Time to put the Two-Weapon Limit Out of its Misery

silasbufu

New member
Aug 5, 2009
1,095
0
0
I really don't see how the game being on a console is an excuse. At most, it seems like a lazy excuse. PS4 controller has a freaking touchpad. You can't tell me you can't use that. D-pads, Wheel-style weapon select (GTA 5 anyone??) . So what's the real excuse? Realism..most likely. And I for one am freakin tired of realism in games. I can just go outside for that.
 

Westonbirt

New member
Nov 7, 2013
35
0
0
I think a way to make it work would be to make the 2-weapon system the implied default by allowing you to carry more weapons... and as much ammo. Or otherwise limiting the player's possibilities, not in a blunt stupid way, but encouraging diversity. Like how Half Life tends to give you ammo sparsely, and most often for the same guns. If availability of ammo was contextual, it could allow people to have variety in the game without overloading them with options such that they shun most of them.

I still like having lots of guns though. That's what I missed a bit about W:TNO. But at least it managed a good balance.

Just kidding, laser marksman all the way.
 

rosac

New member
Sep 13, 2008
1,206
0
0
Metroid prime is a good example of a mix of these systems. You don;t start out with all the weapons ever, but you retain them as you go on (exception being prime 3 with the plasma cannon and ice missiles I suppose) which then opens up more areas, makes previous enemies easier to defeat etc. etc.

My personal favourite example of a balance is RE4. You have a case. This case has limited spaces. Weapons, ammo and healthpacks all take up space. I always took the TMP (an inferior weapon according to every strategy guide ever) as being able to cripple a load of villagers and buy me more time was useful.
 

JemJar

New member
Feb 17, 2009
731
0
0
Toadfish1 said:
Its not because consoles are somehow incapable of doing it, its so that a designer can make sure that they know exactly what the player is using at any one point so that they can not use a weapon that would break any one particular encounter. This, in turn, gives them a greater variety of weapons if they know that said weapons won't be used outside of the portion they were designed for and around.
This is a very astute post that has somehow drifted past without being noticed. That's a shame.

It's not strictly true of course, I've dragged a Boomshot around huge amounts of GoW games in order to use it in totally inappropriate areas but the fundamental idea, that it limits player options to specifically enable design decisions is at least potentially true. I suspect many games fail to use it properly, but it's a way of using a feature to help the game design.

To put my own twist on it : the two-weapon limit also encourages / forces players to move around and explore some of the big combat spaces in the game to go and find the weapons needed for the big bosses. The player has spent ages fighting through standard goons, not needing anything bigger than a shotgun or SMG, then suddenly the big boss appears, or the big tank-battle set piece begins. Sure, you can try camping in the entrance and just using the SMG to chip away at things. But if you can make it to the bunker in the middle of the area there's a rocket launcher you can grab...