A reasonable explanation for everything that went wrong?

+
I'm always curious about what people like you really want to hear? I mean, what's your endgame about their "responsibility" ? What should CDPR do (that they haven't done yet) to make amends? Or are you just venting and calling people with different experiences / mindsets as "fanboys" ?

Well, **my** reasonable explanation will always be : "going cross-gen". it should have been made for decent PCs, XSX / PS5, that's it.
Not that I ever expect this to happen, but I'd like to see data on what percentage of total development hours went into trying to re-envision, rework, optimize, and occasionally give up and remove systems in the game, trying to get the thing up to sufficient functionality on last-gen consoles.

My opinion, which I can't prove and wouldn't even try to, has always been that we were on target to get a very different game until two things happened: (1) they got Keanu Reeves on board and late in the process had to shoehorn in a story with him as the central character, while still letting players design their own character; and (2) they found out that last-gen consoles couldn't run the game that they were making.

As for CDPR doing a mea culpa, I think they've already done that as much as their legal representation will ever let them. What's done is done.
 
That's the perfect scenario - both an apology coupled with actions. Which I'd argue CDPR did. Again, maybe not to everyone's liking (you can't please everyone anyway) but there was an apology and the subsequent actions proved they were serious about it wouldn't you agree? If not, I'm curious, is there a point where CDPR could've done enough for you to accept and move on from their lack of a "proper" apology?

Agree with this. They have been pretty explicit about it being a mistake to release when they did - in one of the investor calls, it was the opening statement I think - and individual developers have made their own statements recognising how poor it was at release. Refunds were available. They've put a ton of effort since into improvements, NOT abandoned the game, and have added content. Now they're working on 1.6 and an expansion to the existing game (I don't know why this still seems to be in doubt), and seperately signed long-term agreement to build future games with UE5, which for some seems to mean ditching the game, but for me adopting an industry-standard engine means more effort goes into game dev.

I'm just not sure what more they are supposed to do at this point.
 
Overall I am just glad I am done with CP77 it's an okay game in its own light but a dark spot on CDPR after the Witcher 3

Which is why TW3 is the only CDPR game I play. Since most of the devs that made TW3 are gone even getting TW4 is a question

But I know with the current team I won't buy the expansion, I won't buy another cyberpunk game.

Liked the premise but the game fell flat for me, so much wasted potential

I think CP77 could of been amazing if they would of had a clear path of what they were making, instead of trying to change story based on a celebrity selling point
 
I'm just not sure what more they are supposed to do at this point.

Right?

That's essentially why I'm asking the questions I'm asking because I can't think of it either.

So far CDPR has apologized. We may disagree on the quality of the apology but it's still an apology. Then proceeded to start fixing their game. Making amends. They still are in fact. Patch 1.6 will bring in more fixes and, I suspect, more QoLs and maybe a bit of content.

Where is the line where what they've done is enough?

Is there a point where it's enough?

I'm very curious about people's answers to that but most people can't discuss that without resorting to plain blind support or hatred.
 
I'm just not sure what more they are supposed to do at this point.
I kinda think thats where people start too bring in there own perspectives on the game. They did the "apology" video and have patched the game into a working (mostly) state. For me that did very little too my enjoyment of the game for example. It worked for me before these 1,5 years spent on patching. It did need too be done, dont get me wrong. But its 1,5 years without content that would probably have fleshed out the very flat world for me.
They have been pretty explicit about it being a mistake to release when they did - in one of the investor calls
Yea in the investors calls, every bit of info we get comes from there pretty much. This is part of the problem i think. They are responsible towards there investors (as they should) but in a way we invested too. We need better communication lines. They dont have too come onto the forums too talk about stuff but atleast do info dumps or something.

Im not angry at them anymore atleast so this time spent here has hade some impact for me atleast. Also ive meet alot of nice people here (even if i dont agree with some) so i have been able too learn and change my mind a bit. Im just still so disaponted in the game and CDPR that im not sure they can really do anything too change my mind. We shall see if i even buy the expansion when it comes out. Ill wait too see gameplay this time around ^^ Witcher 4 will probably be the same, im going too view there games with much more skeptecism atleast from now on.
 
On the original topic: There's a lot of different things that contributed to the game's state at launch. It's naive to think that changing one thing would've fixed everything. Clearly, CDPR have identified issues with their development process internally, so we've seen them announce a switch to Agile. Now, Agile is not a silver bullet, you can still do de facto Waterfall even if you're meant to be following Agile practices, so how successful that is will come down to how strong CDPR's commitment to it is. And even then, you still need to have a strong vision and the right priorities (in terms of scope, time and quality) to begin with - even a successful Agile project can fail as a product if the vision is crap and/or you have the wrong priorities.

On the topic of the last few posts: There's not much CDPR can do at the moment in terms of pleasing people. They targeted too wide an audinece with desires that are very different. For example, the ability to have a tattoo or sit on a bench won't do much for me while the game is filled with uninteresting side quests and lacks in RPG depth, but for others it would be a great improvement. And in some cases, those desires can collide - e.g. someone preferring action combat that is focused on player skill vs combat that relies more on the character's stats.

The issue with Cyberpunk then, I find, was that CDPR were not very clear with their vision to the wider audience, while also not quite living up to expectations with some of the existing audience based on their previous work. And in those cases, the buggy state of the game and the... let's say less than optimal performance on last-gen consoles was never the main issue, it was just the cherry on top. That said, patching the game up and delivering a working product is a basic expectation, so I wouldn't expect them to abondon it, but I also hope they don't expect praise for it either.
 
Last edited:
Just as ignoring the fact FF14 first launch in 2010 was even worse. So much so it had to be taken offline and rebuild from the ground up only to be relaunched no sooner then a whopping 3 years later. But hey, That is all passed down and forgotten, right? The almighty His Majesty Yoshi P. can't possibly do anything wrong.

For the Reds, Cyberpunk's launch is a thing of the past. As for me. They are working towards the future. If you want to keep dwelling in the past, be my guest. it doesn't concern me.
at least se showed they can fix their stuff, how about cdpr after a whopping 2 years hm? ^^
 
My opinion, which I can't prove and wouldn't even try to, has always been that we were on target to get a very different game until two things happened: (1) they got Keanu Reeves on board and late in the process had to shoehorn in a story with him as the central character, while still letting players design their own character;

I see this point being made over and over but can't find anything to substantiate it. Where does this idea come from, that Keanu Reeves's involvement completely upended the game's entire development?

It's just that, when you're writing a story, revisions and re-writes are such a normal part of the process anyway that I just can't see how this could've been a significant factor.

IMO, it seems that, overall, the real issue was that this is a very big, complex, and ambitious game that needed more time BUT adding even further delay was such a taboo thing in the industry that hardly any game studio would've been willing to do it. That is until CP77 happened - that was a wake-up call to the industry and now more studios are willing to use longer delays. So.... silver linings.
 
I see this point being made over and over but can't find anything to substantiate it. Where does this idea come from, that Keanu Reeves's involvement completely upended the game's entire development?

It's just that, when you're writing a story, revisions and re-writes are such a normal part of the process anyway that I just can't see how this could've been a significant factor.

IMO, it seems that, overall, the real issue was that this is a very big, complex, and ambitious game that needed more time BUT adding even further delay was such a taboo thing in the industry that hardly any game studio would've been willing to do it. That is until CP77 happened - that was a wake-up call to the industry and now more studios are willing to use longer delays. So.... silver linings.
Respectfully, what part of "can't prove and wouldn't even try to" is unclear?

Unless or until CDPR publishes a time line of every major decision regarding development of the game, I don't think there will ever be a definitive publicly available answer to such questions.

Edit: Maybe you're just asking me what would prompt me to even consider such a thing. If so, then that's a fair question. It seems to me that there are two games going on. In one, you develop a character slowly, gradually leveling up street cred through what would be months of gigs and side missions, in game time. You buy cars, rent apartments, et cetera. Some skills level up so slowly that the vision had to be the equivalent of months, or years, of in-game time passage. And then there's a second game, in which you're given two in-game weeks to live, and at least two weeks worth of missions following up that one story line. Something happened in the development process that imposed the second game onto the first one. I don't know what that was. Keanu Reeves coming on board seems a big enough event for them to have imposed the second game onto the first. It's not the only reason.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you're just asking me what would prompt me to even consider such a thing. If so, then that's a fair question. It seems to me that there are two games going on. In one, you develop a character slowly, gradually leveling up street cred through what would be months of gigs and side missions, in game time. You buy cars, rent apartments, et cetera. Some skills level up so slowly that the vision had to be the equivalent of months, or years, of in-game time passage. And then there's a second game, in which you're given two in-game weeks to live
Answer if you want, I don't want to launch a debate in any way but I have one question :
- What lead you to think there was a "first game" ?
A "first" one which had as story like "V came from the ground and made his path to reach the top"
I wonder, because I didn't follow too much announcements and the "hype", so I probably miss a lot of things... But in the 2018 gameplay video, the story seem to be already set.

A bonus question :D
- Where the "two in-game weeks" come from ?
Viktor said "few weeks at top"
 
Respectfully, what part of "can't prove and wouldn't even try to" is unclear?

Erm, nothing? That's why I wasn't burdening you alone with the task and instead asked a question on an open forum where anyone can answer. You may not know where the whole Keanu thing comes from but someone else might. I asked because so many people keep repeating it (usually as if it's a fact).
 
Erm, nothing? That's why I wasn't burdening you alone with the task and instead asked a question on an open forum where anyone can answer. You may not know where the whole Keanu thing comes from but someone else might. I asked because so many people keep repeating it (usually as if it's a fact).
As far as i know it comes from a report(by a game magazine i think) that Keanu liked Johnny that much that he asked for more lines, then you can pick your poison:
-some people believe that they trashed their whole story. I think its mostly people who would have preferred a "rise to power"story-as till the heist-.
-more likely (imho) is all those times where johnny appears outside the main quest and says a couple of phrases like

-you scan a prostitute, he appears and comments.
-you get into the scavs braindance trap, he complains.
-the one you track routers that sent subversive texts.

there are quite a few of them, but its been a while since i played and was not counting words.

This phrases i think were quite easy to insert in isolation of the main story because are self-contained vignettes.
 
As far as i know it comes from a report(by a game magazine i think) that Keanu liked Johnny that much that he asked for more lines, then you can pick your poison:
-some people believe that they trashed their whole story. I think its mostly people who would have preferred a "rise to power"story-as till the heist-.
-more likely (imho) is all those times where johnny appears outside the main quest and says a couple of phrases like

-you scan a prostitute, he appears and comments.
-you get into the scavs braindance trap, he complains.
-the one you track routers that sent subversive texts.

there are quite a few of them, but its been a while since i played and was not counting words.

This phrases i think were quite easy to insert in isolation of the main story because are self-contained vignettes.
Yea this is pretty much the trigger. I doubt they did a complete story overhaul due too this small additions but some do think that. I dont think the story changed much due too this, it changed alot when they decided too do it FPP and "scraped" the prof of concept and earlier builds tho.

After B&W came out and witcher 3 was done alot changed and they pretty much started over as far as game was concerned. I pretty sure they also rewrote the story too fit this new vision. The basic concepts of the story probably did not change much but they would probably have adjusted it.
 
Last edited:
I would imagine it is a combination of the following things (I would say these are in order of how likely they are):

1. Including the game on last gen consoles. (I think this is 100% true)
2. Investor pressure to release the game early due to holiday sales/people being stuck inside for COVID. (I think this is 99% true)
3. Keanu being brought in late and them shifting the story because of it. (I think this is very likely to have happened, but others disagree)
4. COVID interfering with work schedules, resource availability and deadlines (Somewhat related to 2)
5. Not learning the correct lessons from The Witcher 3 (Example: I think shortening the main story was a mistake, though some certainly disagree. I also think "build your own V" was a mistake over a set main character given how great of a job they did with Geralt as a pre-defined character.)
6. Development changes and not deciding on included features early enough in development (Example: Initial teasers and trailers showed things like third party cut scenes that were later removed. Also combat and gameplay features that were later cut.)
7. QA issues that were reported. This seems incredibly odd though... someone besides these teams had to be playing the game and realized just how broken it was, especially on last gen consoles.

Not saying any of the above is necessarily factual. Just guesses.

I also do not think Cyberpunk 2077 was a complete disaster. It's one of my top 15ish favorite games of all-time and I only did a play through before all of the patches - so I imagine it climbs post-expansion in my rankings. I played on PC though - I imagine if I was playing on PS4 I'd be singing a different tune.
 
After B&W came out and witcher 3 was done alot changed and they pretty much started over as far as game was concerned. I pretty sure they also rewrote the story too fit this new vision. The basic concepts of the story probably did not change much but they would probably have adjusted it.
Yeah, there is some hints of the systems (some "skill checks"-attributes actually- in some gigs-like intimidate-) that kind of say they originally wanted something more stat driven ; maybe something between Bloodlines and Deus Ex Human Revolution (Gig level design kind of go into that direction, story quests are as linear as in Witcher 3) but I think that this type of gameplay heavily collides with CDPR cinematic storytelling and after Witcher 3 they decide to go that way in terms of storytelling (not judging here if TW3 or CP2077 has better story/storytelling, just the style of narrative exposition that is heavily scripted dialog/cutscene).

But scratching concepts from pre-production is not that strange, original Fallout pitch was about a time and space traveler who was searching for her girlfriend in a planet ruled by dinosaurs (minute 3.36):


So I'm confident CDPR didn´t change that much the story and concept of CP.

PS:maybe Obsidian with Microsoft money is able to gives us the original idea of Tim Cain RPG.
 

Guest 3847602

Guest
After B&W came out and witcher 3 was done alot changed and they pretty much started over as far as game was concerned. I pretty sure they also rewrote the story too fit this new vision. The basic concepts of the story probably did not change much but they would probably have adjusted it.
IIRC, the original story premise was about V being tricked into committing some blackout crime, getting arrested, getting out of jail and trying to unravel the conspiracy.
So yeah, post-2016 story is a complete rewrite of the original version.
Though, maybe some remnants of the original story were actually incorporated into Peralez questline.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I played on PC though - I imagine if I was playing on PS4 I'd be singing a different tune.
A comment I've seen very often and almost looks like certain people will want you to believe if you have a PS4 copy, therefore you'd have a bad experience.
I can tell you: as base-PS4 user.
- Never experienced any game/story-breaking bugs that would unilaterally stop me from continuing the game. Ever. Period
- Post 1.06 (and for me from basically the start): only experienced 1 or 2 game crashes over the course of 300/400 hours of play across 3 characters.
- Post 1.06 and certain post 1.1 I believe: the "worst" glitches I experienced are sudden popins and/or motorcycles falling from the sky. I only once felt through the floor somewhere in Santa Domingo and that was before 1.1

Overall, I have had a very pleasant gaming experience with Cyberpunk 2077 for almost the entirely of playing and on top of that it was a definate joy to walk that universe.

Infact, I've experienced more issues on my PC version where I have somewhere like 80 110 hours.
 
A comment I've seen very often and almost looks like certain people will want you to believe if you have a PS4 copy, therefore you'd have a bad experience.
My first year with Cyberpunk was on base PS4 too. Whilst it can feel janky coming back from playing it on next gen hardware, the assumption that it was an unplayable mess is just false, as are the "PS2 graphics" claims made by youtubers. At worst, before the first two patches it would crash semi-regularly, usually after a couple of hours. After 1.3 I would get two whole crashes in the 100+ hours I took to finish the game.

I still think it's impressive they managed to cram that game into working on old hardware like that.
 
My first year with Cyberpunk was on base PS4 too. Whilst it can feel janky coming back from playing it on next gen hardware, the assumption that it was an unplayable mess is just false, as are the "PS2 graphics" claims made by youtubers. At worst, before the first two patches it would crash semi-regularly, usually after a couple of hours. After 1.3 I would get two whole crashes in the 100+ hours I took to finish the game.

I still think it's impressive they managed to cram that game into working on old hardware like that.
I think the interesting comparison here would be.

|..Fallout 4.............Cyberpunk.......Horizon: Forbidden West..|
Cyberpunk surely walks closer to the line of jankyness which we know from Fallout games (and I find FO4 the best example in use)
Edit: on second thought, no Cyberpunk 2077 is much better and closer to Horizon. I forgot about some real frustrating elements in the FO series like inability to climb/wallgrab or properly crouch underneath openings which would clearly support the character model.Horizon seems to run more smoothly, albeit I also have had the occasional crash there and some moments of controls-issues, but overal Horizon would be the level at which you'd want to be with Cyberpunk gameplay/controls wise.
The graphics thing I have never understood. Partially because I'm less interested in by default but even then... PS2 era graphics... some people really are full of crap there.
Even on PS4, Cyberpunk looks real good. The only thing I could understand is if someone isn't fan of the artstyle Cyberpunk goes for, but that is subjective: you like or you dont. But CP definately does NOT have bad gaphics objectively. Case closed.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom