EPTCyberpunk 2077 - Page 49
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
mierin
United States4943 Posts
| ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On December 27 2020 22:34 mierin wrote: I don't sue BMW because they promise a luxury car just because I can't afford it. People on old generation playstations and xboxes who thought they'd be getting a game with cutting edge, revolutionary graphics...I just can't understand it. Does it run on the lowest of the low settings on those consoles? If so I don't see what the lawsuit is even about. It isn't the people that bought the game that are suing CDPR, so it's little wonder you don't understand it. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11958 Posts
On December 27 2020 22:34 mierin wrote: I don't sue BMW because they promise a luxury car just because I can't afford it. People on old generation playstations and xboxes who thought they'd be getting a game with cutting edge, revolutionary graphics...I just can't understand it. Does it run on the lowest of the low settings on those consoles? If so I don't see what the lawsuit is even about. That is a really bad analogy. Having older hardware is not similar to not being able to afford a car. This is about telling the truth when selling something. If i claim a thing i sell you to is able to do X, and then it isn't capable of doing that thing, that is a huge problem and something that you should be legally liable for. That obviously doesn't protect against lawyering and claiming that something technically is able to do X, but not the thing people expect when you tell them it does X, and all that annoying shit. Of course, on the consumer side the best protection against this is to inform yourself before buying stuff and to look for independent sources. But that doesn't mean that the companies should be let of the hook. If they claim really incredibly stuff when selling stuff to you, you should obviously be wary and probably not believe them. But on the other hand, they should not be able to hide behind "The thing i said was obviously insane, why would you believe that?" If i claim to sell you a new BMW sports car for 5000 bucks, and then deliver a rusty old VW, i cannot just say that it would be absurd for you to expect a new BMW at that price. I need to be honest when telling you what i sell, making my lies very stupid should not protect me. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9064 Posts
I'm actually excited to get back to the game after this holiday break. Almost bought the PS4 version from Walmart for 50$ because why not? | ||
|
iXphobos
Germany1465 Posts
On December 27 2020 01:57 Elmonti wrote: Think again about that statement, please. It's literally what "marketing" is. . Sorry, but i think you misunderstand the word "hype" here. Of course it's the purpose of marketing to create a "hype" around your game to advertise it. That's obvious. But you can't compare that level of "ordinary marketing hype" to Cyberpunks' "One of the biggest hypes in gaming history". If you could just pay a bunch of people to create such a hype, we all would be drooling about the latest FIFA or Assassins Creed anouncement every other week. Here are two good examples to prove that point: Among Us didn't become a massive hype 2 years after its release because the developers ran an awesome marketing campaign. Ubisoft on the other hand pumped millions into crating an artifical hype for Hyper Scape and they failed big time. | ||
|
bluzi
4703 Posts
On December 25 2020 18:58 iXphobos wrote: This is just some greedy assholes jumping on the hatetrain that followed the hypetrain to make profit. You can't blame CDPR for the hype. It's not something you can artificially create as a marketing strategy. Yes, CDPR fucked up and deserve to be criticized for it. But there's no way anyone, not in a million years, would have even thought about filing a lawsuit if this was EA's or Ubisoft's game. Not even if it was 20 times worse and 40 times more hyped. This is complete "Trump"esque bullshit. I also find it disgusting that law firms are jumping up and down with joy when they see those $$$ bills , Sony response is hard enough , and I would like to see some heads fly at the top of the company , this is a CEO level resignation (but i think the CEO is also the biggest owner of shares ?) , seeing the leeches of the world making money of CDPR is a bit too much for me , even though they really did a shameful act releasing the games to consoles , the fact MS kept the game at their store just because they are the biggest marketing partner is also shit to their users. If anything i would put the blame on MS and Sony to further extent on such law suits , they are liable for the games they sell in their store , when i buy a defective product in bestbuy the liability is on bestbuy and not the Chinese manufacturer that bestbuy decided was good enough to put on their store front. MS and Sony were the greediest of them all , knowing the game didnt pass their qualifications but went ahead and release it anyway , i dont care if CDPR "promised them" , they took the risk and it backfired , if i tell my boss I have bugs in my code , deadline is in 1 week , and I believe I can fix it by then , then we get on the nightly train release with a patch scheduled for the weekend , and we miss it because i coudlnt make it in time (ce la vi) , he is getting the heat , not me. So TLDR - if you sue anyone it should be the store fronts that sell the defective products while knowing fully that it was a defective product when they put it up on sale. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22547 Posts
On December 28 2020 01:07 bluzi wrote: If it was consumers sueing CDPR then yes, I agree with basically all of it but such a lawsuit would not go anywhere because Once the problem was identifited they pulled the product and offered a full refund. I also find it disgusting that law firms are jumping up and down with joy when they see those $$$ bills , Sony response is hard enough , and I would like to see some heads fly at the top of the company , this is a CEO level resignation (but i think the CEO is also the biggest owner of shares ?) , seeing the leeches of the world making money of CDPR is a bit too much for me , even though they really did a shameful act releasing the games to consoles , the fact MS kept the game at their store just because they are the biggest marketing partner is also shit to their users. If anything i would put the blame on MS and Sony to further extent on such law suits , they are liable for the games they sell in their store , when i buy a defective product in bestbuy the liability is on bestbuy and not the Chinese manufacturer that bestbuy decided was good enough to put on their store front. MS and Sony were the greediest of them all , knowing the game didnt pass their qualifications but went ahead and release it anyway , i dont care if CDPR "promised them" , they took the risk and it backfired , if i tell my boss I have bugs in my code , deadline is in 1 week , and I believe I can fix it by then , then we get on the nightly train release with a patch scheduled for the weekend , and we miss it because i coudlnt make it in time (ce la vi) , he is getting the heat , not me. So TLDR - if you sue anyone it should be the store fronts that sell the defective products while knowing fully that it was a defective product when they put it up on sale. Once full refunds are given your options as a consumer are basically done, your not going to get more then your money back. But his lawsuit is from investors and shareholders and for them the problem is CDPR lying and knowingly releasing a faulty product which negatively impacts CDPR stocks. Their beef is not with Sony or MS agreeing to sell the product. And I would suspect both Sony and MS to be more hesitant selling something they have not directly been able to test in the future. But yes, the statement from the board that they would 'take responsiblity' rings very hollow when that meant they should have resigned but didn't. | ||
Poopi
France13017 Posts
I should finish in 10-20 hours and probably make another character with different gender for the romances and different build/approach, we'll see if the replayability is good enough for making another full run. | ||
|
virpi
Germany3599 Posts
On December 27 2020 20:21 Manit0u wrote: That's not saying much. Shooting is kinda bad and some mechanics are weird (like needing 20+ headshots to take down the target). The funny thing is that I see how amazing it could be if they adapted shooting from Rainbow Six: Vegas for example (with cover system etc.) and close combat from VtMB where it would switch you to 3rd person perspective for it. Why not learn from the past? 20+ headshots? Wtf. Most enemies die after 2 or 3 for me. (I play on hard.) | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10940 Posts
| ||
|
clusen
Germany8702 Posts
On December 28 2020 01:07 bluzi wrote: MS and Sony were the greediest of them all , knowing the game didnt pass their qualifications but went ahead and release it anyway MS and Sony don't intensively bugtest games or test them for missing features promised in marketing campaigns, CP passed their requirements apparently. It's not the only game with bugs in their store. €: Also I think it's laughable to put the blame for this on anyone besides CDPR. It's not store owners, gamers, game "journalists", the society and whatnot. Only one company had a say in managing, producing, relasing , marketing, and only one company knew about the state of the game and still went ahead to release it for christmas. So who is the greedy party in this? | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9064 Posts
| ||
|
PassiveAce
United States18076 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States14196 Posts
They literally had access to the game and were testing it on the older consoles to see if it worked on consoles No one is putting less blame on CDPR but acting like sony and MS didn't have a part in this is silly. | ||
|
clusen
Germany8702 Posts
On December 29 2020 03:54 Sermokala wrote: I mean Sony and MS had the say on if the game was released on older consoles. that's literally the entire purpose of the certification process going back to the crash that the console owners need to put their stamp on the game before it goes out. They literally had access to the game and were testing it on the older consoles to see if it worked on consoles No one is putting less blame on CDPR but acting like sony and MS didn't have a part in this is silly. MS and Sony are testing the interaction between game and console/console OS, not the game itself. | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10834 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9064 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States14196 Posts
On December 29 2020 07:06 clusen wrote: MS and Sony are testing the interaction between game and console/console OS, not the game itself. Which should find some of the problems with the crashes and whatnot? If the process can be fooled so easily what even is the point of calling it a "certification". I don't get how minimal the "interaction between game and console" could be to find anything at all without finding something about the terrible performance, bugs, and other crash's. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17833 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9064 Posts
| ||
| ||
