Current Events > 2 weapon limit and health regen add nothing to shooters

(+) Yeah! (+)

nt

In singleplayer campaigns and pickup-based (as in, everyone starts with the same weapons and all others are pickups) multiplayer shooters like Halo, I agree to an extent. If each player could have three or four guns with them at a time in these games, it still wouldn't drastically affect the gameplay because you still need to go out and find the weapons you want without dying in the process. But letting a player carry any number of weapons at once would get ridiculous at some point, so there still has to be some kind of limit.

In loadout-based multiplayer shooters like Call of Duty and Battlefield, I disagree. Having three guns of your choice on your loadout and being able to have one for every situation right away would badly unbalance, maybe even ruin the gameplay of those games. Plus, having more guns at once removes the threat of running out of ammo if you go on a long streak, and no one should have that benefit in those games without having a perk like Scavenger or an LMG with a huge mag, both of which come with their drawbacks.

As for health regen, I think it depends on how much starting health you have. In games where it only takes 3-4 shots to die, like Call of Duty, you need to have health regen. In games where it takes a lot more shots to die, like Halo, it's not as important but I think it does help. Without health regen, there would be more lopsided gunfights where one player is badly wounded and would stand no chance. But with it, you have to always assume the person you're shooting is at full health, even if you're not. I think that adds to the game.
---