Yeah that's 8 months. Sorry i didn't do the math.
It was supposed to release in April. It's a 5 months delay.
Fucked if I know. But the title of the thread and the article comes off as something of a quote, and to me a mischaracterization of the statement they made. Their words were "some degree of crunch". But gamespot translated that into "extra long hours." And people coming in here are in turn reading that as "wow if even CDPR are talking about extra long hours, work in on CP77 must be some sort of forced march through an apocalyptic hellscape." The thread and article title are just giving incorrect impressions about what CDPR said. We can have the conversation without the distortion. These suspicions and concerns about how bad it may be are totally reasonable, but aren't directly supported by what CDPR's saying. I don't think. I don't know.What's the definition of crunch in not working more hours than is ordinary or healthy?
I literally don't care when it releases, I'll buy it any day it releases. No need for this.
This seems like erroneous thinking. The idea that a game can be big enough that it is completely unaffected by the realities of its own launch window doesn't sound right. Surely even RDR2 gained or lost sales on the basis of the financial, competitive, and seasonal realities of its launch date. And when a game is that big, there's just that much more money at stake.At this point delaying from September to October would not hurt sales. Even November, with a new gen console launch, they'd still get the same sales. They are that big.
Oh yeah, I'm sure Adam Kicinski was talking about something completely different when he mentioned crunch:Again, they didn't. Those aren't their words. That's gamespot's editorialization.
Despite what people are thinking, Cyberpunk proper development started in 2016 after they finished working on The Witcher 3: Blood and Wine expansion. There was even an insider here or on the old place who written more details about this.
Fair. To me it comes off more as them trying to find a way to pad saying "yes" when asked about crunch on the spot, but I get what you're saying with regard the title/wording and people taking it as a quote.Fucked if I know. But the title of the thread and the article comes off as something of a quote, and to me a mischaracterization of the statement they made. Their words were "some degree of crunch". But gamespot translated that into "extra long hours." And people coming in here are in turn reading that as "wow if even CDPR are talking about extra long hours, work in on CP77 must be some sort of forced march through an apocalyptic hellscape." The thread and article title are just giving incorrect impressions about what CDPR said. These suspicions and concerns about how bad it may be are totally reasonable, but aren't directly supported by what CDPR's saying. I don't think. I don't know.
"To some degree, yes--to be honest"
"We try to limit crunch as much as possible, but it is the final stage."
"We try to be reasonable in this regard, but yes. Unfortunately."
I agree. It's probably worse than they state, and as things usually bear out, will likely be worse than even they presently expect. He has every reason to hedge his own remarks about it, and I don't take his words at face value. But I just feel like his words are his words. I appreciate you seeing where I'm coming from.Fair. To me it comes off more as them trying to find three ways to pad saying "yes" when asked about crunch on the spot, but I get what you're saying with regard the title/wording and people taking it as a quote.
You took "extra long hours" to be his own words, and contextualized it as being extra long by CDPR standards. All I'm saying is that you've been somewhat misled or have misunderstood what CDPR themselves have said about this crunch.Oh yeah, I'm sure Adam Kicinski was talking about something completely different when he mentioned crunch:
There have always been rumours about CD Projekt Red having pretty long hours, and them crunching hard for months on end to finish Witcher 3, so I was referring to their reputation, more than the wording of the title.You took "extra long hours" to be his own words, and contextualized it as being extra long by CDPR standards. All I'm saying is that you've been somewhat misled or have misunderstood what CDPR themselves have said about this crunch.
To me whats even worse with this happening these days is that its not even like when a game goes gold , that's it, the project is done.
Once they finish the project it'll be straight on to patches, post release support, dlc etc so even after crunching and rushing to make this new release date, there isn't even a real break seemingly to look forward to at the end
Nah, we're too busy aping the US and hollowing out our social security systems and workers rights.There have always been rumours about CD Projekt Red having pretty long hours, and them crunching hard for months on end to finish Witcher 3, so I was referring to their reputation, more than the wording of the title.
I would also restate again, that I wish countries in the EU at least would push back against this kind of worker abuse, which crunch absolutely is in my mind.
The old way used to be after crunching for months, a large bunch got laid off. Losing your job wasn't better. In saying that, even with DLC and patches, there's no reason they can't plan around them so those periods aren't crunch. They just released the full game, at that point in the project there's no excuse to not be able to mostly accurately predict how long something takes. If they are still crunching at that point either they had a massive giant unforeseen problem or they built the crunch into the planning stage.To me whats even worse with this happening these days is that its not even like when a game goes gold , that's it, the project is done.
Once they finish the project it'll be straight on to patches, post release support, dlc etc so even after crunching and rushing to make this new release date, there isn't even a real break seemingly to look forward to at the end
It's not progress, CDPR just knows they can get away with it and genuinely don't think they're doing anything wrong.Crunch is bad, and sadly still a reality in 99% of AAA development, it seems. CDPR is being more candid about it than most other studios, though, which seems like some kind of progress, however incremental? idk. all we can really do is take them at their word when they say they try to minimize it. Or not. I wouldn't mind if it got delayed more, personally, but at some point publishers and financial timelines probably dictate that it needs to release before point X.
The old way used to be after crunching for months, a large bunch got laid off. Losing your job wasn't better. In saying that, even with DLC and patches, there's no reason they can't plan around them so those periods aren't crunch. They just released the full game, at that point in the project there's no excuse to not be able to mostly accurately predict how long something takes. If they are still crunching at that point either they had a massive giant unforeseen problem or they built the crunch into the planning stage.
Crunch isn't a problem since they get paid but I hope people aren't forced to or if they want time off they can get it.
This. They are also known as a crunch studio so it's not just "normal" (shouldn't be normal but there does seem to be some studios trying not to have it) crunch for AAA, it's expected, harder and longer than other studios, so it's not right that 99.9% of AAA studios are doing it because one, we know from devs in the industry that the big publishers like EA and Ubisoft have been trying to reduce and two, CDPR have even worse crunch then their peers. It's not just one of those things that's standard for their industry, CDPR's way of doing it is not the standardIt's not progress, CDPR just knows they can get away with it and genuinely don't think they're doing anything wrong.
Anyone here working in an industry with zero crunch/ overtime? Genuine question
This seems like erroneous thinking. The idea that a game can be big enough that it is completely unaffected by the realities of its own launch window doesn't sound right. Surely even RDR2 gained or lost sales on the basis of the financial, competitive, and seasonal realities of its launch date. And when a game is that big, there's just that much more money at stake.
This is a really dumb take.Crunch isn't a problem since they get paid but I hope people aren't forced to or if they want time off they can get it.
Absolute fucking garbage.
Like Jim Sterling would say: "And it IS abuse".
Anyone here working in an industry with zero crunch/ overtime? Genuine question
A big part of responsibility for this lays on the shoulders of those managers who planned and set the original release date, because now it is seen as falling behind schedule and thus we have crunch. Release dates should not be made public almost a whole year ahead in complex projects like this and allowances for shifts in time-frames have to considered. Instead, the people responsible jumped the gun, potentially planning some PR-cycle that they had produced, and now the common Joe dev will have to pay for all of that. That is super not cool.
Anyone here working in an industry with zero crunch/ overtime? Genuine question
They really didn't do that thoughI love when companies tell this to the media like it's a positive thing
"To some degree, yes--to be honest," Kicinski said. "We try to limit crunch as much as possible, but it is the final stage. We try to be reasonable in this regard, but yes. Unfortunately."
Lol at people saying just delay it another year.
You guys must not work in project related jobs.