Cyberpunk 2077 He showed how it's done: From debacle to success. MindsEye The developers wanted to achieve exactly the same thing, but according to former developers, that ship has sailed. A BBC summary paints a disastrous picture.
As Build A Rocket Boy, the studio run by former Rockstar boss Leslie Benzies, MindsEye When it was released, everything seemed set for the next big thing: former GTA developers, a futuristic setting, ambitious technology. But instead of applause, there was derision and scorn. The launch was a disaster – unfinished systems, broken missions, performance problems on all platforms. The game quickly became synonymous with excessive ambition and poor management.
300 layoffs – and shattered trust
The BBC report This sheds light on the matter. Former employees reports from Crunchchaotic leadership and creative conflicts between developers and management. After the debacle came the massive layoffs: around 300 employees had to leave, which insiders say was a death sentence for the project.
While studio CEO Benzies publicly spoke of "sabotage" and promised, MindsEye Former employees consider a re-release at some point to be unrealistic. Trust has been destroyed, the core teams broken up, and the infrastructure too unstable for a genuine reboot.
A second Cyberpunk 2077? Probably not.
The comparison with Cyberpunk 2077 It seems obvious – but it's a fallacy. After the false start, CD Projekt RED had a stable foundation, a well-established team, and the necessary resources. Build A Rocket Boy In contrast, after the flop, the company is on the brink of collapse, both in terms of personnel and finances. The hope for a "comeback of the year" sounds romantic, but is hardly realistic when, according to insiders, there isn't even a clear vision anymore.
MindsEye It was a game with potential, but not a project with a plan. What was intended as an ambitious debut ended as a cautionary tale: size alone is not enough. Without structure, trust, and clear leadership, no studio will experience a cyberpunk comeback. Perhaps the biggest lesson of MindsEyethat not every failure deserves a second chance.
As expected, I find it quite solid. When I saw the foaming mouths on YouTube etc., I knew that this was yet another artificial polarization, primarily serving the attention-seeking needs of such people.
A few things bother me. Aside from the detailed faces, the graphics aren't good enough to justify the framerate issues on a PS5. The story has potential depth, but at least so far (I'm about two-thirds of the way through) it's not fully explored.
But it also does many things well. The flow is nice, most gameplay elements are fun, there's no grind, the sci-fi setting is believable and immersive, checkpoints are fair, the characters are interesting, subtly sprinkled humor lightens the cold setting here and there, and it balances fascination with and critique of the technological zeitgeist of our present with analogies and insights into the visions and thinking of the tech industry.
In terms of quality, I'd say it's roughly on par with Watch Dogs 1 for its time. A solid game that's good to play between bigger blockbusters. Above all, it's a better alternative to the completely insane last Watch Dogs installment, and for people who absolutely can't stand FPS gameplay, it's a sort of Cyberpunk 2077 substitute.
What it isn't—and perhaps the reason why it polarized so many—is a title that can compete with the quality and scope of a GTA. False expectations were raised.
In short: The classic 70% AA title, which lovers of 3rd-person story games with cover shooter mechanics can add another 5% to.
"The classic 70% AA title, which lovers of 3rd-person story games with cover shooter mechanics can add another 5% to."
That's exactly how I see it too.
And I don't regret the purchase.