Cyberpunk 2077 Dev Confirms Toggle To Turn Off Nudity, Shows 175 Hrs Playtime But Still Not Done

Cyberpunk 2077 QA Lead Łukasz Babiel has shared some information on the game's features revealing a toggle for nudity and his total playtime.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
rockwhynot53d ago

I put 320 hrs into The Witcher 3 so that's cool.

JonTheGod53d ago

Currently 510 hours and counting on Red Dead 2.

Si-Fly53d ago

510 hours into single player?

bouzebbal53d ago

I barely played it for 2 hours.. Game' is too stiff, and map visibility is close to zero

angelsx53d ago

anyone know what's the resolution and frame rate on ps5/xboxSX?

seanpitt2353d ago

Hopefully it will be 60 FPS out the gate for next gen but do realise it’s not optimised fully for the new systems there will be no ray tracing until next year but I am hoping 1440p 60fps for ps5 and Xbox

ClayRules201253d ago

I put over 100 hours into RDR2 on my first play through. I absolutely love the game/experience. It’s certainly stiff in areas, but still extremely enjoyable and the story was a real adventure! Highs and lows, with great camp conversations, boat songs, and great dynamic world events.

Another masterpiece by Rockstar “in my opinion”

chiefJohn11753d ago (Edited 53d ago )

Game of the generation right there.
No other games did what RDR2 did. It was a true step up, new experience that wasn't rivaled at all.

Sunny1234552d ago

Rdr2 was a great game of 2018, but God of war was better, goty 2018.

DaleCooper52d ago

Over 100 hours of it was spent watching the animation to loot dead bodies.

anast52d ago

I got around 200 on Witcher and with RDR2 100 SP and about 50 on MP. Both are excellent games.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 52d ago
52d ago
OneLove53d ago

Damn thats a whole lot of playtime.

Fraggle198753d ago

I hate to hear playtimes like this. No game can sustain that length and not feel like a grind. Not good.

alextdarling53d ago

I personally love it, im a completionist so im gonna be a bit bias...

toxic-inferno53d ago

I have to say, I agree. I'm generally more likely to buy a game that is 18 hours long than a game that is 100 hours long, because I know that I'm likely going to get put off by the sheer length of the game and give up before I even reach the 18 hour point.

That is a very clumsy sentence, but essentially, I weirdly find that (for me) shorter games to be better value for money.

UnSelf53d ago


There is no way you’re taking away from a game being good because of your inability to commit

I really hope no devs out there take opinions like this serious. Keep making them longer and longer

FinalFantasyFanatic53d ago

I just tend to avoid most open world games, half the time I feel lost, I generally need an experience that is a little more linear. I'm not saying I haven't enjoyed open world games, I like BotW and HZD, those games were fantastic, I also really enjoyed Assassin's Creed Black Flag.

toxic-inferno52d ago


That is precisely why I didn't use the word 'good' but rather referred to 'value for money'.

Also, I don't consider 'inability to commit' to be a negative thing in this context. It's entirely a choice - I very much could commit, but choose not to, as I tend to enjoy tight narrative more than sprawling freedom.

There are different reasons why people play games - developers should exist that cater to all interests.

Taero51d ago

I agree for a different reason, I work and have kids, i just can't commit hundreds of hours to something. I'd rather have something tight paced around 20 hours plus whatever collectibles they put in etc. and know I'm actually going to finish it.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 51d ago
Rocketisleague53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

You don't have to complete all the hours, the idea is replayabilty. There are 100s off quests I never did in many rpgs

Psychotica53d ago

Not necessarily true. I still play GTA V just to start shit with the police and go on a police chase, no grinding involved.

SDuck53d ago

That's not true. Take Witcher 3 as example, played it twice, never finished it because of the playtime it provides but I don't feel like it was a grind and loved playing it both times which will probably make me return to it again. Back when I was a kid games were way harder than nowadays so I rarely finished them which means I learned to enjoy my time playing them rather than finishing them.

sagapo53d ago

You don’t need to complete every single mission in just one playthrough. I didn’t in Witcher 3. Finish the game more than once, with a different playstyle. That way there will be quests enough you didn’t play before and keep things fresh.

ClayRules201253d ago (Edited 53d ago )

TW3 for me was so so so much fun. I put 75 hours into it, but after that had to take a 2 week break from it. It wasn’t that it was a grind so much as I had done so much in that time, side quests, exploring, main missions, fights, everything was just so thrilling and magical in a sense and just kept getting better. But I’d gotten exhausted too, from playing so much but I had time off work to enjoy. So I took a leave from the game. After that break, I felt refreshed and was so ready to dive back in. Finished the game and little over 200 hours put into the game in the end.

That reminds me, I need to play the DLC which I’ve done, but bought a good while back lol.

andy8553d ago

Disagree. Depends how much variety there is. I never got bored with Witcher 3 and I'm sure I got close to that playtime same developer is a good sign. Dragon Quest XI I was over 100 hours too and wanted more

TakeTori53d ago

You probably don't have to play even 100 hours if most of what you do is story stuff, I imagine.

HyperMoused52d ago

I felt like that with the witcher, after i finished the game i thought ill go through it again, then actually thought about it, just too much, and i have other games that need playing.

SmokinAces52d ago

I suppose it depends on the game and the story but yeah there definitely is a really weird bias in gaming where some games get chastised for just being too long like Days Gone, while others are praised for it like this one.

frostypants52d ago

Then just play the main quest and ignore distractions.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 51d ago
NewEnds018653d ago

I spent alot of time in the witcher 3 just wondering the map and doing odd quest that randomly showed up and other side stuff. I had over 200 hours into the witcher so 175 is not bad to me.

Psychotica53d ago

I worked as a Software QA analyst for years, those hours don't really mean much. He could have spent 20 hours just testing that he could spin around in a circle. Also, if he hasn't done everything the game has to offer that means he hasn't tested everything that the game has to offer. Hopefully that means someone else is doing it.

SDuck53d ago

He admits he was just chilling, enjoying the off time the game offers and taking his sweet time to advance in the story

rpvenom52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

100 of my hours will be spent "chillin" with judy alvarez

Show all comments (65)
The story is too old to be commented.