On Hype...

[LeKill3rFou]

What I suppose...
Maybe some have dreamed they would have a Ferrari and finally they only had a Mercedes. What a disappointment...
But hey, after a little reflexion, a Mercedes is not too bad and always better than a Lada

 

[greeks]

Meet the rebels - CD PROJEKT RED

The studio is home to well over 800 game-making professionals from all over the globe. We speak many different languages but share one love — games.

en.cdprojektred.com

Nowadays reading this feels like a joke or a very ironic take of some journalist on current state of the studio.


Sony allowed CDPR to perform their own quality assurance. Same with Microsoft. CDPR communication with their investors and third parties was always the same: "trust us". And everybody did. The media, the influencers, the investors, their business partners and obviously us- gamers. We all desperately wanted to believe in CDPR and in the idea that a pro-consumer company can be successful.
I don't think this kind of trust, once betrayed, can ever be regained. I can't see how anybody can have any amount of trust in CDPR anymore.


Saying "this is fine" and allowing for level of quality to drop will only make the quality of the next product to be as low -- if not lower. That conserns me because if we allow CDPR to get away with level of quality of Cyberpunk, there is a huge possiblity that their next project will be just as buggy and unfinished as the previous one. Quality costs time and money. Highly competent employees are expensive. What's the point of making a high quality product if your customers are willing to buy a lesser quality one? Remember that it's not the developers who decided to release Cyberpunk in its current state. The management made the decission and they made millions of dollars on it. It's only logical to assume that they will try to get away with it again.

 

[ya1]

Projects like this are not a bunch of devs sharing office space where people can just wander around the room to see how everyone else is doing. There are different teams of people working independently on different aspects of a game around the world. Main gameplay coding and the story script was done in Poland, while the subsidiary California offices handled motion and audio capture, I believe. There are also offices in China, though I've got no idea what their role was. That means that during any 24 hour period, numerous issues may be encountered, but it will likely be 8+ hours before another team even becomes aware. That often requires other teams to stop, undo, and redo their parts to adjust for something that had to change with a different team.

When the pandemic hit, it meant that people couldn't even go into their actual studios to use their workstations to continue their jobs -- just as everything was supposed to be "put together" for the first time. So, the leadership would be left trying to remotely contact various teams and getting a sense of where things were.

Making video games is hard. Pandemic is bad. Yet other AAA titles like Horizon ZD or AC: Valhalla made it. And for the fraction of CP77 budget.

However, claiming "CDPR did this on purpose because they knew their game was bad and they tricked us into buying it," is utterly ridiculous.

Wasn't the class action lawsuit about misrepresenting the state of the game? And what was it with not letting the press use their own footage? What seems somewhat ridiculous to me is suggesting that the most critically acclaimed video game company working on the second most expensive game ever did not know what state the game was in.

Simple logic here: if I'm going to intentionally "over-hype" my game to drum up sales at release...why would I refund the money after the fact?

Because a board member of a big game company would know by their knowledge of marketing and years in the business that most people don't refund games.

I did not refund. I wouldn't bother. I bought it on Steam and I would have had to contact them first, wait for them to refuse, then contact CDPR, bother with formalities, etc. Not worth it. Also, at that point, I still believed in Iwinski's Commitment to Quality and truly believed that the game would be fixed someday... How wrong I was!

The rest -- that people's fantasies were not met -- is no one's problem but their own.

First and foremost, it's nobody's problem but CDPR shareholders and stock owners. How many billions was lost? Is It people's fantasies that lost them that money? Or CDPR management who overhyped it and then released an unfinished game?

It is six months later. Except for console players who have grievances with the technical performance of the game, frankly people need to get over it and re-enter the real world.

Exactly. But how do you know it's the real world and not Cyberpunk...?

Try throwing something in the water and see if there's a splash. Or throw a knife somewhere and see if it's there. Just don't try one-shotting no final bosses in real life, okay? (Or in any other game for that matter. Because it is unprecedentedly unprofessional to release an "RPG" so broken that you one-shot the final boss with any half-decent build.)

Talking about 6 months, seriously... while all these things still haven't been fixed.

 

[incomingdamage]

I actually didn't follow many promotional materials, just those few trailes they released (never watched full "deep dive" gameplay with Sandra Dorsett rescue mission and Maelstrom, or however it was called) and I think I agree on the hype being at large on the audience part. Have to admit that this is not the first game that shows through its trailers things that might not even be present in the final product (or at least not in the same form). I remember Deus Ex Human Revolution trailer (great one btw), where we were shown some street uproar with crowds of people shouting and fighting with the police, a combat robot intervening, some explosions, and what did we get in the game for the same situation? A couple of npcs standing around in front of a police car + some distant sounds of an unhappy crowd .
What about movie trailers? These are continuosly kind of "misleading" when it comes to show the actual content of the movie. Remember how the last trailer presented Bladerunner 2049, it pulled out almost every action scene from the movie, which resulted in an impression that it might be actually an action movie, while it was quite the opposite in fact.
So yeah, in most part promotional materials usually have to advertise the product in an attractive way, and if it succedes, the audience sometimes tends to fantasize and build upon the content that was presented to them.

Still, in case of CP2077 the trailers were so good and convincing that it was actually quite easy to fall into these fantasies about what we might get in the final product. I actually fell into these fantasies as well, to some extent: thought that I would be able to travel from point A to point B not only on foot or by car, but also by metro in real time; sit in a bar and consume food with proper animations, just to immerse myself while I look at the tv news and wait to do another gig or side quest; decide to change my haircut or facial structure; sit actually in the ripperdoc's chair while ordering another cyberwear etc. Also some more dynamic events, more mobility for the city's residents and more quests you just stumble upon while exploring instead of seeing them already fixed on the map. Just some small dissapointments, I'd say. The game is still great without these.

I sense that much of the overall dissapointment from the audience comes from the fact, that the environment CDPR created here is so amazing, visually complex and realistic / immersive, that it kind of begs for a bit more "life" than just pedestrians moving around and having small conversations here and there. This overall dissapointment took in time a form of accusations about the gamers being cheated by the company, I guess. That's at least how I see it.

As for me, I still after many hours of playing (and general enjoyment) have this slight feeling that something is kind of missing here, could have some dynamic adventures, like walking round a corner and bumping into an npc who begs for some aid, because their friend got attacked by someone in an alley nearby; or being approached by some criminals to hand over some goods; or seeing a maxtac AV flying somewhere in haste and following it to see what happened, only to get involved into an intense fight between two gangs. Things like that. A bit more of stories told through actual events, and less through data shards. But that's just me - other than that (and annoying bugs that I still encounter) I really like the game.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Cybeprunk 2049

I agree for the rest, but it's probably BladeRunner 2049, no ?
Edit : crap, already corrected. I leave the quote, pretty hilarious, so sorry

 

[incomingdamage]

I agree for the rest, but it's probably BladeRunner 2049, no ?
Edit : crap, already corrected. I leave the quote, pretty hilarious, so sorry

Sure, I don't mind. True, turned out funny

 

[MaxPrimal]

Hype can only happen if you pay attention to Hype

 

[ya1]

Hype can only happen if you pay attention to Hype

Dude, there were posters and billboards EVERYWHERE. I don't remember any game in my whole life ate this much money in advertising. My grandma who doesn't know what Mario is knew about Cyberpunk.

 

[Kizu_KCM]

Hype can only happen if you pay attention to Hype

Just don t look

 

[Restlessdingo32]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but for me "does not represent the final look of the game" means what it says...
That it is possible that nothing that is presented will be present in the final game. Basically, it is quite possible to change everything, to cut everything or to modify everything.

The 2 step process mentioned much earlier covered this topic.

It's completely understandable to slap work on progress on presented material. Nobody in their right mind thinks game studios immediately know exactly what they intend to offer, exactly how they intend to offer it and exactly how everything along the way will play out to get there. It's a creative process. It's an iterative process. Regardless, WIP shouldn't be a convenient way to say A and change it to B without elaboration. Nor should it be a means to showcase a certain level of quality or functionality when it's known it will never actually exist.

As a consumer it's not unreasonable to expect better. I see a behavior I don't like and my choice is to say, "Dear dev studios, you should probably stop doing that.". Instead of passing it off as normal, claiming I'm exceptional at reading between the lines so it doesn't hurt me, falling back on "send it back", "manage your expectations", and things of this nature. Even if those type of comments aren't meant to deem it acceptable what is said and what is heard are two totally different things. When those comments are said what gets heard is "this is acceptable, by all means keep it up".

Wasn't the class action lawsuit about misrepresenting the state of the game? And what was it with not letting the press use their own footage? What seems somewhat ridiculous to me is suggesting that the most critically acclaimed video game company working on the second most expensive game ever did not know what state the game was in.

The lawsuits had nothing to do with players. The lawsuits were about misrepresentation to investors. As least as I understand it. Not that they'll go anywhere. Even if they did the penalties would likely be a slap on the wrist at best.

Hype can only happen if you pay attention to Hype

hype verb (2)
hyped; hyping

Definition of hype (Entry 3 of 5)

transitive verb
1 : put on, deceive
2 : to promote or publicize extravagantly hyping this fall's TV lineup

hype noun (2)

Definition of hype (Entry 4 of 5)
1 : deception, put-on
2 : publicity especially : promotional publicity of an extravagant or contrived kind all the hype before the boxing match

There are a couple versions of the definition for hype from Merriam-Webster. Take note of the words "deceive" and "deception" included in the definitions. Check virtually any other source for the definitions and you'll find more of the same.

If we want to say it only works or goes anywhere if the viewer believes the claims by all means. The viewer arguably shouldn't have to go to such lengths to disregard the claims though. The entities making the claims should be attempting to be as clear, concise, accurate and honest as possible. The viewer should expect better. The product should compete based on it's merits.

Just don t look

How does one make an informed decision on purchasing a product if they disregard any and all information provided about it? Flip a coin? Roll a dice? Keep in mind it's a rhetorical question. The answer is wait 6 months after release and buy the game on sale.

 

[northwold]

Dude, there were posters and billboards EVERYWHERE. I don't remember any game in my whole life ate this much money in advertising. My grandma who doesn't know what Mario is knew about Cyberpunk.

A bit off topic but I've seen this sort of saturation advertising for a fair number of games although the imagery was so unimaginative and generic that I can't remember what they actually were (possibly call of duty among others -- random pictures of soldiers looking like soldiers - - yawn). Granted I live in London so a major market.

So credit where credit's due, Cyberpunk had really strong branding and the choice of an almost entirely plain yellow background was inspired.

 

[KunoichiRider]

The rest -- that people's fantasies were not met -- is no one's problem but their own.

I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, but it's hard to think of a similar outpouring of childish grief that a commercial entertainment product failed to meet people's own fantasies since the Star Wars prequels.

It is six months later. Except for console players who have grievances with the technical performance of the game, frankly people need to get over it and re-enter the real world.

Please bear in mind, that this game and its PR-campaign also catered especially to people interested in cyberpunk as a genre, from the RTG Table Top Fanbase to elitist Sprawl-ites.
These people received a product which was substandard in some game-design/mechanics aspects, and also did not deliver too many cyberpunk-y features, i.e. this game does not differ much from some generic sci-fi or even present or near future scenario first person shooter.

The company responsible for this product issued some roadmap for improvement and "commitment to quality" statement after release and as far as I remember the contract with RTG covers at least two games using the Cyberpunk IP.

Why is anyone surprised that people come back here, or still folllow twitter accounts, subreddits or whatever on this game?
I do not understand why people, who do not like this product (as it is now), are made fun of or even harassed and offended, because they still follow the game in (social) media.

 

[ipxLestat]

My grandma who doesn't know what Mario is knew about Cyberpunk.

That's a good one!!

 

[northwold]

Please bear in mind, that this game and its PR-campaign also catered especially to people interested in cyberpunk as a genre, from the RTG Table Top Fanbase to elitist Sprawl-ites.
These people received a product which was substandard in some game-design/mechanics aspects, and also did not deliver too many cyberpunk-y features, i.e. this game does not differ much from some generic sci-fi or even present or near future scenario first person shooter.

The company responsible for this product issued some roadmap for improvement and "commitment to quality" statement after release and as far as I remember the contract with RTG covers at least two games using the Cyberpunk IP.

Why is anyone surprised that people come back here, or still folllow twitter accounts, subreddits or whatever on this game?
I do not understand why people, who do not like this product (as it is now), are made fun of or even harassed and offended, because they still follow the game in (social) media.

I don't think I can sensibly respond to that in any depth without inadvertently offending people.

However, the Financial Times, presciently, did run a piece a couple of days before the game's release pointing out the dangers of launching a title the very name of which people associate with their own personal expectations of a genre, who might then fail to differentiate their expectations from the (distinct) product.

We've seen the result of that in various ways online, including the extremely surreal discussions about how the soundtrack needed to be tacky 80s synthopop and that the non-inclusion of such music made the game a betrayal.

 

[Didacgomez]

In 2021 we are discussing about agressive ad campaigns to boost sales in videogame industry? Really? People is too young or has a very short memory.

 

[Guest 3847602]

However, the Financial Times, presciently, did run a piece a couple of days before the game's release pointing out the dangers of launching a title the very name of which people associate with their own personal expectations of a genre, who might then fail to differentiate their expectations from the (distinct) product.

Reminds of one pretty well-known youtuber who spent 1st hour of his Cyberpunk 2077 critique (he may have kept going longer than that, I stopped watching) in trying to explain how the game failed to capture the essence of Neuromancer. Not one mention of Mike Pondsmith.

 

[BigWezz69]

They did a lot more than just put work on progress on it... there was also this message at the end which makes it quite clear that this was unlikely to be what the game would look or perform like.

View attachment 11226401

Yeah, but "work in progress" and "not representative of the final product" doesn't normally mean a downgrade.

Those sorts of terms are meant to say; "hey, we know the game/demo/footage is a bit rough in areas, but this will be better come release."

And not; "hey we know game/demo/footage is a bit good in areas and looks exciting and all, but this will be worse come release .. and it may not function properly or at all .. but since we are giving you this warning now, please don't get mad k?"

Post automatically merged: Jun 16, 2021

In 2021 we are discussing about agressive ad campaigns to boost sales in videogame industry? Really? People is too young or has a very short memory.

It think people are just seeing this sort of malarkey or often, or maybe its just more visible these days, and people are sick of it?

 

[northwold]

Yeah, but "work in progress" and "not representative of the final product" doesn't normally mean a downgrade.

Those sorts of terms are meant to say; "hey, we know the game/demo/footage is a bit rough in areas, but this will be better come release."

And not; "hey we know game/demo/footage is a bit good in areas and looks exciting and all, but this will be worse come release .. and it may not function properly or at all .. but since we are giving you this warning now, please don't get mad k?"

Post automatically merged: Jun 16, 2021

It think people are just seeing this sort of malarkey or often, or maybe its just more visible these days, and people are sick of it?

Hold on that IS often what work in progress means in a gameplay preview. Because, even if it's being run on the working engine of the game, it is usually run at insanely high graphics settings that get downgraded before release so that the game as a whole runs properly.

Maybe I'm unusual but I would expect gameplay videos to show gameplay that is at least the best in the game, if not something running at settings the game does not, on its release, allow. That has been my experience in reality.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Hold on that IS often what work in progress means in a gameplay preview. Because, even if it's being run on the working engine of the game, it is usually run at insanely high graphics settings that get downgraded before release so that the game as a whole runs properly.

On a PC certainly inaccessible to ordinary people

 

[cartlidge]

Yeah, but "work in progress" and "not representative of the final product" doesn't normally mean a downgrade.

Those sorts of terms are meant to say; "hey, we know the game/demo/footage is a bit rough in areas, but this will be better come release."

And not; "hey we know game/demo/footage is a bit good in areas and looks exciting and all, but this will be worse come release .. and it may not function properly or at all .. but since we are giving you this warning now, please don't get mad k?"

They explicitly address this in that text message
I don't think the game looks worse than that video either but I understand this is subjective.