Cyberpunk 2077 Review Thread | 83 OC, 87 Meta

[DonFerrari]

Chazore said:

JRPGfan said:

Days Gone wasnt buggy (to near same degree).... it doesnt belong in that short 3 game list you made up.

ARK ran like crap too, on consoles, and also just mainly got a pass. It was horrendous on the Switch, and base PS4/XB1s didnt run it that well either.
It too was a buggy mess, with horrible performance.

However I agree, Fallout 76, should have been pulled too.
If games arnt up to standard, a storefront should be allowed (and not afriad) to pull it.

PC version obviously got most of the attention from CDPR.
Also, while on console you have to downscale it to get it running, and the outcome is 15fps and ugly gragphics... on PC, you can just brute force it, by playing it on a 3000-5000$ PC.  Granted most PC players, dont own PCs to run it as well as reviewers do. PC reviewers gave it a huge pass. I feel like you should have reviewers review games, on differnt PC setups (low/mid/high end) to more accurately reflect the real world consumer.

This.

I do a search on youtube and I'm seeing all sorts of bugs from DGB, almost like it's looking at Creed Unity all over again.

Also, the PC version is filled with bugs. This was me during my first ever run with the starting mission:

And no, I cannot fully brute force the game either. It's been shown that on most systems that the presets hardly do much. Some have run them to low settings and it's done nothing, while a small few claim medium gave them a boost in performance, it's not concise.

I myself have to run it with a mix of medium to high settings, but as it currently stands, I cannot run the game natively at 1440p 60fps. The game for me at native would run at a mix of 35-45fps, and that's with the "demanding" settings turned off or to low and on top of that, ini file edits and disabling Async compute.

I actually have to do what the consoles do and scale the game down to half 1080p, just to run the game at near 75fps, but that still doesn't stop the random drops to 50, and combat most definitely drops fps for me and no setting can change that at this current time.

Cards like the 2000/3000 series can gain some performance back via DLSS, but that's a piece of tech, not a mythical £3k card or anything. The game is just horribly optimised and it's not even making use of anyone's RAM, let alone VRAM.

Also here's the user scores for the game on PC, which tells a different story, compared to the embargo review sites:

You can also see the constant list of complaints and negative reviews on Steam, as well as the plethora of youtube vids pointing out the game's shortcomings, so PC gamers are hardly giving it a full on pass, that's most ly the 1% that own stupidly high end systems that are, but it's not like they matter in the grand scheme of things. 

We even had Alex at DF testing the game on a high end system, using an RTX 3090, which was most disappointing, because it wasn't being tested on multiple setups, which we all know DF owns. I can't even trust DF at this point, and I know damn well NX gamer stopped giving a shit about keeping up with PC testing a year ago, so he's no good. 

Worse yet is that it seems that even on 3090 the game still present several issues and performance drops. So the critics that gave 100/100 while mentioning there is plenty of bugs and crashes but that will be fixed in the future aren't doing gamers a favor.