510°

Cyberpunk 2077 Has Reached "A Satisfactory Level", Says CDPR

CD Projekt Red's management has reportedly said its beleaguered RPG Cyberpunk 2077 has now reached a "satisfactory level".

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
SullysCigar1066d ago

Hmmm...they also said it was ready for release, when it wasn't.

CorndogBurglar1065d ago

Didn't they just put this thing back up on PS+ last week, plastered with warnings about the game's poor state? If you have to put warnings on your game in order to sell it on PS+ then how is it considered "satisfactory"?

GamerRN1065d ago

Sony put the warnings, not them.

Spenok1064d ago

Read the article, he's only referring to one part of the game. It's stability. Not the game as a whole.

RpgSama1064d ago

Oh wow, after 6 months of release the game is in only at a "satisfactory level", that's SO sad.

What a mishandled property.

Jericho13371066d ago

Waiting for the next gen version. Will hopefully be the game the first envisioned.

EazyC1065d ago

I don't think it's the game they envisioned initially, nor will it ever be.

SyntheticForm1064d ago

And unfortunately, it doesn't matter if the game that was envisioned ever comes to fruition - only the money. Well, the money they envisioned certainly came in.

Who knows what they envisioned at this point; could be that this is what they had in mind all along. Create a nice frame to impress, fill it with bullshit to pull the wool over our eyes, then sell it for the money they envisioned,

VenomCarnage891065d ago

The game they first envisioned is basically impossible to bring to life at this point. Where we currently stand, anything more than hoping they patch up the glaring issues that get in the way of basic gameplay would be wishful thinking

ElvisHuxley1064d ago (Edited 1064d ago )

Play it on PC. Game is great. The angry mob doesn't represent reality. The response to the last gen version, which probably shouldn't have been released, has been imposed on the entire release. If I play it on PC, and it's amazing, it doesn't matter, because the mob has canceled the game, a shame. It feels like most of the people trashing the game haven't even tried it.

chronoforce1064d ago (Edited 1064d ago )

It is just as janky on PC and I have seen my far share of jank. Cars unable to pass around the slightest of obstacles, npc's without routines that walk back and forth before disappearing in front of your very eyes. V seemingly being the only person alive who has a licence to ride a motorcycle, npc's without animations for opening car doors along with said doors swinging right through characters as well.

Fixers you have never met call you out of the blue offering you Jobs and to buy vehicles for some reason. These Fixers are actually on the map but CDPR could not be asked to integrate meeting them into the game and story properly or even give them initials on the map so you know who's who.

Street racing and seeing the AI cars teleport forward as they get left behind, the broken, uncomplete wanted system. The list goes on and on.

You are in denial if you think the people that negatively critique the game have not played the it.

jznrpg1064d ago

Unless they totally rework the AI , add a ton to the interactivity in the worlds objects and npcs this will never be close to what they were hyping. Maybe if they green light a CP 2 they can do it but it’s so much work it may be impossible without starting from scratch for the first game .

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1064d ago
Knightofelemia1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

They made these promises before the damage is done everybody knows about this game and how it's broken.

GameZenith1065d ago

Does not mean they cannot improve.

I am sure you made assertions that you'll be able to accomplish something only to fall short of expectations. So does that mean you should be labeled a failure and someone who does not meet expectations for the rest of your life?

Fluttershy771065d ago

No. But it means you have lost some credibility

CS71065d ago

But did he blatantly lie and say his accomplishment ran ‘surprisingly well’ when he knew at that point that it ran terribly?

https://www.gamesradar.com/...

Did he hide the state of his accomplishment knowing that people would spend their money to buy a broken product?

https://www.thegamer.com/cd...

The problem isn’t the miss, it is the lies.
And if you defend CDPR for lying, you are the problem in the industry.

I hope every game you ever buy runs buggy and terribly while the developers tell you it is amazing.

I hope every developer hides review copies and you are never able to see a true review for any game ever.

Since you think CDPR was is ok.

Hikoran1065d ago

@CS7 Bit drastic. We all play games, we're all entitled to an opinion. You shouldn't wish harsh stuff on someone because their views don't align with yours.

Knightofelemia1065d ago

@GameZenith

Yeah they could improve the game probably be 2077 until the game is actually playable. When they were popping out updates for this game the updates would fix some issues then open up more problems. They lied, rushed this game out the door, even their staff said the game was not ready, it gets pulled down from the PSN store, digital store fronts and even CD Projekt were offering refunds. Also the misleading to the higher ups that has lead to what four lawsuits on this game. They rushed the game out the door to snag up holiday sales instead of pushing the game back to clean up and spit and polish the game. I will admit some of the bugs were funny at first but then they just got annoying. I like the dirty futuristic stories like Judge Dredd, Fifth Element, Total Recall. I got tired of waiting on patches other games were coming out so I traded in this half baked cake of a game for something better that was actually fun to play.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1065d ago
Relientk771065d ago

Going from The Witcher 3, which is a masterpiece, to this train wreck with months of patches and it's just "satisfactory"

Wow, how their standards have fallen.

FlavorLav011065d ago

Witcher3 wasn’t a masterpiece. It had some of the stalest combat I’d ever experienced in a game with that level of production. Story, characters, and world building were great. But good lord, the same 2 or 3 sword combos over and over were laughable

WillyC0091065d ago

That’s your opinion and very much in the minority. Witcher 3 is a masterpiece of an RPG, a modern classic.

Elda1065d ago

I agree. I tried playing TW3 several times & it was just a bore to me.

KINGS471065d ago Show
CantThinkOfAUsername1065d ago

It's an action RPG (in the broad definition of RPG). RPGs don't excel in combat. The best of the genre, according to critics and gamers, have serviceable combat at best. For example, Mass Effect has the most mundane combat I've ever seen to date. Skyrim is another example. Both are heralded as masterpieces.

Combat never defines RPG. Characters, Dialogue, Quests, Story, World, and overall freedom do.

Snakeeater251065d ago

Combat system is terrible

poppatron1065d ago

I don’t know about laughable, but I do however think everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. The mass critical and commercial success does make you in the minority. But people shouldn’t jump down your throat for voicing a perfectly valuable point of view

Silly gameAr1065d ago

I didn't really like The Witcher 3, either. It's like Fallout 3 to me. No matter how much I tried to like it and get into it, it just didn't click with me.

Taero1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

@FlavorLav01 Agreed, TW3 combat (and really all of the Witcher series combat) is 'adequate' at best. As an RPG the quests and story are top notch but the actual fighting? Mediocre at best.

I see a comment below about how "Combat never defines RPG. Characters, Dialogue, Quests, Story, World, and overall freedom do." and my addition to that would be to ask 'why not?' Is there a a reason we shouldn't expect to have fun in combat and just settle for the lore/story?

Slightly different wheelhouse but it's in my mind since the demo for the sequel just came out but "The World Ends with You" on the NDS was a masterpiece RPG imo when it came out, story was great, characters great, customization great, length great, and the combat was innovative and also great fun. Now I'm not expecting tapping and frantic circles, scratching, shouting etc. on TW3 like TWEWY :p but the idea that you should just not expect decent combat because it's an RPG smacks of excuses and hand waving.

P_Bomb1065d ago

I was late to the party, didn’t playthrough Witcher 3 til last year. But it quickly became one of my goats. Loved it.

Zhipp1064d ago

You should've played on the hardest difficulty. There's a lot more strategy and timing involved. Plus you actually have to make use of signs and potions.

frostypants1064d ago

Witcher 3 had plenty of weapon moves. The issue was you really didn't need to learn or use them.

WillyC0091064d ago

There are a lot of ppl on here I’m thankful don’t get a say on games of the year awards and what gets deemed ‘class ice’. A lot of comically bad takes hahaha

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 1064d ago
Yui_Suzumiya1065d ago

The Witcher games just never interested me. It's the setting that I don't care for. Dragon Age II is the only fantasy themed RPG I've ever enjoyed. Cyberpunk I absolutely love though. One of the best RPGs ever made.

Psychotica1065d ago

One of the best ever made?? lol..absurd

DankSinatra1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

I’m seriously thinking you guys are forgetting how bad the Witcher was when it launched. It wasn’t “masterpiece” material with it’s large number of technical issues and they had to patch it like crazy. CDPR has low standards for games technically since the Witcher 1.

GamingSinceForever1065d ago

I agree. TW3 was in fact the last game that I recall having to stop playing until they fixed a glitch that would allow me to advance on a story mission. I recall it being the one where you had to recruit a clan. It took several weeks before they patched it.

WillyC0091065d ago

The state of Witcher 3 wasn’t nowhere near as bad as cyberpunk 2077. That game was unplayable for me on the ps5. I still get crashes every 30-40 minutes. I didn’t forget about the issues when Witcher 3 launched but the foundation, story, world, gameplay, exploration, lack of load times besides travelling the the different worlds. Outstanding. The game is simply a modern classic and a true masterpiece as far as I’m concerned.

BigMalk1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

It wasn't though. I reviewed it with a pre-release copy, and the only major problem was Roach and his pathfinding. The rest was minor stuff that didn't really interfere with the fun of playing.

DankSinatra1065d ago (Edited 1065d ago )

@WillyC009 I had the same experience with cyberpunk 2077 where I had a total of 2 glitches and 1 crash in my entire play through of 130 hours. But with the Witcher it was a constant struggle to play. Strange Tpose glitches, crashes, riach and characters floating, textures not loading, falling through the map. Not everyone has the same experience with either games but TW3 was definitely in a similar state as CP2077 was, it’s just more publicized now with the amount of hype riding from what the Witcher 3 had become later on.

@BigMalk same to you, not everyone had the same experience, you can look up anywhere if you don’t believe my experience and people will tell you TW3 was absolutely in a bad state at launch and took a bit of updating to make it playable for a lot of people.

Am I defending cyberpunk 2077? No. They made promises they didn’t keep. The only thing I’m pointing out is that the technical issues should have been expected.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1065d ago
specialguest1065d ago

Sorry CDPR. You blew it and I've lost interest months ago. I was hyped for this game until trouble was reported

GameZenith1065d ago

Then dont play it. Leave it for others to enjoy.

Snakeeater251065d ago

I did not waste more than 5 hours … such terrible combat and gameplay

specialguest1065d ago

I won't be playing it. We are both in agreement 👍

Show all comments (89)
110°

Resident Evil Zero and Code Veronica Remakes are reportedly in the works, not Resident Evil 1

Industry insider Dusk Golem reveals that there is no Resident Evil 1 Remake in the works. Instead, Capcom are reportedly in active development of Resident Evil Zero and Code Veronica.

-Foxtrot1d 2h ago

RE Zero would be better to do first over RE1 because they can tie the story into RE1 more.

The original RE Remake was weird because Rebecca never mentioned anything about what happened in Zero and it felt so disjointed because Zero was developed during the Remake and they clearly didn't share any notes with one another.

Cacabunga1h ago

Wise decision. 2 of my favorites!

Knightofelemia23h ago

Give me Dino Crisis dammit Capcom

TGG_overlord5h ago

And all it took was +24 years + a phone call from me lol.

Show all comments (8)
110°

Hi-Fi Rush Developer Tango Gameworks Was Working On 2 Games Before Studio Closure

Tango Gameworks, the developer behind rhythm-based action game Hi-Fi Rush, had been working on 2 games prior to studio closure.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
H96h ago

That's for people who said that Ninja Theory would not get closed because they are working on a new game

1Victor59m ago

Well Microsoft have to plug the holes somehow to appease their investors 🤷🏿

darthv7253m ago

Tango was part of Bethesda, that was their call. Ninja is their own thing, and MS lets them do their own thing. MS may own Bethesda, but they let them make their own decisions.

porkChop37m ago(Edited 37m ago)

That is technically true. I do think Xbox can still come in and make those kinds of decisions if they want to though, but it's true that Bethesda has been running themselves. That's how we ended up with Redfall in the first place.

I wouldn't let Xbox off the hook though because they obviously would have known that Bethesda were shutting them down and let them do it. Xbox could have just moved Tango directly under Xbox Game Studios instead.

darthv7222m ago

We can only assume as much since we dont fully know the conditions of their partnership. It may be that Bethesda agreed to the merger under the conditions that they still be allowed some autonomy like making decisions for game releases and studio management. Again, that's just a guess but when i see people try and convey that Ninja Theory is in the same boat as Tango... this is what comes to mind. NT is their own entity, under direct management of MS. Tango was not.

250°

Metal: Hellsinger dev says he is against Game Pass after seeing how it affects sales

Founder of Metal: Hellsinger studio says he wasn't against Game Pass until their game launched on Microsoft's service, which affected game sales.

TheProfessional10h ago(Edited 10h ago)

Why did PS copy gamepass if it's so terrible and unprofitable? PS Now was before gamepass but it was streaming trash that no one had any interest in.

And honestly the way the industry releases overpriced and broken games with day one season passes and dlc who wouldn't want to just pay for a subscription instead of $70 per game?

Only biased PS fans would defend paying more to a corporation rather than an option that's cheaper for the consumer overall. If it's from an indie studio that needs the sales that's different but games published by larger companies are fine on a subscription model. Also any of these devs who complain did decide to put their games on gamepass in thr first place.

ocelot079h ago

Ahhh yes the typical but but but Sony in a Microsoft article.

When did Sony copy Microsoft? I havent seen Sony's big day one titles such as God of war Ragnarok or GT7? Do you want to know why they are not on the service? Because people are still willing to PAY for the games. Sony has already admitted they lost millions putting Horizon Forbidden West and Ratchet & Clank on PS+ Extra.

"larger companies are fine on a subscription model" Oh really? So why is all the cod games yet to be on it? Where is elden ring? Resident Evil 4 Remake? Street Fighter 6? Boulders Gate 3? Alan Wake 2? Where are they of gamepass is great and big publishers are fine putting newer games on it?

I'll tell you where they are. They are currently still selling for their respected publisher's. You know actually making them money. That money they can use to fund the next project.

who wouldn't want to just pay for a subscription instead of $70 per game?

I'm one of the millions who much rather pay $70 so fully support the publisher. Why do we do this? Well for starters I rather just pay for it rather than keep renting it each month. If we all just kept renting years ago blockbuster would still be around. Secondly, I rather we have AAA titles in 10 years time to enjoy. Rather than play mobile quality crap from a subscription.

Tell me how this is a good thing for gaming going forward. The last time I subbed to Gamepass was October 2023. During that one month subscription I played the newly released Starfield, Forza and a few other titles. All for the cost of about $7. Since then Microsoft have not released anything I want to try out or put anything on GP I want to try. So they last made $7 from me 8 months ago.

In the last 3 months. I have bought Sea of Thieves on PS5 (earning MS more money on that than my 1 month subscription to gamepass). Resident Evil 4 for £20 and Diablo 4 for £25 (again earning MS more buying this than buying a sub). Tell me how it's best for gaming I pay $7 and play the latest and greatest for a month. Rather than just buying what I want even if it means waiting a few months and getting it cheaper than full price yet earning the publisher more than renting said games of a monthly sub.

darthv721h ago

...but didn't this game leave GP and then join PS+?

If a sub service is so bad, why get into another one right away?

Cacabunga1h ago(Edited 1h ago)

Finally devs waking up! More will follow .. reminds me of capcom during PS3,360 era almost going bankrupt they released extremely poor games because Xbox gave them paychecks not to release them on PS3 for as period. Sales were terrible and they went away from that.

Hofstaderman8h ago

Sony has never released new titles day one. They experimented with Forbidden West which was fairly new and quickly discovered that it cannabalized sales. XBOX gamepass was always an act of desperation to remain relevant and in their desperation they effectively dug their grave where today everybody is biding their time for their formerly exclusive titles. In a nutshell GamePass made XBOX not relevant.

Plague-Doctor271h ago

It wasn't desperation. Subscription Models had a very different outlook in 2017 and then with the gaming surge during COVID reaching critical mass seemed more and more possible.

Phil convinced Satya to chase a trend and it hasn't worked out

lellkay7h ago

Literally dev who put game on gamepass:
It's not good

TheProfessional: but but sony but sony

S2Killinit7h ago(Edited 7h ago)

Sony didnt copy MS. MS copied Sony, then MS went on to make xbox a subscription device. Remember that part? Yeah.

MrNinosan6h ago

You're not too bright, right?

First of all, Sony didn't copy Microsoft regarding PS+ and GamePass, which you admit to early in your comment, but with some faults. PSNow was not only streaming.
The mentality at Xbox gamers, is to NOT buy games, because they are used to get it on GamePass, preferbly day 1 like with all Xbox Studios games.

This is not a thing at PS+ and never was.
Sure there was plenty day 1 games on PS+ like, Rocket League, Stray, Sea of Stars, Tchia, Operation Tango etc, but those didn't take away from gamers that it was more like a "bonus" than a "thing".

Playstation gamers buy games, a lot of games and PS+ has been proving to be way better for business than GamePass, both by actually having more subscribers but also no eating up sales.

dveio6h ago(Edited 6h ago)

"Only biased PS fans would defend paying more to a corporation rather than an option that's cheaper for the consumer overall.“

How can you possibly come to this conclusion?

First, you pay for a subscription.

Then download games. But games will eventually leave the service. You will again need to buy them if you want to play them ever again. Or if you cancel your subscription. Right?

Eventhough this may NOT have an effect on every subscriber, this IS in fact the economical motiviation behind the service like GP.

If you are not already paying "double" this way, you pay at a 1.2 or maybe even at a 1.5 ratio eventually than opposed to simply buying the game in the first place.

As I said, this maybe doesn't apply to every subscriber. But this doesn't erase the fact of this business model existing. And possibly keep growing.

It's driving me nuts at times that especially the die hard Xboxers seem not to understand what they are actually cheering for foolishly.

The Wood5h ago

xbots always tryna group...

..they'll never understand or refuse to acknowledge why these two console brands are miles apart. Gamespass isn't the golden egg some would have you believe. Its hit its peak and is nowhere near the demanded target of subs by the purse holders

The Wood5h ago(Edited 5h ago)

xbots always tryna group...

..they'll never understand or refuse to acknowledge why these two console brands are miles apart. Gamespass isn't the golden egg some would have you believe. Its hit its peak and is nowhere near the demanded target of subs by the purse holders. on top of that it seems more devs on top of the devs that have shunned the service are not seeing the value of subs vs actual sales. Sell first, sub later works better than sub off the bat. MSGaming has a major sea change decision to make regarding COD. Do they release it dod and lose a high portion of up front revenue or either up the price of gp on the whole or create an even higher sub tier to cushion the blow or don't release it on gp at all and potentially damage the good will gesture reiterated not too long ago. The acquisition money wasn't free money....they'll have to pick their poison

anast3h ago

"Why did PS copy gamepass if it's so terrible and unprofitable?"

They didn't copy GP. They aren't dumb enough to put their exclusives day 1.

"Who wouldn't want to just pay for a subscription instead of $70 per game?"

People who don't like to rent things.

outsider16242h ago

It's funny when he says who wouldn't pay for a subscription instead of paying 70$. Well no shit...if MS keeps releasing average titles who wouldnt..🤣

Cockney14m ago(Edited 8m ago)

The reason is playstation didn't copy anybody and they don't release broken games, their games are still not day 1 and Ps players still buy games so ps+ is just an option for those that want a subscription service, the fact playstation doesn’t push it front and centre should tell you a lot.
On xbox gamepass IS front and centre with an option to buy games on the side, look how that is panning out for them!
Xbox fans are the only ones trumpeting this from the rooftops

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 14m ago
Skuletor10h ago

I feel no sympathy for the guy, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that putting your game on gamepass would affect sales.

JEECE4h ago

Seriously, how is it that devs need one of their games to bomb in sales due to Gamepass for them to realize what so many people could easily predict? Like people joke about "armchair CEOs" on here, but at least with respect to the effect of Gamepass, we keep seeing that the armchair CEOs are actually smarter than the real heads of these indie studios.

dveio8h ago(Edited 8h ago)

The 'day-one' feature is the breaker or maker with GP, business-wise.

GP is no Netflix.

Because, from all the Marvel's Avengers to Sicarios, illustratively speaking, they all had their box office money. Before they had entered Netflix.

This concept shows you what Microsoft have actually put themselves into.

And what situation studios put themselves into if they go day-one into GP.

solideagle3h ago

GP/PS Extra day one is best suited for GAAS or free to play games

truthBombs8h ago

Why not sell your game the traditional way first? Then after about 6 months to a year put it on a sub service.

Day one on gamepass is a gamble. It works for some (Pal world) and not for others.

anast3h ago

It's the old psych. experiment. Set out some candy and tell the person they can have it all now, or if they wait, they can have double the amount. Most choose the first option, then complain when it doesn't work out for them.

Show all comments (35)