Cyberpunk 2077

[Neon Ignition]

Imagine if patches were only allowed to add DLC, you're game had to be final on launch. You'd see some Q&A mass recruiting then. Standards have fallen so much

[Yakumo]

Imagine if patches were only allowed to add DLC, you're game had to be final on launch. You'd see some Q&A mass recruiting then. Standards have fallen so much

That's how it should be. The reason we even have these patches now is all steamed from PC gaming. That's where it all started. Then consoles started needing games to be installed and yep, bloody patch city and day one updates. And do you know what, so many people accepted it say it was a good thing. It helped improve the game. BS! should have never been broken in the first place.

[MartyG]

Imagine if patches were only allowed to add DLC, you're game had to be final on launch. You'd see some Q&A mass recruiting then. Standards have fallen so much

No, you'd have broken games that never get patched, it's the corporate way.

[Junko]

8 years to bake a turd . 8 years . If anyone thinks this is OK , we are part of the problem .

[Hirst]

Imagine if patches were only allowed to add DLC, you're game had to be final on launch. You'd see some Q&A mass recruiting then. Standards have fallen so much

It's a great situation for developers and publishers - they managed to replace paid Q&A testers with the general public, who don't just want to do it for free, they'll actually pay them to do the job in the form of overpriced pre-orders and launch day price gouging.

[Cepp]

They really kicked the hornets nest with this. Watching more videos of the last gen console releases (which is the way most people on console are going to be playing it) and its pretty shocking. I'd want a refund in that situation too.

[Cassius_Smoke]

Imagine if patches were only allowed to add DLC, you're game had to be final on launch. You'd see some Q&A mass recruiting then. Standards have fallen so much

I think it's all a matter of balance. Remember the psone days when you'd fall through the ground in Tomb Raider 2, or Tony hawk where the game would just freeze. Faults in games have always existed. They never got patched before because they couldn't get patched before.
I would say its not patching that's a big problem, I accept it to a point. It's the acceptable amount of faults that's the problem. We are at a point now were games are being released almost in Alpha stage and we just say 'well, it'll get fixed eventually'. Not acceptable.
There is a minimum viable product that we should demand and that should be enforced.

[Cassius_Smoke]

Also, reviewers who gave this game 9/10 or 10/10 are part of the problem. They gave high scores so they don't get in the bad books and they brushed the faults under the carpet. Anyone that played the game for 10 minutes can see the NPC AI is non existent and the framerate is appalling. And that even without the faults its missing LOD distances and interactions we've come to demand from a AAA dev.
The reviews facilitate the patch culture we see.

[fishbowlhead]

Also, reviewers who gave this game 9/10 or 10/10 are part of the problem. They gave high scores so they don't get in the bad books and they brushed the faults under the carpet. Anyone that played the game for 10 minutes can see the NPC AI is non existent and the framerate is appalling. And that even without the faults its missing LOD distances and interactions we've come to demand from a AAA dev.
The reviews facilitate the patch culture we see.

So called “reviewers” are an absolute joke. This games launch has been farcical from start to, well its not even finished is it.

Have we all learned our lessons on all this?

[dataDave]

Also, reviewers who gave this game 9/10 or 10/10 are part of the problem. They gave high scores so they don't get in the bad books and they brushed the faults under the carpet. Anyone that played the game for 10 minutes can see the NPC AI is non existent and the framerate is appalling. And that even without the faults its missing LOD distances and interactions we've come to demand from a AAA dev.
The reviews facilitate the patch culture we see.

They reviewed the PC version, which seems to be a different game for the most part..

[Digfox]

The reviews process for videogames is broken and has been for a while. In part because of the relationship between the publishers and the media. Although they (the publishers) have succeeded in making review irrelevant; an after launch acknowledge of the games, which is is no longer a non-controllable factor in their hype trains.

Skill Up put out some interesting thoughts yesterday, which is a complete opposite to Kotaku's - let's blame it all on the 'gamerZ' stance.

Embedded Tweet

Problem is pushing back and not covering videogame publishers who don't provide review code in acceptable timeframes and for all formats is something that should have been done many, many years ago. Arguably CDPR should be blocked from all coverage for this stunt they pulled. They won't be though.

[fishbowlhead]

They reviewed the PC version, which seems to be a different game for the most part..

Not really, pc version is just being brute forced to run well by people with newer graphics cards. No pc player is going to be playing this on a pc thats the same sort of level as a base One/Ps4.

[nonny]

The review system is very similar to influencers on YouTube. I must have watched a load of videos about LG Nanocell TVs in the past month whilst TV shopping, hearing about how great they are for gaming when the reality is they're average at best and the person reviewing has simply been given the TV for free and gets to keep it...

Whether you think you can remain impartial or not they're attempting to buy your viewers through giving you a gift.

I work in banking where it's basically illegal to take gifts over £25 however genuine they may seem because basically it's a system designed to influence you.

As for this game. Is it possible for this game to be a 9 on PC and a 5 on last gen simply because one can adequately run it enough to be playable?

I've not voted on the score in the first play thread yet but my time with it has been enjoyable on Series X. I'd be inclined to give it an 8 this far but have barely scratched the surface. It's certainly not a bad game when it runs properly. It's just a shame the last gen version is so hobbled.

[Golgo]

I wonder why there doesn't seem to be much space in the reviews world for a site that offers full and thorough reviews after the game has been out a week or so, where they buy the game themselves and are beholden to no-one. I imagine it could be marketed quite successfully to gamers who want a fair opinion. Currently, though, the review model is a pandering and validatory one: 1. to validate the buyer in their pre-order/day 1 purchase; 2. to pander to devs and publishers in the hope of continued access to them for freebies, invitationals, opinion pieces, etc.

[nonny]

I wonder why there doesn't seem to be much space in the reviews world for a site that offers full and thorough reviews after the game has been out a week or so, where they buy the game themselves and are beholden to no-one. I imagine it could be marketed quite successfully to gamers who want a fair opinion. Currently, though, the review model is a pandering and validatory one: 1. to validate the buyer in their pre-order/day 1 purchase; 2. to pander to devs and publishers in the hope of continued access to them for freebies, invitationals, opinion pieces, etc.

Giving reviewers some slack here, the review process is very compacted with time deadlines. More often than not they are forced to review on non-final code in order to hit a deadline that lines up with the release date of the game simply because a lot of consumers want to know whether they should buy it the minute it's available.

It's a flawed system in a world of day one patches and post release date updates... but it is what it is. The cure is simply to make sure the game being reviewed is final and representative of the release code consumers will buy, but the reality is that simply does not exist anymore and won't be returning.

There definitely need to be more scrutiny along the process to limit issues like this happening but if people think this is going to change the way patching works these days back to how it was in the good old days you're going to be sorely disappointed.

I think the best we can hope for is that reviews need to be done across platforms (i.e. at least review on PC, Next Gen and Last Gen even if not on every single console available)... Developers need to show footage/material from every platform as well.

The worst thing CDPR have done here is keeping the last gen versions hidden so that the consumer is buying unaware of just how crap it actually is on that platform.