To be fair, it's not like these features can't be improved. They can only develop and implement a feature within the scope of the time they can afford (time and resources are finite). There's also, I'm sure, a series of standards that the game needs to be able to perform to, before a new feature is distributed to the public. It doesn't really matter how well a game is designed, if it doesn't run to an optimal standard (lag, crashes, etc.). They're not going to just throw a feature haphazardly, and then plop it into the game. This practice has been the ruin of many a game. I'd rather have a less than ideal feature added, than one that caused the game to crash. Again, they can always improve it later.

Also, just because another game may "do it better," doesn't mean that the devs of this game have access to their competition's design structure (they're not going to hand over their "blueprints" to the competition). They still have to figure out how it is going to be implemented in their own. There's no waving of the proverbial magic want that causes a new feature to be added instantly, perfectly designed and perfectly optimized (and perfectly received by the players). These things take time to design and develop, and even more time to perfect (partly based on user feedback, of course).

That being said, since we are paying customers, and they have provided us with this lovely forum, it's up to us to provide them with constructive feedback. We shouldn't allow them become complacent. Laurels are nice, but they don't pay their bills. We do. However, I'd say it would be a much better time for all to keep your expectations in check. It's perfectly acceptable to want better, but it's really not worth the energy to take it personally.