Ok, this is your definition of the relic. So let’s examine what you’re saying after.
Why does it have to be called something new and unique? Why not just call it a relic, since it follows the same definition you laid out for the term relic. It’s a weapon you get by upgrading through the duration of the expansion, ends up being a flashy weapon and at the end of the expansion it becomes BiS. And might I add, that I also consider the relic the weapon with the purple background.
What I’m against is saying “separate Relic from Eureka content” and not saying “give us another relic content along side Eureka”. This creates the impression that it’s going to be something worse than what we know as a relic (it won’t be ultimate level for sure). And the comment I replied to explicitly stated that they’re not advocating two relics. So that doesn’t make sense not to call them relics if they both follow the exact same definition.
Well, I never said I’m against the relic being obtained from both ways. I’m totally fine with that. But, again, I’m against when people are asking for a separation of the relic from Eureka and giving Eureka another weapon and refuse to call it a relic. Then what prevents it from being another garbage weapon?
I know I’m picking on wording, but if they’re both relics, then just simply ask for a relic weapon for the old content style and not separate relic from Eureka if they’re both going to be relics in the end and follow the exact same definition.
Else we’d have more comments like the one I replied to saying they don’t want two relics.
