Jump to content

Talk:CD Projekt/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Someone got confused when creating this article

This article describes CD Projekt and CD Projekt RED as one which is very wrong. CD Projekt is a mother to CD Projekt RED (video game developer), GOG.com and cdp.pl. This should be fixed ASAP.

CD Projekt RED should not redirect here, it should have its own article.

Krystian4842 (talk) 01:33, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm curious to how this got mixed up. If I go to cdprojekt.com/en, it takes me to the CD Projekt Capital Group Website, but it shows an about page for both. CD PROJEKT Capital Group is a group of companies with years of experience in developing new installments of The Witcher and Cyberpunk franchises (CD PROJEKT RED) and worldwide digital distribution of videogames (GOG Ltd.) [1] and CD PROJEKT RED Studio – game development studio, active since 2001. Creators of the world-renowned The Witcher franchise, which follows the adventures of Geralt of Rivia. The first two games in the series have sold over 8 million copies. CD PROJEKT RED is among the most respected RPG videogame developers in the world. The company employs over 230 world-class GFX artists, animators, programmers and designers, both Polish and foreign.[2] Their homepage is http://en.cdprojektred.com/. Both sites use the same logo, but one is clearly their distributing front and the other is the development studio. I agree, they need to have their own separate pages.Chewbakadog (talk) 01:38, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. The best solution here is to create a new article for CD Projekt RED and move the information about The Witcher from here to there. This article should probably be stub-length. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cronos Dage (talk • contribs) 21:57, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.cdprojekt.com/en/Capital_group/Business_profile
  2. ^ https://www.cdprojekt.com/en/Capital_group/Business_profile

Reassessment

Came here via the talk page reassessment request; bumping this up to B-class. Some ideas for improvement follow:

  • Wow, great expansion!
  • At this point, should CD Projekt Red be a separate article? It's entirely covered by this article now; if you plan on expanding that one out to be bigger then fine, but it should be merged here or the developer section cut down to be a summary and the content moved to Red.
  • "When Interplay reached financial difficulties, one of CD Projekt's project, the PC port for Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance was cancelled, and team members decided to use the codes to make their own games, which eventually became The Witcher, a video game based on Andrzej Sapkowski's works." - grammar problems ("project", "the codes", and the whole thing is a run-on sentence that should be chopped in half at least.
  • "GOG.com, originally served to help players to find old games, eventually expanded to cover other new triple-A games and independent games" - weird tense issues
  • "The company has a strong will against digital rights management" - strong will?
  • "The team also considered maintaining independent as one of their most important strategies." - independent?
  • "According to Iwiński, he liked video game since he was young" - game?
  • "Iwiński was not qualify for the computer course"
  • "Iwiński, which was only 20 years old at that time"
  • I'm going to cut off the grammar review there- you basically have a grammar error every sentence or two throughout the article, so... you'll want a pretty extensive copyedit pass before submitting to GAN
  • Especially note that you have a lot of present tense when talking about past events. Also a bunch of problems with plurals.
  • The structure and content of the article is great, though, so grammar is really the only thing you need to really fix. --PresN 17:01, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
@PresN: Thank you very much for the reassessment! I would start fixing these issues very soon. AdrianGamer (talk) 12:42, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Contradiction?

How can the cracked copies be illegal if no copyright law existed? The given source also does nowhere mention it to be illegal, it sounds very much like original research without the research. --Constructor 07:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

minus Removed AdrianGamer (talk) 08:31, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on CD Projekt. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:46, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on CD Projekt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Split into CD Projekt and CD Projekt Red

I feel this article should be split into two - CD Projekt and CD Projekt Red. Most of this article says about game development, which is CD Projekt Red's domain. CD Projekt is its parent, it's not directly involved in making video games.

Related links:

Debeet (talk) 22:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on CD Projekt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:50, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Owner edit war

@NightShadow23 and Dissident93: You are both at 3RR (Technically 4RR for Dissident) right now. Please stop the edit war and discuss here at the article talk page, so we can avoid more drastic remedies like protection or edit war blocks. -- ferret (talk) 20:34, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Problem with "Trade as" parameter

Going on "WSE: CDR", will result in a HTTP 404 page. I think there is some kind of problem with the "CDR" abbreviation or something. I actually found CDPROJEKT page here, but I was not able to repair the problem. Lone Internaut (talk) 16:23, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

  • The problem lied within the template as its link base was outdated. I overhauled the templated and enforced a refresh here. It should work now. Lordtobi (✉) 16:32, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
@Lordtobi: It works great. Thank you, much appreciated. Lone Internaut (talk) 16:37, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Sure thing! Ping me if you require similar fixes for different pages. Lordtobi (✉) 16:58, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Uncertainty about my edit

I just made an edit for grammar and clarification, however I'm uncertain if it's technically correct, or just an assumption. I wanted to point this out, just in case. (Probably doesn't matter.)

Original: They expected the title to become popular in Poland, and no retailer would be able to translate the text from English version to Polish.

My edit: They expected the title to become popular in Poland, and felt that no retailer would be able to translate the text from English to Polish.

--BevansDesign1 (talk) 15:09, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

While I understand that this quote is taken directly from a Eurogamer interview, it's also self0evidently not true. Copyright law had existed in all countries, even in North Korea. What I think it was supposed to mean there is that it was poorly defined, especially in the context of rapid economic and societal changes in Poland in early 90-s. Perhaps someone knowledgeable in lawspeak (or just English) could rephrase it so that it doesn't sound so dubious and misrepresentative? --5.44.170.9 (talk) 03:39, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

CD Projekt Black?

Is there any information about their other development team, CD Projekt Black, which made the infamous Saints Row 2 PC port? [1] -- 179.183.148.246 (talk) 05:14, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I think what you are talking about is the CD Projekt Localisation Centre, which started doing ports in 2008-ish, later became (by rename or merge) Porting House, and has since become part of the GOG operations (which still does porting, but from older games instead of between platforms). The name "CD Projekt Black" is not official as far as I can tell (Michael Watson / IdolNinja, who posted the response linked, has only been with Volition since 2013-ish, so he probably misinterpreted some Volition-internal name for the studio; the box of the game reads "CD Projekt Localisation Centre"; no "CD Projekt Black" appears in official documents). However, there are not sufficient reliable sources for this to appear in the article, it seems. Lordtobi (✉) 11:29, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Optimus SA

The link Optimus S.A. redirects to this page, but the page doesn't have any information about that company. It was a media company and a PC and cash register manufacturer that was acquired by CDP Investment, parent company of CD Projekt in 2011, via reverse takeover, which was the means by which CDP went on the stock market. Optimus was involved in a tax evasion controversy back in the late 90s. The company chairman Roman Kluska was cleared of all charges in 2003 but by then his company was at the brink of bankruptcy. The media division was acquired by ITI Group, while the remains went to CDP.

--Ca1ek (talk) 12:59, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree, see also articles such as Onet.pl that link to Optimus of the time it had nothing to do with CD Projekt. I have mentioned this problem here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SMiki55 (talk • contribs) 12:34, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Most valuable games company in Europe and other things

It is recent news that CD Projekt just became the most valuable games company in Europe, beating Ubisoft. Besides reporting the thing in the article, should "Operating income" and "Total assets" numbers (reported in source 1) be added at the infobox? I think it would be good, the thing came to mind watching at the Ubisoft article. Lone Internaut (talk) 03:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

CDPR's goodwill

@WikiHannibal: - I think my edit is more suitable here than Cyberpunk 2077 article. The poor messaging of CDPR with regards to refund, the turmoil within the studios and how the staff are challenging the management, and most importantly, the erosion of goodwill, showed that the company managed to piss off both their team, their customers and their investers simultaneously, and this will directly change the company's perception in the coming years (and seems like it may even result in a class-action lawsuit). All of them are more related to the companay than the game itself. The information I added is well-sourced and is certainly not OR (the information is supported by RS like PC Gamer and Polygon, and now we have even more from New York Times and IGN which also disucss the situation). The fate of CDPR is intrinsiclly tied to the launch of Cyberpunk 2077, so both article should have this information, rather than putting them all in Cyberpunk. Meanwhile, stuff like "CD Projekt Red offered to pay refunds of Cyberpunk 2077 out of their own pocket after issues with PS4 and Xbox One consoles" actually belongs to the Cyberpunk article because that is only referring to the physical version of the game. OceanHok (talk) 05:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I agree with your reasoning reagrding the importance of the info you added for CDPR, and I did not say it should not be in CD Projekt; I said both article should have it, with CD Projekt using a trimmed version. The sources are RS per se but the sentence "Reports alleged..." should be atrributed directly to Bloomberg; PC Gamer had no additional info regarding the meeting. Bloomberg had two sources who speak about what other two people (one employee, one developer) said. I think there is too much distance between the original speaker and the content of the wikiarticle. Regarding the shift in your edit, "two members" is more precise and more neutral than "some members" (which implies larger numbers). I suppose your "misleading the customers" is an interpretation of "one staff member asked management why it said that Cyberpunk 2077 was complete in January when, according to that employee, it wasn't". I think there is too much OR in that interpretation. The "unrealistic deadlines" come from "several CD Projekt Red staff members, past and present", not necessarily members of the dev team. I tried to come up with an alternative wording you might accept but failed; if we stick to what Bloomberg writes, there is simply not much of encyclopedic content (that I can see) left. For example, if they have spoken publicly or there were more sources, we could attribute and it would be noteworthy; but internal meeting debates can be heated and info from the meeting fits newspapers but it is not encyclopedic; there have been probably a number of debates thoughout the years where emyployees complained. Regarding refunds, "left the responsibility" is a little bit loaded, and "may not successfully" seems like a conjecture (without more context). (This does not mean I like "out of their own pocket"; the refunds can be trimmed to something like "Console players could get refunds from Sony and Microsoft following standard procedures.") The confusion regading CDPR offer is not encyclopedic at present (it can be expanded when there are significant numbers of refunds, for example). WikiHannibal (talk) 10:51, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
I disagree on what makes "encyclopedic content" as we can document whatever is documented by RS. Members of the dev team include both members past and present and basically anyone who have worked on the game. I certainly don't think just two members grilled the management (and isn't implied by the source either as they are presented more as examples of sharp questions. With the currently development, I think we can wait and see what happens in the next few months and then update the article accordingly. What I wanted to point out though, is that if you think that you can improve my edits, you can just go ahead and rephrase it rather than doing an entire revert, which is not helpful at all. OceanHok (talk) 12:27, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CD_Projekt/Archive_1&oldid=1252094276"