Contradictions:
"We want the player to feel like it’s their story. Players are going to customise their V in ways we might not have thought about, and we hope that people mess around with all of those options so it feels like it’s your story, your V, and your cyberpunk. "
"That’s the tricky part, to be honest, because it all started with defining V as a character. We wanted to give you as much freedom as we could, so you can decide what kind of cyberpunk you’re going to be. You can choose how you look, who you are, to some extent, and so on. But we wanted you still to be a cohesive person, like a person who would be alive, not doing stuff from totally different angles. So, you still seem to be the same character. "
Hm, I more so see certain constrictions you simply have to deal with depending on how you tackle a plot or story.
I'm by no means a quest or game plot designer or writer. But I would bring forth symbolic examples:
1) A random Call of Duty game
2) An (online?) sandbox building game
3) A(ny) recent Fallout or Elder Scrolls RPG game
With example 1 we have something very linear or defined. You are a set character in a "tunnel level" and fixed narrative - you cannot deviate much, only be in it for the ride like a rollercoaster ride. You enter, enjoy while staying on rails or a guided path and then exit.
The second example is probably located on the polar opposite side. I have played quite a few of them because I enjoyed them. You are in essence or often (depends on the exact game and frame) thrown into a large world where you, the player, has no hard-coded story path and has to make a lot up for himself or with other players, like factions. It's the "tight vs loose" approach. You have more freedoms and more definition because it's largely up to you, but there's no story path - or not one in the classic sense.
Option 3 is some sort of combination or compromise that you often see in many SP RPG games. Since I did not play the Witcher I cannot comment on that so I picked Fallout or TES. Here, you do have a story of sorts and a somewhat defined special character, but are granted many freedoms within the story frame. In New Vegas it would be what main factions or side factions you support or engage. Compared to the other options this is like a compromise because it aims to both tell an ideally compelling story while granting you certain deviations or freedoms - opposed to the total "being on rails" or "being in the gigantic sandbox" experience.
The same I see with Cyberpunk. Obviously, my own preference would've been a tad more freedom in terms of classic joinable factions within a main narrative but I get that it's a style choice in the end, depending on how you want to tell a story. They have picked this approach.
The trick basically is to tell a story with a somewhat defined character while still allowing you freedoms and customization or branching-out options. Sometimes it's a hard thing to balance. And it won't, can't, please everyone.
But before I judge this from afar, I will do so when I eventually play the game. So far nothing 'scared me off' at all and I look forward to the game and world. And perhaps also mods if modding will be above-average or solid, beyond simple mini-tweaks and texture or mesh replacers.
Besides, even if you want to be totally pessimistic: It'll be the first game in a series of games. We're in essence looking at the Witcher 1 here, and there will be follow-up Cyberpunk games with different changes compared to the prior ones. So, if one wanted to be pessimistic, which is fine, I'd argue that it can only get better with DLCs, potential mods and follow-up games.
