Not really - is this via Galaxy or offline installers?

Is the game placed on SSD?

Yup it is.

If you are using a HDD or even a first gen SSD, things can be very slow.

To patch, it copies over around 60 gig of files, then applies the patch, then copies them back.
Then deletes the patch data.

Very inefficient time wise, but super efficient d/l wise.

Normally I'd agree, but every single patch this game has gotten, has left my M.2 at 92% "applying patches" for a day every single time. This clearly doesn't change much between HDD/SSD/M.2, they apply the patches in the worst way I've ever seen. I have plenty of room on the drive it's patching on, well over 120gb of extra space beyond what it even needs, I am finding it harder and harder to believe these excuses....

Uninstalling the game and installing it again is faster than doing these patches.

I stopped playing cyberpunk around 11am yesterday and went out.
I came in at 10pm last night and saw that the game was patching and at 57%.
It's now 9am the next day and it's 92%(!!!!!).

Before someone asks..
1) Yes, it's on a HD, but that time scale is ridiculous.
2) No, it didn't take anywhere near that length to install.
2) I have 300gigs+ spare on my HD, so it shouldn't be a spacing issue.

I'm starting to think the uninstall/install is a better option.
I've not actually tried that yet.
It's only a good option for people with 50+ megabit connections though... lots of people dont have that.... so I hope they stop using this dumb patch method.

Odd you guys had such trouble... maybe you are short on drive space?
Mine finished eventually.... about 3 hours later.

53 GB Patches ..

I mean .. something is very wrong with that if you think about it.
I think AAA games need to take a look at how they set up patchability - this is just excessive.

Think about how much energy is used for what - a few fixes in code and maybe some textures and assets that boil down to a few dozen or hundred megabytes at best.

You misunderstand.
The patch is anywhere from 500megabytes to 3 gigabytes.

The problem is that the patching method they use is coppying over all the data files (60gig or so), before applying the patches, then coppying them back.
then deleting the temp files.

It's not that patching is slow it's that they released an Unfinished game under executive orders against the advice of talented people for profit.

1/2 the stuff I thought was working is not working, Game's just not complete.

Waste of Money / 10 much worse than its performance on PS4 literally 1000x worse than what plagued PS4, At least they didn't have to play through finding that most item stats are cosmetic or only work up until a new save is loaded then it's all just little pictures of number that do nothing.

This is the worst QA I've seen bethesda were bad with crashing due to bad script / prop setup wrong easy fixed, The stats on Items apply in fallout the saves don't glitch out unless massive tampering with the core of the game..

This is an Alpha release with a Beta like finish, There are more functional Demos for games than this.

I also thought this would be about releasing patches, but it seems OP means the actual download/installation of patches. Oh? Do you have source for this? I thought the devs and the QA had said the game is not ready, but the management ignored both and published it anyway. But if you have information that QA did not report all the worst bugs, I would like to read about it.

Part of QA is also management agreeing on what the finished product is acceptable as, Not the Play testers they would've known this from the get go.

I don't exactly agree, but I do understand what you mean. Yes, the managerial side is a part of the process, but not a part of the QA department.

From how I understand it, the devs and the QA did their best and it is the management and marketing that have the full blame on this one. Management pushed an unfinished product out, in spite of devs' and QA's warnings and marketing promised way more than the game could deliver.

My finger is pointing directly at the management.

Did you read about the vulnerability? Some modder (PixelRick) found a security risk. A few days later CDPR, instead of releasing a hotfix, wrote a message "modders bad". ( https://twitter.com/CDPRED_Support/status/1356604047671898112 ) So another modder (yamasushi, known for Cyber Engine Tweaks) had to make a modder side statement ( https://forums.cdprojektred.com/index.php?threads/important-pc-version-vulnerability.11078852/#post-12855656 ). The management and marketing just keep on messing up. Instead of releasing a critical hotfix to address a security vulnerability, they threw modders under the bus. I don't understand why the stock holders don't demand that CDPR replaces the whole upper management.

Yeah, just read this, very disappointing. CRM 101 was clearly not provided as training to those in charge.

More to do with your PC then the patch imo... it installed relatively quickly (for its size) on mine... 10700k M.2 2 gig 32 gig of 3200 ram... no doubt it will vary from PC to PC.

Yeah that's why your patch finishes faster.... it's still doing the entire data archive copy, but you have something that is vastly faster at copying the data.

Try mirroring your m.2 drive to a HDD and you'll see the 3+ hours patch times.