>>3369060Honestly, /p/ shouldnt be allowed to discuss cyberpunk because every time I see someone in these threads give a definition its always different, and its always bad. Cyberpunk isnt some super restricted genre that has to fulfill a very limited range of checkboxes, and neither is it just an aesthetic. Sometimes I even see posts (hopefully just bait) arguing that seminal cyberpunk works like Bladerunner or Neuromancer aren't cyberpunk. Since before the release of 2049, I've been seeing the misconception spread more and more and I believe its time someone puts a stop to it before it kills the genre, or turns into another obnoxious cousin of steampunk; a course that from here I can plainly see. Cyberpunk IS based centrally around the theme of "high tech, low life", the juxtaposition of technology and social class. Cyberpunk works have also featured minor themes such as the limits of human consciousness, the consequences of transhumanism, whether machines can truly live, This is something any anon can read off Wikipedia, but they choose instead the definitions supplied by shitposters because this board is full of retards and teenagers thinking they know something.
What works of cinema or literature are there for steampunk that can compare to bladerunner, matrix, neuromancer, and gits 95 among others? Steampunk is an aesthetic, nothing more. Good Cyberpunk media often addresses themes such as governmental and corporate oppression, AI, transhumanism, and the limits of the human soul.
To continue, any that criticize cyberpunk in such a poor way havent bothered to digest or analyze any of its media. What other genre has such heavy themes of advanced technology impacting every day life? Cyberpunk becoming more a reality every day reinforces the impact of their messages. That said, artists that treat cyberpunk as nothing but an aesthetic are just as bad as steampunk fags and are giving the genre a bad name.
