If you're one of those folks inexplicably bitter about prerelease trailers then maybe I can understand your stance. But dismissing the monumental amount of effort that it has taken to deliver what some of us perceive as one of the highest works of art in the genre, is ridiculous.
I definitely think CDRP had a lot of help world building from the source material (perhaps leaning on it too much) but I'd definitely buy a sequel, maybe not on launch though!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberpunk_(role-playing_game)
I also loved the game. Really don't understand all the hate it received.
I can't say anything about C2077 because I haven't played it, I can just repeat what Gibson said about it. And he didn't play it either, he was just judging the trailer.
What I can say is to note the three things you mentioned, "transhumanism, sex and corporate power" are also explored in other highly derivative and uninspired works of cyberpunk-influenced fiction, like Altered Carbon. Boy, was I disappointed by that show [1]! It's completely shallow, uninterested in exploring the philosophical ramifications of the technology it introduces, and instead goes for flashy visuals, endless action and explosive gore. I watched season 1 because I wanted to know whodunnit -- it was disappointing -- and season 2 was unbearable.
Whether you agree with me or not that Altered Carbon on Netflix was garbage, at least you must concede using those cyberpunk tropes you mentioned is not enough to determine quality or complexity of the plot and/or message. They are just tools in a toolbox, and can be used to build something interesting or something utterly uninspired, just another "gritty" cyberpunk copycat.
---
[1] and from what my friends tell me, the book series is not fundamentally different. Only the details vary.
Richard K. Morgan's Altered Carbon books (as well as his Black Man, published as Thirteen in North America) are very angry and bleak in tone, from what I recall. (But they were not angry at technology itself, the way the characters of the Altered Carbon TV series were; in-universe characters weren't trying to eliminate the cortical stack in the books.) They also have some spectacular action sequences, which is probably why they were picked up for TV. They have some horrific tortures (both in VR and out of it), much worse than shown in the TV adaptation, which is why I haven't re-read them like I did Neuromancer.
But as a fan of the genre I think that CP2077 did what it set out to do and then some. And while those points may be somewhat tired cliches -- and admittedly these are my favorite kinds of narratives so I don't really care -- the only pieces of any kind of media that made me truly feel like I was in the driver's seat roleplaying that experience was the original Neuromancer and Cyberpunk 2077. Not Rifts RPG, not Blade Runner, not The Ascent (and holy shit what a suprise blessing that game was), nor anything else.
One dimension of Cyberpunk as envisioned by William Gibson genuinely was explicitly aesthetic, in the way in which it was meant to be understood and experienced. So derivatives focusing on that aren't necessarily missing the point.
However, it's still certainly possible to reproduce those aesthetics in bad ways, or to lean on them to the exclusion of any deep message or story of any kind, etc. And it's certainly fair to criticize any given derivative for shallowness of vision. So, as a criticism of Cyberpunk 2077 it's perfectly appropriate, but I don't think execution of aesthetics in and of itself misses the point.
Point of correction: I'm trying to convey what Gibson said. If there's a generalization, it's not mine but his. The guy invented cyberpunk, so I think he has a right to holding very strong opinions about it.
I do tend to agree with Gibson, but I also like the aesthetic and I'm content reading and looking at cyberpunk, as long as it's not too lazy.
I'll look harder later ;)