Imagine this: you’re rushing through the corridors of Doom, blowing demons’ heads off with your super shotgun, then whipping out your scoped rifle to take out a cacodemon. Then you land in a sweat and notice a mancubus in front of you, the cartridges in both the shotgun and the rifle have run out, but it doesn’t matter, because you have a bazooka. More precisely, it was… After all, this is Doom from a parallel universe, in which the player can only carry two guns.
It’s hard to imagine a modern Doom like this, right?? But if it had come out during the wild popularity of “limited” shooters, it could have been like this.
One of the recent blogs highlighted a complaint about BioShock Infinite, namely the notorious mechanics that do not allow the player to carry more than two guns. Why did the developers at some point decide that giving the player only two types of weapons was cool?? And why has this solution become so popular?? Today we will try to figure out what is the reason for this phenomenon and whether it is justified?
In the beginning there was a word and there was a word – Halo.
Indeed, if you try to find the first game that used similar mechanics, then it was Halo. Mister Chief’s space adventures are rich in arsenal, but it is limited to only two slots. And the player either has to juggle all the guns that come into his hands, or find the optimal combination and go through the game with it.
Some alien guns are made in such a way that they have a strictly limited number of charges, which is why you won’t be able to use them for a long time and, most likely, you will throw them away immediately after the start of the battle. Some kind of illusion of an extensive inventory.
Limitations of gamepads
Why so? This is where we get to the first theory of the emergence of a limited arsenal is the lack of hot keys for gamepads. And it seems true that when you play on a PC, you have number keys at hand, and therefore the ability to switch weapons at any time with a quick movement of your hand. Controllers don’t have that many buttons, and scrolling through your inventory by constantly clicking is not very convenient, especially if you play an arena shooter or a dynamic game in which you have minimal reaction time. So it turns out that switching weapons to the conventional “triangle” is simply convenient.
But, stop. What about the weapon wheel, you ask?? And you’ll be right. Many games already use a mechanic where you hold down a button and use a stick to select the barrel you want. It turns out the Halo developers just didn’t think of this? I doubt.
Weapon wheels in: 1 – Doom; 2 – Far Cry 4; 3 -Red Dead Redemption; 4 – GTA V/
Weapon wheels in: 1 – Doom; 2 – Far Cry 4; 3 -Red Dead Redemption; 4 – GTA V/
Weapon wheels in: 1 – Doom; 2 – Far Cry 4; 3 -Red Dead Redemption; 4 – GTA V/
Weapon wheels in: 1 – Doom; 2 – Far Cry 4; 3 -Red Dead Redemption; 4 – GTA V/
A similar wheel is perfectly used in the GTA, Far Cry, Doom and many others series of games. If we take the same Doom, we will see the most competent implementation of this mechanics: when you open the weapon interface, time around the Doom Slayer, if not freezing, then moves very slowly, which allows you to select the desired barrel without losing precious HP. But you can also switch between the current and previous barrel simply by pressing a button, so as not to lose the dynamics. What prevented you from doing this in Duke Nukem Forever, which was recently in Debriefing? There were also complaints about the fact that Duke carries only two guns with him. Of course, if you checked the settings from the beginning of the game, you can increase the capacity up to four barrels, but this does not change the situation much.
POV: You ride a radio-controlled car, hold a shotgun with one hand, but you can’t carry more than two guns.
Need more realism?
Maybe it’s about the desire to give the game more REALISM – the second theory of a limited arsenal. I beg you, what realism is in Duke Nukem? This is a classic joke game, in which, first of all, the cool feeling of shooting is important, and not the realistic physical capabilities of the main character. If this is truly realism, then why not cut rampage mode from the game after a can of beer?? Let’s say in the case of Duke it just got a puncture and let’s go back to Halo.
The distant future, space, extraterrestrial technology, was it really impossible to come up with some kind of levitating holster so that the third barrel would simply fly nearby?? But this is nitpicking.
I don’t deny that all of the above is purely subjective, but it’s possible to make a limited arsenal organic. Get Max Payne 3. It approached the creation of realism extremely responsibly. When the main character hears a speech in a foreign language, the player will not see subtitles and most likely will not understand what the dialogue was about, because just like Max, he does not know this language. The interaction with weapons also looks realistic: the protagonist has two holsters in which he carries pistols and two hands to hold a larger gun. If you need to grab pistols, be kind enough to throw the long barrel, and then pick it up if you need it so much. Well, or carry a machine gun in your hand, but at the same time you will be able to shoot only from one pistol. Realism? Realism. And the fact is that realism is justified. The hero Max Payne is the most human person there is.
And Captain Chief from Halo, although he is a man (or more precisely, a super-soldier, charged at the very least), is clad in fantastic armor, and he is located in a fantastic universe in which it would be possible to increase the arsenal.
Another example of justified realism is The Last of Us series. The main characters are people who are simply physically unable to carry more than two weapons with them at the beginning of the game. But during the course of the action the player can purchase various holsters and already carry 4 guns.
In both the first and second parts, the heroes carry guns exclusively in holsters or on their backs. No invisible GTA style pockets.
In both the first and second parts, the heroes carry guns exclusively in holsters or on their backs. No invisible GTA style pockets.
The BioShock game series, which was already mentioned today, provides a lot of room for thought on the topic of the blog. In the third part, Booker carries only two guns and a whole wheel of plasmids, which he literally juggles in the arenas. Let’s say this was done for greater realism, because, in fact, plasmids are selected by the power of thought and do not require anything to “transfer” them within ourselves, which is why we can choose any of them at the right time. But guns still have weight, and therefore in this part of the series their number is limited. Whether this is necessary and whether it was a good choice to abandon the weapon wheel from the first and second parts is a moot point. After all, most likely, the player will choose one combination and spend 80% of the game with it, and you can try all the weapons to your heart’s content only if you try to complete achievements. But, from the point of view of realism, this approach has a place to be.
This begs the conclusion: that the decision to make a limited arsenal out of a desire to add more realism to games is not always justified.
Try to balance it out.
Well then for sure It’s a matter of balance – the third theory of a limited arsenal. Let’s consider it on one of my favorite shooters – Legendary, in which the player’s arsenal is also limited to two slots of firearms and one slot of melee weapons (which contains an ax by default).
Disclaimer: I have never dealt with game balance, so I will judge purely from the logical side of the layman.
Let’s get started. We have a https://eddyvegascasino.co.uk/ typical first-person shooter, of which in the tens, judging by the sensations, they came out in batches. And straight away from realism. Let’s say our main character is endowed with the strength of a standard man and cannot carry a bunch of guns with him at the same time. But carrying a rocket launcher, which is about the size of him, a machine gun and a fire ax in addition, does not cause him any problems. GG has the ability to restore HP by absorbing the souls of opponents. Then what’s the problem with just bringing in more bobbleheads and giving the player a full arsenal of weapons?? After all, a larger number of enemies per square meter increases the average damage received by our hero, as well as the amount of ammunition required to clear opponents. This means that the player will simply need to use all the guns in his inventory. Although, perhaps due to the fact that all the weapons in the game are boring and do not differ in any effects other than rate of fire and damage, the already not very interesting process of shooting would become simply tedious. Plus, most likely, I would completely lose interest in fighting fantastic monsters. The griffins, which became the hallmark of the game, did not cause any problems even with two guns in their pockets. And with a full arsenal they would even become bullet bags.
In order for the entire arsenal to be justified and interesting, there must be different types of enemies against which certain weapons are effective. But again, this makes it more difficult for game designers and balancers. After all, you need to calculate what combinations of enemies can be in one arena, what number of enemies is optimal, and so on. It’s much easier to make mobs susceptible to the same damage and just set the two-barrel limit.
Let’s summarize
Now we put all the facts together and try to draw a conclusion.
The player carries two guns only due to the lack of hotkeys on the gamepads? – No. If this decision was initially made for a similar reason, then it has already been proven a thousand times that it is possible to make the choice from a large number of weapons convenient.
The player carries two guns only because it gives the game more realism? – not always. There are famous examples where this mechanic really added a sense of realism to games. But otherwise, this only reduces the possibilities of the project, forcing the player to remain within the established framework.
The player carries two guns only because it is easier to balance the game? – a complex question that requires the comment of a specialist who can tell you about the game balance (or your opinion in the comments). From logical reasoning it is clear that in some cases such a solution simplifies the game balance and can hide shortcomings and a meager “bestiary” of opponents. Implementing the entire arsenal in shooters is not an easy task and requires a lot of effort, time and money, which not all companies can afford.
The player carries two guns only because it is a convenient design move that has found success in large projects? – this is the option I stick to. Seeing the success of Halo using this mechanic, studios picked up this trend and used it in their projects, and then the chain reaction. The number of successful genre projects with one mechanic gives rise to a bunch of copycat projects with the same mechanics.
Nowadays, the genre of shooters (especially first-person shooters) is not as popular as in the 1910s, and nowadays, in order not to be considered a second-rate shooter, developers are trying to come up with new mechanics, against the background of which it is no longer so important how many guns the hero of the game carries.
Best comments
Somehow the thought spread strongly across the tree. =)
But, stop. What about the weapon wheel, you ask?? And you’ll be right. Many games already use a mechanic where you hold down a button and use a stick to select the barrel you want. It turns out the Halo developers just didn’t think of this? I doubt.
You shouldn’t doubt it. Look at the dates – when was Halo, and when was the weapon selection wheel popularized?. When things are invented they naturally seem obvious. Well, then, as I said, copying/imitation. =)
If you still remember games where the limitation of 2 barrels was extremely unnecessary, then Bulletstorm immediately comes to mind. A game about various methods of killing limited these very possibilities.
As for the first appearance of a restriction on 2 types of weapons, I can immediately remember Robocop vs Terminator 1993 on Sega Megadrive 16-bit. And there this is apparently a deliberate game design decision, since often the choice of weapons in “shooters” of those years was not limited to the choice of 2 barrels.
The weapon and skill selection wheel appeared relatively recently. So, most likely, they simply didn’t think of it before (as already written above).
As for realism – I agree. This decision may be due to the desire for realism. But sometimes the cause-and-effect relationship can be the opposite – they slip us a limit of 2 barrels and motivate this with a desire for realism.
Regarding the fact that it’s easier to balance the game this way, it may well be. But on the other hand, in many shooters with a normal choice of weapons, you can shoot with everything, and meanwhile the player himself runs around with a pair of his favorite guns.
Just a convenient design move? It may well be too. But then again, how often do you come across games with such a limitation now?? If anything, the question is not rhetorical, I thought about it myself.
Personally, I am most inclined towards the first option, as the most likely. Well, in some cases, to an emphasis on realism.
And Shadow the Hedgehog is so hardcore that you can only carry one weapon with you! XD
Very interesting reasoning. I thought about it myself, and this is the conclusion I came to:. There could be multiple reasons for Bungie to use two weapon types in Halo.
Firstly, as already mentioned, they could simply not have reached the idea of a weapon wheel. The first game I know of that used a wheel was Mass Effect (for which the shooter gameplay is not really the main thing), and it came out five years after Halo, if I remember correctly. After all, Halo is the first fully 3D console shooter, if I remember correctly, at least one of the first. There simply might not be any creativity left for this
Secondly, perhaps they did not want to disrupt the dynamics of the battle. Selecting a weapon on the wheel takes significantly longer than simply pressing a button. And the combat in Halo is quite intense, the enemies are very accurate, and it would be unpleasant to waste time on it
Thirdly, this may be due to the presence of multiplayer in Halo. In any shooter match, every second is critical, especially when you have developed a certain skill. And having to spend precious seconds switching weapons could be annoying for players, so a one-button, two-weapon option might make more sense for them.
But then again, how often do you come across games with such a limitation now??
If you take a classic shooter in its truest sense, it’s not often. But the same Call of Duty, Battelfield, royales like Arekh, still use. I googled “Top shooters 2020”, and Disintegration came up first. I haven’t heard anything about the game at all, but it also has a limit of two guns. (Not one at all, but sometimes a second barrel is given).
The games listed are multiplayer projects (Disintegration of PvPvE, as far as I remember). And literally in a comment above they wrote that in PvP this option is better suited so as not to waste time on the wheel. It seems to me that it’s not so much about the wheel, but about the fact that for PvP you don’t need more than 2 barrels, usually.
Coincidentally, the comment above was written while I was writing mine)).
I agree that this is more convenient for multiplayer projects.
As always, a very cool blog on a very common topic. Thank you)
Well, for the link of course
Great game, I remember how I was cringed when choosing a weapon. I really didn’t want to throw away the sniper rifle with guided bullets). But there it was offset by a variety of methods of killing and outrageous action.
By the way, then they brought Duke into the game, but there is no ability to switch between at least 4 guns.
Did Duke do anything?? Or was it a regular skin?
Yes, because 1 is for the enemy, 2 is for the girlfriend!
The point is that you are forced to use trophies. There simply isn’t enough ammunition for the main modular cannon for all the enemy’s steel, chitinous and scaly snouts.
So it turns out that switching weapons to the conventional “triangle” is simply convenient.
It’s not just convenient. This does not ruin the dynamics of what is happening. You write about it yourself below.
If we take the same Doom, we will see the most competent implementation of this mechanics: when you open the weapon interface, time around the Doom Slayer, if not freezing, then moves very slowly, which allows you to select the desired barrel without losing precious HP. But you can also switch between the current and previous barrel simply by pressing a button, so as not to lose the dynamics.
When selecting a weapon through the wheel, you are pulled out of what is happening and transported to a relatively safe place, where you will spend some time selecting the desired weapon, while the game is paused or, as in the case of Doom, slowed down.
In Last Of Us, as far as I remember, in battle you switch between the selected weapon by single or double pressing the d-pad left or right. The game doesn’t stop, the enemies don’t freeze, you’re still in danger. And changing the selected weapon is not so fast and requires a safe environment around the player.
Or let’s take Control. There is essentially one weapon on which the firing modes change. Weapons change firing mode between two selected ones with the press of a single button. The player simply needs to select the two shooting modes that he likes in the pause menu. Your ammo is endless and the same for all shooting modes. No enemies that require a specific shooting mode. And from this moment until the player wants to change these shooting modes, or until he beats the game, not a single firefight will slow down or stop. The player will simply switch two weapon modes with one button in battle.
And besides the dynamics, the wheels also have problems. They have become multi-level. In the same FarCry, inventory with buffs is on level 2 of the wheel. In RDR2, tonics are at level 2 of the wheel, and horse items are at level 3. Choosing the right weapon in GTA 5 is generally a quiet horror, if you think soberly. You need to not only focus on the weapon category, but also then use the cross to click on the desired barrel. And all this is so due to the fact that the wheel has a limit of 8 positions. And it turns out that the convenient wheel in Doom is only because there is a choice of 8 barrels. And in Eternal, because they added one powerful weapon, they threw out the pistol and put the BFG in its place, so that later, when you got the Unmaykr, you could get it by selecting the BFG and switching the shooting mode on it. And I can’t call it anything other than a crutch.
It’s a funny situation there. Duke replaces the main character, but everyone ignores it. What does he constantly react to?.
I also remembered the Republic Commando, which was also recently celebrated in blogs, where there was a main multifunctional gun and an auxiliary “trophy” one. And it seems to be even on topic, but the game was ruined by a constant shortage of charges to the base.
It’s been a while since I went to Republic and I barely remember, but it seems like there was an additional gun there, something like non-witcher swords in the first Witcher. It seems like they exist, but no one uses them. Unless the shotgun was usable, like a three-barreled one, if I remember everything correctly