I said the developers removed the labels to be more inclusive and OP (and now you) added them back.

There are technical reasons (pointed out in many comments) for why they might not have full sliders to make any body type you want.

As you can see from OP’s response to you, my primary issue is that OP is still calling the option the “female” or “feminine” one. The developers specifically removed those labels to be inclusive and OP is adding them back. The complaint about the order was the secondary issue.

As a woman, I look at “Body Type A or Body Type B” and think “Well, I’m a woman, not a Body Type B, and isn’t it kinda misogynistic that the secondary option is the female one? Like A+ for Men, B- for Women?”

This really pissed me off, I have to say. Why are you calling the “secondary” option “the female one”? To me that seems a bit presumptuous.

If I have body type B with he/him pronouns, are you saying something about my body? Is it too “feminine” for you?

Honestly, you seem to be looking for something to complain about. The developers have taken an extra step to try to be accommodating and inclusive and your complaining about the order the choices are listed in… Smh

Usually, when it’s a one-off like this, the video game gets “paid” to put the stuff in their game. That payment may be in-kind advertising campaigns, etc.

For something like Need for Speed, Forza, etc, the game will be licensing the likeness of the vehicles and the company logos in the game. I don’t know the costs, but the fact that it’s also advertising will factor in.

In this case, there are a few likely scenarios:

1. The game director or art director or someone high up at Epic has a hard-on for the Cybertruck and really wanted it in the game. So they pursued Tesla and made a deal.
2. Epic wanted to add vehicles to the game and decided to go with licensed vehicles. Their merchandising people reached out to merchandising people at all the auto companies and then figured out some deals.
3. Someone high up at Tesla (maybe even Musk) loves, or has a kid who loves, Fortnite and decided they want the Cybertruck in the game. So they pursued Epic to make a deal.

Number 2 is most likely, but I don’t know the game well enough to know the vehicle situation in it.

For all of them, you have to factor in a bunch of details to figure out who is paying who:

• who wants it more (/ power imbalance)
• how much money is it going to cost to make the models, animations, etc
• how much is it going to cost players to get the item
• are there aspects that either company finds undesirable (E.g. sometimes car companies don’t like their cars shown with damage)
• who will be doing the bulk of the marketing, and who has the marketing budget to spend on the venture
• probably a lot more

So, it’s hard to say without more inside info. Games I’ve worked on have had 1 and 2, but not 3 as far as I know. I think it was pretty much an in-kind deal for the 1 situation though (like we got the likenesses, they got advertising through the game, ostensibly we sold more games with the likenesses, but I think it just stroked someone’s ego…) All of the 2 situations were done to bring in money for the game’s marketing budget / or were in-kind marketing deals, possibly bringing money directly to the bottom line, but I don’t know.

I want multiple streaming services that can stream almost everything so there’s competition, but still a valid reason not to just drop and switch constantly.