Author Topic: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible  (Read 3751383 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Tiops

  • Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21240 on: June 12, 2019, 11:47:17 AM »
someone plz make me an avatar of the cyberpunk trans girl :(

Can it be just the penis part?

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21241 on: June 12, 2019, 11:47:48 AM »
the secret to including trans people in your game is to make a 100% normal game with no trans people in it

then 3 months after release you hit them with the ol' JK Rowling

"Geralt was trans the entire game and you never realized it.  He's completely confident and fulfilled in his new body, and everyone sees him as and treats him as a man.  We did not address this in-game for the obvious reason of deadnaming, and because it's not relevant to the male self Geralt expresses now.  We also thought it an appropriate twisting of the knife to reveal this fact now to bigots everywhere: you were playing as a trans character all along.  :)  Cheers and stay Witching."
Uncle

marrec

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21242 on: June 12, 2019, 11:47:55 AM »
someone plz make me an avatar of the cyberpunk trans girl :(

I would but I like my job.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21243 on: June 12, 2019, 11:48:44 AM »
someone plz make me an avatar of the cyberpunk trans girl :(

Can it be just the penis part?

no :(
IYKYK

Tiops

  • Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21244 on: June 12, 2019, 11:49:04 AM »
the secret to including trans people in your game is to make a 100% normal game with no trans people in it

then 3 months after release you hit them with the ol' JK Rowling

"Geralt was trans the entire game and you never realized it.  He's completely confident and fulfilled in his new body, and everyone sees him as and treats him as a man.  We did not address this in-game for the obvious reason of deadnaming, and because it's not relevant to the male self Geralt expresses now.  We also thought it an appropriate twisting of the knife to reveal this fact now to bigots everywhere: you were playing as a trans character all along.  :)  Cheers and stay Witching."

I think that's a good solution, and not even mentioning later which character is or not. Just say "some of them are, we're not going to tell which because that would be deadnaming." Done, all well represented.

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21245 on: June 12, 2019, 11:49:10 AM »
http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/11/feature_why_nintendo_isnt_popular_in_poland

At least Nintendo refuses to do business with terrorists.
©@©™

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21246 on: June 12, 2019, 11:49:59 AM »
> constantly insists that trans women are women regardless of genitalia

> Gets an ad of a trans woman with a penis in a game, showing that trans women have become so accepted into that society that they have ads of obviously trans women in public

> this articulates a society where trans women are accepted

> REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

if anything at least they will have one happy ass customer in filler

marrec

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21247 on: June 12, 2019, 11:51:42 AM »
Reading the response the Red Strings Club dev wrote to Waypoint is pretty telling... like writing a strongly worded but polite letter to your hostage taker.

Anti-Monitor

  • Junior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21248 on: June 12, 2019, 11:51:52 AM »
Just so we’re clear, what is being discussed is that Cyberpunk is transphobic because it has a poster of a model with a big dick but otherwise female features? That’s it? Am I missing something?

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21249 on: June 12, 2019, 11:53:04 AM »
Just so we’re clear, what is being discussed is that Cyberpunk is transphobic because it has a poster of a model with a big dick but otherwise female features? That’s it? Am I missing something?
you're supposed to read this thread:
https://twitter.com/acvalens/status/1138767383475212288

Quote
Some gamer: “THE CYBERPUNK JOKE ISN’T DISRESPECTFUL DON’T YOU WANT TO NORMALIZE GIRLDICK?”

Me, realizing I now have to explain the nuances of fetishization and the cis gaze today:

Hyperfixating on a trans girl’s penis is very cis gazey; it has a long history of both ridicule and obsessive desire. The “joke” in Cyberpunk is that a woman is genderfucked and can now maintain a visible erection. It’s meant to shock, not endorse, and certainly not normalize.

And you know what? Even if CDPR didn’t have this history of transphobia — only trans women, enbies, and trans femme folks w/ penises can really, accurately walk through the nuances of being a femme-coded person with a penis. I can assure you we’re constantly three steps ahead


Like: I have an erotica Twine coming out next week (@BloodPactTwine) with two trans girls that have dicks. Both are used and feature. But I weave in their genitals in a way that feels feminine, soft, and affirming. There’s no shock value here, because girldick isn’t shocking.

If Cyberpunk 2077 treated girls’ dicks as just another facet of life, it would be fine. This ad shows that CDPR thinks trans people are weird, shocking, and fundamentally sexual. How do you “get” the joke? By looking at the model’s bulging erection. It’s a trope.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21250 on: June 12, 2019, 11:55:32 AM »
https://twitter.com/SpudFella/status/1138773850014060544

exactly, POLAND is out of control at this point

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21251 on: June 12, 2019, 11:56:10 AM »
Quote
Like: I have an erotica Twine coming out next week (@BloodPactTwine) with two trans girls that have dicks. Both are used and feature. But I weave in their genitals in a way that feels feminine, soft, and affirming. There’s no shock value here, because girldick isn’t shocking.

 :dead

exactly, POLAND is out of control at this point

time to invade Poland

 :hitler


GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21252 on: June 12, 2019, 11:58:44 AM »
someone plz make me an avatar of the cyberpunk trans girl :(

I mean I would, but its a 'zoom and enhance' of an offscreen photo from a closed doors nvidia ray tracing demo, or a screengrab from last years gameplay demo



which kind of makes you question why people are zoom and enhancing background details and then extrapolating that to decalre that to be the overt political messaging of the game

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21253 on: June 12, 2019, 11:58:59 AM »
I'm not saying we should invade Poland, but just boycotting isn't going to make it stop existing.

Coitus

  • Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21254 on: June 12, 2019, 11:59:08 AM »
Who cares?  Cyberpunk is going to be a shitty choose your own adventure novel pretending to be a game just like the Witcher games are. 

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21255 on: June 12, 2019, 11:59:29 AM »
I love twines about weaving genitals

honestly been thinking about getting a genital weave myself, the time is right
Uncle

BisMarckie

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21256 on: June 12, 2019, 12:00:02 PM »
We have now been returning fire since 5:45 AM
And from now on, we shall repay girldick for girldick!

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21257 on: June 12, 2019, 12:00:08 PM »
Quote
I love when cyberpunk games go against everything cyberpunk is about.
it's actually about ethics in cyberpunk

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21258 on: June 12, 2019, 12:00:11 PM »
someone plz make me an avatar of the cyberpunk trans girl :(

I mean I would, but its a 'zoom and enhance' of an offscreen photo from a closed doors nvidia ray tracing demo, or a screengrab from last years gameplay demo

(Image removed from quote.)

which kind of makes you question why people are zoom and enhancing background details and then extrapolating that to decalre that to be the overt political messaging of the game

:(
IYKYK

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21259 on: June 12, 2019, 12:01:06 PM »
I love twines about weaving genitals

honestly been thinking about getting a genital weave myself, the time is right

Just make sure your genital weave is feminine, soft, and affirming. Wouldn't want to make your girldick look shocking.

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21260 on: June 12, 2019, 12:02:00 PM »
Cindi I would totally do it, that is a thing that I do

But I'm busy at work  :(

In 4 hours I can
Uncle

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21261 on: June 12, 2019, 12:02:02 PM »
Just so we’re clear, what is being discussed is that Cyberpunk is transphobic because it has a poster of a model with a big dick but otherwise female features? That’s it? Am I missing something?
you're supposed to read this thread:
https://twitter.com/acvalens/status/1138767383475212288

Quote
Some gamer: “THE CYBERPUNK JOKE ISN’T DISRESPECTFUL DON’T YOU WANT TO NORMALIZE GIRLDICK?”

Me, realizing I now have to explain the nuances of fetishization and the cis gaze today:

Hyperfixating on a trans girl’s penis is very cis gazey; it has a long history of both ridicule and obsessive desire. The “joke” in Cyberpunk is that a woman is genderfucked and can now maintain a visible erection. It’s meant to shock, not endorse, and certainly not normalize.

And you know what? Even if CDPR didn’t have this history of transphobia — only trans women, enbies, and trans femme folks w/ penises can really, accurately walk through the nuances of being a femme-coded person with a penis. I can assure you we’re constantly three steps ahead


Like: I have an erotica Twine coming out next week (@BloodPactTwine) with two trans girls that have dicks. Both are used and feature. But I weave in their genitals in a way that feels feminine, soft, and affirming. There’s no shock value here, because girldick isn’t shocking.

If Cyberpunk 2077 treated girls’ dicks as just another facet of life, it would be fine. This ad shows that CDPR thinks trans people are weird, shocking, and fundamentally sexual. How do you “get” the joke? By looking at the model’s bulging erection. It’s a trope.

Oh, its good that someone who, lets be charitable and not say creating or orchestrating, but commentating on this controversy, has the time to simultaneously promote their upcoming work

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21262 on: June 12, 2019, 12:03:08 PM »
is there a reason you can't just use the image as it is, is it not cropped
Uncle

BisMarckie

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21263 on: June 12, 2019, 12:03:33 PM »
I'm not saying we should invade Poland, but just boycotting isn't going to make it stop existing.

We need a fourth partition of Poland. I am not saying Germany should get its former territories back, but if and only if the Green Party wins the next election, it’‘s probably for the better.

nachobro

  • Live Más
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21264 on: June 12, 2019, 12:04:23 PM »
you're supposed to read this thread:
https://twitter.com/acvalens/status/1138767383475212288

Quote
Some gamer: “THE CYBERPUNK JOKE ISN’T DISRESPECTFUL DON’T YOU WANT TO NORMALIZE GIRLDICK?”

Me, realizing I now have to explain the nuances of fetishization and the cis gaze today:

Hyperfixating on a trans girl’s penis is very cis gazey; it has a long history of both ridicule and obsessive desire. The “joke” in Cyberpunk is that a woman is genderfucked and can now maintain a visible erection. It’s meant to shock, not endorse, and certainly not normalize.

And you know what? Even if CDPR didn’t have this history of transphobia — only trans women, enbies, and trans femme folks w/ penises can really, accurately walk through the nuances of being a femme-coded person with a penis. I can assure you we’re constantly three steps ahead


Like: I have an erotica Twine coming out next week (@BloodPactTwine) with two trans girls that have dicks. Both are used and feature. But I weave in their genitals in a way that feels feminine, soft, and affirming. There’s no shock value here, because girldick isn’t shocking.

If Cyberpunk 2077 treated girls’ dicks as just another facet of life, it would be fine. This ad shows that CDPR thinks trans people are weird, shocking, and fundamentally sexual. How do you “get” the joke? By looking at the model’s bulging erection. It’s a trope.

Quote
But I weave in their genitals in a way that feels feminine, soft, and affirming

newsfeed pls god

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21265 on: June 12, 2019, 12:04:32 PM »
Ever since John Kerry forgot about Poland, they've been getting away with far too much.
©@©™

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21266 on: June 12, 2019, 12:05:50 PM »
i guess i can crop it more?


Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21267 on: June 12, 2019, 12:06:27 PM »
Just so we’re clear, what is being discussed is that Cyberpunk is transphobic because it has a poster of a model with a big dick but otherwise female features? That’s it? Am I missing something?
you're supposed to read this thread:
https://twitter.com/acvalens/status/1138767383475212288

Quote
Some gamer: “THE CYBERPUNK JOKE ISN’T DISRESPECTFUL DON’T YOU WANT TO NORMALIZE GIRLDICK?”

Me, realizing I now have to explain the nuances of fetishization and the cis gaze today:

Hyperfixating on a trans girl’s penis is very cis gazey; it has a long history of both ridicule and obsessive desire. The “joke” in Cyberpunk is that a woman is genderfucked and can now maintain a visible erection. It’s meant to shock, not endorse, and certainly not normalize.

And you know what? Even if CDPR didn’t have this history of transphobia — only trans women, enbies, and trans femme folks w/ penises can really, accurately walk through the nuances of being a femme-coded person with a penis. I can assure you we’re constantly three steps ahead


Like: I have an erotica Twine coming out next week (@BloodPactTwine) with two trans girls that have dicks. Both are used and feature. But I weave in their genitals in a way that feels feminine, soft, and affirming. There’s no shock value here, because girldick isn’t shocking.

If Cyberpunk 2077 treated girls’ dicks as just another facet of life, it would be fine. This ad shows that CDPR thinks trans people are weird, shocking, and fundamentally sexual. How do you “get” the joke? By looking at the model’s bulging erection. It’s a trope.

Oh, its good that someone who, lets be charitable and not say creating or orchestrating, but commentating on this controversy, has the time to simultaneously promote their upcoming work

i fucking hate that shit.

in every one of those viral tweets the try hard mother fucker always go "SINCE PEOPLE ARE READING THIS PLEASE DONATE TO THIS FUNDRAISER" or whatever

fuck off. It's always reassuring when their viral tweet has 200k likes and their beg tweet has 5.
IYKYK

Leadbelly

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21268 on: June 12, 2019, 12:06:32 PM »
His teeth were so rotted that they pulled all of them and gave him dentures. Now he no longer is afraid of smiling and you seeing that so instead of his old creepy grin he has a new one.

His head is normal sized so the personal grooming/shaving does a lot when you can't see the rest of that body. People thought he was actually losing weight till he showed up to some event. :doge

Not really dentures as such. He has had tooth implants. And he has lost weight. The fact that he turns up to events walking is evidence of that. Before he was unable to walk.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21269 on: June 12, 2019, 12:07:09 PM »
is it objectifying enough yet?


agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21270 on: June 12, 2019, 12:07:59 PM »
i guess i can crop it more?

(Image removed from quote.)

ef you benji, I spent two minutes on this


benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21271 on: June 12, 2019, 12:08:16 PM »
Yep. Threads like these make it easy to see why the alt-right thrives in the gaming community.
BAN RESETERA.COM

DO IT YOU COWARDS

BisMarckie

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21272 on: June 12, 2019, 12:08:42 PM »
I think it‘s the second time I have watched them form their narrative speak their truth in real time(first one was the ArenaNet firings :delicious) and it‘s simply fascinating.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21273 on: June 12, 2019, 12:08:55 PM »
ty benji and nacho for the avvies
IYKYK

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21274 on: June 12, 2019, 12:09:31 PM »
Quote
Stonewall would’ve never happened if we just played nice and gave in to the bullshit from the gender norm community while hoping things get better.

I don’t expect straight people to understand the fight that the queer community has put itself through, but give us respect when we stand up against bigotry if you’re a so called ally.
Quote from: Robin, translesbian moderator
What bothers me most about situations like this is how exhausting it is to be consistently told these things are "one bad actor". Somewhere in the thick of things there's a debate to be had about how responsible the entire body of a company is for shit like this, sure, but it surely does not start and end with one individual. This does not occur over and over again in a vacuum.

Also, it isn't exclusive to CD Projekt Red, this is the culture at large.
BAN POLAND

DO IT YOU COWARDS

marrec

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21275 on: June 12, 2019, 12:10:11 PM »
Is all internet outrage really just a product of marketing?

Don Rumata

  • Hard To Be A John
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21276 on: June 12, 2019, 12:10:30 PM »
someone plz make me an avatar of the cyberpunk trans girl :(


There's only a shitty slanted screenshot, so i did the best i could.

source is here, btw:
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/cyberpunk-2077-nvidia-partnership-ray-tracing/

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21277 on: June 12, 2019, 12:10:38 PM »
someone plz make me an avatar of the cyberpunk trans girl :(

I mean I would, but its a 'zoom and enhance' of an offscreen photo from a closed doors nvidia ray tracing demo, or a screengrab from last years gameplay demo

(Image removed from quote.)

which kind of makes you question why people are zoom and enhancing background details and then extrapolating that to decalre that to be the overt political messaging of the game

:(



good as I can do :trumps

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21278 on: June 12, 2019, 12:11:07 PM »
Quote
Oppression isn't always conscious or intentional. Being part of an hegemony means that you are part of the group that oppresses.
BAN BANS

DO IT YOU COWARDS

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21279 on: June 12, 2019, 12:12:19 PM »
dios mio all of these avvies

thank you boys
IYKYK

BisMarckie

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21280 on: June 12, 2019, 12:16:04 PM »
Quote
Stonewall would’ve never happened if we just played nice and gave in to the bullshit from the gender norm community while hoping things get better.

I don’t expect straight people to understand the fight that the queer community has put itself through, but give us respect when we stand up against bigotry if you’re a so called ally.
Quote from: Robin, translesbian moderator
What bothers me most about situations like this is how exhausting it is to be consistently told these things are "one bad actor". Somewhere in the thick of things there's a debate to be had about how responsible the entire body of a company is for shit like this, sure, but it surely does not start and end with one individual. This does not occur over and over again in a vacuum.

Also, it isn't exclusive to CD Projekt Red, this is the culture at large.
BAN POLAND

DO IT YOU COWARDS

You know who‘s fault it is that Poland even exists?

That‘s right, America!



Woodrow Wilson :pacspit

Raist

  • Winner of the Baited Award 2018
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21281 on: June 12, 2019, 12:17:04 PM »
I don't know why anyone is surprised.

They're called CD Projekt RED.

Of course they're a bunch of russian nazis who hate the LGBTQ+ community.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
CD stands for Communist Dawn btw
[close]

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21282 on: June 12, 2019, 12:18:29 PM »
Quote
No way in hell that these sort of things are unintentional and based on ignorance about minorities. The guys on CDPR are doing these king of shit with purpose The same way depicting latinos in the demo.
BAN

oh forget it

BisMarckie

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21283 on: June 12, 2019, 12:19:43 PM »
#BDSPoland

joeboy101

  • TheBore rulez
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21284 on: June 12, 2019, 12:20:40 PM »
We clearly need a Diggeh style disclaimer post for all future threads featuring CDPR games. People need to KNOW! How else will peace come to the victims?

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21285 on: June 12, 2019, 12:21:51 PM »
Nah, I’m not going to apologize for being tired of straight white males. It’s exhausting dealing with the bigotry and intolerance here.
see what i'm saying about ResetERA.com, it's clearly a Polish webforum with all of this on it

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21286 on: June 12, 2019, 12:23:51 PM »
Apparently, this is the next outrage:

https://twitter.com/RaeofSun95/status/1138777079233880064

Which ignores that the Voodoo Boys, at least, have been part of the Cyberpunk tabletop games since the 1991 sourcebook, written by Mike Pondsmith, who is black.
dog

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21287 on: June 12, 2019, 12:23:57 PM »
wait, is the fee-male in the ad Polish? because that could change everything

venereology

  • Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21288 on: June 12, 2019, 12:25:07 PM »
Remember the time waypoint posted an article written by a CIS MALE about how a game was supposedly transphobic and the creator of the game spoke out and turned out to be trans

lol

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

that was Danielle and she doubled down on it. I guess I didn't expect waypoint of all places to harbor TERF writing but hey

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21289 on: June 12, 2019, 12:25:49 PM »
Apparently, this is the next outrage:

Which ignores that the Voodoo Boys, at least, have been part of the Cyberpunk tabletop games since the 1991 sourcebook, written by Mike Pondsmith, who is black.
ya they got thread about that too sorta: https://www.resetera.com/threads/rps-cyberpunk-2077s-e3-demo-has-weak-gunplay-and-unimaginative-stereotypes.122727/

i've admittingly been stealing from both because it's the same posters talking about the Polish Plot in both

the trans one has more anger and talking about people dying though, apparently racism is less bad than having a woman with a dick

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21290 on: June 12, 2019, 12:26:52 PM »
Apparently, this is the next outrage:

Which ignores that the Voodoo Boys, at least, have been part of the Cyberpunk tabletop games since the 1991 sourcebook, written by Mike Pondsmith, who is black.
ya they got thread about that too sorta: https://www.resetera.com/threads/rps-cyberpunk-2077s-e3-demo-has-weak-gunplay-and-unimaginative-stereotypes.122727/

i've admittingly been stealing from both because it's the same posters talking about the Polish Plot in both

the trans one has more anger and talking about people dying though, apparently racism is less bad than having a woman with a dick

Guns are good, the penis is evil.
©@©™

BisMarckie

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21291 on: June 12, 2019, 12:27:06 PM »
I think the evil gang should be ethnically Polish. Then you invade their home turf and kill them for not being progressive enough. Your goal in the game should be  to erase them from this game world because they are genetically predisposed to become bigots.

nachobro

  • Live Más
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21292 on: June 12, 2019, 12:27:20 PM »
has resetti called mike pondsmith a coon yet? seems about up their alley

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21293 on: June 12, 2019, 12:28:43 PM »
Quote
A team had to move this asset through the development process (design, implement, approve, and program in that asset among other things). There were plenty of places this could have been flagged and changed. This was a team effort, and because of that CDPR totally deserves to be called out. There are smarter ways to show a world filled with extreme levels of transhumanism that don't include backhanded transphobic "jokes".
this guy is ignoring that the Polish government ordered this

marrec

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21294 on: June 12, 2019, 12:29:45 PM »
Apparently, this is the next outrage:

https://twitter.com/RaeofSun95/status/1138777079233880064

Which ignores that the Voodoo Boys, at least, have been part of the Cyberpunk tabletop games since the 1991 sourcebook, written by Mike Pondsmith, who is black.

God damnit...

They are going to LOSE THEIR DAMN MINDS when they start digging into WoD writings for Bloodlines 2.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21295 on: June 12, 2019, 12:29:58 PM »
I’m not going to let you come for me like that, sis.

It IS telling because we’ve had numerous accounts in this thread banned for this very thing, burner accounts with little posts except to spread alt-right hate. I’m going to call out that shit. I’m not going to let straight males dismiss this serious issue without a fight.

this dude lol

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21296 on: June 12, 2019, 12:29:59 PM »
We clearly need a Diggeh style disclaimer post for all future threads featuring CDPR games. People need to KNOW! How else will peace come to the victims?

I got you fam
Yeh I slipped and put the red on there iny my early morning haze. Honestly not the best time to be trying to delve into this, likely still isn't when I consider the bird's nest atop my head and the muted dial-up sounds within when my brain tries to connect to anything.

Fundamentally that changes little for me though, and I can get that that's a strict reaction to something for someone, nonsensical even with some of the replies here and perhaps your own referencing of Bethesda and their structure. So, as you appear to be going in earnest I'll try to break it down and foray into the wood of words once more. In doing so I'll likely cover points not in your post, perhaps you completely agree with them, just to give some bedrock around it considering some of the replies here.

This is someone choosing not to buy a game, that's it.

It's easy to envisage or act like people unhappy in this thread are red-eyed and crazed, frothing at the mouth, frantically typing their posts as they conitnue to stab needles into tiny Geralt dolls. In reality though, it's just people who are considering their purchasing decision and deciding they don't feel comfortable buying an entertainment product.

The attempt to paint people with the issue as being at an extreme, or overreacting is a common one. It's a tired tactic to win cheap points in the argument. If you can dismiss this all as someone throwing a tantrum and doing something totally unreasonable then you're golden. Look how upset this person is, they must be unstable. They're obviously just being emotional.

People blame companies for the actions over issues, that's how accountability works in the corporate world.

People blame, criticize and hold companies accountable for the actions of their employees. This really isn't anything that should need to be explained and the fact we've had people doing so is frankly bizarre. A company as it's core is a fictional entity. It literally doesn't exist. You have offices, employees, money, product, letterheaded paper and more. You pieces of paper and legal documents that define what the company is, who owns it and more but the actual company itself is immaterial.

Which is kind of the whole point. You have this entity to challenge and criticize, or respect and follow. One purpose of this shell is very much to provide a blank form capture for the business or institution as a whole, as opposed to any singular individual. So the idea that noone should criticize a company in favour of an individual is one that's so childlike in its naivety I can't take it seriously, especially if you're growing up in any modern society. When you go on to suggest it's "fucking cowardly" to criticize a company instead of directly targetting specific employees then, sorry, but this abundantly clear that your only issue with this all is that it's CDPR/CDP/GoG involved, who have happened to make some absolutely stellar video games in their past.

I highly doubt if they saw someone criticizing one of the major banks or supermarkets they'd be willing to type paragraph upon paragraph about how it's "fucking cowardly" to attack a company instead of individual people.

It wasn't the company though, it was a person on twitter!

Again, this level of naivety and feigned ignorance over things that are common practice in every other facet of business and industry is one that's hard to take seriously. The person didn't just fart and land on the desk in the office, primed to write a shitty tweet. They were hired, they were told the remits of their position, they may or may not have had the tweet vetted by at least one other employee before it was sent – and yes, I have worked within marketing departments of large organizations. It's rarely some spotted teen who's been allowed to run rampant with the front-facing image of the company without restriction.

That's what this is, and that's what twitter is. It's a very conscious front-face to your company that can be used to directly engage with your community. Anyone hiring for, and anyone applying for, this position would know this and understand the importance of it.

"Gut writes shitty tweet, guy gets fired" is a reduction of what happens.

Hiring for the above positions should rely on some background into the person their hiring's activity on social media, not least because this person is front-facing in a digital position where they'll actively been communicating on your behalf. It's not some NSA level nonsense, just a cursory scroll through public pages to get a sense of some of their vocal positions. It's basic due-dilligence for the role, done in minutes while assessing candidates. So it's likely it occured and nothing was raised, but it's a potential area for things like this to be caught.

So you've got your written job spec (likely written/agreed by people outside of the hiring manager). You have your hiring manager. Now you've hired the little would-be devil. You have an induction, you train him. At this point you might be congizent of the fact you've had prior twitter controversies within your family of companies, and knowing how one can affect the other perhaps you labour the point of being careful what to post. It's not comprehensive but it's key guidance on the tone your company wishes to write with, the remits of what they can and can't go for (politics, social issues, competition, the like). This is an important step as it's the bridge between their past experience within media positions, and how you would like for them to represent you. This can be as vague and as strict as it likes, but it's defined by the client/employer.

So.. guy writes shitty tweet.. From this point it's not even about the guy any more. That part of the story is locked in time, and now the only matter of meaning is how the management and wider entity react.

It's here where people galvanise their long lasting opinions, not the actual act.

Employees have done shit things in abundance, it's a tricky thing for a company to handle granted but if done right it can almost completely reverse the tide of good-will. This is because we largely recognise that yes, any employee of a company can go rogue and do whatever so it can be hard to not have such an event occur within a large organization over the span of many years. Instead it shifts to how this event is handled, whether similar events have occured recently, how swiftly a response is made, what that response is and whether ongoing any shift or change. It varies from situation from situation but you get the gist of it.

In this case it's where most people feel GOG and CDP have let the ball drop.

Firing the person isn't the start and end of this, nor is it particularly worthy of praise (nor scorn either). You would expect any major company to fire someone over transphobic tweets. There's poorly worded tweets and then there's mocking the entire notion of gender identity. We've established there's internal scrutiny to be cast on the hiring and training process, but now it shifts to how they were fired and how that was communicated with those hurt.

"It's gotten too much" as the sole reason for firing someone for the above is pathetic, and – with that we have – honestly doesn't point to much more than "you've become more hassle than you're worth to us".

Firing the person certainly shows they understand that there was a negative reaction to their actions, but in isolation it doesn't indicate much more. You have a very real financial and business incentive to fire them, even outside of any concern for LGBTQ+ rights. So further clarification is needed at that stage, to see whether CDP/GOG understand the ramifications of the tweet within the community and how it's hurt players. You'd want a statement put out pretty prompty to reassure that, to which we got:
(Image removed from quote.)
https://twitter.com/CyberpunkGame/status/1031930291772899329

Which, as with the above, misses the mark again. "Sorry to all those offended" is not an apology for the action. It's an apology solely if it offended you, when it should be an apology regardless because the issue is the mocking in the tweet not the reaction to it. Harming somoene is rarely anyone's intention, so again – nothing really much here. No outreach toward the trans and NB community, just a "sorry for the offense".

So it's felt that nothing was really understood in what was actually wrong in the scenario, despite a corrective action (the firing) being made. Then you have this pop up:
(Image removed from quote.)

Which is responded to with this:
https://twitter.com/GOGcom/status/1054706033887793152

Even less understanding and zero apology. Which will lead onto..

GOG, CDP and CDPR are all separate!

In the wake of the GOG tweet the fired community manager said this:
Quote
Halliday told Eurogamer that this tweet was not his doing, and that the accounts for CD Projekt Red’s games are run by seperate teams, but it was still easily seen externally as part of a trend of bad tweets from the company’s social media accounts.
..because that's exactly what it was. CDP aren't stupid, they're more than aware that people interlink the three entities and they were always going to when they never shied away, or attempted to distinguish themselves from, the association.

Naturally they want all of the good will from The Witcher 3 and the CDPR brand to splash over onto GOG and it has. However you can't try and have that be a one way street. If you're congizent of the fact that your brands are associated and you're leveraging good will from that, then you need to accept that if one is stained by something like a PR mishap then it is likely to have consequences for the wider group. Certainly if you're having repeat issues on social media, there should be a focus on ensuring group-wide communications are consistent and managed.

So when you find a situation where two parts of this connected group are getting in hot water about mocking the exact same topic, and when apologies or no-apology is given in the wake are unsatisfactory you might land on not wishing to support any aspect of CDP until they make strides toward changing that attitude, and actually understanding the impact the actions have had within the community. Frankly, if they don't show much regard for the community in the wake of it being mocked when why should the community follow them blindly into the next purchase?

Vote with your wallets!

Ah yes, the long-repeated mantra that's brought out and vigirously waved around when microtransactions, loot boxes, sub-60fps performance and the like are found in games. We must vote with our wallets to discourage these actions so that they might alter them in the future!

Except when it comes to trans and NB rights when met against CDPR. If it was loot boxes and The Witcher 4, there'd be an uproar and voting of wallets. If there were transphobic comments put out by an EA social media account for which little was done to remedy the issue, people would cry to vote with our wallets.

This combination though; we have a minority group that's commonly not taken seriously against one of the most beloved developers this generation, with legions of people who feel emotionally invested because these are the people that made their game of the generation. This becomes a little different. It shouldn't, but it does and it's something that's obvious in a number of interactions in the thread.

Still not done?

That's all to say that choosing to not buy a product from a company because of their actions, and how that's affected you, is nothing new. It's nothing extreme. It happens in every B2C and B2B industry and it's certainly nothing worthy of rebuke. It's an incredibly harmless action that the majority here promote unless it's within a certain few set of circumstances.

marrec

  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21297 on: June 12, 2019, 12:31:39 PM »
We clearly need a Diggeh style disclaimer post for all future threads featuring CDPR games. People need to KNOW! How else will peace come to the victims?

I got you fam
Yeh I slipped and put the red on there iny my early morning haze. Honestly not the best time to be trying to delve into this, likely still isn't when I consider the bird's nest atop my head and the muted dial-up sounds within when my brain tries to connect to anything.

Fundamentally that changes little for me though, and I can get that that's a strict reaction to something for someone, nonsensical even with some of the replies here and perhaps your own referencing of Bethesda and their structure. So, as you appear to be going in earnest I'll try to break it down and foray into the wood of words once more. In doing so I'll likely cover points not in your post, perhaps you completely agree with them, just to give some bedrock around it considering some of the replies here.

This is someone choosing not to buy a game, that's it.

It's easy to envisage or act like people unhappy in this thread are red-eyed and crazed, frothing at the mouth, frantically typing their posts as they conitnue to stab needles into tiny Geralt dolls. In reality though, it's just people who are considering their purchasing decision and deciding they don't feel comfortable buying an entertainment product.

The attempt to paint people with the issue as being at an extreme, or overreacting is a common one. It's a tired tactic to win cheap points in the argument. If you can dismiss this all as someone throwing a tantrum and doing something totally unreasonable then you're golden. Look how upset this person is, they must be unstable. They're obviously just being emotional.

People blame companies for the actions over issues, that's how accountability works in the corporate world.

People blame, criticize and hold companies accountable for the actions of their employees. This really isn't anything that should need to be explained and the fact we've had people doing so is frankly bizarre. A company as it's core is a fictional entity. It literally doesn't exist. You have offices, employees, money, product, letterheaded paper and more. You pieces of paper and legal documents that define what the company is, who owns it and more but the actual company itself is immaterial.

Which is kind of the whole point. You have this entity to challenge and criticize, or respect and follow. One purpose of this shell is very much to provide a blank form capture for the business or institution as a whole, as opposed to any singular individual. So the idea that noone should criticize a company in favour of an individual is one that's so childlike in its naivety I can't take it seriously, especially if you're growing up in any modern society. When you go on to suggest it's "fucking cowardly" to criticize a company instead of directly targetting specific employees then, sorry, but this abundantly clear that your only issue with this all is that it's CDPR/CDP/GoG involved, who have happened to make some absolutely stellar video games in their past.

I highly doubt if they saw someone criticizing one of the major banks or supermarkets they'd be willing to type paragraph upon paragraph about how it's "fucking cowardly" to attack a company instead of individual people.

It wasn't the company though, it was a person on twitter!

Again, this level of naivety and feigned ignorance over things that are common practice in every other facet of business and industry is one that's hard to take seriously. The person didn't just fart and land on the desk in the office, primed to write a shitty tweet. They were hired, they were told the remits of their position, they may or may not have had the tweet vetted by at least one other employee before it was sent – and yes, I have worked within marketing departments of large organizations. It's rarely some spotted teen who's been allowed to run rampant with the front-facing image of the company without restriction.

That's what this is, and that's what twitter is. It's a very conscious front-face to your company that can be used to directly engage with your community. Anyone hiring for, and anyone applying for, this position would know this and understand the importance of it.

"Gut writes shitty tweet, guy gets fired" is a reduction of what happens.

Hiring for the above positions should rely on some background into the person their hiring's activity on social media, not least because this person is front-facing in a digital position where they'll actively been communicating on your behalf. It's not some NSA level nonsense, just a cursory scroll through public pages to get a sense of some of their vocal positions. It's basic due-dilligence for the role, done in minutes while assessing candidates. So it's likely it occured and nothing was raised, but it's a potential area for things like this to be caught.

So you've got your written job spec (likely written/agreed by people outside of the hiring manager). You have your hiring manager. Now you've hired the little would-be devil. You have an induction, you train him. At this point you might be congizent of the fact you've had prior twitter controversies within your family of companies, and knowing how one can affect the other perhaps you labour the point of being careful what to post. It's not comprehensive but it's key guidance on the tone your company wishes to write with, the remits of what they can and can't go for (politics, social issues, competition, the like). This is an important step as it's the bridge between their past experience within media positions, and how you would like for them to represent you. This can be as vague and as strict as it likes, but it's defined by the client/employer.

So.. guy writes shitty tweet.. From this point it's not even about the guy any more. That part of the story is locked in time, and now the only matter of meaning is how the management and wider entity react.

It's here where people galvanise their long lasting opinions, not the actual act.

Employees have done shit things in abundance, it's a tricky thing for a company to handle granted but if done right it can almost completely reverse the tide of good-will. This is because we largely recognise that yes, any employee of a company can go rogue and do whatever so it can be hard to not have such an event occur within a large organization over the span of many years. Instead it shifts to how this event is handled, whether similar events have occured recently, how swiftly a response is made, what that response is and whether ongoing any shift or change. It varies from situation from situation but you get the gist of it.

In this case it's where most people feel GOG and CDP have let the ball drop.

Firing the person isn't the start and end of this, nor is it particularly worthy of praise (nor scorn either). You would expect any major company to fire someone over transphobic tweets. There's poorly worded tweets and then there's mocking the entire notion of gender identity. We've established there's internal scrutiny to be cast on the hiring and training process, but now it shifts to how they were fired and how that was communicated with those hurt.

"It's gotten too much" as the sole reason for firing someone for the above is pathetic, and – with that we have – honestly doesn't point to much more than "you've become more hassle than you're worth to us".

Firing the person certainly shows they understand that there was a negative reaction to their actions, but in isolation it doesn't indicate much more. You have a very real financial and business incentive to fire them, even outside of any concern for LGBTQ+ rights. So further clarification is needed at that stage, to see whether CDP/GOG understand the ramifications of the tweet within the community and how it's hurt players. You'd want a statement put out pretty prompty to reassure that, to which we got:
(Image removed from quote.)
https://twitter.com/CyberpunkGame/status/1031930291772899329

Which, as with the above, misses the mark again. "Sorry to all those offended" is not an apology for the action. It's an apology solely if it offended you, when it should be an apology regardless because the issue is the mocking in the tweet not the reaction to it. Harming somoene is rarely anyone's intention, so again – nothing really much here. No outreach toward the trans and NB community, just a "sorry for the offense".

So it's felt that nothing was really understood in what was actually wrong in the scenario, despite a corrective action (the firing) being made. Then you have this pop up:
(Image removed from quote.)

Which is responded to with this:
https://twitter.com/GOGcom/status/1054706033887793152

Even less understanding and zero apology. Which will lead onto..

GOG, CDP and CDPR are all separate!

In the wake of the GOG tweet the fired community manager said this:
Quote
Halliday told Eurogamer that this tweet was not his doing, and that the accounts for CD Projekt Red’s games are run by seperate teams, but it was still easily seen externally as part of a trend of bad tweets from the company’s social media accounts.
..because that's exactly what it was. CDP aren't stupid, they're more than aware that people interlink the three entities and they were always going to when they never shied away, or attempted to distinguish themselves from, the association.

Naturally they want all of the good will from The Witcher 3 and the CDPR brand to splash over onto GOG and it has. However you can't try and have that be a one way street. If you're congizent of the fact that your brands are associated and you're leveraging good will from that, then you need to accept that if one is stained by something like a PR mishap then it is likely to have consequences for the wider group. Certainly if you're having repeat issues on social media, there should be a focus on ensuring group-wide communications are consistent and managed.

So when you find a situation where two parts of this connected group are getting in hot water about mocking the exact same topic, and when apologies or no-apology is given in the wake are unsatisfactory you might land on not wishing to support any aspect of CDP until they make strides toward changing that attitude, and actually understanding the impact the actions have had within the community. Frankly, if they don't show much regard for the community in the wake of it being mocked when why should the community follow them blindly into the next purchase?

Vote with your wallets!

Ah yes, the long-repeated mantra that's brought out and vigirously waved around when microtransactions, loot boxes, sub-60fps performance and the like are found in games. We must vote with our wallets to discourage these actions so that they might alter them in the future!

Except when it comes to trans and NB rights when met against CDPR. If it was loot boxes and The Witcher 4, there'd be an uproar and voting of wallets. If there were transphobic comments put out by an EA social media account for which little was done to remedy the issue, people would cry to vote with our wallets.

This combination though; we have a minority group that's commonly not taken seriously against one of the most beloved developers this generation, with legions of people who feel emotionally invested because these are the people that made their game of the generation. This becomes a little different. It shouldn't, but it does and it's something that's obvious in a number of interactions in the thread.

Still not done?

That's all to say that choosing to not buy a product from a company because of their actions, and how that's affected you, is nothing new. It's nothing extreme. It happens in every B2C and B2B industry and it's certainly nothing worthy of rebuke. It's an incredibly harmless action that the majority here promote unless it's within a certain few set of circumstances.

I hope you fuckers don't start endlessly quoting this again

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21298 on: June 12, 2019, 12:35:48 PM »
We clearly need a Diggeh style disclaimer post for all future threads featuring CDPR games. People need to KNOW! How else will peace come to the victims?

I got you fam
Yeh I slipped and put the red on there iny my early morning haze. Honestly not the best time to be trying to delve into this, likely still isn't when I consider the bird's nest atop my head and the muted dial-up sounds within when my brain tries to connect to anything.

Fundamentally that changes little for me though, and I can get that that's a strict reaction to something for someone, nonsensical even with some of the replies here and perhaps your own referencing of Bethesda and their structure. So, as you appear to be going in earnest I'll try to break it down and foray into the wood of words once more. In doing so I'll likely cover points not in your post, perhaps you completely agree with them, just to give some bedrock around it considering some of the replies here.

This is someone choosing not to buy a game, that's it.

It's easy to envisage or act like people unhappy in this thread are red-eyed and crazed, frothing at the mouth, frantically typing their posts as they conitnue to stab needles into tiny Geralt dolls. In reality though, it's just people who are considering their purchasing decision and deciding they don't feel comfortable buying an entertainment product.

The attempt to paint people with the issue as being at an extreme, or overreacting is a common one. It's a tired tactic to win cheap points in the argument. If you can dismiss this all as someone throwing a tantrum and doing something totally unreasonable then you're golden. Look how upset this person is, they must be unstable. They're obviously just being emotional.

People blame companies for the actions over issues, that's how accountability works in the corporate world.

People blame, criticize and hold companies accountable for the actions of their employees. This really isn't anything that should need to be explained and the fact we've had people doing so is frankly bizarre. A company as it's core is a fictional entity. It literally doesn't exist. You have offices, employees, money, product, letterheaded paper and more. You pieces of paper and legal documents that define what the company is, who owns it and more but the actual company itself is immaterial.

Which is kind of the whole point. You have this entity to challenge and criticize, or respect and follow. One purpose of this shell is very much to provide a blank form capture for the business or institution as a whole, as opposed to any singular individual. So the idea that noone should criticize a company in favour of an individual is one that's so childlike in its naivety I can't take it seriously, especially if you're growing up in any modern society. When you go on to suggest it's "fucking cowardly" to criticize a company instead of directly targetting specific employees then, sorry, but this abundantly clear that your only issue with this all is that it's CDPR/CDP/GoG involved, who have happened to make some absolutely stellar video games in their past.

I highly doubt if they saw someone criticizing one of the major banks or supermarkets they'd be willing to type paragraph upon paragraph about how it's "fucking cowardly" to attack a company instead of individual people.

It wasn't the company though, it was a person on twitter!

Again, this level of naivety and feigned ignorance over things that are common practice in every other facet of business and industry is one that's hard to take seriously. The person didn't just fart and land on the desk in the office, primed to write a shitty tweet. They were hired, they were told the remits of their position, they may or may not have had the tweet vetted by at least one other employee before it was sent – and yes, I have worked within marketing departments of large organizations. It's rarely some spotted teen who's been allowed to run rampant with the front-facing image of the company without restriction.

That's what this is, and that's what twitter is. It's a very conscious front-face to your company that can be used to directly engage with your community. Anyone hiring for, and anyone applying for, this position would know this and understand the importance of it.

"Gut writes shitty tweet, guy gets fired" is a reduction of what happens.

Hiring for the above positions should rely on some background into the person their hiring's activity on social media, not least because this person is front-facing in a digital position where they'll actively been communicating on your behalf. It's not some NSA level nonsense, just a cursory scroll through public pages to get a sense of some of their vocal positions. It's basic due-dilligence for the role, done in minutes while assessing candidates. So it's likely it occured and nothing was raised, but it's a potential area for things like this to be caught.

So you've got your written job spec (likely written/agreed by people outside of the hiring manager). You have your hiring manager. Now you've hired the little would-be devil. You have an induction, you train him. At this point you might be congizent of the fact you've had prior twitter controversies within your family of companies, and knowing how one can affect the other perhaps you labour the point of being careful what to post. It's not comprehensive but it's key guidance on the tone your company wishes to write with, the remits of what they can and can't go for (politics, social issues, competition, the like). This is an important step as it's the bridge between their past experience within media positions, and how you would like for them to represent you. This can be as vague and as strict as it likes, but it's defined by the client/employer.

So.. guy writes shitty tweet.. From this point it's not even about the guy any more. That part of the story is locked in time, and now the only matter of meaning is how the management and wider entity react.

It's here where people galvanise their long lasting opinions, not the actual act.

Employees have done shit things in abundance, it's a tricky thing for a company to handle granted but if done right it can almost completely reverse the tide of good-will. This is because we largely recognise that yes, any employee of a company can go rogue and do whatever so it can be hard to not have such an event occur within a large organization over the span of many years. Instead it shifts to how this event is handled, whether similar events have occured recently, how swiftly a response is made, what that response is and whether ongoing any shift or change. It varies from situation from situation but you get the gist of it.

In this case it's where most people feel GOG and CDP have let the ball drop.

Firing the person isn't the start and end of this, nor is it particularly worthy of praise (nor scorn either). You would expect any major company to fire someone over transphobic tweets. There's poorly worded tweets and then there's mocking the entire notion of gender identity. We've established there's internal scrutiny to be cast on the hiring and training process, but now it shifts to how they were fired and how that was communicated with those hurt.

"It's gotten too much" as the sole reason for firing someone for the above is pathetic, and – with that we have – honestly doesn't point to much more than "you've become more hassle than you're worth to us".

Firing the person certainly shows they understand that there was a negative reaction to their actions, but in isolation it doesn't indicate much more. You have a very real financial and business incentive to fire them, even outside of any concern for LGBTQ+ rights. So further clarification is needed at that stage, to see whether CDP/GOG understand the ramifications of the tweet within the community and how it's hurt players. You'd want a statement put out pretty prompty to reassure that, to which we got:
(Image removed from quote.)
https://twitter.com/CyberpunkGame/status/1031930291772899329

Which, as with the above, misses the mark again. "Sorry to all those offended" is not an apology for the action. It's an apology solely if it offended you, when it should be an apology regardless because the issue is the mocking in the tweet not the reaction to it. Harming somoene is rarely anyone's intention, so again – nothing really much here. No outreach toward the trans and NB community, just a "sorry for the offense".

So it's felt that nothing was really understood in what was actually wrong in the scenario, despite a corrective action (the firing) being made. Then you have this pop up:
(Image removed from quote.)

Which is responded to with this:
https://twitter.com/GOGcom/status/1054706033887793152

Even less understanding and zero apology. Which will lead onto..

GOG, CDP and CDPR are all separate!

In the wake of the GOG tweet the fired community manager said this:
Quote
Halliday told Eurogamer that this tweet was not his doing, and that the accounts for CD Projekt Red’s games are run by seperate teams, but it was still easily seen externally as part of a trend of bad tweets from the company’s social media accounts.
..because that's exactly what it was. CDP aren't stupid, they're more than aware that people interlink the three entities and they were always going to when they never shied away, or attempted to distinguish themselves from, the association.

Naturally they want all of the good will from The Witcher 3 and the CDPR brand to splash over onto GOG and it has. However you can't try and have that be a one way street. If you're congizent of the fact that your brands are associated and you're leveraging good will from that, then you need to accept that if one is stained by something like a PR mishap then it is likely to have consequences for the wider group. Certainly if you're having repeat issues on social media, there should be a focus on ensuring group-wide communications are consistent and managed.

So when you find a situation where two parts of this connected group are getting in hot water about mocking the exact same topic, and when apologies or no-apology is given in the wake are unsatisfactory you might land on not wishing to support any aspect of CDP until they make strides toward changing that attitude, and actually understanding the impact the actions have had within the community. Frankly, if they don't show much regard for the community in the wake of it being mocked when why should the community follow them blindly into the next purchase?

Vote with your wallets!

Ah yes, the long-repeated mantra that's brought out and vigirously waved around when microtransactions, loot boxes, sub-60fps performance and the like are found in games. We must vote with our wallets to discourage these actions so that they might alter them in the future!

Except when it comes to trans and NB rights when met against CDPR. If it was loot boxes and The Witcher 4, there'd be an uproar and voting of wallets. If there were transphobic comments put out by an EA social media account for which little was done to remedy the issue, people would cry to vote with our wallets.

This combination though; we have a minority group that's commonly not taken seriously against one of the most beloved developers this generation, with legions of people who feel emotionally invested because these are the people that made their game of the generation. This becomes a little different. It shouldn't, but it does and it's something that's obvious in a number of interactions in the thread.

Still not done?

That's all to say that choosing to not buy a product from a company because of their actions, and how that's affected you, is nothing new. It's nothing extreme. It happens in every B2C and B2B industry and it's certainly nothing worthy of rebuke. It's an incredibly harmless action that the majority here promote unless it's within a certain few set of circumstances.

I hope you fuckers don't start endlessly quoting this again

why would we do that?

HaughtyFrank

  • Haughty and a little naughty
  • Senior Member
Re: River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible
« Reply #21299 on: June 12, 2019, 12:36:26 PM »
Quote
If they have an active trans community in their workforce why did they not consult with them before including this in the game?

I don't know how they can combine that state of mind with "minorities are not a monolith!"
« Last Edit: June 12, 2019, 12:40:43 PM by HaughtyFrank »