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

[Koeryn]

It didn't become popular, it became realistic.

To the detriment of the games IMO.

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.

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.)

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.

I made it through with assualt rifle, dual pistols, assualt cannon for the most part but I only used that last when I was REALLY desperate, and made it thrhough mostly with pistols and rifle.

I'm disappointed in the MC, I've always been. Seriously, if Kratos can lug around bigass chuncks of magical metal, why can't he carry an extra pistol or somethin' like that?
Badass? Meh.

Kratos is a demigod, the Master Chief is just a genetically augmented human in Future Armor. With a computer in his head. A hot computer.

Anyways, He only carries two guns out of his military trainin', if ya read the books. He's only got a single attachment point on his back, it's hard to carry more than what's on your back and what's in your hands in that case.

Don't ask where the clips come from though. The only answer is nanites. -nodsnods-

My complaints about Halo've got nothin' to do with the two-gun system, and everything to do with the guns feeling like airsoft guns for all damage they did to anything.

 

[Gladion]

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.

It only does in theory. Practically you carry one gun you use all the time because it's your favorite and one for bossfights.
It seems the only time when things change is when a sniper rifle or some sort of rocket launcher is needed - but still, it won't give you much of a choice if the game demands you to carry a specific weapon. So they could as well just give you all of them at once.

 

[Zeraki]

I think Halo made it popular, but it didn't start it. The first game I remember playing with a limited arsenal was Rainbow Six on the N64. That was such a fun game.

 

[sooperman]

I think that the 2-weapon system only works in FPS games like CoD on multiplayer, because there are so many opportunities to change weapons.

Pick them up off of the ground, or get gunned down in about 2 seconds and change to a class that is better for the situation.

On Halo, you learn to magnage having only 2 guns, but it would have been better with more, like 4.

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

In any halo game, it's truly irrelevant what you ar carrying as long as you have the basic assault rifle or smg. the enemies appear to be made of paper unless you come accross an Elite or Brute. And even then it's not REALLY much of a challenge!

Or run into a Hunter pair or vehicles, or turn up the difficulty.

Anyway, that's how most two-weapon FPS's are. You're meant to carry a standard weapon and another weapon based on need, taste, or convenience.

The limited weapons system while being a respectable gameplay mechanic in its own right is mostly a matter of necessity. Without hotkeys quickly selecting a weapon in your magical arsenal is fairly impossible. One button cycling between two or three weapons is far better suited for a controller. The Orange Box did fine by having a four-directional list selected by the d-pad but it's still a fairly clunky way to choose a weapon.

To answer the OP's question: November 15, 2001. The day that Halo: Combat Evolved became the fastest selling video game of all time (up to that point).

 

[Taylorcrw]

I would of hated halo if you could have more than 2 weapons,

 

[Valiance]

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.

When? It became popular circa 2001 when halo became so popular.

Honestly, I agree with you. The game should not create arbitrary challenges and barriers that "WOULD BE EASY IF I HAD MY OTHER GUN," and it should create challenges that let you change and switch on the go, adapting to the situation - which is why I liked having, say, 10-15 guns.

 

[Angrywyvern]

Halo might have made it popular, but I think call of duty 1 had this system, well, it was more like, 2 main weapons, pistol, grenades, but still

And it was popular too

 

[Cowabungaa]

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

Actually, that's not the case in Halo: CE. In the first Halo, you had a normal healthbar wich you could replenish with medipacks, and a shieldbar from your MJOLNIR suit wich regenerated. Best of both worlds if you ask me, I loved it. God knows why they replaced that in 2 (if I recall correctly) with regenerative health, but Halo didn't start that trend.

Anyway, I'm not really against or for just having 2 guns. It does give you another tactical choice, so I really like it for multiplayer. But for singleplayer, meeh, can be nice because you don't simply use an uber gun every time. You're forced to deal with a certain situation. But then again, you can usually find the guns you want in Halo for example. Every now and then you'll find a crashed Pelican or something with some human guns.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Once again, it's just games trying to be more like Halo. I like the Half-Life 2 way of doing it.

 

[Xan Krieger]

Here's an example for me of the two methods.
Limited weapons: Gears of War 2 where I have to decide if I really want the sniper rifle bad enough to drop one of my other weapons for it as I don't know if I'll need it. Made for planning and strategy. If you could carry everything you wouldn't even be able to screw up badly like bringing a flamethrower to a long range sniper fight.

In Fallout 3 (which I play from the first person perspective all the time) I carry one of almost every weapon in mint condition and 1 or 2 to repair it. No real tactics, just pulling out the right sized gun for the job. Also since you can carry limitless ammo as far as I know tactics are nearly a waste of time.

 

[ygetoff]

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.

I think it puts a little bit of tactics in the game. If you could carry every weapon in the game, you really don't have to make a choice on which weapons to discard and which to keep.

 

[Alphacron]

Halo. I enjoyed the game (though in no way is a fanboy). that said i have no wish to see so many clones of it. Halo is as far back as i can remember this trend (granted my philosophy is once you've played one FPS you've played them all, and don't play too many FPS, only Halo 1 (i just watched the cutscenes for 2/3 on youtube) COD4 and that's about it.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

I prefer the "2 or 3" weapon approach, it encourages game designers to make every weapon actually useful instead of "upgrading" like old fashioned doom made you do.

 

[Digitaldreamer7]

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.

Agreed, also, with only being able to use 2 guns, all you do is find your basic bad ass assault rifle and then you find one of the following: Uber shot gun, Sniper rifle, or rocket launcher and play the game all the way through with them. A good example of this is gears 2. as soon as I got the Sniper rifle I didnt change weapons again. It was pick off the guys from as far off as I can and then run in with my assault rifle and mow them down, rinse and repeat. I did use the occasional grinder/mortar gun but that doesnt force you to drop any of your weapons. There were a few times i swapped out my sniper for the shotty or the hammer of dawn but for the most part I played the entire game with my assault rifle/sniper combo.

I cant say im for or against reducing the items you can carry. On one hand I like only having to fidget with a few weapons, on the other hand I get a kick out of pulling out that rocket launcher I got 4 levels ago and blasting people in a narrow hall with it. So idk where I stand on it.

 

[JediMB]

I've always had a habit of constantly using the same weapon until it runs out of ammo anyway, so I don't really mind that a lot of shooters have reduced your arsenal.

I think it's interesting how Far Cry 2 did it, where you can carry a machete, a side arm, a primary weapon, and a secondary heavier weapon... and grenades. These days I'm usually running around with a grenade launcher, a sniper rifle and a heavy machinegun.

In less realistic and more action-oriented FPS:es I tend to stick to the trusty ol' boomstick. Shotgun, that is.

 

[Xanadu84]

Some games are better with fewer weapons, some games are better with more. If a game is more realistic and tactical, then the fewer weapons, and required strategy in choosing your weapons is beneficial. If your going for a sense or realism, but stylized, then have only a few weapons, but random weapons all over the place, so you can switch it up. If your going for over the top ridiculous, or want the sense of being a 1-man-army, then allow many weapons to break out as situations warrant. Survival Horrors should limit your arsenal, so you might be worried that you have the wrong tool for the job. Games where you spread wholesale destruction should have many weapons. And there's also middle grounds and grey areas: For example, "F.E.A.R." is a horror game, but has a lot of action, shoot-em-up gameplay, so it compromises by still giving you limitations, but you also have a pretty sizeable arsenal. Really, most games I can think of allow you to have just the right number of weapons for what there going for.

 

[Quala]

A reason I like this is because it's near impossible to find the gun you want among the heaps of weaponry.

I remember playing old MoH games. Took forever to find the 'good' machine gun/shotgun/sniper rifle. It was easier to get one good all-rounder and keep it out. Not to hard with the heaps of ammo you could get.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Realism....fucking realism my friend.