Polygon misses the blindingly obvious point of The Witcher 3.

An objection on the side of creative freedom for video game developers

[OrangePowerz]

Polygon would miss a cruise missile if it would fly up their ass. The problem is you can't shoot one up their ass because they have their heads already up there.

[Shubhendu_Singh]

Hahaha...
I'm imagining a "polygon" shaped head up their own ass. Hmm, that's gotta be pointy and hurts.

[Gazondaily]

Damn I bet Polygon regret giving TLOU a 7 now.

[OrangePowerz]

Why? That wasn't the only bullshit they did. They scored Bayonetta 2 lower because it was "sexist" (by a guy who frequents frquents Suicide Girls website), they gave Ni No Kuni a ridiculous low score, the guy reviewing Killzone complaint ahead of reviewing it that he doesn't like Killzone, just before Lego Dimensions was announced they bought the domain for it and redirected it to their website etc. etc. They are a bunch of unprofessional muppets. If I would have worked like they do during my time at a print magazine I would have been fired.

[rainslacker]

Title could have been shortened to "Polygon misses the point".

Wouldn't even need an article about it.

[Kreisen]

I find the notion that every game has to either feature or mention every gender, race etc silly. Im 27, in my life i havent come across a single shemale, if i were to make a videogame on my life so far would that make me a bigot? According to social media it seems like that is the case, which is fucking stupid if you ask me.

[Eonjay]

You really can't win. If you don't have shemales you are a bigot and if you have all shemales its not safe for work lol. Seriously though what they should do is take all that ad revenue and make a video game. Then when they find that a diverse cast without a good story is not worth playing they will become enlightened. Everyone want diversity because everyone is part of some underrepresented group. Instead of demonizing the content we do have, invest in strategies to get different folks to join the game development business as writters.

[Razputin]

@Kreisen,

You haven't come across a single shemale that you know of.... Just saying lol.

[GortJester]

Razputin, Your reply started out decent enough but good God your last paragraph is just some of the most ignorant shit I've ever read...

[Razputin]

Yeahokwhatever. Bro, that is not a natural tan. Bro yeaokaywhatever.

[Nathan_Hale53]

I mean, only redheads get red when they tan, I get almost as dark as an Native American during Summer. Also explain all the people that go down to Florida pale, and a few shades darker when they return?

[Eidolon]

You're thinking of sunburning easily.

I like how this turned into a serious conversation about tans.

[yeahokwhatever]

Bro, tanning salons. Ever heard of them? Its where white people pay to go get a few shades darker, using light exposure. They don't turn red, because that doesn't actually happen. You're thinking of sunburn, which is like being burned by fire(because it is), just slowly over a long period of time.

[kraenk12]

I am an blonde, bright blue eyed German and turn massively brown every summer and get almost no sunburn at all. You come off as pretty ignorant my friend.

[rainslacker]

Caucasoid is a rather broad term used for many varying skin tones. The presence of melanin, or lack thereof, within a person is not what determines if one is a Caucasian, or one of mixed race. Even people of color, which I assume you mean to be Black, are not necessarily negroid because of their skin tone, nor dose light skin within a person of color denote a mixed race ancestry.

There may certainly be intermingling of different races among the various races, but we're talking about many thousands of years ago when looked at in the big picture. It would be impossible to trace back where people of different races intermingled for the vast majority of people to determine when and where our ancestry changed from one specific race to another, and any topic about that generally looks at time spans of thousands of years to discuss it. That being said, even before negroid and Caucasian races had interaction with one another, there is ample evidence to support that the could tan like us white people do today. However, there are some people that are Caucasian that lack significant melanin, thus burn instead of tan.

The darker skin of black people is from a higher level of melanin within their skin, borne from natural selection making it better for them to adapt and survive within the environments from where they originate from. This all happened well before modern history, and even before the race of homo sapiens were common, or even existed. Many species of man had melanin in their skin, and more often than not displayed a copper or yellowish hue to their skin, thus the amount of melanin is not a aspect of race determination.

That being said, I know tons of white people that tan naturally, and some that burn and have very pale skin. Are you suggesting that the tons of white people out there all have negroid ancestry? That defies all logic of how the human race has migrated and intermingled throughout hundreds of thousands of years, and going that far back can only be looked at in a broad sense, instead of the more specific way we define such races today.

That's the truth. You can choose to verify it, or remain ignorant of the subject for whatever reason. Quite honestly, I don't even know why you'd even bring it up. It's hardly pertinent to the topic, and no one believes that Geralt is supposed to represent a person of color in any way.

That being said...give Geralt or the other women in the game tan lines, and it'd be called sexist....again.

@ws

That's why I said human race(singular) as in what we call ourselves as a whole. The races are what existed before modern homo sapiens, and they are also indeed a thing. The human race is indeed a thing as defined by the similarity in our features, where our genome has enough similarity to create and classify us as human. Races as we define them are merely an aspect of the human race, and those genetic differences have been passed down over millennia where different races of humans have made up what we know as human today, thus all becoming part of the homo sapien species.

It has also been proven that not all ancestors to humans started in Africa, however, African predecessors to modern man often dominate our gene pool. No species of man, ancient or modern, started in any one area, as early man was often migratory. Maybe if you go back far enough you can find no interbreeding, but for the purposes of my comment, I didn't go back that far.

[wsoutlaw87]

@rainslacker There is no such thing has human races. You are referring to old terms of pseudoscience no longer used as a whole in race terms. As proved many times, including from the human genome project, me and someone from asia have the same genetic differences as me and my white neighbor. While people were able to determine skeletal differences among different color of people and thought they concluded race, they were using a preconceived ideas of races, and there are more examples of similarity groups between these races. You can see differences in people by geographical area but it doesn't just stop at the large geographic areas thought of before(Europe, Africa, Asia). If you tried to break humans down in to definable groups you would have way to many to keep track of(irish people were once called a race). All of us are homo sapien sapiens. All Homo sapien sapiens started in Africa and had high melanin as you said because of adaptation. Its not like all homo species evolved at the same time. Every human is a descendant from there and are still homo sapien sapiens. Being separated into geographical areas caused genetic differences as you would expect, but did not change races. There are many different ETHNIC groups of humans which you can group as you like, but human races are not real. It is 100% a social construct. You can't determine what you think of as race through dna. People tried to invent proff of race. Just fyi

no there are not any races of humans alive. You are absolutely incorrect in what you stated. You are discussing a simultaneous evolution which is not only absurd but proven incorrect. The fact is that humans today dont have races and you trying to bring up ancestral gene identifiers doesn't change that. You used racist pseudoscience in your comment as fact.

[yeahokwhatever]

.03% of the population. There's probably more pedofiles than that, hence the reaction to Target's bathroom policies.

[rainslacker]

Christ, that's a cluster f**k right there. I live here in NC, and I can't believe it's even a topic of discussion. I'm all for making people comfortable, and having equal rights, but you just don't subvert the vast majority of people feeling comfortable to validate an extremely small portion of the populace. It's like these lawmakers just don't understand that they are supposed to represent what their constituates want, and not cater to the fringe groups every whim. If they feel uncomfortable going into a bathroom for a gender they don't identify with, just imagine how everyone else is going to feel when they walk into a bathroom where their gender is different.

Then the fact all some pervert has to do is say they identify as a different gender to get off the hook for what used to be against the law, or parents having to explain to their 3-5 year old kids why that guy is in the womans bathroom, or how places with public restrooms of this nature are totally lacking in the ability to handle confrontation to this matter between their patrons, yet being forced to have to accept it.

I identify myself as a rabbit in a man's body, but that doesn't mean I go into the pet store and piss all over the floor. I maintain normal social etiquette which is acceptable within the confines of what actually makes sense, and what makes sense is just going into the bathroom meant for my physical gender, doing what I have to do, washing my hands, and leaving. At what point do people come uncomfortable in a public bathroom unless they have an aversion to it to begin with? You go in, ignore everyone else, do your business, then leave.

All the other things the LGBT community ask for had no impact on others whatsoever beyond their moral sensibilities, but this just puts it right there where everyone has to deal with it in ways which are extremely uncomfortable and unnecessary. Changing marriage laws to allow homosexuals to marry did not change the definition of gender, it changed the definition of marriage. This whole thing changes the definition of gender, and puts that definition into the individuals hands, and when you start putting the definition of things into other people's hands in relation to law, it makes laws that much harder to make and enforce.

Bathroom is sacred. There are just some things which shouldn't be used to further a political agenda.

Anyhow, sorry for the off topic rant. Every time I see it I'm just dumbfounded that it's even an issue that's being considered, much less adopted. Target is trying to be progressive, but I feel they haven't really considered the majority opinion on this. Funny thing is, Target's usually have unisex bathrooms available, or family bathrooms where individuals can go, that people can use it if they don't feel comfortable.

[yeahokwhatever]

@rainslacker
Absolutely. One must remember though that a republic is NOT a democracy. That is mob rule. The majority really shouldn't be the barometer in which we gauge the goodness of ideas. The constitution does not mention marriage, thus, the supreme court has 2 real constitutional options: marriage is up to the individual states or a new constitutional amendment has to be drafted to make marriage a constitutional right. Unfortunately for liberty and individual freedoms, lately it seems the SCOTUS has been magically granted power over everyone and everything. Personally, it is my opinion that marriage has no place being overseen by the state. That can only lead down a dark road for religious liberty, which IS protected under the US constitution.

[rainslacker]

Now I believe we'd be getting into a much more involved argument, but I'll hit on the highlights.

With gay marriage, no law was written which infringes on marriage, only laws which define marriage in accordance to what the state will recognize, and thus, some entities much abide by that mandate if their policies are determined by what the state says marriage is, namely inheritance, familial, and ancillary rights afforded to married couples. On a level of principal it doesn't change what marriage is, because people are still free to believe what they do, just the state no longer has the gender requirement. Some believe otherwise, but that's how I see it. Individuals don't have to agree that others are married according to their own beliefs, they just can not stand in the way of other people's beliefs....which IMO is the way it should be.

The majority should be the mob rule except in the instances of where the mob is uninformed and does not understand their reasons for wanting something. I think in this instance the majority are informed, and understand very well why they don't want something. Maybe not everyone can put it in equitable terms, but most can. Unfortunately, with a corrupt government, it's too easy for them to determine what is best for us. Sometimes they do it right, because people are usually misinformed, sometimes they screw up. In this case, I don't feel it's a matter of mob rule, but rather a minority determining what is best for everyone in absence of all evidence to the contrary, to push a political agenda.

Statutes mandate that public bathrooms where genders have their own facilities, that only people of those genders are allowed to use those bathrooms. Technically, even a young child of an opposite sex going in with their parents is illegal, however, common sense prevails, and it's just looked at as for the safety of the child, with everyone capable of understanding that. However, a transgendered person is of an age to understand gender distinction, and as such, has no place going into a bathroom of the opposite sex regardless of how they associate themselves, because their association is not consistent with the actual statutes.

I do believe SCOTUS has been overstepping it's bounds from time to time lately, however, there are too many instances of the minority interests trying to hold other minority interests back. Laws and SCOTUS should strive for equitable rights and policies for everyone, however, lawmakers and everyone else should not allow common sense to be ignored.

@ws

No, my rights aren't more important than others. But it boils down to this. Taking the pedo rant out of it, if your a guy or a girl in a public bathroom, and someone of the opposite gender walks in, you're going to not be comfortable. In this case, the concerns of a very small minority are outweighing the wishes of the vast majority.

Also, if you think those pictures are the typical representation of a transgendered person, you are just naive.

[wsoutlaw87]

Yes those pedophiles always follow the laws right? People used to want to go in bathrooms and assault girls but werent aloud to so they got a gender change just to go in the womens room. That makes a whole lot of sense. Its not like being a pedophile is illegal anyways right? Are there now gender checkers at bathroom doors. What is wrong with people from Georgia/NC. Its a damn bathroom, take a piss and leave. What are little kids running around naked in your bathrooms. Why do some people feel persecuted by other people getting equal rights. You aren't more important and your rights don't matter more than people you think are different; even if you consider yourself the vast majority. Also your entire argument is proven stupid because you dont want someone who looks like a man in the womens room because OH NO THE CHILDREN, WHAT WILL WE SAY TO THEM, yet you want people like this http://instinctmagazine.com... in the womens room. Thats what you are demanding. Despite them looking exactly like a man you want them to be required to use the womens room. Good job. Its always those states trying to turn non-issues in to problems.
"Bathroom is sacred" hahaha wtf? You really like public bathrooms.

we aren't going to pass laws because you are uncomfortable. Grow up and get over it.

[rainslacker]

I've met one transgendered person that I know about. However, in any normal setting, he always maintained social compliance by conforming to socially accepted norms about how he was supposed to act and behave....which is what most normal people do. I mean, how many people with crazy fetishes go around displaying those fetishes on a normal basis, or how many people with abnormal personalities don't try to maintain some level of social acceptance when in public? Heck, how many straight people bring their own sexual orientation or sex life into their public social life on a regular basis?

Anyhow, It was only in private or going out sometimes that he would be himself...or herself depending on how you want to look at it. He also never went on at length, or tried to make it a big deal, which is one reason we're friends, because it's not about that for him, rather he just prefers to be a decent person who doesn't believe the world revolves around him, nor think that it should cater to his whims.

[wsoutlaw87]

Yeah you can't always pay attention to social media crap. They don't always mean it. Most of its just trolling to be a pain in the ass. Should there be more female and other types of games? Sure. Is that the witchers problem? Not at all. If every game I had to play involved my character having sex with every guy, I would be pretty annoyed, but the devs make their game and the characters and that doesn't make them bad people.

[wsoutlaw87]

.

[Elda]

Still have this game fresh in plastic unopened & still with all the games I'm playing & buying for the month of May & throughout the year I may not get around to playing it this year.

[Helios86]

Please trust me when I say, this game should come before 90% of whatever you own or will own. This is not the kind of game you put on hold. :)

[Elda]

I'm having a blast with DS3,R&C,still playing The Division,now Alienation,Battleborn,Shadow Complex Remastered next week U4,Doom & Shadow of the Beast next month is Odin's Sphere & Star Ocean,then Aug & Sep is Deus Ex & FFXV.Though I've had The Witcher for months now bought it for 25 dollars on Black Friday I can't seem to get the interest in playing it.

[philm87]

It'll likely be better than anything else you play this year so get on it!

[Elda]

I don't know about that,so far everything that's being released so far I'm having fun with including more games being released throughout May till Oct.I just haven't found the interest to play though I will play it one day knowing everyone says it's a great game.

[esmittystud101]

Don't feel bad. I've had the game since release and have maybe have made to 50% completion yet. I'm in Skelige and have like a million "?'s" to venture to. Don't really know what percentage to be honost. Some guys told me probably 50%. Still haven't touched DLC area either, which is just a knotch above my character level at the moment.

I was like you, I just got cought up in other games. Its okay. You play what you want to play. Coming from someone that bought Bloodborne in Febuary of last year and then having to sit it down to play The Witcher 3 that following May was very difficult for me. Bloodborne was my first From Software game and that combat system they brought to the table was amazing. But I finally started playing The Witcher 3 eventually and I can say I wasn't dissapointed. CD Project Red did a fine job with that one. The story is pretty good, the characters is the best thing about the game, they are great. I still suck at Gwent, LOL.

But I will eventually pick the game back up one day. At the moment I'm on Dark Souls for X1 B.C., amazing game. Maybe my favorite game of all time, which used to be Bloodborne until I played DS. Next up for me is Dark Souls II: Scholar of The First Sin, then after that is Dark Souls III.

When I sit Souls down for a night I usually dab into Star Wars: Battlefront, CoD: Black Ops 3, Assassin's Creed: Syndicate, Life Is Strange, The Order 1886, Metal Gear Solid V:The Phantom Pain, Quantum Break, Dying Light, Just Casue 3 (which is broken with the last update), soon to be Uncharted: 4.

Even Uncharted 4 will wait for a while and its my most prized story in video games to be honost. Thats how much fun I'm having in Dark Souls.

[Elda]

I'm with you on Bloodborne,it was my first souls game also & I loved it! I beat the main game but I still have the chalice dungeons to finish & the ending boss in the dlc.I'm playing what I want & I've never played any Witcher games,I only bought it because of the hype & everyone saying how good it is,it's just I haven't got around to playing it..one day I will.

[esmittystud101]

@ elda:

The Chalice Dungeons are worth it. The two Depth Five Dungeons if you run with atleast one Moon Rune, I use the one 30% increase for Blood Echos, you will get over 1,000,000 blood echos in one run on just one of them.

When I started the dungeons, the house in Hunters Dream was burning, all I had left to do was fight final boss, I was level 80 or so. When I finished all the dungeons back to back to ect., my character level 204.

[nitus10]

I actually purchased Bloodborne and TW3 together and steeled myself in playing TW3 first on "Blood and Broken Bones". I actually completed the Skelige islands then decided to restart the game on "Death March" which IMHO is the best difficulty to play the game on especially if you can play any of the Souls series and/or Bloodborne.

I did get a reasonable way in the game (Novigrad) but I really wanted to play Bloodborne as well since I only had 30 minutes play initially so I have put TW3 on hold for now.

As for other games which you have mentioned (I only have a PS4) most are on my to do list however I won't buy them until after I have finished Bloodborne and TW3.

[Grap]

It's the benchmark of this generation, whether you play it or not i really don't care.

[rainslacker]

I started it, played for a couple hours, got killed by some dogs, and quit playing. I was interested in going forward, but at the time I just couldn't bring myself to get into an open world RPG like that. Granted, I then started MGSV and sunk a lot of time into it.

I want to give it another go though, as it seems like something I will enjoy. But have to work myself up to a point where I can actually commit enough time to it.

[nitus10]

Well to each his own. The dogs in TW3 are probably the most easiest of creatures to kill although to be fair they are pack animals and on the harder difficulties can actually back attack you while two or more attack from the front. It can be even worse with some necrophages since some will recover life while others fly into a rage and recover life much more quickly while hitting so much harder.

If you have played Bloodborne or any of the Souls games then play TW3 on "Death March", it becomes so much more challenging and interesting to play. You will die allot till you "git gud" unless you wimp out and use the difficulty slider. 😉

[rainslacker]

Yeah, I was pretty early in the game. Just after the first tavern or something going off doing some side thing looking in some house.

It's not that I found the game hard, or that I was unwilling to learn how to get past the dogs or learn the game mechanics, it's just that at the time I couldn't bring myself to really get into an open world game of that nature at the time. MGSV I probably wouldn't have either, and didn't realize it was so "open world" when I started it, but the campaign got me addicted to the game play...and I eventually platted the game. It was more a matter of timing for me, and not that I didn't find the game good. I really didn't have enough time to play it to determine that, but I'm going to default to general consensus and believe that it's probably worth playing.

I'll revisit it again one day and learn all that stuff without letting the dogs get in the way.:)

[nitus10]

Since you have played DS3 I would recommend playing The Witcher 3 on "Death March". Play the game on other than that difficulty and I will guarantee you will hate it for being too easy.

Personally I am the opposite since I am currently playing Bloodbore . I did play TW3 on the "Blood and Broken Bones" difficulty and got a fair way into the game before finding it too easy, so I restarted on "Death March" and found it so much more challenging. Unfortunately I also wanted to give Bloodborne a go as well so I put TW3 on hold for now since I do know I have a fair way to go before I reach where I originally left off although I will go back to it later.

As for DS3 and R&C they are definitely on my to do list but I don't think I will be buying them for quite a few months.

In some respects RPG's although R&C is more Action/Adventure take a very long time to play (well for me they do since I have never been interested in powering through those games) so you really do have to steel yourself into not getting another game till you have played the previous one to death, although on the plus side you do save money in the long run.

[Ogygian]

Don't give Polygon the time of day. Disgusting, bigoted people who only seek to push their narrow-minded political views on others.

[_LarZen_]

Polygon has to be one of the worst "professional" gaming sites I know of. It's like Scientology but for gamers.

[rainslacker]

Scientology at least has the requirement that you can afford to buy into their rhetoric. Polygon share's it's idiocy with the masses free of charge. I don't mind people that buy into Scientology because it feeds their narcissism. But polygon's form of pandering is just shameful and hard to take seriously.

[Razzer]

The voice of Lambert:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm...

[CrimsonWing69]

I'm so sick of seeing these "games aren't PC" articles everywhere I turn. Not every game has to have a diverse range of ethnicities. Not every game has to remove any sense of sexiness from it. Not every game needs to have a female lead. Not every game needs to be sensitive to a majority of cultures. We have plenty of games that address the sensitive content social justice warriors are on a crusade for.

Games should be treated like movies. There's plenty of controversial movies and politically incorrect movies along with politically correct movies. Freaking let up already and stop trying to make a name for yourself as one of the people that sterilized creative freedom in gaming. Polygon is an absolutely disgusting site that has time and time again pushed its agenda on its readers. Their reviews are a joke, their opinion pieces are a joke, their agenda sickens me, just quit supporting such a garbage site and hopefully it'll die off one day.

[Ristul]

“The only way you could make a piece of media that they didn’t care about, right? Is you would have to have every single body type, made up Tumblr gender, real gender, race, sexual identity and everything all in the same, like, the entire cast and nobody could be a side character because that would be marginalizing them. Then you couldn’t kill off anybody who is a minority because now you’ve killed off the only minority in the game.”

"The truth is, there’s no pleasing some, regardless of the steps you take, it will never be enough."

QFT

[rainslacker]

It really is strange coming into these articles and seeing almost no dissenting opinion that representation doesn't have to be ubiquitous. It's like we as gamers understand that things don't have to be all PC to be fair and equitable, and we seem to understand this on a pretty vast margin of people.

Yet somehow, a very small minority of supposed gamers still have the kind of influence to determine that these kinds of things are necessary, or even reasonable. To me it just shows they lack complete comprehension on what the diversity subject entails, and have even less knowledge on how to tell a cohesive story, or even what makes a good...or even a decent story to begin with.

In all this, I think devs and pubs should just look at what the majority consensus is on the subject, and make their games they way they always have been. Their customers have no complaints about this kind of stuff. If some want to venture out and try new things, that's great, if they do it well, and don't do it because it's considered PC, then we may even enjoy them, and they will achieve more than forcing the idea on everyone, which only annoys or alienates their current customers.

[Articuno76]

I've not read the books and such so i'm curious, does the world of The Witcher make reference to other far off continents and cultures that could be analogous to parts of Asia, Africa, South America etc; or does it just never come up? If it's the former you could always work a bit of diversity in using the lore of the world.

Though I suspect that Polygon would always bring their political poleaxe to bear on the game no matter what.

[OrangePowerz]

Yes they do and the first game had a black character from one of those e far lands, but in the end it's a mythology that's based on the Slavic culture.

I actually find it kind of silly that Thor has a black guy in it given that it's all based on Norse mythology just to have a token black guy. Same how it's bloody stupid to have a crap load of white people in movies that are set in old Egypt or having a white guy play Jesus.

[nitus10]

Well actually it Polish culture which is not Slavic culture. Take a look at a map of Europe and you will see that Poland is quite close to a number of major countries including Germany, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Ukraine, Lithuania and across the Baltic sea Sweden.

[OrangePowerz]

I'm not sure what it's proximity has to do with being Slavic or not, but yes they are. Just like the Czech, Slovaks, etc. are Slavic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...

[wsoutlaw87]

lol dont tell people jesus wasn't white. They believe in a light haired white guy from the middle east. Even though those depictions of him were based off of a young zeus.

[rainslacker]

I think it does, although I only have a cursory knowledge of the source material. Most fantasy novels are set within the influence of norse mythology, and as such, most of the genre will be populated by common aspects of that mythology. Things like elves for instance are actually believed to be derived historically through a Swedisn or Scandinavian people that existed at the time, as their traits as established for the modern narrative by Tolkien are all very similar in terms of looks, and their hunter gatherer culture leading to exceptional skill at remaining unseen and skilled with certain weapons, as well as being quite spiritual and connected to the Earth.

Given the time within real history most of these types of stories would be set, seeing people of different races was quite uncommon, particularly for those that didn't travel outside of their areas by ship or migration. Even further south in Europe you didn't see a lot of it due to the time it took to travel, and lack of easy means to do so.

Many times these races or places were well known to exist, and their people were often described in ways that exaggerated their features or abilities.

However, it is common for many fantasy novels to use such methods of showing the differences of the world by expressing them as being far away, and filled with a culture of people that was markedly different than the main characters of the story. Sometimes, these characters would be an oddity to the cast, and usually have abilities unique to their own. This in itself helps to establish the more primitive nature of the setting, while also allowing whatever "advancement" that does exist seem more potent from the perspective people within the narrative, thus putting it forth that these people are often at the cusp of advancement, which we can relate to.

I don't feel the exclusion of different races within fantasy is these fantasies being exclusionary. I feel more it's that it's trying to maintain the same level of belief for the world which would be expected to exist during the time frame in which they take place, and a diverse race of people and cultures is going to break that belief. The only exception is when the characters travel to a far away place, and you do see a rather different culture, or if it's a trading area, a plethora of cultures on display. Kind of like Danaryus in Game of Thrones, or any JRPG which ends up travelling really far away from it's initial starting point. Tolkien himself had the Southron, and it's believed to be considered Africa and it's people, as Middle Earth was actually what would be considered Northern and Central Europe. However, if you went far enough west, it was more southern Europe, with a somewhat different culture existing...although that is only expressed in the books and supplemental material to the series.

[nitus10]

You do have different species such as Dwafs, Elves, Trolls, Succubi, Witches and even Vampires to name a few. Basically in the game if you can talk to it (this includes humans as well) you may be able to reason with it.

As an example (not really a spoiler - I hope) there is mini quest where you go to an island and talk to a Troll who says he/it has joined on the Radania forces although I am quite sure these forces would not welcome a Troll. When Geralt talks to the troll the troll mentions how there was a battle between Radania forces and peasants and most were killed.

When asked by Geralt where are the bodies the troll answered that it would be a waste to let good meat go to waste so he/it ate them. Basically Getalt has two choices the first being to ignore this since the bodies were dead anyway and the troll did clean up the mess and possibly saved the populous from plague, or the second option being to kill the troll for eating the dead humans.

The above is a very trivial trivial example of choices you have to make in the game. Some are very minor others do have consequences later on in the game.

[donwel]

Polygon misses the blindingly obvious point on practically everything.
I'm beginning to think it's just willful ignorance at this point.

[BrickHardcastle]

This article doesn't seem to be responding to many of the points actually made by the polygon article. It also cites this strange strawman figure who isn't satisfied with the representation of people of color in games no matter how they are portrayed – but the author of the polygon article clearly states what he would be happy with. The rant at the end that insinuates those who disagree with the author are "entitled idiots" doesn't really help their case either. I often disagree with the opinions presented by Polygon, but this article is a little lacking.

[DragonPaw]

Some reason, I just don't imagine gamers as social justice warriors. Technically, games are art, the manifestation of the imaginations of the developers. To label their game is labeling them. This is, after all, something created from a mental image. Witcher doesn't and didn't need approval to be an awesome game despite hurting polygon's feelings for having its own perspective.

[opinionated]

Why justify a dumb article with an even dumber response? "Everybody in witcher 3 is white because they are a bunch of slave owners". Why sink to their stupid ass level? It's Europe. That's where white people are. Plain and simple.

[Antifan]

Love Witcher 3. Best RPG ive ever played. Don't care about polygon because they make a living off trashing good games for clickbait purposes. The Witcher 3 is made for adults, so of course it will have adult themes like nudity, sex. Actually, the Witcher 3 is the most adult game ive played.

[Hold_It]

Great article. Way to stick it to those hacks at Polygon.

[mahmoods26]

They're not idiots for suggesting it. You're saying Northern Kingdoms didn't have people of colour because its a representation of Northern Europe. Well they didn't have monsters or monster slayers either. It's a fantasy setting and it's up to the developer to be inclusive in their case. Meaning they have to make the effort in this day and age. I don't think the decision to not include people of colour was racially motivated, I think it was simpler than that. It just didn't occur to them at the time. A point they're now rectifying with Heart of Stone and Blood and Wine which shows that people of colour do exist in the neighbouring kingdoms. CD Projeckt Red didn't have to make these changes but I can see how such a simple thing escaped their view. When you're making video games, you make what you know. What they made was mostly based around a society with white centric characters. It's what they're used to. It happens more often than not with a lot of developers. When was the last time you saw a Dice game with a coloured character of substance in it that wasn't in the background or a palette swap. I get it. I also appreciate that they're making the effort to be more inclusive in their DLC and probably will keep an eye on it in the future. Something other studios could learn from.

[OrangePowerz]

It's fantasy set in a medieval European place. It was not common to run into people of colour during that time. It could happen but you could have easily lived there without ever running into someone. Do you want to complain that games set in Africa don't have enough white people and are not inclusive? Resident Evil 5 must have been really offensive to you with all those villagers of colour and not enough white people in that african country.

It has nothing to do with what they are used to, it has to do with what the base material is based upon and that's slavic medieval fantasy. The first game had at least one important coloured character (maybe more). It's up to developers to make the games they want to make and not pander to people because they think someone isn't included. For bloody hell a white guy complained that there aren't other ethnical groups in the game. I haven't seen any african americans running around complaining about it because they take no issues with it.

Gies thinks he is the bloody gift of the gods fighting for everybody's rights when in reality nobody besides of him gives a shit. That's the asshole to give Bayonetta 2 a lower score for being sexist (nothing female gamers complained about) while he is a happy customer of Suicide Girls and loves Game of Thrones. He is just a dim-witted idiot who thinks he speaks for others when in reality he doesn't.

As for "rectifying" things in the DLC. They aren't, because that's not something they did after reading one useless and shity Polygon article. If you played the first DLC it would be quite obvious that they didn't shoehorn other ethnicities into the game but that it was always a substantial part of it. It is insulting to suggest that they would dance to the tune of Polygon or that they did something wrong in the first place.

As for DICE and the last time of having a character of colour that has a substantial role, Mirrors Edge *cough* asian main character *cough*

And just to be clear. Yes Polygon are idiots, the same idiots that are toxic to the games media and support people like Sarkeesian who rips people off and is just a waste of air. If Pokygon would have any idea about anything they would notice on how many levels the Witcher games tackle racism and racist behaviour. But Arthur Gies is too busy looking at softcore pictures to notice that.

If I would have the free time I would make a nice game just for Polygon containing all the stuff they complain about and send them the review copy just for the fun of it and call the game Polygonal Incorrectness.

[SaveFerris]

Something tells me Polygon isn't going to like Deliverance: Kingdom Come either.

[3-4-5]

* Polygon misses the point on almost anything. They aren't very intelligent and push certain agendas.

They shouldn't be taken seriously by anybody anymore....they've earned that.

[Tankbusta40]

Polygon and SJWs need to be banned from life for retardation.

[AngryTypingGuy]

Liberal social justice warriors are so petty. It's blatantly obvious that the game creators are basing Temeria on Europe. No one was being left out due to racial hatred. It's ok to let art imitate life. If a game is based in Africa, I want all or most people in the game to be black. If it's in Japan, they should be Asian. If it's in a rural US town, the people should be mostly white, and if it's in a US city, then there should be a heavy mix of races. Who cares. People need to calm down about race and stop jumping to the worst conclusion right away. At some point in time, the human race forgot how to analyze the context of a situation and ask what a person's intent was.