IIRC they fixed various bugs but they didn't fix the broken promises. The biggest problems with Cyberpunk were architectural, things that would basically require redesigning the game to match what was promised.

▲

gamesieve 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Online sentiment has drastically changed about how bad those broken promises were - a near-complete turnaround, similar to what happened with No Man's Sky. Basically from when the DLC was released, most people started feeling that they fulfilled the essence of everything that was promised.

▲

SXX 3 hours ago | parent [-]

IMO Cyberpunk is fundamentally not the game their marketing promissed. They marketed it as actually non-linear RPG and beyond very beginning of the game they just could't deliver on it.

After tons of patches and DLCs its just became a very very good game. Just not what was promissed.

▲

prmoustache 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Those kinds of promises only engage a small niche of nolife who follow news about upcoming games.

Most customers only hear about a game when it is released and reviewed and/or recommended by a friend and will never have heard about them.

	▲	SXX 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yet those niche nolife hardcore fans is exactly what makes or breaks games. If 10,000 unhappy hardcore fans will go around pouring shit on your game and company then you likely never get 1,000,000 players who could've potentially liked it. Nolife hardcore fans will also be the the first to buy your game, review it and tell everyone if they did not liked it. CDPR got huge amount of trust after Witcher 3 and they mostly had to start over after CP2077 release. EA can survive if 4/10 of their games flops completely, but company like CDPR will likely just end there.