Different strokes for different folks. As with all games the experience will differ between people. Reading your post JohnnyFootball it sucks that you didn't resonate with the game like I did

. I feel that way about everybody taking a more disappointing stance though, because clearly many of the issues that hampered yours (and their) enjoyment simply did not crop up for me.
Combat is probably the big line drawing factor for me though. I don't necessarily feel the combat
can't be improved, but my opinion of the matter is that most people who don't like it quite frankly just suck at it and the problem is theirs, not the game, and I wouldn't want CDPR to redesign a perfectly functional game system to accommodate people who've failed to adapt to it. I don't want the click-to-win flow of Arkham, and I don't feel it needs to be like Souls. I quite like the direction CDPR went and how it has its own feel.
But yeah, different strokes. I like reading dissenting opinions on popular, well received games as alternate perspectives are always healthy. Much like how people slobber over Bethesda's Skyrim and Fallout 3, to me they're borderline turds, and I know that's an unpopular opinion. It's good that we have some variety in game design, and opinions all across the spectrum.
For example, stuff like this (which you admit to going either way):
Is more or less the heart of what I love about role playing, the absence of which dulls other "RPGs". In fact, I wish Wild Hunt did
more quest networking and alternate pathing.