One thing that struck me in some of the early announcements / 'reviews' of the Warrior was people talking about them being a model that is 'less than' the 2K11 - phrases such as 'cut some costs', 'reduced features' and so on ... the overall impression was the Warriors could be significantly 'less than' the 2K11s in features and performance.
I guess time will tell if any of that means problems for the Warrior platform as such. And whether future reviews talk about the Warrior for what it is, rather than it being compared semi-negatively to the 2K11.
You'd hope that Kimber having apparently taken on feedback from some experienced heavy users and modifying the 2K would mean that they have a lot of experience to put into the Warrior. In some ways, this might be a better approach than when a company makes a 'good enough' base model, and then tries for something advanced, but falls short. Will be interesting to see the longer-term reviews.
I guess time will tell if any of that means problems for the Warrior platform as such. And whether future reviews talk about the Warrior for what it is, rather than it being compared semi-negatively to the 2K11.
You'd hope that Kimber having apparently taken on feedback from some experienced heavy users and modifying the 2K would mean that they have a lot of experience to put into the Warrior. In some ways, this might be a better approach than when a company makes a 'good enough' base model, and then tries for something advanced, but falls short. Will be interesting to see the longer-term reviews.
