This was exactly what I thought when I first read it. But then the box "Unseen Attackers and Targets" talks about "...a target you can't see..." and even though it doesn't mention the Invisible condition, it would be reasonable to assumes that "invisible" would fall under "a target you cant' see".
I really can't see he problem here. All the designer taking part in 4e, has talked about how they were inspired in one way or the other by video games.
I mean, I remember the days back then. MMOs were huge and "the new thing" back then. I could totally see how people at WotC looked at that and...
Oh geez, not you too, Chris Perkins. Edition warrior badge earned.
Perhaps just accept people opinions on 4e differ? We can all have our own opinions about this without taking it so personally.
My feeling as well. There definitely was an uptake on the heels of the OGL-crisis, but I have heard many that switched back to 5e (or other systems like A5E) because of the more complex PF2 game play.
Pretty much agree. But I do fear that something akin to Apple's walled garden is hard to resist for business suits. But I do hope they don't go that way.