>>7334648I already see two of my biggest Nerf gripes present across all three (jolt reshells don't count) blasters.
>"pull-cord" style priming mechanismsSeen on the long rifle (blaster 3) and on pic related. Nothing makes me feel like I'm playing with a kid's toy than pulling on what looks like the cord from a Fisher-Price See 'n Say or a talking doll to prime the blaster. In an era of blasters that regularly feature firearm-inspired slide-action primes, pump-action primes, bolt-action primes, and even historical lever- and hammer-action primes, shit like pull-rings on extending rods doesn't cut it. I don't know why they're releasing so god damn many of these lately.
>"break-action" (not break-action) or "breech-loading" (not breech-loading)Seen in guns 1 and 2, and again in pic related (seriously the Tri-Break is my most reviled Nerf gun ever). It defeats the point of "realistically" cracking the barrel open and swinging it down on its hinge to expose the barrels' breech, when all you've done is exposed the gun's actual muzzle(s) hiding behind the hollow "show barrel" shell, and have to load darts backwards into the ends of the secret muzzles anyways. On top of that, it's not even remotely "break-action" when opening and closing the barrels does nothing other than add a fake barrel shell to throw off accuracy, and you still have to use a secondary priming mechanism to actually prime the blaster. Not a break-action load, not a break-action prime. For "breech-loaders" it's the same thing. Open the door to the "breech", then load darts backwards into the hidden "real" muzzles of the gun, alternate prime.
Both of these features succeed at nothing. They fail to provide a sense of firearm realism for "cool factor", they make for poor rates of fire and minimal dart capacity, proving inefficient for battles, and they're like three steps back in terms of design from blasters they were selling like hotcakes 3 years ago.
