It was definitely overhyped, and I expected opinions that it does not live up to the hype. But I can honestly say that I didn't expect it to be full of so many jarring, "in your face" bugs. Even that last delay was rumored to be related only to making it run well enough on old consoles. Clearly, they must have known it's not actually ready but just had to release it at this point.
I think that was a lot of people. I feel like I was one of the few people sincerely concerned about the launch back during the delays... the delays and specifically, the mixed messages sort of foretold this. I said then that it looked like management problems. And seeing the game, I still see it in the product. Just a lot of things you know they didn't miss in testing, but didn't deal with. Sometimes a manager's main job is to pick what to look away from. Especially under duress.
Hype isn't just about unrealistic expectations. That's a bullet you always bite with this marketing style. It's NEVER going to attain parity with the hype it gives off.
The arguably bigger aspect that goes overlooked is the pressure to bring a lot of ambition and then strike while the iron is hot. I get antsy when I see studios actively escalate the massive buzz they fall into with major releases, not because I'm concerned with how people will ultimately react on release day, when everyone comes back to earth... but rather, because that translates to unreasonable demands and expectations on the project itself, and thus the very people who make the game.
Many times, it's hard enough for a good studio to get it all in and get it in on time
without the otherworldly hype spree. The 'idea load' grows, the execution necessarily becomes more involved, and there's a whole 'nother layer of difficulty added to actually achieving the damned thing. Ideally, it elevates a title, but only if the whole thing is well-managed. Typically, you will see some signs of that one way or the other. More balanced, less heavy presentation. LESS transparency (can indicate deliberateness.) And most importantly, little to no delays. We can see here how waiting through delays doesn't necessarily mean the product will be better for it - the game still has a lot of issues that will take a good bit of time to iron out. Sometimes it turns out that delays simply mean the product wasn't as good as it was supposed to be. The fact that they have to go back on their timeframe and refine it gives me more of a sense of misplaced confidence than that of a desire to be meticulous or honest. I do still think that CDPR ARE meticulous - it still shows in the game. For me it's neither here nor there, just saying, there were reasons to think they might be scrambling much more than they let on. I'd have been more surprised if there wasn't at least one kneecapper problem at launch.
That's just what tipped me off before... gave me that sinking feeling telling me something is really wrong. You can say that if they're delaying the game, they're trying to get it right. But that also means things aren't going as expected and may intonate that there is a problem with how it's being run along, or at the very least with the amount of resources available... but then you get to the competency of management to size-up and coordinate tasks. It's always sort of on them to have attainable goals and hold the path to them. What happened before seemed like a reasonable indicator of issues there. From that point on, it was looking rocky. Stuff like that can really turn things over quickly sometimes.
In other words, I expect the hype itself to objectively influence the result you get, and sometimes you get little signs of it beforehand. Given CDPR's reputation and the way things were presented, I think we all would've liked for things to be more polished off. But making a game like this is an undertaking that spares nobody. Pretend it is any other studio and predictions on how things would turn out would've been at least a little different.
Not even really a knock on them. I expected there to be issues and I wasn't disappointed.
These sorts of things happen, but I think all will be well in the end and the game will still go down in history as one of the better of its kind, minimum. People will still be playing this years later.
I am still having a blast with this game. The atmosphere, holy crap! I think I've been waiting a long time for a game that looks and feels like this. One thing you really gotta hand it to CDPR on... the thing they always get right that I think makes people forget some of their ongoing shortcomings... they really know how to craft a world that you just want to be in all of the time. Like, really hone in on every detail... every aspect of experiencing a game world, and refine every attribute of that to the finest level of detail achievable. Cyberpunk definitely still has that 'it' factor that makes you go "Yeah. I think I like it here. I think I'm in good hands here." Almost makes you forget the clunky idiosyncrasies you encounter. Seriously. The game's not perfect and yet I don't care, because it's still keeping me very immersed.
It's an immersion style that I have a hard time pinning down. A lot of games work in different elements, but very few even try to create games that are all about that emergent, dynamic world and really delve into hashing that concept out. Bethesda may have cornered the market on that... it's one thing they're still loved for. But Bethesda is like a kid daydreaming that he's a knight when he's actually swinging a stick in the backyard. There's a freedom in it and it's fun, but it's not convincing. It's not
plausible. CDPR trades the last bits of 'openness' from that general trait-pool to swing what is, at its core, a very similar game concept, more towards being a plausible, visceral experience. And then they take a more worldly approach to getting it done, not shying away from keeping up with the times in terms of tech, visuals, and gameplay elements. I kind of think of them like games Bethesda might make if they used an extra mountain of polish and whittled out the go-nowhere stuff that ultimately compromises nut/bolts stuff for that total modularity... and while Bethesda wouldn't be happy with this game if they made it, I still think it beats them handily at what they try to do, even if it's not the same charm. Everything about role-play and world that the big ole B fucks up or flat out does not bother to refine at all, CDPR gives special treatment.
I guess I could just say that games like CP2077 and Witcher 3 strike me as the sorts of games the Bethesda would make if they became serious grown-ups and made some nitty-gritty compromises. Their worlds are as wide as an ocean, but as deep as a puddle. CDPR doesn't have that problem because they have the direction to not act like a child with ADHD trying to chase and hold onto hundreds of different-color balloons. So they can bring you this fully realized vision of a lived-in world with all sorts of variety and opportunity.
For all of the issues this game seems to be having, and the weaknesses that I'm sure it does have, I feel like it's delivering on the things I expect from the game that follows after Witcher 3. I don't know if it would be fair to compare it... Cyberpunk is really sort of a different thing. But I'd say they both have a lot of the same core strengths. I think in the end, both in fully finished states, it might just come down to which aesthetic and play style you more prefer. As I play more, it's kind of hard to say.
.