Maybe it would help if you would stop assuming you're right and think about what you're asking.
Last try to explain this. Load the demo. Go to the room with the shotgun and ammo. Take both. Arm the shotgun. Fire enough rounds that the ammo bar is almost depleted. Switch to pistol. Fire like, two shots and the "clip" is gone.
If you had your wish, you would have just reloaded.
No, again, you're making unnecessary assumptions, not to mention the fact that you act as though you've put it that way before when you haven't. The way you described it is one solution, and I think that would work just fine, really. Or when you bring up a new weapon it could always start with a fresh clip, presumably loaded offscreen. Besides, I don't know where you got the idea that I want unified ammo and reloading -- I want regular ammo and reloading, like the first game, like an actual weapon in the physical universe. It seems like they're going to too much trouble to create a gameworld that corresponds to player expectations of an actual world (sound propogation, light and shadow, physics, AI, etc.) to create a system as wacky as this one. And I'll reiterate, I don't think that this is a giant gameplay flaw. But it is a simplification and it is unneccesary. I don't see how anyone can say that this system is better than the one from the first game. Sequels shouldn't break things that worked in the original. And Deadeye is right, the expanding crosshair needn't have been tossed out either. Taken collectively, the regression of all of these small features adds up, and it can be pretty disappointing, especially since we've seen these features work in tons of previous FPS games, including DX.
At this point, if you don't buy it, go to the ion storm forums and ask them. You've descended into name calling over this and I don't have any more desire to debate with someone being an asshole over a game discussion - so take it to them.
I've been on the ion forums, it's not like I think that your explanation is the wrong one and that they would give me the "real" answer. I think it's a dumb decision and there is no real explanation, so you're coughing up stupid reasoning for it. At least what you said here made some sense. I've resorted to "name calling" out of exasperation. Most of what you've said up until this point has been utterly inane and devoid of logic, even in response to completely rational posts.
You and I discussing it, or me discussing it in the IS forum, isn't going to change their decision. I just think it's a very poor design decision and I think it's silly when people try to provide excuses for it instead of acknowledging that.
~Steve
This comment was edited on Nov 24, 20:12.