Why do so many people NOT want Dual Wielding in the next Fallout?

[Jitansgate]

 

 

Knives yes but guns make no sense, in the Fallout universe ammunition is scarce and every shot has to count, dual wielding and spraying bullets around like Rambo wouldn't happen.

"

.

 

That is why you make your own Ammunition or buy the Ammo from Merchants and Traders every 3 Days.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Jitansgate

[billyro]

 

 

 

Knives yes but guns make no sense, in the Fallout universe ammunition is scarce and every shot has to count, dual wielding and spraying bullets around like Rambo wouldn't happen.

"

.

 

That is why you make your own Ammunition or buy the Ammo from Merchants and Traders every 3 Days.

 

 

That's a non lore-friendly mistake on the developers' part - according to Fallout lore, ammo is very scarce, thus people wouldn't unnecessarily waste ammunition by dual wielding.

Edited January 22, 2014 by billyro

[Jitansgate]

If you don't want to use it then don't use it simple as that.

[billyro]

No, it isn't, because enemies will be using it, and we don't like that.

[Jitansgate]

ok but your not playing as enemies your playing as the main character if you don't like duel wielding then don't use it Simple as that plus if ammo was really scarce Bethesda wouldn't have added all those guns to fallout and they would have added more Melee weapons.

[billyro]

What I'm saying is that dual wielding in real life is absurd - aiming is compromised, ammo is wasted, reloading is difficult and time-consuming, and the chance for self injury is increased. Dual wielding guns is simply more trouble than it's worth.

 

That's why I won't use it, and why I will not like it if enemies use it. It's not a matter of, "Bethesda made heaps of ammo so it's no problem": it's a matter of taste and the desire for practicality in a video game that we all want.

 

I would be completely fine with it if Bethesda included it as an optional feature, but I just don't want it in my game.

[Jitansgate]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c

[billyro]

Tsk. :P

 

That's the point, no?

[JimboUK]

If you don't want to use it then don't use it simple as that.

 

No it's not, if the game is balanced in such a way that you end up at a disadvantage by not dual wielding then its inclusion has had a negative effect on anyone not wishing to run about like John McClane. If they must include dual wielding then there should be a significant accuracy penalty for using it, sadly I don't think Bethesda will go for that, all they care about it is things looking cool.

[obobski]

I don't even know how they'll handle reloading with dual-wielding. Seriously, I don't think it's possible (unless they make it so the guns are just lowered beneath screen and the sounds play, CoD style).

 

With that in mind, perhaps they won't make dual wielding.

 

Serious question: Have you ever played (or are you familiar with) Hitman or Tomb Raider? In both games the protagonist dual wields pistols, and while it isn't the most accurate representation of either weapon handling or reloading (Tomb Raider probably is more convincing, since she has the "ammo backpack" thing (they did it in the movie too), whereas Hitman seems to just produce the magazines from thin air (even in the movie...)), they're videogames after all (and if you're going to suspend disbelief enough to accept the premise of either, the fact that Agent 47 and Lara Croft can handle a pair of .45s isn't that much of a leap).

 

Now whether or not Bethesda can/will pull it off just as well as IOI and Eidos have in the past, that's another story. But from a technical standpoint, I don't see why they couldn't if they really wanted to, given that it's been done before in a number of games (there are 5 Hitman games, and at least as many Tomb Raider games; both franchises have been around for a long while too).

 

Alternately - what's to say it has to be dual-wielded guns? Why can't my character pick up two knives? That's a legitimate fighting tactic in some parts of the world. Or two sticks? Or why can't I box with two power fists? :devil:

 

Finally - why should the game be a nanny and prevent my character from doing reckless things? I mean, I get that with something like Fallout 3 there are probably technical limits that prevent multi-weapon wielding, okay I can accept that. But if it could be done, why not? It lets you do all sorts of other reckless things, like consume massive quantities of addictive drugs and alcohol, pick fights with significantly stronger and better equipped enemies, climb around on rusty and unstable rubble piles, release dangerous and unknown viruses into a fragile ecosystem, etc. Is pulling out a pair of guns really that much worse? Also nuclear rocket RPGs (that the user survives at short range), drugs that instantly reverse the effects of radiation, and radioactive mutant soldiers are okay, but pulling out two guns and waving them around is too far? I guess I don't get it. :ohmy:

 

 

 

If you don't want to use it then don't use it simple as that.

 

No it's not, if the game is balanced in such a way that you end up at a disadvantage by not dual wielding then its inclusion has had a negative effect on anyone not wishing to run about like John McClane. If they must include dual wielding then there should be a significant accuracy penalty for using it, sadly I don't think Bethesda will go for that, all they care about it is things looking cool.

 

 

I honestly doubt this would be the case - Skyrim includes dual-wielding and it is not required to play the game, nor are characters who don't build the skill at any significant disadvantage; it does not have a negative effect by not using it. It does incur its own penalties (you can't block), and the game's little "helper hints" even encourage you to weigh the pros and cons of increased damage output relative to not being able to block. Whether or not you dual-wield is based on your personal preferences and playstyle, but it certainly isn't required. I really could not foresee Bethesda doing something that so dramatically reduces the ability of players to play the game their own way.

 

Also - what's the problem with things looking cool? It's a game after all - isn't that part of the point? (you know, to be fun) :blush:

 

I'm not arguing that in real life it's a bad thing to do with your pistols (there's even a MythBusters episode that tests it, so that you don't have to waste your own ammo trying it out), but if I wanted to shoot guns off with perfect realism, I could just go shoot guns off (I don't know if this true in all parts of the world, so I guess this might be an overly broad statement - but in my situation, going to a shooting range isn't an unreasonable proposition). It's all the other stuff that I can't do and reasonably expect to survive - like fighting a mutated bear with a sledgehammer or taking on an army of robots with a BB gun. Being able to have two guns out at the same time doesn't seem like that much of a leap.