.. is rather a trade-off between handling and comfort+reliability rather than a "missing feature". Even Civic TypeR in UK has a beam instead of independent suspension (which would be a bit sportier).
Double wishbone wears out faster, thats a given but the
handling characteristics are far superior-- there is no deniability to it. Ride comfort is also fine its mostly durability and cost concerns. Torsion beam costs much less since its not an independant suspension and an overall simpler design.
Quote from Wiki:
A major disadvantage is that torsion bars, unlike coil springs, usually cannot provide a progressive spring rate, forcing designers to compromise between ride quality and handling ability—progressive torsion bars are available, but at the expense of durability since they have a tendency to crack where the diameter of the bar changes
The new UK Type R, aside from looks and an awesome interior-- I would say is a poor Type R. The engine is detuned for fuel economy and handling characteristics are not that great.
Prior to the dominance of front-wheel drive in the 1980s, many everyday cars used double-wishbone front suspension systems, or a variation on it. Since that time, the MacPherson strut has become almost ubiquitous, as it is simpler and cheaper to manufacture. Double-wishbones are usually considered to have superior dynamic characteristics, load handling capability and are still found on higher performance vehicles.
It does not hold a candle to the JDM FD2 (which is basically FD1 but with performance extras).
I suppose they went with a Torsion beam because of the space saving since the car is already a hatchback and smaller than the sedan counterpart.