So I think with two specific examples we can start to suspect it’s a (mini) pattern…
Community loudly objects to some stupid feature’s Gears 5 implementation, and their defense is “ohh, it was in past gears, we didn’t add it to G5, it’s not fair to attribute it to G5! It was in past games!” Then, sometime later, in a much quiter voice they add “we just really cranked it waaay up AND added new OP elements to it, for G5, but the high level feature wasn’t our idea. We just made it really stupidly OP”.
Example 1: aim assist.
Aim assist isn’t new in g5, they say! GoW4 had it! Yes!
Then: we just cranked up friction and bullet magnetism, and introduced this new thing called adhesion, but see, GoW4 had ‘aim assist’ too!"
Expecting us to be complete idiots and not notice the HUGELY DIFFERENT implementation and effect of their changes…
Example two: auto aim melee
We didn’t create auto aim in melee, goodness no, past games had it too!
Then (from yesterday’s dev stream) “we just greatly increased the arc in which it activates AND we added the 5meter command lunge to it, but no, we didn’t create the idea of an auto aim melee!”
Again, expecting us to be morons and just accept that since past games had an implementation of auto aim melee they should be free to completely change it, add new elements to it, and expect us to accept it, because they aren’t adding a new “concept” to the game, lol…
Replies like that make me think either they are idiots or they think we are idiots. Or both…