When did you can only carry two guns at any time become popular????

[chaos666]

This is something that's been bugging me for awhile. Call me old school but I liked it better when could carry every weapon in the game. But now it seems a game can't make it out the door without the whole you can only carry 2 guns at a time. Resistance 2, Killzone 2, the Halo franchise are all example of this. Some games are more forgiving like the F.E.A.R games with 3 guns in the first one and 4 in Project Origin.

I can understand how this can make the game a challenge and how it does add some realism to the game, but at the same time it feels like the creators were lazy and in order to hide the lack of challenge in the game they limited what you can carry.

So my question is when did this become popular, was it a game franchise, a random feature that caught on, or did a bunch of fanboys with "We want more realism" signs get together? I'm curious.

 

[Ancientgamer]

Halo:CE started it.

Aside from being more realistic it makes you have to asses each situation you go into, because you don't when you're going to be able to find another weapon, ect. It basically adds another tactical choice to the game.

 

[Knight Templar]

I think halo made it popular, not sure if was first do do it however.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Project Snowblind and Urban Chaos let you carry as many guns as you wanted, as do many other FPS games that aren't trying to be Halo.

Seriously, Halo started this. At least, as far as I can tell. It's more realistic, maybe, but I don't like the trend. Most guns in any FPS can't function as an entire arsenal, which means knowing what to take in any given level usually requires memorization or some such. Bleah.

Probably the best FPS that lets you carry as many guns as you want is Timesplitters: Future Perfect. While every arsenal is usually time-specific, there are no size limits on how much you can carry. And I know it's a Yahtzee complaint, but I too hate it in FPS games when I'm forced to use what the enemy are carrying just because that's all I can find ammo for. It limits my creativity and spoils my fun.

 

[kewlrabbit]

Yup, it's Halo's fault. I think it worked pretty well in that game, it's just too bad that all the developers had to ape it for their own games. I miss the days when I could have an entire arsenal with me at all times.

 

[asinann]

Have you ever actually TRIED to carry more than say 3-4 weapons and a few thousand rounds of ammunition for each?

I can see being able to carry 2 handguns and a pair of rifles, that's within the realm of possibility as long as you aren't trying to hide anywhere (hip, hip, back, arms.)

But really, a chain gun, a rocket launcher, 2 shot guns, a plasma rifle, a large plasma ejector, a hand gun, a chainsaw (which is a load on it's own) and a rifle? Plus hundreds upon hundreds of rounds?

It doesn't generate much difficulty (ammo availability does that) but it DOES generate a bit more immersion, Halo I think was one of the earlier games that did this.

 

[Abedeus]

Actually, Hitman had a limited weapon system. And was before Halo.

 

[Ronwue]

I think halo made it popular, not sure if was first do do it however.

I remember delta force, mission equipments did not allow you to carry more than 2 guns. Yes, I find it more adequate to have a limited amount of weapons at any given time.

 

[Booze Zombie]

"Hey, this game is realistic! Why? Because you can only carry two guns! Oh, you got shot? Don't worry, your health regenerates."

 

[MercenaryCanary]

Because Halo did it. You needed an uncluttered way to switch weapons, and so they only had you carry two weapons.

 

[searanox]

A lot of it is realism, but it's also an excellent way of incorporating some form of resource management into the game design. By allowing the player to carry a limited number of weapons, a great number of decisions are introduced that make the gameplay experience altogether deeper. A number of questions are raised in the player by such a system, including:

What advantages does the player get for carrying weapon X over weapon Y? If weapon X has less ammo available than Y, is it still worth carrying it? Which enemies are susceptible to which weapons? Do these weapons offer any special gameplay-enhancing features (invisibility, x-ray vision, etc.), and if so, which do I keep? Do I go stealthy but have less firepower at my disposal, or do I sacrifice discretion for raw damage output?

While you don't have to be strictly limited to two weapons in order to bring out the same gameplay elements (Far Cry 2 has what is probably a more realistic system, in that you can carry four weapons: melee, pistol, assault rifle/machine gun, and rocket launcher/flamethrower/etc.), and I think it's this sort of balancing act that draws players to games, not so much the raw realism of it. Those sorts of old-school shooters still have their place, like Serious Sam and Unreal Tournament, but I don't think the gameplay is quite deep enough anymore for most players. The bar has been raised.

Another notable reason is because on a console controller, it is much easier to cycle between two guns than several. A keyboard has no such problem because of the large number of keys available, but navigating long lists or pausing the game to select a weapon is cumbersome at best with a standard pad.

 

[zacaron]

halo seemed to be the start of it but not all games follow halo, Bioshock and UT3 let you carry every gun/plasmid or more recently Deadspace.

 

[Legion]

I don't think laziness has anything to do with it. I'd imagine it's harder to program a weapon pick-up/drop/swap mechanic than a switching-between-10-guns mechanic.

halo seemed to be the start of it but not all games follow halo, Bioshock and UT3 let you carry every gun/plasmid or more recently Deadspace.

Dead Space you get about 8 weapons in the game but can only carry 4 of them.

"Hey, this game is realistic! Why? Because you can only carry two guns! Oh, you got shot? Don't worry, your health regenerates."

Heh, that's so true. Although it can only be so realistic while keeping it fun.

 

[zacaron]

halo seemed to be the start of it but not all games follow halo, Bioshock and UT3 let you carry every gun/plasmid or more recently Deadspace.

Dead Space you get about 8 weapons in the game but can only carry 4 of them.

yes that is true but carrying 4 is better for combat then the 2 that master chief carrys.

 

[DigitalSushi]

its for tactical gaming in FPS', it also hides the games variety, not much variety?, easy, limit to amount of the player being able to carry to offset it.... because some guns hardly get used on first playthrough it doesn't feel like there is armoury lacking.

 

[Yooz]

20-guns-at-a-time on Unreal Tournament anyone?

 

[ssgt splatter]

It didn't become popular, it became realistic.

 

[TheGreenManalishi]

I don't like realism in games. If I wanted to carry two guns at a time, I'd join the army or something.

 

[chaos666]

All valid points as to why they do this in games (from the replies I've read so far). Sucks the trend started because every game wanted to be like Halo (just like how MMO's are trying to be WoW). In the end what can you do, as much I love carrying a dozen guns around mowing down anything that moves you have to adapt and I have. In the end I'll be happy just so long as Half-Life doesn't go down this road.