Here's an anecdote or my perspective:
When the hype about No Man's Sky became bigger and bigger (probably THE most hyped game besides CP2077), I was also full of anticipation and watched almost everything about it.
Nevertheless, I always stayed grounded, and found everything that came in that direction (concerning the game) good.
When, as with CP2077, the pressure to release the game and the expectations became stronger and stronger, the game came out prematurely.
Everyone hounded and hounded that supposedly nothing that was thought by many was present in the finished game.
I bought the game on release day and loved everything about it.
After all, the original idea was still there.
So even before the Foundation Update (1st content update), I had already played over 200 hours, and was fully satisfied with what was already offered.
In the meantime, the game has been renewed with dozens of updates. So that now suddenly everyone is claiming that the game is now what they expected (even though in most updates there was content that was never announced in the first place).
I myself feel that the original idea of No Man's Sky is unchanged, and I don't see what makes the game more worth playing. In my opinion, all the updates so far have been of a superficial nature rather than improving the basic mechanics (there are still no real enemies or real dangers for what you have to/can explore and collect for resources).
That's basically how I see it with Cyberpunk2077.
I was fascinated by the idea from the beginning, as a cyberpunk-themed fan (Blade Runner), had played The Witcher 3 from its initial release in 2015, completely flashed by the atmosphere, and have therefore been following the game CP2077 since the first trailer.
Since the game came from CDProjektRed, I was sure that the game would have a good atmosphere and was just happy for everything that came.
When the hype for Cyberpunk2077 increased immeasurably, especially because of the public relations for it (similar to NoMansSky), the mismanaged pressure in everything increased to the scheduled release date.
This game also came out too early in every respect as a result.
Nevertheless, the game was there in its original idea and atmosphere, just like No Mans Sky.
So again, I took and still take the game for what it is, and have fun with it. Since I was and am a fan of the idea (as with No Man's Sky), even a very big fan.
Of course, The Witcher 3 offered more storylines and as many say, many more choices. Nevertheless, I was also satisfied with what I got in CP2077. As the basic idea and atmosphere, and for me especially the moving, exploring and fighting in the world of my dreams (cyberpunk theme) was and is there.
In contrast to The Witcher 3 (since I'm not such a big fantasy fan) the running around and fighting there in the endgame didn't have as much replay value for me. So after the story of The Witcher 3, that was more or less the end for me.
Due to my interest in the subject matter and focus, Cyberpunk 2077 has more replay value and is therefore more appealing.
So, like everything in life, it's a question of one's own perspective and taste in games.
Nevertheless, and this is what I wanted to say with the examples mentioned here: - that you should always see the game as such that you get. And not what you would like to have and thought is impossible to fulfil in all or special aspects. Especially if you know the background around such a release.
Because that in no way does justice to what you get (like CP2077 in its coherence and atmosphere).
Nonetheless, I would like to see the monorail system work and to be able to use airborne vehicles. Night City in particular, with all its verticality, is tailor-made for this and is therefore my dream.
(I play on an XBOX Series S)