Class-action lawsuits reportedly brewing over Cyberpunk 2077 buggy launch

The extent of this lawsuit should be that anyone who purchased this game on disk who is not happy with it should be able to return it for their money back.

Same goes for people who got the digital download.

Going Forward, games should not be made available if they don't work.

This could have ALL been avoided simply by disallowing PS4 owners and Xbox One owners from purchasing it unless it was understood that it would be downloadable on the Xbox Series X and the PS5.

That said: this game feels like "the new Crysis". I played it on my streaming rig that has a 9900k, 3090 and 32GB DDr4 with SSD and could still only muster 50 fps. That's ridiculous and it tells me this game was NEVER going to work on a last gen console - let alone one with a HDD and slower "everything".


I wasn't on the hype train.

I didn't care about this game or look up any news during its development process.

I wasn't even going to buy it.

I wrote it off as a Borderlands clone (a reason I never bought Far Cry: New Dawn).

But something about it made me give it a chance and I was shocked at how awesome a game it turned out to be.

This game absolutely succeeds on the PC and it's just sad that anyone in development had any belief whatsoever they could get it on last-gen systems. My Xbox One: Day One edition is so slow it barely boots up properly nowadays.
I agree about the game on PC, it's great. I feel like it should always be night time and raining while in the city. With the neon lights and fog and puddles, the atmosphere is fantastic. I truly have no idea how there would be any expectations for this to run on old consoles. It also runs pretty well on a PS5 which is lower specced than my PC.
 
An earlier quote here: "Honestly it is a very good game...probably the best of the decade...but it should have not been released!" My Take: It's really all about the money. Game developers repeaditly are raking-in 'billions' with just one successfully published title including forced in-game purchases and unbundled DLC's. Bonnie and Clyde were once asked: "Why do you rob banks?" Their answer: 'This were the money is." In this instance by being the 'man on the street' I feel that I am the bank!
 
Last edited:
I agree about the game on PC, it's great. I feel like it should always be night time and raining while in the city. With the neon lights and fog and puddles, the atmosphere is fantastic. I truly have no idea how there would be any expectations for this to run on old consoles. It also runs pretty well on a PS5 which is lower specced than my PC.

As I heard it, PS5 and Xbox Series X are equivalent to a 2080 Super. Reminds me of Wierd Al Yankovich's quote:

"My computer's got the clocks that rocks, but it was obsolete before I opened the box".
 
The extent of this lawsuit should be that anyone who purchased this game on disk who is not happy with it should be able to return it for their money back.

Same goes for people who got the digital download.

Going Forward, games should not be made available if they don't work.

This could have ALL been avoided simply by disallowing PS4 owners and Xbox One owners from purchasing it unless it was understood that it would be downloadable on the Xbox Series X and the PS5.

That said: this game feels like "the new Crysis". I played it on my streaming rig that has a 9900k, 3090 and 32GB DDr4 with SSD and could still only muster 50 fps. That's ridiculous and it tells me this game was NEVER going to work on a last gen console - let alone one with a HDD and slower "everything".


I wasn't on the hype train.

I didn't care about this game or look up any news during its development process.

I wasn't even going to buy it.

I wrote it off as a Borderlands clone (a reason I never bought Far Cry: New Dawn).

But something about it made me give it a chance and I was shocked at how awesome a game it turned out to be.

This game absolutely succeeds on the PC and it's just sad that anyone in development had any belief whatsoever they could get it on last-gen systems. My Xbox One: Day One edition is so slow it barely boots up properly nowadays.

I don't want to pile on if anyone else has mentioned this. But this lawsuit is of a completely different nature. It's shareholders not customers suing. They're basically stating that CDPR misrepresented the state of the game and now that the truth is out the stock price went down making them lose money. How possible success is is hard to say. CDPR didn't knowingly defraud stockholders, just last gen console owners. A lot comes down to European/Polish law I guess.
 
How is it going bud? Sorry to bother you again, but I am still trying to understand the case being proposed here. I still feel quite lost, and I would very much appreciate your assistance and insight on the matter.

I will explain the parts I am struggling to understand from the law firms case, "CD Projekt may have misrepresented itself to investors in order to secure funding", but what does "secure funding" actually mean specifically? Do they mean mislead investors/shareholders to obtain cash/money from them? Or do they mean to mislead investors/shareholders so they would purchase stocks/shares in the company? Or is it a combination of both?

I think it may be more stocks related, because it seems that all 'Securities Fraud' offenses are related to 'Stock/Shares' type offenses in general, such as 'Insider Trading'. So is that why 'Insider Trading/Investment Fraud' are both under the same category of 'Securities Fraud', because they are both related to 'Stocks/Share' offenses? So does that mean "secure funding" actually means mislead investors/shareholders to purchase 'stocks/shares' in the company? Or is it to obtain cash/money from investors/shareholders? Or a combination of both? I honestly feel lost.

What confuses me further, is that the law firm is also "actively calling for any investors/shareholders who were affected by the removal of CP2077 from PS Store to contact them."

So does the fact the law firm is calling for "investors/shareholders" to contact them, mean that this case is cash and shares related? Are "investors" cash, and '"shareholders'" shares? So investors=cash, shareholders=shares? Or are both investors and shareholders just shares?

Or does the fact that they refer to "investors/shareholders who were affected by the removal of CP2077 from PS Store", mean they are talking about '
shares/stocks' specifically? Because the removal of CP2077 from PS Store caused the "investors/shareholders" share/stocks value to fall? This is the bit that makes me think it is indeed only stocks/shares that they are refereeing to here, so am I going in the correct direction thinking that?

I am seriously just trying to wrap my head around the proposed case here, and you know much more about 'Securities Fraud' than I do. My understanding of 'Securities Fraud' is very limited, as in 'Securities Fraud 101' levels of understanding, so I would indeed appreciate any insight or knowledge on the subject. I have taken a crash course in 'Securities Fraud' since this case was announced, so I am trying to catch up my understanding of the subject and the proposed case.
 
Last edited:
CDPR did say "Cyberpunk 2077 runs “surprisingly well” on current-gen consoles according to CD Projekt’s CEO"

There was a news report by Gamesradar+ about a month ago. In summery, CD Projekt joint-CEO Adam Kaciński has praised Cyberpunk 2077's performance on PS4 and Xbox One in an investor call.

https://www.gamesradar.com/cyberpun...nt-gen-consoles-according-to-cd-projekts-ceo/

That news report was a Q3 2020 Results - Earnings Call Transcript from seekingalpha. CDPR has been less than honest in their meeting with their investors.

I don't think lawsuits are best way to solve problems, but had they delay it by 6 or so months. If they are more honest, more forthcoming, things could have gone much smoother for everyone.
 
CDPR did say "Cyberpunk 2077 runs “surprisingly well” on current-gen consoles according to CD Projekt’s CEO"

There was a news report by Gamesradar+ about a month ago. In summery, CD Projekt joint-CEO Adam Kaciński has praised Cyberpunk 2077's performance on PS4 and Xbox One in an investor call.

https://www.gamesradar.com/cyberpun...nt-gen-consoles-according-to-cd-projekts-ceo/

That news report was a Q3 2020 Results - Earnings Call Transcript from seekingalpha. CDPR has been less than honest in their meeting with their investors.

I don't think lawsuits are best way to solve problems, but had they delay it by 6 or so months. If they are more honest, more forthcoming, things could have gone much smoother for everyone.

CDPR Board Member Micheal Nowakowski, also misled investors at the October 2020 investor meeting, and far worse than even Adam Kiciński did.

Read the above article I linked, I think what Micheal Nowakowski told investors, is far more of a problem for CDPR and the potential lawsuit, than what Adam Kiciński told investors about the consoles performance alone, because what Micheal Nowakowski told investors about the console versions at the October 2020 investor meeting, is straight up lies:-

------------------------------------------------------------------

"The executives on that October call did everything they could to tamp down on the idea that anything other than normal optimization was happening. Asked if the game would be unduly buggy for any platform upon release, Michal said: “t’s basically optimization and all the challenges related to that. There’s no other ‘hidden story’ here.”

"Later, he reiterated: “I wouldn’t say there is a ‘problem’ because there’s nothing wrong with Xbox or PS4 versions – there is optimization to be handled, also because of how we were approaching things from the get-go in terms of development; so – there is no problem with Xbox or PlayStation 4, to be honest.” (Emphases added).

"When the questioner pointed out that they were specifically asking for information about a rumor that there had been problems optimizing the game for Xbox One, Nowakowski again stepped in to squish it, saying: “This was a total hoax; a fake rumor… there’s just regular work to be done on both platforms.”

"Three times, the man was asked to elaborate or explain rumors of a poor product. Each time, he denied there was any truth to them. We now know better, and his October comments about how they have to optimize the consoles now because they failed to do it properly from the get-go, contradicts what the developers of Cyberpunk 2077 were telling the press in 2019."

"For the record, Michal Nowakowski is the same person who published an apology with instructions on how to get a refund for Cyberpunk 2077 on Monday, only to turn around and say that there were ‘certain misconceptions‘ about CD Projekt Red’s willingness to assist with the refund process hours later."

"He has also admitted that CD Projekt Red is responsible for the condition of the game at launch, and that Microsoft and Sony were told various issues would be fixed before release."

"We can’t say for certain that the devs who gave 2019 interviews were lying, but three things are clear: First, the company’s leadership lied about the state of the game to investors, repeatedly claiming that there were no unusual bugs, no particular problems, and that only a final coat of finish was needed on the base console version of the title before it debuted. None of this was true, and CDPR knew it in October. There was no chance a game that looks and runs as poorly as Cyberpunk 2077 does on PS4/Xbox, could ever have been finished in the six weeks from October to early December.":-

------------------------------------------------------------------

But what Adam Kiciński said is definitely misleading / deceptive, and would feature in the CDPR investor lawsuit as well. And when we combine what Adam Kiciński told investors, with what Micheal Nowakowski told investors, it becomes even more deceptive, and an even bigger issue. It paints the picture that they were all lying to investors about the state of the console versions, not a pretty picture, but an accurate picture.

And I absolutely agree with you, they should have all just been honest and upfront, doing so would have come with its own set of issues, such as reduced investor confidence and lower share value, but it would have gone a lot better overall, and they wouldn't be facing potential lawsuits for misleading investors to secure funds. Some very poor decisions were made.
 
Last edited:
Back