QUOTE (Tymeaus Jalynsfein @ Dec 17 2012, 02:02 PM)

One man's Dumbing Down is another man's Streamlining.

No argument here.
QUOTE (Murrdox @ Dec 17 2012, 02:03 PM)

I don't really understand why people don't enjoy 4th and prefer 3rd or even 2nd or 1st. I mean yes I do understand but at the same time I don't. 4th solved so many problems with previous versions of Shadowrun.
The answer is two-pronged;
1) Mathematically, the 3rd edition mathset worked fine. It offered superior granularity and functionality, at the cost of some minor complexity. I never had any trouble with that complexity (in fact, it was that complexity that I enjoyed - it's the difference between a game of checkers on an 8x8 board and a game on a 4x4 board). I understand not everyone likes math. 4th "streamlined" it away. I'll run 4th for my kids. But I don't enjoy playing it for myself; not for a tactical game.
2) Setting-wise, SR3 did have some issues. SR4 removed most of those issues (and a lot of other stuff too). But what they replaced it with wasn't great. In my SR3 game, I steal liberally from the SR4 core book. There's more wireless matrix, cheaper cyberware, etc. There is quality material there, and it does fix some issues with my game. But they took it too far, and I don't enjoy at least 30% of the other material (with a good chunk of the remainder either being the same, or good but not applicable to my game). I like an 80s cyberpunk setting, with hermetics being substantially different from shamans and so on, and SR4 isn't that.
This isn't a knock on SR4. I just don't like it, and that's okay. I don't like D&D either, but that doesn't mean the hundreds of thousands of D&D players are playing a worse game.
If SR4 were revised, to either be a more granular, tactical game, like SR3, or to be a rules-ultra-lite, story-driven game, or something crafted like Eclipse Phase, I might enjoy it more, and get back on board. If SR5 is SR4 with a new cover, obviously I still won't like it (although SR4 could use a new cover ...)