> I never advocated anything like that. Matthew, you agree with what I say can be construed as lazy programming. Like you, I believe that playing through a story-driven game like Half-Life isn't lazy programming.
>
> Stephen is thinking I'm saying all games that have levels should have those levels accessible at any time.

See, I agree with both Matthew and Faux Pas here, so why we're debating this point is kind of silly. But, to go back to the original point, I don't think that having a driving simulation which forces you to earn money to get the best cars is misleading when it claims to "feature 200 cars."

> "Features 30 levels" does not indicate that each level is played sequentially; "Play through 30 levels" implies as such.

But it doesn't indicate that they're not played sequentially, either. As Matthew said, all it means is that the game has 30 levels in it. I think is the central point of contention here.

Faux Pas, I really don't understand why you think the word "features" implies that all features are accessible from the very start.

Ste "Yeah, okay, so I *was* being kinda pissy before, and for that I apologize" phen