|
|
 |
| [Jan 07, 2012, 5:52 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
Bitmob.com - Shooters only need eight guns.
At last count, Borderlands contains over 17.5 million color-coded, procedurally generated firearms. The gun population of planet Pandora outnumbers the individual populations of Cuba, Greece, Israel, and Switzerland. What the hell am I supposed to do with all that? I know we're talking about a loot drop game where the entire appeal lies in those loot drops, but outside of dollars, I don't need 17.5 million of anything. That's way, way, waaaaaaaay too much crap to ever constitute fun. Hell, even the comparatively modest arsenals of Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 quickly blur into one amorphous, nondescript mess.
Eight guns. That's all you really need. Maybe fewer. And imposing that kind of limitation will net you a better game to boot. Here's how.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 38. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jan 9, 2012, 12:19 |
Bhruic |
|
|
You're aware that the CoD series didn't become really popular until CoD4, right?
Really? You might want to go look up some sales numbers before you throw off such blatant untruths. As an example:
Call of Duty 2 was the most popular launch title on the Xbox 360, with 250,000 units sold in its first week of availability.[43] 77% of people who purchased an Xbox 360 also purchased the game, which contributed to its high sales.[44] As of July 2006, 1.4 million copies of the game had been sold on the Xbox 360.[45] By January 2008, the game had sold 2 million copies.
Did it have the 10+ million copies that we see today? No, but there weren't 10+ million Xbox 360s to sell to.
And then, of course, there's the fact that CoD:Black Ops was set in the 60s, and featured weaspons that were available at that period of time, rather than modern ones.
No, people expect sequels to play like its predecessors and the weapon selection is a fundamental part of how a game plays
Funny how you start with "No", and then go on to say exactly what I said.
You're arguing semantics.
No, I'm arguing the point. The FAMAS with the flashlight has different specs than the FAMAS with the suppressor. The slight variation in specs (and performance) doesn't stop it from still being a FAMAS, and doesn't make it a separate gun in either case.
Again, you're wrong. Certain weapons are staples of certain games
No, certain weapons become staples of certain games. I can assure you that even if you were right, and no Quake game would be made without a rocket launcher, no one at id was sitting around saying "Man, we need to make a game with a rocket launcher in it, what game can we make to do that?" when they were first designing Quake.
Quake without a rocket launcher is not Quake, which is why every Quake game has a rocket launcher. You seem to dismiss this fact, even though it's plainly obvious to anyone who has played those games.
If id made a Quake 5, and didn't have a rocket launcher in it, then I'm sure there would be complaints. But at the same time, I'm sure there would be many people who would buy it and would completely consider it a "Quake" game.
On the other hand, many people didn't consider Quake 4 a true "Quake" game, despite the fact it did contain rocket launchers, so that's hardly a relevant point. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Twitter 
