Zeithri said:
It all depends on how they dumb it down.
Like the examples you give, the combination of multitool and lockpick into one item is a lot better than running around with both when you think about it.
I am all for universal ammo clips as well (unless it's for rocket launchers or such) because it gives the feeling of futuristic (or in DE case: cyberpunkish). They had the same system for Shadowrun on the Sega Genesis.
Oh dear lord no
Of course I disagree on both fronts since I used the examples in my original post, no surprise there. But I never did elaborate on it so here goes.
What having both lock picks and multi-tools did for the game was to spawn situations where multiple solutions to a given problem existed, but depending on how many you stocked for either at the moment, some options would seem to expensive or completely out of reach.
Also, it meant that there were two different skills governing the effective use of these tools, so it was perfectly possible to be a master at picking locks and a douche when dealing with multi tools.
This would mean that such a player would be more likely to look for sewer grates or fences to pry open whereas multi-tools expertise would create an agent who was more proficient with electronics, and thus more likely to disable turrets and the like.
With a common system, every option is as viable as the other which removes some of the challenge and depth of the game as you're not as focused on finding solutions based on your supplies and skills.
The same goes for weapon ammunition. I've had a natural tendency to thin the numbers of any fortress with a sniper rifle before taking on the rest. If sniper rifle is hard to come by, that means I'm forced to employ other weapons and tactics to compensate.
If all weapons share the same ammunition the game can only challenge me by making all ammunition scarce or pulling one of those "We remove all/some of your weapons in preparation for this scene because we want to challenge you" often fixed with a cut-scene which is a cheap shot by any standards.
==== In response to the various other comments ====
Yes I'm biased as hell - but the subject itself isn't really one to be made objective. The question of the thread can basically be formulated as a "Do you prefer x to y?" query and opinions are just that, subjective.
That said, sure, I could've argued my point better - and I do agree that there's many nuances to the discussion which I only glanced over or ignored entirely.
It is, however, my understanding that a discussion is best sparked by being a bit provocative, biased and narrow-minded, it incites people to retort as you have
