Oh things can be very shiny in real life, problem is cameras never do it justice, neither do displays. HDR is still in its infancy and screens can only display up to 50% of the color range the human eye can perceive. Hence overcast videos always look more realistic.

Also lower resolution videos tend to look more realistic as your mind will fill in the gaps with more detail. 4K graphics videos reveal all the pristine surfaces making it look fake. Hence developers use crutches like dirty/cheap lens effects, chromatic aberation, film grain, to hide the lack of small detail.

Well it should, cause it's reality lol. But shows cameras can show near and far detail in focus perfectly fine, enough with the dof effects :)

The combination of the highly detailed lighting and modelling with those awkward robotic animations creates a rather unpleasant effect, in my opinion.

It's not enough to just look real, your world also needs to move and feel real.

Looks weird but I wouldnt mind playing it like that.

Infact I'm hoping to play it in the future when I get a better PC.

This. The tech demo looks boring because it's a tech demo.

Live-action movies are usually quite photorealistic, many of them have a lot of artistry too.

The more realistic, the better. The problem with that video is that there is no dirt and grime and wear and tear, everything is too clean and pristine and the lighting is more studio than real life. But realism in itself is not the cause of that, it's about how you model things.
Too bad I didn't get to see Panam bae in this mode.

I done a quick search and found this from a few days ago. While it's still a little bland in terms of artistry, I'd like a kind of Elden Ring oil painting look over it but it's definitely something I can get behind more than the Cyberpunk demo. It's still... uncannybin the way everything moves, aside from the fact that they are lions. Although  game studios are much, much better at animations. RDR2 animations are so much better than anything I've seen after a quick search of live action, there even better than Hollywood cgi. 

Realism and design are two different metrics though; one doesn't automatically enhance or dampen the other. One issue with realism in games is that it usually looks too glossy and polished - it looks like a layer of effects placed on top of assets and environments to make them appear more real. The realism, or lack thereof, in game visuals doesn't put me off playing them. Games are about so much more. Heck; look at something like SKALD: Against the Black Priory, the whole package makes for a terrific experience.

Yes, I do think graphics can be too realistic. There’s a visual language to video games, which maintains a certain safe distance from reality. Eliminate that distance and something important is lost. It’s not unlike 48 FPS in movies — it might be technically better but it goes against a cinematic language that’s been operating for a century.

I think video games need some level of artifice to work.

Exactly, there's a soap opera effect after a certain point. I'm hoping games go more for renaissance art effect in their realism. Elden Ring already had that oil painting effect on landscapes and some other games do it too and some say that's a bad looking game. One game that gets it right though is RDR2, it looks so much like a fresco painting in certain conditions and many people call it one of the best looking games of all time.