3 ms·

Cyberpunk 2077 is labeled as "Not yet. Released, but still in active development", but it's clearly a "Done" game, as in they've added a ton of stuff and develo

Cyberpunk 2077 is labeled as "Not yet. Released, but still in active development", but it's clearly a "Done" game, as in they've added a ton of stuff and development slowed since then. Still patches, yes, but should that mean "it's not done yet"? I agree it seems more to be about "receives patches still or not", which is different compared to if major feature development essentially stopped.

Kwolok 1mo ago
Cyberpunk is a bit of an odd one. They have pretty long stretches between releasing major content. It certainly feels "done" but it had a LONG tail of development after launch. Phantom liberty is most likely the logical place to say its fully finished but cd projekt red haven't definitely stated there is no more content coming (and there might be with edge runners 2 about to release). So I would argue the assessment is fair, its most likely done, but we can't say for sure so we flag it still. Given enough time has passed, with no communication and no more updates, it will eventually flip over to done.
- KomoD 1mo ago
  So a game is only done if you neglect it?
  - Kwolok 1mo ago
    I wouldn't say this is making a judgement on neglect or care. Its just making a judgement on "Do we expect any more content coming for this game". A neglected game over time will become an answer, as will a cared for game with a "We now consider our journey complete" developer post.
- embedding-shape 1mo ago
  I'm guessing for similar reasons you have The Witcher 3, a game released more than a decade ago, labeled as "Not done yet"? I'm not sure how this is supposed to be helpful, especially not when the labels will arbitrarily change back/forth as stuff is announced or it was a long time ago you heard about anything.
  - Kwolok 1mo ago
    Most games do not change, is the leading principle. But bear this scenario in mind: A game is released, receives post launch support and then the developer posts a blog post stating "This was the final update, thanks for playing my game, there will be no more updates". The system reads that, makes the anaylsis and we mark it done. Then three years later the developre comes back and goes "PSYCHE! HERE IS AN AWESOME NEW UPDATE". Well we can't account for that, so the system will see the update and change it from done to not yet. This is an imperfect system because its trying to assess a situation that has no actual contract. But for 90% of titles or more, when a game is flipped to done it won't suddenly be revived at a later date. The Witcher 3 being hte exception not the rule.
    - Martinussen 1mo ago
      > "This was the final update, thanks for playing my game, there will be no more updates" So you're only going to call abandoned and/or end-of-support games "done"? Even if they were abandoned because there wasn't more that needed fixing/balancing, you're still using a definition I have never seen any other human being use. If it would be done at a given version if the dev just left, isn't any game that provides access to run any version better than "done"? (Minecraft, for example.) For any multiplayer game this seems to just favour yearly release slop over actually good games with good teams behind them.

Kwolok 1mo ago

Cyberpunk is a bit of an odd one. They have pretty long stretches between releasing major content. It certainly feels "done" but it had a LONG tail of development after launch. Phantom liberty is most likely the logical place to say its fully finished but cd projekt red haven't definitely stated there is no more content coming (and there might be with edge runners 2 about to release). So I would argue the assessment is fair, its most likely done, but we can't say for sure so we flag it still. Given enough time has passed, with no communication and no more updates, it will eventually flip over to done.

KomoD 1mo ago
So a game is only done if you neglect it?
- Kwolok 1mo ago
  I wouldn't say this is making a judgement on neglect or care. Its just making a judgement on "Do we expect any more content coming for this game". A neglected game over time will become an answer, as will a cared for game with a "We now consider our journey complete" developer post.
embedding-shape 1mo ago
I'm guessing for similar reasons you have The Witcher 3, a game released more than a decade ago, labeled as "Not done yet"? I'm not sure how this is supposed to be helpful, especially not when the labels will arbitrarily change back/forth as stuff is announced or it was a long time ago you heard about anything.
- Kwolok 1mo ago
  Most games do not change, is the leading principle. But bear this scenario in mind: A game is released, receives post launch support and then the developer posts a blog post stating "This was the final update, thanks for playing my game, there will be no more updates". The system reads that, makes the anaylsis and we mark it done. Then three years later the developre comes back and goes "PSYCHE! HERE IS AN AWESOME NEW UPDATE". Well we can't account for that, so the system will see the update and change it from done to not yet. This is an imperfect system because its trying to assess a situation that has no actual contract. But for 90% of titles or more, when a game is flipped to done it won't suddenly be revived at a later date. The Witcher 3 being hte exception not the rule.
  - Martinussen 1mo ago
    > "This was the final update, thanks for playing my game, there will be no more updates" So you're only going to call abandoned and/or end-of-support games "done"? Even if they were abandoned because there wasn't more that needed fixing/balancing, you're still using a definition I have never seen any other human being use. If it would be done at a given version if the dev just left, isn't any game that provides access to run any version better than "done"? (Minecraft, for example.) For any multiplayer game this seems to just favour yearly release slop over actually good games with good teams behind them.