Jeff's exactly right about why we made the format change a few years ago. Having consistent headings allows for a reader to quickly skim a review and focus on only the aspects of a vehicle that are important to them – useful if someone is comparison shopping. In fact, part of the original plan was to allow two or three reviews be pulled up side by side for a point-by-point comparison. (That didn't happen for a variety of reasons, but as a result there was a push for smaller, more frequent comparison tests of popular models.) And the editorial direction to avoid technical jargon is also intended to make these reviews easy to understand for a general audience.
First drives are the counterbalance to this rigid structure; we just haven't had a lot of them over the past year or so (for reasons). There was also a budget crunch last year (for reasons) that severely restricted the types of story we could pursue, which is why the balance tipped heavily toward straightforward reviews. So even in instances where previously we would have run a first drive, we didn't know if a) the vehicle would make it to the press fleet, and b) we would have budget to cover it when it did.
With restrictions on public gatherings lifting, we'll see a shift in the balance of stories; once OEMs can run events as they're used to, writers will only have a few hours in a car, rather than a few days – it's enough for a solid first impression, but not enough to get a complete sense of its function in everyday life. The format for full reviews isn't changing, but you'll see writers being able to flex their writing muscles a bit more.
As for the 10/10 Power ratings... well, that's above my pay grade – I'm just the spreadsheet guy.
