Talk:Development of Cyberpunk 2077

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Cossacks (video games series) (2 participants)
Rat Race (video game) (7 participants)
Red Barrels (2 participants)
The Campaign Trail (Web Game) (23 participants)
Paper doll (video games) (5 participants)
TheoTown (10 participants; relisted)
Old Grandma Hardcore (6 participants; relisted)
WePlay AniMajor (2 participants; relisted)
Zero Hour (video game) (6 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

REDengine 4 Environment.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 January 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: The consensus is to go ahead and Merge this page with Cyberpunk 2077 >>> Extorc.talk 15:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Development of Cyberpunk 2077 → Development and release of Cyberpunk 2077 – This article's scope does not only include the development of the game, but also the notorious "disastrous" release and the resultant controversies and discourses which resulted from the negative reception to its status as a product at the time. As such, the title should reflect this. silvia (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within) 11:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am firmly neutral on the proposal to re-merge the content back to Cyberpunk 2077. I think that there is WP:POTENTIAL for a worthwhile spinout article to be developed, but I also acknowledge that at present the current content does not cut it, and that what is here right now can be covered perfectly fine at the main article. If it is merged, I believe such an outcome should not prejudice against the possibility of de-merging in the future, if the article becomes long enough to be worth splitting or if someone develops a better and more viable draft of a separate "development and reception" article. silvia (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within) 22:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Right now the article mentions the release just a bit, does not merit a move. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 19:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Cyberpunk 2077. Yes, I'm hijacking this discussion per WP:NOTBURO. There is no WP:SIZESPLIT reason for this article to have been spun out. It suffers from some detailcreep because of a desire to use every single source on the planet, but that can be pared back in the merge. There is also a worry that this article will become a WP:POVFORK of the main C2077 article by relegating negative coverage of the game's technical issues to a subpage. Overall, the main page would be stronger and more cohesive if this article were remerged and there are no size-related reasons not to do so. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@OceanHok, Salvidrim!, Zxcvbnm, Maplestrip, Masem, Sergecross73, David Fuchs, Shooterwalker, DecafPotato, TheJoebro64, and ProtoDrake: pinging people who discussed this article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#New Articles (December 26 to January 1). Axem Titanium (talk) 22:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Simply Merge the content to the main Cyberpunk article. The disastrous release needs to be part of the main article so separating the reception around that makes no sense. The combined size may start approaching SIZE concerns but certainly not well beyond 100k. --Masem (t) 22:32, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Rename as proposed if kept standalone, there's a metric ton of discourse and analysis and relevance to the topic of the game's botched release; for the record I'm neutral on the topic of merging or not because I haven't done enough research to come up with a cogent argument (although my gut says if any topic has ever had enough coverage for a spinout about development/release, it is by far this one). Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 22:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as an unnecessary WP:CONTENTFORK. If it's not merged, then I'd probably oppose per WP:CONCISE. Sergecross73 msg me 22:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – If this article's scope is increased to cover the Development, Marketing, Release, and Reception, the real-word elements that WP:VGSCOPE says that articles about video games should focus on, I don't see how this is a neccessary content fork. DecafPotato (talk) 23:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Per others. That said, I would support the creation of a separate article on the controversy around the game incorporating some of the information here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into a proper section in the main article, and if it becomes overly large without prose bloat and excessive quotes to pad it out, then it can be re-split into a dev article. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to main article per all. WP:SUMMARYSTYLE will help trim down a lot of the excess WP:WEIGHT. There are some obvious cuts to make, like developer quotes. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.