You left something out:

> watched others and read a good number of reviews

What's the point of reviews, if not to give people this kind of general sense of a game before they decide whether or not to buy it? Why else would AAA studios be so anxious to impose and enforce pre-release embargos, except to reduce the risk of the preorder hype and FOMO being in any way ameliorated by reality?

First-hand reviews play an important role in the ecosystem, yes.

When someone hasn't even played the game and comes out swinging, though, it comes across as a bit silly, especially if you've played the game and disagree with them.

I am not coming out swinging - my comment was very much about the reaction to the game and I never tried to pretend otherwise. I said my impression is that it's a B+ game at it's best, which means that its horrible technical failures and unscrupulous marketing are particularly glaring.

It has not been regarded as a flawed masterpiece, but something more like 2001's Anachronox - a solid game with strong elements, but in many ways mediocre and hardly justifying a tortured development cycle and myriad bugs.

Well I've played it and is has routine quests, an underwhelming plot, and not too many interesting choices for character development. I was most disappointed that crafting is useless because I wanted to roleplay that skill tree. The game is so boring I've been playing Far Cry instead and Far Cry is trash. Coming from a Deus Ex background there is nothing there to Cyberpunk. However most people liked the game so what's the big deal, it works and the audience is mostly happy.

> Far Cry is trash

Having recently played around with this series (3 and 5) for the first time in my life - since they were heavily discounted over the holidays - I have to say, for shooters they could be a lot worse. FC3 has clearly influenced other games that came out since. Production value is high, graphics are great, they run fine on 5+ year old computers and the stories are fun. I'm neither bored nor overly frustrated.

Really my only issue is the lack of non-lethal play options, but you can play stealth most of the time and it's a good challenge for me. Not a shill or anything, I was just surprised to be enjoying them.

I should have said trashy, though it is also super buggy and with poor quests/dialogue/etc. It's definitely a guilty pleasure of mine and something about the light RPG elements pull me in to completing the challenges.

Well I've played it and I love it.

I'll agree with parts of what you said. If you want in-depth crafting, this isn't the game. If you want a sandbox, this isn't the game. If you want an immersive sim, this isn't the game.

If you want hacking, this is the game. I don't mean the hacking mini-game, which is still better than most, I mean the fact that every major skill tree can be ruthlessly exploited by learning its rules, and on higher difficulty you're basically forced to do this. Many reviewers call it broken, but the incentive landscape is both steep and similar across different skill trees which makes me think it's intentional. In any case, sniffing through the rulebook looking for exploitables and gleefully exploiting the shit out of them is The Hacking Experience as far as I'm concerned. Doom Eternal wants you to learn quickscopes and weapon-switching, CP2077 wants you to learn RTFM and exponential growth. It's not as visceral and it's much easier to cheat, but if you play it honestly then the thrill is quite comparable when your plan snaps together and you go from "struggling asthmatic" to "cyber-god" or "machete-king" or even "discount doomslayer."

The character writing is on point. CP2077 puts more effort and personality into throwaway characters than most AAAs put into supporting characters, and it really shows in side missions and replays. The Witcher 3 was in its own class for having meaningful side-missions and while CP2077 doesn't exceed it, it's a positive outlier in the right direction. When someone who hasn't played the game calls the side-quests unimaginative, it comes across as lazy and inauthentic virtue signaling. If someone came to that opinion first-hand I'd agree to disagree.

The endings are a highlight. No, they don't have a combinatorial number of AI-written endings that respect every possible permutation of choices, but anyone who expects that in a 2020 game is delusional. In 2020, if you want quality endings you can either have a large number of short endings (Prey) or a small number of fully fleshed out endings. CP2077 does the latter and does it very well. It is now my go-to positive example in that regard, the polar opposite of Mass Effect 3.

On PC, the bugs weren't bad and the graphics were good enough to give me a handful of "ambiance moments."

I enjoyed CP2077 and since I kept my expectations under control that's enough to stop me from going online and flaming it.

I had trouble getting into the characters, especially Jackie. Outer Worlds characters drew me in much more but the gameplay was dry. I'll definitely go back to Cyberpunk when they turn on PS5 ray tracing.

Well the only side quests I got so far are go here and kill people grinds, but the bar is low. I consider a side quest interesting if it gives you some speech options or has some kind of immersion to the side quest environment. Having novel puzzle solving or forcing some kind of reasoning skills, revealing something fascinating about the world that adds depth to what is going on, those are great side quests.

There was definitely world building in the computer messages which was good. You can hack a computer to skip some side quest requirements, it's not bad. To me the world is kind of cliche and dreary, again contrast with the playful inventiveness of Outer Words sci-fi world.

Actually I started playing on hard but switched to normal and then got super bored because it was too easy. Hard was kicking my ass and I couldn't do anything but it does emphasize the hacking you are talking about and probably is how I would make the game interesting for me.

I got dejected after I ground out the money for the doctor who helps you and it had no impact on anything and realized my craft deconstruction perk was tearing up valuable sellable things and not giving much XP (you can't turn it off). If it had scaled XP to value that would have been cool.

> I was most disappointed that crafting is useless

Crafting/engineering is one of the the most OP paths you can invest in. There's a great build posted some time ago on YT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUMlmI685rc

I agree it is a viable combat path. I meant economically, it's a lousy way to make money. That's what my character was turning into a tech weapon build, but I wanted to get rich from making things.