The only reason to crunch is because management did a shitty job planning things and then didn't want to risk their bonuses by delaying the game outside of their fiscal.

No, no, I didn't mean to imply that it does at all if you read it that way. I mean to say the company/management/who-the-fuck-ever at the studio seems to think it does and yet still delivers the same old buggy-ass Day 1 release with tons of issues despite, and on top of, treating their employees like total garbage.

[johnny]

at least this game has lots of dildos 

[Keyser_Soze]

On 12/7/2020 at 6:02 AM, CitizenVectron said:

Okay so for someone who is totally ignorant about this, what is the closest game to compare it to? Fallout?

 

It's like Rise of the Dragon meets Just Cause

[gamer.tv]

2 hours ago, johnny said:

at least this game has lots of dildos 

I look forward to my wife experiencing that in two days time. As for the controversy, rather than it be reported to me, I’ll see the issues in game for myself and make a judgement on CDPR following that - rather than before.

[legend]

I think it would be an improvement and more inclusive to allow pronouns to be independent of voice choice. This is a good idea and it's too bad CDPR didn't do that from the start.

 

But I also think it's bizarre to ding CDPR so hard for doing that that you won't get the game. I wouldn't even hold it past them not to introduce that as an option in the future. CDPR is always working on their games. But right now they're trying to squash the apparently multitude of bugs to make the game a better experience. Adding yet another variable to weave through the game when it's already glitchy isn't the best place to start.

 

I think the comparison "even CoD does better!" is weird. We may knock CoD for its standard formula of gameplay, but it's still a big project that a lot of people work on and matters to a big audience. It makes sense, but is also commendable that it's one of the games leading the way and not doing as well as them shouldn't be looked down on.

 

Regarding some of the marketing and in game poster that was being criticized. The CDPR artist responded with fair reasoning. The Polygon article's authors reaction was "that sounds nice, but I don't believe you." That seems pretty unfair. If you're just going to make up your mind about the motivations of the artists independent of what they're telling you then there isn't a conversation to have.

 

To sum up: CDPR can do better. There is a good chance they even will in this very game as they patch it and expand it. It's also fair to highlight how some of what they've done might be counter productive. But I don't think the extreme reaction and vilification is warranted.

 

 

 

 

[Brick]

 

 

This has to be an accident. Hopefully this can be patched out soon. 

 

[Ghost_MH]

1 minute ago, Brick said:

 

 

This has to be an accident. Hopefully this can be patched out soon. 

 

 

They're going to patch in an epilepsy warning. With the effect they have going, I don't think it'll be enough. It also may not be out in time for launch. If the effect is as bad as it sounds, we're going to have a lot of people that had no idea they were mildly epileptic all of the sudden going into seizures. That's cool.

[Moa]

2 minutes ago, Brick said:

 

 

This has to be an accident. Hopefully this can be patched out soon. 

 

 

Yeah, this is obviously a critical issue that should be CDPR's top priority for fixing, but acting like that sequence was put into the game maliciously is laughable.

[thedarkstark]

13 minutes ago, legend said:

To sum up: CDPR can do better. There is a good chance they even will in this very game as they patch it and expand it. It's also fair to highlight how some of what they've done might be counter productive. But I don't think the extreme reaction and vilification is warranted.

 

 

 

 

It's going to do the opposite, it's going to draw more attention to the game and in turn drive up sales. The Streisand effect. 

 

I think you nailed it but I'm going to try and refrain from further comment until I've actually played the game and can form my own opinion, not just blindly follow the word of some Polygon hack. 

[CitizenVectron]

5 minutes ago, thedarkstark said:

It's going to do the opposite, it's going to draw more attention to the game and in turn drive up sales. The Streisand effect. 

 

I think you nailed it but I'm going to try and refrain from further comment until I've actually played the game and can form my own opinion, not just blindly follow the word of some Polygon hack. 

 

That's not the streisand effect.

[skillzdadirecta]

So... nobody but me read the Resetera post that @CitizenVectron posted huh? That was MUCH more damning than the Polygon article... and I am STILL getting the game.

[thedarkstark]

3 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

That's not the streisand effect.

Yes it is, trying to make it "go away" and having the opposite effect only making it more visible to a wider audience who may have otherwise never known of its existence.

[Ghost_MH]

16 minutes ago, legend said:

I think it would be an improvement and more inclusive to allow pronouns to be independent of voice choice. This is a good idea and it's too bad CDPR didn't do that from the start.

 

But I also think it's bizarre to ding CDPR so hard for doing that that you won't get the game. I wouldn't even hold it past them not to introduce that as an option in the future. CDPR is always working on their games. But right now they're trying to squash the apparently multitude of bugs to make the game a better experience. Adding yet another variable to weave through the game when it's already glitchy isn't the best place to start.

 

I think the comparison "even CoD does better!" is weird. We may knock CoD for its standard formula of gameplay, but it's still a big project that a lot of people work on and matters to a big audience. It makes sense, but is also commendable that it's one of the games leading the way and not doing as well as them shouldn't be looked down on.

 

Regarding some of the marketing and in game poster that was being criticized. The CDPR artist responded with fair reasoning. The Polygon article's authors reaction was "that sounds nice, but I don't believe you." That seems pretty unfair. If you're just going to make up your mind about the motivations of the artists independent of what they're telling you then there isn't a conversation to have.

 

To sum up: CDPR can do better. There is a good chance they even will in this very game as they patch it and expand it. It's also fair to highlight how some of what they've done might be counter productive. But I don't think the extreme reaction and vilification is warranted.

 

The comparison to CoD isn't about how those games are mostly crappy. It's about how they're churned out, one after the other, and this game has been in development for years. I don't think CDPR would be getting any of the grief they're getting if not for their thin veneer of inclusivity. There's nothing that irks people more than companies/people being fake.