In CP2077 yes, your choice of breakfast will lead you to eat and end of history, but the RPG should be, you can cook something, eat a expired burrito or eat nothing, and this will have consequences in your day and the people you will interact with.
Not all RPGs are built on a dialogue choice based system, but there are consequences in Cyberpunk.
Bioware was good in doing this, ME was a puzzle of choices, CDPR is somehow ok with this system, in W3 we have a lot of quests that have consequences, most of the time we choose the lesser bad, witcher style.
I understand what you're trying to say, have more choices with immediate and clear cut effects, like swapping out NPCs and lines of dialogue, which is pretty much the extend of the result in those games you mentioned, except for The Witcher 2 of course.
Well Cyberpunk has different types of consequences presented through world building, like clearing out an area brings in regular people and opening up shops, news bulletins, radio, NPC chatter, shards and dialogue lines.
I understand you might prefer the other method, but I can see them both for what they are, and I'm completely fine with it because it serves the purpose of telling a cohesive narrative that's rather fluid in the middle arc and branching in the latter arcs.
It's different and there are few traditional choices and consequences and I would have liked to have more, or more distinctive ones or at least have the world be more reactive (like NPCs towards V).
CP2077 was a rushed game, we see this clearly because act1, in act1 we have some important choices to make with consequences, after that we have choices only in the end.
That's conjecture, there are similar scenarios in all of the acts that lead to specific story beats that need to stay consistent.
As for the rushed part, clearly it was.
But besides the bugs we don't know what else was affected maybe this was always the finished state they had in mind they just couldn't optimize the engine in time for release on seven different platforms.
The point is we don't know, it seems coherent to me so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt regarding the narrative in the game.
Sure you can approach any quest as you want, stealth, rambo or whatever, what can change is how much eddies you will earn, nothing more, the mission will progress the way it should and fixer will still have that icon available to you in the map.
You develop your character, if approaching stealthily you gain stealth xp which boosts your attribute to unlock the special perk at the end.
If you don't play your build consistently you will never level up your attributes fast enough for them to become effective.
As for the rest, depending on the job specifications there are different outcomes, if the job requires stealth you get a bonus at the end, if the job is an assassination there are different ways to get to your target, one of them being dialogue, you can convince the target to leave the city as well in some scenarios.
You can fail main quest lines if you don't do them properly, if you take your time Saul dies, if you tell on Panam to Saul she erases you from her phone, depending on how you talk to Johnny you can lock yourself out of Rogue's missions, if you don't investigate properly you can botch River's quest, same with finding out what happened to the previous Mayor.
Yes the long lasting implications are too subtle sometimes I agree.
