People here seem to not have much of a problem with that when it comes to IGN and the like, right? I don't think SR3 is anywhere near GOTY material. Customization, cut scenes, missions, activities, NPCs, vehicles, stores, exploration; almost every aspect is watered down or gutted from the previous titles, save for more satisfying combat. It's no surprise there's so much backlash on the official forum. I really love this series; SR3 deserved better than this. Maybe Volition was rushed and under funded, or they pulled a Rockstar North and streamlined everything to make it more accessible/ capture a larger audience. The new engine is in place and they have Steelport to build off from. If SR4 isn't as big a leap from three, as part two was from the original, and all the series' staples are still missing, we'll know they've gone in a new direction.
According to the Tom Chick interview, the main component that was loss due to a design decision was the story. They felt that the tone of the Boss in SR2 wasn't right, particularly in the brotherhood missions. Losing food was also a conscious decision, to allow the improved grenades. All the rest was a 'we wish we could have done it, but couldn't justify spending the money for something very few people would see'. And I wouldn't go by what people on the official forums say -- they're kind of crazy.