Polygon, Gamespot, Kyle Bosman (and I think maybe some of his friends from Easy Allies), etc. all addressed these issues (and not in a positive way). Admittedly, had I not seen those things, I might not have called the game transphobic. But I'm also not transgender (also not a woman, not a minority, etc.). Reading these takes from those in the transgender/LGBT community made me more critical of CDPR's work though, and the responses from their pr about this didn't do them any favors imo. A more reasonable response might have resulted in me shrugging it all off to be honest. I think they could have easily nailed a cyberpunk world while being more respectful to various communities. They didn't though, and I think it's fair to be critical of that. Let's just ignore the ethical arguments about this for a minute. Crunch is not good for a project like this (I can speak from experience). Especially extended crunch. This wasn't 60 hour work weeks for the last 6 weeks of the project or whatever. IIRC, this was closer to like 100 hour work weeks during the last 12-24 months. No wonder this required multiple delays and still ended up a technical mess. To their credit, this is an industry-wide problem. But that doesn't make it right imo, especially given some of their takes on it (a lot of other places seem to begrudgingly accept crunch, while CDPR seem proud of it). This is basically another thing to add to the pile of "CDPR has shitty management," which is why I bring it up. They kinda all go together imo, and that's why I'm hesitant to support them until they address these things. There are hundreds of other great games to check out instead (likely with better open world AI too ). Of course, others are free to do as they'd like.
Oops skipped over this earlier... Not a bad option, but personally, I think I might prefer playing this on Geforce Now or Shadow, though they have their own downsides. Being able to customize the graphics (including adding RTX and DLSS) as well as not having to "double-dip" on the game in the future (in case you want to play on a local PC) seem like nice advantages. I'm still not feeling Stadia's pricing model. I'm a big Google fan, but not sure if I fully believe in Stadia's long-term viability (at least as currently implemented).
I think you're still attached to having a local PC beefy enough to run when it comes to cloud gaming. You're either vested enough for a local rig or you're not... 50 bucks without buying anything else and being set up for console like experience on TV is the best value for the game. GeForce now is nicer looking with ray tracing but is a pricier investment for just one game. I'm not sure how long Stadia will last, but likely longer than when people are bored of Cyberpunk.
Yeah, I think there are situations where either approach is acceptable. CCity Zero mentioned having a decent gaming PC around, so given that, I thought Shadow/Geforce Now could make more sense for him. He could even play other PC games on those services, whereas he'd have to re-buy them on Stadia (assuming they're even available). He could also play on those services now to get Ultra graphics, but then play locally in a few years via a cheap PC upgrade (that's actually kinda how/why I use these services). If you have no intention of ever doing PC gaming locally (or jumping between services), and/or you only care about playing Cyberpunk, then yeah I could see Stadia being more attractive. To be fair to GF Now, it does have a free tier, though I wouldn't recommend it. Honestly, I think even those that had paid memberships probably had difficulties playing Cyberpunk on demand. That's one downside to that service unfortunately. I actually do wonder if Stadia will still be going strong by the time Cyberpunk finishes up with all their expansions and whatnot, but I'm probably being pessimistic. I'm thinking this release will end up being an indicator to Google about how the future of Stadia looks, and if it was super successful, then I could seem them pushing ahead for quite some time. If it did poorly, then they might re-evaluate things in the near-future.
At least they got paid for it. I've had to work plenty of "overtime", off-hour deployments, waking up in the middle of the night to resolve issues, working weekends, etc. for free. The majority of the working class gets to enjoy truly tuning out at 5pm every day. That's not the case for most dev jobs.
Honestly a little repetitive IMO, but I may just have a small sample size. Really fun, though. Gameplay is good. I'm on Series X so can't speak to last-gen issues, though.
Sony is offering refunds for the game. https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikka...efunds-for-ps4-and-ps5-after-gamers-cry-foul/
LOL the struggle we had as a kid. Bro, I used to try to steal these hoes at walmart back in the day. My mom caught my ass and fuked me up,hahha
There are people from today reporting that Sony is refusing to give out refunds. Seems to be pretty hit or miss, or possibly a change from Sony as refund requests skyrocketed (CDPR recently stated people can/should get refunds if they're disappointed in the game). Pretty bad look from both Sony and CDPR to be honest.
The majority of gaming journalism has devolved into wokehood so I don't care much what they have to say, would rather just see it for myself. People were complaining about the Witcher's lack of diversity when its based on Slavic mythology. Cyberpunk has prostitutes, female and male. It has an abundance of nudity. The universe its based on is dark with corporations exploiting everything, including and especially sexuality. The controversy is around an advertisement in the game by corps using a transgender that's supposed to be ironic. If it comes off as exploitative, guess what? Its supposed to, that's the world that was created by Mike Pondsmith. (A black man mind you, so at least the woke crowd can't call the game racist!)
I use the performance mode. 60 FPS is most important to me. My television at the moment doesn't have the power to get to those elite visuals, but I do plan on getting a new one in the next half-year or so.
I think if it was just one little questionable ad, I'd shrug it off (like I alluded to earlier). But their response to the criticism (basically mirroring the "Buy it or F off" ad in the game) is what kinda set things off to me. Also, I think it is at least 2 ads (at least for transphobic content), some issues with the character creator, and I guess LGBTQ representation in the game in general. I'm a white, heterosexual, cisgender, thirty-something year old gamer, so I don't know if I'm the best one to decide if it is actually transphobic or not. That's why I took a "I need to digest this all and decide for myself" approach initially. But I've seen enough criticisms from those in the transgender community, and I think their criticisms make sense. You can actually read these criticisms and see why it is more than just the ad you're referencing that is bothering them. I understand what you mean about the world of cyberpunk being exploitative. I haven't played the game, so it is hard for me to say for sure. But when it comes to these criticisms of racism, misogyny, and transphobia for Cyberpunk 2077, I see a lot of people pointing out that CDPR puts this stuff into the game without actually trying to denounce it, which is usually how you'd do this kind of thing. Yes, it makes sense that in the world of cyberpunk, you'd have ads that exploit transgendered people (among other groups). But shouldn't the game kinda make it clear that this isn't OK? My impression is that Cyberpunk 2077 doesn't do this. It almost seems to glorify this stuff rather than denounce it, which is how I believe most cyberpunk (not 2077) stuff handles this kind of stuff (i.e., cyberpunk is not about glorifying big corporations and whatnot). I understand Mike (a black man as you pointed out) created the cyberpunk genre. Though I would point out that just because he's black doesn't mean the genre or the game can't be racist. That's pretty big logical fallacy there. I've seen some comments about racist content involving Asians in the game, which seem reasonable (and again, CDPR doesn't seem to denounce it within the game's world). It also isn't like the game is a perfect recreation of Mike's original vision (IIRC, CDPR tweaked some things Mike created that arguably make it racist, where it might not have been like that in the original). I got the impression Mike handled this stuff better than CDPR, but that's hard for me to say for sure. Though even if his original stuff was wrong in some of these things, it isn't like CDPR had to keep his mistakes. Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree on some of these things. But hopefully people are aware of the issue and can make their own conclusions.
who really cares about that stuff when you are actually playing the game and trying to complete missions I see the adds and they just add to the atmosphere and style , what suckers are taking it seriously? how's this different from GTA?
The difference between GTA and Cyberpunk 2077 is that the GTA devs actually bothered to build in NPC AI and other systems you'd actually expect in an open-world game. And typically doing it on hardware much older than the PS4/XBO. Is that what you meant? Actually, GTA gets similar criticism AFAIK, though it has the benefit of releasing further in the past. It turns out social norms change over time. I'd be curious to see if Rockstar adjusts things for the next GTA. If not, they'll probably get the same criticism CDPR is getting. On the bright side, I don't believe Rockstar PR ever responded the way CDPR did.
