Why do they do it?

+
This is not so much about CDPR and Cyberpunk, even though I will use it as an example. But honestly it could be said about a lot of companies and games.

As we all know CP released in a less than optimal way, which is what it is. But why do they do it?

Because clearly now that the game is released and CDPR knew the poor state it were in, they still have to spend a shitload of time fixing it, because as a result of the released they pissed off people, which honestly could easily have been avoided by releasing the game in a more complete state.

Furthermore, I think everyone know now, that it will take a very long time before CP is even remotely close to what a lot, if not most, people expected it would be at launch. I might be able to get it, if they had released it, because it was preventing them from whatever or what other reasons could force a company to release a game in a poor state.

Because thinking about it, given all the issues the released have caused for CDPR are there any benefits from doing it? I can't imagine that it's cheaper to do it like this, having to rebuild reputation? I can't imagine that it is less stressful for the company having to deal with all the backlash as well? I don't think the game made more money compared to them having released it in a year, since they are now having to spend time fixing issues anyway? I don't think that CDPR as a company were especially pressured in regards to economy, given the popularity of TW3 after the series etc.?

So adding it all together, why do they choose to release the games like this, it makes very little sense to me, as I don't really see no benefits? Some might argue that it was pressure from investors, but given meeting with investors, which didn't seem to put pressure on CDPR in order for them to release a hardly functional game and even if further delays would have caused the stock price to go down a bit. It is nothing compared to the impact of a bad release. So I personally don't really buy that explanation.

Yet, I assume that companies chooses to releases games for some reason anyway, just can't figure out why?

(Again, this is not particular aimed at CDPR, simply using them as example since its their forum, but it might as well be any of the other big poor releases.)
 
The general answer is the money runs out.

You start developing a game with a certain budget to pay your programmers and artists. When that money is gone, you only have a few options:

You can go to your publisher/investors and ask for more money, which might happen if you can show you're close to release and have a solid product and have reason to believe sales will cover the additional cost.

You can abandon the game (or sell the work you've done to another company). This happens fairly regularly.

You can release the game, and take the money from sales to pay for development to fix/refine/add to the game (or just take the money and call it a day).
 
The general answer is the money runs out.

You start developing a game with a certain budget to pay your programmers and artists. When that money is gone, you only have a few options:

You can go to your publisher/investors and ask for more money, which might happen if you can show you're close to release and have a solid product and have reason to believe sales will cover the additional cost.

You can abandon the game (or sell the work you've done to another company). This happens fairly regularly.

You can release the game, and take the money from sales to pay for development to fix/refine/add to the game (or just take the money and call it a day).
They clearly stated money was no worries. There are plenty of interviews and plenty of people who spoke out and said money was literally no issue here. Especially since the Gov also funded them.
 

iCake

Forum veteran
The game has worked for me far better than any bethesda release has ever worked for me and I'm mostly talking about fully patched versions of their games. For example, I've only ever had one quest bug out in my 100+ hours experience with Cyberpunk 2077, you usually end up with a handful of bugged quests in your journal in Bethesda games by the time you've racked up that many hours. The game has also crashed on me exactly 3 times, I had to abandon my survival playthrough of the goty version of Fallout 4 on my xbox one, because crashing had become so frequent it was just not fun anymore. As for performance, while Cyberpunk 2077 doesn't run well on last gen consoles, many games don't. Aformentioned Fallout 4 is a lagfest in the downtowm area, RDR noticeably drops frames in Saint Denis and the list can go on and on here.

That said, there are a lot of small time, insignificant bugs in Cyberpunk 2077, that's true, and they might bother some people and that's a perfectly reasonable attitude, I, however, couldn't care less about bugs that don't break anything. I'm all for having a polished experience here, but that'll not happen overnight.

So, to answer your question, I think they made the decision to release this game because they thought that most of the people playing the game would hold an opinion similar to mine.
 
Last edited:
So, to answer your question, I think they made the decision to release this game because they thought that most of the people playing the game would hold an opinion similar to mine.
They care about reviews surely and that these are as good as possible, bad reviews can kill games very fast. Just look how the reviews caused it to be pulled from PS store. I don't think they wanted that, but also it does tell you something about the state of the game.

I myself didn't ran into game crashes either, but bugs was all over the place. But one can't hide the amount of movies on youtube showing a game that is/was unplayable at launch on certain platforms and for some people.

And the fact is that reviews and feedback from players will stay for them for a very long time due to this. Yet they still have to spend a lot of time now purely fixing the game. Time which they could have spend prepared it for making a good release without a lot of bad reviews.
 
If not PS4/Xbox one shit storm release, everything would look completely different. I had a blast during about 100 h gameplay on medicore PC. Yes, I would love many game mechanics developed in completely different way but it was design decision to make it looter/shooter type of game. The story was great and emotional in my opinion. Last gen consoles version put CDPR in the situation they are now.
 

iCake

Forum veteran
They care about reviews surely and that these are as good as possible, bad reviews can kill games very fast. Just look how the reviews caused it to be pulled from PS store. I don't think they wanted that, but also it does tell you something about the state of the game.

I myself didn't ran into game crashes either, but bugs was all over the place. But one can't hide the amount of movies on youtube showing a game that is/was unplayable at launch on certain platforms and for some people.

And the fact is that reviews and feedback from players will stay for them for a very long time due to this. Yet they still have to spend a lot of time now purely fixing the game. Time which they could have spend prepared it for making a good release without a lot of bad reviews.

To be fair, I don't think it was taken from PS Store due to the game's reviews but rather due to Sony's current refund policies clashing with CDPR claims they would refund anyone wanting to refund. Moreover, the reviews are what they are mostly due to how CDPR chose to market the game, they leaned heavily on the good will they'd managed to garner with the release of the Witcher 3 and their history of "pro-consumer" moves, which can be explained as good marketing moves btw but that's beside the point. All of that pretty much boiled down to this in consumer heads:

"We're about to release a perfect game here, that's why we put a "when it's ready" tag on the release date."

That, together with the fact that gamers can be quite an imaganitive bunch, has only made all the game faults so much more pronounced. Besides, when you make a bold claim like that, quite a bunch of people will take it as a dare and will actively try and find arguments to use against the darer to bring them down for their audacity.

The bottom line is, the state the game is in is nothing we haven't seen in the gaming industry. There are games, AAA games, that have arguably launched in pretty much the same state, if not worse, before, but never recieved a fraction of the hate Cyberpunk 2077 has. And that's all due to the marketing image the game created for itself, in other words, the hype they pumped just bit them in the ass.

At the end of the day, if you manage to avoid falling into the pitfall of actively searching for bugs and paying attention to each and every flaw in the game, however little, chances are you're going to find a good game here, very good in fact. The game's not perfect though, for sure, but not nearly as bad as the current situation would have you believe.

P. S. What they pulled with delaying sending the console code for reviews is outright shitty and unforgivable, that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
Deepest apologies for all the suffering bereft PC players (my partner includes herself amongst you, although not really cos she always waits a year for fixes / sales etc, no matter the game) but I for one am extremely glad they did whatever they had to do to squeeze it into old-tech consoles. I guess the only real lesson to learn is to not advertise future games (and request money) for any machine until they've got a better grip on whatever their current development will be requiring of the hardware. I imagine most financial models involve the current capitalism-gone-mad sitch of 'get the money up front to fund the project', so it's probably hard to avoid that in the current zeitgeist, and I'm certainly not expecting their next game to follow too much of a different path.

As for damage to reputation, nothing to add really, reputations are only as good as your last product, half the staff might change between one project and the next. One thing is for sure, on the strength of CP I think it's high time I had a nosey at this Witcher 3 everyone bangs on about all the time :D
 
They wanted the money. That's basically it. They also thought the game was in the same quality range of RDR2. Even if you throw out all the console problems and bugs. Tons of systems are not up to standards. And please, don't bring up the whole "this is not GTA". Watchdogs is not GTA either. But it mimics the car mechanics from GTA. Because that is the best example in doing them. It's simple as that. But what really killed it for people, is the narrative.

That is the most disappointing element of the game. When I watch a movie or play a game. I expect a full story. There's tons of characters that are just plot points and don't get developed. V is a disembodied head. Because they didn't do cut scenes. I wish LP's where merged into a personality trait. And played out in one long opening. Since they have very little use through the story. Above all. Lots of things have no game mechanics tied to them. I still give the game a 7. But I'm not interested in buying anything from this series anymore.

Unless the DLC continues the story of all the ignored characters. Gives us choices where the game does fake ones. Romances are fixed. And mainly definitively ends V story. Living or dying. I also do not want a celebrity involved in the series again. The story was clearly influenced with Reeve's presence. Actors serve the story. The story doesn't serve the actor. Unless said actor is the LEAD.
 
Last edited:
IMO they were running out of money, in their eyes PC was good enough to withstand the backlash from consoles (probably banking on their Witcher love). They probably didn't want any more investor money which would mean less proceeds for them. But whatever their idea was it backfired tremendously.
 
As we all know CP released in a less than optimal way, which is what it is. But why do they do it?

Without going into conspiracy theories, woeful financial situations, or anything like that, for the games we are talking about...

1. All games have defects. They are complex to the point where it is almost literally impossible to eliminate them all. Given that reality, the question becomes not whether to ship with defects, but whether the currently known defects are acceptable. Someone has to make that decision, and it is management, not the player, that has to decide. This means that this will always be disagreement.

2. No game is ever finished. There is always something else that could be done. If it isn't a bug fix, it is tweaking some feature to make it better, or adding this little do-dad over here, or spending a few more days making this one animation perfect, or whatever. At some point, someone needs to say "done" and tell everyone to take their hands off the keyboard.

So, like with every other action adventure, role playing, survival, and first person shooter, whether single player or multiplayer, Cyberpunk was shipped with more work that could have been done.

The great thing about the digital age is that the studio can continue working on the game after they ship it, and I expect that this factors into the decision making process. They can patch the game for a very long time, if they want to.

Cyberpunk, specifically, looks like it was shipped because management decided that it was time to ship it. All of the above was taken into account, as we as other factors. They drew the line in the sand, so to speak.

From the looks of the game, as shipped, this is one of those games that would never ship, unless someone took a hard stand and drew the line. This is a huge game, with quite a bit of potential. The development team could have spent years working on the game, fixing REDengine 4 and ultimately updating REDengine to version 5, supporting more platforms, adding quests and stories, filling in the world, enhancing performance, updating models and textures, completing or adding complex game systems, etc.

I think they jumped the gun a little, mainly in that they should have resolved old-gen console issues before shipping. That said, if they are willing to continue developing the game post-launch and drop regular patches as they continue to fix bugs and enhance the game, then I would rather have the game in-hand than be looking at more delay announcements.
 
This is not so much about CDPR and Cyberpunk, even though I will use it as an example. But honestly it could be said about a lot of companies and games.

As we all know CP released in a less than optimal way, which is what it is. But why do they do it?

Because clearly now that the game is released and CDPR knew the poor state it were in, they still have to spend a shitload of time fixing it, because as a result of the released they pissed off people, which honestly could easily have been avoided by releasing the game in a more complete state.

Furthermore, I think everyone know now, that it will take a very long time before CP is even remotely close to what a lot, if not most, people expected it would be at launch. I might be able to get it, if they had released it, because it was preventing them from whatever or what other reasons could force a company to release a game in a poor state.

Because thinking about it, given all the issues the released have caused for CDPR are there any benefits from doing it? I can't imagine that it's cheaper to do it like this, having to rebuild reputation? I can't imagine that it is less stressful for the company having to deal with all the backlash as well? I don't think the game made more money compared to them having released it in a year, since they are now having to spend time fixing issues anyway? I don't think that CDPR as a company were especially pressured in regards to economy, given the popularity of TW3 after the series etc.?

So adding it all together, why do they choose to release the games like this, it makes very little sense to me, as I don't really see no benefits? Some might argue that it was pressure from investors, but given meeting with investors, which didn't seem to put pressure on CDPR in order for them to release a hardly functional game and even if further delays would have caused the stock price to go down a bit. It is nothing compared to the impact of a bad release. So I personally don't really buy that explanation.

Yet, I assume that companies chooses to releases games for some reason anyway, just can't figure out why?

(Again, this is not particular aimed at CDPR, simply using them as example since its their forum, but it might as well be any of the other big poor releases.)


because when doing a creative project sometimes you have to give up on perfection and just commit to a release. If you are good at managing, by the time that happens the product is complete, but if you aren't, then it might not be. And to be completely honest an incomplete/imperfect release is better than a non release.

Its not just about money, its also about time, energy, resources, Inspiration, progress

And the big difference with a product you haven't released, is it still has an unknown scope, post release, the focus is generally cleaning it up.

The idea of put it out when its ready, usually doesn't lead to a much better product. George RR Martin's Winds of Winter, Duke Nukem Forever, Battle Chasers comics.

It should in theory lead to better products, but actually I think iteration or serialization actually is more effective. Ffxiv has achieved more in the same timeframe of ffxv development time.

nothing is ever as good as it could have been, so its probably better to learn from your mistakes and try to incorporate what you learned into the next iteration.


That isn't to say all incomplete works are acceptable, but its pretty much let the consumer decide if its good enough I think.
Post automatically merged:

Without going into conspiracy theories, woeful financial situations, or anything like that, for the games we are talking about...

1. All games have defects. They are complex to the point where it is almost literally impossible to eliminate them all. Given that reality, the question becomes not whether to ship with defects, but whether the currently known defects are acceptable. Someone has to make that decision, and it is management, not the player, that has to decide. This means that this will always be disagreement.

2. No game is ever finished. There is always something else that could be done. If it isn't a bug fix, it is tweaking some feature to make it better, or adding this little do-dad over here, or spending a few more days making this one animation perfect, or whatever. At some point, someone needs to say "done" and tell everyone to take their hands off the keyboard.

So, like with every other action adventure, role playing, survival, and first person shooter, whether single player or multiplayer, Cyberpunk was shipped with more work that could have been done.

The great thing about the digital age is that the studio can continue working on the game after they ship it, and I expect that this factors into the decision making process. They can patch the game for a very long time, if they want to.

Cyberpunk, specifically, looks like it was shipped because management decided that it was time to ship it. All of the above was taken into account, as we as other factors. They drew the line in the sand, so to speak.

From the looks of the game, as shipped, this is one of those games that would never ship, unless someone took a hard stand and drew the line. This is a huge game, with quite a bit of potential. The development team could have spent years working on the game, fixing REDengine 4 and ultimately updating REDengine to version 5, supporting more platforms, adding quests and stories, filling in the world, enhancing performance, updating models and textures, completing or adding complex game systems, etc.

I think they jumped the gun a little, mainly in that they should have resolved old-gen console issues before shipping. That said, if they are willing to continue developing the game post-launch and drop regular patches as they continue to fix bugs and enhance the game, then I would rather have the game in-hand than be looking at more delay announcements.

nailed it, the console release was the huge misplay is my guess.
 
Seeing as the game needed another year their stock would fall anyway and people would lose trust in them. This way they at least got some money, to the detriment of the people that bought the game. I think it was done very calculated, they even managed to control the review process so that people wouldn't cancel their pre-orders. And people are also very forgiving when it comes to these kinds of practices, specially in the gaming industry - there is a strong emotional bond between the studio and the consumer. CDPR fulfills some kind of power fantasy of what the game can be, because remember, they have essentially sold a concept and not a functioning game. And this, being just a game, is at least a milder form of when people work against their own interests.
 
"WHY DO THEY DO IT?"
"As we all know CP released in a less than optimal way, which is what it is. But why do they do it?"

Know that I'm strictly guessing, purely based to how I am seeing it. I think simply because the development budget ran dry. The development of CP77 was on trail, until Corona hit. When Corona hit, the team was forced to disperse. When they did, the development came to a dead-stop. That is what I think where the development of CP77 fell horrendously behind. Loads and loads of content was left unattended, and would never make it in time to be ready for release.

What I think what the team did then was improvise. Maybe with extra money, they asked for more time, (release 2 times delayed), to make the game ready so that at least it could be played, and completed. They gave the game high chances for it to generate enough revenue to earn itself back and then some, to continue development after release.

The future will show whether or not the game will receive the rest of it's content.
 
And people are also very forgiving when it comes to these kinds of practices, specially in the gaming industry
No. That's more like preying on the people who don't care about quality. That's how EA keeps making Madden and their gambling garbage games yearly. It takes a while. But EA is an example of failing. Because they kept making crap after crap. CP was the last Bastion of being a good company. They broke it. They won't ever fully recover from this. You do it once. You can do it again.
 
No. That's more like preying on the people who don't care about quality. That's how EA keeps making Madden and their gambling garbage games yearly. It takes a while. But EA is an example of failing. Because they kept making crap after crap. CP was the last Bastion of being a good company. They broke it. They won't ever fully recover from this. You do it once. You can do it again.

I know people who would by madden year after year. They enjoy their purchases. I guess fans like new stats/players. but at least back then my friends would love getting the new Madden, rarely heard complaints.

so its not really for me to say it was a bad idea.
 
I know people who would by madden year after year. They enjoy their purchases. I guess fans like new stats/players. but at least back then my friends would love getting the new Madden, rarely heard complaints.

so its not really for me to say it was a bad idea.
It is. Because those people don't see the exploitation. Buying a game that in this day and age requires only a roster patch. Not $60 purchase. And losing all the stuff they buy each game. To rebuy it again. If everyone was smart. EA would collapse from people not buying Madden etc.
 
This is not so much about CDPR and Cyberpunk, even though I will use it as an example. But honestly it could be said about a lot of companies and games.

As we all know CP released in a less than optimal way, which is what it is. But why do they do it?

Because clearly now that the game is released and CDPR knew the poor state it were in, they still have to spend a shitload of time fixing it, because as a result of the released they pissed off people, which honestly could easily have been avoided by releasing the game in a more complete state.

Furthermore, I think everyone know now, that it will take a very long time before CP is even remotely close to what a lot, if not most, people expected it would be at launch. I might be able to get it, if they had released it, because it was preventing them from whatever or what other reasons could force a company to release a game in a poor state.

Because thinking about it, given all the issues the released have caused for CDPR are there any benefits from doing it? I can't imagine that it's cheaper to do it like this, having to rebuild reputation? I can't imagine that it is less stressful for the company having to deal with all the backlash as well? I don't think the game made more money compared to them having released it in a year, since they are now having to spend time fixing issues anyway? I don't think that CDPR as a company were especially pressured in regards to economy, given the popularity of TW3 after the series etc.?

So adding it all together, why do they choose to release the games like this, it makes very little sense to me, as I don't really see no benefits? Some might argue that it was pressure from investors, but given meeting with investors, which didn't seem to put pressure on CDPR in order for them to release a hardly functional game and even if further delays would have caused the stock price to go down a bit. It is nothing compared to the impact of a bad release. So I personally don't really buy that explanation.

Yet, I assume that companies chooses to releases games for some reason anyway, just can't figure out why?

(Again, this is not particular aimed at CDPR, simply using them as example since its their forum, but it might as well be any of the other big poor releases.)
Massive pressure from the shareholders is the main reason. That and the overwhelming desire to recoup development funds and to acquire the most profit possible as early as possible. The opposite is generally in play though as the damage incurred by releasing the game in a state like CP2077 is much greater. Damage to a companies reputation takes a long time to recover, however the norm seems to be AAA game companies to release crap, apologize for doing it, then take forever to attempt to fix the game.

I've said it many times on this and other forums, but the government needs to get involved (like the FCC in the US) to outlaw the practice of "pre-ordering". All it does is give game developers and manufacturers a license to do whatever they want and deliver products like CP2077, Anthem, Fallout 76, etc. This needs to stop. Let the content creators on YT, Twitch, FB, etc., play the games, early editions, and see for ourselves whether they meet standards of what was promised or not. I realize some of the content creators are paid by the games devs, but not all of them are. A little bit of caution and research prior to throwing down our money should take the place of pre-ordering from now on.
 

iCake

Forum veteran
It is. Because those people don't see the exploitation. Buying a game that in this day and age requires only a roster patch. Not $60 purchase. And losing all the stuff they buy each game. To rebuy it again. If everyone was smart. EA would collapse from people not buying Madden etc.

That's an exercise in demagoguery if I ever saw one. EA provides product and people who buy it show them their support. Simple as that, if that was not the case, EA would simply change their product somehow, including changing that to game as a service model, or abandon it.
 
No. That's more like preying on the people who don't care about quality. That's how EA keeps making Madden and their gambling garbage games yearly. It takes a while. But EA is an example of failing. Because they kept making crap after crap. CP was the last Bastion of being a good company. They broke it. They won't ever fully recover from this. You do it once. You can do it again.
Some care about quality but denial is a widespread phenomenon. We are all susceptible to it (of course it helps when the acting party manipulates that potential). There are those that are happy with how the game is now - they know nothing about quality. Then there are those that are apologetic because they live for the concept of the game and hope for some kind of miracle in the future, not seeing that the dice was cast when CDPR decided to fake a demo and present it as gameplay.
 
Top Bottom