“Since this game was never meant to be a ballistics simulator like Tarkov, this approach seems reasonable.
By all means, keep advocating for what you want, but I would suggest what you want with regard to the weapons is not a massive priority on the part of the majority players, whereas new reserves and animal species are.”
With all due respect, I’ve heard this song before.
This year, I’ve convinced three of my adult coworkers to try out this game.
I didn’t tell them much about the game other than it was a hunting game, but that there was lots of maps for DLC that they can try on multiplayer to see if they would like to try different reserves around the globe.
They all had fun, of course, BUT ALL three express frustrations with different base weapons. [ First impressions matter. ]
I’ve tried explaining to them that they can purchase weapon DLC‘s to remedy this.
Two said they might think about it (PS5 & PC) and one said that if so many of the base weapons were unpolished, why bother -(Xbox.)
The two that said they would think about it are both IRL hunters and the third plays with a content creator friend that often bounces from game to game for fun while live.
This thread doesn’t at all seem to me like it’s nitpicking and efforts to become a ballistic simulator, instead, it seems more akin to trying to bring justice to a weapon or caliber that has been done dirty by interpretation.
Something to note: As this is a hunting game, if you’re actually hunting. - Your following tracks, listening to calls, spotting game, and harvesting game - Approximately 1/4-1/2 of your interaction with the animals may utilize a weapon.
If you’re grinding, then the performance of your weapon is magnified.
Downplaying the importance or role of weapons (particularly base weapons/calibers) doesn’t really seem to hold water, does it.