If they went for Witcher 4 or whatnot, it's fine to avoid certain themes. But Cyberpunk has some serious themes at its very core, and avoiding those or only touching upon them superficially was worrying to me.
Watch_Dogs 1's tone was more serious and the mechanics really drove home the subtle but negative consequences of widespread surveillance capitalism.
I don't think this is true.
One could create 'high fantasy' games, movies, books, and infuse it with any number of political views. But with cyberpunk the most common themes are highly political (and I'd say relevant to our time).
That said, I don't believe it always has to neatly fit into a 'left-wing' perspective. If anything, I'd say one of the defining characteristics is libertarianism, perhaps with leftist tendencies, but not necessarily so.
It barely admits that being able to choose genitals, independent of gender, is a step forward, only to then complain why CDPR didn't go much further by having players select pronouns and a non-binary voice.
Then it complains how the game is allegedly transphobic because it "objectifies trans bodies", a statement solely based on one poster in the game that made the rounds trough the Twitter-outrage-sphere a while ago, while completely missing how in the CP2077 world pretty much everything is commodified down to peoples memories and their individual body parts.
It's like there is some kind of agenda to paint the game, and it's developers, as transphobic since their PR Twitter account made a not so well received "Did you just assume my gender?" joke a couple of years back.
Along similar lines: Jeff Gerstmann complains about the lack of political correctness in some of the NPC lines, like when hardened gang-bangers proclaim "We are getting raped over here".
Which is just such an odd thing to complain about considering the setting: Here are these hardened criminals committing all kinds of unimaginable crimes like human trafficking, killing people, torturing people and pretty much everything else in the book, yet there's a weird expectation that they should be completely PC in their speech while engaging in these inherently anti-social practices.
Extra odd considering that a lot of the source material did something very similar for its time: The slang Gibson used in his books was inspired by very real criminal sub cultures like biker gangs and dope pushers. These kinds of sub-cultures where never particularly PC, still are not to this day.
So the expectation that criminal sub-cultures have to use socially progressive language, while abducting somebody to saw them apart for parts to sell, is just really weird and highlights a very odd double standard in our actual times: Depictions of all kinds of nasty things is okay, but as soon as the language gets nasty, that's where we want to draw very vaguely defined lines.