Remove ads

Cyberpunk 2077: Rockerboy Keanu Silverhand

Reader mode
Althaea said:
While this is preferable to "everyone's straight", the issue with that solution is that it kind of implicitly suggests that simply being andro- or gynophilic is somehow wrong or incorrect in a socially progressive society.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
... Does it?

I'm fine with restricted romances and non, so I don't really have a horse in this race. But to me, having everyone romanceable by any player character just suggests the developers wanted everyone to be able to have their cake and waifu it too, rather than insinuations on the morality on who you want to bang.
 
You could just have people with non pan sexualities not be romanceable? It's not like the player's romance is the only one the game can have, writing wise.

I think CDPR's track record suggests that everyone was going to be player sexual regardless, though.
 
There's also different people's games being, well, different.

In any gamewith mulltiple gameplay choices, it's not like the setting is a superposition of all choices.

In my playthrough, NPC A might totally be into someone like me, as revealed by the romance options I chose, and how that relationship developed. In your playthrough, it never came up.

An NPC being "protagonist-sexual" does not, to me, mean the character is Pan.
 
I love the fact that I'm able to romance anyone. But I'm pretty damn pansexual myself so I might be a bit biased.

At least it isn't bi-erasure like usual. :<
 
Huttj said:
There's also different people's games being, well, different.

In any gamewith mulltiple gameplay choices, it's not like the setting is a superposition of all choices.

In my playthrough, NPC A might totally be into someone like me, as revealed by the romance options I chose, and how that relationship developed. In your playthrough, it never came up.

An NPC being "protagonist-sexual" does not, to me, mean the character is Pan.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah NPCs being "rewritten" to be attracted to whatever the player identify as in each different games doesn't have to imply they're attracted to everyone.
 
I've not seen it mentioned here so I thought I should throw it out.

CD Project Red will be streaming the Cyberpunk 2077 Gamescom Demo on their Official Twitch and Mixer channels August 30th, 8PM CEST

  • UK: 7PM, August 30th.
  • Central Europe: 8PM, August 30th.
  • Eastern Europe: 9PM, August 30th.
  • US East: 2PM, August 30th.
  • US Central: 1PM, August 30th.
  • US Mountain: 12PM, August 30th.
  • US West: 11AM, August 30th.
  • Eastern Australia: 4AM, August 31st.
  • Western Australia/China: 2AM, August 31st.
  • New Zealand: 6AM, August 31st.
  • India: 11:30PM, August 30th.
  • Japan: 3AM, August 31st.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Last edited:
Riggnarock said:
I've not seen it mentioned here so I thought I should throw it out.

CD Project Red will be streaming the Cyberpunk 2077 Gamescom Demo on their Official Twitch and Mixer channels August 30th, 8PM CEST
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, that's like half and hour from now and I'm off work today, so I guess I might as well watch.

  • US West: 11AM, August 30th.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
For future reference, the timezone on the west coast of the US is called traditionally called Pacific.
 
Okay the gameplay video wasn't too bad, but it's a bit short and well nothing we haven't really seen before, though they seem to be a have a few neat ability that would spice up gameplay (Not sure how the hell hacking suppose to work)

I'm suprise that the animals don't have litteral animal features, cause I remember this capacity being in the paper rpg game, though I guess they couldn't properly implemanted it
 
Redem said:
Okay the gameplay video wasn't too bad, but it's a bit short and well nothing we haven't really seen before, though they seem to be a have a few neat ability that would spice up gameplay (Not sure how the hell hacking suppose to work)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think that footage had been shown at conventions, but hadn't been online before. It was stuff I'd heard about but hadn't seen.

I feel like they could have saved themselves a lot of controversy if they'd just made the Animals various ethnicities instead of all or nearly all black. It's not like white dudes don't abuse steroids and become obsessed with lifting, which seems to be what the Animals are all about.

The comments in the Twitch chat during the video were pretty gross.

The gameplay portion is up on YouTube already, so that's probably a better place to see it:
 
The Narrator said:
I feel like they could have saved themselves a lot of controversy if they'd just made the Animals various ethnicities instead of all or nearly all black. It's not like white dudes don't abuse steroids and become obsessed with lifting, which seems to be what the Animals are all about.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

To me, it looked like at least a third were on the Caucasian/Hispanic end of the spectrum and even then there were less than twenty members of the gang even shown. It really feels like the controversy stirred up by RPS was at least taking things out of proportion.
 
isn't the gamescom demo an updated build over what everybody was talking about at e3

like boy I wonder why some things seemed to have been changed after the fact :V
 
tygerbright said:
To me, it looked like at least a third were on the Caucasian/Hispanic end of the spectrum and even then there were less than twenty members of the gang even shown. It really feels like the controversy stirred up by RPS was at least taking things out of proportion.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
On the other hand, this is a cut down (and potentially remade version) of the original 45 minute demo. It doesn't make much sense to complain about only seeing 20 people when RPS saw many more.

If I can put my tinfoil hat on for a moment, it would even make sense to assume that they paid attention to race when assembling this condensed cut, so as to undermine rather than reinforce these criticisms.
 
10ebbor10 said:
If I can put my tinfoil hat on for a moment, it would even make sense to assume that they paid attention to race when assembling this condensed cut, so as to undermine rather than reinforce these criticisms.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Or they responded to criticisms about race by making The Animals significantly more racially diverse.

They responded to the trans-related criticism by promising to do better, and they seeingly have, it doesn't make much sense that they'd do anything else for the race-related criticism.
 
Fourthspartan56 said:
They responded to the trans-related criticism by promising to do better, and they seeingly have, it doesn't make much sense that they'd do anything else for the race-related criticism.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well they seemed to have kept the advertisement, though it's a bit hard to know if it stayed the same or

However, it seem to be running on an older version (for exemple we don't seem to see any body type modificaiton when we see character creation), so who knows
 
Redem said:
However, it seem to be running on an older version (for exemple we don't seem to see any body type modificaiton when we see character creation), so who knows
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This footage is all a few months old at this point, IIRC, so it wouldn't reflect any changes made in response to the criticism.
 
Redem said:
Well they seemed to have kept the advertisement, though it's a bit hard to know if it stayed the same or

However, it seem to be running on an older version (for exemple we don't seem to see any body type modificaiton when we see character creation), so who knows
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
As I understand it, and I'd greatly appreciate if any trans posters in the thread correct me if I'm wrong, the problem wasn't necessarily the presence of the ad itself, but rather the ad and the lack of positive representation of trans people.

It's one thing to have an objectifying ad to serve as an example of how corporations are commodifying and exploiting everyone but if you just stop there then you're just objectifying trans people. There has to be a counterbalance to make sure the audience to recognize why that objectification is wrong. Now, I'm not going to thank CDPR until we've actually seen that they've done it correctly but their decision to decouple gender and physical form and their promise to provide better representation of the trans community is most certainly an encouraging sign.
 
Last edited:
Redem said:
Well they seemed to have kept the advertisement, though it's a bit hard to know if it stayed the same or

However, it seem to be running on an older version (for exemple we don't seem to see any body type modificaiton when we see character creation), so who knows
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

There's nothing inherently wrong with the advertisement when it's accompanied by real representation.
 
Delirium said:
The current narrative from the Devs is that it's part of a larger theme of exploitation so yeah, that goes without saying.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I gathered that, but I've been burned enough times to not trust that people will get the message unless it gets hammered into their heads. Which is why I emphasized it.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it can definitely be tricky even if you're honestly doing "we're doing this thing that ____ does to show how crass it is," where it winds up being "we're doing this thing ____ does."

Doing something satirically, ironically, or critically, if you flub the context/delivery, is just doing the thing.
 
Fourthspartan56 said:
As I understand it, and I'd greatly appreciate if any trans posters in the thread correct me if I'm wrong, the problem wasn't necessarily the presence of the ad itself, but rather the ad and the lack of positive representation of trans people.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Delirium said:
There's nothing inherently wrong with the advertisement when it's accompanied by real representation.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I see, I stand corrected.

I didn't exactly combed through the interview after the bit, but I was a bit excited that the game would have actual sword (I mean we do know that we have Melee, but those were arm blades that were use in support of a major) I'm suprise they didn't use the opportunity to show how it would work at higher level.

I thought that they had pretty bunch boilled down the classes to two axis of Solo(brawl)/Netrunner(stealth) but the interview later says the techie still there (thought it's presumably not that different from netrunner and used more as something you had to the two other class+ plus you get ot use robot)
 
Last edited:
10ebbor10 said:
On the other hand, the narrative of the devs also says that the natural body is sacred and that all modification is profane.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No, the words were sacrum and profanum very specifically. "This is cyberpunk, so people augment their body. So the body is no longer sacrum; it's profanum." is the quote. And while sacred and profane is derived from the latin words, they don't mean the exact same thing.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top