Poll: Bioshock Infinite: Two Weapon Restriction

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

I'm apathetic towards it; on hard(which is essentially medium difficulty because of how easy medium can be at times) you run out of ammo really fast and you have to actually swap out weapons mid-fight/battle.

It makes the gameplay more tense and faster-paced, and I think having more than two weapons available would only diminish the effect of disparity.

But, I wouldn't mind if they let you carry more weapons IF the difficulty was balanced accordingly.

As a side-note, why is it that only the special enemy types use vigors?(Fireman, Raven etc.)
After all, Booker is a (sort-of) average guy, so why don't the regular enemies just down vigors like there's no tomorrow?

 

[khiliani]

I had no real problem with the two weapon limit, though it did surprise me at first when i tried switching to a weapon i thought i was carrying, but had apparently dropped. Im assuming its there to allow Elizabeth to throw stuff to me mid combat, which i thought was a nice touch, so i wont begrudge them for it.

What i found more off putting was the lack of appearance change on the weapons when you upgrade them. In the original bioshock when you upgraded a weapon, the barrel was longer, or the clip visibly bigger, whereas in infinite there is no change at all. I get its because you are swapping weapons out a lot, and we cant have the bad guys with fancy guns, but i still like the visual feedback of the gun looking better

 

[Shodan1980]

I'm not that bothered by it, there's always weapons lying around if you need to switch, and Lizzie usually throws in some useful little things to help. Makes you think about the tactical use of Vigor's more though, noticing more situations to use them in recently.

One thing I'm not happy about is these damn George Washington Terminators. Now THEY are a pain in the arse.

Shock Jockey is your friend. Makes them a pushover.

OT, I found the two weapon limit to be very little of a problem. When you have access to every weapon, how many do you constantly use anyway? In Infinite I picked a versatile spread and let Elizabeth and the vigours pick up the slack.

Whatever your feelings folks do not let such a minor issue deprive you of this classic

 

[Kael Arawn]

I'm apathetic towards it; on hard(which is essentially medium difficulty because of how easy medium can be at times) you run out of ammo really fast and you have to actually swap out weapons mid-fight/battle.

It makes the gameplay more tense and faster-paced, and I think having more than two weapons available would only diminish the effect of disparity.

But, I wouldn't mind if they let you carry more weapons IF the difficulty was balanced accordingly.

As a side-note, why is it that only the special enemy types use vigors?(Fireman, Raven etc.)
After all, Booker is a (sort-of) average guy, so why don't the regular enemies just down vigors like there's no tomorrow?

I presume its because where as our character isn't held back by morality we have access to them a lot easier then the normal Columbia citizen's that are actually semi subservient to there moral code, our Booker kills, steals and possesses his way through the world and after the first vigor we are given as a trial we pretty much take every other by force or under handedness.

Still its a fault with the world in general as i never once saw anyone using them besides the standard enemy times you have already mentioned and booker (we the player).

Where were the people using vigors to power production lines etc, if they exist i presume they would be a big part of general life in columbia like it felt like plasmids where in rapture.

 

[verdant monkai]

As someone who's a fan of the series but hasn't played infinite yet (but will get round to it) I can't say that I dislike it or that it doesn't benefit the game. But a 2 weapon limit is a boring idea for bellends, it wasn't fun in halo or call of duty, and it pissed me off in Gears uh War Judgement. I could strap at least 5 guns on my body! an assault rifle and a scoped rifle on my back, a shotgun above my clenched buttocks, a pistol and a sub machine gun on each of my glistening thighs. See Mass Effect 3 for how to strap weapons onto yourself...

Spoiler

There are no excuses for it either it wont dramatically decrease the difficulty because of the large amount of weapons, because you can crank up the difficulty or decrease the available ammunition. It wont get in the way of the vigors either because you could have two separate radial menus for each like in bioSock one and two.

As I said I haven't played it yet so it may have some reason which make it acceptable but I highly doubt it. It just seems like a lazy conformist move to me.

 

[ClassicJokester]

I found it rather fun to suddenly realize the sniper rifle I'd been icing fools with had gone worryingly quiet. Taking note if any enemies had been holding anything particularly juicy before their demise, or using a vigor as a quick distraction while making a mad dash to a convenient tear was thrilling. The game is clearly designed around the choice to only have 2 guns immediately on hand. Never found myself wanting for a particular class of gun (light, medium, heavy/special) when I felt I needed it. I suppose I just prefer interacting with the guns in the environment (includes dead baddies) when I need some more punch, rather than playing "pick the gun that is the clear winner for this situation right away, then go to the next area and do it again." Having to improvise a bit can be fun.

You may notice I'm avoiding saying 'weapon' re: the 2 gun limit.

You may notice you'll have 10 weapons on you at any time by the end of the game. Vigors are absolutely weapons.

Plus, ALL the guns interact well with Vigors (discounting the Burst Gun, which can go interact with anything it likes far away from me, piece of shit that it is). Were Vigors not a thing that you could use in this game, the 2 gun limit would get pretty stale. Once I figured out that maxing out salts first is the infusion route for real men with hairy chests and deep voices, I found myself hardly using guns at all except to start off my exploding Overkill/Upgraded Vigor Chains of doom.

Really though, if you're getting hung up on not having all the guns all the time, try using Vigors a little bit more gratuitously. I was very rarely low on salts past the first few chapters thanks to "Endless Pockets" Elizabeth, and you'd be hard pressed to deny the appeal of turning every enemy in the room into a mass fireworks display instead of dully popping at them with the guns.

Hint for anyone unsure how to use Vigors effectively: As soon as you can, start using the Upgrade/Gear (my sleepy brain can't remember which it is) that allows fireballs/bucking bronco/shock jockey to chain onto nearby enemies once the main target has died, along with Overkill if you have it. And upgrade vigors over guns when at all possible.

 

[TheEvilCheese]

I like the limit in infinite, I really enjoyed having to scavenge for a new weapon in the middle of a fight and felt it made to combat a lot more tense and satisfying. A 3-4 weapon limit would probably have worked better (two weapons and a pistol?) in this sort of game though. The lack of an RPG strapped to my back made me think about fighting the tougher enemies and experiment with vigor/weapon combos all the more. Then I found shock jockey + shotgun = dead patriot.

That said, I feel 1999 mode should probably have no weapon limit but remove the ammo Liz throws you mid combat. That would have been a nice throwback to old-school shooters and with the increased overall difficulty would be reasonably well balanced.

 

[Kael Arawn]

Plus, ALL the guns interact well with Vigors (discounting the Burst Gun, which can go interact with anything it likes far away from me, piece of shit that it is). Were Vigors not a thing that you could use in this game, the 2 gun limit would get pretty stale. Once I figured out that maxing out salts first is the infusion route for real men with hairy chests and deep voices, I found myself hardly using guns at all except to start off my exploding Overkill/Upgraded Vigor Chains of doom.

LOL, extremely well put. That sums it up really, all plasmids available at all times once collected means ANY gun works well.

 

[theevilgenius60]

It didn't affect me except for keeping me from using the weapons outside my comfort zone. I stuck to the basics: pistol, carbine, 3r machine, china broom and sniper. There was always another on hand if I ran out of ammo... Except in Comstock House. All I could find was a Paddywhacker and a burst gun. Not my favorites.

 

[BanThisAccountNOW]

if Dewitt can use the crank gun while riding the rails, he should have no problem carrying all those weapons. however any problem i have with this game is immediately dismissed because of how awesome it is.

 

[Kael Arawn]

if Dewitt can use the crank gun while riding the rails, he should have no problem carrying all those weapons. however any problem i have with this game is immediately dismissed because of how awesome it is.

LOL! I never noticed that, i never tried carrying a crank gun on the rail system and firing it at the same time, Booker dewitt either has a 3rd arm or he can turn the crank handle with his penis

 

[Matthi205]

I like it a lot. The limit adds a minor strategic element and makes the game feel less arcady. And it makes it easier for me to think of the protagonist as an actual human being instead of a pack mule with a bag of holding.

In theory, yes. But in this special case, it makes you ick up the best weapons and stick with them instead of using whatever is fun to use.
I personally ended up using the burst gun and the volley gun and nothing else, even if I'd have liked using the other weapons.

In PVP games there's a weapon limit because it's easier to balance a game when players can only have two weapons at once.

But I accept that the game is balanced for 2 weapons... so how could you balance it for more? JUst give the player less ammunition for each gun, maybe 2 mags (one already loaded in, one spare). This way, one would end up using all the weapons.

I'd welcome a mod for this, and I'd even do it myself. But I don't know anything about Unreal 3 scripting (yet).

 

[Arrowsmith]

Ideally the weapon limit would force you to conserve ammo and/or plan for the situation ahead. I feel that in Bioshock Infinite, this system doesn't really work because ammo is cheaply purchased from shops, found by Elisabeth, or readily available from dead enemies and stockpiles from tears and the environment. All that this limited is how I take out my enemies, but be it RPG or pistol, they are going to end up dead anyway because I am swimming in rounds/rockets/blah blah bah. At that point, you might as well just give us all the weapons to have a bit of fun with, and just limit the amount of carried ammo for each. As for forcing the player to plan ahead, there is very little indication in the lead-up to a particular area that specific enemies would show up. "Is it worth taking an RPG for a patriot that may or may not show up?" "Am I going to burst out of this house and find myself surrounded by snipers?" In the first game, you got time to study the enemy types before engaging them. You could hear a big daddy lumber about in the distance, or the game would show you silhouettes of spider splicers. Perhaps Infinite could have had some subtle indication; like a window that showed you would be entering a fairly vertical area (prepare for snipers) or perhaps one of the rebels pounded into the ground (handyman around!). Then I think the 'planning' aspect of the two weapon limit could have been a bit better implemented. I also wish ammo types had been kept

Bioshock Infinite is ****ing amazing, but man, the combat aspects are just a little shot sighted.

(PS First post! YAY )

 

[erbi79]

I think, you can argue that there are many flaws with Infinites Gameplay, the two weapon limitation being one of them

To me it was generally to easy, even on hard, and I dont even play FPSs. Or the lack of any kind of puzzles.

In the end I think the question is how important the shooting and gameplay aspects are to you personally in a game like this.

Since I consider Infinite to be such a personalized ecperience, its really hard to make generalizations if some change in gameplay would have improved the game overall.
But I could talk for hours on this ^^

 

[Cranky]

I don't mind it, it makes the game more balanced and challenging. The style is kind of different from previous Bioshocks anyway.

 

[Asset Rose]

I really hate the limit, its just not as fun, and I don't get to use or enjoy all the weapons because I want to survive. And a really lame excuse is that, "I don't want to change it because its the game design" Really now why does the design matter? Your changing one feature that really sucks, and its optionally. If its broke fix it. And this is defiantly broke. COD in zombie's now has a perk that lets you hold THREE guns, and if I really wanted a limit I would play Halo again. And I don't mind a limit as it doesn't matter in Halo because you run out of ammo and you find the same weapons over and over again. These you don't as much, (I've only played 30 mins so I'm guessing.) or ever find again. And why do I want to depend on birds to help me fight? And this game has taken all the great unique things that made Bioshock Bioshock. Its not as creepy, not as surprising, and not to hard to thing about, like in Halo, it really requires just to shot people in the face. No real strategy any more. To say the least, I'm very disappointed. Hopefully there is no Sequel to this place in the sky and they fix these issues. Majority rules.

 

[Asset Rose]

I really hate the limit, its just not as fun, and I don't get to use or enjoy all the weapons because I want to survive. And a really lame excuse is that, "I don't want to change it because its the game design" Really now why does the design matter? Your changing one feature that really sucks, and its optionally. If its broke fix it. And this is defiantly broke. COD in zombie's now has a perk that lets you hold THREE guns, and if I really wanted a limit I would play Halo again. And I don't mind a limit as it doesn't matter in Halo because you run out of ammo and you find the same weapons over and over again. These you don't as much, (I've only played 30 mins so I'm guessing.) or ever find again. And why do I want to depend on birds to help me fight? And this game has taken all the great unique things that made Bioshock Bioshock. Its not as creepy, not as surprising, and not to hard to thing about, like in Halo, it really requires just to shot people in the face. No real strategy any more. To say the least, I'm very disappointed. Hopefully there is no Sequel to this place in the sky and they fix these issues. Majority rules.

I mean no offence by this comment

 

[Genocidicles]

I didn't like it, but it wasn't a massive deal breaker.

Most of the weapons felt kind of samey and bland, so I'm not fussed.

 

[Lennie Briscoe]

The game, first and foremost, is made with storytelling in mind. Most first-person shooters nowadays simplify the weapon limits (among other things) in an attempt to keep the game's pace flowing. To allow you to switch weapons in the blink of an eye without the use of something visually intrusive, like a weapon wheel. Given the more cinematic nature of Infinite, it makes mechanical sense.

The original Bioshock wasn't so much a cinematic game, but one of survival. Carrying every weapon made sense given the setting and mechanics present. It also helped that there were, what, five, six weapons in the game? Infinite has something like eleven or twelve; carrying all of them would be a big hassle.

So no, I guess I don't mind it because what works for one Bioshock won't necessarily work for all of them.

 

[RaikuFA]

Hated it. It made the game so boring because I needed to run and hide while I look for more ammo for my machine gun, pistol and salts while in other games I could switch to a shotgun or any other weapon as well and take down the guys annoying me.

Ken fucked up big time, just so he could appease to that frat house he visited. He's nothing more than a tool in my book. Though he's still good as a storyteller.