Poll: Enough with this 2-weapon limit bullcrap
- Thread starter Treblaine
- Start date
My 360 is pretty much a pile of dust. I haven't kept track of any news relating to it.Treblaine said:
Looks like I'll be checking that out then, thanks
.
I like it. It makes you chose your loadout carefully. If you can have fifty bazillion weapons then it takes all the tactics out of the game. One thing I am against, however, is dual wield. I know it's only a game, but I can't stand the way it's giving kids the they can load and fire 2 pistols with respectable accuracy. If there's a guy 5 meters away, use one gun and you will probably hit 13/15 times. Use 2 and you might hit 5/15. Also, you'd have to stop to reload and it would take ages, so by firing 2 at once, you're less accurate and slower on the move.
I think I particularly addressed your issue with my post in said post.. Since you apparently didn't get the message, that I was saying that *I* feel there is NOTHING wrong with the way they're doing the 2-gun only thing, or maybe add one extra for gameplay elements.Ninjamedic said:
As I was saying, and I will repeat yet again: There are good arguments for both sides of the argument (Therefore doing the OPPOSITE of just throwing them aside), we *clearly* differ of opinion, I respected that, apparently - you didn't.
I shall state again, because it seems hard for you to understand what I'm trying to say: I was not being condescending, but the exact opposite... Hope the message came through this time.
i dont know why everyone saying to keep it realistic when the main games doing the 2 weapon limit are far from being realistic in any way, for example halo and bulletstorm.I wish i could name more but my mind is blank atm
I prefer it in multiplayer TBH
I would rather JUST use My weapon of choice than run aroud like a retard looking for it.
HOWEVER I find it un-excusably stupid, unentertaining, and annoying. I want to feel like im getting stronger, not staying the same the whole time.
hell, how about blood 2: there was, what? twenty+ guns?
you could only hold ten. that still annoyed me
the game wasn't very balanced, there, are weapons you want, except You would need a guide to know which and when. when
You never know whats useful, what isn't, and whats useful when, and may I point you have to constantly juggle your fucking weapon selection? heres a hint: for the final chapter, just have all the weapons bigger than you, the final boss won't rape you.
of course all THOSE weapons are incredibly dangerous to use beforehand, and are nowhere to be found in the FINAL levels! fuck!
I would rather JUST use My weapon of choice than run aroud like a retard looking for it.
HOWEVER I find it un-excusably stupid, unentertaining, and annoying. I want to feel like im getting stronger, not staying the same the whole time.
hell, how about blood 2: there was, what? twenty+ guns?
you could only hold ten. that still annoyed me
the game wasn't very balanced, there, are weapons you want, except You would need a guide to know which and when. when
You never know whats useful, what isn't, and whats useful when, and may I point you have to constantly juggle your fucking weapon selection? heres a hint: for the final chapter, just have all the weapons bigger than you, the final boss won't rape you.
of course all THOSE weapons are incredibly dangerous to use beforehand, and are nowhere to be found in the FINAL levels! fuck!
Yes but in almost every level in halo you do get access to most weapons, human weapons are found lying around the place most of the time and covenant ones you can just kill some and take them.Treblaine said:
You do have a good point, and I did overlook that. Its funny really, I had just been playing Fallout 3, which implements a similar system, yet I didnt even think about it. Ocarina of Time isnt a good example though, since its a RPG, and we are focusing on shooters, where the two weapon problem is rampant. But if you want to include it, Ratchet and Clank implemented a similar system. It works fine in story mode, but in Multiplayer it was a pain in the ass. IIRC, they dropped the entire multiplayer aspect in the PS3 versions. Sad really, it was flawed, but fun.Treblaine said:
Most FPS games only have a dual weapon system in singleplayer. The multiplayer actually has some very good systems, whether it be the main, sidearm, grenades and perks system that Black Ops uses, or the Class system that Battlefiled uses. These arent dual weapon systems, but are rather used to limit what the player has, so players have certain advantages and disadvantages, rather than being jack of all trades. This has been in most multiplayer games since Team Fortress 2.
But were really overlooking the main point here. FPS Devs just arent paying attention to single player, period. I cant really think of a FPS thats been single player only in a long time. This is the real problem. Single player always seems like the same afterthought multiplayer used to be. It seems rough and unfinished. I honestly dont see why multiplayer focused games try to tack on a single player campaign. Why dont they just drop it (who really cares about it?), go the TF2 route and work on the multiplayer. Then they could use the money they save to build a decent single player FPS with no multiplayer aspect.
PS:I did really just focus on FPS's though, you do have some valid concerns with TPS games like Uncharted and Vanquish.
PPS: If youre suggesting that we take away a dedicated melee and grenade button, I would suggest you stick your head in a lake and ponder how stupid that is for a few hours.
Given that the reason for the limit is based on the simple fact that, as weapon counts increase, it becomes increasingly difficult to select the proper weapon using a gamepad, I am generally in favor of the idea. That is not to say that I support this move in all cases. Plenty of games trade largely on their abundance and variety of weapons and I tend to feel this key aspect is undermined by a low weapon limit.
No need to go that far. In ANY game is the grenade-throw or melee-button on the D-pad?Mr Pantomime said:
I'm just saying 2 things basically:
(1) controllers are not so limited by their number of inputs
(2) games can have a lot more flexible controls/functions
Games like CoD take away a lot of choice. You begin the game with the grenades they set for you and you cannot willingly trade smoke-grenades for flash grenades. I have to wait for the game to do that for me.
The function of the Y-button remains crucial as "switch to previous gun" works perfectly with a large inventory mounted on say the 8-direction D-pad or brought up as an analogue Wheel when Y is held down.
We're coming up on the 10 year anniversary of Halo, but have the controls REALLY advanced with the times?
D-pad = 8 directions = 8 gunsEclectic Dreck said:
What's the problem? Interestingly 1-8 keys is about as far as you can stretch your fingers to reach on a keyboard without having to lift your hand and lose position on home keys.
Another pro-tip from PC gamers, a common function is "Q = select previous gun"
So you can select Rifle and then Rocket Launcher, tap Q to cycle between them quickly. Pressing the Y button on say a 360 controller would function the same. But if you need a submachine gun for clearing out a trench then just select it from the D-pad.
I REFUSE to believe that PC gamers are simply smarter and able to keep track of more weapons and guns, it's just console gamers need to dream BIG! Stop thinking about how things can't work and start thinking about how they COULD work.
That still requires a relatively precise selection. It is not impossible of course, which is why I never said it was; rather, I simply pointed out that as the number increases the ease of selection decreases. The maximum number of weapons that one can have before this maxim starts to hold true is 4. At 8 it becomes a hair difficult to properly select the proper weapon, especially when under stress. At 8+ serious problems can emerge.Treblaine said:
But, in most games, there is no reason to offer such a selection of weapons at the ready. Adding additional options would add nothing to a game like Modern Warfare where any particular weapon is probably "good enough" for the job. By contrast, when a game like Bulletstorm only lets me carry a handful of weapons when the weapons are the stars of the show, I resent it.
Again you didn't address his points, you just said "everyone has their own preferences".mageroel said:
And when you are willing to say:
You had better be able to back up what your saying.mageroel said:
What irks me is this looks like it will be a "feature" of duke nukem forever a game which previously let you carry as many weapons as you wanted. This happened with Bulletstorm too, if they feel this is so damn important add an option to let people play with their weapon limits. I don't get why single player fps's limit you like this. It's like somebody lined up some delicious cakes and then told you that you could only have two of them at a time. Why can't they just let us eat our cake?
Hey, fighting games do pretty darn well depending on players getting diagonal inputs. The 360 controller was designed to make the diagonals as easy to get as horizontal/vertical directions. And still the "tap Y for previous weapon" would be for most combat scenarios.Eclectic Dreck said:
The thing is COD4's arbitrary inflexibility. It puts 2x claymore mines in my loadout, that's 8lbs of equipment, that could be a sniper rifle with ammunition! Or an M72 LAW rocket Launcher. Why can't I trade my useless night-vision-goggles for a pistol?
I will agree with you on COD's vanilla weapons, this is a reflection of real life. The modern assault rifle (M4A1, AK47) is designed to be a general purpose, jack-of-all-trades kind of weapon for almost all circumstances:
-moderate power
-moderate capacity
-moderate range
-moderate mobility
-moderate firepower
But this military practicality makes for a boring game. A game filled with guns having no major strengths or weaknesses makes combat really repetitive and predictable, not much strategy manoeuvring to a position where your weapon would have the advantage. It plays too much like a rail-shooter.
I think Metro 2033 did it well, it was realistic in its nature and yet it had a knife throwing kives, revolver, assault rifel/sniper rifel, shotgun/pneumatic gun and 2 different types of pipebombs all at onece, so it's possible ot have more than 2 weapons and still be realstic.
You seem to *utterly* and *totally* miss my point. I'm saying both sides of the argument have valid points and that I do not wish to further throw rocks against solid walls of castles built by either side of the argument... The whole POINT of me saying this is that I will not address further their arguments as all *I* can throw at them are my personal preferences.Ninjamedic said:
I disagree, and doing so honourably by not condescending into calling names, so to speak. It'll be the abortion fight all over again: it's a black-and-white thing to most people, and seeing as this isn't improving or at least aiding the discussion, I did not address any further. As you keep pulling me into argument I have indeed shown my personal preferences, and leave it at that; it is the most valuable thing I can add to the discussion, keeping it healthy and not a flame war.
I think I made perfectly clear what I wanted to say, and if you do not see this; ignore. I shall not respond again, as it will not add anything of worth to the discussion.
Well thanks for not actually adding anything of worth to your side of the discussion. Bye!mageroel said:
In theory it works, but I always find it a lot easier to have dedicated buttons for melee and greanades. The worst part of Half-Life and Counterstrike was having to switch to the Grenade or Melee weapons quickly. Even on the PC it was finicky as hell.Treblaine said:
This I agree with, though I do remember a certain TPS whose name escapses me where you could switch grenades using the D-Pad.
While it works, does it work better than current controls? The problem youre looking at is that these controls will have to be as smooth and easy as the current ones if theyre to be implemented.
While I like youre ideas, I cant really think of any titles that would really benefit from using them. What games would use these systems?