I said name a sports/racing simulation that doesn't have realistic graphics.  You've come up with nothing.  Thus, having stylized graphics is a very strong indicator (read "screams" as I said in my first post) that the game is going to a more arcade style.  What sims have you even played, by the way?

Having the ability to correct a mistake in the future does not make making the mistake okay.  The fact of the matter is  that EA is clearly going for an entirely different audience than their existing one, and I'm betting if they miraculously have it do well, they're not going back.  They've dropped their core (I'm using core in reference to their existing audience, not that casual/hardcore crap) audience in hopes of making more money on another.  Do NOT try to compare this to Nintendo.  Nintendo has made their existing games more playable, but maintained the traditional set up (i.e. Galaxy with its co-op).  That's much more like the All-Play of 2009 (Without the terrible boxart and message they sent out to people).  Then, Nintendo created NEW franchises that focus on an expanded audience.  It's very different than what EA is trying to do.

"I said name a sports/racing simulation that doesn't have realistic graphics."

I wrote that there is a first time for everything, and if it doesn't work, they go back to the traditional graphics (as it would make solid proof those are needed). Why do you keep missing that?

That wasn't why I asked that (the point is not whether or not stylized graphics are a good thing).  I said, because there has never been one, this changing to stylized graphics makes it VERY VERY LIKELY that it is no longer a simulation.  You're forgetting the point of the argument.

"Very likely" is a big f-ing "Duh!". Of course it's likely.

I thought your argument was that they were dependent on a certain graphical style, and my response was that this game could prove that one way or the other.