• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Crax

Member
May 21, 2018
878
With how bad the console versions of the game performs, do you think more outlets should update their reviews to also include the console versions? Right now the user scores on Metacritic for both Xbox and PS4 are below 3.0.

Edit: I'm aware that reviewers only received the PC version before launch.
 
Last edited:

Ales34

Member
Apr 15, 2018
6,455
Yeah, it's bizarre that there are still no more console versions' reviews. It's like they're all afraid to say anything.
 

shancake

Managing Editor ‑ Press Start
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
485
Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.
 

J_ToSaveTheDay

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
18,804
USA
Yes,

but the console versions were under NDA until release day and I don't think most outlets (if any) were even given access to the console versions until launch day either.

Not the outlets' decision to purposefully withhold the info. It was CDPR's terms for the review process.
 

SolidSnakex

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,374
Push Square currently has a review in progress, but based on their conclusion the score isn't going to be pretty

We're still playing Cyberpunk 2077 in order to bring you a finished review, but it's impossible to recommend picking this game up at launch on PS4 or PS4 Pro. On PS5 via backwards compatibility, there's still fun to be had — a glimpse of the game's excellent potential — but even then, it's crippled by bugs and crashing issues. There's something truly special at the core of Cyberpunk 2077, but in its current state, it's simply not good enough. So far, a colossal disappointment.

 

ASleepingMonkey

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
4,497
Iowa
Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.
This is a big factor, I know there are many reviews still coming because they didn't get access are all for the PC version that was reviewed. I do think you'll be hard pressed to find a lot of immediate 10s on the console version, though. PC was buggy but it wasn't this broken.

It will be interesting
 
Oct 25, 2017
15,110
e0yBOse.png


This is the only PS4 review on Metacritic right now lol

Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.
Reviewers can't see the future, though. I also thought Square Enix would patch the PC version of Nier Automata at some point, but hey!
 

SxP

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,867
This just feels a bit like 2011. Skyrim's PS3 version was trash, so many problems. But the media never talked about it, as they didn't play it. Raked in all the awards, not a single note of criticism from the media.
 

Alexandros

Member
Oct 26, 2017
17,808
As far as I'm aware most sites receive a single version of a game for review and they score based on that.
 

-Tetsuo-

Unlimited Capacity
Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,575
Aren't they? Probably just taking a while cause the base console versions are so terrible.
 

ASleepingMonkey

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
4,497
Iowa
Reviewers can't know that. I also thought Square Enix would patch the PC version of Nier Automata at some point, but hey!
That's part of the problem honestly, for a game like this there's no doubt CDPR is going to put in the work to bring it to its full potential so you risk writing a review that becomes dated within weeks.

It's tough. Personally, I'll probably write my review as is and then do an updated review in like 6 months.
 

Ales34

Member
Apr 15, 2018
6,455
Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.
But it's not just the bugs. Broken police AI, empty streets, lack of meaningful interactions in the world, nothing to do in the world (no mini games and activities), NPCs being dumber than zombies and not reacting to you properly, very little meaningful choices in dialogue, bad driving, less than mediocre combat, inability to change your appearance/buy stuff, etc. The issues with the game are numerous. If it were some kind of masterpiece, the bugs could have been forgiven. It's bizarre the PC version was reviewed as well as it did.
 
OP
OP
Crax

Crax

Member
May 21, 2018
878
Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.
I feel like this really depends on how they are fixed. If the fix is to lower the graphics settings even more, then the game isn't really what it was advertised to be anymore.
 

J_ToSaveTheDay

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
18,804
USA
Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.

I think it would be a bad show to withhold reviews until bugs can be fixed. Reviewers should report the game as it is available to consumers, or at least proximate since they often get code ahead of consumers that isn't completely updated in the same state that consumers will play. Updated reviews or follow-up statements can be issued later.

CDPR doesn't get a hype-moment pass just because bugs can be fixed later on. If the experience of buying Cyberpunk and trying to play in its current state is kinda bad, I personally think outlets might have a responsibility to document and report that.
 

Radec

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,406
I doubt they'll update their scores when they can talk about the PS4 /XBO versions.
 

SlickShoes

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,770
Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.

But you review the game based on what it is and what you play?
Why would you review something based on what will maybe come in the future? That's not a review.

This just sounds like you are willing to mislead your readers to give the big game development company a break.
 

-Peabody-

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,596
Nah if the game is a mess at launch then review it as such. If they update the game later then possibly change it. There shouldn't be any sort of holding back just because "they could" fix issues in the future.
 

GeekyDad

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
1,689
USA
Absolutely. Isn't the price the same or pretty close? It's sounding like those versions are in terrible shape. Folks should know. Yeesh...
 

SlickShoes

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,770
That's part of the problem honestly, for a game like this there's no doubt CDPR is going to put in the work to bring it to its full potential so you risk writing a review that becomes dated within weeks.

It's tough. Personally, I'll probably write my review as is and then do an updated review in like 6 months.

Within weeks? Have you seen the game on console? This fixing will take months if not years assuming it ever comes.
 

HellofaMouse

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,167
I find it kinda funny that the game is being reviewed mainly on expensive pcs most users wont have access to.

It should've released on pc and next gen first and came to last gen later. This whole thing wouldve been a lot less messy.
 

ASleepingMonkey

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
4,497
Iowa
Within weeks? Have you seen the game on console? This fixing will take months if not years assuming it ever comes.
yes, I'm reviewing it on One X and Series X. Pretty radical leap on those alone. But given how fucked it actually is, it's very possible for large portions of a review to become quickly irrelevant. Even if it's not fully fixed, there will be elements that gradually get better (ideally). Not going to stop me from writing about its current state though.
 

TheMadTitan

Member
Oct 27, 2017
27,225
That's part of the problem honestly, for a game like this there's no doubt CDPR is going to put in the work to bring it to its full potential so you risk writing a review that becomes dated within weeks.

It's tough. Personally, I'll probably write my review as is and then do an updated review in like 6 months.
While that move makes sense, not everyone has the time to go back and edit a review after all of the patches, nor should we expect that.
 

ASleepingMonkey

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
4,497
Iowa
While that move makes sense, not everyone has the time to go back and edit a review after all of the patches, nor should we expect that.
Absolutely. I don't expect it from every outlet. This is the state the game released in so honestly, if you're charging money for it, you deserve whatever score you get.

I'm sure the game will get a second wind with the native next gen versions.
 

DaleCooper

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,852
I find it kinda funny that the game is being reviewed mainly on expensive pcs most users wont have access to.

It should've released on pc and next gen first and came to last gen later. This whole thing wouldve been a lot less messy.
That's the state of video game "reviews" these days. It's basically just a part of the marketing process when it comes to big budget titles.
 

Shairi

Member
Aug 27, 2018
8,562
That's part of the problem honestly, for a game like this there's no doubt CDPR is going to put in the work to bring it to its full potential so you risk writing a review that becomes dated within weeks.

It's tough. Personally, I'll probably write my review as is and then do an updated review in like 6 months.

I don't think that's a huge problem.

I believe a review is most important during the launch of the game. People are paying 60-70 bucks afterall to play it at launch, these are the people that need to know that a game is basically unplayable in its current state.

It really doesn't matter if the game is fixed in 6 month, when you payed full price for it and had to play it in a broken state and you never gonna touch it again to see it in its fixed state.
 

MeltedDreams

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,945
Yes! Console version is different (much inferior) product. The two reviews so far are 3.5/10 and 6.8/10. More sites should review console versions. CD Projekt straight up tried to hide console versions before launch and refused to send review copies of it.

Cyberpunk 2077

Cyberpunk 2077 is an open-world, action-adventure story set in Night City, a megalopolis obsessed with power, glamour and body modification. Assume the role of V, a mercenary outlaw going after a one-of-a-kind implant that is the key to immortality. You can customize your character’s cyberware...
 

Izanagi89

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,588
Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.

Millions of people pre-ordered. The version they'll be playing is that version, not the one down the line that'll have seen many fixes. Reviews at launch matter to those people and they obviously deserve to know if the game they're buying in is a buggy mess.
 

Zomba13

#1 Waluigi Fan! Current Status: Crying
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,927
Why do French call it "fat"
There was a reason the PS3 was called fat, and that's because it was literally fat. Nothing fat about the PS4

Because of the existence of "slim" versions. PS2 Slim, PS3 Slim and the other slim one. Xbone to Xbox S etc. It's just another way of saying base or original or whatever and only because companies release revisions where "slimmer" is one of the selling points.
 

asd202

Enlightened
Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,552
Depends on your rig, I've heard of some pretty solid rigs struggling to do 60FPS on it. There's a lot of graphical settings that can be changed to help performance as well. I certainly don't think it's as bad as XB1/PS4 unless you have a weaker PC.

Here's a comparison:

Heh guess I was right in saying they should delay the game until next gen console version are ready.
 

gogosox82

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,385
Honestly it's a tricky one (and speaks more to why reviews at launch are kind of redundant from a technical review). If the issues are all bugs/performance issues, then they can and probably will be fixed.
Not necessarily. Skyrim on ps3 still has a ton of bugs. They just stopped the game from crashing but even that took a good 6 months. Nier on pc never got a patch and you need to use the far mod to have it run properly. I think if a game has technical issues that you notice, it should be noted in your review.
 

jetsetrez

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,919
Yes, and to the same effect, I think tech sites should always be reviewing the entry level models too. It's pretty gross to me when you see them always reviewing the models that are like $1000+ more than the version that the vast majority are going to use.
 

Streusel

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Dec 28, 2017
2,407
yes. it would probably get like a 60 on Metacritic though
 
Last edited:

bell_hooks

Banned
Nov 23, 2019
275
I saw like 2 hours of playthrough on PS4 Pro and frame rate looked ok, no big drops or stutter.
I wonder if Pro version is more stable than base or it was just this particular part/ area that did not struggle
 

horkrux

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,730
Because of the existence of "slim" versions. PS2 Slim, PS3 Slim and the other slim one. Xbone to Xbox S etc. It's just another way of saying base or original or whatever and only because companies release revisions where "slimmer" is one of the selling points.

Yeah i figured, but then you end up calling those slim revisions fat as well. Just makes no sense.
 

MarkRJR

Member
Oct 25, 2017
355
Yes, 100%. The base console versions run embarassingly bad. The Xbox One version hovers around 15fps-20fps in areas and can go as low as 10fps, while having resolutions go below 720p. IGN just posted a comparison video today and I was blown away how poorly it runs.

 
Last edited:

Fliesen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,254
Btw, how does Metacritic pick which version of a game is the 'primary' one and which ones are the "also on:"

XFYgfi7.png


It's kind of silly to make the "You need a $1.500 gaming PC for this to look and run well" version the headliner, while the game runs shit on consoles with install bases of tens of millions.
Like, a botched console release should at least be signified in some way. Like coloring the console versions according to the metascore (i.e., probably yellow)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.