Is Cyperpunk 2077 a political game?

[Darkibone]

and you think that cyberpunk is not about the power relations between individuals

Oh, it absolutely is.
But something being about politics does not make it political.

For example, a neutral documentary about the civil war in the USA is not political, despite being about politics.
It would become political if it was taking sides or recommend actions as a lesson from that.

The game does not take a value judgment on almost anything, and it most certainly does not prescribe a certain behaviour.
You are totally free to LIKE the way society works in Cyberpunk, and you can even express that in many dialog choices...

Maybe that is nitpicking about the meaning of "political".
But your description of the game was very close to the definition of sociology, and then you turn around and say THAT is the definition of politics. Which it is not

 

[SpookyFX]

Maybe that is nitpicking about the meaning of "political".
But your description of the game was very close to the definition of sociology, and then you turn around and say THAT is the definition of politics. Which it is not

I do not think it is nitpicking. People abuse labels (loaded words that once upon a time had a lot of power) too much these days. It is better if we are all talking the same language if we really want to communicate.

Hence, at least understanding the meaning of the words we are using.

On the other hand maybe that is one of the reasons we like the game, we hear different things from the same song.

 

[Alt-Mikoshi]

To the OP. I am not even sure why this is even a question or why you are even surprised at it. Every single story shall have inevitable linkages to real-life societies. The authors need to have or reference a society in order to make a world that is believable.

Main issue I see is that it is overly glossed in the way that Silverhand completely ignores individual responsibility and all the blame goes to corporations regardless of how and who was responsible of giving them so much power. It is not as simple as "unchained capitalism", it is more that people allowed it to happen by their own complacency.

Taking a real world analogy; Google would not be so omnipresent if people forsake a lot of the commodity given by said company. Only reason arbitrary decisions made by Google affect peeps is because of their overdependence on it as the company did not magically spawn with omnipresent power, people gave that power to it due their inherent desire for convenience.

Silverhand and the whole "anti-corpo" mob just blindly hate corporations disregarding that the individual will of people were the ones who allowed it to grow.

Back to the original question; most games are going to have one or many political statements in one degree or another. It is silly to be surprised or wonder if it is even possible to not have any sort of political statement or view in a game where there's a defined story.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

To the OP. I am not even sure why this is even a question or why you are even surprised at it. Every single story shall have inevitable linkages to real-life societies. The authors need to have or reference a society in order to make a world that is believable.

Main issue I see is that it is overly glossed in the way that Silverhand completely ignores individual responsibility and all the blame goes to corporations regardless of how and who was responsible of giving them so much power. It is not as simple as "unchained capitalism", it is more that people allowed it to happen by their own complacency.

Taking a real world analogy; Google would not be so omnipresent if people forsake a lot of the commodity given by said company. Only reason arbitrary decisions made by Google affect peeps is because of their overdependence on it as the company did not magically spawn with omnipresent power, people gave that power to it due their inherent desire for convenience.

Silverhand and the whole "anti-corpo" mob just blindly hate corporations disregarding that the individual will of people were the ones who allowed it to grow.

Back to the original question; most games are going to have one or many political statements in one degree or another. It is silly to be surprised or wonder if it is even possible to not have any sort of political statement or view in a game where there's a defined story.

not really accurate, silverhand says the same thing you said, that people are accepting this. He actually made music to reach people and inspire change, He is very annoyed that his biggest fan listens to his music and hasn't gotten the spirit of his message.

However, the story glosses over Johnny's philosophy, probably partially because they didnt want to make it seem like Johnny is preaching to you. Which, is probably a disservice. Many players see Johnny as just some ranting guy, and a terrorist, even though there was actually a physical corporate war going on in night city at the time. And the whole operation was actually organized by militech. They give you very little information in the game unless you dig very deep. It almost seems like they go out of their way to muddy the lore so that the politics are less obvious.

Post automatically merged: Mar 10, 2021

Oh, it absolutely is.
But something being about politics does not make it political.

For example, a neutral documentary about the civil war in the USA is not political, despite being about politics.
It would become political if it was taking sides or recommend actions as a lesson from that.

The game does not take a value judgment on almost anything, and it most certainly does not prescribe a certain behaviour.
You are totally free to LIKE the way society works in Cyberpunk, and you can even express that in many dialog choices...

Maybe that is nitpicking about the meaning of "political".
But your description of the game was very close to the definition of sociology, and then you turn around and say THAT is the definition of politics. Which it is not

political doesn't necessarily mean a value judgement or taking sides.

though, I think its a bit of semantics to claim something is apolitical when it presents are certain system of government's logical future as a dystopia. Pondsmith even said cyberpunk is a warning, not an aspiration. Its less explicit, but it clearly presents a suboptimal future.

 

[Alt-Mikoshi]

not really accurate, silverhand says the same thing you said, that people are accepting this. He actually made music to reach people and inspire change, He is very annoyed that his biggest fan listens to his music and hasn't gotten the spirit of his message.

However, the story glosses over Johnny's philosophy, probably partially because they didnt want to make it seem like Johnny is preaching to you. Which, is probably a disservice. Many players see Johnny as just some ranting guy, and a terrorist, even though there was actually a physical corporate war going on in night city at the time. And the whole operation was actually organized by militech. They give you very little information in the game unless you dig very deep. It almost seems like they go out of their way to muddy the lore so that the politics are less obvious.

Silverhand also blames corporations for people's misery and has a very double standard regarding who's responsibility is.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

Silverhand also blames corporations for people's misery and has a very double standard regarding who's responsibility is.

oooh, you think its peoples fault because they allow the corporations to do whatever they want?

rereading your post, I don't think your perception is that accurate, when a guy buys a steak, he isn't really saying its cool to bribe a government, or approving of proxy wars in other countries. No one informs consumers of the practices of the company when they make a purchase.

especially in this specific case of cyberpunk, where arasaka's main product is security, weapons, and warriors, sold to corporations, not to regular communities, yet they dominate peoples lives in Night City.

 

[Alt-Mikoshi]

oooh, you think its peoples fault because they allow the corporations to do whatever they want?

For someone to gain power the larger majority must allow it in the first place. Saburo was a common man, wasn't born rich or anything, used his cunning to raise but alone he wouldn't be able to build anything as in any capitalist society if no one buys your crap, you cannot earn capital to grow and buy more assets.

People are as responsible for Arasaka's dominance as the Arasakas themselves; both are to blame, one for exploiting the trust of people and the people for blindly trusting a man and allowing it to harness so much power unchecked.

It is not an issue of one side being inherently good or the other inherently evil.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

For someone to gain power the larger majority must allow it in the first place. Saburo was a common man, wasn't born rich or anything, used his cunning to raise but alone he wouldn't be able to build anything as in any capitalist society if no one buys your crap, you cannot earn capital to grow and buy more assets.

People are as responsible for Arasaka's dominance as the Arasakas themselves; both are to blame, one for exploiting the trust of people and the people for blindly trusting a man and allowing it to harness so much power unchecked.

It is not an issue of one side being inherently good or the other inherently evil.

Arasaka, as I edited in my post, sells security to corporations, and manufactures weapons. You don't need the larger majority to allow anything. Corporations often dominate third world countries politics by bribing the people in charge. Or deals with more powerful countries that can dominate other countries. Saburo also was son of a war weapon manufacturer, not a self made man.

then there are corporations which simply buy and sell things of value. Like stocks.

 

[Alt-Mikoshi]

Arasaka, as I edited in my post, sells security to corporations, and manufactures weapons. You don't need the larger majority to allow anything. Corporations often dominate third world countries politics by bribing the people in charge. Or deals with more powerful countries that can dominate other countries.

then there are corporations which simply buy and sell things of value. Like stocks.

Arasaka did not start selling corporate assets to other corporations. Selling weapons to government agencies or private parties is mostly dependant on legislative decisions that allow the government to spend taxes into buying defense assets from a private entity; catch here? Who elected the government and allowed said government expenditures? If the people did not give plenipotentiary allowance to the government to use taxes to give excessive controlling power to a private entity Arasaka would not be nearly as big. The disdain or disinterest of the larger populace regarding how they are governed is also an issue with the people.

If all people were like Silverhand (the irony) and everyone agreed to nuke or destroy X corporations and unite to dethrone their oppressors they could, sure a lot would die as it always happens with conflicts of this nature. People are to blame by their willingness to delegate responsibility to government, corporations, or other parties. It is a far more complicated issue than just blaming Arasaka or the government.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

Arasaka did not start selling corporate assets to other corporations. Selling weapons to government agencies or private parties is mostly dependant on legislative decisions that allow the government to spend taxes into buying defense assets from a private entity; catch here? Who elected the government and allowed said government expenditures? If the people did not give plenipotentiary allowance to the government to use taxes to give excessive controlling power to a private entity Arasaka would not be nearly as big. The disdain or disinterest of the larger populace regarding how they are governed is also an issue with the people.

If all people were like Silverhand (the irony) and everyone agreed to nuke or destroy X corporations and unite to dethrone their oppressors they could, sure a lot would die as it always happens with conflicts of this nature. People are to blame by their willingness to delegate responsibility to government, corporations, or other parties. It is a far more complicated issue than just blaming Arasaka or the government.

"In 1970 Saburo created the Arasaka Security division of the Arasaka Corporation. The new division specialized in high quality personal and corporate manpower, electronic, and computer security and protection. "

So he did sell to corporations.

Not all governments are elected, Among those that are, In some places corruption is rampant, or oligarchies limit the options.

it is true that revolution is an option, however, its not always going to change society, because winning a war isn't simply about how many people are on your side, weapons, politics, influence, money all effect the outcome.

Of course its partially people accepting, but its not really accurate to claim the few actively making the decisions are not responsible, because the masses don't revolt.


And bringing it back to the OP, the fact we can have this debate shows politics is a part of cyberpunk, one way or the other.

 

[Alt-Mikoshi]

Not all governments are elected, Among those that are, In some places corruption is rampant, or oligarchies limit the options.

it is true that revolution is an option, however, its not always going to change society, because winning a war isn't simply about how many people are on your side, weapons, politics, influence, money all effect the outcome.

Of course its partially people accepting, but its not really accurate to claim the few actively making the decisions are not responsible, because the masses don't revolt.

Yes, but does not mean that people cannot revolt.

And I never said it was unilaterally people's fault, but much of it was shared with Arasaka and the other corporations. If the other corporations did not sell or get their capital from the people. governments, etc. Arasaka itself would have no one to sell to. Again, it is a circle, corrupt officials are corrupt because people do not pressure anyone to stop it and sometimes the common folk participate in corruption to get a stake. It is incredibly naïve to think corporations are plenipotentiary just by themselves when the sole notion is absurd due how the market works.

Also, quoting your own quote "[...] Saburo created the Arasaka Security division of the Arasaka Corporation" which makes obvious that its seed capital and first methods of capital growth weren't dependant on corporate exchange at first. Reading the Wiki "The company originally was focused on manufacturing and took full advantage of World War II to forward their wealth and power by supplying the Imperial Army." which directly puts the Government at fault for making Arasaka wealthy, if the people revolted and avoided poking the USA and others Arasaka would have no market and given the government would not have funds of taxes or coercion to fight an internal war on top of a foreign war of aggression; the populace allowing such hostilities to escalate allowed that.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

Yes, but does not mean that people cannot revolt.

And I never said it was unilaterally people's fault, but much of it was shared with Arasaka and the other corporations. If the other corporations did not sell or get their capital from the people. governments, etc. Arasaka itself would have no one to sell to. Again, it is a circle, corrupt officials are corrupt because people do not pressure anyone to stop it and sometimes the common folk participate in corruption to get a stake. It is incredibly naïve to think corporations are plenipotentiary just by themselves when the sole notion is absurd due how the market works.

Also, quoting your own quote "[...] Saburo created the Arasaka Security division of the Arasaka Corporation" which makes obvious that its seed capital and first methods of capital growth weren't dependant on corporate exchange at first. Reading the Wiki "The company originally was focused on manufacturing and took full advantage of World War II to forward their wealth and power by supplying the Imperial Army." which directly puts the Government at fault for making Arasaka wealthy, if the people revolted and avoided poking the USA and others Arasaka would have no market and given the government would not have funds of taxes or coercion to fight an internal war on top of a foreign war of aggression; the populace allowing such hostilities to escalate allowed that.

So is it realistic to expect consumers to be informed of who the company hires for security, and possibly weather the company is financing/profiting from wars in foreign countries?

I don't disagree on a large scale, that people as a whole allow the bad actions of the elite by not being willing to stop them.

But there is a power differential, and it doesn't really matter if your grandfather allowed it back when, you have to deal with it in the present tense, and you would need to organize people in the 10 thousands to equal one of them in power.

Yes, bringing it back to cyberpunk, the society is sick, however, thats also not an accident, the corporations control the media, and the marketing. They have propoganda ads convincing people they should get cyberware to get ahead at work. The people have to buy food, because corporations created agricultural viruses/strains to wipe out competitors agricultural products. The news convinces them natural foods are deadly and unsafe.

yes, the people are accepting it, but they are not the architects, and they are not making informed decisions.

Johnny types, basically their only option is to counter propaganda people and convince them they have power, and can act. And they basically would have to tear down the corporations, since the corporations are the architects, who currently hold the power.

 

[Niatka]

although the game points to important issues; many are directly related to my way of thinking, of reacting to circumstances; I don't think CP-2077 is a political game. it's just a game. it's up to us to define whether or not CP-2077 is political.
some media made a lot of money with this controversy, long before the game was released. everything is good to take for the info-money. this is also targeted in the script.

from my heart, Yes CP-2077 often thinks like me, I don't believe in coincidences so CP-2077 is not a political game but a game that tries to open your eyes, without taking sides.

 

[Aenima1]

Nice Post. This forum seems to excel at splitting overlapping hairs with these discussions. I saw the title and thought, ooh another one! (I just came from the religious/offensive language one)
Maybe we could just accept that there's an entire spectrum of thought on pretty much all these topics, and no two people will have the exact same perception and/or opinion.
Subjectivity certainly is a powerful thing. (I mean a simple question for example like - "Is cyberpunk an RPG?"
And take a look at how that thread is going... {spoiler alert}...round and round still arguing over technicalities, opinions, genres and definitions..etc.) pretty cool.

So is cyberpunk political?
Will always depend on who you ask.
_

Ps. Doesn't mean the discussion won't be interesting though.

Anyhoo, sorry, I figured this was slightly better than putting: "following" while I prepare the popcorn.

 

[Spectral_Warrior]

^To above poster: I thought I did recognize that name

Nah in all seriousness, I think there's definately political views to be taken from a game such as this. I think it would be rather hard finding a game like this that doesn't touch on political elements. But its a stretch to say they want to tell something about the political climate that we have IRL.
Cyberpunk is a dystopian 'future' where the state of the world has gone a specific direction. We knew this from years before the IRL political state we have. Cyberpunk stands on its own, it does its own thing and the world and stories we find within the game make it come to life sufficiently to make it feel more real. This includes the entire use of cyberware thats integrated in the society, also the harsh environments and class devided setup between rich and poor. I see very much Dredd in it, in fact, it was the first thing I had to think off seeing the megabuilding reference and thir presentation in the world. Now ask yourself: what does Dredd tell us about politics? Again ... Its a world on its own.
Naturally there are players that will seek out potential similarities and wether or not it means something in relation to our IRL world. Personally I dont think of it that way. (although I can definately see what other may see)

To 'answer' the question: Is Cyberpunk political, yes and no.

 

[Aenima1]

Yeah true. I think if I had to add an opinion on it, I would have to agree with the people who are saying that as an artistic creation (like a video game story) if it depicts a world that is populated by a society, it can't help but contain some kind of politics, even if it's only incidental.

Basically, if there is intelligent life/human society in the story, then somewhere in there will be politics.

Post automatically merged: Mar 10, 2021

But as you pointed out, it doesn't mean that it was intentional, or that there is a specific message. Just that politics is part and parcel of creating, or re-creating a self contained world.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

^To above poster: I thought I did recognize that name

Nah in all seriousness, I think there's definately political views to be taken from a game such as this. I think it would be rather hard finding a game like this that doesn't touch on political elements. But its a stretch to say they want to tell something about the political climate that we have IRL.
Cyberpunk is a dystopian 'future' where the state of the world has gone a specific direction. We knew this from years before the IRL political state we have. Cyberpunk stands on its own, it does its own thing and the world and stories we find within the game make it come to life sufficiently to make it feel more real. This includes the entire use of cyberware thats integrated in the society, also the harsh environments and class devided setup between rich and poor. I see very much Dredd in it, in fact, it was the first thing I had to think off seeing the megabuilding reference and thir presentation in the world. Now ask yourself: what does Dredd tell us about politics? Again ... Its a world on its own.
Naturally there are players that will seek out potential similarities and wether or not it means something in relation to our IRL world. Personally I dont think of it that way. (although I can definately see what other may see)

To 'answer' the question: Is Cyberpunk political, yes and no.

political doesn't mean you have to literally choose some real world situation. The larger questions of politics are generally pretty basic, so if you have something to say about the politics in your created world, its going to be saying something about the real world.

division of power, dealing with corruption, revolution, classism, responsibility of government, war, same thing.

Also, the more you research something, the more likely it will have real world analogs. Now, in the case of cyberpunk(source material), it actually goes through a lot of effort to look at how things got to where they are in cyberpunk world. They didnt just create the world lore to house the story of V, or Johhny, or Alt.

They built the world based on real world politics, and tech, and then, what might lead to a "cyberpunk" dystopia. The characters and the story and plots came later.

 

[Spectral_Warrior]

political doesn't mean you have to literally choose some real world situation. The larger questions of politics are generally pretty basic, so if you have something to say about the politics in your created world, its going to be saying something about the real world.
division of power, dealing with corruption, revolution, classism, responsibility of government, war, same thing.
Also, the more you research something, the more likely it will have real world analogs.

This was also exactly what I meant. Everything is drawn from real life at some point, becasue thats what is the foundation of all of it. Cyberpunk creates a world that is its own world but the building block come from what we as humans know life to be as. But the question on on wether Cyberpunk is political (which I interpreted as does it convey message about IRL state of affairs): then I say both yes and no, Y because its anchored in it eventually, no becasue the CP world is not our own world.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

Yeah true. I think if I had to add an opinion on it, I would have to agree with the people who are saying that as an artistic creation (like a video game story) if it depicts a world that is populated by a society, it can't help but contain some kind of politics, even if it's only incidental.

Basically, if there is intelligent life/human society in the story, then somewhere in there will be politics.

Post automatically merged: Mar 10, 2021

But as you pointed out, it doesn't mean that it was intentional, or that there is a specific message. Just that politics is part and parcel of creating, or re-creating a self contained world.

yes but... its kind of a lie. I am a creator, I've read other creator's processes, they don't really do this stuff by accident. They know what they are saying and implying. They have a perspective on everything they write. Now, its theoretically possible cyberpunk 2077 is an exception, because its written by many different people, but even then they still generally decide on overall themes and perspectives.

Now, I see some people say political means taking a "side" but thats kind of weird, because it implies there always has to be a side if you are exploring politics. What if the author's "side" doesn't align with any existing group? Does that make it apolitical?

 

[Aenima1]

yes but... its kind of a lie. I am a creator, I've read other creator's processes, they don't really do this stuff by accident. They know what they are saying and implying. They have a perspective on everything they write. Now, its theoretically possible cyberpunk 2077 is an exception, because its written by many different people, but even then they still generally decide on overall themes and perspectives.

Now, I see some people say political means taking a "side" but thats kind of weird, because it implies there always has to be a side if you are exploring politics. What if the author's "side" doesn't align with any existing group? Does that make it apolitical?

No I said EVEN IF it wasn't intended.

Meaning that even if the creator does not intend it, there is still some kind of politics simply as a by product of having a world in the story. I didn't say that the writers are oblivious to their own content. Just that sometimes they deliberately use political ideas or even preach an agenda, and sometimes it is purely incidental.