And it was greedy as hell because when that DLC was announced and released the game was still buggy and unfinished. The game still doesn’t feel complete without the DLC is what I hear from everyone I know and multiple reviews
The game is not only finished and complete, but Phantom Liberty was the best damn DLC I’ve ever played for any game in any genre, since the Shivering Isles for Oblivion.
I love how you’ve personally taken offense to everyone shitting on your precious cyberpunk in this thread. It was broken trash in 2020 and it’s only slightly less trash in 2025 bud. Sorry you have poor taste.
Art is subjective. You don’t get to speak for anyone but yourself. Half the world thinks what you like is shit, but go on about how you know what’s really good.
I know greed when I see it. I know cut content when I see it. A good DLC doesn’t include stuff that should’ve been in the game.
CDPR did good with the witcher series years ago. But after cyberpunk they showed how disgusting they can be. They don’t deserve money. Have fun and enjoy the game but don’t defend it, there’s no point
I’ll defend it if I want. Neither you nor anyone else gets to decide anything for me, so fuck out of here with that attitude. There’s a reason you and the people who share your opinion are getting downvoted so much in this thread. That reason is people think your opinion is shit.
That is me literally saying I’ll defend the game. It’s your words that defending the game is defending “greed”, which is a bullshit, weak ass argument.
Spoken like someone that has played about four or five video games in their entire life. It’s not even an RPG. It’s a shitty first person shooter with pointless skill trees tacked on. Even if you were to classify it as an action RPG, it doesn’t crack the top 20.
It absolutley does. Also cyberpunk actually gives you a lot of freedom on how you aproach combat. Can you play it as mindless shooter. Yup . But you can also play deus ex like that and no one calls it a shitty first person shooter ( even tho thats technicaly the easiest way to finish the game ). And as far as the world and story is concerned its equisite. As far as whetewer its an RPG or not. If mass effect is an RPG than so is cyberpunk i think . Very subjective thing in general . Definietly not a hill im willing to die on.
The game is finished. Maybe not finished to your expectations, but it is definitely finished, and is a damn fine action RPG. And Phantom Liberty is the best damn DLC for any game I’ve ever played since the Shivering Isles for Oblivion.
Calling others opinions lies just because you don’t appreciate what they’re saying is what we in the industry like to call a “bitch ass move”.
Thats a fallacy. You’re essentially saying because one company was able to fix their shit, the systemic problem isnt real. Thats not the case. Look at the broader picture. Companies are consolidating, building massive conglomerates and the market is hostile towards its customers.
No the systemic problem is real, but I don’t think this one independent company has succumbed fully to it yet. If they had, they wouldn’t have fixed it as well as they did.
Thats what I’m saying too. The reason they released it in the state they did was market pressure and most likely bad decisions in an abusive capitalist system. Thats the reason why I said it initially.
I really enjoyed it and didn’t experience any bugs as I waited for it to be sorted. It was also one of the rare games that held my attention long enough to finish, so that’s probably why I think highly of it. Love that I’m being downvoted! I’ll know not to bother contributing my opinion next time.
Most likely not since it will be made in Unreal Engine 5, though since everyone at CDProjektRed is working on Witcher 4, Unreal Engine 6 might be out and what the games made with. There were many reasons why CP2077 was broken as it was at launch, but one of the main reasons was due to using their own game engine and a ton of effort trying to support last Gen consoles.
The worst i hear is its games tend to be kinda unoptimized, but how much of that is the devs not being given enough time to optimize the game before release and how much is just the engine being bad idk. I used UE4 a lot and it was pretty smooth sailing for the most part, but maybe 5 got worse in some aspects.
The best time to buy a console is just after its sequel is released, lots of people upgrading and selling their old one with all the games and controllers
Nexon making SC? Nice, the new SC will be free, but each unit have 10 level of upgrade and you only have basic unit available, the rest is unlockable as you earn your space buck. Fully upgraded unit have the same stats as the one from SC2. There will be 50 maps to play, but you only can access to 3 each week, and they put map in rotation. Each unit have 20 skins available. New race: the space elf with mushroom people.
It would be worth it if it cost $50. Of course it never would cost $50.
It would be worth it if it cost the same as the first switch and if the games weren’t so expensive. There is a price point at which it is actually a good value product, but it’s so far beyond that price point now, even without tariffs.
I mean, hating on Nintendo is a good idea, but their games distinctly do not suck (at least most of them). They only suck in so far as you have to pay Nintendo in some form to legally acquire and play them.
Normally, id agree. But with pc parts prices being what they are… Its still a “bargin”. I hate to use the word bargin here, because the pricing of both pc and consoles is insane
You’re not wrong. A 4070ti or a new 5000 series Nvidia costs twice as much as a PS5 pro alone. And not many PCs can have Ray tracing at 60fps on 4k for under $500
I understand that not everyone has the expertise, but for 800$ you can put together a very capable system that will beat the PS5 easily. It will probably include some used parts. You don’t need a 4070 in there, not even remotely close.
But yes, obviously the prices have gone up quite a bit over the last years.
Not really. To have games in 4k and 30fps in modern games you need a gpu that is more than half the budget. And you dont even have a cpu, ram, mobo or even case.
Dont get me wrong btw, i will always pick pc because i do way way more than just gaming, but recommending pc for gaming is becoming really hard
Unless I misunderstood something, the PS5 isn’t “true 4k”, but uses upscaling just like any semi-modern GPU can do as well (DLSS and FSR I think is the AMD version). That changes that equation quite a bit.
I would argue that reocmmending a PC over a (new) console has gotten easier, especially for someone on a budget. Because you can actually get an incredibly competent machine these days (used of course). Even if you decide to pay more to get a better PC, you then have access to the vast PC library with all the bundles, frequent and often deep sales, giveaways, … The cost of the console isn’t just the console, but also what you can play on it and what it costs, and this aspect has improved massively on PC in recent years (and was already pretty good before then).
Of course, if you’re interested in exlusives or first-party titles (like nintendo), or you generally play mostly AAA games, the console might just be the better or only option, but you better bring the wallet for the whole journey.
Huh, i thought ps5 (pro) was 4k native, but looks like its via some hardware upscaler. Good to know hehe. That changes some things, but lets see. The ps5 pro gpu is equivalent to a rx 7700 xt, which is a 400 msrp card. In reality its way more, but lets work with msrp prices to give this the best chance of success.
Ps5 pro is 700$ msrp, so thats 300$ you have left for cpu, ram, ssd, case, and psu. I dont think you can do that, but lets look at the next part: cpu
Cpu is equivalent to a ryzen 7 3700x, which is an old cpu so is cheap atm, 120$.
Ok, 180$ left in the budget, next: motherboard.
I found a board on amazon for 65$, which was the ASRock A520M-HDV. 120$ left.
Ok so, ssd. Ps5 pro comes with a 2TB ssd. I found some sketchy, offbrand, m.2 ssd’s from brands i never even heard off for 94$. There is probably cheaper, but amazon’s website was being an arse and lets face it, how trustworthy or slow are those. 36$ left in budget.
Thats 36 for ram, case and psu… As much as i hate to admit it, as a pc person, you cant make a pc with equal strength as ps5 pro and it sucks arse.
Second hand might give us more leeway but i dont think its a lot.
I will agree that yes, with pc you have a lot more options and its easier to put in a bit more into the budget to build a way better pc than a ps5 pro.
But from a pure budget standpoint, no pc isnt worth it.
As soon as you add other arguments, the choice changes
You kinda missed most of my points. Because a core advantage of building a PC from individual parts is that you can buy some parts used, or adjust them to what you actually need. You can’t buy the PS5 used cause it just came out, but the components are actually relatively old.
A case can be had for cheap (often with fans). Also a used GPU might allow you to get a bit more performance for the same money (or the same perf for less money). Keep in mind that the hardware specs of the PS5 aren’t exactly cutting edge top tier performance. You can also find a complete used PC with roughly the right specs, and a quick check showed an eBay listing for case+PSU+mobo+3700x+16gb and 512gb nvme + 2tb HDD for 309€. And that was the first hit, with “buy it now”, after 30s on the site.
You can also tailor what exactly you buy to your needs. Maybe 1TB nvme is enough for you, or you can even start out with 500gb. It’s a PC, just buy another m.2 when you really need it, takes 5 minutes to install.
But all that is kinda not the point either. Mainly the advantage is that it’s a PC. It’s not just a gaming thing (though it can be). That is what makes it worth it, also obviously depending on the individual needs. And that’s the point. The PC does what you need, and can be made to change to whatever that is.
When you said “from a pure budget standpoint, no PC isn’t worth it” you also one again COMPLETELY IGNORE that you need to buy games to play. Those are so much more expensive (and have a much more limited selection) on console. And over the lifetime of the console, game costs will have been much more than the device. That’s the point, and why they are relatively affordable, they are subsidized by the manufacturer who makes money on every game bought for it. When a console comes out, they typically loose money on it.
Finally, once a few years have gone by, you can actually upgrade PC parts individually where needed. You don’t have to buy the next generation new one, like with consoles. Again, much cheaper. For people who are on tight budget, this is or should be a huge consideration. Once you got a PC, the next upgrade is so much cheaper than a new console, yet it’ll be equivalent to that new console.
Consoles are cheaper the day you buy them (and not by a lot). Even just weeks or months later the PC is cheaper. Years later it’s cheaper by a lot.
So far, it’s a pretty looking game. The trouble is finding things to do in it.
That was the end of the quest. All setup, no punchline.
There was no one to thank me. All I had was a little more loot. Where’s my impact on the world?
If these quotes ring true in the final game, that’s a hard pass. I want RPGs, action-oriented or not, to allow me to play a role. A million games can make fantasy look pretty, Obsidian needs to make it interesting.
that’s what i’m saying! I hope the quests are more dense with writing in the final release. Well-designed quests with clever writing are the entire appeal of an Obsidian RPG!
After playing part of their game Outer Worlds, I’m not surprised. I thought the writing was alright, but the game felt lacking and empty. I was surprised because I’ve only ever heard good things about New Vegas. I haven’t played New Vegas yet but I’m assuming it’s a much better time
You’d be right in my opinion. New Vegas is incredible. But something felt missing from the outer worlds, and I was hoping they would find it in avowed.
it’s interesting to think about the logistics here. How much money should Rockstar have allocated for the soundtrack, to offer a better deal to artists? The article mentions that they licensed over 240 songs for GTA5. At $7500 a song (who knows what they actually paid), that’s $1.8 million. The total budget for GTA5 was around $265 million, so that $1.8 million is less than 1% of the total budget. Some songs surely cost more than $7500 to license, so let’s assume it added up to 1% of the budget by the end. Evidently GTA6 is looking like a $2 billion budget game atm (absolutely bonkers), and I don’t think it’s unreasonable for them to allocate at least the same percentage to the music licenses, given how central the soundtrack is to the GTA experience.
If they allocated 1% of $2 billion to the soundtrack, that would give them $20,000,000 to play with, or average $83k per song if they are going for about the same size of soundtrack. Now, this is all just my quick napkin math based on the assumption that Rockstar paid about $7500 per song for GTA5, but I think this indicates that either A) they are massively underballing Heaven 17 here, or B) Rockstar senior management has not allocated a music licensing budget that matches the size of the game they are making.
What do y’all think? Is $83k per song a reasonable rate for the kind of license Rockstar is asking for? Or is even that too low?
I’ve never heard of Heaven 17. On GTA V, there are a lot of bands than I had never heard of too. Rockstar introduced me to those bands, their other work, solos from those members, and other artists in those genres.
Frankly, if I was a musician that wasn’t already a huge star, I’d do it for FREE because of the massive GUARANTEED exposure.
artists die from “exposure”, because it doesn’t pay the bills. I think you are right that the exposure has value, but it definitely doesn’t have $83k worth of value, because musicians simply do not make money from album sales anymore. Most artists barely break even from doing concert tours.
Artists die from not getting exposure. This isn’t one of those “play my wedding for exposure” things. It’s being a regular song playing in one of the world’s most popular game franchises.
They should get paid, sure, but telling them to fuck off because the rate wasn’t what they want is dumb.
It takes upward of 200 streams of a track on Spotify to earn a single penny. 20,000 streams to earn a dollar.
(For me and my personal expenses, this would mean I would need 40,000,000 streams per month to pay rent/pay bills/eat. I’m dirt poor and live a dirt poor budget. 40,000,000 streams to pay $1400 in rent is INSANE.)
That “exposure” can still add up to “not paying the bills.”
Also, if he gains no new listeners? He would have made a huge mistake not angling for more money.
This guy is being smart, and the rich just want people to THINK that exposure is worth it. Even Oprah pays in exposure and its bullshit. The company has got the fucking money to pay it they just don’t want to.
You, as an individual, buy enough of their stuff to support them month-to-month? How generous of you.
Now that the snark is out of the way: Clearly an individual doesn’t make enough money to do that, and if you’re the only new fan they gain that’s still nowhere near enough to make a living.
You could have responded without being an asshole. If we had discussed this politely we probably could have reached an acceptable middle ground and both learned something from the other person’s experiences and ideas.
You’re coming out here arguing in favor of a megacorporation keeping even more money for itself instead of artists getting paid for their work. I feel like you should have expected to have upset people.
It’s the internet. Calm down. Not everything has to be a fight. Use that energy to yell about something more important, like genocide or climate change. Goodbye
To be fair, they were smart enough to get some exposure even without accepting the deal. This is not the first place I see this discussion and some people are definitely going to check their stuff now out of curiosity.
But this exposure is short-lived with an incredibly limited audience Who may or may not listen to it. I did not look them up. I don’t have the time right this moment and I will definitely forget.
I just think that in this particular video game franchise, even if they did not receive the amount of money they wanted upfront for royalties, They could not pay for this kind of Marketing opportunity.
Sometimes, when I play a AAA game and something expensive is visible on screen (e.g. half of New York getting destroyed during that long quick-time event in Spider-Man), I like to shout “Production value!” at nobody, like that director self-insert kid in “Super 8” (2011).
I get a feeling I would ruin my voice doing this every time in GTA 6.
To answer your question, I think we would have to look at what music licenses usually cost. Some quick googling tells me that $7500 is hardly an outrageously low sum for a song from a middle of the road '80s band. They aren’t exactly Depeche Mode. I think they would have benefited far more from the inclusion of their song in this game financially (since it would cast them into the limelight again, providing streaming revenue and perhaps gain them new fans) than the little and likely very temporary publicity they gained from rejecting the offer.
But your assumption is that every artist gets the same deal. Some maybe more valuable and expensive than others. Then the question is, if this group was valued very low and that is whats upsetting. But come on, 7500 for lifetime rights is really bad payment. I wonder what the deals with prior games and songs was.
Sony is also encountering similar issues in terms of the cost of games being unsustainable and Moore’s Law kicking in. The difference is that they’re making games that move consoles and Microsoft just aren’t.
At this point, I don’t know what strategy Microsoft has at this point. If you say “Xbox everywhere”, what does Xbox even mean any more for the enthusiast? I don’t think Xbox is done, but if they were looking to be HBO before, they are now going for the Netflix approach - high quantity content, mediocre product - and possibly alienate the existing audience they have.
I say this as an Xbox Series S owner, I’m happy with my purchase, but as a consumer I don’t think I’ll be upgrading my console to anything Microsoft ship any time soon.
“I may have stolen your wallet, but it’s okay - I gave it back. Surely it wasn’t because several police officers were walking over with curious expressions.”
videogameschronicle.com
Ważne