Alright, since Karma responded to that seriously (and I agree with his points here), I'll actually give a serious response instead of a poop metaphor.
I mostly GM, much more than I play. And I don't like things in rules that make me, as a GM, have to spend a lot of time dicking around with "how does this actually work" or that make me have to spend a lot of time and effort balancing PCs. When I play Shadowrun, it's because I want to play a game about people who meet in theme bars to pull off heists, not because I want to figure out how much ceiling space is needed for the high trajectory of a compound bow. Rules that are incomplete as-written and require me to figure out the rest of it myself piss me off. I can and do tweak rules, but I really prefer that there BE default rules for me to tweak. And I especially hate rules that are vaguely or inconsistently written, because then sometimes I will read it one way and a player will read it another way, and then we have to waste time figuring out what the rules actually say.
As for why Catalyst should care and why I feel I have the "right" to complain: if they made more good quality products (and had more timely errata for the existing produts), I would buy more of their stuff, run more games (and thus get more other people to buy stuff), and be more likely to recommend purchasing their stuff to other people. It's not like the only options are "Play shadowrun 24/7, it is the best game ever" and "never play Shadowrun again." I can also do what I do now, which is buy some but not all of their books, and when people ask me if they should buy newer Catalyst stuff, give them my honest opinion (which, for much of it, is largely negative).
