Cyberpunk 2077 - New RPG by CD PROJEKT RED

[Osprey]

Since people are talking about The Witcher games a lot here and needing to play them...

GOG is running a sale on the PC versions of the entire series until Monday at 6PM EDT:

The Witcher: Enhanced Edition - $1.49 ($9.99 originally and on Steam)
The Witcher 2: Enhanced Edition - $2.49 ($19.99 originally and on Steam)
The Witcher 3: Game of the Year Edition - $19.99 ($49.99 originally and on Steam)

The GotY edition includes Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine, so $19.99 for all TW3 content seems like a pretty good deal.

The Witcher up to -85%

 

[Do Make Say Think]

I don’t believe them really. Developers are notorious for either saying something is really close (when it’s not) or saying it’s still pre-alpha when they move to beta six months later. They started pre-production back in 2012 and probably full-time since at least Blood and Wine (likely earlier).

With how vocal the studio has been with "everything is still on the cutting floor" I think you are being very optimistic for a next year release. I think CDPR have earned the rep of being trust-worthy, the reason they didn't want to show this to the public was because the game is so far away from finished.

I mean we all know how toxic gamers are these days (check out the reaction to Insomniac announcing DLC for Spidey a week or so before it actually release), I 100% believe them when they essentially admit that they didn't want to have the internet mob after them for showing stuff in a trailer and not having that be in the final game. When almost everything is on the cutting floor, it's more than a year away I'd think.

May 2020, 5 years after Witcher 3, is what I'd bet on.

 

[Commander Clueless]

I agree with 2020.

The game looks fantastic, but all the disclaimers make me think they are a ways out from where they want it to be.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Just in time for Nvidia, Intel and AMD to come out with new and amazing cards for the release date. Seems like the right time .

 

[Osprey]

With how vocal the studio has been with "everything is still on the cutting floor" I think you are being very optimistic for a next year release. I think CDPR have earned the rep of being trust-worthy, the reason they didn't want to show this to the public was because the game is so far away from finished.

I don't really think that that's the reason.

I mean we all know how toxic gamers are these days (check out the reaction to Insomniac announcing DLC for Spidey a week or so before it actually release), I 100% believe them when they essentially admit that they didn't want to have the internet mob after them for showing stuff in a trailer and not having that be in the final game.

That, more or less, is the reason, IMO. They simply don't want to incur the kind of disappointment and backlash that a game like No Man's Sky suffered by showing that E3 trailer that looked better than the actual game ended up. The omnipresent disclaimers about it being a work in progress are less an indication of how far along the game is and more an indication of just how scared they are of making Hello Games' mistake.

The thing is that they design these games on high-end hardware and only later try to optimize them for the relatively low-end console hardware that they're aiming for. What we saw is how well the game looks and runs on a GTX 1080Ti. The XB1 and PS4 don't have graphics that powerful, so CDPR may eventually have to reduce texture quality, draw distances and the like for the console versions. If they do, they don't want fans to be upset about it like they were with No Man's Sky. I bet that the game is very far along, but they just haven't gotten to the optimization stage yet, so they don't want to get fans' hopes up that it'll look quite that nice for everyone.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

I don't really think that that's the reason.

That, more or less, is the reason, IMO.

Two sides of the same coin.

 

[Commander Clueless]

The thing is that they design these games on high-end hardware and only later try to optimize them for the relatively low-end console hardware that they're aiming for. What we saw is how well the game looks and runs on a GTX 1080Ti. The XB1 and PS4 don't have graphics that powerful, so CDPR may eventually have to reduce texture quality, draw distances and the like for the console versions. If they do, they don't want fans to be upset about it like they were with No Man's Sky. I bet that the game is very far along, but they just haven't gotten to the optimization stage yet, so they don't want to get fans' hopes up that it'll look quite that nice for everyone.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but textures/draw distance/etc. being lowered for consoles is true of pretty much every AAA style game.

You tend to see a lot of games shown off on high end PCs and being not as shiny for console players, unless specifically labelled otherwise.

I'm not sure this would produce anger or confusion, being fairly common...but I've been wrong before.

 

[Osprey]

Two sides of the same coin.

I don't think that being afraid of disappointing fans necessarily means that a game isn't far along. It's not uncommon for game developers to give "when it's finished" as a release date even up until their games go gold and, literally, are finished. Rockstar didn't show its first actual gameplay of RDR2 until three weeks ago... and that game is releasing in October. Why did they wait until only 3 months before release? It could've well been that it wasn't until then that they were well into the optimization stage and were confident that the final game would look and run as well as they were about to show. Similarly, CDPR allowed the first real gameplay demo of The Witcher 3 around E3 2014, when the game was expected to be released later that year and, after a delay, it still came out less than a year later. It's possible that this game won't release until 2020, but I wouldn't rule out 2019 just yet; that's all.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but textures/draw distance/etc. being lowered for consoles is true of pretty much every AAA style game.

You tend to see a lot of games shown off on high end PCs and being not as shiny for console players, unless specifically labelled otherwise.

I'm not sure this would produce anger or confusion, being fairly common...but I've been wrong before.

I'm not sure that slightly reduced textures and draw distances would incite anger, either, but my point is that CDPR may be that paranoid or interested in playing it that safe. After all, one of the biggest complaints about No Man's Sky upon release is that the textures looked awful compared to the E3 trailer. That's a bit of an extreme case, but it was also a warning to all game developers to be careful and not over-promise.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

I don't think that being afraid of disappointing fans necessarily means that a game isn't far along.

It is because the game isn't anywhere near complete that they were afraid of "disappointing". I use brackets because what they were afraid of is giving ammo to toxic gamers.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but textures/draw distance/etc. being lowered for consoles is true of pretty much every AAA style game.

You tend to see a lot of games shown off on high end PCs and being not as shiny for console players, unless specifically labelled otherwise.

I'm not sure this would produce anger or confusion, being fairly common...but I've been wrong before.

Check out NeoGAF if you want to find out just how toxic gamers are nowadays.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Check out NeoGAF if you want to find out just how toxic gamers are.

Believe me, there's a reason I avoid NeoGAF.

 

[Osprey]

It is because the game isn't anywhere near complete that they were afraid of "disappointing".

We don't know how complete the game is. Not being far along could be why they're cautious, but being cautious doesn't mean that they're not far along. "If A, then B" does not mean "If B, then A." We can speculate how far along CDPR is with the game, but only they know for sure.

 

[Commander Clueless]

We don't know how complete the game is. Not being far along could be why they're cautious, but being cautious doesn't mean that they're not far along. "If A, then B" does not mean "If B, then A." We can speculate how far along CDPR is with the game, but only they know for sure.

While it's true that we don't know how complete the game is, the narrator in the trailer talked about changes to game mechanics specifically and what the game will actually play like. While this obviously doesn't give us the whole picture, we do know they are still working on a pretty key aspect of the game.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

We don't know how complete the game is. Not being far along could be why they're cautious, but being cautious doesn't mean that they're not far along. "If A, then B" does not mean "If B, then A." We can speculate how far along CDPR is with the game, but only they know for sure.

Or we could just believe them when they explain why they weren't sure about showing the gameplay to the public at this juncture.

They say the game will be ready when it is ready and that most of the features we saw could still be cut/reworked. That means the game isn't anywhere near done. Only a few weeks ago, CDPR said that the game was playable from start to finish for the first time. That means there's a lot of work left.

As posted earlier in the thread by XX

That third paragraph is all you need. They are wisely afraid of toxic gamers and manage to frame it in a positive light nonetheless.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

See this as more proof as to how devs need to be hyper aware of how toxic the scene is in terms of online discussion

 

[Osprey]

While it's true that we don't know how complete the game is, the narrator in the trailer talked about changes to game mechanics specifically and what the game will actually play like.

I take that to mean tweaks to the gameplay, not overhauling it. After all, in CDPR's letter to the fans, in giving examples of what may change, they mention the chance that a gun may shoot differently and the interface may change. Those could be classified as "game mechanics," but are pretty minor things that could be done in the final weeks of development, so I don't think that suggesting that they're subject to change has much relation to how far along in development they are.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I don't understand why people get so upset when the actual alpha gameplay videos are not as pretty as the E3 demonstrations. The fact that you are getting more information before the launch date should be considered a positive thing. Gives you a better idea of what to expect which means you will be more informed when it comes time to put actual money down to purchase the game.

Right now all people are investing in this game is hype, so why are you mad when your hype is slightly reduced? Boo hoo.

 

[Osprey]

Or we could just believe them when they explain why they weren't sure about showing the gameplay to the public at this juncture.

They say the game will be ready when it is ready and that most of the features we saw could still be cut/reworked. That means the game isn't anywhere near done. Only a few weeks ago, CDPR said that the game was playable from start to finish for the first time. That means there's a lot of work left.

If you choose to believe them, you should believe what they say, not put words into their mouths. You can still believe them without jumping to conclusions about what their words "mean." I'm not sure why you can't just say, "I believe that what they've said means that the game is a long way away." You might very well be right about that. I'm only taking issue with the fact that you're using absolutes ("this absolutely means that") instead of couching them a little bit.

Just to be clear, I agree that the game is at least a year away, so it's technically true that it's not near to being done and there's a lot of work left. The real point that we're arguing is whether the game could still come out in late 2019 or is a 2020 release (if not later). The fact that CDPR is being so cautious and may still cut or re-work elements doesn't "mean" that it definitely won't come out until 2020. For all that we know, they may end up being satisfied with how the game plays now, not cut anything that was shown in the demo and release the final game sooner than you think. After all, the possibility of things being cut or re-worked is just that: a possibility. Giving themselves the PR cover to change things doesn't mean that they will. Because they're talented, experienced and have been working on the game since 2012, my hunch is that they won't end up changing nearly as much as you might imagine. I could be wrong, but I could also be right. After all, it stands to reason that they decided to proudly show it off because they're pretty happy with how the game looks and plays.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

If you choose to believe them, you should believe what they say, not put words into their mouths. You can still believe them without jumping to conclusions about what their words "mean." I'm not sure why you can't just say, "I believe that what they've said means that the game is a long way away." You might very well be right about that. I'm only taking issue with the fact that you're using absolutes ("this absolutely means that") instead of couching them a little bit.

I said

When almost everything is on the cutting floor, it's more than a year away I'd think.

So I have no idea what you are talking about.

Disclaimer: I do not work for CDPR. Even if I sound authoritative, I am not. Everything I posted so far is my own, personal, opinion.

Glad we got that out of the way.

 

[Osprey]

I said

So I have no idea what you are talking about.

Disclaimer: I do not work for CDPR. Even if I sound authoritative, I am not. Everything I posted so far is my own, personal, opinion.

Glad we got that out of the way.

I was referring to you saying "the reason is [this]" and "[this] means [that]." If those were just opinions, there was no reason to argue back when I took issue with how factual they sounded. You could've just clarified then and agreed with me.

 

[RandV]

I don't understand why people get so upset when the actual alpha gameplay videos are not as pretty as the E3 demonstrations. The fact that you are getting more information before the launch date should be considered a positive thing. Gives you a better idea of what to expect which means you will be more informed when it comes time to put actual money down to purchase the game.

Right now all people are investing in this game is hype, so why are you mad when your hype is slightly reduced? Boo hoo.

That's due to a combination of many 'gamers' being whiny little bitches and a long history of developers screwing around with their early preview footage. Though in this case CDPR has a playable demo so it really shouldn't be a reason for concern, but again that's just a part of the audience they're selling too.

 

[aleshemsky83]

With how vocal the studio has been with "everything is still on the cutting floor" I think you are being very optimistic for a next year release. I think CDPR have earned the rep of being trust-worthy, the reason they didn't want to show this to the public was because the game is so far away from finished.

People reaaaaally overstress this. Witcher 3 was a great game and a decent leap in game development but it was really just a mish mash of mass effects grounbreaking dialogue and story, Skyrims pretty good open world, and Ubisoft's horrible crafting and map systems.

It was a super buggy game that got patched for a year and a half to get to a polished state.

My biggest issue was they built the whole game around an insanely tedious fast travel system instead of just manually locking fast travel when a quest required you to walk out of the building manually.

Anyways I'm getting sidetracked. Point is, Witcher 3 was and is a great game, but it was a great game from a (formerly) small studio that overdelivered. I feel it gets overhyped for that.

I'm not joking I've seen multiple people on Reddit claim they bought witcher 3 on every platform just to support the amazing cdpr. There's actually people who think witcher 3 was made by 2 guys in their moms basement instead of what is now a massive publisher and development studio. The worship has reached new heights.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

Witcher 3 only became so big in scope because Witcher 2 was so well received.

Also, yeah the ionizing of CDPR is kind of weird, especially considering the poor work conditions a lot of developers claimed to have to deal with during development of TW3.

 

[TheDoldrums]

I'm not joking I've seen multiple people on Reddit claim they bought witcher 3 on every platform just to support the amazing cdpr. There's actually people who think witcher 3 was made by 2 guys in their moms basement instead of what is now a massive publisher and development studio. The worship has reached new heights.

Such a massive publisher that they've never published a game outside the Witcher franchise...

In the context of actual mega publishers like EA and Square Enix, they are the little guys. Even something like Bethesda, which is obviously a tier below those two is still well above their reach. So when they spend ~4 years making their magnum opus and betting everything on one game, it's gratifying for some to see it pay off so well. They were nothing before Witcher 2, that gave them the resources to make Witcher 3, that's given them the resources to make Cyberpunk. Seems like an easier studio to root for than most of the AAA industry.

And I'm not one of the biggest Witcher fans out there by any means, I had multiple games I liked more in 2015. But I did think it was a great game and I could tell how much they put into it through the sidequests, which got more care and good writing than most games main quests.

 

[aleshemsky83]

Such a massive publisher that they've never published a game outside the Witcher franchise...

In the context of actual mega publishers like EA and Square Enix, they are the little guys. Even something like Bethesda, which is obviously a tier below those two is still well above their reach. So when they spend ~4 years making their magnum opus and betting everything on one game, it's gratifying for some to see it pay off so well. They were nothing before Witcher 2, that gave them the resources to make Witcher 3, that's given them the resources to make Cyberpunk. Seems like an easier studio to root for than most of the AAA industry.

And I'm not one of the biggest Witcher fans out there by any means, I had multiple games I liked more in 2015. But I did think it was a great game and I could tell how much they put into it through the sidequests, which got more care and good writing than most games main quests.

CDPR owns GOG, they publish and re-release games all the time for older games and Indies.

 

[TheDoldrums]

CDPR owns GOG, they publish and re-release games all the time for older games and Indies.

Fair play, wasn't aware. Still doesn't make them a massive publisher or take away from the main point about why people would root for them over the EA and Square Enix's of the industry.