Poll: Enough with this 2-weapon limit bullcrap

[David Bray]

I reckon an inventory weight load managed behind the scene's would be better.

Got a bazooka, then you can only have a pistol.
Got a pistol, then you can have a rifle and a shotgun.
Got a shotgun, then you can have a combat knife and 2 pistols.

Its because of multiplayer that this standard has arisen, as it's easier to impose immediate balance on the game. Wanna see it return? Play more single player

 

[Reaper195]

I think realism needs to fuck right off in video games. I miss my three tonnes or ammo and weapons, and my health packs and my ability to take five rockets to the face before I died. Now I get hit by a single bullet, I die two bullets later because the screen was covered in strawberry jam.

 

[babinro]

Duel weapons adds strategic decisions to the game, but lessens experimentation.

Personally, I'd like to see all weapons available on lower difficulty levels, and reduce down to two weapons in multiplayer and hard difficulties.

 

[aristos_achaion]

What I thought was ridiculous was _Transformers: War for Cybertron_. You're a giant robot, and your weapons fold into and out of your arms...is there any reason that the weapons ought to be limited to just two? The two-weapon limit even hurt the flow of the game...the level designers pretty much had to telegraph the strategy for the next room by dumping the necessary weapons right by the entrance.

 

[UberNoodle]

I've had it with this crap, Halo started this "genius idea" back in 2001 now it's everywhere, even in Duke Nukem.

Duke Nukem.

What is it with this obsession? Games back in the 90's with far fewer buttons on each controller had HUGE weapon inventories and functioned absolutely fine, Ocarina of Time being most notable it worked damn near perfect.

Yet today games publishers treat us like idiots, seemingly incapable of keeping track of more than 2 weapons at a time. When we encounter a tank that needs a rocket launcher we basically have to depend on the god-like game designer to save us by implausibly placing a rocket launcher lying around for us to pick up.

Why can't I carry more than 2 guns at a time? Adding grenades as well to their own button is not enough to balance this out as there are more than just 2 weapons for 2 scenarios:

-melee weapon: silent, insta-kill, favours the bold flanking and closing to kill
-close quarters: shotgun or machine pistol would be best
-General purpose close-medium-long: assault rifle, SMG, bow (jack of all trades, master of none)
-Shit-hit-the-fan weapon: heavy machine-gun, flame thrower, BFG-9000 area effect for enemy swarms
-Long range: sniper rifle, crossbow,
-Heavy boss gun: rocket launcher, grenade launcher, super-laser

-Special: gravity gun, portal gun, grappling hook, shield, laser-designator, freeze ray, etc

This 2 weapon stifles innovation so much. If Half Life had felt it had to bent to the will of the status quo and enforce a 2-weapon limit then it's very likely the Gravity gun would never have made the final cut as one item would reduce your weapons options by 10%.

My problem is I believe developers have come to see the Halo-weapon system as the status quo and are too afraid to change it. Afraid that "people won't get it" that is will be something for the critics to ding their game for in an age when critics won't knock of anything for being derivative and lazy. The fact that Gearbox has caved on this just shows how bad it has gotten, a game that is ALL ABOUT old-skool charm compromising in this way... I don't know.

My point is when you have such a limited inventory you can't make any of your weapons too unique, every one of them must function "well enough" in all circumstances as you only ever have one alternative.

You are assuming far too much, and it seems like you want to say something but know that if you did, you'd start a shitstorm.

The reason for the two weapon limit, which I am certain that Halo did not 'invent' (see Counter Strike and SWAT4) was a move towards realism. It's a fact that carrying more that one large weapon would be difficult and cumbersome. Carrying the Doom arsenal at once would be impossible. Additionally, the Primary-Seconday weapon arsenal limitation demanded that players consider the road ahead and swap out weapons based on that, rather than allow players to unbalance the gameplay with a vast collection of weopons.

Usually, game designers inexplicibly strip your weapons away between levels. Is that any more preferable to having a Primary-Seconday limit?

Additionally, many games with that limit, include grenades and tertiary weapons as extra. Thus, weapons can be three or more. Adding them to their own button was also a great idea. I am not sure if you have had a hand in the Gearbox thread of exactly the same goal, but in there negativity against melee and grenade buttons rears its illogical head as well.

All you can argue right now is whether DNF is the KIND OF GAME in which a Primary-Secondary-Tertiary weapon system is appropriate. You can fairly argue that it is not, and I agree. Duke should have a sack of huge guns on his back. However, I am not down with blanket disapproval of the system simply because it doesn't work in a handful of outlandish games.

The system was intended to take gamers away from the walking war machine gameplay you described, and I applaud it. Your argument should be whether DNF requires another gameplay metaphor.

 

[Nieroshai]

It has its place in realistic this-world military shooters like CoD, and makes sense in a lot of other games. But now and then I like a good Doom or Jedi Knight-style shooter with more guns than a police armory. So it all depends on what kind of game you're going for.

 

[Weaver]

Why the fuck are people saying "It's unrealistic".
It's god damn DUKE NUKEM, there's not a single iota of realism in the bloody game.

Did you miss the part where it's painfully the wrong kind of unrealism? Or the part where "2 weapons is not realistic" is a response to the blatant lie that it is? Next time, try reading the thread rather than skimming it like an illiterate fuckwit.

I read the entire thread, I saw no good argument as to why or how having all the weapons available to me in Duke Nukem Forever would be "the wrong kind of unrealism".

 

[thisbymaster]

Let me keep all guns I find without exception. Part of the fun in FPS games is picking the right gun for the right fight, if I have all of them then I can keep changing between them based on the need. This way you can build a room that needs a rocket launcher, mine layer and a shotgun without having the player waste play time STARING AT THE GROUND. Maybe my biggest problem is that you have to press a button and that takes time out of the action. If there was a better mechanic to swap out the weapons, then I want to hear about it.

 

[rt052192]

it fits well in most instances. personally i have no desire to scroll through at least 6 weapons and possibly skip over it, thus taking longer. Never had an issue with the main weapon/backup weapon setup. Also, the inventory system works well. It all depends on the game really.

 

[icame]

In military shooters it makes sense, otherwise I hate it.

 

[Duskflamer]

As I said before, the system has it's place in "Ultra-realistic" style shooters, the problems with including it in DNF are twofold:

1) Duke Nukem is not known for being anything close to realistic.

2) The excuse given for why the devs went with this system is pure bunk, as proven by the myriad of console games which let you carry all your weapons that others have listed.

In addition, there's a more pervasive issue that a vast majority of FPS games go with this ultrarealistic style as though it's the only one to go with. DNF could have been a chance to have a big name game go in a different style but instead they went with the standard of ultrarealistic when it comes to the gameplay...sad.

 

[MadCapMunchkin]

Let me carry an insane amount of weapons. I wanna be a one man demolition team...

 

[-Dragmire-]

The best implementation of the 2 weapon limit was the Battlefront games, but the 'choose your own soldier type' made it work.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

It will end up like this without the two limit

 

[Rusty pumpkin]

I don't like the realism philosophy at all. I can only carry so many weapons and ammo cause it's realistic, and in the same game I can get hit dead on by a shotgun, and as long as I manage to crawl behind something and sit still for a few seconds I'm fine.

I would enjoy more weapons being carried, opens up a few more options in a fight beyond "Grab rifle, get shotgun, gernades, go." But if people are going to defend this under the banner of realism, explain how regenerating limbs are realistic. I get that having limited health would be suicide in current gen fps, but either make an excuse for the regeneration, or use something else.

 

[GreyKnight3445]

actually realistically you could carry 5 weapons (1 gun in hands, 2 guns on his front and back, plus 2 pistols) but you`d be slower then an obese zombie with 1 leg.

 

[Ensiferum]

Yeah this "trend" needs to die except in those military shooters that are trying to get as close as possible to being "realistic" (yes I know they still usually aren't but at least there it makes sense). Games like Duke Nukem are supposed to be ridiculously cheesy and over-the-top. Hell, Duke should be able to carry an unlimited arsenal of weapons as far as I'm concerned.

 

[MajWound]

I personally think that the Bulletstorm mechanic was fun as hell for a zany killfest. Slap Duke's skin on Grayson's character model and it would look like a damn fine Duke game to me.

 

[Vibhor]

There are games where it works and games where it doesn't.

I think the best example of it working (although it is not a perfect example) is in the Stalker games. You can only have two weapons that you can quickly pull out, but you can carry more around in your inventory if you wish.

BRB Gotta reinstall.
But seriously, the mechanics do not make for a fun experience.
In a game like duke nukem it is absurd. You have to choose whether you want to have fun or want to actually live.

 

[Meestor Pickle]

Halo started it? I know cs 1.6 did it long before halo and im sure there were others before that.

I quite like it though, especially in multiplayer games.