Just answer me one thing

>term thats been used for over 20 years to describe the buggy but glorious games from european countries
Obsessed with what exactly?

It's irrelevant that a 5 year old game was buggy on release. Why does that matter or make it okay for cyberpunk to be?

o b s e s s e d

Okay Mr Buzzword

What revisionist BS is this? W2 was rock solid from launch. W3 had the XP bug and thats about it.

It is fucking eurojank.
What else would it be?
What would you even call Piranha Bytes games if not eurojank?

...

Actual historical revisionism. If you even browsed this board during the first week of release the reaction was essentially the same to cyberpunk when it comes to bugs. It was fucking awful and ran like shit before patches.

Witcher 3 didnt have to think about next gen consoles so they could easily move the release date half a year. Also they had to worry about porting it to fewer platforms.

Not even close.

Witcher 3's biggest issue was weird visual glitches and mostly in cutscenes.
>as was Witcher 2
Horse shit. CDPR fucked up bad with cyberpunk, doesn't mean you have to revise history on their other shit.

Yes
Cdpr cannot into pre release optimization
Who the fuck manages the projects?

it is and that's why it's great.

>weird visual glitches and mostly in cutscenes
No your memory is just awful. Witcher 2s bugs existed pretty much entirely in cutscenes and were minor. It ran well but needed patches.
Witcher 3 had faces disappearing, t-posing, floors disappearing and falling through, xp, hard CTDs, performed at a third of the level it does now and this board was up in flames over it laughing how they couldn't top The Witcher 2

>the reaction was essentially the same to cyberpunk when it comes to bugs.
This is a blatant lie. There were a few bugs, but nothing that was anywhere near as bad as cp2077, just glitches that are typical of every release. There were definitely issues with optimization that needed to be fixed, but cp2077's is far worse for PC than Witcher 3 and it's practically unplayable and broken on PS4 which is probably the hardware most people are going to try to play it on

You're arguing an entirely different thing. I know the severity of the bugs isn't the same - cyberpunk tops TW3 twice over it's an unfinished mess.
This boards reaction however was the same. TW3 was extremely divisive and had thread after thread laughing at the amount of bugs present. If anything Zig Forums didn't know how good they had it.

The truth is that every game since 2003 has sucked, people just don't like to admit it.

HA, no.
It was buggy but nowhere near this bad.

>this board was up in flames over it
Zig Forums went over the top to shit on a major release? Color me shocked. Never use this site as a barometer for anything, that's probably why your memory of TW3 is so warped. Even higher ups at CDPR are admitting they fucked the release and are giving bonuses without requiring a review average requirement.

My memory isn't warped the game was buggy, unoptimized and needed a further delay. They fixed it and majority of people who played loved it in the end. Does not change the state it arrived in, this boards reaction or my personal experience with it. Cyberpunks release isn't even relevant in the conversation. I'm not defending it in the slightest

I've had 1 game-breaking bug in 25h of playing and a few visual bugs. I don't know if I'm lucky or if people are just exaggerating.

I think the game as a whole is pretty damn amazing still.

Attached: ye.jpg (604x438, 61.32K)

Ok then I guess we are arguing different things. But the people you quoted in your post weren't talking about Zig Forums's opinion on it, they were saying that CP2077 was worse, then you accused them of revisionist history for it.