To be fair to GTA 5, it did add a lot more content/vehicles and is set in such a large/varied map that it still stands up as a great game in it's own right imo, even with the regression of many details compared to 4. Although I'd put 4 above it, I can see why as an overall package 5 was more highly rated and popular. How they even got GTA 5 to run playably on 360/PS3 is witchcraft to me (probably why many things got downgraded, to run on that gen), especially as it still had a decent amount of traffic/pedestrians around. Not as many as ideal but not a complete ghost town like Cyberpunk seems.
Yeah, well... if only CDPR had took the same path as GTA V, in the aspect of making it first playable on the consoles (and PC's) owned by the vast majority of the world's population (which is absolutely NOT ps5's and 3000 series cards), and THEN worry about new-gen, maybe all this clusterfuck might've been avoided somehow... Both GTA 4 and 5 are masterpiece games on their own. But again, as I believe you think the same: Rockstar is a mogul company. CDPR is a small studio when compared. It's not even fair... I was wondering if all this debacle might end up putting CDPR out of business, and a bigger company might come and buy them out. I sincerely hope this doesn't happen, since there's no way of not loving CDPR's no-DRM policy and all the great stuff they put out on gog.com
Bad R* physics are still great physics in comparison to the vast majority of other games though. They are one of the only studios to really use physics as part of the experience in pretty much all of their games - look how people react when shot in RDR2 or Max Payne 3, how the animations adapt to it, they don't just act completely normal until their HP reaches 0 and then they become a limp dead weight. People even complain about RDR2 being unresponsive/clunky because the game actually respects momentum and has animations that can't just transition in a millisecond.
As in both companies, I also believe it's impossible to compare Rockstar's RAGE engine, with this REDEngine used in Cyberpunk. Some people will always complain. In regards of the games you mentioned, I believe there were very few people complaining about the physics. As opposed to Cyberprank, which has a much bigger "posse" of unsatisfied people with LOTS of elements in the game. Unfortunately, I'm amongst those people.
This may be controversial, but do CDPR have any history of games that have good gameplay/physics/AI? It looks like The Witcher series is the only other thing developed by them, and I think it has fucking atrocious gameplay with barely any physics and the AI is bog-standard at best. It's an eye candy fest where the writing/characters/setting do the work, with just about serviceable gameplay driven by canned animations. I doubt many people rate TW1-3's gameplay mechanics among the best in any department.
Don't think it's controversial. You pretty much nailed it. Witcher 3 is a memorable game because of the great story, memorable characters and also memorable quests. Even some secondary quests are amazing. There was one particular quest in Blood & Wine that I believe I posted in gabe's W3 thread which is just mind boggling (the quest with the wight and the spoons, for example). Lots of them are unforgettable. The combat is mediocre, but serviceable. The inventory/U.I. is a total mess (and you thought CDPR could've learned from that, but they did Cyberpunk inventory and U.I. even worse, if such thing would be possible). Physics are messed up, but at least the water moves when you cast wind (ward was the name?) into it... Have you checked the water in Cyberpunk? Oh, the humanity...
Witcher 1 and 2 are sub-par games when compared to W3, but then again, W3 is held in high regard by those 3 elements: story, characters and quests. Of those 3, Cyberpunk might only have a good (and only main, not side) story. Something absurd for such a hyped game. I couldn't stop playing Witcher 3. It just sucks you in... I don't feel any desire of playing Cyberpunk, apart from sheer curiosity, really.
I can't deny that I'm extremely impressed by some of the visuals in Cyberpunk, especially how densely detailed some of the environments are, but this is meant to be a game, not an art project of 3D renders. A map like they made could have incredible potential for a game like this, if paired with actually good gameplay/physics/AI. Imagine this with Mirrors Edge style movement, GTA IV physics and any kind of AI etc...
Yes, it would probably turn out much better. Especially if you could opt (like GTA V) between 1st person and 3rd person camera, without a hint of hampering the gameplay. Although, as you said it about Max Payne 3 and GTA, there would probably be a few RPG enthusiasts that would complain about it, somehow... who knows? We'll never know it for sure... I believe I'll always see Cyberpunk as a missed opportunity for making a truly memorable game. And now, it will probably be remembered in years to come for all this debacle. Which is truly sad...
. I wholeheartedly agree there's a lot of stuff (mostly physics / ragdoll related) that GTA 4 does way better than 5. But hey, the same "nicer-looking-graphics" argument you used in the end of your post is enough for people to argument that GTA 5 is better just 'cause of "some graphics".
but i wouldnt recommend doing that! 
