You've already made it clear your position. But that doesn't matter, hers matters far more than yours. Since she saw the footage and most likey wrote something similar.
Yeah, because Sam L. Jackson is totally a killer for hire in his spare time.
So how does her position matters far more? She saw the footage, that is right but others saw and heard it too, not to mention that she wrote what happened there. The strength of a position should be decided by the strength of the argument.
Do fictional characters have to 100% conform to the self-image of the group they're based on? I don't think they do.
There's value in knowing how others see you. If you can't appreciate Jackie as a character, try and appreciate it as an example of how an outsider perceives American Latinos. Sure, you might decide that the image insulting and exaggerated, but that's a little early to tell when the game is years away from being released. People are allowed to express their opinion about you. If you reject that opinion simply because someone else said it, that tells more about you than them.
There's value in knowing how others see you. If you can't appreciate Jackie as a character, try and appreciate it as an example of how an outsider perceives American Latinos. Sure, you might decide that the image insulting and exaggerated, but that's a little early to tell when the game is years away from being released. People are allowed to express their opinion about you. If you reject that opinion simply because someone else said it, that tells more about you than them.
It's shocking to see how many people disagree with this. It's fine, just surprising.
Individual > Group, when it comes to writing about characters in a game. Good writers can make people stand out, and not just be yet another member of a group, based on their other personality traits, their appearance (Which is pretty badass, if anybody has actually looked at Jackie), their personal style. Oh, and in Kofe's case, the numbers on their character sheet.
I seem to have to keep repeating this, so I'll say it one last time now that the discussion has calmed down a bit, but Jackie is an individual. Maybe he wants to talk like a tough gang-banger. Maybe it doesn't actually matter what journalists think, because they aren't the ones who have spent years writing excellent characters in video games.
Its really easy to brush of the representation of a minority character when you aren't one yourself. Just saying. I feel like a lot of you are missing the author's point and the points of other's in this thread because it doesn't make sense to you at all and why would it?
Media usually treats the majority as individuals (and being America and Europe, that means white people here). They very often don't draw characters of other ethnicity with the same care and detail, and that's why the interest was piqued here, because absent of the full game, his characterization can seem pretty jarring. Yes they could narratively explain why he's being awkward, but we dont have that info, the author doesnt have that and neither do you. so what we're left with is impressions based on what we know.
Its a concern, not a condemnation.
Media usually treats the majority as individuals (and being America and Europe, that means white people here). They very often don't draw characters of other ethnicity with the same care and detail, and that's why the interest was piqued here, because absent of the full game, his characterization can seem pretty jarring. Yes they could narratively explain why he's being awkward, but we dont have that info, the author doesnt have that and neither do you. so what we're left with is impressions based on what we know.
Its a concern, not a condemnation.
Can we stop bringing race into this, please? We've all already been slapped for it. Race is irrelevant, writing quality is relevant. If you feel the way Jackie has been written is over-the-top, that's one thing, but enough of this "you're white so you don't understand" BS please. We can have that discussion elsewhere, if we must, but the mods have made their stance on it clear.
I'm glad that you acknowledge that none of us know anything about the character, because it's true! And that's the point I've been making.
I'm just arguing against impugning the skill of the writers or the quality of their work without further information, or saying "we need XYZ to write for XYZ character" without knowing anything about the game or its writing.
I'm asking for us to adopt a "wait and see" approach before saying CDPR needs to change what they're doing, whereas others (not you) have said "this needs to change RIGHT NOW" which is silly in my opinion.
Personally? I have complete faith in CDPR. No, the racism in TW3 wasn't between ethnic or skin color groups, but it was racism nonetheless, and had many parallels with modern (or past) racism. People weren't harmed or executed for the color of their skin, but rather their pointy ears, or their short stature. It was a fascinating way to handle the matter.
It was "if you're different than me, you deserve to die," which is a very human problem. Given how well CDPR handled that there, I have no reason to feel CDPR won't handle their characters in this game maturely, even absent themes like racism (diversity already seems like the norm in 2020).
I must be the only person finding it odd how a "journalist" can be critical of stereotypes and generalizations, imply the speech pattern of a video game character was stereotypical, and make generalizations themselves in the very same argument.
More on topic... It's important to understand the function of game trailers and demos. Perhaps they were trying to show off the voice acting in several languages, or how they can mix the voice acting of several languages together in a seamless fashion.
More on topic... It's important to understand the function of game trailers and demos. Perhaps they were trying to show off the voice acting in several languages, or how they can mix the voice acting of several languages together in a seamless fashion.
One thing I find fascinating is the whole translator implant thing. Apparently that's going to be a mechanic - we'd first heard of it years ago, so I was worried it wouldn't make the cut.
I actually talked to that mod in DM, no, the issue was we were straying from the original topic, not the discussion itself.
but we're not talking about CD Projekt's treatment of racism, but the treatment of other ethnicities. the issue is that working with fictional races makes it easier to navigate the nuances you need when telling a racially charged narrative compared to races and ethnicities and cultures grounded in the real world. They didn't have to worry as much about being sensitive because there are no elves or dwarves to offend irl.
the other issue I have with this is that this isn't really a modern frame of racism. its much more complex and subtler than that. CD Projekt went much deeper than that in the witcher series but they'll have to dig even deeper for a game grounded in the real world.
Yeah, I'm not sure why you keep stating that Jackie is an individual. He is not an individual with his own autonomy. He is a fictional character. Everything that makes him up from dialogue, appearance, personality, mannerisms and speech patterns is chosen by other people. The writer/s, artists, voice actor and director etc. all have input in his creation. While it may seem, as a writer, that characters become alive and seem like they are writing themselves in your head, this is simply an illusion.It's shocking to see how many people disagree with this. It's fine, just surprising.
Individual > Group, when it comes to writing about characters in a game. Good writers can make people stand out, and not just be yet another member of a group, based on their other personality traits, their appearance (Which is pretty badass, if anybody has actually looked at Jackie), their personal style. Oh, and in Kofe's case, the numbers on their character sheet.
I seem to have to keep repeating this, so I'll say it one last time now that the discussion has calmed down a bit, but Jackie is an individual. Maybe he wants to talk like a tough gang-banger. Maybe it doesn't actually matter what journalists think, because they aren't the ones who have spent years writing excellent characters in video games.
Every single person brings conscious and unconscious bias to their work and it can often be difficult to take a step back and analyze that work for authenticity. I think that this is a good opportunity for CDProjektRed to take that step back, even get some more cultural input and review their work with fresh eyes.
...what? Did you really think I was saying Jackie was a real human being?
Characters are individuals, yes, influenced by writers with their own biases and such to deal with. But now we're getting back to the whole "you can only write a good XYZ character if you are also XYZ."
I'm saying CDPR can write Jackie to be that way based on his individual character traits. Maybe he talks like that because CDPR wrote him as somebody who wants to talk like that. Maybe he's well-aware of the fact that it's a stereotype, but he's trying to act like a badass.
I've known people in real life who talk like that. I've known people in real life who don't talk like that. *shrug*
You can be upset/offended by the end result of Jackie. That's fine. You can even criticize it (and should, if it bothers you). But can we at least wait until the end result? Or until we know more?
In my experience, CDPR is not and never has been insensitive with their writing. If they chose to write a character a certain way, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt until I know more.
Seems like a pretty reasonable approach to me, but if others choose to be upset before knowing the full picture (not saying anybody here is), I guess they can go right ahead and do that too.
Not to mention... we are literally discussing the opinion of a single journalist (or two, or three - doesn't change my point) who was concerned. Have you guys even heard the audio for yourself? The context?
Are you even sure there's something to be worried about? Do you know this journalist personally? Do you know how credible/not credible their reports are? Are you aware that other latinos, other black people, other XYZs have also seen the demo and had 0 of the issues this journalist had?
Wait and see.
No, the discussion itself is problematic, thus my earlier GIANT WARNING LETTERS.
It is very difficult to have a reasonable discussion about racism and race-influenced subjects - especially so if you can't bring real-world politics into it, as per CDPR guidelines.
So, the discussion is an issue.
You FOR SURE cannot say things like "You can't understand if you're not a minority." That puts your viewpoint into other people and, ironically, often indicates a lack of empathy or ability to see the other person's viewpoint.
Don't tell people what they can or can't understand - it raises hackles and makes things ugly. That's our job.
So, in summary, this discussion is basically "You can't understand, you're not a minority" opposed be "don't tell me what I am or am not and it's the writing that matters" and this goes around and around.
We'll start deleting and Warning if it goes poisonously circular.
Cultural experts and sensitivity readers have become an accepted option in the editorial process for literature for a while now. I don't see any harm in CDProjektRed getting extra advice about whether they are possibly perpetuating stereotypes. Advice is harmless. It's up to CDProjektRed whether that advice has any impact on their writing, voice acting or editorial procedure.
Last edited by a moderator:
If said viewpoint is all about dismissing the topic as nothing more then ambiguous in nature. That's not really a viewpoint that's called side stepping. Even if the thing in question is a relatively small example, it is a important topic in relation to representation and should be reflected on. How CD will go about giving all these many different npc's, and companions in different -distinct- districts, believable personalities/dialogue without relying too heavily on stereotypical identifiers to add flavor. Despite the fact that Night City isn't exactly the most nuanced place.
Still i'm sure CD doesn't want a Deus Ex: Human Revolution -jive talking POC character/s- type-situation in Cyberpunk.
(Even though Eidos Montréal/Canada is much closer to america)
Also the notion of "you can't understand unless your a minority" is no different then saying "you haven't walked a mile in my shoes" or the difference between someone that's experienced. The depth and mental effects of real combat and how that can effect a person, compared to some that's never experienced it. So i don't think it's about belittling someone's viewpoint. Its just about relying a perspective and making it understood that certain past/present experiences are unique to particular groups.
Even though generally everyone gets shit on.
Last edited:
I'm just curious here and I'd like an explanation to help my understanding. Do mods follow the same guidelines? It just confuses me if Xer received a green light from another mod to discuss this yet you aren't okay with it.
I'm not by any means challenging what you are saying, and this is a touchy subject for people but I'd just like to know why one mod is fine with the discussion yet you aren't.
Cheers mate.
this is precisely what we're talking about. EXCELLENT example.
exactly. Its not meant to discount someone else's viewpoint but to point out that there's unique experiences that some people have and others don't.
Glad to have provided it and there are more than a few other examples. But that's the one that sticks out in relation to it being a interactive npc. That helps you in a particular sense.
Believable based on what? Your own personal experiences?
The game takes place years beyond the current year. CDPR can make the characters speak however they damn well please.