I think the problem here is definitions. I understand "morality" an imposed judgement system that rewards player for doing what it wants and punishes them for going against it.
What you're talking I call simple consequences, as in "I kill an NPC so they won't help me later.". But this is present in the game.

Also, have you even played TW3? Playing as Geralt is riddled with difficult moral choices. The fact he's an established character doesn't change that.

A tentative glance at the cesspit that is the "official" Cyberpunk 2077 Subreddit makes me wonder whether this old saying is actually true or not. Collective amnesia of the state in which The Witcher 3 was at launch, perhaps? Or maybe not, since anybody not buying into the hate train gets downvoted to oblivion.

Ah, yes. I apologize for mybrain. My attention deficit disorder disallows me to conjoin concepts and topical sentences in coherent manners. I start an argument, get distracted, move on to the next topic and forget to finish the first one.

What I was implying here, was something very much akin to Bethesda's Fallout 3's karma system but more involved, deeper. Something like different ways to get information and whichever choice you choose has a moral effect which adds to a hidden value. Whenever that value hits a milestone, you get a reward or a punishment and that would feel realistic. An example of a quest, would be to hit a location or to warn these people ahead of time. Whatever path you decide to take, you would gain an ally and/or an enemy. That would then influence the whole world around you, how NPCs see you etc.

Maybe somewhere along the way here, I mistook Cyberpunk 2020's Humanity for morality and I know they're not the same. I might just drop morality altogether to be honest. I'm feeling a little silly about it all now. But I stand by the dialog checks. They feel necessary for me, at least.

I don't really mean faction locked content, but faction themed stuff. Like Maelstrom ripperdocs could give you those nifty red LED eye implants they have. Something like that

Well, karma system is precisely what I'd call "imposed morality".
What you're describing here sounds like faction standing. That's true, the game is really lacking it. I did many missions against Maelstrom and then went to the main plot line and they're completely OK with me. IMHO the mission to recover Flathead should not even have a peaceful option if you're a notorious Maelstrom killer.

Basically, the game has no faction identity whatsoever. "Gang affiliation" defines only visuals, technically every encountered group is 100% independent. What player does to one has no bearing on how other groups treat you. That's a glaring flaw, hands down.

Aye, I agree 100%. Faction disposition is completely unavailable and it's ridiculous. Like, if I kill animals, I fully expect the Voodoo Boys to like me and vice versa.

Dude, in an environment like Night City, the only thing that would matter is if you can be trusted to keep your word. That's it. And nobody would care about anything else. Night City would have to change into a almost different environment before being a bad person or a good person, would matter to people.

Okay, but if you had the option to extort someone for money would you really expect them to not care? That there'd be no consequence to that action?
I personally hate one dimensional characters that can do absolutely no wrong. They lack creative writing and any depth to their development.

Humanity isn't a morality system, it's a measure of how human the character is as opposed to a machine. It doesn't really reflect a moral compass - a character with low humanity could be Data or they could be the Borg, one with high humanity could be Jesus or Satan. It also wouldn't work too well for the system you're describing - the only way to gain or lose humanity is to install or remove cyberware (and in the case of removing it, spend a few weeks with a shrink to rebuild your brain). Depends on how you define weight. There are consequences to your choices, literally life and death ones at times, though the consequences aren't usually immediately apparent. You're not going to make a huge impact on the world; just consider for example Johnny Silverhand detonated a nuke inside Arasaka's tower and the only real thing he achieved was a blip in property prices. As V, if you manage to make a neighbourhood slightly safer by taking out a particularly brutal Scav gang you're doing well, though most of it's inhabitants are too busy simply surviving to do much in the way of thanks.

I'd also point out that just because there's no enforced system of morality in the game doesn't mean there's a lack of moral choices. I've had several missions thus far where you have the option to jump through the hoops or pay up for a peaceful exchange versus simply taking what you want by force. That's a moral decision, you just don't get a pat on the head for making it in a specific way.

This is the problem right there ... When people say they got no problem with game.x() while others are facing massive problems influencing their opinion it usually ends up in a fight when one or the other share their opinion. Voting up/down is a weapon to further escalate or undermine/derail a discussion. Adding to that the fact that you never know whether it's a concerted effort, certain twitter groups or certain communities hijacking discussions, down-voting just for 'fun' or genuine votes and discussions of people owning it. Owners whether satisfied or dissatisfied for whatever reason aren't any better. Your experience is bad? Your fault! I enjoy it! Anyone saying different is a/an {insert word or words here}. where on the other side of the fence the argument is How can you say this game runs fine. You don't know jack ... Even company-representative.x() admits it is not! You are just a/an {insert word or words here}. Both sides are digging trenches, exchange niceties, vote up/down reviews or contributions to ongoing discussions depending which side they are on or believe is right.

You mentioned the Witcher 3 launch and you are correct. It wasn't quite what could be called a post-launch success. At least for many who bought day one it was not. For others though? It was a stellar success. Same story, same arguments and in the end the same outcome: People not satisfied will move on, press will stop writing about what's going on, discussions will decline and eventually stop until the next highly expected and over-hyped game comes around.

This has happened millions of times in the past 30, 40 years and hardly anyone remembers that there has been such an outrage about game.x() back in the day. Take Half-Life 2! People were outraged when they heard that it would require a thing called Steam to play. The game was said to be doomed ... Hardly anyone would if not specifically asked.

My guess is that people do not necessarily forget about such occurrences - or suffer from collective amnesia as you put it :-) - but rather the realization that it isn't important. And never was as it is one of a million of games out on the market. Whatever happened is in the past and people move on. The very same cycle starts all over again when the next big game is out.

The only lessons I would think people always forget because they're easily forgotten are never to buy into promises made by a studio or publishers in interviews/broadcasts and never to buy until a week, month or year after launch. Despite past experience many seem to cling to a hope that this time things would go well. Sometimes they do most often they don't. Hard to believe that there was actually a time one could go buy a game in a store on day one and most of them worked. Why? Because studios and publishers worth their salt made absolutely sure they would. Days long gone ... Not saying there was ever a time games hadn't had any bugs - far from it! ;-)

So, lets just wait until the storm over CP lightens up and see what's going to become of it: Massive success or failure. The jury's still out there. :-)

Furthermore, you mentioned Silverhand nuking Arasaka Tower and having no more impact than a drop in stockmarket values. Okay, but explain how everyone in Night City knows V's name? Their reputation? You say the city won't care about our deeds but it already has, by default. If V is already known from the Konpeki heist, then the ludicrous amounts of theft and murder they commit should be enough to raise eyebrows.

That argument is void. V does enough to make their voice heard, so it follows that a reputation system should work (rep, morality, either one applies to deeds committed).

It does to an extent, though primarily only in V's interpersonal relationships. Outside of that it wouldn't really work within the setting. You're one small fry in a city of millions, why would anyone care about you? If it's Sinnerman there's good reasons Joshua wouldn't be able to do that :P One of the core themes the game is trying to ram home though is that you're a faceless cog in a machine consisting of millions of other faceless cogs. If you refuse a mission, the client will just hire someone else. Taking retribution? That would imply you're somehow important enough that they bothered to remember your name. Key thing to remember in Night City is that human life is utterly worthless, biz is everything. Nobody cares what you do, they only care about what you could be worth to them, and if it doesn't work out there'll be another schmuck along in a minute.
There's some good contrast during PanAm's questline since the Nomads have a rather different ethos. Not coincidentally, it's probably also where you have the most direct link between choices/reputation and effect.

All good points but also, every fixer in Night City knows V. I drove through various parts of the city and got bombarded with 50 gigs to complete because I'm "the best and was recommended". Is that not enough to make you question V's place in Night City? Are they, honestly, just another 'cog' in the machine? Cuz this cog seems pretty important.

One minute with a scanner and I've got anyone's name, criminal record etc ...

Not everyone knows your name, note even your downstairs neighbour doesn't know your name, you have to remind him about a conversation before he even recognises you.
You're known to a couple of the fixers at the start because it's shown you and Jackie have been building a reputation as a team that can get things done. All of the other fixers tell you in their intro call that they've been passed your name. Fixers are little more than employment agents though, and while there's only a few we meet in the game in the setting there's thousands; while the Padre is important to us because we work with him, he could be a small fish in the grand scheme of things. The only 'top tier' fixer you really meet is Rogue, and even she's past her prime at this point. Unlikely. This is Night City.. The accepted means of promotion in a corporation is to assassinate the guy who's job you want, and your boss will praise you for the initiative. If you want to keep that job you're expected to bump off any ambitious underlings, and the only thing the corporation will care about is whether it hurts the bottom line. The city government's answer to the homeless problem is to nerve gas the tunnels they're living in, and areas of the city are designated a combat zone simply because nobody sees any profit in trying to establish order there, Bands of looters, murderers and rapists frequently raid the outskirts and neither the city nor the corporations do anything about it unless they become a problem to their plans. You think in the middle of all this anyone's going to care you bumped off some corpo private security and stole a biochip?