So I just got the PC version of this game and I really should have done more research before doing this. We all know the issues by now, FPS locked at 30--if you hack it to run at 60+ it completely breaks the game to a non functional level, and not to mention that terrible opening tutorial. If you feel like you don't understand why these are big issues just watch this video from TotalBiscuit:
So to get to the point of this thread; wasn't NFS suppose to be in the hands of Criterion and Criterion alone? I thought I read a press statement about this before Most Wanted came out. I am not starting a witch hunt here claiming that this game is total dog shit just because it wasn't made by Criterion. It isn't total dog shit, I actually do enjoy playing the game. But the choices they made with the locked frame rate of 30fps (which as TotalBiscuit said, shouldn't even be acceptable on this console generation let alone the PC) and the poor tutorial/introduction to the game are all decisions that I feel Criterion would not make. I believe they would hold themselves to a higher standard then that.
I was so hugely optimistic the direction NFS was heading towards when I thought Criterion was taking full control. This game is still pretty fun to play but the questionable design choices in Rivals are just frustrating. I was hoping Most Wanted would set up a standard for the NFS series that was sorely lacking in the previous editions, this game just feels like a step slightly backwards from that standard. I fear it is a trend will see continue to worsen with NFS but at the end of the day...it's just EA being EA ya know? guys?