You are wrong if you think Cyberpunk 2077 was 8 years in development

[madmidder]

Hey,

I know there are some problems with the game, but I'm so tired to read "arguments" how game was 8 years in development and still it's bad. So Cyberpunk 2077 was announced in May 2012 with teaser trailer in Jan 2013, but it doesn't mean they worked on the game. It was even before The Witcher 3 was announced (2013, release 2015), so there is no way they already started development. Maybe if CD Projekt Red is big studio like Rockstar Games with 2000 people they can work on two big AAA games at the same time, well they are not.

Development of Cyberpunk 2077 started with about 50 people back in 2013, but pre-production started after Blood and Wine was released (source). So these 50 people started working on script and how game should or shouldn't work? I have no idea, but full speed development started after Blood and Wine release and it was back in May 31, 2016. So 4 years and 6 months for game like this is clearly not enough with 500 people, and I guess there wasn't around 500 people at the beginning, they hired more and more during development, because Witcher 3 was developed by 250 people ("The project began with 150 employees, eventually growing to over 250 in-house staff." (source)).

Game is clearly half-baked and have some problems, but there is strong foundation, so we can expect bright future, I hope.

Please, stop saying it was 8 years in development, it's not true.

 

[Myajha]

Development of Cyberpunk 2077 started with about 50 people back in 2013

Wait hold up. Not that I'm doubting your premise, but you state that the game wasn't in development for 8 years, then you type this. Full development sure, but development, well you just proved against your own argument with this statement. (though admittedly its 7 years). Full production doesn't mean production, it's just when they bring on the most people to start coding what they're already roughed out previously. You don't bring on 500 people and go "make a game". That parts already been done, the rough coding framework and storyline has already been planned out.

It's like saying a building a building starts when they lay the foundation. That's starts years ago when the engineers start designing the building, then they bring in the massive workforce to build the building.

 

[Selestrielle]

Wait hold up. Not that I'm doubting your premise, but you state that the game wasn't in development for 8 years, then you type this. Full development sure, but development, well you just proved against your own argument with this statement. (though admittedly its 7 years). Full production doesn't mean production, it's just when they bring on the most people to start coding what they're already roughed out previously. You don't bring on 500 people and go "make a game". That parts already been done, the rough coding framework and storyline has already been planned out.

It's like saying a building a building starts when they lay the foundation. That's starts years ago when the engineers start designing the building, then they bring in the massive workforce to build the building.

Except game development is less like building a building, with clear defined steps and workers showing up only for their part and then leaving. It's more like the building is getting planned and designed while lawyers are still figuring out the permits, and people are building foundations while the plans are getting re-drafted and re-drafted.

Making games is a madhouse endeavour, with plans that change again and again during development according to the realities of production, budget constraints, industry changes and available workforce. I'm willing to bet the initial plan for the game is so different from what actually got released it would be barely recognizable.

All this to say, while it's probably correct to say the idea of Cyberpunk has been floating around and getting worked on in some form for 8 years, the idea that a full team of hundreds of workers has been working full time on a single initial design for all this time is ludicrous.

 

[madmidder]

Wait hold up. Not that I'm doubting your premise, but you state that the game wasn't in development for 8 years, then you type this. Full development sure, but development, well you just proved against your own argument with this statement. (though admittedly its 7 years). Full production doesn't mean production, it's just when they bring on the most people to start coding what they're already roughed out previously. You don't bring on 500 people and go "make a game". That parts already been done, the rough coding framework and storyline has already been planned out.

It's like saying a building a building starts when they lay the foundation. That's starts years ago when the engineers start designing the building, then they bring in the massive workforce to build the building.

I have no idea what those people worked on, they probably weren't full focused on Cyberpunk, but I have no more specific information. And if they were, it doesn't matter, because you can plan whatever you want, but in the end you can hit the wall were your plans are not possible to realize.

And building a building is not in my opinion best example. I would say it's more like if you want to make movie about book which will release in 3 years. You can plan how to do it because you imagine what book is about, but after book is released you can see it's not possible because you have no technology or budget to do it.

For example if plans were "16 time the details", "it is 4 times the size, of Fallou.." (oh wait.. that's different game) and if you start with full speed development you can realize it's not possible to do it (in such a short time).

 

[Kieran_Grosvenor]

I reckon it took 8 years it's still quite a meaty game.

 

[Garrison72]

Yeah this game only really started development in 2016. I'm not sure why CDPR even insinuated it had any meaningful development before that. The amount of cut and rushed content is on full display. Also, I have no idea how many actually worked on it. I've seen quotes starting at 500 and others claiming over a 1000. Not sure what to believe there, but around 350 made TW3 in around 3.5 years. So something was really off with the game's production. Also, I'm not sure when they ditched a bunch of content and started fresh, but without a doubt that played a huge role.

 

[Greywilde]

Wait hold up. Not that I'm doubting your premise, but you state that the game wasn't in development for 8 years, then you type this. Full development sure, but development, well you just proved against your own argument with this statement. (though admittedly its 7 years). Full production doesn't mean production, it's just when they bring on the most people to start coding what they're already roughed out previously. You don't bring on 500 people and go "make a game". That parts already been done, the rough coding framework and storyline has already been planned out.

It's like saying a building a building starts when they lay the foundation. That's starts years ago when the engineers start designing the building, then they bring in the massive workforce to build the building.

"it's just when they bring on the most people to start coding what they're already roughed out previously. [...] That parts already been done, the rough coding framework and storyline has already been planned out."
> What do you know about it ? Have you any element proving this ? What do you know about the initial work done before 2016 ?

To join the initial post idea, I agree with the point that the "8 years dev" thing could be a bit misleading if we don't have a clear understanding of the dev cycles. Conception phase could last for years before the project is actually kicked off and dev begins.

But CDPR said themselves that they were working on the game since their 2012 conference : we need to be clear when we talk about dev time : are we including the initial phases or not ?

But getting into the datas :
If Wikipedia is not wrong, GTA 5 was 3 years dev for a 1k people team.
RDR2 was a 8 years dev for a 2k - 3k people team.

Obviously, if getting to a Rockstar level was their objective, CDPR didn't put the staff to match their ambition with their 500 talents. Maybe they'll need 3 more years to turn the "half-baked" game we have (poor AI/physics, low perf on consoles, short story for few open world interactions, blablabla) into the masterpiece it deserves to be.

 

[NevaEilhart]

Problem is, it wasn't a streamlined developement. Unlike the games people like (even if the comparison is irrelevant) to bring up when they talk about Cyberpunk, like GTA FIVE or Red Dead Redemption TWO (which is a GTA with cowboys so that makes it GTA 6 basically...), Cyberpunk is a brand new IP.

Which means new assets, new designs, new mechanics. This alone takes time and some tuning before coming up nicely.

Then, you have the problem they faced of switching to 1st person. We're talking about a studio that didn't develop any 1st person game before, in an ambitious urban setting.

That also explains why so many features were changed and tuned during the developement, and why CDPR did such a marketing campaign. Hard to really market your game properly if you don't even know internally how it's supposed to end up.

As you've said, there are so many strong fondations, the game is stunning for a new IP, and it does justice to the Pen and Paper book (that's what's most important to me). The characters are so memorable when compared to other games, the city is properly done and laid out, and the assets (animations, designs) are stellar. For a first game in a new IP, this is definitely something promising, and probably the game with the most potential I've ever played.

 

[sad_jester]

True

 

[madmidder]

Yeah this game only really started development in 2016. I'm not sure why CDPR even insinuated the it any meaningful development before that. The amount of cut and rushed content is on full display. Also, I have no idea how many actually worked on it. I've seen quotes starting at 500 and others claiming over a 1000. Not sure what to believe there, but around 350 made TW3 in around 3.5 years. So something was really off with game's production. Also, I'm not sure when they had ditched a bunch of content and started fresh. Without a doubt that played a huge role.

Back in October 2020 we had leak from CDPR dev, and he said game was in pre-alpha in Q1 2019 and already at that time developers knew it's not possible to finish it in 1 year. No idea if is it true, but article was from Jason Schreier.

 

[IskrasFemme]

Tell me more aobut 1k or 2k people in a game...

ONLY 1 single guy - and a Game used by NASA

SpaceEngine – Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre

pt.wikipedia.org

For me, there is no such thing, mere or pure propaganda to say that games are tasks of monopolies. Cyberpunk has no more than two years of real commitment. The rest, pure and simple advertising, maybe some scribbles of the game on the engine ... (I think, what took more time, was to build the engine or improve the red engine 3). There are real pieces of art made with UE4 by absurdly small teams, 2, 3 or 4 people, that, in two or 3 years (it is the time that these indies can take without profit by dedicating themselves to their chores). I may be wrong, but there hasn't been a game being made in eight years. This is fantasy.

 

[madmidder]

Tell me more aobut 1k or 2k people in a game...

ONLY 1 single guy - and a Game used by NASA

SpaceEngine – Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre

pt.wikipedia.org

For me, there is no such thing, mere or pure propaganda to say that games are tasks of monopolies. Cyberpunk has no more than two years of real commitment. The rest, pure and simple advertising, maybe some scribbles of the game on the engine ... (I think, what took more time, was to build the engine or improve the red engine 3). There are real pieces of art made with UE4 by absurdly small teams, 2, 3 or 4 people, that, in two or 3 years (it is the time that these indies can take without profit by dedicating themselves to their chores). I may be wrong, but there hasn't been a game being made in eight years. This is fantasy.

Well we know CDPR is talented team, maybe their management f*cked up, but if it was really 8 years in development, we are playing right now very different game. Just wait a year (or 1 or 2 expansions) and we will see day and night difference.

 

[Mk3rd]

Don't forget a huge chunk of the game was scrapped around 2017. So 3-4 years of rebuilding. And they added Keanu in pretty late as well. So this game obviously went through multiple revisions since full prod.

 

[madmidder]

Don't forget a huge chunk of the game was scrapped around 2017. So 3-4 years of rebuilding. And they added Keanu in pretty late as well. So this game obviously went through multiple revisions since full prod.

Oh this is true, also their plans weren't to have Keanu as main protagonist if I'm not mistaken and because they both (Keanu and CDPR) liked results, they changed their plans. It's time consuming, and another bad decision from management team if they after this change still wanted to release in 2020.

 

[Mk3rd]

Oh this is true, also their plans weren't to have Keanu as main protagonist if I'm not mistaken and because they both (Keanu and CDPR) liked results, they changed their plans. It's time consuming, and another bad decision from management team if they after this change still wanted to release in 2020.

It's a common thing for new and ambitious IPs as opposed to smaller games that get built up and get more complex through sequels multiple like GTA or the Witcher games. Suddenly tackling a game of this scale was a huge endeavor for Cdpr as if TW3 wasn't already big enough and they just went in and dove through the risks.

Guerrilla Games here came from shooters to an open-world ARPG that took 6 years to develop and went through the same revisions. Lucky for them, the final revision became clear pretty early on and the map, mechanics, and world elements aren't on the same scale as Cyberpunk's. And prolly management was smooth af. def that too

 

[tcarlisle]

I think we all get that active implementation development probably didn't start 8 year ago. Because if that was the case, there would have been a lot of re-work because it would have been targeting GPU's/consoles that have long since been obsoleted, and targeting windows visa and maybe windows 7. And undoubtedly, as VR came into the picture, they may have gone off on that tangent.

Lastly, it would have been released on an engine that doesn't even come close to what other AAA titles are releasing with today -- and it certainly wouldn't have supported ray tracing and other RTX technologies.

The story and scripts certainly date back that far, and they probably produced some internal mock-ups that rode on top of their Red Engine 3 at the time of TW3. But it would have taken a big chunk of time and resources to progress Red Engine 3 to 4, which is what this game rides on top of.

At the end of the day, this problematic release might end up being a good example case for studying the pro's and con's of whether it is best for a AAA studio to develop and maintain their own engine -- or better to leverage one of the leading engines (Unreal, Unity, CryEngine).... or a combination which involves forking one of those to produce an customized engine that is unique for your game.

Clearly, CDPR banked on it being better to develop their own... but the wisdom of that is probably one of many things that I am sure are being debated internally in the aftermath of a release that didn't live up to its hype.

And to be fair, last time I counted Ubisoft still pays people to maintain 6 or 7 proprietary game engines. And they are a major force in the industry so there must be a good reason to keep doing that.

But I really fail to see anything in this game that would not have been doable on top of Unreal Engine 4, and doing that probably would have helped them avoid developing game code that was not ever going to work well on PS4/ Xbox One.

The sad part, in my view, is that just barely two weeks later after a couple of patches this game plays and perform well enough to be considered production release quality on PC.

But discovering the game can't really run on PS4 and finding that out AFTER millions of sales and unhappy customers..... that is just not good.

It just reeks a stench of rushed implementation, corner cutting in play testing, with too much of that 8 years chewed up by developing Red Engine 4.

 

[Kenzou84]

CDpr is the victim of their own success they achieved, just give em good folks of CDpr a chance, got a good track record, I believe in them.

For now, felt so many vultures, keep circling the game's lack of features, bugs, and the refund controversy on console. I had a much worse experience in FO76, AC unity, and Batman Ark Knight.

As a base, this game is good.

 

[die-yng]

Weird. I remember seeing and hearing CD Projekt Red say that the game has been in development since 2012/13.
Do you suggest they were lying? I mean, I'm pretty sure they lied about a lot of stuff in relation to Cyberpunk, so I ain't surprised they did it here as well.
Still, it feels like a ridiculous way to defend a game, by stating that the developer lied to the press, investors and fans about since when they were developing the game.

Seriously, you apologists can try to spin it any way you want, in NO SCENARIO does CDPR get away from this without shit on their hands.
They screwed up, they were dishonest, worked their devs to the bone and didn't listen to them, all of this they practically admitted.
You like the game fine, you still like CDPR, also fine, but stop with these ridiculous attempts to defend their screw-up.
I'm so frigging tired of people blindly, senselessly defending CDPR at this point, definitely way more tired than the OP is about hearing it has been in development for 8 years. It makes me sick, that so many people don't want to accept the truth right before their eyes and instead go to any length to try to pass the blame or pretend everything is fine.

 

[Trykz]

Development started when they brought in Keanu Reeves.

Period.

Most of the original story and intent for the game's direction got scrapped at that point. And it's plain to see by simply watching the trailers from before and after his involvement with the game. The game drastically turned into "The Johnny Silverhand Chronicles".

Adding him as an actor in the game was a good move. It's the implementation of his character that was completely wrong. The main focus of the game shifted to his story, and away from the V character story (YOUR story, which is ultimately what ANY RPG should be primarily focused on).

The focus should have remained on the main protagonist: your character. The Johnny Silverhand story should have been an appetizer. NOT the main course. More like YOU dragging him around rather than HIM dragging you around. By mid-game he should have been an afterthought that you'd dispensed with through side jobs to get rid of him. Or perhaps you keep him around to use as you see fit (through the pills you get from Misty). Your choice. NOT a pigeonholed linear outcome.

This is easy to remedy though.....

offer a FREE DLC that offers the player those options, and sets the game back onto it's originally intended development path. For the players who chose to let Silverhand have their body, start the DLC at the moment BEFORE that choice was made. For everyone else, start it at the point where they made the choice to keep their body. Either way, Silverhand eventually goes away with the priority quest being to get rid of the chip, or at least delay the inevitable death of V. Which opens a path for future DLC to eventually culminate with V ultimately getting rid of the chip once and for all.

Do this, and the whole Johnny Silverhand disaster will be a distant memory.

 

[madmidder]

Weird. I remember seeing and hearing CD Projekt Red say that the game has been in development since 2013.
Do you suggest they were lying? I mean, I'm pretty sure they lied about a lot of stuff in relation to Cyberpunk, so I ain't surprised they did it here as well.
Still, it feels like a ridiculous way to defend a game, by stating that the developer lied to the press, investors and fans about since when they were developing the game.

Seriously, you apologists can try to spin it any way you want, in NO SCENARIO does CDPR get away from this without shit on their hands.
They screwed up, they were dishonest, worked their devs to the bone and didn't listen to them, all of this they practically admitted.
You like the game fine, you still like CDPR, also fine, but stop with these ridiculous attempts to defend their screw-up.
I'm so frigging tired of people blindly, senselessly defending CDPPR at this point, definitely way more tired than the OP is about hearing it has been in development for 8 years. It makes me sick, that so many people don't want to accept the truth right before their eyes and instead go to any length to try to pass the blame or pretend everything is fine.

I have no idea what are you talking about. I'm just saying if you think game was really 8 years in development, you are wrong. No one here defending their fck up, game can have very good foundations, but that's not enough, and now we can just wait for future updates and fixes. Some people are not willing to wait, so they can refund the game and give feedback why game sucks for them.

Saying they did nothing wrong is dumb as well as saying they are worst company because game have no promised features and run bad on base consoles. And I don't want to insult anyone, but mostly console players playing on base consoles are mad, that's 2 of 9 platforms where game was released.

Development started when they brought in Keanu Reeves.

Period.

Most of the original story and intent for the game's direction got scrapped at that point. And it's plain to see by simply watching the trailers from before and after his involvement with the game. The game drastically turned into "The Johnny Silverhand Chronicles".

Adding him as an actor in the game was a good move. It's the implementation of his character that was completely wrong. The main focus of the game shifted to his story, and away from the V character story (YOUR story, which is ultimately what ANY RPG should be primarily focused on).

The focus should have remained on the main protagonist: your character. The Johnny Silverhand story should have been an appetizer. NOT the main course. More like YOU dragging him around rather than HIM dragging you around. By mid-game he should have been an afterthought that you'd dispensed with through side jobs to get rid of him. Or perhaps you keep him around to use as you see fit (through the pills you get from Misty). Your choice. NOT a pigeonholed linear outcome.

This is easy to remedy though.....

offer a FREE DLC that offers the player those options, and sets the game back onto it's originally intended development path. For the players who chose to let Silverhand have their body, start the DLC at the moment BEFORE that choice was made. For everyone else, start it at the point where they made the choice to keep their body. Either way, Silverhand eventually goes away with the priority quest being to get rid of the chip, or at least delay the inevitable death of V. Which opens a path for future DLC to eventually culminate with V ultimately getting rid of the chip once and for all.

Do this, and the whole Johnny Silverhand disaster will be a distant memory.

Sadly this is true, relationship development with Johnny is very good, but game is only about him. Act I (prologue) is only about 3 hours and rest is with Johnny. For some people it's definitely good, because he is their buddy, but not for me.