Latest Cyberpunk 2077 patch fixes saved game corruption bug

midian182

Posts: 6,786   +61
Staff member
What just happened? Cyberpunk 2077 players now have one less thing to worry about after CD Projekt Red released Hotfix 1.06. The latest patch brings significant improvements to both the console and PC versions of the game. In the case of the latter platform, it fixes the save file corruption bug.

Earlier this week, reports arrived of an issue in Cyberpunk 2077’s PC and Stadia versions that causes save game files to corrupt if they exceed 8MB in size. CD Projekt Red recommended that players try to keep a lower number of items and crafting materials. It also advised against using the item duplication glitch and not to load any save files affected by it.

CD Projekt Red writes that Hotfix 1.06 removes the 8MB save file size limit on the PC, though it doesn’t mention Stadia. The company notes that previously damaged save files cannot be recovered, which comes as bad news for those who have lost hours of progress. “Further investigation why the save files are bigger than expected is ongoing,” it notes on the GOG support page.

On consoles, the patch improves memory management and stability, reducing the number of crashes players experience. It also addresses a bug on all platforms in which Dum Dum goes missing from Totentanz entrance during the Second Conflict quest.

Hotfix 1.06 is 993MB on PC. On the Xbox and PlayStation, it’s a massive 15 – 17GB.

Despite GameStop becoming the latest retailer to accept refunds for copies of Cyberpunk 2077, even if they’ve been opened, the game sold over 13 million copies in the ten days following launch and remains a top-seller.

Permalink to story.

 

yRaz

Posts: 3,674   +3,669
I'm happy to see they are rolling out fixes for major bugs quickly, I'm approaching 100 hours so far. It's unfortunate for console users that the game is basically unplayable but I've actually been getting some pretty good performance numbers on PC. A fairly solid 60FPS@1080p/ultra on a 1070ti.

Something I find odd about the game is that it isn't using all of my CPU cores, which is fairly common for games, but I only ever see it using ~5gb of RAM, no more than 6.8GB of my VRAM(I have an 8GB card) and only about 65-70% GPU usage. So there are lots of resources that it is not using. I find those numbers odd because I only really see it using 2cores/4threads. The other thing that's odd is that I see modern games often using more than just 8GB of ram. Chrome uses more memory than 2077....

But what I find good about that is that there is lots of room for performance optimization.

My main complaint about 2077 is that it seems fairly obvious that there was a lot of cut from the released game. I feel this is going to be released as paid DLC. The cut content is probably close to being done anyway, it'd be fairly low hanging fruit to just release it as DLC.

While the state of 2077 isn't great right now I am optimistic about it's future and look forward to where CDPR takes it.
 

QuantumPhysics

Posts: 4,894   +5,437
I hear so much talk of bugs in this game but I was able to play it for more than 35 hours while simultaneously recording with Microsoft game bar and from what I remember it never crashed even once. Yes I have experienced a few crashes but it never got in the way of my gameplay.

Those crashes typically happened as I was starting the game or as I was shutting the game down.

It’s amazing that someone like me: who didn’t really even care about this game, didn’t follow this game all this time it was in development and didn’t care about any of the hype for the game only to buy the game and be one of its main proponents.

This game never should have been released for PS4 or for Xbox one. It was never going to work for the consul peasantry.
 

ClintL

Posts: 20   +48
I don't understand,if you read through the steam comments there are a few people saying their update was 1gb and some saying 2gb.

This article says it is a 1gb update,mine was 2gb.

So why the different sizes for PC?
 

Adhmuz

Posts: 2,148   +952
Something I find odd about the game is that it isn't using all of my CPU cores, which is fairly common for games, but I only ever see it using ~5gb of RAM, no more than 6.8GB of my VRAM(I have an 8GB card) and only about 65-70% GPU usage. So there are lots of resources that it is not using. I find those numbers odd because I only really see it using 2cores/4threads. The other thing that's odd is that I see modern games often using more than just 8GB of ram. Chrome uses more memory than 2077....
I'll need to take a more in depth look at my RAM and VRAM usage to let you know how those stack up, but one thing I can confirm is my GTX 1080 usage does sit at a solid 99-100%. Also my CPU usage is usually in the 50% range and can spike to almost 70%, this is on a not so modern but still very capable 5960X at 4.5GHz, that too I can check the game usage a little more in depth and report back.

On a stability related note, I haven't had the game crash on me once in my 36 hours of gameplay. I have had some pretty interesting glitches occur, re-spawned at the beginning of a mission inside of the driver of a vehicle despite supposed to have been the passenger for example. But nothing game braking, or so bad that it made me want to return the game, it has enough good to overlook some of the bad. Although I have been avoiding the main story line missions and doing most of the side gigs and general exploration objectives in case I do encounter a bigger issue.
 

JStacts

Posts: 25   +34
I know the game launched with bugs and is a regrettable existence on the base consoles, but I would like to point out just how fast these patches have been coming. Once they get the bugs under control, I would love to see them flesh out the origin stories and character creator (the two low points for me so far).
 

RedBlu

Posts: 33   +36
Save what? It's pc game of the year for me.

I am by no mean's a ultra-hyped fanboi- I knew nothing of the gaming going in beyond the original 2013 trailer. It's a good game. It's basically cyberpunk Witcher 3 and that's fine. I like Witcher 3. But even with my non-existant expectations I've found myself caught out: I can't customize my car's paintjob? I can't reassign my face/body via ripperdoc? I can't play pachinko in one of the city's multitude of dens?

Even Witcher 3 had Gwent. Even conservative Nintendo had armour dying in BotW. They dropped the ball.

It's okay though. I'll finish playing through on 1.0~ and replay as a different game in a few years with all the DLC and patches.
 

CrisisDog

Posts: 239   +132
Playing on the Xbox One X, haven't had any major issues. But, I'm really not seeing what all the hype is about this game, it really has been difficult to keep my attention. Play for an hour, and get tired of it.
 

m4a4

Posts: 2,352   +2,636
TechSpot Elite
So, how many more patches to finally save this game? Starting to resemble No Mans Sky ......
It's in no way close to No Mans Sky in that regard.
NMS had a stark absence of promised content (because the guy in the interviews couldn't keep his mouth shut), while CP2077 has the majority of what was promised, with a lot of bugs/glitches. The only major thing they shared was that they were hyped up past what they were going to deliver.

Basically, absence of promised content vs absence of polish.
 

terzaerian

Posts: 913   +1,305
It's in no way close to No Mans Sky in that regard.
NMS had a stark absence of promised content (because the guy in the interviews couldn't keep his mouth shut), while CP2077 has the majority of what was promised, with a lot of bugs/glitches. The only major thing they shared was that they were hyped up past what they were going to deliver.

Basically, absence of promised content vs absence of polish.
People seem to forget that New Vegas's launch was also a bit of a disaster and the game went on to basically become the most beloved Fallout ever
 
I'm happy to see they are rolling out fixes for major bugs quickly, I'm approaching 100 hours so far. It's unfortunate for console users that the game is basically unplayable but I've actually been getting some pretty good performance numbers on PC. A fairly solid 60FPS@1080p/ultra on a 1070ti.

Something I find odd about the game is that it isn't using all of my CPU cores, which is fairly common for games, but I only ever see it using ~5gb of RAM, no more than 6.8GB of my VRAM(I have an 8GB card) and only about 65-70% GPU usage. So there are lots of resources that it is not using. I find those numbers odd because I only really see it using 2cores/4threads. The other thing that's odd is that I see modern games often using more than just 8GB of ram. Chrome uses more memory than 2077....

But what I find good about that is that there is lots of room for performance optimization.

My main complaint about 2077 is that it seems fairly obvious that there was a lot of cut from the released game. I feel this is going to be released as paid DLC. The cut content is probably close to being done anyway, it'd be fairly low hanging fruit to just release it as DLC.

While the state of 2077 isn't great right now I am optimistic about it's future and look forward to where CDPR takes it.
looks like your CPU is the slowest part of the system, I'm having R5 3600 + RX 5600XT and getting constant 99-100% usage of GPU and all of my 12 threads are in use. 5.3GB of VRAM on ultra/1080p and 50-55fps. Maybe you have very slow speed of ram, mine capped on 3600Mhz with 16-19-16-36.
P.S. 80 hours and only 1 crash, this game is pretty stable at that and a lot of other bugs I found in game was just funny at most.
 

bluetooth fairy

Posts: 159   +102
Bugs have some reasons and they usually can't be seen from our's point of view. The worst thing is that we don't know when cp2077 will become stable and get rid of most annoying bugs and glitches, which as a whole can ruin the atmosphere. I really enjoyed watching the game' subreddit, can't remember when was the last time I laughed so loud and so long. Can't tell that I'd like to see it in game.

If it really was in development during last 7 or 8 years, it's a bad sign for this software. Unless they rewrote everything from time to time to make its design suitable for new ideas and techniques.

Some bugs are easy to fix, some may take a week of hard work of expert engineers, skilled in game dev and who know the cp2077 core in depth either. Given the lifetime of this software it's not unrealistic to say that there were many turnovers in almost every position of the cp2077 team. Legacy code can be pretty hard to fix, because legacy can be everywhere.
 

defaultluser

Posts: 146   +101
This reminds me of the bug fixes they rushed-out for buggy as hell Fallout 2; one of those would make your car's trunk permanently disappear.


The final fix still broke old games saves anyway, much like there is no fix here for Cyberpunksave corruption... Are you telling me that, 25 years later the rest of the world's *****s haven't learned like I did?

Don't buy big unfinished RPGs during release Month
 
Last edited:

Adhmuz

Posts: 2,148   +952
Something I find odd about the game is that it isn't using all of my CPU cores, which is fairly common for games, but I only ever see it using ~5gb of RAM, no more than 6.8GB of my VRAM(I have an 8GB card) and only about 65-70% GPU usage. So there are lots of resources that it is not using. I find those numbers odd because I only really see it using 2cores/4threads. The other thing that's odd is that I see modern games often using more than just 8GB of ram. Chrome uses more memory than 2077....
Just to follow up I did a little more detailed tracking of system resource usage.

RAM usage only hit 5GB after a few hours of playing, initial game load sees roughly 3.5GB. On the bright side it appears to really use my NVME drive as it loads at 2 GB/s, one thing I do find good is how fast the game loads on startup, now I was able to see why.

VRAM usage also maxed out just shy of 7 GB, I think your 6.8GB is nearly identical to mine, GPU wise 1070ti and 1080 are also near identical and we both play at 1080p Ultra. GPU usage sits solid 99% however and never dips.

Now CPU usage is where I was shocked, in Windows task manager the game hits all 16 threads of my CPU and hard, running it nearly at 100% most of the time. I've never seen a game's CPU usage hit my CPU this hard before, I'm honestly impressed, although not as much if it comes down to poor coding.
 

Ultraman1966

Posts: 158   +61
I am by no mean's a ultra-hyped fanboi- I knew nothing of the gaming going in beyond the original 2013 trailer. It's a good game. It's basically cyberpunk Witcher 3 and that's fine. I like Witcher 3. But even with my non-existant expectations I've found myself caught out: I can't customize my car's paintjob? I can't reassign my face/body via ripperdoc? I can't play pachinko in one of the city's multitude of dens?

Even Witcher 3 had Gwent. Even conservative Nintendo had armour dying in BotW. They dropped the ball.

It's okay though. I'll finish playing through on 1.0~ and replay as a different game in a few years with all the DLC and patches.
What's wrong with Gwent? It's a great mini game!