There are two types of people. Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Anyway, I wish he'd been more explicit in outright saying something he very obviously meant. Which is that you have to pick the fantasy you're attempting to capture. Because you can't do them all. That's how you get excessively granular, crunch-for-its-own-sake, bland, expensive, kitchen sink systems that try to be everything to everyone and fail.

He could have said "blunderbusses are a valid fantasy that you could do, but we're not doing that today". And "muskets are valid, not today" and "flintlock pistols valid" and on and on. And it would have added 20 minutes to the video and no value to anyone. And he'd still apparently piss off someone who cares deeply about mechanically differentiating a glock from a desert eagle or whatever.

I despise the idea of revolvers in D&D and yet somehow still understood his design approach. Am I offended he didn't focus on matchlock long guns, the clear best firearm for D&D? No, because he's teaching tools and techniques in a free video, not providing polished mechanics that I commissioned for payment.

Side note. Any mechanic that discourages dynamic movement in combat (looking at you, Tasha's mechanic for rogue aiming) is bad design that contributes to dull, static combat. I remember playing 3.5e and being angry any time I had to reposition because it meant I only got one attack this round. Never again.