C2077 Cyberpunk 2077 - News Roundup

Analyst Predicts Cyberpunk 2077 Will Launch in Late 2019 & Sell 19 Million Copies

Only 19 million? Not a unit more or a unit less ?

you said:

Only 19 million? Not a unit more or a unit less ?

Click to expand...

Who knows but I foresee future headlines about lower expectations. Anyway given it's already playable from start to finish like I said before late 2019 is a possible release.

Also for new readers here's the translated forecast from the polish company.

Cyberpunk 2077 vs RDR2: We're keeping to the estimation of a debut in Q4 of 2019, with sales of 19 million copies in Q4 alone, and income of 1.9 billion PLN (about 525 million USD). During a conference call, the Board has confirmed that quality remains the absolute highest priority for CD Projekt, and Cyberpunk 2077 will be no less elaborate and polished than RDR2.

For comparison, the sales of RDR2 (gross) was 725 million USD within the first three days after it shipped, 15 million copies within the first eight days, and 17 million copies within the first twelve days (data from Take Two). The game was released only on PS4 and Xbox One consoles. With that in mind, our forecasts for CP2077 seem very reserved - remember the game will be simultaneously both on the consoles [PS4 and XBO] and PC. We also believe that the world of Cyberpunk / sci-fi should be more popular among gamers than the Wild West.

Click to expand...

I'm not an analyst, but I can see Cyberpunk being a major hit.

That said, I think 19 million copies in the first quarter of release is a bit too optimistic.

I wouldn't presume to speak against the "expert analysts" - but Rockstar/GTA has a LOT (as in a LOT) more clout with the larger mainstream audience than CDPR has, even today.

I mean, even the notion that one good and polished game will sell as much as another good and polished game - for those reasons alone - is so staggeringly ignorant that I struggle to put it into words, but again - we're talking "experts", so what do I know

So, first of all, I don't see the audience being quite as big as for Witcher - seeing as how I consider fantasy much more mainstream than cyberpunk sci-fi.

I mean, just look at the critically acclaimed Blade Runner 2049 movie. Something of a flop - and they really did what they could in terms of marketing.

The most recent AAA cyberpunk game I can think of would be Mankind Divided. Another game that sold much less than expected.

I understand that CDPR have managed to project themselves as Santa Claus in terms of free (albeit meaningless and mostly shallow) DLC - and that people confuse amazing stories and presentation with amazing gameplay - but that's not quite enough, I don't think.

That said, they've certainly grown very bold in terms of marketing.

I can see it selling maybe 5 million copies in a few months - but not much more than that. 10 million at the very most - but I wouldn't count on it.

Of course, it's all entirely unpredictable - and maybe there's something going on that I'm not seeing.

One thing I will say for CDPR, though, and that is that they're very shrewd when it comes to PR and marketing. A lot of big corporations could learn from them.

For whatever reason, they've managed to become quite huge - and yet they're still perceived a little as the underdog that needs ever more praise and support.

Probably the Hillary factor - seeing as how they're up against Activision, EA and ZeniMax.

There's this thing in public perception and marketing - and I'm sure "analysts" have a real term for it - but it's when you have the positive inertia going on, and the "good word" is being spread by the vocal trend-setters - where you can actually predict your own fortune and aim REALLY high, and people will support it simply because it would be cool if such a bold prophecy came true for the thing you're rooting for.

Is there a word for that? I've seen in a couple of times, though I'm not sure it's been deliberate in each case. Arguably, Star Citizen is a similar thing in terms of funding.

Should be interesting to see, though

I agree that 19 million on release sounds too much, even considering that they release on all platforms. But 5 million in the first few months is incredibly low. Make that the first week.

Darth Tagnan said:

I understand that CDPR have managed to project themselves as Santa Claus in terms of free (albeit meaningless and mostly shallow) DLC

Click to expand...

Uhm, yeah, clearly they have managed to pull off this incredible trick where releasing additional quests for free is perceived as something good. I wonder how they managed to do that.

Cacheperl said:

Uhm, yeah, clearly they have managed to pull off this incredible trick where releasing additional quests for free is perceived as something good. I wonder how they managed to do that.

Click to expand...

I don't care about free stuff unless the game itself is worth playing.

Now, don't get me wrong - W3 was worth playing. But it doesn't magically become this masterpiece because they release "free stuff" for it.

That's my point.

It was a good game - even from my point of view. But you can't buy yourself the illusion of having made a better game because you give me free stuff.

But that's me

In that same way, Disney couldn't make me love their super hero movies even if they gave me a new Tesla.

It just doesn't work like that for me - so I don't intend to support CDPR for that kind of marketing approach.

If they make a great game, I will buy it. I don't give a shit if they sniff coke off Trump's asshole in their backyards.

The game is what matters to me - not PR and not "free stuff".

I agree with the "they're very optimistic" part. 19 million copies sold in the very quarter the game is released gives more than 210,000 copies sold every day. Yet so, I expect it to be a huge success.

Darth Tagnan said:

I don't care about free stuff unless the game itself is worth playing.

Now, don't get me wrong - W3 was worth playing. But it doesn't magically become this masterpiece because they release "free stuff" for it.

That's my point.

Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough.

Darth Tagnan said:

In that same way, Disney couldn't make me love their super hero movies even if they gave me a new Tesla.

Click to expand...

Oh, trust me, they'd have me pretending real good.

I don't think I've ever seen a single person claim TW3 was better than (insert whatever) because of the free DLC.

Next up: JDR talks about how marketing doesn't affect sales.

Next up from that: Games sell only according to their quality - and not irrelevant factors like public perception of the people making games and how "nice" they appear to be.

Comedy gold!

Cacheperl said:

Oh, trust me, they'd have me pretending real good.

Click to expand...

I don't doubt it

Darth Tagnan said:

Next up: JDR talks about how marketing doesn't affect sales.

Next up from that: Games sell only according to their quality - and not irrelevant factors like public perception of the people making games and how "nice" they appear to be.

Comedy gold!

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's exactly what I said.

You've always been good at trying to place words in other's mouths though, so it's rarely a surprise when you ply your typical bullshit.

Always quick with the big words

My point was precisely that people are irrational when they support developers because they're nice - or whatever other nonsense they're telling themselves.

It's emotional manipulation 101. It's no different from a salesman buttering up his client. It has nothing to do with the product or a need for the product.

Now, this isn't unique to CDPR - not by a long shot. In fact, I honestly think some of the lead guys behind CDPR are genuinely nice - at least based on the interviews I've seen.

But that's irrelevant and it should be irrelevant, I think.

Because you're right, the game is NOT better because the developers are nice - and that's the foundation of my argument here.

So, if no one will say W3 was better because CDPR are nice - then what's the rational argument for supporting CDPR a little extra and receiving a little more praise?

I mean, W3 was great (well, I think it was merely good) - it was received very well - and it sold well. Isn't that enough?

As I said, I think it's very much the Hillary factor.

The public perception of companies like EA, Blizzard, Activision and ZeniMax is at an all-time low.

I think we can all agree that's a very pleasant climate for a company like CDPR to project themselves as the anti-corporate type, right?

Well, maybe I'm wrong - who knows.

But that would be my own theory about why CDPR is getting slightly more praise than they deserve.

As in, something isn't better than it is - because something else is complete crap.

While some of it is marketing; one still has to admit that CDPR is offering very good value for a reasonable price - esp when you compare the the milking done by companies like EA, Blizzard, ....
-
As a public company this is not likely to always be the case - but we can hope it lasts a bit longer...

Darth Tagnan said:

Always quick with the big words

My point was precisely that people are irrational when they support developers because they're nice - or whatever other nonsense they're telling themselves.

It's emotional manipulation 101. It's no different from a salesman buttering up his client. It has nothing to do with the product or a need for the product.

Now, this isn't unique to CDPR - not by a long shot. In fact, I honestly think some of the lead guys behind CDPR are genuinely nice - at least based on the interviews I've seen.

But that's irrelevant and it should be irrelevant, I think.

Because you're right, the game is NOT better because the developers are nice - and that's the foundation of my argument here.

So, if no one will say W3 was better because CDPR are nice - then what's the rational argument for supporting CDPR a little extra and receiving a little more praise?

I mean, W3 was great (well, I think it was merely good) - it was received very well - and it sold well. Isn't that enough?

As I said, I think it's very much the Hillary factor.

The public perception of companies like EA, Blizzard, Activision and ZeniMax is at an all-time low.

I think we can all agree that's a very pleasant climate for a company like CDPR to project themselves as the anti-corporate type, right?

Well, maybe I'm wrong - who knows.

But that would be my own theory about why CDPR is getting slightly more praise than they deserve.

As in, something isn't better than it is - because something else is complete crap.

Click to expand...

you said:

While some of it is marketing; one still has to admit that CDPR is offering very good value for a reasonable price - esp when you compare the the milking done by companies like EA, Blizzard, ….
-
As a public company this is not likely to always be the case - but we can hope it lasts a bit longer…

Click to expand...

Good value if you enjoy their games, certainly. They've always been priced quite reasonably.

Then again, I never fret too much about price. I guess money just isn't that big a factor in my enjoyment of games.

It can be a factor in terms of how many games I buy that I actually don't need - given my limited time. But in terms of my enjoyment - I will enjoy a good 100$ game a HELL of a lot more than a 1$ mediocre game.

So, for me, money is rarely a factor - unless it's obscene or so cheap that I buy it "just because".

That said, I do understand that modern culture is very focused on money and that free things are apparently more interesting than free time.

That's not at all my own perception, but that's what has allowed the F2P model to flourish - I guess.

Money isn't a factor per sey but I have something against price gouging.
--
One problem with a public company is there is a desire for growth. Most companies reward executives for growth which tends to drive them to execute schemes to increase revenue. If you have 1B revenue and 400M profit that's not good enough you have to then grow to 1.2B the next year to maximize your bonus. Anyway in recent years we seen very profitable games use gimmicks to increase revenue. To me that is gouging and I am oppose to such.

CDProjek shows that a drm free game can be very profitable and their dlc have a lot of reasonable content for a low price (good production value); compare that to some of the garbage EA shovel down our throat with DA:I or even DA:O.

Darth Tagnan said:

Good value if you enjoy their games, certainly. They've always been priced quite reasonably.

Then again, I never fret too much about price. I guess money just isn't that big a factor in my enjoyment of games.

It can be a factor in terms of how many games I buy that I actually don't need - given my limited time. But in terms of my enjoyment - I will enjoy a good 100$ game a HELL of a lot more than a 1$ mediocre game.

So, for me, money is rarely a factor - unless it's obscene or so cheap that I buy it "just because".

That said, I do understand that modern culture is very focused on money and that free things are apparently more interesting than free time.

That's not at all my own perception, but that's what has allowed the F2P model to flourish - I guess.

Click to expand...

you said:

Money isn't a factor per sey but I have something against price gouging.
--
One problem with a public company is there is a desire for growth. Most companies reward executives for growth which tends to drive them to execute schemes to increase revenue. If you have 1B revenue and 400M profit that's not good enough you have to then grow to 1.2B the next year to maximize your bonus. Anyway in recent years we seen very profitable games use gimmicks to increase revenue. To me that is gouging and I am oppose to such.

CDProjek shows that a drm free game can be very profitable and their dlc have a lot of reasonable content for a low price (good production value); compare that to some of the garbage EA shovel down our throat with DA:I or even DA:O.

Click to expand...

Well, I tend to separate the people holding the funds from the people creating the game.

In the case of EA - my opinion about the games they fund and publish varies from title to title.

For CDPR, it's less clear where the financials and the creative drive meet and part.

I personally don't care about DRM in the slightest. I think it's only fair that people protect their hard work - and I can deal with the tiny, tiny inconvenience of modern DRM.

The notion that CDPR is trying to push in the industry - that DRM isn't needed, is not something I find particularly compelling or convincing.

I definitely think it's possible to earn a lot of money without using DRM - but I think it's inevitable that you're going to lose out a certain percentage to piracy.

Given the nature of online media - and the availability of Internet access - I think the consumer is the unreasonable one, in terms of resisting DRM.

On the other hand, it's not like I mind - as a consumer. If I don't have to have Steam/GOG or whatever running when I play a game - then that's fine, but so is the reverse.

CDPR built themselves by modifying existing popular franchises - like Baldur's Gate. To me, that's not a very interesting creative endeavor. To me, that's just another way to earn money that has nothing to do with actually making a game.

So, I'm not disposed to like them for that sort of reason.

However, I do like their down-to-earth attitude in interviews, and - as a Dane - I'm much closer to the public CDPR personas than, say, the typical American suit. Denmark and Poland share a somewhat similar tradition when it comes to the 80s and 90s and pirated software. Our cultural norms in terms of humor and "who gives a shit" sort of attitude is quite similar, I find.

However, ultimately - I don't care about money and I don't care about politics.

I care about the games. If the game is great - and the price is within reason - then that's what matters to me.

I don't tell myself I have the capacity to "judge" who is morally right and who is morally wrong.

I don't believe for a second that the average shareholder having a stake in CDPR is any less greedy than the average shareholder from EA.

AFAIK, CDPR is a publically owned company - and that means a lot of people are involved who couldn't give two shits about the finer points of game mechanics and design. They care exclusively about what will yield the greatest return on their investment - which is exactly why W3 was so watered down in terms of being accessible and almost played itself.

From there, it's a basic matter of me having a lot of experience with human nature and what happens when money is what you're focusing on.

It doesn't matter if you're Mother Theresa or Donald Trump. If your obligation is to the shareholders - then compromises will be made, and the game will almost certainly not be pure.

So, really, I don't buy into the whole Santa Claus image from CDPR. Not for a single second.

Right now, they're projecting that image - because it's what they're known for, and they're playing the audience like that.

They will do that for as long as the shareholders and suits believe it's the most profitable approach.

If something changes and they stand to lose money by being like that - they'll turn on a dime - and the audience will forgive them for a few years, until it's their new standard.

People are so very slow on the uptake.

Of course you can argue that CDPR is just as greedy. Maybe they are just sitting in a good niche that lets them seem like they are not greedy, yet still make a nice profit. It may very well be a pure business decision rather than some kind of ethics/belief/whatever. (Probably both is true to some extent, since multiple people are involved. It's not like they did not _try_ another business model. See Gwent.)

From a customer perspective, I do not care. As long as their business model is beneficial for me (no microtransactions, free DLC, no DRM, quality games, etc.) I can't care less for their hidden motivations. Why worry about something that I'll never really know?

I'd even say: if it is a pure business driven decision to act that way: all the better. Because that means it's probably more stable and sustainable. It actually means you can make solid money without scamming your customers (yeah, a bit of hyperbole, don't kill me).

Cacheperl said:

Of course you can argue that CDPR is just as greedy. Maybe they are just sitting in a good niche that lets them seem like they are not greedy, yet still make a nice profit. It may very well be a pure business decision rather than some kind of ethics/belief/whatever. (Probably both is true to some extent, since multiple people are involved. It's not like they did not _try_ another business model. See Gwent.)

From a customer perspective, I do not care. As long as their business model is beneficial for me (no microtransactions, free DLC, no DRM, quality games, etc.) I can't care less for their hidden motivations. Why worry about something that I'll never really know?

I'd even say: if it is a pure business driven decision to act that way: all the better. Because that means it's probably more stable and sustainable. It actually means you can make solid money without scamming your customers (yeah, a bit of hyperbole, don't kill me).

Click to expand...

Well, I'm not suggesting CDPR the developer is greedy. It's my experience that most developers who're talented are rather passionate about making games.

But they're subject to the shareholders and the publisher model - which means they're subject to greed from other sources.

Well, not greed exactly. That's a crude term.

Let's call it good old fashioned opportunism - which is a natural part of any profitable company, I would argue.

Some people care about running a successful business and making a ton of money - and that's no more or less greedy than caring about making the best games, I guess. Those are just two kinds of interests or "greed".

But it is what it is.

That said, it seems we agree to some extent.

I don't care about what their reasons are - same goes for EA, ZeniMax and all the others.

I care about games exclusively.

Of course, if you really care about the trivial free shit and the fact that you have to launch games from a tiny client on top of your 20GB operating system (of which you use maybe 2%) - then I can see why you'd want to support CDPR more.

We all differ in that way.

CDPR is underrated. They're getting slightly less praise than they deserve.

See, projection is easy.