How could I be quote mining when I quoted you in entirely within context. Nice hindsight bias bro " you know that content and features are pretty much interchangeable" in WHAT WORLD! You are literally " shifting goalposts" to make yourself look better and admitting you used an equivocation fallacy. Those two words, even in that context, are not the same things.Something can have a wealth of content but lack features and vice versa. Kaz was wrong when he said nothing was dropped, two things were indeed dropped, Course creator and car maintenance, the reset was either adapted or modified for sport. You can still race and upgrade your cars as you win more races, although it's useless when only 10% of the career races let you select a car. Geez , you found an absolute that wasn't an absolute from a translation. Also, you can accuse me of "strawmaning" when you replied to MY comment and not vice versa. My original comment was : GT sport is neither unfinished or buggy. I'v stayed on topic the whole time, haven't I.
I didn't say you quote mined me!
You quote mined Kaz, "Edit: Kaz said more features, not content....."
You based your entire argument around that, removing the entire part about nothing being removed.
A lot more features have been removed than the two you now mention as well.
Dynamic weather is gone, dynamic time of day is gone, the entire GT mode gone at launch, b-spec gone, vehicle modification via parts upgrade gone, track creation gone.
These are not minor removals, but major features.
So as I said, either GTS is not complete or Kaz was being deeply missleading (some would say outright lying) about GTS.
That's aside from the fact that only one example would be needed to show that GTS was not complete at launch, and we have two already. The livery import feature and the new single player mode.
I'm even surprised this is behaviour is something that would be argued, given PDs track record this over the last title!
You also seem to have forgotten to answer the questions regarding how bugs are measured! If it's you contention that a certain level of bugs needs to be reached for that term to be used you should have no problem answering them.
Now if buggy were a subjective area and any title with a bug or bugs could be described in that way then it wouldn't be an issue, but you seemed rather fixed on the view that it had to reach a certain level.
If and how buggy a title is however is subjective to a very large degree, is a title with a number of very minor bugs that don't impact on gameplay buggy?
What about a single bug that doesn't affect all, but utterly shuts down a key area of a title for those that encounter it? Is that buggy?
What if a title has suffered from both of these kind of things? Would that not be buggy?
My point was (and remains until you can provide an objective measure and definition of buggy that is standardized) that buggy is utterly subjective to the individual player.
Those who encountered the cars static on the grid in FIA events may have considered GTS at that time to be buggy to the degree of game breaking, regardless of the actual bug count at that time.