OK NO. I'm drawing the line here.

[epicelite]

At 1:06 havoc picks up a rocket launcher and drops his shotgun. That best not be a weapon carry limit.

YOU BEST BE JOKING.

It's not April so this better be some kind of strange joke!

[Havoc89]

Rather then just complaining, back up your point as to why it is a bad idea.

[R315r4z0r]

I don't understand what the problem is. It was stupid to be able to carry 50 weapons around.

..And in most servers you don't even get weapon drops... so you will never even REACH the limit.

[epicelite]

You say you're ADDING new features to make game-play just right? Adding = taking things away? I apologize if I missed the memo on that one.

• Weapon limits were introduced due to the limitations of console, to make games more accessible to the masses, and for realism in some cases. (Though I'd argue Call of Duty is not realistic.)
  
• Carrying multiple weapons is FUN and allows for more dynamic gameplay and prevents backtracking.
  
• (singleplayer) Prevents getting stuck somewhere and being screwed because all you have is a pea-shooter while your surrounded by tanks.
  
• It's FUN trying to collect every weapon without dieing.

If you REALLY have to limit weapons in some way here is the proper way it should be done:

Limit it to a single weapon per-slot/type, IE:

PIC or Railgun, $500 sniper or Ramjet, Flamethrower or Grenade Launcher, laser rifle or laser chaingun or Tiberium Fanchette Gun, Chem gun or Chem Sprayer, etc...

Even better:

Free repair gun or upgraded repair gun, Officer's rocket launcher or Gunner's Rocket Launcher.

Now THAT would be an upgrade, stopping redundancy when one weapon is an obvious upgrade over another, or perhaps you prefer one of another. (IE: You want the $500 sniper for its instant ballistic velocity and no tracer.)

[Havoc89]

Umm... what?

So you think that limited weapons in FPS games is not for tactical gameplay decision making for the player so that they are not a walking tank, but instead its a console limitations? Infinte weapon holding could be done in the first FPS game called Wolfenstine, but it couldnt be done on the Xbox or PS2 or even the current gen PS3 and Xbox 360 (which are more powerful the a lot of PCs) and thats your argument? Unless you ment to say that its less complicated for the player to have only 2 weapons but its more complicated for the player to have all the weapons and be able to manage them all. I personally dont see why it would be so difficult because you have weapons with very specific names and functions, and most FPS games dont have as many weapons as Renegade does let alone how many weapons Renegade X will have. So it actually make perfect sence for the player to not be able to hold every weapon avaliable.

Well actually I think your only argument is that "its fun to have all the weapons" Yeah sure not gonna argue that it isnt fun to hold all the weapons at any given time. But its also very cheap because then you become a walking tank. Instead with weapon limitations you are then forced to pick and choose your weapons carefully based on not only what is going on, but also based on what kind of weapons are avaliable. It's a much smarter way to play the game because you get involved into the experiance and are forced to make important decisions rather then being a lazy gamer and collecting all the weapons and not have to worry about what kind of enemies you have to deal with.

For Renegade specifially it's multiplayer will be virtually unaffected by this since you almost never carry more then 1 primary weapon, but there are servers with weapon drop/spawns, and the last thing we want is to have people not making tactical decisions where they need to think about what is best for the team and instead play in a selfish way where all they want to do is be invisible and have all the guns but not shoot a single bullet because they dont want to die and loose all their guns.

We've got the single player covered and you dont have to worry about not having the right weapons for the job. Ofcourse you can play as an idiot and not balance your inventory with the right weapon and just choose the biggest baddest guns and find out your screwd because you didnt bright the right gear. There are weapons that are good against infantry, weapons that are good against anti-armour, and weapons that are balanced for both, its up to you to choose wisely.

Your suggestion on your variant on the weapon limitation is valiant but still you can have 10 weapons which is very stupid because you will always trade off the weaker weapons for the bigger weapons which are the only weapons you would use anyways even if you had the option to have all the weapons in your pocket.

[Demigan]

What they are adding, epicelite, is more tactical insight and a good grasp of what's to come. I doubt that they will send wave after wave of infantry at you, then when all you got is anti-infantry, they drop some tanks on you. If they do, there will be at least some kind of anti-tank weapon available from a nearby soldier.

So far I've never seen havock alone, there's allied tanks and infantry fighting alongside, with you spearheading them and trying to dominate the battlefield. Even if you end up with only anti-infantry weapons, your allies will be more then willing to destroy those tanks for you, if you keep them safe from the infantry.

I also think it is a loss that you cannot carry all weapons anymore, just like I think it is a loss that the original maps won't be returning, or at least not any time soon. But we get a lot for it back!

Renegade has always had a little more special moments. People taking incredible risks to kill that special unit running away, or having to circle around a bunch of enemies while trying to kill a tank. Renegade was special because in any other game the best target was the nearest target, and not in Renegade.

I can already see two people with anti-tank weapons, running towards one anti-infantry weapon and hoping, PRAYING to get their first. Or someone suddenly doubling back a little to get a weapon more suited for the occasion, switching from a patchgun to that new machinegun sniper for example. Even better: a sniper quickly switches weapons to kill a few damaged guys, one of them manages to pick up the sniper from under his nose and tries to make off with it. This way, people could end up with strange loadouts, and new, strange things will be happening on the battlefield. Making Renegade more unique than it already is.

[[NE]Fobby[GEN]]

This method rewards strategic players. You're still going to be able to hold 2 main weapons and unlimited sidearms, but after that point, you're going to have make decisions on what weapons are better to carry. Players with good insight will succeed. Anyone can carry around 10 weapons, it takes no skill and often makes the game worse. If you were an SBH picking up whatever you find, there'll be no point in purchasing expensive weapons anymore, since you can spend small amounts of money and simply pick guns off other people's kills. Moreover, there's a good reason why hotwires and techs don't come with any primary weapons; they can take out a building and most vehicles on their own. We're not barring them from picking up weapons, but putting a cap keeps relative balance.

Also, the more weapons you have, the more likely you'll hide, stay away from major battles, and not do any complex rushes, base attacks, or any real teamwork. It dumbs down the game.

In one sense we're not like Battlefield where you can only carry one primary weapon, but at the same time, we don't want people carrying an armory in their front pocket.

[epicelite]

"Console limitations" is more about the controller VS keyboard+mouse. Yes you can do unlimited weapon carrying but it never works just right because there aren't enough buttons to quickly switch between weapons and you end up making a weapon's menu at best.

Yes, weapon limits can be done properly when its in context of the game's design. A survival type game, or a realistic military simulator.

From a singleplayer standpoint limiting weapons removes a lot of the thinking and being tactical, and is just feels silly especially in a sci-fi game such as Renegade.

You place the player on a cliff and give them a sniper rifle.

You give the player a rocket launcher just before they head into a outdoors area.

You give the player a chaingun right before then enter a narrow hallway.

You place a weapon better then the one the player currently has, they're going to pick it up.

There is no "being tactical" as you say. Maybe in another game, but not Renegade.

I don't see how giving a player access to every weapon makes them a "tank" it just gives them more options when fighting. You worked hard for all of those guns and you deserve to have more options! You might be able to plan for what enemies you're going to encounter in singleplayer but not always in multiplayer.

Renegade is not Call of Duty, each gun is unique. You need different weapons for different situations.

In Call of Duty each gun is basically the same thing with a few rare exceptions, and those are limited to specific situations.

This is RENEGADE not military simulator 2011.

[epicelite]

Oh and one more thing.

When you force players to stop and think about which weapon they should take, that slows the game down.

[kenz3001]

it will be the same as it is now you pick your character and that's that ... but if you see a better weapon you pick it up like in most other FPS games, Call Of Duty is one of the best examples and that game play is anything but slow unless you like to hide like a pussy

i would like to see a level system were you get better add-ons to put on your weapons and armour like in COD but that's entirely up to the team and it may make the game play a bit lopsided and off the beaten track

[[NE]Fobby[GEN]]

Oh and one more thing.

When you force players to stop and think about which weapon they should take, that slows the game down.

Picking up weapons slows the game down, and people with 10 weapons avoiding battles, rushes, and teamwork doesn't?

[epicelite]

People do that anyway!

They will still do it if they can only hold 2 weapons, some guy finds a Ramjet rifle he is going to do his darnedest to not die just the same as if he had a Ramjet and 20 other weapons.

There is no difference either way in that aspect.

Though I would understand how it's acceptable if SBH's were not allowed to change their weapons or pick up another one.

Another problem that might come up is people buying a X character, dropping that guy, buying Y character and then having both guns easily.

[R315r4z0r]

Oh and one more thing.

When you force players to stop and think about which weapon they should take, that slows the game down.

No it forces you to learn how to think quickly. If you have 50 weapons in your pocket, you then need to waste time thinking "Hmm... which weapon would work best here" where as if you were forced to pick up the weapons you only thought you would need, then it's much easier to select the right weapon for the job since you already thought about it before you even entered the combat area.

[Demigan]

Another thing that should be mentioned: when you can carry 20 weapons around, you'll be using only the best weapon for that situation. Which like you said is easy: on a cliff you have a sniper, through narrow hallways you pick a chaingun, in open fields you get a rocketlauncher.

But if you carry only 2 weapons, you might have to make due with a weapon not so well suited to the situation. You will need to make tradeoffs: instead of a rocket launcher, you pick up a laser rifle, good vs both infantry and tanks, although it will take a while before you kill the tank.

This will enhance the gameplay, anyone can be good in singleplayer if you always have the best gun for the task, but with a gun that isn't suited for the task, you need to be skilful and smart to be able to survive.

I'm wondering, the loss of carrying all the weapons doesn't seem that great a loss to me, why does it seem the end of the world to you? Is there something that so defines your game when you play that taking it away will immidiately destroy the entire game?

I always play on renegade servers with weapon drop, and I usually use only 2, maximum 3 of the primary weapons I pick up. It would only be the third weapon that might be a problem, but nothing else.

Fobby, what was it you said about unlimited sidearms? How many kinds of sidearms we going to get?!

Yours sincerely,

Demigan.

[ElizLestrad]

Epicelite, I completely agree with you. At least on the changes made regarding weapons. The last thing we need is another Call of Duty clone. Renegade as it was stood well enough on its own it didn't the "help". I think it would be a great disservice to the title to do that and while I was very much excited about the mod, the latest promo video along with this news has given me pause about just how excited I should be. Still this news ranks second next to the "all new campaign".

Beyond Black Dawn:

00:30

"Havoc is back in action with an all new single player adventure..."

~01:23

"Our 'new' infantry system rewards strategic players by making them more effective on the battlefield"

Translation: Call of Duty:Modern Warfare/2/CoD:BO.

A remake is exactly that, a REmake; theres really no place for artistic license. I think if the devs are so intent to make it into Call of Duty/Homefront, then keep the weapons limitations to Multiplayer and leave Single Player and Skirmish modes alone.

I swear Call of Duty is becoming a cancer...thank God we still have iD.

[[NE]Fobby[GEN]]

Actually most of the team dislikes Call of Duty to be honest, at least their multiplayer. I honestly can't see the comparison here at all. Renegade X has structures, vehicles, aircraft, unique teams, capturable buildings, superweapons - Call of Duty had none of this. Renegade X is arcadey, our infantry and vehicles have a lot more health than Call of Duty, we have sci-fi elements, etc. It's a terrible comparison.

Like Havoc89 said earlier, in the vast majority of Renegade games, you only had one weapon anyway. Sometimes, you had two. Maybe 5% of the time you would have more than that. Most servers in the old game didn't even have weapon drop. We're allowing weapon drop and weapon swap, and we're allowing you to carry 3 different C4 types, a sidearm, and two main weapons, while Call of Duty does not even get close to that.

I think my points in post 7 are sufficient. Either way, we are going to do a lot of testing before the game comes out. I don't see us removing this though, because it barely changes the game at all. I'm asking you to trust us.

[Jointn00b]

So tell me... how come you 2 think that there'll only be 2 primary weps in SP? 1 of the devs (Havoc or Fobby if I remember correctly) stated that there won't be a weapon limit in the SP... So tell me... where's the problem anyway?

[[NE]Fobby[GEN]]

There is a weapon limit in singleplayer, but what you use is mostly based on preference. For example, if you're fighting off infantry, you can use snipers, rifles, shotguns, chainguns, flamethrowers, etc. and they'll all work fine.

[Demigan]

So tell me... how come you 2 think that there'll only be 2 primary weps in SP? 1 of the devs (Havoc or Fobby if I remember correctly) stated that there won't be a weapon limit in the SP... So tell me... where's the problem anyway?

Epicelite, could you just tell what is the exact problem you have with it?

-Is it just the fact that you can't carry all the weapons?

-Is it the fact that you cannot collect something during the game? Trying to gain prestige by wielding as many weapons possible?

-Is is the fact that the game looks similar in some ways to other games? (although I would think it's a comparison of 'they have a wizard in their game, you cannot put one in this game as it would make it similar!', although I understand why you wouldn't like this seeming copy of another game)

-Is it the fact that you think the game will be dumbed down by always throwing the right weapon at your feet? (although I think that they should refrain from exactly that and make it hard on you)

-Is it the fact that you might need to backtrack?

Yours sincerely,

Demigan.

[Qbert987]

How hard would it be to unlock the wepon limit?

Later in the multiplayer could the limit be a server side option?

I personally don't mind at all.

[TheGroundsKeeper]

SBH + Ramjet = OP, never like the wpn drop games just because of that.... get a SBH, Get A ramjetrifle, take your time oneshot an infantry and 5 secs later invisible again not a tactic, not nothing, as close to cheating without cheating as it can come so limit or not, matters not really for me, wpn pickups in Renegade was all lame

[Demigan]

SBH + Ramjet = OP, never like the wpn drop games just because of that.... get a SBH, Get A ramjetrifle, take your time oneshot an infantry and 5 secs later invisible again not a tactic, not nothing, as close to cheating without cheating as it can come so limit or not, matters not really for me, wpn pickups in Renegade was all lame

why would you go for basic infantry? It was never overpowered, an SBH was prone to taking too much time for aiming, they hamper the team more then anything else. Even worse: an SBH first needs to get a ramjet, and they don't drop that often, and the ramjet had only one bullet at a time.

It takes 7 seconds for an SBH to recloak, by the way, and when you zoom in, you also become visible.

An SBH with a sniper rifle is something powerfull, but if you keep at the task at hand, a stealth sniper will rarely fire.

Think of the laser rifle itself, considering the cost/benefit of the weapon, it's probably the best weapon out there. Good vs infantry AND tanks, loads of ammo, good range, fast reload, good firerate, precise. Yet no-one ever uses it right, go on, take an SBH and treat it like it isn't stealth, shoot the moment you see an enemy, and you'll see it's a great weapon, especially for a price of 400.

And yet it's rarely ever used properly, the same counts for any other weapon an SBH holds, people are too careful about unstealthing.

Yours sincerely,

Demigan.

[TheGroundsKeeper]

I personally remember Going SBh and starting up with getting a small sniper, then a rocketlauncher then a portable ioncannon, then a ramjet, you have a free pullback unless you had very low hp and aiming at people are so much more easy when you stand still, and when you already have a great aim jumping and sidestepping.... its on line pointwise with the arty campers that had been talked so much about, and that was only from sniping infantry.

id say back in renegade that combo gave me close to a 100/1k/d ratio,

Edit: Btw the ramjet-sniper had 4 shots, you are thinking of the revashaw rifle, or am i remembering wrong? And you didnt really had to use the scope in renegade, you had the red color on the crosshair when you had a chance of hit why the scope was awesome in renegade wat because of the scope glitch where you were all over the place Being invisible just tops that big time.

Edit again : ohh and every infantry instant died from headshot with both snipers and the Sydney and raweshaw rifles. Not base infantry, All infantry, and with 100pts for a havoc/sakura possibly raweshaw/sydney kill, you could harvest points pretty fast as far i remember if that was what you wanted, and in the end your opposite team runs out of money, buying a 1000credit unit andthen loosing it secons later makes you poor really fast or go for another tactic

[Killa]

Epicelite.

Simple facts follow.

YOU are not developing this game. You complain so often about changes. If you want to make some constructive criticism, then do so, when your educated enough and have the game development skills that our team does.

I hate having to come on here, read your ignorant rants about minors changes that will in fact make a minor impact... if not a HUGE positive impact to OUR game.

I have a simple outline for you to follow.

Shut up, Enjoy the developments and achievements we are making, and stop bitching.

OR.

Leave.

The Choice is yours.

[kenz3001]

*cheers and claps* @ killa

[Demigan]

and in the end your opposite team runs out of money, buying a 1000credit unit andthen loosing it secons later makes you poor really fast or go for another tactic

key words: or go for another tactic.

For some reason, people think kills mean something in renegade. I never understood that, a player who is good isn't defined by his kills. It is defined by his kills versus deaths versus points. And those deaths don't really count if you use low grade units.

If you die as a havoc a few times in a row, then it's time to switch tactics. If you don't understand that, you deserve to die by SBH snipers. Personally, I get an APC or organise a small hunt with one or two other people to kill an SBH sniper.

Ramjets have 4 bullets in renegade, UNLESS you pick one up. A pickup ramjet holds only 1 bullet, and has 40 in reserve. How it will happen in Renegade-x? who knows? with less restrictions on vehicles, an SBH sniper might be hard put to find even a target to shoot at. And with larger maps, it will be harder not to use the zoom function, although it will be easier to hide.

Yours sincerely,

Demigan.

[TheGroundsKeeper]

I see. didnt remember the pickup ram only had 1 shot, but in the end thats all you need with sbh.

Kills matters, It gives you extra credits to spend on other units, or donate to new players or simply for swapping infantry, good players can easy come in a situation where you dont really need weapon pickup i remember in a non pickup game to swap from havoc to engineer, repair a building then swap back again to an havoc and still have loads of credits after. ofc u end up boinking alot of basic infantry, but it doesent really matters, good snipers wins renegade imo.

And damn they suck being up against

[epicelite]

@Demigan

No, if I have every weapon I'm going to be using the one that's the most fun. Perhaps in some situations it will be the most powerful but other times I might choose to pull out my flamethrower to mow down some infantry just because I like to burn people. Others maybe I want to blow them into a million pieces with a rocket launcher.

I'm wondering, the loss of carrying all the weapons doesn't seem that great a loss to me, why does it seem the end of the world to you?

I'm fucking tired of playing the same Call of Duty clone. Not to start throwing out cheap insults, but maybe if you and r315r4z0r had been playing video games for as long as I have you would be able to see the current stagnation and uncreativeness of the current industry. All we have to fall on now is game mods, and Indy developers. While Renegade-X isn't exactly a new IP, it was SOMETHING to look forward to.

I think the RenX team is just trying to make the next Call of Duty(Doesn't matter if you like CoD or not, its whats popular and selling.) clone in order to look good to prospective employers because they obviously would like jobs in the gaming industry. No I'm not trying to say that a job making games is a bad thing. (In fact, now more then ever, we need the right people in those jobs, and they could be those people.)

Let me leave you with this:

[TheGroundsKeeper]

I think you are overreacting Renegade x i s already unique, and cant really be put in any other fps genre, and i already think it rewards the good players more than the average. even before pickups the good players dominated the game, got the better uints first, and in the end kept bad players on basic infantry fairly easy. I never needed multiple guns to play the game and have fun. There were always something to do no matter what arsenal you were carrying. The mods that emerged that allowed you to carry more than only your prebought wpn is kinda what made it more like every other fps if any. Choosing unit after what you find best for the team is part of the tactics of the game

[maty]

@Demigan

I think the RenX team is just trying to make the next Call of Duty(Doesn't matter if you like CoD or not, its whats popular and selling.) clone in order to look good to prospective employers because they obviously would like jobs in the gaming industry.

I am in the games industry. I'm stuck in the middle of crunch time as an environment artist on an MMO... Just sayin' .

And if you think making a "CoD clone" (which RenX is about as far detached from that mold as you can get) improves your prospects? Far from it, take that from experience. Weapon carry limit is not a game breaker and doesn't make it like "every other FPS". Wait to play the finished product before getting so defensive, the game will be fully enjoyable, weapon carry limit or not.

Besides... Tanks? Ion Cannons? Stealth? Lasers? Rockets?... Whats not to love?!

[Demigan]

Epicelite, I'm with you on the game industry becoming more and more alike. And you should have a say in what you think makes the game more COD like.

So far, there are two things that I remember you saying that makes the game more COD like, the first is that you can only carry two primary weapons, the second that you will level up if you play.

For carrying two primary weapons, it's a small change that, in my opinion, should not be rated as a defining feature for COD. I think there were even games before COD who used such a system.

As for the leveling up as you play, we don't even know what this will entitle, what kind of advantages you will get. It could range from COD clone advantages, to whole new idea's that enhance Renegades gameplay.

We don't know if you keep the advantages you earn if you die, perhaps all you are rewarded for is not dieing and earning lots of points and kills over time, but losing all when you die.

Maybe the advantages won't be advantages over other people, but stragetic advantages.

Being able to use the overhead tactical map to command your friends along, the capability to erase lower player's commands off the tactical map to create a more unifying plan from the best players. Being able to get different gadgets, like a directional microphone on your sniper, allowing you to hear what an enemy is saying over teamspeak if you are aiming at him. Those will not make other players more powerful then others, but will make them more useful. That would be far away from COD clones, and there are other ways to create improvements for players that are completely un-COD like. Like an option for higher level players to fire the missles of the mammoth tank in series rather than swarms, etc.

My suggestion: give your own idea's on how to fill in the features the team presented to you, and try to make them as un-COD like as possible. In the meantime, you wait and see what they are actually planning to do.

Yours sincerely,

Demigan.

[TheGroundsKeeper]

Imo adding more advantages to the players who play alot is an epic fail. If you wanna level up and own others with none of your own skill involved, go for WoW or one of the other skillless MMO's out there. The only advantage there should be is YOUR skill. And do you have enough of that, you dont need "Level advantages". The only thing i see that adds is that you have to use alot of "craptime" to get enough "Skill" to have a fair advantage, so you can actually start to play. And lets face it, its already hard beeing new or skill-less in a game like renegade because you have a harder time getting credits for your first , and the odds are when you have it you get instant pewned and looses it because you hve no idea what you are doing.

[epicelite]

Whats not to love?!

Only holding 2 weapons at a time.

Man, you walked right into that one.

[kenz3001]

just face the fact you cant get you own way all the time

[Demigan]

Imo adding more advantages to the players who play alot is an epic fail. If you wanna level up and own others with none of your own skill involved, go for WoW or one of the other skillless MMO's out there. The only advantage there should be is YOUR skill. And do you have enough of that, you dont need "Level advantages".

You are right, that's why I was advocating things that do not make you harder to kill, or give you an easier time killing others, but things that make you more useful to others.

Also, every game offers advantages that are consistent during that game. So earning during the game, will have you able to use it all that game long. I would like to see a game that takes all those earnings away the moment you die, if they enhance your character.

What in the end would be best for a game like Renegade, is that people can earn more options as they 'level up'. With the example of the mammoth tank, new players just need one mode of fire for their missles, no need to make it more complicated by adding other modes just yet. So the basic mode would be the most used one: you fire all your missles at once as seen in the teaser.

For more experienced players, other modes become available. For instance, shooting the missles in series will allow you to scare off infantry that might otherwise enter through a certain entrance. This way, player will never be at a disadvantage against more experienced players, and can learn the game without being overwhelmed by secondary, tertiary modes and dozens of additional gadgets that enhance gameplay. Especially if a new player suddenly gets a message with 'new mammoth tank firing mode aquired'. He will buy one, fiddle with it, try it out, learn how to use it himself and if need be ask other players.

It's better then taking people by the hand in tutorials.

Yours sincerely,

Demigan.

[TheGroundsKeeper]

But you already have credits to back you up as a good player, you hit more, and earn credits fatser, y0u get the good stuff before the others, and in general your entire team gets the good stuff before the other team because of you. what is more to have? eg you and your team pewns the harvester at start while protecting your own harvester. Thats already a huge advantage right there.... i dont really see any reason to tip the balance even more...

[Havoc89]

@Demigan

No, if I have every weapon I'm going to be using the one that's the most fun. Perhaps in some situations it will be the most powerful but other times I might choose to pull out my flamethrower to mow down some infantry just because I like to burn people. Others maybe I want to blow them into a million pieces with a rocket launcher.

I'm fucking tired of playing the same Call of Duty clone. Not to start throwing out cheap insults, but maybe if you and r315r4z0r had been playing video games for as long as I have you would be able to see the current stagnation and uncreativeness of the current industry. All we have to fall on now is game mods, and Indy developers. While Renegade-X isn't exactly a new IP, it was SOMETHING to look forward to.

I think the RenX team is just trying to make the next Call of Duty(Doesn't matter if you like CoD or not, its whats popular and selling.) clone in order to look good to prospective employers because they obviously would like jobs in the gaming industry. No I'm not trying to say that a job making games is a bad thing. (In fact, now more then ever, we need the right people in those jobs, and they could be those people.)

Let me leave you with this:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-LZmq-9_j9k4/ToQoMKKGukI/AAAAAAAAAIk/kFR8AaFE1sc/1317283633205.jpg

Hah, you've got some nerve and an ego calling Renegade X a generic FPS. This whole post alone just makes me think you have no credibility to anything that you're saying because I'll tell you what you're saying.

You are saying that if we take Renegade, limit the number of primary weapons to 2, add a bunch of C&C related innovative ideas such as tech buildings (and more that we havnt disclosed yet) you get a generic FPS that plays just like Call of Duty. You really are starting to annoy me, quit making dumb ass posts.

[kenz3001]

i feel bad , i was the first to comparing RenX to COD, but i was only compairing the amount of weapons you can carry and how that effects the game play but not the game play in genaral i.e. pick up a new gun and it takes time to do and most of the time you die ... and if you pick it up you only get a small amount of ammo.

as i said before the original game only lets you use 2 guns 1 primary (any gun) and a seconder (pistol) i dont know why people are Bitching about it when you can ditch the pistol for a better gun !

have you ever held a pistol/machine gun/rifle + ammo i would like to see you carry all that around the battle field ... why should a game be any different.

carying all the weapons is like cheating, there is no fun in cheating, there is no fun in having all the game at your disposal you might as well go play ut3/quake or TF2 if you wont that sort of game ... im board of all of them

i feel that the DEV's have made a Good call on this 1 it will stop Cheater in the future ...and im sure that some servers will make all weapon pick ups in the future

as for this thread, im done looking at the invalid arguments.

[TheGroundsKeeper]

Theres a reason we are all hyped about Renegade-X. That is because it has the Heart and Soul of the original Renegade. I already felt that the mod in the original that made you able to pickup a sniper in the fields, made a horrible balance issue and was kinda damanging for the game. Its a fine line, This is a remake of an old game!!!! If they wanted to make a new game, no reason to call it renegade they could have called it Generic fps as shown. But luckily they dont do that. Ive been waiting what feels like half my life on a sequel to renegade. I never been able to enjoy a fps like i did with it.

Fate is that its in the hands of cabable entusiast and not scum like EA games that buys up good titles and then milk em for money till the game lost all its soul and good memories. Just be happy with the awesome work put into this!!!!! And be happy its not in the hands of people with no backbone or respect for what what the title stands for.

[R315r4z0r]

I'm fucking tired of playing the same Call of Duty clone. Not to start throwing out cheap insults, but maybe if you and r315r4z0r had been playing video games for as long as I have you would be able to see the current stagnation and uncreativeness of the current industry. All we have to fall on now is game mods, and Indy developers. While Renegade-X isn't exactly a new IP, it was SOMETHING to look forward to.

I don't quite think you understand the definition of the word "creative."

The weapon limit mechanic has been used in many FPS games for years. Not because the devs are lazy (which is a dumb reason because it takes time to create the code for a weapon limit), not because the devs are lacking creativity, but because weapon limits grant players a better gameplay experience. It's for balance.

It lets the developers take a weapon and then truly maximize on it's usefulness. They can't do that if there is no weapon limit. Why? Because if all the weapons are powerful, then someone who gets a hold of a lot of them will ruin the game for everyone else. Meaning, if you want to have a weapon limit, all of the weapons need to be generic and do minimal damage. That way if someone manages to collect an entire armory's worth of weapons, they aren't considered to be an overpowered threat to the game's balance.

For every thing you do, there has to be one way to counter it. That's just basic game balance 101. What is "uncreative" is creating 20 weapons and then letting a player carry them all at once because they are too lazy/stupid to plan their attacks ahead.

[maty]

Only holding 2 weapons at a time.

Man, you walked right into that one.

That's two more than none! And you can trade them out - its not like there are only two weapons in the whole game.

You might also actually find it improves gameplay not having everything at your disposal. You know, having to use that brain! Wait until we finish, announce the final feature list - then decide if you like it.

We welcome ideas but just getting angry over a feature-list we've not confirmed, for an unreleased game, thats free, that you don't have to play, is a little bit over the top.

[159456]

=(

why does nobody like the all weapon pickup??

everyone keeps syaing it makes you Over Powered...

thats not ture, if you have 10 weapons, that dosent mean you ARE 10 Different infantry...

that just means you have the ability to change weapons when we want to, to best fit the situation at hand..

you are after all ONLY firing ONE gun, and switching takes time btw..

(i dont know how to quote so..)

some one said: a small change like the weapon limit isnt a game breaker..

so?, if its not so bad one way why is it so bad the other way,

i'm not comparing to cod.. but cod only lets you have 1 primary because of ammo issues and balance, in renegade, ammo aint no biggie, you after all just take a small walk back to your base...

-ammo isnt a problem

-weapon usage shouldent be a problem (like i said , you only ever use one gun, its not like you dual wield, Imo worst ever implication to COD, Horrible decision, Ruined and unbalanced the WHOLE game, hate it...)

=(

why not just give server owners the choice of choseing whether or not to implicate all weap. pickup...

oh yeah, today is renx birthday, Happy birthaday. =D

[maty]

Quit comparing weapon limits to CoD... games go back decades with weapon limits, very successful games too (Counter Strike being a great example, only the single most-played multiplayer PC game of all time).

Anyway its besides the point - you still get to use all the weapons, you just can't carry them all simultaneously. It forces you to think a little more, involves you a bit more and has a whole load of additional effects for the player (more reward for killing opponents [a new option of weapon switch]), gives the designers more freedom and quite frankly this whole topic is ludicrous. See my post above about this being unfinished, unfinalised, free and no skin off your back.

[OnyeNacho]

=(

why does nobody like the all weapon pickup??

everyone keeps syaing it makes you Over Powered...

thats not ture, if you have 10 weapons, that dosent mean you ARE 10 Different infantry...

that just means you have the ability to change weapons when we want to, to best fit the situation at hand..

you are after all ONLY firing ONE gun, and switching takes time btw..

(i dont know how to quote so..)

some one said: a small change like the weapon limit isnt a game breaker..

so?, if its not so bad one way why is it so bad the other way,

i'm not comparing to cod.. but cod only lets you have 1 primary because of ammo issues and balance, in renegade, ammo aint no biggie, you after all just take a small walk back to your base...

-ammo isnt a problem

-weapon usage shouldent be a problem (like i said , you only ever use one gun, its not like you dual wield, Imo worst ever implication to COD, Horrible decision, Ruined and unbalanced the WHOLE game, hate it...)

=(

why not just give server owners the choice of choseing whether or not to implicate all weap. pickup...

oh yeah, today is renx birthday, Happy birthaday. =D

I don't really understand why dual-wielding is suddenly the worst thing ever done.....

[159456]

have you ever went up against thoes dual g18's or thoes dual rangers???

i mean going up against that is just.. cruel....

but its my opinion any way...

[OnyeNacho]

ah.... multiplayer.... The competitive, yet semi-ridiculous game mode (semi because of certain games like Call of Duty, Halo, and Valve's Source games, too many trolls that ruin gameplay).

[159456]

if you think about it, theres eventually going to be trolls on ren-x that would ruin the game for every one..

if dual wield happens in ren-x, my god...

=P

it would end up like COD, the actuall players which "play for fun" dont play anymore, and what you've got left is trolls that go round killing everyone, and stop the game from BEING played, (in ren-x case, sbh ramjetters, which can STILL happen with the 2 primary only weapon system)

=P

back on topic: the old carry everything wasnt so bad, so why does it have to go ?

[OnyeNacho]

if you think about it, theres eventually going to be trolls on ren-x that would ruin the game for every one..

if dual wield happens in ren-x, my god...

=P

it would end up like COD, the actuall players which "play for fun" dont play anymore, and what you've got left is trolls that go round killing everyone, and stop the game from BEING played, (in ren-x case, sbh ramjetters, which can STILL happen with the 2 primary only weapon system)

Well I am no fan of MP in general. Not to mention, I rarely play MP games nowadays (too busy with education and projects).

back on topic: the old carry everything wasnt so bad, so why does it have to go ?

looking back to previous posts, I think this would be the best solution. instead of the abnormal unlimited weapon idea and making Renegade X a simple "Run and Gun" game, I believe a weapon limit would best suite this game. (ends here because i have to rush to class in high school).

[StealthGod]

I normally don't post but I can't resist now that I've seen a few of these comments. Imo it is awesome that you have a limit on the guns now, I never liked them games when you were playing as Nod and for example 2 players out of the 6 wend SBH and didn't try to push into the enemy base and destroying it as that is the main objective, no what they were doing was collecting all the guns and if they died during that they just took a SBH again and repeated this the entire game...

This takes so much time and basicly the player behind the SBH could be doing so much more for himself to get credits and for the team to get their victory. I never quite understood why all these servers put those weapon drops in whenever you kill a person, the basic weapon drops at bunkers etc were somewhat decent and useful, it could help you as an Engineer or a Hotwire since you only had a pistol and then you could grab one of the basic weapons like a rifle or a shotgun but it was not unbalanced, it wasn't an advanced weapon.

Imo the tactical mode inside the C&C mode got a bit out of hand when the weapon drops came. When you had all weapons it didn't matter anymore what kind of person/vehicle came arround, you will have any weapon ready to counter them and that just disappointed me. So I'm glad that you guys took it out. :-)

And now that I'm posting anyway, I have to say I'm so amazed by you developers, it's just beyond incredible what you've done to this old game, basicly a full rebirth. I'm in my first year Informatics now, I wish I was born five years earlier so I could accually apply to one of your functions as atm I only have the basics of some programming languages. Oh well, nonetheless good job really and I can't wait till it's done.

Oh yeah awesome new video from Black Dawn that came a few days ago, loved it!

[R315r4z0r]

have you ever went up against thoes dual g18's or thoes dual rangers???

i mean going up against that is just.. cruel....

but its my opinion any way...

The poorly balanced settings of one single game out of many is hardly a reason to just the general mechanic as a whole across all games. And you're talking about MW2... which is absolutely nothing like Renegade.