They will never add it. There is a reason why they made it a first person only.
Just a question like that, is it me or there V positions were removed in 1.23 in photo mode ?
For me, some are missing anyway
(like the one where V is sitting or leaning against an imaginary wall).
For me, some are missing anyway
(like the one where V is sitting or leaning against an imaginary wall).
Absolutely untrue.
This statement is more of a milestone. When work on the game is done, it will be announced. I'd say we are still years from a final version. Instead, I'd interpret this to mean: "We've got things in a pretty good place. Yes, there are still some issues that need to be addressed, but the time has come move forward with the game." (And that most likely means DLC content, expansion quests, new mechanics, etc.)
I think you're missing the focus behind what I was saying. When a game uses an engine, regardless of how many different platforms it is released on, I'm not going to make foundational changes to the engine specifically for only one platform. I may make certain tweaks to the engine if, saaay, the console has trouble streaming lighting data from more than 5 simultaneous sources. So, I'll limit max number of shadows to 4 on that console version to ensure there are no graphical issues with shadows. (Yup -- that might not look as cool as it did in a prior version, but it was necessary to do as it was a limitation of the hardware. Can't leave it at a higher setting without issues.)
However, if I'm dealing with a much more foundational change, like, saaay, the way that I'm compressing the game's data packages and the way the engine will load that data into RAM when it's called for, I'm not going to make a change like that for only one platform version of the game. It will fundamentally change the way the game works at a core level, and that change will affect every subsequent issue that may crop up. So, if on PC, the data packages are compressed as individual .json files or something by object category...and instead I decide it may work better overall if we compress specific packages by game area instead...that will alter the way that information loads completely. If I do it by category on PC, but by area on on console, there's no longer any relationship in how each version is running. A bug that appears and is fixed for PC may never even appear on consoles. A bug that looks similar and appears on both platforms may be caused by two completely different things, and it will take me forever to track down where each of them lies, as I need to hunt it down twice. A bug that does exist on both builds may not be solvable on one, and it will require that platform version to undergo another, foundational change -- further increasing the disparity between the two builds. Eventually, this will mean that I basically need totally separate teams to handle each version, and work overall will be much, much slower.
A much more efficient way of doing this is to handle any fundamental changes to game functionality universally. An all-encompassing approach to how the game functions at its core, then balancing changes for various platforms within that framework. (From what I've always seen, this is usually done on PC first, then adapted and scaled for consoles. Hence, if a change like that is made to an engine, it's almost never a matter of getting it to work on this or that particular platform -- it's a situation that has been identified as inherently flawed -- or someone happens to come up with a much better approach -- or there's new options provided by advancements in things like drivers, etc. It's simply the best way of fixing an issue or handling things better across the board. It is counter-productive to take things in multiple different directions at the same time.)
I think we should moderate our expectations and don't read too much into what someone didn't actually said using exactly the same words. If CDPR says that the game reached "satisfactory" level of stability, it means that they are preparing the ground for "the game is done, no more patches".
Remember how they said that the game runs "surprisingly well" on consoles? And what we got?
Remember how they said that the game runs "surprisingly well" on consoles? And what we got?
Just a question like that, is it me or there V positions were removed in 1.23 in photo mode ?
For me, some are missing anyway
(like the one where V is sitting or leaning against an imaginary wall).
You get different options on the poses depending on what is going on around you.
Too weird, impossible to do this one against a wall in the Lizzie and impossible to do the "sit on the floor" position on the beach.
(maybe only on Xbox version, or just on my game...)
Maybe.. Just went to pacifica to check the beach pose..
I found the problem and it's pretty insane !
All this "missing positions" are not available if you're wearing a dress
If you have a dress, you can test. It's quite weird because with a skirt you have all
So...if work on a game manages to get its stability to a "satisfactory" result (which means: not crashing, relatively consistent FPS, no huge graphical glitching, etc.)...that somehow translates into:
- all work on the game is now over.
- no further work will be done to increase performance optimization at all
- no further content will be added
- no attention will be paid to gaemplay mechanics
- no expansions will be made to content
- no features will be polished further
- no more bug fixing will be done for things that are not related to stability concerns
- It's over. It's just all over.
The statement means exactly what it actually says. Stability is now satisfactory.
Nothing...absolutely nothing...was said about any other aspect of the game.
I'm inclined to wonder where people are getting the idea the game is going to have years of support. The chance for that died due to their failures.
What we've got is what we're getting, just slightly less catastrophic.
Simple: because every single thing we heard from CDPR about Cyberpunk 2077 never lived up to expectations. All I ever wanted was a game free of bugs. And they can't even deliver that.
I'll talk more about this after the next patch or three. The DLC will likely have been announced if not begun to come out by that point, as well.
The major focus up to this point was getting things in a more stable place on last-gen consoles. Of course, that also entailed a lot of working getting the game more stable overall. I don't know of any major changes that were done for gameplay elements aside from vehicle controls being tightened up a bit and things like police spawning being handled a bit more dynamically.
I'm not sure what's causing the overall graphical issues for some people. I don't really notice any difference at all on my end. Certainly nothing like people are describing above.
If using mods, or if they have ever been used in the past, it may require them to be removed and the game verified/repaired to ensure default textures display correctly. In worst-case scenarios, the game may need to be reinstalled and begun again to rectify such things.
If no modding has ever been used, then my next guess would be either file corruption (which again would be a verify/repair). Or it could be some issue with drivers; updating or rolling back (using DDU and a CLEAN installation) may help.
Aside from that, I'd describe the problem, take a screenshot or two, and send it into CDPR Support. It's impossible to account for all of the different things people are seeing on their end without actually being able to see it.
Sorry to burst that bubble but that is literally impossible, for one very simple reason (and yes, I'm deliberately saying it this way) : have you seen the variety of expectations set by people around here? Impossible to live up to because there's way to many, differing and sometimes contradicting expectations.
Yours may be a 'simple' one (by name) but achieving that may not be as easy but they are working to do so. But the excessive amount of wildly varying expectations... There are always gonna be people (lots even) that will not have their expectations being met. Maybe ever even.
Also, I believe it was said, or laid out somewhere, that it would take a minimum of 1 year that the game would approach the level of what the devs had aimed for. And last I checked we're only halfway there.
Right? Here is a good summary of why some people are never, and were never, going to be satisfied with Cyberpunk 2077:
2077 has many, many flaws, no question. There was also exactly zero chance it was going to be what some people wanted. And HAD it been -that- game, it would have "utterly failed" for a whole other group of people.
Indeed, they only confirmed the stability part.
But my question is, at this rate, how long we'll have to wait for the game to actually get some improvements on PC and QoL updates?
Cuz' it's been 6-7 months and they only fixed the stability at the price of graphical downgrade to all platforms?
i bought the game day 1 ( my mistake) and still cannot play properly. I want to play don't get me wrong . I like the world, the characters, story seems cool.
But do I have to wait another 7 months or a year? I'm starting to lose my patience, because i payed for a service that was sub-standard at launch. Why they are working so slow, releasing only small patches like 1.23 was this time? It's mind boggling to me.
At this rate Cybperunk will never be fully patched up, and that is my biggest fear. I fear that the game sold at satisfactory level and made CDPR a satisfactory amount of money. It could make more but it's still well within satisfactory margins. I fear that CDPR will take an acceptable hit to their brand and close the project, leaving us with a 6/10 game, would be 9 but graphic glitches and cuts in development dragged the experience down.
at this point they should really just come out and communicate. These weird interviews with random media or statements from investor meetings or board meetings just aren't cutting it and they just create more confusion an anger. Just come out, tell us what your plans are or if there are any and get it over with. Rip off the damn band-aid.
This is somewhat what I'm fearing too. The "satisfactory" regarding to now open money sources, not the game itself. The game became satisfactory exactly when it was brought back on PS store. Meanwhile people have been noticing the introduction of more bugs than with any previous patch, at least in my opinion.
About not meeting expectations, it's not us bad people who always want CP77 to be something that it isn't. Games absence from ps store shows the game didn't meet Sony's or CDPRs expectations too.
It's a common misconception that whoever criticizes the game is a hater, while we just want CP77 to be the best it can be. We all see the sheer amounts of potential that lays in the core of the game,we just want it to be pushed further, to reach the maximum level of possible goodness.
People aren't patient, just like it's me who is fighting the gravity (gravity being marketing culture), CDPR fights the nature of human beings. Generally speaking it's never good to have 7+ million people waiting on something they already paid for.
That being said i fully understand the focus on console performance, those are the other 7+ million customers just like those mentioned earlier. It's a lose/lose situation, half of us had to wait no matter what. Now that 1.23 has been announced as satisfactory stability wise, us pc players hope for some changes in regard to core functionalities at least. See nobody REALLY expects cut content to be brought back, but already existing game functionalities should work (perks, clones inside each other etc). But we're yet to see any of those "actual" improvements, so we're sceptical. This is just human nature. Let us be sceptical. Prove us wrong. Trust us, ALL of us, unanimously wholeheartedly hope to be proven wrong, we want to laugh it off in the future, while reminding us of hilarious bugs that we used to encounter. We want the Roach syndrome. "Damn this is gorgeous, but remember when it was xyz?"