Yeah, having played Witcher 3 in 2016 on a base model PS4, I couldn't agree more. Loading times after dying were a full minute long. A MINUTE! They eventually fixed that with updates, but CDPR just isn't good at optimizing a game for consoles.

Rockstar is definitely up there, but they are not in some AAAA gaming space of their own. Nintendo's Odyssey Team, Santa Monica, Sekiro devs, Dragon Quest dev team, etc are all just as good as rockstar. And I'd even throw CDPR into that list. That is if they could launch their games without having so many bugs. :P

1. There is no PS5/Series version so that shouldn't be used at all to evaluate the PS4 and X1 version, that doesn't make any sense at all. And when you say specially on PC, you are in fact also talking about the console versions. There is only a single review of 81 in metacritic that gives lower than a 6 to Cyberpunk, while there are a lot more that gave it 10 even with all the flaws, some even recognizing they exist and are big.

The game working well for you in Series X doesn't remove the fact that it works very bad on base consoles (that are like 80-90% of the consoles) nor the fact that even on the mid gen they don't work fine at all. So bringing 9th gen running it better in BC to excuse the game isn't acceptable at all (because if we go the gen8 vs gen9 comparison then it is about 160M against 5M so less than 5% of gamers would be getting the experience on gen 9 system).

Have you looked at the system the reviewers have used? Don't mind PC (where yes they should also cover the minimum required on their review, which would certainly tank the scores), but on the consoles review I don't see they saying they played on PS5 or Series X, because again that would be moronic to evaluate the PS4 or X1 version on a different console. And some of then, like IGN, have posted the video of their playthrough and even recognizes that he had a very good time on PC but terrible on base consoles.

You are basically asking reviewers to be dishonest to favor a game you like.

2. Ok. My mistake, mistook you for someone else.

Weird I haven't had these issues. 30 hours in now and the game has been nothing short of fantastic. Actually I did have the floating thing once during the first prologue mission and once I walked through the items they went away and I haven't seen it since then. They have released a patch and NVidia driver since then though so who knows.

Its not the budget or workforce - lots of developers have that (ok not all at Rockstar Levels).  Rockstar strive for perfection in the their games and are given the space and time to do it.  Thats the difference in my opinion - space and time.

CDPR this time got greedy and pushed out an unfinished, unpolished game whilst doing their utmost to hide the flaws.  If they had given themselves more time which they could have easily done the game would have been much better received.  

Games should be finished at launch. It's pretty annoying when they aren't. Cyberpunk is a particularly bad offender and probably needs another 6 months of dev time even on the PC version. But I think that pales in comparison to throwing microtransactions into $60 games. Just my 2 cents.

There seems to be a theme with people that experience less issues (so far). The consensus on Steam is that the further you get in the story the worse it gets. The prologue and early areas are decently bug free, and the more time you spend there on crafting and side quests, well you haven't got to the really unfinished parts yet. Or maybe you're already further in and it's bizarrely random.

HDD fragmentation (or nearly full HDD) can play a roll, the game has very poor streaming, and HDDs usually get filled up from the faster outer layer to the slower inner layer. (Constant angular velocity, slower data rate and less data in the inner circles, bigger seek times). With freeing up space it's potluck where the game goes on the HDD, unless you factory reset your console first, delete everything.

That can't explain all the bugs yet time constrained from streaming data can cause plenty issues. Your play style also has an effect. The slower you walk, drive, the more time the game has to keep up. Crawling around in stealth mode should work better than running in guns blazing. Walking instead of driving obviously also 'improves' performance. I found similar issues in FS2020, places where if I fly too last low over the terrain, the sim starts falling behind in its data streaming and data management, gets slower and slower and eventually crashes. Very reproducible, one plane no slow down at all, a faster plane, slow down and crash, or the same plane with 2x sim rate.

So maybe, if you take it slow, stop a lot to stare at the details, the game gets enough time to keep up and the glitches stick to a minimum.

Another troll review

https://www.videogamer.com/reviews/cyberpunk-2077-review

Available on: PlayStation 5 [reviewed on], PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Xbox Series S / X, PC, Google Stadia

Since its release, last week, CD Projekt has issued an apology for only showing gameplay videos that were captured on next-gen hardware or high-end PCs. Those who bought it on last-gen consoles have found it in especially rough shape, with a faltering frame rate and a litany of bugs. I played it on a PlayStation 5, where it unreeled at a robust 60 frames-per-second, and I noticed very few visual glitches. I did experience three crashes, none of which—thanks to the autosave function—cost me any progress.

Puts up screenshots of the ps5 version, which doesn't even exist yet. Where is his apology?
BC killed the review system (well not really, can't kill what's already dead)

Their qualification for an 8

Proper quality: wonderful narrative, a breathtaking score, gameplay ideas that make it stand above other titles in its genre. Only a few issues hinder it from reaching that upper echelon, but we’re not talking anything serious like an addiction that rips a family apart. This is top bins, lad.

First one sure, second maybe (haven't heard anyone about the score, nothing about the music is this review either), rest erm no.

Completely moronic review, Hey I'll review base gen 8th game on gen 9 HW. At least he said it. And if you click on the explanation of what their score means you'll get that it basically contradicts the score gave by the reviewer.

The only metric SSM and ND doesn't compare to R* is the size of their map and duration of the game, but honestly that is pointless to me and if was the purpose of the studios or Sony they could pull a giant open world, if Ubisoft and even a lot of small teams (like team Yakuza, which can even make 80 creative sidequests and still release a game a year, without such major bugs and breaking game as Cyberpunk) can I see no reason why ND and SSM couldn't if that was their objective.

Insomniac was able of not only make SM near the end of PS4 life it also were able to make a beefy spin-off, make it crossgen, add a lot of stuff that can't be done on gen 8, remaster the original all for launch and they are Open World and will release RC next year.

No idea why you would compare a Rockstar open world game with TloU 2 or GoW. No problem to prefer TloU or GoW because of what they do better or just different but there is just no way to argue that a Rockstar open world game isn't a much bigger project in an own league which should also be much harder to handle.

Doesn't mean ND or SM couldn't release a similar game with the same quality, though.