ALL THE HYPERBOLE. RIGHT HERE. (Destiny)

by Cody Miller , Music of the Spheres - Never Forgot, Sunday, November 17, 2013, 19:41 (3815 days ago) @ electricpirate
edited by Cody Miller, Sunday, November 17, 2013, 19:48

No it does not. Players should not have to play an inferior version of a game (where they have little weapon choice) just to later get to the real version (where they have lot of weapon choice). The real version is what you should play from the start.

Halo's 2 weapon system, and limiting the available weapons by what you've earned are the same abstract concept. They are both about creating more meaningful choice by limiting down from a wide variety of options.

Wrong. Wrong Wrong Wrong.

Having every weapon unlocked and available right away may create such a system. But having to unlock them is not a strategic choice, since if you want access to all the weapons and choices YOU HAVE TO GRIND AND EARN THEM. That is the opposite of meaningful choice; you are practically required to do it.

Halo's two weapon limitation is beneficial BECAUSE YOU CAN'T WORK AROUND IT. The limitation of having a small weapons set unless you earn them CAN BE BYPASSED BY SPENDING THE TIME TO EARN THEM. Once you earn weapons it's no longer limiting you down! It's not a real limitation, since all you have to do is spend time to get around it.

There's nothing wrong with having asymmetric options for each player either, as long as the tools to balance them are done well.

This is correct, but I fail to see how this has anything to do with unlocking weapons and grinding for rewards. You can easily have asymmetric options without having grinding. Ever play a fighting game with different characters, or an RTS with different races?