#the actual full interview not being available until september is wild | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

aion-rsa · 4 years

Text

Every Cyberpunk 2077 Controversy So Far

https://ift.tt/2L1A5cF

Cyberpunk 2077 may be the most anticipated game of 2020 but its long road to release can be measured by numerous controversies that have often attracted the wrong kind of attention.

From delays to questionable tweets, Cyberpunk 2077 can easily be considered one of the most controversial games in recent memory, and it hasn’t even been released yet. While time will tell if Cyberpunk 2077 can “usurp” The Last of Us Part 2 and become 2020’s most divisive game, the project is already at the center of several heated debates that are causing fans to take sides.

If you’re wondering where you stand on the game’s most contested topics, here’s a rundown of every notable Cyberpunk 2077 controversy (so far):

The Numerous Delays and Long Development Time

Believe it or not, there have only been three official Cyberpunk 2077 delays so far and all of them have happened in 2020.

Cyberpunk 2077‘s first official release date was April 16, 2020. While developer CD Projekt Red noted early in the year that the game was “complete and playable,” the studio delayed the game to September 17 as part of an effort to better optimize its performance.

On June 18, the Cyberpunk 2077 team announced via Twitter that the game’s release had been delayed again and was now (at least at that time) scheduled to be released on November 19. Again, CD Projekt Red cited a “huge number of things to iron out” as the reason for the delay.

Finally, on October 27, CD Projekt Red announced that Cyberpunk 2077‘s final release date had been rescheduled for December 10. This time, the team cited not just bug fixes and optimization as the reason for the delay but the challenges presented by their desire to release the game across so many platforms.

Before we dive into some of the other delay related controversies, we should point out that much of the fan frustration regarding Cyberpunk 2077‘s delays are closely related to the fact the game was revealed via a teaser trailer released in 2013. While we don’t know what the status of the game was at that time, the popular perception is that Cyberpunk 2077 has been in development for seven years. That means that each one of the game’s 2020 delays has stung some fans harder than they otherwise may have.

The Crunch Schedule

You can’t talk about Cyberpunk 2077‘s delays without talking about the game’s controversial crunch development schedule.

We’ve covered this topic before in greater detail (you can read our full report on this subject here), but the gist of the situation is that developer CD Projekt Red had previously stated that they would not force the Cyberpunk 2077 team to work through a crunch schedule. In September, though, CD Projekt Red boss Adam Badowski confirmed reports that the studio asked employees to begin working additional hours. In exchange for the extra work, they would be compensated with overtime pay and additional funds offered by the company’s profit-sharing program.

That information triggered two additional debates. The first saw those who opposed the company’s crunch schedule battle those who claimed the company’s employees were being fairly compensated for their extra work. While it was generally agreed the company was compensating its employees for overtime more than other game developers have done in the past (and that some employees anonymously stated they were fine with the schedule), many argued that crunch development is an industry problem which needs to be addressed whenever it appears.

Finally, there’s the matter of the game’s delays. The latest Cyberpunk 2077 delay was confirmed after the report of the company’s crunch schedule had broke. If the insinuation was that the crunch schedule was implemented as a desperate measure intended to ensure the game was released on time, then could CD Projekt Red have skipped the crunch schedule and just delayed the game a little longer?

The PS4/Xbox One Controversy

When news broke that the most recent Cyberpunk 2077 delay was partially attributed to the struggles of launching the game across so many platforms, it didn’t take long for some fans to worry about the PS4 and Xbox One editions of the game.

Why? Well, some people expressed their concern that the previous-gen versions of Cyberpunk 2077 may hinder the day one quality of the next-gen editions. CD Projekt Red has stated that the PS5 and Xbox Series X versions of Cyberpunk 2077 will benefit from day one upgrades, but the “full” next-gen versions of each title will not be available until a later date.

Others had the opposite concern and worried that the next-gen editions of Cyberpunk 2077 would be the “real” versions of the game and that the PS4 and Xbox One versions would suffer from serious performance downgrades. There’s currently no evidence which strongly supports that claim, but it does ring loud at a time when it’s nearly impossible to find a PS5 or Xbox Series X/S.

The Gender Tweet

One of the earlier Cyberpunk 2077 controversies involved this now-deleted tweet from the Cyberpunk 2077 Twitter account:

The tweet itself was sent in the midst of a greater debate over the use of that term and whether or not it had become a way to mock transgender people or those who sympathize with the struggles of transgender people. Basically, there was some concern that the Cyberpunk 2077 team’s use of that term was meant as an insult

CD Projekt Red deleted the tweet and issued the following statement regarding it:

“Sorry to all those offended by one of the responses sent out from our account earlier. Harming anyone was never our intention.”

As some noted at the time, this controversy was amplified by another incident in which GOG (a digital store owned by CD Projekt Red) tweeted a GIF of a Postal character urinating on a tombstone that read “Games Journalism” and “August 28th, 2014.” That date is believed to be a reference to GamerGate.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The Transgender Poster

Arguably the most infamous Cyberpunk 2077 controversy involved this in-game poster:

The poster showcases a transgender model advertising a soda with slogans could be interpreted as references to transgender people. Given that this poster was circulated shortly after the aforementioned tweets, some felt that this was another example of CD Projekt Red using transgender people as a punchline.

In an interview with Polygon, the CD Projekt Red artist who designed this poster, Kasia Redesiuk, explained her thought process behind it.

“Personally, for me, this person is sexy,” Redesiuk said. “I like how this person looks. However, this model is used — their beautiful body is used — for corporate reasons. They are displayed there just as a thing, and that’s the terrible part of it.”

Redesiuk also stated that she had no intentions of directly offending people but did note that she was aware the image was inherently provocative.

“I would say it was never the intention to offend anyone,” Redesiuk said. “However, with this image of an oversexualized person, we did want to show how over-sexualization of people is bad. And that’s it.

The Gender Choice Character Creator

Cyberpunk 2077 would once again find itself at the center of a gender-related controversy, but this one was a bit different than the others.

In an interview with Metro, Cyberpunk 2077 artist Marthe Jonkers explained that the game would not offer simple male and female gender options during the character creation process.

“You don’t choose, ‘I want to be a female or male character’ you now choose a body type,” Jonkers explained. “So you choose your body type and we have two voices, one that’s male sounding, one is female sounding. You can mix and match. You can just connect them any way you want. And then we have a lot of extra skin tones and tattoos and hairstyles. So we really want to give people the freedom to make their own character and play the way they want to play.”

While some felt that this was the company’s attempt to cover up for their previous actions, much of the blowback in this instance came from fans who saw this as an example of the Cyberpunk 2077 team “pandering” to critics. There is currently no information available that suggests the game’s character creation process was drastically altered in response to any such criticisms.

Games

Cyberpunk 2077 Soundtrack Revealed – Listen to the Songs Here

By Matthew Byrd

Games

Cyberpunk 2077: Who is Judy Alvarez?

By Matthew Byrd

The Animals and Voodoo Boys

The reveal of Cyberpunk 2077‘s gangs caused some to question whether or not the game was relying on racial stereotypes.

This debate focused on two gangs: The Animals and Voodoo Boys. Some fans felt that the “Animals” name was intended as an insult directed towards a gang that appeared to largely be comprised of people of color. As for the Voodoo Boys, there were concerns that the gang’s name, design, and background were designed to exploit racial and cultural stereotypes.

CD Projekt Red later stated that The Animals is actually a multi-racial gang and that that the initial portrayal of them as a gang that consisted entirely of people of color was based on the specific scenario of the gameplay demo they were showcased in. Cyberpunk 2020‘s creator also offered this response in regards to these controversies:

“As for the Animals–the WHOLE FREAKING POINT is that they think of themselves as POWERFUL, DANGEROUS, WILD ANIMALS. You’d have thought the Lady named ‘Sasquatch’ would have given them a clue…The original Voodoo Boys were a scathing commentary on cultural appropriation. I LOVE the idea that real practitioners of Voudon moved in and took back their turf. And they even got the Creole right…Who the (bleep) do YOU think you are to tell ME whether or not MY creation was done right or not?”

The Microtransactions

Earlier this year, CD Projekt Red’s Adam Kicinski caused a stir by implying that Cyberpunk 2077 would have microtransactions despite previous implications that the game would not.

“We’re never aggressive towards our fans!” Kicinski said during an earnings call. “We treat them fairly and we’re friendly. So of course not – we won’t be aggressive – but you can expect great things to be bought. The goal is to design monetization in a way that makes people happy to spend money. I’m not trying to be cynical or hide something; it’s about creating a feeling of value.”

The Cyberpunk team later clarified that statement somewhat with the following tweet:

Nothing changed. Cyberpunk 2077 is a single player game with zero microtransactions. One single purchase. No tricks. Don't believe the clickbait. https://t.co/qX0iZwsAf2

— Cyberpunk 2077 (@CyberpunkGame) September 7, 2020

The issue of microtransactions is typically controversial in and of itself, but the debate was amplified in this instance by CD Project Red’s apparent “anti-microtransaction” culture and outward consumer-friendly image. Furthermore, Cyberpunk 2077‘s multiplayer has been its own source of controversy due to the mysterious nature of the concept and concerns its development has further delayed the release of the Cyberpunk 2077 campaign.

The First-Person Controversy

It feels so quaint now, but one of the earlier Cyberpunk 2077 controversies involved the game’s first-person perspective.

In 2019, the Cyberpunk 2077 team confirmed the game would largely take place in first-person with third-person angles being used for certain cutscenes and driving sequences. This upset some fans who were not only led to believe the game would be third-person based on early footage (and The Witcher 3) but were concerned by the implications of a first-person game. Namely, they worried that the game would end up being a first-person shooter and that first-person cutscenes would not be nearly as “immersive” as the third-person storytelling featured in The Witcher 3.

Some fans also felt that a first-person perspective would limit the impact of the game’s character customization options, but CD Projekt Red later clarified that you’ll be able to see your character in mirrors and on the inventory screen.

The post Every Cyberpunk 2077 Controversy So Far appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3oeT0ia

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

3 notes · View notes

lifejustgotawkward · 7 years

Photo

365 Day Movie Challenge (2017) - #348: Blade Runner 2049 (2017) - dir. Denis Villeneuve

As the end credits rolled on Blade Runner 2049 last Sunday night at the Regal Union Square multiplex, I turned to my friend and asked her my usual question, “So, what did you think?” She groaned out, “that was really boring,” and the wave of relief I felt at her response was the perfect summation of my feelings.

How did Blade Runner 2049 disappoint me? Let me count the ways.

I watched Ridley Scott’s original Blade Runner (1982) back in September. I was impressed, though not bowled over, by the theatrical cut, but I still wanted to give the final cut a chance. When I got around to watching that “definitive” version, I found that I actually missed Harrison Ford’s gruff, noiresque narration from the earlier edit of the film, but overall my appreciation for Blade Runner had grown and the second viewing allowed me to focus less on the plot and to better appreciate both the acting and the technical aspects of the production.

My expectations for Blade Runner 2049 were fairly high. I was eager to see how Denis Villeneuve built on Scott’s (and, of course, writer Philip K. Dick’s) visions of dystopian Los Angeles by pushing the narrative thirty years further into the future from the first Blade Runner’s setting in 2019. Although I missed the chance to see this new installment in IMAX - hey, those tickets are expensive when you don’t have spare cash to throw around! - I knew I still had to take the time to watch the film on the big screen. No TV could possibly do justice to an epic sci-fi tale of the Blade Runner variety, at least not for an introductory experience.

Bear with me, now, when I say that Blade Runner 2049 was a massive letdown. Yes, Roger Deakins’ stunning cinematography is practically guaranteed to earn him an Oscar nomination. And yes, the art direction, production design and set decoration further supports Denis Villeneuve‘s strengths regarding compelling visuals. I would also be totally fine with Renée April getting an Oscar nomination for costume design since the coat that Officer K (Ryan Gosling) wears throughout the film is incredible. Unfortunately, for the third year in a row (after Sicario and Arrival) my hopes for Villeneuve’s work have been dashed. For three years running he has fallen short of his ambitious ideas, whether attempting to concentrate on an idealistic DEA agent (Emily Blunt in Sicario), a linguist simultaneously mourning the death of her daughter and trying to make contact with aliens (Amy Adams in Arrival) or a Replicant Blade Runner (Ryan Gosling in Blade Runner 2049) who unravels a mystery about a female Replicant who was able to bear a child. All of these protagonists should be worthy of my undivided attention. Instead, Gosling - like one of Nexus’s new edition of Replicants - is just another in a continuing line of failed leads.

Part of the issue is Ryan Gosling’s own fault. In interviews I find him absolutely delightful, a funny and self-deprecating guy with a nicely offbeat sense of humor; in movies he is unremittingly bland. Whether we’re talking about The Notebook or Crazy, Stupid, Love or The Big Short, he never seems to have any discernible personality on film. It makes sense, then, that he would be chosen to play an android in Blade Runner 2049. But what does it say that he didn’t even play Officer K well? Replicants can be portrayed with emotion, if you recall Rutger Hauer, Sean Young, Daryl Hannah, Brion James and Joanna Cassidy in the original Blade Runner. Each actor breathed life into their characters in unique styles. So why couldn’t Villeneuve and screenwriters Hampton Fancher and Michael Green find a way to inject some flavor into their film’s characters?

The posters for Blade Runner 2049 imply that Harrison Ford and Jared Leto play important roles in the film, but in actuality, Leto’s “antagonist,” Niander Wallace, barely has any screen time and Ford’s returning antihero, Rick Deckard, doesn’t show up until the last third of the film. I enjoyed every moment he was onscreen, spitting his dialogue out with the same jaded sarcasm he had in the first film, but I wish the character had had more time to develop in the film. Wallace bears an undistinguished aura of evil, but what was supposed to be so special about him? Given the spotlight often put on his sightless eyes during “creepy” closeups, was his blindness really intended to be read as part of what defined him as bad (in which case, uh, what is that saying about disabilities)?

Next we have to take a look at the women of Blade Runner 2049. There are six notable female characters: Joi (Ana de Armas), a hologram who is a product created by Niander Wallace and who functions solely as K’s live-in girlfriend; Luv (Sylvia Hoeks), a Replicant who acts as Niander Wallace’s right-hand woman; Lieutenant Joshi (Robin Wright), K’s supervisor on the police force; Mariette (Mackenzie Davis), a "pleasure model” Replicant; Dr. Ana Stelline (Carla Juri), who works for the Wallace corporation in a capacity that I shouldn’t spoil for those who have not seen the film; and Freysa (Hiam Abbass), who plays a role that I similarly should not divulge. Of these six, Joi and Ana Stelline are the most sympathetic characters, but regardless of how these women’s actions are meant to be interpreted, the designs of these ladies are problematic.

Joi is an immediately likeable character, but since she is a product (and one who does not initially have a corporeal form), she does not have autonomy. With the push of a button, K can turn her off any time he wants, which I’m sure is an option a lot of dudes wish they had available for their girlfriends. Joi exists only to serve K, telling him how wonderful he is when he gets home from a long work day and providing whatever eye candy he desires (she can shapeshift to alter her clothing, hair and makeup). Should I ignore the fact that Joi has zero character development and applaud Blade Runner 2049 anyway for highlighting the ickiness of a future society where Joi-models are prevalent (thus eliminating the need for actual human women)? Maybe, but the film doesn’t bother to make a statement about this element of social interaction, other than the fact that it exists.

K is finally able to experience physical contact with Joi when she “syncs” with Mariette, a prostitute, to combine their bodies for a sexual encounter with K, resulting in my favorite shot in the film: an unsettling image of Joi and Mariette’s four blurry hands wrapping around the back of K’s head and caressing his hair. While this interlude incorporates an interesting degree of romantic intrigue - to what extent do K, Joi and Mariette understand what love is? - there is something a little too weird in the film’s dependence on the Madonna and Whore tropes, suggesting an either/or dichotomy where the only time a woman can possess both attributes is when she finds another person (technically a Replicant) who can temporarily provide the missing skills.

Luv is probably the best-developed female character, although since she is Niander Wallace’s servant, it is impossible to say where her allegiance to him ends and her own taste for violent retribution begins. Luv seems to genuinely savor hurting people, but I suppose that attitude was programmed into her by Wallace, which somewhat minimizes the cool factor in her badass fight scenes. It’s kind of odd, though, that she manages to outshine the film’s other resident tough gal, Lt. Joshi (I didn’t think anyone could outdo Robin Wright in this department, especially after Wonder Woman). Villeneuve and his writers couldn’t settle on how best to represent Joshi, so the character fluctuates between a generically butch stereotype and a leering boss who drinks too much and flirts with K. Again, not that women have to be only one thing, but I like consistency in characters rather than mixed messages. I wonder how much of Blade Runner 2049′s muddled and archaic depictions of women are thanks to Hampton Fancher, who also co-wrote the original Blade Runner’s screenplay, which was full of troublesome approaches to womanhood, sexuality and sexual consent.

In the end, the difference between Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049 is like the distinction between a human being and a Replicant. 2049 tries to live up to the originality of that which inspired it, but it lacks the soul of its predecessor. It really says something that the most heartfelt moments in Blade Runner 2049 are two references to Ridley Scott’s film: a pivotal scene in Wallace’s lair that conjures up the memory of Rachael (Sean Young) from the film, and a moment in the penultimate scene that reuses a key piece of music from Vangelis’s original Blade Runner score. I recognize that many viewers see Blade Runner 2049 as a masterpiece, and I have tried many times in the past week to understand why, but I’m hard-pressed to comprehend why I should have spent close to three hours sitting through such an unsatisfying project, other than being able to say I bravely weathered this particular storm.

P.S. (because I couldn’t figure out where else to write this): I don’t know how many viewers will know where I’m coming from, but for the cult classic freaks out there, let me propose this theory: Blade Runner 2049 is trying to be like Paul Morrissey’s notoriously wild horror-satire Flesh for Frankenstein (1973). Check it out: a really bizarre and wealthy man (Udo Kier/Jared Leto) and his devoted assistant (Arno Juerging/Sylvia Hoeks) endeavor to construct a set of superhumans (FfF) or humanoid robots (B42049), entities that will give birth to a new generation of superbeings that will take the place of their inferior progenitors and obediently do their master’s (Kier/Leto) bidding. In fact, there are two specific scenes that reminded me of Flesh for Frankenstein while watching Blade Runner 2049: when Niander Wallace kills the naked, infertile Replicant woman (ugh, what a terrible scene), it mirrors a moment in Flesh when Arno Juerging, the loyal assistant, tries to commence sex with Baron Frankenstein’s female zombie-monster by punching her in the stomach and fatally damaging her internal organs, resulting in a grotesque display of violence similar to what we see in Blade Runner 2049.

Secondly, when Luv battles K at the sea wall and she kisses him, she is mimicking an action that Niander Wallace carried out when he killed the Replicant woman; this is also reminiscent of Flesh for Frankenstein since the Arno Juerging character often does horrible, perverse things - like conflating his lust for the female zombie with a disturbingly compulsion for violence - because he is following his master’s patterns. Take all that analysis for what it’s worth, Blade Runner fans!

P.P.S. I am also convinced that Blade Runner 2049′s Las Vegas wasteland scene was either an homage to or a ripoff of Nastassja Kinski’s desert dream sequence from another of 1982′s finest cult offerings, Cat People. Even in the slightly faded YouTube upload of the clip, the orangeness cannot be overlooked.

11 notes · View notes