It happens to me in several places, not just this one 
1 Like
But thatās literally what I was saying. Someone says āI think this would be funā, the first response is literally āno, that would be dumbā, but somehow itās still the fun-sideās fault for being exhausted with the cycle of over and over again having to defend what theyād like to see and trying to end the discussion by saying āyou donāt have to use it if you think itās dumbā (which between the lines also means āI understand that you think itās dumb, you donāt have to say it three more times whenever someone who likes this idea says they like itā).
The problem Iām seeing is that the original duck idea was profoundly misunderstood, and that the āhow to balance itā idea ended up being literally what Heisenberg suggested in the first place.
He never said āI want an electrocution duckā, he said āI want a taser duckā, and he explained more than just once that it wouldnāt be like the phone, because it wouldnāt work just anywhere, only in puddles.
1 Like
Same here, that is just one spot of many where it doesnāt seem to work for whatever reason. I dunno why.
1 Like
You think itās going to be fixed.
At this point, I doubt it. But you never know. I donāt work for IOI and donāt know their plans.
1 Like
Then you completely ignored my explanation then. I explained the whole ādumbā part, and also mentioned other people were not commenting like this! I showed screenshots of this! One person doing this does not mean we are all doing this! Why was this not mentioned? Why is it when āourā side makes a valid point, it never gets discussed properly by the fun-side? Why is it that we still look like as if weāre putting the fun-side down, even when weāre doing nothing of the sort?
I feel like Iām shouting into a cave and getting not even an echo back.
If the fun-side does not want to engage in mechanical balance discussions by suggesting mechanical changes over a back-and-forth, then they must be prepared for the fact that it that might impact their view on a weapon or ideas for one. They can try to tie subjective feelings in with objective observations and logic (you can still talk about the feel of a weapon in this context quite easily). Otherwise, the members of the fun-side that do this should either not enter the conversation to begin with unless they can do this, or donāt try and hijack it and attempt to end it with āyou donāt have to use it!ā, because it comes off as trying to change the subject into something subjective, and less objective; completely neutering the potential discussion, it is also possible to make such a discussion flow naturally into subjective weapon preferences too, which I believe has happened a few times.
In case this wasnāt obvious by now, I am exhausted with this cycle.
Also, Heisenberg, to his credit, didnāt say āthis would be funā, they were more opining about not having different ducks with different abilities (specifically annoyed at the twitch duck likely becoming an explosive or something weāve had before ā which I can agree with the sentiment), and they disliked the amount of reskins the ducks had; it was never about one specific duck to start with, and I donāt think they ever said it would be fun to do this:
His wording implied more that itād be nice to have a different reskin with a different ability to the rest of the ducks in WoA, not that itād be fun to use or have. Maybe they meant that, but thatās not how it comes across here, at least to me.
The responses they got were divided up so people could talk about each one. That started very reasonable discussion, and wasnāt inherently problematic.
And thatās something we agreed on! Both sides agreed this would be a balancing factor. I think I mentioned H2/3 generally has less water puddles in base-game target routines. What seems to be misunderstood and/ or ignored is that when merely mentioning it would not completely balance it, then the fun-side threw their arms up and reacted in the same way.
Because on this subject - taking away fun things because it somehow ābalancesā the game- āyour sideā has never made a valid point.
I will point out, however, in the interest of bringing this uphill boulder roll to an end, that a āvalid pointā is a subjective term, and neither side has a good track record. Now letās all drop this, shall we?
Itās not too bad, at least theyāre trying with Bean. Iām glad heās back officially. Busey is technically next but frankly, I donāt think anyone really wants him back.
1 Like
I said āthe first reponseā, not all responses, the first response, which implies that it was the first and not all responses.
Iām having a similar cave experience right now, so, letās just disengage. This is not me ignoring what you said, this is me recognising that whatever I say, however diplomatic I try to word it and whatever the extent I try to point out how both sides play into the issue, will be interpreted as aggressively insisting that Iām right and you all are wrong.
I do; this is a perfect place for such a thing, not in spite of, but because of that happening. We get to kill him over it.
Thatās not how itād be, though. Heād get money from the renegotiated contract and positive publicity. Up until this point it was an honour for celebrities to be murdered in Hitman, that wonāt be turned around to the polar opposite just because the celebrity is, um, problematic. IOI would be sending the message that yes, it is okay to feature him again despite everything. Theyād be actively participating in Buseyās reputation management, which would be a very, very bad look.
Iām sad that we wonāt be seeing this ET ever again, but there is no way to salvage this (apart from redesigning the NPC and getting a different voice actor, which they probably donāt want to do?).
3 Likes
@Combatglue after reading all this shitā¦
20 Likes
Fair cop, but frankly Iād rather not pay $5 (or equivalent) to bring him back.
Well everyone keeps to make their minds up because in the Freelancer thread a while ago everyone wanted it changing to emetic poison and stated it was bugged? 
I guess weāll find out eventually. Letās see what cool stuff awaits throughout the rest of this year. Iām sure IOI will have a few more surprises up there sleeve 
2 Likes
Nah as far as I remember, the bug that was reported was that if you had the emetic device and another emetic thing (like poison bottle, mushroom etc) in your inventory, when you used the still it would select the emetic device by default to make lethal poison, without letting the player choose if they wanted to use the bottle or shroom instead. There were indeed a few people wondering why it didnāt make emetic poison instead of lethal but that was earlier and totally unrelated.
4 Likes
Oh I canāt remember to be honest with you. Still, one or two bug fixes are still outstanding in Freelancer, such as the soundless Dubai Helicopter and the missing coin saga 
Thesd may very well be part of the upcoming patch as part of this roadmap though?
1 Like
Part of me hopes Year 5 happens, if only because Y5 would be Year 10 of content since the World of Assassination began in 2016. Ten would be a neat number to hit.
13 Likes
It is time for the penultimate not communicated on the roadmap Elusive Target: The Collector is live for the next 10 days, in Dartmoor.
Donāt forget the painting! (or do, itās optional for the low low cost of a at best 4 star rating and a missing challenge)
13 Likes
In PS5, the roadmap for this month in the āRecommendationsā section of the main menu has not changed from the winter roadmap.
Elusive Targets does not have the word āYear 4ā in it.
I donāt think the laws of previous updates have carried over.
Did the person in charge of the 4th year update not take over the job description from the person in charge of the previous yearās update?
2 Likes
Calm down - we do be in the Year 4, but have not reach the Season of Undying yet.
Ingame roadmap update, along with game update will probably come around 21 March.
9 Likes