To the detriment of the games IMO.ssgt splatter said:
Having a whole arsenal to pick from at any given time in F.E.A.R. 2 and FO3 is just awesome fun and stops you getting bored. I like my game sto be fun, not realistic.
When did you can only carry two guns at any time become popular????
- Thread starter chaos666
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Having a whole arsenal to pick from at any given time in F.E.A.R. 2 and FO3 is just awesome fun and stops you getting bored. I like my game sto be fun, not realistic.
Yooz said:
Ouch... major suckage. Won't be getting this when I get my Ps3 later this year.danskrobut said:
The OP asked when it became popular. Halo: CE wasn't the first game with a limited weapon system, but it was the game that made the system popular.Abedeus said:
It isn't actually a problem. At least it never was for me. The revolver is more than enough to get you out of tough situations. It's no different from COD4 really. COD4 has the same system, yet I don't see anyone complaining about that...miracleofsound said:
Dont let that one detail stop you from playing some of the finest multiplayer games ever developed.miracleofsound said:
Dunno, Killzone just doesn't really appeal to me. I think by the time I get my ps3 (i.e. when GOW 3 comes out) there'll be a definitive shooter released for it. I hope so anyway.Rock Beefchest said:
I'd rather have an entire armory with me than picking 2 weapons. Every time I played through halo I put more thought into what weapons I would carry rather than actually fighting. HL2 made me feel right at home with the ability to carry half the US military budget on your back.
Actually, FEAR 2 only allows you to carry four weapons. The original FEAR only allowed three. (Fortunately, it considered paired handguns to be a single weapon.)miracleofsound said:
When done right, limiting the arsenal you can carry enhances the game experience. In my opinion, Halo did this "sort of right", requiring me to anticipate ahead of time the sort of enemies I'd be seeing up ahead, or improvise when I was caught without the right weapon for the job. (It was the balancing of the weapons that bothered me more.) It's a different kind of challenge than the Magic Gun Rack™ allows for. Of course, this assumes that the weapons are well-designed and that an adequate variety of challenges are present, requiring different approaches- I'm sure I'm not the only one who got through 99% of FEAR with the assault rifle/SMG/shotgun combination.
The shotgun in FEAR was utterly overpowered, but in FEAR 2 there's more of a balance between the weapons. My favorite is actually the first smg, it's very satisfying.The Rogue Wolf said:
Four weapons and four grenade types at any given time... compared to most shooters that is an arsenal!
More realistic?vivaldiscool said:
I always carry at least 3 firearms with me at any given time.
I think the question of 1, 2, 3, or 40 is a matter of which game it is. For the game to work, Halo needs to prevent people from owning a map by having a shotgun, sniper, rocket launcher, and sword. For the game to work, Unreal Tournament needs to reward players for hanging onto a map advantage by affording them many options at their disposal. The weapons and maps and health bars demand it.
That said, I think more games could benefit from a hardpoint system, like mech games. A Rocket Launcher will probably take up your entire back (or both arms). A pistol will holster easily, if you have a holster. If you have an appropriate harness, you could shoulder 2 rifles easily. Heck, you could probably shoulder half a dozen, but you won't be able to switch weapons without dumping the ones in the way on the ground, and you're gonna be weighed down. Ammo is the next difficulty. Unless you have a pack or a special harness for that gun class, you're going to have to work to carry much more than an extra clip. And taking clips from a pack takes longer than from a clip harness on your thigh. Do any FPS games, particularly RPGs (even ones more like Halo single-player), use harness equipment? I can't think of any, and it would be pretty awesome. It'd be a must for an FPSRPG.
That said, I think more games could benefit from a hardpoint system, like mech games. A Rocket Launcher will probably take up your entire back (or both arms). A pistol will holster easily, if you have a holster. If you have an appropriate harness, you could shoulder 2 rifles easily. Heck, you could probably shoulder half a dozen, but you won't be able to switch weapons without dumping the ones in the way on the ground, and you're gonna be weighed down. Ammo is the next difficulty. Unless you have a pack or a special harness for that gun class, you're going to have to work to carry much more than an extra clip. And taking clips from a pack takes longer than from a clip harness on your thigh. Do any FPS games, particularly RPGs (even ones more like Halo single-player), use harness equipment? I can't think of any, and it would be pretty awesome. It'd be a must for an FPSRPG.
Hahaha, Ninja'd! That's exactly what I came here to say, because it makes no sense.Erana said:
People say it's more 'realistic' but why is realism welcome on a game where you fight aliens in a battle suit and you have rechargable energy shields?
Anyway, Halo didn't start it, Rainbow six came out before Halo and did it, so did Hitman, and I imagine some other games did it too. Granted though, halo made it popular.
That was the definitive shooter, or at least to PS3 owners. Maybe MAG might appeal to you when it comes.miracleofsound said:
In the first halo the assault rifle was garbage, close to the worst weapon in the game.Mushroom123 said:
It took a whole clip to kill anything.