First look at the upcoming controller, which uses PlayStation Link technology to deliver wireless connectivity with ultra-low latency for fighting games.
The history of CD Projekt RED suggests that the recently shown demo for The Witcher 4 may be more marketing than actual gameplay.
Not only CDPR but Epic Games as well i still haven't seen any game with that fidelty of that Ps5 tech demo .. that was 2020
Digital Foundry in its reaction video said they believe the demo reflects real performance, as overstating it’s competence on PS5 could bring significant risks to Epic Games’ shareholders and legal risks.
https://youtu.be/5PIyPpB83V...
Actually Horizon Forbidden West exceeds this in image quality. So it seems very plausible. Intergalactic is actually beyond this presntation in IQ, RT and resolution and thats locked 60FPS as well. As far as the usage of hardware RT in UE, they were able to reduce the CPU overhead.
This was a tech demo for UE 5.6. That was clearly stated and is evident by the presentation itself where several of the new features of UE are highlighted
This article title is inaccurate because this was not a demo for Witcher 4. It was a technical demonstration of Unreal Engine 5.6.
***Cyberpunk 2077’s gameplay features that were showcased in initial footage but never made it into the final game***
They literally made a big deal of telling everyone that they changed the gameplay of CP2077 during development and then did a new demo of the game with the new gameplay. There was no hiding this to the public. CP2077's problem with the buggy as heck and obviously too early release.
This is really bad journalism to promote this line of thinking. It's an attempt to rewrite history. You can definitely say you preferred the initial demo, but they were very open and clear when they moved from third-person to first-person that it would include major changes in gameplay and showed those off multiple times a year prior to the game's release.
---
As to the point of this article? Yeah, the whole event is a marketing event. I don't trust anything until it's released, tbh. No matter who is making it. I can still be excited by what I see, but it's not going to get me to pre-order a game or get me to go out there and sell what I saw as if it will be just like that in the full release.
What about the fact CDPR showed gameplay behind closed doors which wasn't real? They dusnt allow anyone to bring their phones or any tech so once media came out of that gameplay reveal CP2077 was hyped to the moon and back. CDPR didn't show console gameplay so let's not act like they were transparent when they switched from 3rd to 1st person when they lied at launch of the game
You mean rumors? You want me to comment on rumors from Bloomberg? We arguing the belief of rumors now and not news?
Here's that fake demo - https://www.youtube.com/wat...
If you've played the game, you know how much that lines up with the final product. That's what I know.
***let's not act like they were transparent when they switched from 3rd to 1st person when they lied at launch of the game***
They literally re-demoed the game with the change, so they were transparent. You're just acting like they weren't when in 2018 they literally demoed the new gameplay. That's 2 years prior to release.
I don't know what they 'lied at launch of the game' is supposed to mean.
-
This game had enough wrong with it at release that we don't need to be arguing rumors and online hatred of the gameplay changes shown in 2018.
Christopher, just to clarify — I'm not trying to be overly negative or dismissive. I fully acknowledge that CD Projekt Red was transparent when they switched from third-person to first-person and even re-demoed the game to reflect that. Credit where it’s due — they did show that change publicly.
But the real issue for me is how the game launched. Despite that transparency earlier on, they deliberately withheld gameplay from the console versions and still charged full price for something that was nowhere near ready. That’s where trust was broken. The game was released in a clearly unfinished and broken state, and it took years to get it into a playable condition. That goes beyond mistakes — that’s a serious failure in leadership and consumer respect.
So when I see something like the Witcher 4 tech demo — and yes, I understand it’s Epic showcasing Unreal Engine 5 — I can’t help but approach it with caution. It’s not blind skepticism, but earned skepticism. A lot of the original developers have left CDPR, so we can’t assume this next game will automatically reach Witcher 3 levels of excellence.
I want it to be amazing. We all do. But I’m not going to fully believe the hype until independent gamers and trusted content creators — people with a reputation for honesty and not being paid off — get their hands on it and say, “Yes, this is great.” Until then, it’s just marketing.
They built up enormous goodwill after The Witcher 3 and the free DLCs — but they lost much of that with Cyberpunk's release. Even platform holders like PlayStation and Xbox, who once trusted CDPR to self-certify, don’t anymore. That alone speaks volumes.
Again, it’s not hate — it’s caution born from experience
"Despite that transparency earlier on, they deliberately withheld gameplay from the console versions"
It was a multiplatform release, and yes they botched it, but clearly consoles weren't lead development platform, PC was. They clearly were hoping that they could get everything together by launch, and this was a mistake. I think them showing this running on a PS5 is a clear indicator that they've learnt from this.
But there are plenty of reasons not to get too excited about this, and it's not hidden behind any lies, it's right there watermarked on the footage. this is a technical presentation of the Unreal 5 engine, running on the PS5 at 60fps. This is technology that may be in the Witcher, this is not the Witcher.
Because it is marketing. Epic did the flying sand girl in 2020 now this with Witcher. I still wanna see what games shows the original showing of Unreal 5? It's been 5 years exactly.
ofc it is, no real gameplay suddenly xrays a horse to show how its muscles are moving realistically.
They were literally showing off the fact it seamlessly can transition from gameplay to ctsceme those aspects of presentation were clear cutscenes....
The studio was founded in March of 2024 by Stig Asmussen, director of the Star Wars: Jedi games.
Thomas Mahler: "Since it's quite bananas that a lot of players still do not understand the economy behind game development, I thought it'd be best to just break down a real example of a really successful first-time developer who managed to make a deal with a publisher. "
I wouldnt call a game that costs 10 million to make and had over 30 people from different companies working on it an indie game.
Seriously, no.
its an independent studio that is not owned by any big studio or publisher. what else would you call them?
Indie means independant PLUS low budget.
Say I'm a billionnaire and decide to fund my own game with a $20M budget, is it an indie game just because I don't call a publisher? Dev costs increase yeah, but $10M is hardly indie
@TheCaptainKuchiki I mean there is a word, independent, now look up what independent means.
https://dictionary.cambridg...
If you are a billionaire and fund your own game your game your studio is definately an independent studio xD
Thats what the word means.
Game development expenditures have exploded since the old days, Terry. Office space, hiring computer techs, game development equipment and art direction all have insane costs now.
Regardless the expenses are still there. If every indie studio had a success like Stardew Valley, they wouldn't be begging big time publishers, crowdfunders and investors to cover development costs. Alas most don't.
I don't get it..
He starts with 10M cost for the game excluding marketing and continues to detract "other"costs...
Why are the costs of storefront, engine etc not included in the 10M?
CEO makes CEO noises.
If he takes a 1 million dollar bonus every year the game is being made and the game took 5 years to be made, the "cost" isn't 10 million, it should be 5 million.
It's just more magical accounting. This industry is replete with it.
@Santouryuu
Yeah, it's weird. On top of that, he subtracts engine, tax from HIS own money, but this should be put on the publisher (or at least be split, 50%/50% or how they agree), because they're benefitting from the sales as well. On top of that, he makes it look like he didn't get a cent, but he (and his team) was paid the salary the whole way through, with bonuses and stuff. Probably rent for the office was taken care of as well and licenses/devices too.
And also, he acts like his games' average price was $10 (by the way, if the game cost $10 million, who decided to sell it for $20?! Sounds idiotic), which is ridiculous, popular indie games don't do 50% discount right after release and the most of the sales are done a few months after release (according to the publishers). As an example, look at Rimworld, Dwarf Fortress, Factorio, Kenshi, they either didn't have 50% discount yet or had it years after the release.
Also, he acts like the game was only sold on Steam, but that's false. And Microsoft, i'm more than sure, didn't take 30% from them (because it's a game published by them on their platform).
The only thing this tells me is that someone is trying to manipulate us and you shouldn't work with Microsoft if you want to remain sane.
because thats what he has to HAVE RIGHT NOW to develop the next game (engine, tax andso on)
Yes xbox of course did not have the 30% tax but then again he is just making a hypothetical, I am pretty sure their game did not sell exactely 20millions ^^
Its not the cost of storefront. Your game made 20million but from those 20million the store takes 30%. Steam took 30% from the 20million you made. got it?
If you make 20million in sales Steam takes 6 million.
So you only get 14millions. Then you have to pay back what you owe the publisher, so 10millions in devcost and 2million in marketing.
So you are left with 2millions.
From the 2millions of pure profit 70% goes to the publisher and 30% to the developer (depending on your contract)
So you are left with 600k to pay for your next game, for now.
lots of numbers but very clearly put
Really enjoy the Ori games, but the studio head has always been an insufferable dickhead. Those costs aren't included cause he's miserable and full of shit.
Where did those $10 million go though? It’s a loan basically, but didn’t those pay through the development? Essentially the developer got paid $10 million upfront to make a game. If the game didn’t hit $12 million in sales-say $8 million. The publisher lost that money. The developer still got $10 million. Sure, maybe their next game may not be funded-but they wouldn’t have to come up with the $4 million missing. That’s a loss from the publisher.
absolutely correct.
He is pointing out the fact that even IF you have a hit game that sells 2million dollars. Does not mean you can pay for the next project.
Interesting.... I'll get one.
Great for Marvel Tokon Fighting
Souls (which looked amazing).
It can also be used wired which is fairly important to note. Anybody using this thing competitively won't go anywhere near wireless.