Sign in to follow this  
Julius

Cyberpunk 2077 (10th December 2020)

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

That's not what I was getting at. I was suggesting that based on your other comments, you were implying that it wasn't really crunch at all, which I disagree with.

Sorry, but I just think 3 months of 6-day weeks is not all that bad... We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. 

17 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Cyberpunk is neither groundbreaking nor a particularly great game, so how can you justify crunch in this case?

Again, agree to disagree, I think it does a lot that hasn't been done. Granted it's not in the best "condition" but they have broken new ground, in my opinion, in terms of world-building and immersion. It's not perfect, but I can see what they're going for an I appreciate it massively. 

18 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

2 months is the minimum. In reality it was probably closer to three. Three months of 6-day weeks and long days - absolutely that is a long period of time that will burn the employees out (in fact there are complaints that happened). These people are not saving lives here, they are making games. There's literally no need for crunch here. The sad thing is that's it's to serve the stakeholders. What is the worst that would happen if they didn't have 6-day week crunch and long days near the finish? It would take 20-30% longer at the end to do the same amount of work? Perhaps less as rested, contented employees do better work. You see what I am saying here?is!

There isn't a need for crunch at all, I agree with you completely. But, as I mentioned in my previous post, both the shareholders and the consumers wanted this game before Christmas. There is fault on both sides here because it shouldn't have been released in this state. People should have been prepared to wait, from both sides, and the developers should have been afforded ample time to finish their project. I will restate again, that this practice is not unique to the gaming industry but one which is prevalent in modern society and will only be addressed when both the shareholders AND the consumers temper their expectations, which is something I, unfortunately, don't see happening any time soon. They are not saving lives, but their work is still held in the same regard as those who save lives. Just like sports icons. They get paid for that sacrifice accordingly. In my book, that means the practice is justified. You may disagree with that from a principled standpoint, and I would agree with you in some respects, but that is the way the world works and I don't see how that will change. Better rested workers definitely work better, but the modern world doesn't respect that principle and divvies out the cash in respect of that. I would argue that removing that the carrot of consumer and shareholder demands will lower the quality of the end product. Ironic position, I know, when considering the state Cyberpunk is in, but ambition can sometimes overshoot the end-product. My overall stance would be that lofty ambitions and almost impossible achievements are infinitely better than a "play it safe" approach. 

26 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Maybe bitterness is the wrong word. Rather, some level of normalisation leads people to think bad practice is fine, because they experience bad practices themselves. Or people suffer bad work conditions then don't want to see others have better working rights, especially not if the other people are getting paid more.

Bad practice is not fine. I don't want people to be overworked, I don't think anyone does, but we should make room in society for those people who are prepared to go the extra mile. I would argue that by allowing people to burn out and pour their heart and soul into something, we ultimately get a better end result. Bad practice should not be "the norm", but regulation against people working themselves to the bone is the wrong approach. Often, it's through that kind of sacrifice that we find the best things in life. I'm thinking Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse here. They paid the ultimate price, but their sacrifice enriched the lives of millions. Who's to say we would have had what they gave us if they had clocked in from 9-5 and accepted a standard wage? Maybe I'm grasping at straws a little here, or embarrassing myself a little, but there is no ying without the yang. You can't have the rainbow without the rain (Brent - loosely paraphrasing D. Parton). 

34 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Your post here what I am getting at. Why do you respect them for working like dogs, when they are basically made to do that? In my view I hold the greatest respect for companies that value the wellbeing of their employees and who manage to develop games without doing that. There was one big game dev, I forget who, who said they don't crunch at all - so it's very much possible. Crunch is essentially a failure of management. If you can develop games but without burning out your workforce, surely that's better, no?

I respect them for the reasons I mentioned above. I disagree that they are "made" to do that because, as I said before, they have agency. Yes, it will impact their career, yes, they may not make the rivers of money they would have if they'd stayed on, but Cyberpunk was always going to be the biggest game of the forever. Surely, being a part of that team that created a groundbreaking form of entertainment would be something to take pride in, ala Cobain y Winehouse. Crunch is a failure of management, I'm with you there, but the consumers play a role in that too. I despise the "I want it all and I want it right now" mentality of modern consumerism. 

39 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Wah...okay. I'm surprised to see you say this - you know the cream "at the top" are the ones crunching the people below? So is the ideal to have a bad ending to the Hunger Games scenario - fight to the top to impose misery on everyone else? I don't think so.

The people at the top (under the shareholders) are crunching just as much. Directors and producers. They are ultimately responsible for the end product and will take all of the blame when everything goes tits up. You think they switch off their phones at 5pm and go back to their families? No. They dont. And they are compensated very well for that. So yes, I do think those who are prepared to put their all in and work harder than others should rise to the top. It's not about imposing misery, it's about taking responsibility and pushing the whole team forward. Those that don't want to play along can get off the ride any time they like. Your job should not be "miserable" - and if it is, consider a different line of work. 

43 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

I don't think I've more strongly disagreed with a statement in a looooong time. 

You could go back through history and utter that sentiment time and time again. Oh you want minimum wage do you? Well sounds like you're just not cut out for this!

The Brent video was meant as a joke. He's not a villain. He's just trying desperately to be loved and respected and failing miserably (Finchy is the real villain, if anyone is).

However, the sentiment is true. I'm going to get a little personal now, so dismiss it as a load of nonsense if you want. Firstly, my Granddad was born in Ireland between the wars. Both of his parents were dead by the time he was 2. His older sister brought him to England and raised him best she could in a shit part of Leeds. He left school at 14 and started working as a mechanic. By the time he was 40, he was managing director of that very same company he'd started at at 14. He managed that because he didn't want his kids to have the same garbage life he'd had and worked his arse off every day to better himself and improve his situation. In a time of few workers rights, and no minimum wage, he did what he needed to do and got rewarded more than adequately for his hard work and long weeks. 

Fast forward a few years and you get me, this clown. I worked for almost 10 years in various restaurants and got paid minimum wage + tips for the duration. The work was, more often than not, absolutely rotten and with little or no thanks. 40, 50, 60 hour-weeks depending on how high staff turnover was that month. No thanks not only from the staff, but from the shareholders as well. Why? Because of the minimum wage. The minimum wage was a direct incentive for the shareholders to cut labour costs to the absolute bare minimum to make any profit. Luckily, in waiting, you can make a fair bit of cash in tips if you manage to do a good job. But because of the minimum wage, I was usually doing the work of three people, and thus making a fraction of what I should have been in tips, pissing off a lot of customers in the process. What would have been really useful, would have been if there was no minimum wage and we were paid next to nothing as a wage. That way, we could have had adequate staff, ran the restaurant properly, given the clients a much better experience and pocketed a decent amount in tips. Everyone's happy. The minimum wage is not a solution to anything, because all it does it cause more pain for the worker and more profits for the shareholder at the expense of customer satisfaction. Customers now expect the absolute best at the lowest price possible. The idea of a minimum wage is wholly incompatible with that philosophy. 

So no, people who expect the minimum wage and are not prepared to put in the effort are not cut out for anything and they should absolutely not be paid well for doing the absolute bare minimum. But I digress, that's a whole nother topic. The principle remains the same though, those who are prepared to work hard, usually get rewarded. CDPR is no different in my view. Crunch is everywhere and is a necessary evil of the system we live in. You don't want to crunch? You can still have a middling to decent life, especially if you put time and effort into acquiring some skills and education. It's easier than ever to learn something in 2020. 

I just don't think it right for people to complain about the work others are prepared to do. Keep your own house in order and let other people worry about themselves. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Cyberpunk, I don't have much to say, as I didn't play it, nor did I want to. From my perspective, it was just an overhyped game that couldn't live up to it. The striking thing about it is that it didn't come from an AAA studio, which sucks for them. Hopefully this situation won't ruin the studio, because I'd place the blame here mostly on marketing.

But it's regarding the crunch discussion that I want to add my two cents: any sort of project-based business is going to work overtime near its deadline (this mentality extends to independent contractors working on commissions, and even PhD students). The project needs to be done by the time you, or your company, agreed to hand it. It's ultimately better for any future prospects and reputation that said project is as good as it can be, hence extra hours near the end, correcting mistakes, fixing details, and whatnot.

Because this is such a given in so many industries, labour protection laws in various countries and cultures are drawn to make sure that 1.Any employee who worked said hours is adequately compensated for their efforts (because the main fruit of those labours always go to the firm first, not directly to who works on it); and 2.That any employee who'd rather not work long hours (due to family, health, or any other potentially heavy personal reasons) isn't punished harshly for that oft necessary choice.

The main issue with crunch, as we understand it in the gaming industry, is that the above is not happening, at least not in the USA. Videogame developers don't seem to have any sort of Union over there, and the few social security nets available to them do very little. As a result, overworked employees aren't properly compensated, and those who don't overwork are quickly fired without any oversight to speak of. That's where the horror stories are coming from, because they pale in comparison to other industries in the same country that have secured measures for workers' rights. The stories from Japan don't get as much attention because they're on par with the rest of work culture from that country (so any issue would be part of a wider debate), but from what I understand, job security is nevertheless strong there.

The story from Projekt RED involves a 6-day work week for the few months leading up to the release of the studio's biggest project in years. And they're getting paid for those hours. All of that seems reasonable, and on par with how other businesses do things, including the one I'm working at right now (an office job at a factory). My sister (an architect) has been working weekends for the past few weeks, being in a similar situation. Just saying, if the issue is exploitation, CDPR's situation is not it at all (especially since nobody's losing their job if they don't comply. I don't think you can even do that to employees under EU guidelines).

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or is the whole gaming scene just exhausting nowadays?

I was just as disappointed as anyone else that Cyberpunk is currently a broken mess, but CDPR have offered refunds to anyone who wants one and promised a patch to those willing to wait. Like, what else can they do at this point? What else is there to discuss? Everyone has an option that can work for them; Don't buy it/get a refund/wait for a patch. Yet people still seem hell-bent on complaining about it, going out of their way to point out exactly why it's an awful game as if it's something we don't already know or comparing it to their favourite developer who would never release a game in such a state. Even people that had no interest in actually playing the game come out to offer their criticisms.

Remember when gaming was just a way to have fun? Now it seems people would rather just complain about things or find the latest thing to be angry about. If it's not the sorry state of Cyberpunk, it's crunch within the industry or loot boxes or my console is better than yours or my demographic wasn't represented exactly how I'd have liked. I wouldn't mind if it was avoidable, but it seems that to get to the actual gaming news, you've got to wade through all the arguments, controversies and dogpiling that comes with it. 

And then there's the actual toxicity. It seems with every major release, there's a group that take their hate to absurd levels. Sending seizure inducing videos to journalists who report on Cyberpunk's braindance segments or people sending death threats to TLOU2's staff because one female character was a bit masculine. I love gaming, but the whole gaming culture has just completely worn me out to the point where I just don't want to be involved anymore.

Honestly, I've never seen such vitriol and toxicity centred around something that is supposed to be fun. A lot of the above isn't really specific to Cyberpunk, but I do think it's the straw that broke the camel's back for me and it made me realise how much I really don't like the gaming "community" nowadays. I can deal with being disappointed in a game, but the gaming culture and politics that surrounds it leaves me exhausted more often than not. It's like wading through treacle. I just want to enjoy a game and maybe have a nice discussion about it, but there's just so much bullshit that comes with it or someone picking fault with every single opinion.

I dunno, maybe 2020 has effected me more than I realised, but I just find gaming culture legitimately depressing and exhausting nowadays.

Edited by Goafer
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nicktendo said:

Again, agree to disagree, I think it does a lot that hasn't been done. Granted it's not in the best "condition" but they have broken new ground, in my opinion, in terms of world-building and immersion. It's not perfect, but I can see what they're going for an I appreciate it massively.

See I would say this game has been an unmitigated disaster for them. Saying it "isn't in the best condition" has to be one of the biggest understatements on this forum I've seen in a while. 8-)

Quote

Bad practice is not fine. I don't want people to be overworked, I don't think anyone does, but we should make room in society for those people who are prepared to go the extra mile. I would argue that by allowing people to burn out and pour their heart and soul into something, we ultimately get a better end result. Bad practice should not be "the norm", but regulation against people working themselves to the bone is the wrong approach. Often, it's through that kind of sacrifice that we find the best things in life. I'm thinking Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse here. They paid the ultimate price, but their sacrifice enriched the lives of millions. Who's to say we would have had what they gave us if they had clocked in from 9-5 and accepted a standard wage? Maybe I'm grasping at straws a little here, or embarrassing myself a little, but there is no ying without the yang. You can't have the rainbow without the rain (Brent - loosely paraphrasing D. Parton). 

See but that's arguing a different thing. Making room for people to work late is a lot different to enforcing crunch. Crunch in general is an unwanted, prolonged period of pressure applying to a lot of people in the company. It's not the same as allowing some people to work late if that's in their nature. I also don't believe that people who work much later than others necessarily end up being as productive or achieving as much as people who work normal hours. It's certainly not better for creative people.

Quote

I respect them for the reasons I mentioned above. I disagree that they are "made" to do that because, as I said before, they have agency.

Saying "you can get another job" because your company does something a bit shitty isn't an option for a lot of people, especially people with financial commitments, and people now during the pandemic where job security is compromised.

Quote

Yes, it will impact their career, yes, they may not make the rivers of money they would have if they'd stayed on, but Cyberpunk was always going to be the biggest game of the forever. Surely, being a part of that team that created a groundbreaking form of entertainment would be something to take pride in, ala Cobain y Winehouse. Crunch is a failure of management, I'm with you there, but the consumers play a role in that too. I despise the "I want it all and I want it right now" mentality of modern consumerism.

I honestly don't think consumers play a part. Why would they release a game sooner because people are crowing about it on the internet? Far more likely they are rushing a release to meet financial objectives.

Quote

The people at the top (under the shareholders) are crunching just as much.

And the shareholders? They aren't crunching. They are crunching the people below to see a faster return. It's pretty shitty, really.

Quote

So no, people who expect the minimum wage and are not prepared to put in the effort are not cut out for anything and they should absolutely not be paid well for doing the absolute bare minimum. But I digress, that's a whole nother topic.

That's what disciplinary action and firing is for. Arguing against the minimum wage is kind of ridiculous really, it's there to protect people from being taken advantage of.

Quote

The principle remains the same though, those who are prepared to work hard, usually get rewarded.

But again, this is a mandated period of crunch, it's not the same thing. Even in other cases where it's not officially said to be mandatory, due to many reasons it pretty much is.

Quote

CDPR is no different in my view. Crunch is everywhere and is a necessary evil of the system we live in.

If it's necessary then why have some devs managed to completely avoid it? I fundamentally disagree with your point of view here. Just because most companies do it, doesn't mean it's needed. It's probably difficult to rethink the way of doing things but it's by no means necessary, and avoiding it will have a lot of benefits for workers in the long run. You can set targets for employees and have performance reviews to ensure productivity without instigating several month hellish periods where people burn out.

Quote

You don't want to crunch? You can still have a middling to decent life, especially if you put time and effort into acquiring some skills and education. It's easier than ever to learn something in 2020. 

I just don't think it right for people to complain about the work others are prepared to do. Keep your own house in order and let other people worry about themselves. 

If you don't want to crunch in these companies you will probably be gone before long, let's be honest. If you read through any of the stuff Jason Schreier put out while he was at Kotaku he interviewed a number of employees about crunch conditions. At the end of the day if you keep telling yourself it's a necessary evil then you're part of the problem. Many work-related issues in the past, like people not receiving minimum wage, could have been justified as "a necessary evil" to ensure the status quo was maintained.

Edited by Sheikah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Nicktendo said:

but Cyberpunk was always going to be the biggest game of the forever. Surely, being a part of that team that created a groundbreaking form of entertainment would be something to take pride in, ala Cobain y Winehouse. 

Cyberpunk was never going to be that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Goafer said:

Is it just me or is the whole gaming scene just exhausting nowadays?

I was just as disappointed as anyone else that Cyberpunk is currently a broken mess, but CDPR have offered refunds to anyone who wants one and promised a patch to those willing to wait. Like, what else can they do at this point? What else is there to discuss? Everyone has an option that can work for them; Don't buy it/get a refund/wait for a patch. Yet people still seem hell-bent on complaining about it, going out of their way to point out exactly why it's an awful game as if it's something we don't already know or comparing it to their favourite developer who would never release a game in such a state. Even people that had no interest in actually playing the game come out to offer their criticisms.

Remember when gaming was just a way to have fun? Now it seems people would rather just complain about things or find the latest thing to be angry about. If it's not the sorry state of Cyberpunk, it's crunch within the industry or loot boxes or my console is better than yours or my demographic wasn't represented exactly how I'd have liked. I wouldn't mind if it was avoidable, but it seems that to get to the actual gaming news, you've got to wade through all the arguments, controversies and dogpiling that comes with it. 

And then there's the actual toxicity. It seems with every major release, there's a group that take their hate to absurd levels. Sending seizure inducing videos to journalists who report on Cyberpunk's braindance segments or people sending death threats to TLOU2's staff because one female character was a bit masculine. I love gaming, but the whole gaming culture has just completely worn me out to the point where I just don't want to be involved anymore.

Honestly, I've never seen such vitriol and toxicity centred around something that is supposed to be fun. A lot of the above isn't really specific to Cyberpunk, but I do think it's the straw that broke the camel's back for me and it made me realise how much I really don't like the gaming "community" nowadays. I can deal with being disappointed in a game, but the gaming culture and politics that surrounds it leaves me exhausted more often than not. It's like wading through treacle. I just want to enjoy a game and maybe have a nice discussion about it, but there's just so much bullshit that comes with it or someone picking fault with every single opinion.

I dunno, maybe 2020 has effected me more than I realised, but I just find gaming culture legitimately depressing and exhausting nowadays.

You’re 100% right. It seems to me the past 10-15 years has just been a gradual build up of people online being mad at other people having fun and trying their absolute best to find fault in anything and everything, and now we’re reaching boiling point. It is exhausting.

The worst thing for me is the authoritarian nature of these people, from all sides, who think it’s their job to regulate the entire discussion and frame it through their own political lens, to regulate what is and isn’t acceptable, what can and cannot be said, and how other people and businesses choose to operate. 

I’d be amazed if these people weren’t completely miserable. All they do is complain about everything. Find pleasure in games you still enjoy, there are people who still want to discuss them at that level. You can still ignore the games from the people or devs that you believe have shitty practices without shouting about it from the rooftops.

This is why I love the gaming diary thread. It’s just people gushing over what they’re playing without any of the noise. It would be nice if more of the forum were like that. Discussion of other topics is still necessary, but I too wish there was less vitriol and certainly less moral grandstanding. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nicktendo said:

You’re 100% right. It seems to me the past 10-15 years has just been a gradual build up of people online being mad at other people having fun and trying their absolute best to find fault in anything and everything, and now we’re reaching boiling point. It is exhausting.

The worst thing for me is the authoritarian nature of these people, from all sides, who think it’s their job to regulate the entire discussion and frame it through their own political lens, to regulate what is and isn’t acceptable, what can and cannot be said, and how other people and businesses choose to operate. 

I’d be amazed if these people weren’t completely miserable. All they do is complain about everything. Find pleasure in games you still enjoy, there are people who still want to discuss them at that level. You can still ignore the games from the people or devs that you believe have shitty practices without shouting about it from the rooftops.

This is why I love the gaming diary thread. It’s just people gushing over what they’re playing without any of the noise. It would be nice if more of the forum were like that. Discussion of other topics is still necessary, but I too wish there was less vitriol and certainly less moral grandstanding. 

This is a difficult one because there are obviously people that take it too far, and real assholes who send death threats and get off at the misery of others. On the other hand, discussion around workplace practices (e.g. with Jason Schreier's journalism) has given a voice to those who have suffered mental health issues due to really bad crunch practices, and has caused companies to respond and start to bring about change. Continued discussion around lootboxes and predatory practices has led to countries starting to (or already) regulating them. And backlashes against certain anti-consumer game design decisions like with Battlefront 2 resulted in very positive (and swift) changes due to the public reaction.

That's not to say that it's not exhausting to see the discussion often focus on 'non-game' aspects of games all the time, especially when it wasn't like this in the past. Ultimately though, being completely quiet about issues like you're suggesting would do more harm than good, and you can generally ignore news articles or threads that discuss these issues if you want to.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The exhaustion and phenomenon @Goafer highlights is something I would put down to the internet and the kind of discourse it enables, as opposed to gaming in particular. Gaming is just made up of a larger and prematurely more reclusive subset of society, and have thus pioneered some of the earliest norms of internet hate. Hell gamergate was essentially a dry run for right wing populism and Qanon. This cyberpunk thing is just the latest in that process of hype>polarization>culture war that consumes the click driven media (i.e. all of it). I'm only in this topic because of that, my interest in this game ended long ago and I'm only here because you can't avoid it.

As to @Nicktendo point - yeah of course, you need hard work (unless you're rich or pretty of course), but there is a line where dedication and passion is manipulated and becomes almost that latent Methodist-esque manipulation on the working man where if you don't work yourself to death you're worthless. It's important that life has balance, because sometimes that life you've had to neglect is all you're left with following the layoffs that come when your game is pulled from the PS store and billions are wiped off the company, and you find yourself asking what was the fucking point.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Sheikah said:

Ultimately though, being completely quiet about issues like you're suggesting would do more harm than good, and you can generally ignore news articles or threads that discuss these issues if you want to.

I agree with the first part of your post. However, that's not what I said - I said discussion is necessary, but that doesn't mean you always have to comment about everything if you don't want to. I prefer to stay away from any kind of discussion surrounding EA because it often feels like shouting into the void. 

The public backlash to shitty practices is important, but the most effective method is simply not buying the shitty products instead of endlessly complaining online and then buying them on sale anyway. If enough people do that, they'll change their ways. The most effective regulation of loot boxes would have been if everyone simply didn't buy them. That won't happen without campaigns and online commentary, of course, but it more often than not descends into toxic lunacy between warring factions and fan-bases. Hence, why I made my point above about the end-user playing a role. Battlefront II was a perfect example of shareholders mercilessly exploiting players, and because of people needing that Star Wars fix, they didn't care enough to ignore the game. That's the cycle. The shareholders don't give a shit about Star Wars, they just want to use the license to extract as much profit as possible and the players, once again, fell for it hook, line and sinker because they love the franchise. Stupidity. If people want change, they have to start making do without or you're going to start getting a load of suits who don't play games deciding what is allowed and what isn't. 

Edited by Nicktendo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Nicktendo said:

I agree with the first part of your post. However, that's not what I said - I said discussion is necessary, but that doesn't mean you always have to comment about everything if you don't want to. I prefer to stay away from any kind of discussion surrounding EA because it often feels like shouting into the void. 

The public backlash to shitty practices is important, but the most effective method is simply not buying the shitty products instead of endlessly complaining online and then buying them on sale anyway. If enough people do that, they'll change their ways. The most effective regulation of loot boxes would have been if everyone simply didn't buy them. That won't happen without campaigns and online commentary, of course, but it more often than not descends into toxic lunacy between warring factions and fan-bases. Hence, why I made my point above about the end-user playing a role. Battlefront II was a perfect example of shareholders mercilessly exploiting players, and because of people needing that Star Wars fix, they didn't care enough to ignore the game. That's the cycle. The shareholders don't give a shit about Star Wars, they just want to use the license to extract as much profit as possible and the players, once again, fell for it hook, line and sinker because they love the franchise. Stupidity. If people want change, they have to start making do without or you're going to start getting a load of suits who don't play games deciding what is allowed and what isn't. 

Unfortunately that would never happen - people will never stop buying the games they want. The next best thing we can hope for is that mounting pressure/coverage causes companies to react (which they have done in the case of Battlefront 2).

Also I don't agree with your primary solution to the loot box issue, we can't say the effective solution is "everyone needs to just avoid it" - loot boxes are gambling (and have been identified and regulated as such in some countries). Once you know that, you see how that response doesn't work - "the thing about gambling, everyone just needs to avoid it". Loot box coverage (including online discussions) has absolutely helped thrust this issue into political spotlight. I have read accounts of how gambling addicts have blown thousands on them, it's really quite an insidious practice that benefits from the exposure.

Edited by Sheikah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that anyone here will care :heh: but a patch has arrived for the save data issue on PC.

I spent ages sorting out my items anyway, had so many duplicates from constantly looting and then just chucking everything in storage! :D 
The menu system (especially for item management) could definitely do with being streamlined in this, very clumsy/slow as it stands. :zzz: 

But yeah, even if improvements are being considered for that, I imagine it’ll be pretty low on the list of priorities for the devs at the moment. :hehe: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got my physical copy refunded.
CD PROJEKT S.A. sent me the money via PayPal. Had to fill out a couple forms over the last 4 weeks, but the money is here.

I thought I had to send them my copy, though. Let's see if I get another email requesting me to do exactly that. I wouldn't mind. Dealing with the refund process was easy and without any hassle, so props to them for that.

Here's hoping they can turn the game around and it'll eventually be what the devs intended it to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you go from...

On 16/12/2020 at 10:58 PM, drahkon said:

However, I gotta also say: I love the game. It runs great on my PS5 and I only had two crashes in 17 hours of playtime, so far.

On 18/12/2020 at 7:55 AM, drahkon said:

Gotta say, I'm very lucky it works as well as it does on my PS5.

21 hours in and I absolutely love it...

On 18/12/2020 at 9:40 PM, drahkon said:

Think I'm going to finish the story soon and then try to sell my copy.

...to requesting a refund?

Edited by Ronnie
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you go from...
...to requesting a refund?
Quite easily, drahkon is clearly a chancer who wants to have his cake and eat it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe there are reasons/situations why someone could use/need some extra money right now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDPR making a statement with their 'Commitment to Quality' video, presented by Marcin Iwinski. 

Quote

Dear gamers,
here's CD PROJEKT’s co-founder’s personal explanation of what the days leading up to the launch of Cyberpunk 2077 looked like, sharing the studio’s perspective on what happened with the game on old-generation consoles.

Feels like it's probably too little too late to be putting a statement out (actions speak louder than words and all that), but yeah, it's a smart PR move, if nothing else. Fair play to them, because in terms of trying to communicate with their audience, they always do a really good job, and I'd say the only issues they have in this regard is that they always seem to be reacting to, rather than getting ahead of, anything negative about themselves. 

It's a learning experience, and hopefully a humbling one for them too. Can only hope that the performance of the game and the studio's management continues to improve. 

Marcin goes on to mention that the next-gen update isn't coming until the second half of 2021, and are aiming to get the game back on the PlayStation Store as soon as possible. 

 

Edited by Julius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sheikah said:

Quite easily, drahkon is clearly a chancer who wants to have his cake and eat it. emoji14.png

Like when he called Xenoblade 2 a 10/10 game, and then the following day that he hated it and would sell it before finishing? I guess I'm just surprised by the ethics (or lack thereof) of some people, but to each their own.

Edited by Ronnie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ronnie said:

Like when he called Xenoblade 2 a 10/10 game, and then the following day that he hated it and would sell it before finishing? I guess I'm just surprised by the ethics (or lack thereof) of some people, but to each their own.

Like CD Projekt's lack of ethics?

 

I don't the this latest PR rubbish is fooling anyone.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cube said:

Like CD Projekt's lack of ethics?

Yeah, pretty much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have no idea about my situation right now so I think those who have a problem with me selling games or getting a refund for one should shut the fuck up.

Edited by drahkon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

Like when he called Xenoblade 2 a 10/10 game, and then the following day that he hated it and would sell it before finishing? I guess I'm just surprised by the ethics (or lack thereof) of some people, but to each their own.

I'm not sure that's totally fair. I mean, who here hasn't played a game and loved a fair chunk of it, only to find their interest in it waning later on into the game?

I can't speak to your example because I can't remember it (and can't be bothered to look it up), but just going off what you mentioned, if anything, I respect @drahkon for moving on from the game once he started to feel that way, because knowing my own gaming habits, I probably would have forced my way through it, which isn't fair to the game or myself. He plays a lot of JRPG's and loves to grind, so I think he's definitely best positioned to figure out what he wants out of a JRPG at this point, and knows if he'll continue enjoying it. 

Anyway, I don't think it's fair to single anyone out for this, and I don't think he was being disingenuous/unethical/whatever. He didn't mention anything before about having too many major issues with the game from a technical and gameplay perspective, so when I read his post I just assumed he was getting a refund (totally fair given the current state of the game) because he'd get more doing that than he might trading the game in, which I know he's mentioned doing plenty of times before for games he's completed/done playing. 

It's no big deal, doesn't hurt anyone, and if anything I appreciate hearing that the refund went smoothly ::shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have no idea about my situation right now so I think those who have a problem with me selling games or getting a refund for one should shut the fuck up.
Fair enough, there are obvious judgements being made here, and we definitely don't know your situation. If you are suddenly finding yourself in hard times then that really sucks and I definitely wouldn't begrudge you getting a refund. Perhaps if you find yourself in better circumstances down the road you can buy another copy to support the devs since it sounds as though you did enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ronnie said:

Like when he called Xenoblade 2 a 10/10 game, and then the following day that he hated it and would sell it before finishing? I guess I'm just surprised by the ethics (or lack thereof) of some people, but to each their own.

Lack of ethics? If you read between he lines, he's clearly got other reasons for wanting a refund. During a pandemic that is causing people a lot of struggles, I'd say it's understandable.

I'd question your ethics to be honest, seeing as you continued pursuing it after a post that clearly had a bit of a serious tone to it.

Anyway, Cyberpunk. Is it playable yet?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sheikah said:

Perhaps if you find yourself in better circumstances down the road you can buy another copy to support the devs since it sounds as though you did enjoy it.

That was the plan. 

With the roadmap being laid out this plan has been postponed to late 2021, though, as I wanted to wait for the next current-gen version.

8 hours ago, Goafer said:

Anyway, Cyberpunk. Is it playable yet?

A friend of mine has been playing the PS4 Pro version since launch and he said it's been getting better with each patch and a couple of days ago he told me it's fine. He does have low standards, though, so... :p 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've put about 5 or maybe 6 hours into this and had a crash almost an hour to an hour and a half into a play session, effectively making me rage quit and play something else.

I'm not too fussed at that next gen update, as it looks great as it is, however it really is so transparent how this game shouldn't have launched until mid 2021 and they probably should have bitten the bullet and say no PS4/xbox version, only next gen as it really feels like the game was rushed/held back/too ambitious to run on base ps4/xbox.

I really wanted to love this game, have it scratch my Deus Ex itch since SE decided to chase marvel money and can that IP, and so far its not lived up to any expectations, including the one to actually just run.

Its wierd, my impressions of "its from the studio that made witcher 3" seems to be the devs own downfall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this