Poll: Enough with this 2-weapon limit bullcrap

[Ninjamedic]

It adds strategy, by limiting a gamer, the designers force the gamer to think carefully about what weapons they'll be needing. Gamers will be forced to use their heads and have to make calculated decisions about what weapons they should use.

And what should the consequences be for picking the wrong weapon to use since I am not psychic and aren't able to predict what they can throw at me?

In a genre that can be as brain-dead as the FPS this is not a bad thing.

Given that the genre is brain dead due to most weapons and forms of combat being over simplified and dumbed down as consequences of "realistic" mechanics such as the 2-weapon system.

 

[Treblaine]

Gears 4 weapon limit

But 2 of those weapons were fixed; the grenade and a shitty pistol.

It's like saying Halo had 4 weapons as you also had Plasma and Frag grenades.

 

[Tdc2182]

Even realistically I think they could bump it up too three weapons.

Pistol and two primaries, easily.

 

[Major_Tom]

2 slots for rifles + 1 for sidearm is fine for realism, in fact it's more realistic than only 2 slots.

 

[Ddgafd]

As I said in another Duke Nukem bitching thread, the two weapons system doesn't fit a game like Duke Nukem. It's not meant to be realistic, it's meant to be ridiculous and over the top.

As for other FPS games, it works. CoD for example handles it pretty well, giving you tons of ammo for both your guns. I personally don't care if it exists or not.

 

[The Cheezy One]

Metro 2033 - you felt badly equipped with throwing knives, pistol, assault rifle, shotgun (or equivalent), and two types of grenade. That was a good game!
On the other hand, sometimes a two weapon limit is necessary. Would CoD4 have felt as good if you were packing about 6 different weapons at once? Making that on the fly choice between SMG and AR shook things up a bit, rather than judging distances and pulling the most appropriate weapon.
But, I admit, DNF doesn't really work with a 2WL.

 

[Treblaine]

Instead of raging like a small child, think about what it adds to the genre. It isn't just realism, I'll tell you that.

Instead of calling people children, how about you read the forum rules.

Tell me what rule I broke.

Being a Jerk, particularly Flaming and calling offensive names. That includes calling people a "small child" without warrant.

 

[SammiYin]

*Yawn*
Is it really that big a deal? So precious half life lets you take around every gun in the universe. That just means when it comes to a tight situation, you just very calmly switch to the shotgun.
In decent limiting games you come to a tight situation and shit yourself, because you have a sniper rifle and a grenade launcher, you become more involved and your blood starts racing as you try and stay alive long enough to adapt to the sudden situational change.

Improvisation isn't hard. Having unlimited guns is even easier.

 

[Nomanslander]

Gears 4 weapon limit

But 2 of those weapons were fixed; the grenade and a shitty pistol.

It's like saying Halo had 4 weapons as you also had Plasma and Frag grenades.

Yeah but you were able to upgrade that pistol to a hand canon the Boltok Pistol. Anyways I guess Mass Effect is a better example, two main guns, upgradable pistol, and heavy weapons.

Still, Resistance 3 should be a fun relief from "realistic shooters," the game deals with health packs, a weapon wheel with alternative shots, and larger roam-able levels.

 

[Treblaine]

PS ArBeater: 2-weapon limit leads far more to tedium than strategy. In practice the developers use this as an excuse to magically provide the weapon they need at implausibly right moment... though more often than not you are left stranded with woefully unsuited weapons.

You can't be strategic as you have zero overview, you have no way of anticipating who or what you will encounter.

 

[Shock and Awe]

Its all about strategy, if I remember correctly that was one of the reasons Bungie made a limit with Halo: CE and started the trend. Its easy to just tote around all the weapons and not have to worry about making a choice but when you have to choose between weapons that are usually just different not better or worse you have to think forward and choose what will best suit your style and probably situation.

That being said, it depends on the kind of game the designer is trying to craft, I honestly think one like Duke Nukem would probably work better with more weapons, but thats just me and I haven't played the demo. But seriously man, don't throw a fit about it. :/

 

[ChildofGallifrey]

I think it should depend on the subgenre. If you're making a realistic shooter (CoD, Battlefield, etc.) have realistic weapon limits. If you're making a wacky-fun, gung-ho sort of shooter (Bulletstorm, Duke Nukem) then it's already blatantly unrealistic, so you have superscience sub-space backpack or something that lets you carry more weapons.

 

[Ryengu]

Three or four plus grenades works fairly good. Like Borderlands or Vanquish. I guess the idea is that it forces you to pick a strategy to use as opposed to just hauling everything around and simply matching weapons to enemies.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

Depends on game.

Duke Nukem shouldn't have the limit, some games should.

Also:

- Halo wasn't the first FPS to have the two weapon limit.

- And in case anbody has or plans to bring it up, Halo didn't even have regenerating health. You had shields, but your actually health was a non healing bar under that. (Which i think is better than just regen or bar)

Well yeah, but you DID die within 2-4 Grunt shots when your shields were down. Halo gave you fuck-all health.

Depends on what weapon they were using and diffculty.

 

[ameemo]

i understand the realism thing but in all honesty i play games to escape from realism, it's supposed to be a game after all. and if game developers say carrying only 2 guns at a time is realistic and want their games to be realistic and then at the same time say only one man can save the world as realistic. Let's face it in real life you cannot be a one man army and save the entire planet from destruction. So if all that can be achieved, why do they have to tie some things down with concepts of realism when everything else is just implausible from realistic view point.

 

[Ih8pkmn]

I thought we played games to escape from reality, not to experience it. So why only 2 weapons? I mean, the original Half-Life let you carry around no less than 14 weapons. Not very realistic, but fun as hell!

 

[Haelium]

I favour a new advanced system where you can hypothetically carry as many weapons(and ammo, equipment etc) as you like, but the more weapons you carry the more your movement is impaired. So you could be a walking armoury but can barely move, or a light-weight recon guy with nothing more than a battle rifle, a pistol and a few mags. I for one would play most games with pistols and nothing else(Like I did in MW2 where duel M9s could stand up to most ARs in CQB)

 

[rokkolpo]

I don't hate the 2 weapons thing.

But the duke should not ever be bound to less than 8.
EVER!
I'd sooner give him 42 weapons (Borderlands) than take one from him.

 

[Pyro Paul]

I wish people would stop bringing this 'Realism' thing into this argument... the 2 weapon set up has absolutely nothing to do with realism and everything to do with game fluidity. Simply said, if you give the player more then 2 guns at any given time you're making the game a lot more difficult.

When you have 3 types of melee weapons or 8 types of hand guns getting to that one specific which would be the best for this situation is a trial in and of itself, exspecially when in the throes of heated combat.

In games like Half-Life, Doom, and Quake you'll often get 'item confused' as you try to quick switch to a specific gun and pull up something completely diffrent. You'll throw Grenades when you wanted to shoot rockets... Pull up a pea shooter pistol instead of a magnum... or worst of all, pull out High Damage AoE weapons in close combat.

this effect can be seen in any game that has a selection that has more then 2 primary tools...
Deus Ex, Terraria, MineCraft, Garry's Mod, Red Dead Redemption, Resident Evil 5, just to name a few.

This is so well known an effect that it has long since been a factor in fast paced competative First Person Shooting games from the Orginal Team Fortress to Counter Strike.


you want players to be shooting...
not juggling weapons...

 

[Kair]

But they just want to make the game a bit more plausible!

- It's the DUKE. His very existence is implausible.