Yeah, I would get that crap outta here, man. Haven't checked the spoiler boxes, but I'm assuming they're spoilers for the story.
And I'm repeating myself here, but you just DON'T know what Nomura's vision was beyond what little ("little" for 8 years) was shown. And what was shown? The beginning of the game (which was potentially much, much better than what we got) and a few snippets of info here and there (and Altissia, which, afaik, looks about the same barring the clearly pre-baked visuals the E3 trailer had).
You don't know how that game (if it ever got to a certain point of development under that vision) developed beyond that point. You don't even know how this game actually unfolds the story, as you haven't even played it. You just saw the ending, I'm assuming, in a half-arsed way (why I don't even know), which isn't enough to ponder on everything that happened before that point. Or bulletpoints, as basically any story is going to look weird and dissapointing in those: it all comes down to presentation and execution, as well as pacing and interrelation with its gameplay.
It's OK to feel dissapointed about changes. I am to, to a certain extent (I liked the original 2009 Stella design better than what was changed during 2013, or her overall presence in Insomnia to what actually happens in KG; I vastly preferred OG Regis even though the new one is a good design too; I would have loved having Insomnia as the main scenario for the beginning of the game; I'm still a bit bummed you can only control Noctis -much less than before, though-). And it's a list that goes on.
The problem comes when everything is blown out of proportion (it's just a videogame, after all) and when people use their own, built throughout the years, expectations, no matter if they have a basis on reality or not, to gauge how a game satisfies them. I'm a bit tired of people dismissing Nomura's vision, but I'm even more tired of people bringing it up as some sort of bastion of great writing, planning and characterization. Basically because we know jackshit about it.
And think about it: many changes you might be complaining about right now could have been made by Nomura himself (in the 2013 trailer, Stella has an almost identical design to Luna -especially as a kid, same dress and all- and she's shown being Noct's friend when a child; it might have just been a dream, or a memory-loss thing. But don't disregard the possibility that that change was made by Nomura himself already). Further than that, Nomura wasn't writing the game afaik; Nojima was. And we all know what he's capable of (both the good or great, and the absolutely awful), so I wouldn't count him as a bastion of know-how in terms of his stories (great concepts often muddled by atrocious or mediocre execution).
Also, many things are being blamed on Tabata as changes he made when we don't know how Nomura would have approached them. He already talked about having the story unfold its plot in a much scarcer amount of Visual Works' scenes and traditional cutscenes: he wanted to give player control. We also don't know how many cities he intented the game to have (nor do we know how many of them there are here; if you do, don't post it here, please). We also don't know what things have been cut beyond the obvious (the beginning) and what would have been done by Nomura. He's also not a god that controls everything, as it's obvious by now that he likes giving others the spotlight and incorporate their ideas.
I'm not saying you can't criticise Tabata's role or this game (which, surprise, is not going to be perfect, far from it), or even do so under a comparison drawn between it and Versus. What I'm saying is, wait until you've played it by yourself, and then do criticise it. And when you do, if you want to compare it to Nomura's vision, do such thing basing your arguments on actual facts and known information (say, "I'm dissapointed with the beginning of the game, Nomura's version looked much better" or "I preferred how Stella fought with a rapier and was in an antagonistic position to Noctis").