85
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2025
85 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
11933 readers
641 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Releasing a broken beta version for full retail price is not "AAA done right".
That's my biggest gripe. Games being released in an unfinished state. I'd rather them be honest, call it an early release and charge accordingly.
My second biggest gripe rides off the back of the first... how the people who make and play games are exploited.
Devs getting worked to death and thrown under the bus for executive decisions.
Gamers' loyalty being taken advantage of including the declining value of Pre-orders.
It has been finished and done for at least two years now, with a solid expansion to boot, so the "garbage at launch" argument doesn't hold much steam for me anymore.
Luckily "garbage at launch" isn't a phrase used to indicate something is bad "right now" so no steam need be held.
The game played like a beta on underpowered consoles, but the PS5 versions were complete and were able to be finished with no DLC needed. They did the work, turned it around, and the game runs and plays fantastic now 5 years after launch. On top of that they did it in less than 3 years.
Not understanding how it doesn't qualify under my original statement.
At Launch the game was heroically broken on ps4, literally unplayable.
PS5 was buggy but doable.
PC was hit and miss, i had a reasonable time with it though.
Agree about the turnaround, like a faster no mans sky, which i would hope with the difference in budget.
I wasn't addressing your original post, but i can give my opinion i suppose.
Your original criteria of "AAA done right" were:
So the comment:
Doesn't so much point out how cyberpunk doesn't fit your proposed criteria, but rather that "baseline release quality" should also be in the list.
Which i agree with, I'd go as far as to say "should be a playable, functional game at launch" is a baseline requirement for any type of studios that wishes to be considered "Doing things right".
I realize now you are not the person who originally commented on my top level comment, so my reference to my original point was moot. Have a great day!