Sony removes Cyberpunk 2077 from the PlayStation Store

[bowepa]

The game will probably come back in February, after a big patch. Sony should change the name to Cyberpunk 2077 Beta and aware people in description. I bought Pixark beta with bugs, updated to full after few months (for free) and I believe it's the best way.

[Nollauno]

I have had no issues - other than visual glitches - some of the quests are bugged (but that can be expected). Plus this is a PC title and after the bugs have been ironed out should be released on consoles (PC with a Lobotomy). The same happened with The Witcher (PC release then onto consoles at a later point).

[Iota]

If it's too complex to roll out to all platforms at once, narrow it down and do it right.

This is something I agree with, it wasn't a console exclusive, so PC launch, then consoles at a later date once everything was working properly. It would create less work within a tight timeframe for the developers as well, which would make their jobs a little easier.

I'm left wondering why CDPR even bothered with last gen consoles, something must have motivated them to do so, did Sony, Microsoft, or someone else offer financial incentives?

The size of the install base and potential sales would probably be the sound financial reasoning. Why would you exclude those potential sales?

[Corky34]

The size of the install base and potential sales would probably be the sound financial reasoning. Why would you exclude those potential sales?

True, but the reputational damage this has done to CDPR is incalculable, and even though it would've sold more I'm left wondering how many more what with a quick 10min search turning up so many examples of how different it is when played on last gen consoles.

I'm not just talking about bugs but how they've had to reduce the number of citizens walking around making the place feel empty, reducing the texture quality by so much that it looks like a PS1 game at times, and frame rates tanking into the 15fps range at times.

[ik9000]

@mods can we merge this thread with the official one? It seems weird to be running two simultaneous topics on the exact same thing!

[excalibur1814]

@mods can we merge this thread with the official one? It seems weird to be running two simultaneous topics on the exact same thing!

More clicks, more smiles!

[Saracen999]

.... Its crazy though as it puts me completely off buying new at full price when I can just wait and pick it up for less than £10 in a years time fully patched!

...

Me too. It's not the only reason (the other major one being DRM) but is certainly a significant part of why I only buy from the likes of GOG these days.

Upside: Far better value for money, usually "bonus" stuff included, no DRM gumming things up and, of course, almost all bugs/issues already resolved.

Downside: No playing cutting edge games when they first come out.

But, seeing as the latter doesn't really bother me, and I very rarely play multi-player let alone online, it removes the vast bulk of the hassle, drama and disappointment. And most of the cost.

[kalniel]

Downside: No playing cutting edge games when they first come out.

Well of course, the game in question, Cyberpunk, did launch on GOG

[Iota]

True, but the reputational damage this has done to CDPR is incalculable

You're probably right, it's why I avoid games from EA. Constantly launch games at silly pricing with bugs galore, or just poor quality games like Anthem where they didn't understand the genre at all.

almost all bugs/issues already resolved.

I actually think this is sound reasoning to simply avoid every game launch and wait a period of time (6 months - 1 year). At least you get the added bonus of the major bugs mainly fixed, as well as paying less for the game. Obviously there are exceptions to this, in which case you know to avoid the game altogether.

[Saracen999]

Well of course, the game in question, Cyberpunk, did launch on GOG

I don't follow games launches enough to have realised that, and haven't checked on GOG for, uhh, several months. But that's unusual, surely, for a brand new game to be on GOG?

[kompukare]

I don't follow games launches enough to have realised that, and haven't checked on GOG for, uhh, several months. But that's unusual, surely, for a brand new game to be on GOG?

The Wikipedia explains this: It is operated by GOG sp. z o.o., a wholly owned subsidiary of CD Projekt based in Warsaw, Poland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOG.com
Remember finding that out with all the TW3 talk.
Since some of the copy protection 'features' seems to have all kinds of issue (CPU hogs etc.), having the CDP games out on gog so soon is a bonus as that's at least one less bug to worry about!

[Baffed]

I'm not surprised from what I've seen the performance and glitches have been terrible. Even on pc the bugs are pretty bad so I can't imagine how much worse it would be on old gen consoles

[fend_oblivion]

Studio gets greedy, forgets what made them dear to gamers, makes devs work like hell, misleads public, and releases a broken and empty "open-world" game.

How the mighty have fallen, eh CDPR?

[Drebin893]

Well I think it's about time game devs were made to release properly finished games and not the beta bugware that too often gets trotted out. Some kind of law requiring beta to be declared as such and limiting the cost accordingly or mandatory refunds where they fail to do so would likely make them sit up.

I agree, how refunds work with the gaming industry needs to be examined. It seems consumer rights being violated has become the norm in gaming.