Ramayana is an Indian epic and what Amish Tripathi has done is to completely fictionalize it. If you are looking it as a book where you just want to read the story of an individual called Ram yes you can go for it. But in no way it should be connected to the epic apart from the names of lead characters.
What I liked about the book was the way adherence to law has been explained. It’s a beauty. Also Ayodhya is represented as a place similar to current India where people dont respect laws.
A place where laws are circumvent and how an individual with his own actions trying to bring back the respect for laws in his land.
What I didnt like about the book was the majorly 3 things
Characterization of Sita. Sita has an inner strength and that is her major quality. There was no need to show her as a woman like Sati walking with knifes and swords
Making Sita swayamvar similar to Panchali swayamvar. Yes I agree he is doing a fiction of Ramayana. But the author also needs to know that there are enough people who have read mythology for what it is and people who understand mythology also. He cannot hoodwink people mixing Ramayana and Mahabharata
There was no need to bring in a case like Nirbhaya in the book. Already the issue of Nirbhaya is very sensitive. Author shouldnt have used it in Ramayana. There was no underage thing in Tetrayuga. Misbehaviour to woman was dealt with death penalty. That was it.
So I would recommend people who have basic idea of Ramayan to give it a try, just to get a perspective. Others please read it as fiction and not as Ramayana from any angle