I mean if people find that exchange offensive and are turned off from buying the game due to it then more power to them. Hitting a company in their wallet is really the only way to have your voice heard. I just don’t get all the outrage and that’s okay – I don’t need to get it. As @Enidigm said everything on the internet basically gets turned up to 11 and my rage-o-meter rarely ever goes that high.
I just read the Gamespot review and it provides some in-game context that seems to support the position or context of the Polygon article (Maybe, YMMV).
The ads are one of many, many aesthetic choices in Cyberpunk 2077 that are grating with no real point. There’s one ad in particular that was the topic of much discussion pre-release; it features a feminine person with a giant, exaggerated, veiny erection in their leotard and advertises a drink called Chromanticore with the tagline “mix it up.” It is everywhere . And while the “purpose” of it may be to show what a sex-obsessed, superficial, exploitative place Night City is, there’s nothing in the main story or any of the side quests I did that gives it even that much context–I found just one message on one of the many computers I logged into that commented on how low-brow Night City culture is. The result is that there’s a fetishization of trans people at every turn, in a game with only one very minor trans character (that I found, at least) and no way to play as an authentically trans character yourself.
- Superficial and often “edgy” aesthetic choices often have no real purpose, which makes them grating rather than adding anything relevant to the world
- The incorporation of different cultures and backgrounds is wildly inconsistent, from good to inaccurate to downright offensive
Just happened to be the first review I read.
Man, I can’t imagine anybody doing Cyberpunk correctly without absolutely everything in the game being grating beyond belief. It sounds like CDPR nailed the setting and stayed true to the source material.
The grating is one of my biggest concerns. Different things might bother me than your cookie cutter Internet games reviewer, but I can empathize.
This is one of those good, simple ways to summarize a broad concept in my mind that I already know well.
I’m not sure I’d characterize one person with an opinion writing an article on the internet as Normandy Beach. The general consensus in this thread seems to be shrug. People are capable of evaluating critical response critically. And no one is going to have their liberal card revoked for playing this game (or any game.) I think a trans person’s perspective about trans representation in the game is valuable and informs my critical response to it, but I’m still going to play it, and I suspect I’ll even have fun doing so.
The quoted bit from the GameSpot review carries a lot more weight with me than the Polygon polemic, that’s for sure.
Well the Gamespot review is based on experience playing the actual game, and the Polygon article is based on marketing.
OTOH, the Polygon article was written by an actual trans person so that tends to lend its perspective on those issues more weight to me. Not that Stacey’s perspective is particularly representative, but is at least based on how it resonates against their lived experience. Regardless, I’m not sure it’s fair to dismiss it by labelling it “polemic.”
It’s a bit more widespread than that :)
One very popular gaming forum has a pinned post with a title accusing CDPR of transphobia, and it looks like they’ve now banned all other discussion of the game except the ones about it being transphobic. (Not “whether it is”, mind you, just ones acknowledging that it is)
Wow. That’s terrifying.
Was not dismissing the Polygon piece so much as describing it. I would argue there are a lot of first principles assumed there, which is probably fine if the reader shares them but less interesting when you’re not starting out from the same place of fist-shaking outrage.
Yet it literally fits within the definition of polemic.
I guess. I’m not sure where you’re talking about, but the widespread consensus about this game seems to me to be: must play
It really does seem like a controversy that’s concentrated in a few places that are, let’s face it, known for exactly this sort of reaction. I’ve seen no indication of any widespread backlash and that metascore pretty much settles the issue.
Which of the issues? That the bugs are irrelevant or that reviewers should ignore treating minorities as exploitable as their workers (and themselves)?
I saw that Metacritic score and I saw all the complaining across the Internet and I had to ask myself if I remembered how math works. It didn’t seem like there was a way they could hit 91. I guess there are a lot of 100s pulling the average up.
All the Metacritic scores are listed under PC as well – no console reviews? Was that part of the review copy problem mentioned a few days ago?
It’s not uncommon for PC review builds to be earlier/easier to get than console ones. Or at least that was the case lo these many years ago.
Lol, you have to know the context.
The context is that CD2077 offers two type of penis, but only one vagina. Some people on Internet (jokingly, I want to believe) complained about that, only one type of vagina! preorder cancelled!
So he is doing the same silly joke. His joke actually a ‘reference joke’. And the joke also points how ridiculous it is, that’s why they are using it, because it was used against them before.
https://i.imgur.com/ASJQEh2.gif
I see it more as puerile (genitals are funny!) than egdy, to be honest.
It’s actually 6 penis options.
I’m thinking about Googling the science on the 6 different types of penises, but I’ll just wait to be surprised.
Are any of them prehensile?