I used to be close minded to the idea of playing an FPS too since I grew up playing RPG's like Fallout and Final Fantasy so the first person view didn't seem to fit an RPG in my mind. But then Fallout New Vegas came out and I was so enticed by the idea of a direct sequel to Fallout 2 that I got it. The 3rd person view was so clunky I switched to the FPS view and got used to it. I still prefer a 3rd person view for RPG's but I'm not closed to the idea anymore and will give this a try.

Cars also had to be hand cranked when they were first conceived. Things usually suck to a degree when they start out, and important elements of it are added throughout it's lifetime. Just because cars used to lack a dedicated battery doesn't make it okay to ditch it, and just because RPGs used to be 100% imagination doesn't mean we should ditch getting to look at our characters.

That wonderfully apt analogy aside, people would still draw their tabletop characters. Character creation and image are important to most RPG fans, then and now.

Funny that so many expected a game in a city to be third person just because a totally different game from the same dev was third person.

Some gamers can think what they want and not buy it because of this but it gets problematic when these gamers try to pressure the dev in changing their idea of their game.

They are the devs and I'm sure they know much better than the gamers what is best for their game. Stop trying to force the devs to make a probably worse game just to get what you want

And that does happen. The past has shown us that genres that were once popular (like RTS) become unpopular oevr time, simply ebcause one group acted vocal and kept buying into one genre oevr another, which caused devs to pander more to that voice oevr the over.

I hope CDPR stick to their guns and doesn't back down to the "3rd person or no buy" crowd. They set out to make the game they wanted, and it's what they should be allowed to do.

Besides, next year is giving us a plethora of non first person based games, so that crowd is being catered to way more next year than the FPS crowd. 

The people annoyed by the first person view are a very minority. Cyberpunk 2077 has the most viewed trailer of the E3 and the overwelmingly majority of people are stoked to get it after the media impressions of the closed door demo.

Let's say i moved on with the times eh? What is enjoyable to me doesn't have to be what is enjoyable to you.

I do think it's important. But there's people that can live without it. That is good for you. For me, i don't like it.

I was quite the opposite - I was kinda late to the CRPG party (though I've played D&D with friends), dabbled with them a bit on C64, but really started only with Dungeon Master on Amiga back around 87/88. Back then A LOT of CRPG were actually from FPP and that felt quite normal.

Rewind a decade later and here comes Fallout 1 - for some reason I never actually read anything about it prior to playing it, and after that Overseer intro, which is in FPP, game starts - in 3D ISO perspective - oh, dear - I've just finished M&M VI, and was keen for more party based FPP RPGs, so you could imagine my disappointment.

To cut the story short, after hour or so I got into it and to this day Fallout 1 is one of my favourite RPGs and video games I ever had a pleasure to experience.

Even if you call it apt, it's still a poor analogy, since we're talking about a cosmetic issue instead of a mechanical issue.  If you'd said something about fender skirts perhaps.  And most people can't draw worth a damn.  I know that when I played AD&D, I didn't even try to draw anything.  My friend did ... and then erased it because it looked like Groo the Wanderer.  

Because it's a feature people like does not mean that it now defines the genre.  If someone released a hand-crank car today, no one would buy it.  If Cyberpunk released tomorrow without a 3rd person view, it would still sale very well.

I mean, you can make any analogy wrong by reading too much into it. Usually people only do that when they don't like the major concept being presented, this one being that values change over time.

Just because an aspect of the game isn't integral to the actual systems of the game doesn't mean it isn't an important aspect. So again I'll ask in this thread: what kind of fan response do you think Bethesda would get if you couldn't customize a character in TES6? Do you think gamers would be indifferent because they  don't find customization and viewing their character to be important in high profile RPGs?

First person is usually fine to play with mouse and keyboard, and it helps aiming in harder games without any form of autoaim. It helps fine handling of items and it can help immersion too. OTOH, third person can be good in melee with more than one enemy, as if the point of view is carefully set, it can help to avoid being flanked or attacked from behind. Third person lets players enjoy the aesthetics of their PCs.
So each solution has its pros and cons, and some depend on the kind of gameplay devs chose to offer. Obviously the ideal solution, when possible, is to offer gamers the choice.