I don't think CP2077 will be abandon before it was originally intended to be, not to be understood negatively. Like with the TW3, they released it and then they created some DLCs and expansions and they were done with it more or less. And moved on to new projects like CP.
There is a saying people in IT like to use: Projects are never finished, but abandoned. The same will hold true for Cyberpunk 2077 and they same is true for any game ever made. This is not a bad thing, it just reflects the nature of software development.
Even if they decide to move to Unreal, it doesn't mean that the Red engine is dead as a result, it is still what drives CP and for the most part the engine is not what causes the issues with CP as I see it, to the point where it is useless. Far from it, we are not talking Bethesda quality engine here
You have mentioned a few points why switching to UE5 makes sense in your own post and I highly doubt CDPR will keep the REDEngine alive, given this deal would result in more resources being used, not less. Therefore, this switch to UE5 (and future iterations) will be permanent. (Unless they discover unsolvable issues with UE5 that force them to switch to yet another engine or resurrect REDEngine.)
The reason for this, I think is more of a strategic decision than anything else. The Unreal engine is very good and you have a huge experienced dedicated team constantly working and improving it. Which will save CDPR a lot of development time having to create their own engine and therefore be able to focus on creating their games instead, because creating a game engine is not a cheap task.
So even if they have to pay royalties to Unreal, it might not really cost them a lot more than having to create their own engine and maintain it.
Another benefit might be that more people are experienced in working with Unreal compared to having to train them in the Red engine, which also cost time and money.
We have seen how many issues these things can cause with the Frostbite engine for example and Mass Effect Andromeda and if im not mistaken Anthem ran into similar issues also having to be developed on that engine.
Those are the reasons I mentioned above and I very much agree with you. However, I would like to point out that according to their statement CDPR is not merely using UE5 (and future iteration), but also actively contributing to the development of said engine. I assume Epic values their open world experience in engine development. Thus, they either have an extremely favourable deal in regards to loyalties, or they do not have to pay any loyalties, or even receive part of the earnings. As a result, CDPR will have to dedicate more developers to engine development than other integrations projects of Unreal usually do.
Of course, there are DLC, but compare the regularity of releases and the number of DLC for TW3 and Cyberpunk 2077. Even the addition of apartments is not interesting since they have no use : you can't customize them and nothing happens there, whereas it was an opportunity to create a story for each apartment and to link it to at least one new mini-quest. Until 1.52, CD Projekt has mostly fixed bugs, and I don't think the next updates will be different as the game is still full of bugs. One could even consider that the game was still in early access until the release of the 1.5 update (considering the character's shadow or the lack of water effects for example).
I think this comparison is overly harsh against Cyberpunk 2077, because most DLCs released for Witcher 3 did not add any additional quests or story content. Rather, those DLCs provided new items or further customisation, just like in Cyberpunk 2077. However, as far as I can remember, there were two quests added as DLCs, but we also have not seen the last DLC for Cyberpunk 2077 yet.
Furthermore, I also disagree that anything before 1.5 could be considered as early access and while the game did have its problems a vast number of them was fixed by the time 1.23 was released.
In conclusion, the game will remain the same.
They never stated otherwise and it was never their intention to fundamentally change the game. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but to me it seems some people still expect CDPR to make the game into something it was never intended to be.
I strongly suspect there will only be one (albeit large) expansion and CP2077 will be put to bed by the end of the year, not sure what the distribution of staff/developers is on these projects right now but I imagine CP2077 is now not their highest priority.
I argue that large enough companies can have two main priorities and shift allocations around accordingly without neglecting either project.
next Witcher will be at least 2-3 years from now so there is a nice gap to fill during that period.
Yeah, 2-3y at the least. Thus, also from a financial perspective it might make sense to keep Cyberpunk 2077 supported for as long as possible.
I wonder if Cyberpunk 2077 could look exactly the same if it where made with the new Unreal engine instead of the red engine, without any difference in but perhaps even better performance.
Say they rework it.. then over night there comes a huge update to version 1.6 and the engine changed, would we find out the difference without gettingh told?
I would say yes, just because there is no way to get everything working the same and I think you have to settle for close enough. This does not mean that an UE5 Cyberpunk 2077 would be a better or a worse game, just different. However, from the few showcases we have seen I would argue that an UE5 might have a higher visual fidelity, due to a better object LOD handling.
That being said, all demos were intended to show the strong side of UE5 and some features might still break at Night Cities scope. Also, the better LOD handling mentioned above (Nanite) is probably making use of DirectStorage and equivalent console features, which are absent on old-gen. (Still, UE5 demos work on old-gen and look surprisingly good, which means the resort to some trickery.) CDPR did not had the luxury of employing DirectStorage when they were developing the game.
ARK use UE4 but performance wise, it was never "great" (even very bad^^). Crashes, bugs, high-end PCs almost required (at time) and I don't talk about performances on consoles...
So a "good engine" don't do everything anyway.
As far as I know, UE4 has grave problems with DX12 which results in stuttering.
The Witcher has always been quest driven, which imo kinda lacks in Cyberpunk 2077 after you finish the game.
I haven't finished the game yet, so please no spoilers, but in this regard I would say Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077 are equal. Both are not intended to be played after you are done with the main story, with the exception of Blood & Wine.
