Theres a mod for it now on nexus. Its been updated for 1.3
Edit: Nvm its been removed.
Edit: Nvm its been removed.
How much of a difference does the instruction set make for CPUs that does support it?
Maybe you should change the recommended system requirements for the game if you don't feel like testing patches on that hardware...
This is not how you should do software development. Why don't you bump the version to 1.31? Is it that important you have parity with consoles?
Last edited:
The "informational version number" given to customers & end users does not have to match the technical version number of the actual software. In fact it doesn't need to even closely correlate. Internally CP2077 could easily be version 6.36.19854 for all we know or care.
I was about to advocate for SemVer but I realised that it doesn't really apply to games software. A games app as a whole doesn't really declare a public API against which backwards-compatibility could be measured. Not unless we're referring to the API provided for mod support. But, then you might find that the game versions start going crazy really quickly, in ways that wouldn't make any sense to non-developers.
Like "Why did we go from 7.4.2 to 8.0.0, for a really minor release?" - well if you break backwards compatibility with mod support, SemVer would demand you bump to 8.0.0, no matter how small of a change you shipped. So - yeah - not worth the trouble. Web browsers (Google Chrome, Firefox) version themselves this way though, which is why we're currently at Chrome version 93.x.
TL;DR: If they're not using SemVer, developers can give their app whatever version numbers they want
True, but still a bit odd. Now people can have the conversation, where one says 1.3 doesn't work with AVX while the other says 1.3 does...The "informational version number" given to customers & end users does not have to match the technical version number of the actual software. In fact it doesn't need to even closely correlate. Internally CP2077 could easily be version 6.36.19854 for all we know or care.
I was about to advocate for SemVer but I realised that it doesn't really apply to games software. A games app as a whole doesn't really declare a public API against which backwards-compatibility could be measured. Not unless we're referring to the API provided for mod support. But, then you might find that the game versions start going crazy really quickly, in ways that wouldn't make any sense to non-developers.
Like "Why did we go from 7.4.2 to 8.0.0, for a really minor release?" - well if you break backwards compatibility with mod support, SemVer would demand you bump to 8.0.0, no matter how small of a change you shipped. So - yeah - not worth the trouble. Web browsers (Google Chrome, Firefox) version themselves this way though, which is why we're currently at Chrome version 93.x.
TL;DR: If they're not using SemVer, developers can give their app whatever version numbers they want
Well, over on GOG (I actually came to the forums just now to see what that auto-installed update was) my version is currently listed as "1.3 AVX".
I need a hotfix for the weapon reload-bug. from time to time any weapon i use will reload very slowly while the rest of the game is running in normal speed.. please do something about this..
If it's "too" annoying for you, for now, you can reset your perk points and don't re-activate any perk points who increase the reload speed of any weapons. Not ideal, but it work
But you can report it to CDPR Support if it's not already done. It's the best way to CDPR to be aware about Bug/Problem
I am experiencing issues in Combat — Cyberpunk 2077 | Technical Support — CD PROJEKT RED
Welcome to CD PROJEKT RED Technical Support! Here you will find help regarding our games and services, as well as answers to frequently asked questions.
support.cdprojektred.com
Please don't ask for hotfixes. Not all the things we dislike requires a Hotfix. From my perspective CP2077 has HDR and LOD issues, but I would never demand the devs have to push out a hotfix for this. Things take some time, just be patient...
The hotfix was implemented in such a way that users who didn't have AVX-related problems shouldn't notice any difference.