Playing Cyberpunk 2077 isn’t going well for last gen console owners

[PlayStation 2]

1 hour ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

Well,... who thought it would run, let alone well,.. on old consoles?

It will run terrible on NEW consoles and we all know it. We knew it months and maybe years in advance actually.

 

Just like Witcher 3 on the Switch. People ARE dumb enough to buy it anyways for...reasons I guess.

 

The only thing that comes to mind really: "Stop using the wrong tool for the job!". Bleeding Edge graphics is not gonna work on any console, let alone an old one. Hell: Most PCs won't run it well for a while.

I will say, in the Switch port of The Witcher 3's defense, that Switch ports of games that really shouldn't be on the Switch are fucking entertaining. Sometimes you get Crysis Remastered, sometimes you get The Outer Worlds, sometimes you get Crash Bandicoot N-Sane Trilogy and sometimes you get SpongeBob SquarePants: Battle for Bikini Bottom Rehydrated. It's always fun to see what the Switch can shit out on its poor Tegra X1. 

As for Cyberpunk on the PS4 and Xbox One... ehh... there's no defending its dreadful performance and visuals.

[RejZoR]

4 hours ago, JZStudios said:

It was supposed to be a current gen title and release window the past like 2 years. It's initial release was supposed to be well before anyone even knew of the next gen consoles. It was built up as a current gen title and you'd expect similar to better than Witcher 3.

 

What's ironic is I have a 960. At the start of this gen it blew away consoles, now I don't even bother with anything in the last 2 or 3 years because it runs like shit.

It's a next gen title for last gen consoles... When it was released it's not even that important as it is the visual feature set it offers which clearly belongs into next gen of games. Especially with ray tracing included.

[Mark Kaine]

11 hours ago, Jet_ski said:

I’m sure most people here aren’t surprised that a last gen console won’t measure up to a new one. But this is the issue with how the game developers market games as well as the console marketing. Just because it runs, it doesn’t mean it runs well. Clearly the average user needs some education on this! @ LTT video ideas.

let's be fair (or honest if you'd prefer) here for second, CDPR fucked this up big time... the "great showcase of next gen graphics, *Ray Tracing *, yada yada" and then it runs like poop and doesn't even look that great or special... 

 

Maybe fans don't mind but overall this is a really poor show and I don't like this trend of overhyped, unfinished, questionable quality products, afterwards defended by internet warriors at all costs, at all... 

[Doobeedoo]

6 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

The marketshare for new consoles is much too small right now. Were CDPR to make that decision, it would’ve been a better idea to hold back the release a few months. 

I mean I do get that, but, console players, they buy new consoles obviously and you'd definitely want a next gen new game on a new console when both release around same time, rather than years old weak consoles no. It's just odd.

5 hours ago, handymanshandle said:

To be completely fair, CDPR was probably getting this game onto the PS4 and Xbox One regardless. This game would've been a swan song for those consoles had it been in good shape for its release. 

I'm actually amazed at how dreadfully it runs. And how fucking horrible it looks. GTA V on PS3 and Xbox 360 looked more consistent and better than this. Cyberpunk looks super blurry on the base machines.

I haven't look much in detail about it, I've hear for some it was bad for some fine. Will check vids from DF now. As for GTA V though, I kinda wasn't impressed at all, it was late on PC too even and didn't look as good as it should've been.

4 hours ago, Arika S said:

But will it? It was in development for 7 years, delayed multiple times. How much more time do they need?

I mean, I'd expect at least some basic improvements, then again, most games run like crap on those old consoles anyway. New ones are out. Also what sucks is how much resources they needed to pull for so many game versions. Kinda feels waste, but I guess they know the best is it worth it or not.

[Kisai]

36 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

let's be fair (or honest if you'd prefer) here for second, CDPR fucked this up big time... the "great showcase of next gen graphics, *Ray Tracing *, yada yada" and then it runs like poop and doesn't even look that great or special... 

If this was supposed to be a keystone RT title, utter fail. As highest end parts can't do it.

 

As I said in the previous message, it reminds me of FFXIV 1.0's launch where the game looked pretty on high settings, but was utterly not tuned to run on the PC, as the game engine was designed for the PS3, a CPU that basically had 8 DSP's, it's not an 8-core CPU.

 

CP2077, we will probably come back to in three years with Geforce 5080's and go "what was the problem again?"

 

 

Quote

Maybe fans don't mind but overall this is a really poor show and I don't like this trend of overhyped, unfinished, questionable quality products, afterwards defended by internet warriors at all costs, at all... 

 

I'm not defending it, heck I was on the fence about it until CDPR (which apparently owns GOG now?) had a bundle that included all the witcher titles. I may yet get into those games.

 

But every time a new "hyped" game comes out, the story is the same. Neir Automata, FFXV, has the same problems, they both eat GPU's for breakfast, and were released when the GTX 1080(non-Ti) was the highest tier card that year. People whine on the game publisher/developer's forums that the recommended requirements are severely under-stated, that the game is unoptimized, stupidly buggy, etc.

 

It's like... what ... did ... you ... expect? Heck even every MMORPG goes through the same cycle and adds "server is down", "hour+ login queues" and "cutscene extreme" problems.

 

Each time a new game comes out, people want to blame the developer for not running on their toasters and potato's. But you can't reasonably expect a high-end game to not look terrible if you want to run it. I've played with people who used their potato laptops, I've used my own weak computers to play games that would "work ok on iGPU" parts, but ultimately it's a rapidly moving goal post when you're at the bottom of the performance curve. It's also insanely ridiculous to play games that you can't enjoy because your computer or console is too weak.

 

Anyway, If this is what Stadia and Geforce Now, and xCloud can help solve, fine, let that be a reasonable solution, but I don't feel that's a good enough replacement, especially since that means buying the game two or three times if you need to switch between platforms to find one that is better optimized.

 

[Bulls420]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

Each time a new game comes out, people want to blame the developer for not running on their toasters and potato's.

You can expect from a game that has been in development for 7 years to run a bit better on the systems with lower specs. On my Xbox Series X I have found 0 perfomance issues yet

 

_{(PS: I cringe every time I see someone with anime as profile picture)}

[Kisai]

18 minutes ago, Bulls420 said:

You can expect from a game that has been in development for 7 years to run a bit better on the systems with lower specs. On my Xbox Series X I have found 0 perfomance issues yet

Nay, It's not like a game dev is going to go "ok we're going to develop for the game console that is out today (that would have been the PS4) with the assumption that the console is going to be a super success. No it's moving goal posts, and there is no development equipment that can predict the performance 7 years out of the PC, and in case you missed the memo, RTX is 2018. CDPR at worst had to retrofit HDR and RT into the game, likely very late into game development. They can not release two separate versions of the game, one for toasters and one for RTX-only hardware. No they will pick something that can run both, which means there will be compromises for both.

 

Take note that even on a 3080, RT off, 4k ultra settings does not net you 60fps

 

 

A 2060 however or a 1080Ti, is apparently enough to get 1080p60 ultra

 

It would not surprise me if the PS4 performance weakness is due to the hard drive, not a SDD, because even a PCIe SSD still had significant loading time.

 

Quote

_{(PS: I cringe every time I see someone with anime as profile picture)}

Cool, good thing I don't have an anime avatar.

[Jeppes]

4 hours ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

And Cyberpunk needs significantly more performance, than a console can and will offer for the next 4-8 years.

Unless, obviously... they turn down the settings some more, to make it in line with the other console games that also just have amazing trailers and look awful while playing.

But it should not need that much perf. Its not like the game looks like it should run 2-4x worse than Doom Eternal or BF V.

[Mihle]

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

 

 

(which apparently owns GOG now?)

 

had a bundle that included all the witcher titles. I may yet get into those games.

Well, technically CD Project owns GOG and CD Project RED, that is the game developer.

And that have always been the case, it's nothing new.

 

Witcher 1 and 2 is meh compared to Witcher 3, the game mechanics is clunky or what you say.

[Lord Vile]

3 hours ago, Kisai said:

Nay, It's not like a game dev is going to go "ok we're going to develop for the game console that is out today (that would have been the PS4) with the assumption that the console is going to be a super success. No it's moving goal posts, and there is no development equipment that can predict the performance 7 years out of the PC, and in case you missed the memo, RTX is 2018. CDPR at worst had to retrofit HDR and RT into the game, likely very late into game development. They can not release two separate versions of the game, one for toasters and one for RTX-only hardware. No they will pick something that can run both, which means there will be compromises for both.

 

Take note that even on a 3080, RT off, 4k ultra settings does not net you 60fps

 

 

A 2060 however or a 1080Ti, is apparently enough to get 1080p60 ultra

 

It would not surprise me if the PS4 performance weakness is due to the hard drive, not a SDD, because even a PCIe SSD still had significant loading time.

 

Cool, good thing I don't have an anime avatar.

YES I CAN RUN IT!!!

[kakik09]

Those who pre-ordered because "CDPR can do no wrong" and kept posting that irrelevant Miyamoto quote deserve it. A game is good when it actually is. Not because it was delayed for so long, or some company with the best PR and track record made it, but by the actual merit of the game alone.

[Zodiark1593]

4 hours ago, Doobeedoo said:

I mean I do get that, but, console players, they buy new consoles obviously and you'd definitely want a next gen new game on a new console when both release around same time, rather than years old weak consoles no. It's just odd.

 

The availability of the new consoles are in a pretty poor state right now, with some having to pay scalpers’ outrageous markups to get one. Sales on launch day would suffer as a result. If the the older consoles are to be excluded, pulling back the launch until next year probably would be the more prudent option. 

[Doobeedoo]

1 minute ago, Zodiark1593 said:

The availability of the new consoles are in a pretty poor state right now, with some having to pay scalpers’ outrageous markups to get one. Sales on launch day would suffer as a result. If the the older consoles are to be excluded, pulling back the launch until next year probably would be the more prudent option. 

Yeah, though even so they'll get back being available soon. Completely reasonable to wait a bit for that to play such a game on them. I mentioned once before, they could've launched PC version before though. The delays were primarily due to consoles. Still odd to me it wasn't PC and current gen consoles only for such a big game. 

[TetraSky]

Friend of mine is playing it on PS4 Pro. I saw him play the beginning of the game and it looked fine to me. A hell of a lot better than what we see in the OP, that's for sure. (patch v1.02 if that matters)

I don't know if things are different after the prologue and enters the open world, though, since it was getting late. Will see that this evening when he's back.

[decolon]

This is why you wait for reviews before buying a new game. Even many of the best games are pretty buggy on release an are only fixed later with patches.

[Master Delta Chief]

It's not like the PC version has it's own set of problems in terms of performance. Currently am using a GTX 1070 which is in the recommended specs, yet in some areas within the city, the fps drops significantly. Usually when I am in smaller spaces I get around 60fps (Fyi I am using vsync). Hopefully they'll sort it out in the next few days.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, TetraSky said:

Friend of mine is playing it on PS4 Pro

The Pro / one X versions do run fine. It's just the base model with their very outdated CPU and GPU that seem to struggle alot

[sof006]

Here is Digital Foundry's breakdown

 

 

[JZStudios]

13 hours ago, handymanshandle said:

Actually, you know what's fucking funny? People would complain about modern games needing patches and patches for shit to actually work the way it should. And yet I'm hearing nothing about it concerning Cyberpunk 2077. We all know it's buggy as fuck and runs poorly. And yet no one wants to admit that Cyberpunk is gonna fall victim to the "we'll patch it later" cycle.

Witcher 3 definitely got improvements through patches, but you could also play most of it day 1 fine. This definitely sucks.

 

13 hours ago, handymanshandle said:

I wrote this on a Discord server I use:

I fundamentally disagree. Burnout 3 had insane amounts of PS2 blur.

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, JZStudios said:

Witcher 3 definitely got improvements through patches, but you could also play most of it day 1 fine. This definitely sucks.

 

I fundamentally disagree. Burnout 3 had insane amounts of PS2 blur.

Eh, it's not that bad. Its motion blur implementation is wonky, but I've seen worse on the PS2. 

It's a clearer game on Xbox for sure.

[JZStudios]

1 minute ago, handymanshandle said:

Eh, it's not that bad. Its motion blur implementation is wonky, but I've seen worse on the PS2. 

It's a clearer game on Xbox for sure.

The street lights streak for miles. The Xbox version had way less blur. PCSX2 has a patch that'll remove the motion blur and it looks way better.

I can't find a good picture of the lights. This might be from Xbox.

 

[suicidalfranco]

im just gonna do what i always do: never buy day one, wait 6 months, enjoy a the game in a better state then when it was released

[Zodiark1593]

3 hours ago, handymanshandle said:

Eh, it's not that bad. Its motion blur implementation is wonky, but I've seen worse on the PS2. 

It's a clearer game on Xbox for sure.

It’s relatively impressive the PS2 can even render blurring at all. There’s no pixel shaders at all on the system. The way the PS2 does it would probably cripple modern GPUs at high resolution though, as the repeated layering hammers fill rates and bandwidth. Though unless a) framerates are high and b) the effect is subtle, it tends to not look great. 

[StDragon]

3 hours ago, handymanshandle said:

 Its motion blur implementation is wonky...

I turned it off. It felt like pixel response times from and LCD screen circa 2005.

[Brooksie359]

16 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

let's be fair (or honest if you'd prefer) here for second, CDPR fucked this up big time... the "great showcase of next gen graphics, *Ray Tracing *, yada yada" and then it runs like poop and doesn't even look that great or special... 

 

Maybe fans don't mind but overall this is a really poor show and I don't like this trend of overhyped, unfinished, questionable quality products, afterwards defended by internet warriors at all costs, at all... 

Tbh I think it would have been fine if they simply didn't release it on the consoles. I mean while it is hard to run it still does objectively look really good on pc if you can run it at high settings. I never expected the game to be easy to run as the Witcher 3 was also hard to run when it came out. The only problem is when you release the game on hardware that is clearly incapable of running the game at a reasonable level of fidelity.