I am pretty sure this would not be the first time a promise has been broken, and I could not think of a better reason than this principle that gatekeeping content from new players for the purpose of placating veterans is better than enticing and increasing loyalty with new players
its like omg new players have the guns I have yes mate - we are playing a video game, people have access to weaponry
and what a pathetic promise to be attached to - again, if it was something so game breaking, it i unfair for u to have and i dont, and if it is not, what is ur objection to other players having it. This btw extends to everything a veteran has and a new player does not
If we are both in a queue and I’m Infront of you and get served first then is this unfair? No of course not, I simply got there before you. If you were there when Stalingrad was happening then you could have got you’re very own copy of a mp717r.
The only way I agree with the mp717r being readded is if it’s just as difficult as playing Stalingrad as a free player like I did. If it is any easier then it would just be a spit in the face to those who grinded Stalingrad.
It’s a betrayal because the Devs promised it wouldn’t come back. The mp717r is not better than the kp31 so it is just a cosmetic difference.
I’m sorry to hear you missed out on it, but the absence of the mp717r is not a legitimate grievance now the kp31 is accessible to you.
this is a false equivocation because in a queue you would assume that what you ordered would also be available to me to order. Like yea… you got in the queue before me and ordered a donut. I should be able to come after you and order Exactly the same donut. What is a more fair example of the situation is me and you go to the donut shop but because you started going before me, you get access to a nicer donut, and I do not have access. this sir, is unfairness
So because you suffered… you want new players to suffer? Right. No one forced you to grind Stalingrad. In fact, you should be on my side for this debate. You should be angry that you were forced to grind this bad campaign in order to gain access to this weaponry. If it was simply in the TT, you could play how you wanted and still gain acecss
I am sure that the devs have gone back on promises before, and this example, would be a great reason to revert on this silly promise
Lots of weapons are cosmetically different, but still handle objectly differently e.g the scope, fire rate etc - I would still want to see this weapon fully accesible
Now, the idea of what is legitimate or not is subjective, something I am willing to park
I started playing this game shortly before merge happened, which I never get my hands on mp717 and I been waiting and wanting to get it through event or something else etc…
I checked its stats to compare KP, and they actually ALMOST same. so I as someone who wants mp717 I am happy for kp.
But still people has right to want something they missed just because they werent there in time, whatever its event or some other way.
but lets go with devs logic, it will be better to add another PPSH with identical mp717 stats and changing its color to little dark and call it mp717(C) and give it via event… and everyone can be happy lol.
Not necessarily, i suppose I should have mentioned something about it being limited time, but that’s what I was trying to get across that because you didn’t get there in time you can’t get it anymore because of scarcity (although it is artificial scarcity in this case).
Captured guns don’t belong in the tech tree. Sure it’s been done before but that’s not a reason it should be done again. I’m angry that I grinded a campaign that the Devs said would be the only way to get a certain gun just for someone who couldn’t be bothered to demand he should get it without trying as hard.
I can’t recall any examples of them outright going against a promise, the only examples I can think of is when they’ll take a long time to fulfil a promise. Feel free to show me a example, however even if you could it doesn’t mean they should do it again.
Lots of weapons handle different but the mp717r and kp31 aren’t an example of this.
there is no scarcity. There is wilful gatekeeping, which is different to there being scarcity. It is not a resource, or a limited edition i.e only X number are around for consumption - this could be an unlimited supply, but there was a choice made to give some access and others none
That’s fair - this is something I’m genuinely williing to conceed on, and discuss.
Hold on there champ… It’s not that I am trying as hard. And again, I am personally sorry that the only way you were able to gain access to this was through this slog. However, the point that I would not try hard for this weapon is unfounded. It could simply be in the tech tree
True, I muddied the water on that one. However, breaking a promise and conducting a uturn are pretty much the same things
well they have different sights, perhaps different dispersion, I imagine different fire rates, sounds. This is largely a moot point, as how I prefer handling and you are subjective so
Because if a developer is honest enough to own their mistakes, that is a pretty good thing to have. Mistakes can be rectified. Those who dig in and cannot call a spade a spade can and will not attract new anything
