Cyberpunk 2077

[nonny]

It’s very playable on the Xbox one x, but the resolution and framerate does drop quite a bit when in the main city area.

Yeah One X seems passable out of the last gen efforts and I was actually surprised by Series S in the DF comparisons. That SSD and CPU does a lot for it.

[Brad]

Arma 3 sees your Cyberpunk glitches and says hi


^^^ nicked off Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/arma/commen...so_unplayable/)

[Hirst]

Sony & Microsoft are just as much to blame as both allowed it to pass certification when it's clear it's not suitably finished for a proper retail release.

I completely agree with this point - publishers have been getting away with this because the console makers allow them to do it. Not saying we should go to a system where console makers decide what's a good game or bad game, but a game that is released with huge bugs - not just glitches but proper game-breaking ones - shouldn't be released.

It's like cooking a cottage pie in the oven, it says it should be 40 mins but it never is. They're doing the equivalent of taking it out and saying "well it should be ready" and then mid-meal finding a bit in the centre that's clap cold and having to put the whole lot in the microwave. Should have just given it that extra 15 mins it needed.

[gambit6613]

Its going to be interesting to see just how the physical copy refunds will work, especially in the UK. Everyone knows that basically every shop will only accept returns if a game remains sealed. I just cant see someone who brought the game from say a supermarket being able to get a refund, very, very unlikely the shop assistant is going to have a clue about whats going on. Game, well they most certainly will be well aware of whats going on but i just cant see them being the least bit understanding, i may be wrong but i doubt it. I wonder what response will come back from that email address CDPR have given?

[nonny]

I completely agree with this point - publishers have been getting away with this because the console makers allow them to do it. Not saying we should go to a system where console makers decide what's a good game or bad game, but a game that is released with huge bugs - not just glitches but proper game-breaking ones - shouldn't be released.

It's like cooking a cottage pie in the oven, it says it should be 40 mins but it never is. They're doing the equivalent of taking it out and saying "well it should be ready" and then mid-meal finding a bit in the centre that's clap cold and having to put the whole lot in the microwave. Should have just given it that extra 15 mins it needed.

I don't think they're "just as much" to blame but certainly they've let a sub-par quality product onto their services. CDPR are 100% responsible for play-testing the thing across all applicable platforms and delivering a game with the "expected level" of quality for the end customer.

Sony and Microsoft, Steam, GOG or any other service is then responsible for ensuring all products on their service meet their own internal quality controls. It is not on them to repeat play-testing of the product to the extent the developer should be expected to, but there should be another quality gate to pass through to validate it is fit for purchase on the services provided.

Most of those services have decent refund policies to safeguard if a product isn't up to scratch in comparison to their own measures, but I think it's unfair to say they share equal blame for the quality of the product itself. It could mean they review their own policies from here out but I would wonder what metrics they would use to make that decision?

Maybe total number of refunds issued for specific title where bugs/issues/performance were to blame?

[importaku]

This has been building for years, if you bought a product and it was clearly faulty you would return it, but for games oh noooo you can't do that without a fight. Sony, Microsoft & yes also Nintendo should be liable for refunding if you certificate a game it's your job to see that it will run without any game breaking bugs before you slap a stamp on it and send it off for manufacture. But this doesn't happen you get the pass the blame game with shops saying you need to speak to the publisher and then the publishers saying you need to speak to the shops.

[Brad]

CDPR have they're helping people get refunds even if the opriginal seller won't issue them.

[Hirst]

Just to be clear, I think more-or-less everyone is to blame. The publishers shouldn't have released it and the console makers shouldn't have certified it. It looks bad on everyone really.

[wakka]

I recall there were rumours back in October that the game had failed certification by the console manufacturers. It sounds like they did just enough to get it over the line of what Sony and MS considered acceptable. It also seems like Sony and MS's bar is too low.

[gambit6613]

I think this where Trading Standards really needs to get a grip over gaming companies and start holding them to account. For years games publishers have had a very easy ride with little to know come back on physcial copies of games where the game is fundamentally broken or not what was representaion of a game on a certain console, such as games like Fallout 76 and No Mans Sky (at launch). I cant think of any other industry where you can release a clearly broken product and have a company simply wash there hands of it andsay it will be fixed later. Video games are bloody expsensive, its crazy there is little to no come back. Its slightly easier with digital versions, at least of PC, but reading on here Sony/MS experiance varies.

Also one thing i think needs to change is with TV adverts, almost every advert you see for a videogame its always some CGI trailer of a game, with a disclaimer saying something like "footage not in game" etc, also none of this bollocks of adverts showing "in game engine" footage. They should have to show at least some actual in game gameplay. Obviously the issue is if a game is releasing over multiple formats, a PC version will look very different to a base Xbox One version so i dont know how you get around this. Maybe they have to make it clear in the advert what format is acutally being shown.

[MartyG]

This has been building for years, if you bought a product and it was clearly faulty you would return it, but for games oh noooo you can't do that without a fight.

Pretty easy on Steam - you go to support, click on "a purchase", select the game, click refund and fill in the issue details. There some limitations, as anything with more than two hour game time is generally rejected (not sure how much, if any, of this is an automated process).

[QualityChimp]

Well, ive emailed them about refunding a physical PS4 copy. No point asking GAME.

O/T, but nice to hear from you.

[Asura]

Pretty easy on Steam - you go to support, click on "a purchase", select the game, click refund and fill in the issue details. There some limitations, as anything with more than two hour game time is generally rejected (not sure how much, if any, of this is an automated process).

Yeah, there are mitigating factors. I think you can state whether the game had a downloader which might've taken hours to install, so 2hrs running is only a few minutes game-time etc.

[Digfox]

Pretty easy on Steam - you go to support, click on "a purchase", select the game, click refund and fill in the issue details. There some limitations, as anything with more than two hour game time is generally rejected (not sure how much, if any, of this is an automated process).

*Cough* GOG!

Whilst you can argue it might be overly generous, it's much better than anyone else and closest to a what we should have.

The updated policy lets you refund a product up to 30 days after purchase, even if it was downloaded, launched, and played. Yes, you read that correctly.

Yeah, there are mitigating factors. I think you can state whether the game had a downloader which might've taken hours to install, so 2hrs running is only a few minutes game-time etc.

Personally 2 hours isn't enough although most run this stipulation but have been known to ignore it. I think Xbox is similar to Steam and also has 2hr window/within 14 days. But doesn't allow for refund on microtransactions (which Steam does within 48hrs). EGS has a similar 14-days/2hr window.

Origin is slightly different but operates a 14-day, but 24hr of testing window.

The problem is PSN which is where the majority of these consoles sales came from. Although on PC UPlay takes the mickey too. With a similar 'close to no-refund policy' where if you access your game you are done.


EDIT: And now anger turning on Sony and Microsoft as reports gather of refunds being refused, which as per the earlier comment may be a case of CDPR saying one thing, but not really doing anything at all.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/use...h-ymmv.344248/

[Cassius_Smoke]

What worries me is that the bugs and errors are the thing getting the attention, and they'll likely get fixed. But once they are the game is still a dead husk.
The bugs are the MINOR problem with this game.