6E is very good imo but there are some flaws that make me question the quality of the playtesting. I don't mean to offend anyone but I find it quite odd that some of the issues with the game actually made it in. The editing has a lot of problems, I don't see why the editor doesn't get fired. He is even listed as "lead troubleshooter" instead of editor, just because his reputation is so bad. Back when Jason Hardy did a lot of the editing the books had far less problems, that was back in 4E. Ever since 5E the editing has been awful. I find 6E very playable but some things can be tough to find, like the rules for how many damage boxes a vehicle gets being tucked away in a section titled shooting from a vehicle. Other times the rules for a certain mechanic are in a few different places in the book and you need to page-flip a lot.
As for errata, the hotfix is a good start and I'm sure the next batch will help a ton. I think its normal for books to have issues but Shadowrun tends to have a lot of them, especially very serious ones that make it hard for new players to play properly, while vets may be able to house rule. Even then, house rules feel bad to me. Pathfinder 2E may have more employees but the book is very well written and almost everything is easily understandable and playable right out of the gate. It has errata but the bulk of it is small stuff. You can only use CGL having a small team as an excuse so much, people want higher quality.
The book is beautiful, the writing is excellent, the artwork is okay but has some awesome stuff too. Fantastic cover, decently well-organized book (most things are easy to find), the game overall plays very well, I'm really happy with it and having a blast. But others are not as tolerant and competition is popping up on a seemingly monthly basis. I'd love to be able to buy the books and not feel like I'll need to buy them again later just for them to work properly with errata.
