Let me try and explain something, sir.
I’m autistic, and I’m, according to the people I know, too logical and too pragmatical.
And I do not think from ‘emotion out’, according to them.
As example I can tell this one:
I’ve always was against plundra, why?
It would upset balance a lot, as people could now start to hoard ammo and whatnot.
It was proven to be correct…
Yet… I use Plundra to store gear to give away to those that want it (Discord Trading Center).
I mean, it’s there, right?
I was against Exp Weapons, unless balanced out, as these, when OP, would imbalance the game further.
I was proven to be correct.
Now… I do not use these, because they are too OP.
But DANG… do they look nice.
I was severely against transport of any type, as this would undo a part of the game: exploring.
I did say, I would accept it, if the dangers that come along with it were correctly implemented: you would be a sweet li’ll target.
Then, FR came with… a TRUCK…
I was the one, the only one, to think: well, if we have this… and seeing that safehouses (with a plundra that stalks us) is somewhat a strange thing, seeing we can teleport (WHA??? WITCHCRAFT, BURN DA WITCH!!!) which makes absolutely no sense…we COULD have a MOBILE BASE!!!
Yes… me… the one that is SO against transport… advising for a TRUCK as base.
BUT: That would undo this “witchcraft”, the “stalking plundra”, and best of all?
This base could be a new crafting thing, so you can make the truck “as you want it” (within limits, obviously).
Simple logic and pragmaticallity.
What I’m trying to say is: Though I do not always agree with implemented things, if I think, it might help the game, the story, I will turn to it for idea.
What I wonder is: you played the main story line, correct, sir?
Have you missed “Human NPC interactivity” (not speaking of spoken messages on recorders and the incoming radio calls)?
Or was that part good as is: where "machines (recorders, radios, …) told you where to go next, what to do next?