Halo CE cemented the 2 weapon bullshit that ended up infecting PC First Person Shooters so fuck that game extra hard.
Halo CE cemented the 2 weapon bullshit that ended up infecting PC First Person Shooters so fuck that game extra hard.
ChromaticAngel posted...
Halo CE cemented the 2 weapon bullshit that ended up infecting PC First Person Shooters so fuck that game extra hard.
"WHY CAN'T I CARRY LITERALLY EVERY WEAPON IN THE GAME ALL AT ONCE?!?! WHAT IS BALANCE I DON'T EVEN"
weapon_d00d816 posted...
ChromaticAngel posted...
Halo CE cemented the 2 weapon bullshit that ended up infecting PC First Person Shooters so fuck that game extra hard.
"WHY CAN'T I CARRY LITERALLY EVERY WEAPON IN THE GAME ALL AT ONCE?!?! WHAT IS BALANCE I DON'T EVEN"
youd think a guy named weapon_d00d would be more interested in carrying as many weapons as possible
How did most of those negatively impact their genre?
Didn't Counter-Strike have a 2 weapon limit somewhat (knife and grenades don't count imo), long before Halo
Anyway I'd say Skyrim because goddamn everything is open world now.
Skyrim, but also Oblivion and Fallout 3 tbh. They all had a part in messing up RPGs and popularizing big empty soulless open worlds with nothing to do in them
How did most of those negatively impact their genre?
Didn't Counter-Strike have a 2 weapon limit somewhat (knife and grenades don't count imo), long before Halo
Anyway I'd say Skyrim because goddamn everything is open world now.
What your poll is missing there TC is any game that proved that microtransactions and online-only play are the most successful business models
Also whats the game with the infamous horse dlc again?
Having a limited amount of weapons carried makes the gameplay deeper and more interesting. You have to decide which combo of weapons to take into each situation as they arise. You could take a Sniper Rifle and a BR/Magnum/DMR in order to pop their shields at long range and clean them up with a quick headshot from the secondary weapon, but that makes close combat tougher. You could take an AR/SMG secondary to deal with close range targets, but that makes it more imperative that you hit your targets right with the Sniper Rifle. You could take a Rocket Launcher to deal with heavy enemies and crowds, but then you've got a versatility disadvantage for dealing with standard enemies. And so on. Limited weaponry makes the battlefield more interactive too because you're scavenging for dropped weapons and constantly on the lookout for stashes.
weapon_d00d816 posted...
Having a limited amount of weapons carried makes the gameplay deeper and more interesting. You have to decide which combo of weapons to take into each situation as they arise. You could take a Sniper Rifle and a BR/Magnum/DMR in order to pop their shields at long range and clean them up with a quick headshot from the secondary weapon, but that makes close combat tougher. You could take an AR/SMG secondary to deal with close range targets, but that makes it more imperative that you hit your targets right with the Sniper Rifle. You could take a Rocket Launcher to deal with heavy enemies and crowds, but then you've got a versatility disadvantage for dealing with standard enemies. And so on. Limited weaponry makes the battlefield more interactive too because you're scavenging for dropped weapons and constantly on the lookout for stashes.
Except games always put the weapon you will need on the ground.
Having a limited amount of weapo
That was Oblivion with its horse armor DLC.
CoD basically killed the Medal of Honor series of games.
So definitely that franchise is the most "negative"
