I do also care more about the journey than the destination, but walking the same path twice just to get to the point where you made a mistake is a waste of time IMHO. If you like that, I agree. What makes a game interesting for you, pisses me off.
It is an individual question of the game we're talking about, I wouldn't do it in any other game. But here I enjoy what happens while walking the same path well enough, so it doesn't bother me. Just like I enjoy rewatching some movies or rereading some novels, while with others the experience of the watching/reading itself isn't that great, and even though it was enjoyable I wouldn't retreat my steps since I know how it turns out. Since in other games it is different for me as well, I do get your point. I just argue that this is a difference of taste, not an objective flaw of the game, so nothing that
needs to be changed.
(c) This isn't real life. It's a game.
It wasn't meant as a justification of
why it is done like that but more as a comparison to make clear
how this game works. A different example would be games where you do not use all abilities at once immediately but first get a hang of how to manage units, then how to manage building, then how to manage economy, before doing the whole gamut. Yes, that comparison is also off, since in most games where that happens you are limited by the game itself which you aren't here.
But while we're at it: it is a game so it doesn't need to mirror real life, that is true, at the same time a certain amount of "real-life-ness" in games is appreciated - though how much and where specifically will depend on the person, the game, and possibly air humidity. So while "this is just in real life" on it's own is no compelling argument that something must be included, "it's a game" is no compelling argument why it must be different either.