Rebel: There is no "need".
It's called "fun", or as Steve might put it, "sending a nod to those without whom..." Showing respect, and having fun on stage. He played 20+ of his own songs, and people have nbeen begging for change, nagging for him to re-introduce old songs. Were you looking in this Forum then??
Anyway, Prince plays covers (He doesn't NEED to), seemingly out of nowhere (see recent Live reviews); Springsteen plays covers (He doesn't NEED to - War, and others); U2 play covers (They don't NEED to - many - also linked in with their own material as Steve often does); Steve occasionally plays covers, and like those other artists the main point is to give people fun, a memory, a chance to remember where it all began; for Steve it was with Dylan and The Beatles; one day he'lll probably perform a Motown song on stage...but not at the "expense" of any other track. He sang, on stage at those recent concerts, for two and a half hours. He's entitled to rock out with a couple of minutes of covers in all that time, don't you think? "Tumbling Down" might well have appeared if there had been a fourth show in that short run - and you would have missed it anyway. On the other hand, it might not have appeared. With 12 albums and a myriad of others' songs to use, why would Steve play "Tumbling Down" for the rest of his life?
Maybe if you'd been there, your criticism might carry some weight....but you weren't thetr, to ENJOY the FUN those who were there enjoyed. I saw two and they were hugely memorable nights. Maybe those who were there will give their own views, many have already, on the 2 short covers SH played in amongst the 150 minutes spent on stage.....RACHEL
PS Steve has explained many times on stage the depth, the hidden messages in the seemingly simple True Love Will Find You In The End - it's not, in Steve's humble opinion, "pretty ordinary" after all