What went wrong? Jason Schreier about CP2077

[casadechrisso]

It is convenient to use the Cyberpunk 2077 bait and talk about his upcoming book.

And guess what, it worked for me. I had his first book on my wishlist for an eternity and was reminded by this video that 1. Audible exists and 2. I still have free books to claim, so I spent this day listening to the whole thing in one go and it was quite worth it.
The overarching topic of the book is probably crunch and how inevitable it seems, also every chapter is about chaos and catastrophes - mostly turning out good in the end, not without exceptions though. Chapter 9 is about CDPR and the Witcher 3 development, and it was quite favorable - one of the real feelgood stories, making me doubt he "just hates on CDPR". Interesting is how similar it seems how Cyberpunk development started, as if trying to repeat the Witcher 3's method, including multiple delays, just that this time it didn't work out.
The whole thing is well researched, talking to countless devs who are involved, and is absolutely not just another news reporting with info scrapped from Reddit and the wayback machine. Schreier has absolutely certain biases and a gigantic ego, but in the book he shows only sympathy and affection for game developers.

 

[Guest 4400165]

I've read most of the posts here and still don't quite understand, what are we supposed to discuss here, fellers? Who or what to blame for the "unfulfilled potential", "broken promises", "underdelivery", the stupid fucking police thing (again), etc.? Like, what would that change?
Schrier just does his job. CP2077 went big again and hit the news, so, he released an article to attract traffic and ignite (pointless) discussions.

I can only hope certain people in charge at CDPR realised what went wrong and learned the lessons already.

 

[Myajha]

I can only hope certain people in charge at CDPR realised what went wrong and learned the lessons already.

I'd say they haven't. Well they have, but not the way we'd like it. They're following the path of EA now, literally. They just cancelled their multiplayer in order to concentrate on bringing online to all their games. Translation, tack on Multiplayer, with microtransactions, just like EA's games as service.

 

[eLmeFist0]

why is a Bloomberg reporter an expert on cdpr/cyberpunk? because he got hits with some halfazzed articles?

When you atack the person trying to discredid him instead of the argument he makes= what he said you already show defeat.

 

[crawfordman]

I'd say they haven't. Well they have, but not the way we'd like it. They're following the path of EA now, literally. They just cancelled their multiplayer in order to concentrate on bringing online to all their games. Translation, tack on Multiplayer, with microtransactions, just like EA's games as service.

if this is true than i am truly fearful of the future of the video game industry. EA still clings onto the belief that single player games are dead.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

When you atack the person trying to discredid him instead of the argument he makes= what he said you already show defeat.

I am not in life combat with the writer, I am wondering why I should take him seriously on this topic when he has no new information, and less information than is out there. He is essentially just another voice in the forum. Except he has a bigger soap box, and he profits directly from attention.

The post seems to be an appeal to authority, and I question his authority

 

[eLmeFist0]

I am not in life combat with the writer, I am wondering why I should take him seriously on this topic when he has no new information, and less information than is out there. He is essentially just another voice in the forum. Except he has a bigger soap box, and he profits directly from attention.

The post seems to be an appeal to authority, and I question his authority

Careful i did not said he is right or wrong. Or that he his is right because he is a journalist or something. No arguments from authority here.
You should combat his arguments with counter arguments if you disagree not attack the person behind the argument. That is the honest approach.

 

[Draconifors]

Please do not try to tell others what they should or should not do in an attempt to antagonize them. And personal skirmishes do not belong in public threads.

 

[DC9V]

That's not libel. That's your personal interpretation of his tone. I didn't see it like "shame on CDPR for making a fake demo." The message was clear to me: "demo was fake, many devs do that, but CDPR did that less than 2 years before release, in a project that should require many times as much time and people. The fact they didn't have the game systems ready so late shows how badly the project was mismanaged. They prioritized marketing over development and completely disregarded expert opinions from their own employees."



Yes, they did. And they didn't do themselves any favors: "10/10 on PC" and "Game is better than the demo." This PR strategy is basically Goebels-happy-go-lucky - say the same thing a hundred times and hope it finds enough believers.




His article is not news reporting. It's investigative journalism with commentary. Different genre. Drawing own conclusions from the collected information and attaching opinions is a part of it.

It's easy to go around saying "media lies." A little harder to point out what exactly the "lies" are, which no-one in this thread ever did so far. [...]

I just can't believe in anonymous sources. For me that's the same category as "alternative facts".

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

That's not libel. That's your personal interpretation of his tone. I didn't see it like "shame on CDPR for making a fake demo." The message was clear to me: "demo was fake, many devs do that, but CDPR did that less than 2 years before release, in a project that should require many times as much time and people. The fact they didn't have the game systems ready so late shows how badly the project was mismanaged. They prioritized marketing over development and completely disregarded expert opinions from their own employees."



Yes, they did. And they didn't do themselves any favors: "10/10 on PC" and "Game is better than the demo." This PR strategy is basically Goebels-happy-go-lucky - say the same thing a hundred times and hope it finds enough believers.




His article is not news reporting. It's investigative journalism with commentary. Different genre. Drawing own conclusions from the collected information and attaching opinions is a part of it.

It's easy to go around saying "media lies." A little harder to point out what exactly the "lies" are, which no-one in this thread ever did so far. [...]

investigative journalism used to determine the story behind a commercial product is questionable to begin with. Investigative journalism tends to take a stance on an issue, based on harmful actions. Using its standard for an entertainment product, to determine why the product isn't "good", Is flawed investigative journalism.

Its conclusion is subjective to begin with, and verifiable facts are questionable on that basis.

There is kernals of legitimate journalism, there is a story about crunch, or worker culture, perhaps marketing, but because its wrapped, tied and promoted as a story on why cyberpunk is a bad product, it muddies its message and loses its integrity. It actually goes against his real message, because it ties a moral message to the success of a product. Which is also inconsistent because the reason many of these issues are in play, is because it works in the industry.

ps: not sure why you are bringing up libel, thats a high legal standard and I never suggested there is a winnable case. However whether you can win a libel suit is irrelevant to anything.

Post automatically merged: Apr 1, 2021

Careful i did not said he is right or wrong. Or that he his is right because he is a journalist or something. No arguments from authority here.
You should combat his arguments with counter arguments if you disagree not attack the person behind the argument. That is the honest approach.

I at no time attacked the writer, my initial post was essentially, why should I take this writer any more seriously than anyone else when it comes to cyberpunk2077.

As for counter arguments, there was a long post on his first article, I questioned his conclusions, reasoning and assumptions in that thread. So when I reference his last article poorly, its because I already evaluated it there.

 

[eLmeFist0]

investigative journalism used to determine the story behind a commercial product is questionable to begin with. Investigative journalism tends to take a stance on an issue, based on harmful actions. Using its standard for an entertainment product, to determine why the product isn't "good", Is flawed investigative journalism.

Its conclusion is subjective to begin with, and verifiable facts are questionable on that basis.

There is kernals of legitimate journalism, there is a story about crunch, or worker culture, perhaps marketing, but because its wrapped, tied and promoted as a story on why cyberpunk is a bad product, it muddies its message and loses its integrity. It actually goes against his real message, because it ties a moral message to the success of a product. Which is also inconsistent because the reason many of these issues are in play, is because it works in the industry.

ps: not sure why you are bringing up libel, thats a high legal standard and I never suggested there is a winnable case. However whether you can win a libel suit is irrelevant to anything.

Post automatically merged: Apr 1, 2021

I at no time attacked the writer, my initial post was essentially, why should I take this writer any more seriously than anyone else when it comes to cyberpunk2077.

As for counter arguments, there was a long post on his first article, I questioned his conclusions, reasoning and assumptions in that thread. So when I reference his last article poorly, its because I already evaluated it there.

you said: " because he got hits with some halfazzed articles?". [...]
Did you watch the video or read his book?
From what i watched he seemed low tone in criticizing never using inflammatory language.

 

[ya1]

investigative journalism used to determine the story behind a commercial product is questionable to begin with. Investigative journalism tends to take a stance on an issue, based on harmful actions. Using its standard for an entertainment product, to determine why the product isn't "good", Is flawed investigative journalism.

This is incorrect. Investigative journalism is journalism that deeply investigates a single matter of importance to the readers, which is usually under some scrutiny from someone or something to remain undisclosed. What constitutes that matter of importance is subjective.

Its conclusion is subjective to begin with, and verifiable facts are questionable on that basis.

Which conclusion and facts? You're still going on with that "media lie" rhetoric yet you failed to specify a single thing.

There is kernals of legitimate journalism, there is a story about crunch, or worker culture, perhaps marketing, but because its wrapped, tied and promoted as a story on why cyberpunk is a bad product, it muddies its message and loses its integrity. It actually goes against his real message, because it ties a moral message to the success of a product. Which is also inconsistent because the reason many of these issues are in play, is because it works in the industry.

I don't agree. It's not up to you to decide what is important for other readers. Just because this is not a serious political or corporate crime, does not mean it does not qualify for the method of investigative journalism. [...]

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

This is incorrect. Investigative journalism is journalism that deeply investigates a single matter of importance to the readers, which is usually under some scrutiny from someone or something to remain undisclosed. What constitutes that matter of importance is subjective.



Which conclusion and facts? You're still going on with that "media lie" rhetoric yet you failed to specify a single thing.



I don't agree. It's not up to you to decide what is important for other readers. Just because this is not a serious political or corporate crime, does not mean it does not qualify for the method of investigative journalism. [...]

you are the one who is talking about media lies. I am saying the writer is not an expert on the subject matter, and that their connections, inferences, deductions, and reasoning is questionable.

If you want to change the usage of the term investigative journalism, thats up to you, but your usage is not standard. (BTW this has nothing to do with whether readers should read it, people can read what they want, But is it any more valid than anyone else's opinion?, thats the question)

Regardless, the dudes investigation is automatically going to be subjective, because his premise is subjective. (cyberpunk went wrong)

His reasoning is flawed as well because at the end of the day, he is saying cyberpunk went wrong because it was essentially developed the same way the industry develops most AAA games.

but some AAA games succeed, so its illogical.

 

[eLmeFist0]

you are the one who is talking about media lies. I am saying the writer is not an expert on the subject matter, and that their connections, inferences, deductions, and reasoning is questionable.

If you want to change the usage of the term investigative journalism, thats up to you, but your usage is not standard. (BTW this has nothing to do with whether readers should read it, people can read what they want, But is it any more valid than anyone else's opinion?, thats the question)

Regardless, the dudes investigation is automatically going to be subjective, because his premise is subjective. (cyberpunk went wrong)

His reasoning is flawed as well because at the end of the day, he is saying cyberpunk went wrong because it was essentially developed the same way the industry develops most AAA games.

but some AAA games succeed, so its illogical.

" I am saying the writer is not an expert on the subject matter, and that their connections, inferences, deductions, and reasoning is questionable."

It's irrelevant if he is an expert or not, young, old, 12 years old.
Making inferences, deductions, and reasoning has nothing do with being an expert but with intelligence and problem solving capabilities of an individual.
A 12 year old boy may be capable to infer, deduce and reason much better then an 70 year old expert with many degrees and experience.
See Einstein. His theory of relativity went against the consensus of the overwhelming experts.
He was mostly self taught. He was right. They were wrong.
You can't dismiss someone arguments just because they are not experts.

 

[exxxed]

It is convenient to use the Cyberpunk 2077 bait and talk about his upcoming book.

Ah Jason...

 

[koalahugs]

Hmm, I really don't get why so many people here feel threatened by Schreier. It's like some of you think he's totally shitting all over the game or something... but he isn't? Sure, there is a sensationalist hate bandwagon, but to lump Schreier in with that bunch is totally ignorant. The Bloomberg articles I've read seems fair and balanced to me and the conversation in this video is so utterly chill and reasonable that I just don't see how anyone can fail to see that he's blatantly on the side of the developers.

And I've seen a lot of you supporting the devs for this project too, meaning he's on your side. And he's actually spoken to a pile of them and has given them a voice. That's more than most of us can say.

Also, re: anonymous sources - I mean, jeez, does that really need explaining? That's just a standard thing journos sometimes have to do to protect their sources. It's a catch-22, but that's why it's important to pay attention to the reputation of the news organisation. If it's Fox News, its probably dog shit. If it's Washington Post, it's probably legit. Etcetera.

Btw, I'm saying all of this as someone who likes and often defends the game.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

" I am saying the writer is not an expert on the subject matter, and that their connections, inferences, deductions, and reasoning is questionable."

It's irrelevant if he is an expert or not, young, old, 12 years old.
Making inferences, deductions, and reasoning has nothing do with being an expert but with intelligence and problem solving capabilities of an individual.
A 12 year old boy may be capable to infer, deduce and reason much better then an 70 year old expert with many degrees and experience.
See Einstein. His theory of relativity went against the consensus of the overwhelming experts.
He was mostly self taught. He was right. They were wrong.
You can't dismiss someone arguments just because they are not experts.

as I said, he is as qualified as anyone else with an opinion. And my point is that his inferences etc are bad because they are bad.

 

[exxxed]

And I've seen a lot of you supporting the devs for this project too, meaning he's on your side. And he's actually spoken to a pile of them and has given them a voice. That's more than most of us can say.

But that's the whole point, there are no sides to take it's not a black and white issue like the media (not just Jason, he's nothing special) is making it seem, having everyone entrenched, defending different sides of the same narrative while simultaneously missing the full picture - which is exactly that it's a multifaceted issue.

Jason's just an opportunist that really enjoys his buzzwords, he wouldn't have made these claims if there wasn't an outrage to capitalize on, like every other time he ''reports'' on something.

One example is the buzzword called ''crunch'' that's getting everyone's panties in a bunch that's nothing but sensationalism, if it were such an industry wide problem, not just some people feeling pressured by others that are doing voluntary over time work, then I'm sure we wouldn't have the need for candid reporting to be such a major pillar in uncovering this ''conspiracy'' against developer's rights or whatever.

Either way it's veering slightly off topic so I'm dropping it here.

 

[eLmeFist0]

as I said, he is as qualified as anyone else with an opinion. And my point is that his inferences etc are bad because they are bad.

Imagine me saying you are wrong because you are wrong.
Circular reasoning which its illogical.

 

[Ayinde_Palmer]

Hmm, I really don't get why so many people here feel threatened by Schreier. It's like some of you think he's totally shitting all over the game or something... but he isn't? Sure, there is a sensationalist hate bandwagon, but to lump Schreier in with that bunch is totally ignorant. The Bloomberg articles I've read seems fair and balanced to me and the conversation in this video is so utterly chill and reasonable that I just don't see how anyone can fail to see that he's blatantly on the side of the developers.

And I've seen a lot of you supporting the devs for this project too, meaning he's on your side. And he's actually spoken to a pile of them and has given them a voice. That's more than most of us can say.

Also, re: anonymous sources - I mean, jeez, does that really need explaining? That's just a standard thing journos sometimes have to do to protect their sources. It's a catch-22, but that's why it's important to pay attention to the reputation of the news organisation. If it's Fox News, its probably dog shit. If it's Washington Post, it's probably legit. Etcetera.

Btw, I'm saying all of this as someone who likes and often defends the game.

actually his entire premise is the game is bad. Also I specifically find it deceptive to claim journalists didnt know the demo was a vertical slice, when thats the norm for the game show it was at, and journalists were specifically told that it was a prototype/vertical slice. Most of the article details problems with the game industry, which I agree are problems, and software development in general, however tying it to cyberpunk specifically, as an explanation on why the game failed is illogical, 1)because wether it failed is subjective 2) because he knows these strategies often succeed.

If the article was instead just about the bad practices and culture it would be much more on point, but he wanted to hook it into an antihype hot topic, and imply it was why games fail, when he knows it to be untrue.