Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Poll [62 votes]: Do You Want Dual Wielding In Reach?
  • Poll [62 votes]: Do You Want Dual Wielding In Reach?
Subject: Do You Want Dual Wielding In Reach?

Were it so easy.

Poll: Do You Want Dual Wielding In Reach?  [closed]
Yes, it could be fun again with new weapons:  60%
(37 Votes)
No:  40%
(25 Votes)
Total Votes: 62

Do you guys want dual wielding back in Reach?

I do, the reason it got boring is because we have been using many of the same weapons for several years, but if they add many new dual wielding weapons in Reach it could be fun again. Consider that when voting.

Think about it, we all liked it when Halo 2 came out because it was close to see all the different combinations and use our favorite combos, then Bungie made Halo 3 and the dual wielding weapons in that felt to similar (Spiker was like SMG, and many Halo 2 weapons stayed).

[Edited on 10.06.2009 11:53 PM PDT]

  • 10.06.2009 11:47 PM PDT

Don't take life too seriously, no one gets out alive anyway.

Australia

If totally new weapons + some revamped old halo weapons then..yes

  • 10.06.2009 11:49 PM PDT

remington nylon 66. best .22 ever period.

no i want it to be a real prequel and if thats in there it wont be

  • 10.06.2009 11:49 PM PDT

Were it so easy.

Posted by: NECROMONGER223
no i want it to be a real prequel and if thats in there it wont be

Yes it will, dual wielding has nothing to do with story or anything. Spartans could always dual wield, they just added in Halo 2 cause they didn't think of it in Halo 1.

Thats like saying Masterchief could only break off a turret in Halo 3 and not in Halo 1 because Halo 3 was later on. No e could always do it, they just added it in the game.

[Edited on 10.06.2009 11:52 PM PDT]

  • 10.06.2009 11:52 PM PDT

Don't take life too seriously, no one gets out alive anyway.

Australia

Posted by: LinkLegend0
Posted by: NECROMONGER223
no i want it to be a real prequel and if thats in there it wont be

Yes it will, dual wielding has nothing to do with story or anything. Spartans could always dual wield, they just added in Halo 2 cause they didn't think of it in Halo 1.

Thats like saying Masterchief could only break off a turret in Halo 3 and not in Halo 1 because Halo 3 was later on. No e could always do it, they just added it in the game.


Ya necro is thinking to literal with halo CE, just cause MS coudn't do it, doesn't mean b/c of the story. Bungie simply thought of this new feature later on.

  • 10.06.2009 11:58 PM PDT

Posted by: Duardo
I'd love to be a 10 year old and tell my mom I'm going on an adventure out into the world catching Pokemon, with her full support. Never mind the fact that there are rapists, criminals, and murders out there, or the fact that I may get killed by a Pokemon.

Luckily I have Pikachu.

No, Bungie did it right with Halo 3: ODST by removing Dual Weilding.

  • 10.07.2009 12:02 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

well despite the fact that all the weapons would need to be rebalanced, it dose free up a button for oh say fire selection, night vision, or hell a counter melee button

[Edited on 10.07.2009 12:11 AM PDT]

  • 10.07.2009 12:10 AM PDT

Posted by: The BS Police
No, Bungie did it right with Halo 3: ODST by removing Dual Weilding.


Agreed. Now, if they could only fix that darn Battle Rifle....

  • 10.07.2009 12:29 AM PDT

Its a trap!!!

I like dual weilding as that thing i do once in a while to play like a newb when i don't feel like using a br. Sometimes its cool like I charge the guy with shotgun carrying an Smg and Plasma Rifle and win before he can get close enough.

I like it becuase you get power out of it but its not overpowering. Especially since you have to drop the combo to switch, melee, and most importantly throw a nade.

I would really like to get a chance to dual weild swords. I would make it so it doesnt give you much and advantage over one sword in normal combat. Except can kill the overshield guy in one hit like the hammer can (so more damage to an already one hit killer) This would be cool in campaign against those crazied health enemies that require multiple strikes.

Also the only other advantage I would make would be one sword vs 2 swords would give 2 swords the melee adavantage

You think that it would free up some buttons. No they work off buttons that already do things. It doesnt hinder the controls. The Equipment was what allowed odst the night vision.

But here is an idea. Make use of the Dpad(its used for basically nothing) for night vision and all the other icing features

  • 10.07.2009 1:01 AM PDT

.:. îXî - $ìgñ øf thé GøÐz .:.


My Profile - iXi Gaming


Î ũňķñ{ǾẄŃ} ū

Dual wielding means that a weapon must be decreased in effectiveness to balance it out when you dual wield. ODST had no dual wielding and it had the best gameplay since Halo 1.


No dual wielding.

  • 10.07.2009 1:16 AM PDT

No. Simply, no. It just feels better without having to worry and ask yourself, "Oh, should I get another weapon to Dual-Weild with this and carry it around making sure a don't lose it?"

How about, "Yay I got an SMG!"

=)

  • 10.07.2009 1:36 AM PDT

spartans didn't just learn to duel-wield during halo 2.
If you play as a spartan, there's no reason why duel wielding should be removed.

  • 10.07.2009 9:00 AM PDT

in the campaign - yes.
online multiplayer - no (i hate dual noobs --> learn to br!)

  • 10.07.2009 9:07 AM PDT

Reach MMO. Here's to hoping.

And the people that believe "the hardcore playlists would be more popular if the rules were strictly MLG" can come off it, now. If you're not willing to support something close to your own setup, there's no reason for us to believe that cloning our own lists and stripping the variety down will attract more people. -- Shishka, Bungie.net

Yes it is a part of Halo now, and I think that it makes for good short range gameplay.

  • 10.07.2009 9:11 AM PDT

With B.B. gone, the passion of Bungie.net has lessened.

Posted by: NECROMONGER223
no i want it to be a real prequel and if thats in there it wont be


Prequels have to do with timeline and story setting, not gameplay mechanics. It can still be a true prequel in every sense of the word with different mechanics than those that were in Halo: CE.

Regardless, I don't see why not. Well, rather, I can, but I'd prefer it to stay in, I guess. I don't really dual-wield much, but occasionally I like to pick up a couple of Spikers in regular Slayer matches and have some fun with those. I think Bungie has done a pretty good job with balancing the dual-weilding mechanic, but I will say that with some weapons, it doesn't really mix well with the melee mechanic. And it could still use improvement.

For some examples (and I'm going to just go ahead and spew some information here, so for those that like to say "tl/dr," sorry :-) ):

Dual Plasma Rifles: Good in the sense that it out-DPSs the Assault Rifle and any range between the maximum of melee and mid-range, making it worthwhile to pick up in a standard slayer match. Bad in the sense that when coupled with melee, it's very powerful on some maps (but Bungie seems to remedy this with the weapon's placement, making it not very easy and/or smart to go grab two PRs with the intent on the short-burst-melee combination).

Plasma Pistols: A weapon you want to combo with another weapon that shoots bullets. Plasma to take down shields, bullets for the kill. However, I've always been a little disappointed that this weapon isn't reliable to use in order to kill on its own, making dual plasma pistols practically useless unless you're fooling around/going for bragging rights. I liked the Halo 1 plasma pistol, as you could kill with it if you really needed to (and it fired FAST if you had a quick trigger finger).

As far as the plasma weapons go, the change I would like to see is this, if dual-wielding is kept: Make the Plasma Rifle an actual rifle again, as opposed to an Energy-SMG. In other words, increase its stand-alone power to be on-par with the assault rifle (which would require a change in the AR as well), but take away its dual-weildability. With that gone, increase the power of the plasma pistol's regular mode of fire (not the overcharge) to make it effective on it's own, especially when dual-wielded. This wouldn't really interfere with the PP's usefulness as a combo-weapon, either. In essence, what we think of the Plasma Rifle and Plasma Pistol from Halo 3, in terms of dual-wielding, would be merged into a Plasma Pistol for Reach.

Oh, and make Grunts dual-wield PPs.

Maulers: Need to be re-worked completely, imo. Take away their dual-wielding ability, and in a PvP multiplayer setting, they overlap too much with Shotguns (for Firefight in ODST, this is ok, as the Mauler basically serves as a shotgun that the computer uses, just giving them a more Alien feel). But in Halo 3, there's no sense to Dual-wielding maulers by themselves; you might as well just take one, and use the one-shot-melee combo to take people down in close quarters. It works great as a combo weapon with the Plasma Rifle, but there aren't many maps where that combination makes sense. IMO, you might as well replace every mauler you see with a shotgun in Halo 3 multiplayer... the difference wouldn't matter much in terms of gameplay.

Spikers: I'm undecided on these. I think their damage against unshielded targets should be increased, but I like them enough on their own such that I wouldn't really change anything. It seems as though if you're going to dual-wield these, then you might as well dual-wield one with another, instead of comboing with another weapon, which basically means that in the general scheme of dual-wielding, these weapons are more limited than most (and Bungie seems to realize that, as most Spikers you see are coupled on the map, encouraging you to dual-wield them). I would say take the dual-wielding mechanic out, but then you get too run into the problem of getting too much weapon-purpose overlap.

Pistols: If there's anything you should be able to dual-wield in the game, it's the pistols. They're light enough to the point where it makes sense. And even if there's a scope feature with the Pistol in Reach, just don't allow anyone to scope when using two...

[Edited on 10.07.2009 9:38 AM PDT]

  • 10.07.2009 9:38 AM PDT

Keep dual wielding.

  • 10.07.2009 9:42 AM PDT

Eh?

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
Dual wielding means that a weapon must be decreased in effectiveness to balance it out when you dual wield. ODST had no dual wielding and it had the best gameplay since Halo 1.


No dual wielding.


Thats pure BS. Using a normal Plasma Rifle can kill quciker than the AR, but when you Dual Weild them its pure beast mode.

Besides it wouldnt hurt if it was in the game. I never came across a situation in Halo 3 where i was like should i dual weild this or just keep that.

If you do, then thats your problem, besides alot of people like Dual Weilding.

  • 10.07.2009 9:51 AM PDT

Can i say that in halo 2 they talk about his armor not being able to suppport it in halo 1 therefore if the armor goes back EVEN BEFORE halo 1 it shouldnt be in cause the armor didnt have the software to run to diffrent ammo clips

  • 10.07.2009 10:12 AM PDT

Dom ~ Thread Killer

Since it is a prequel to Halo: CE, I don't think this would work, at least in the Campaign. However, since Matchmaking is non-canon, it could be done.

  • 10.07.2009 10:18 AM PDT

Posted by: DC Dominus
Since it is a prequel to Halo: CE, I don't think this would work, at least in the Campaign. However, since Matchmaking is non-canon, it could be done.


So what you are saying is one day master chief can't dual wield and the next day he magically can dual wield?

Correlation is not causation. Just because there wasn't a dual wielding mechanic in Halo CE because Bungie didn't think of / didn't have time to put it in doesn't mean that there won't be a dual wielding mechanic in Reach.

Otherwise the ODSTs shouldn't be able to rip off turrets and carry them around because Chief couldn't do that in Halo 2.

[Edited on 10.07.2009 10:20 AM PDT]

  • 10.07.2009 10:20 AM PDT

Dom ~ Thread Killer

Posted by: Hylebos
Posted by: DC Dominus
Since it is a prequel to Halo: CE, I don't think this would work, at least in the Campaign. However, since Matchmaking is non-canon, it could be done.


So what you are saying is one day master chief can't dual wield and the next day he magically can dual wield?


Not at all. In the Halo series' timeline, Reach is a prequel to CE. To keep things consistent, Bungie would remove dual wielding. But like I said, it COULD be done for Matchmaking. Heck, they can put it in Campaign too. I don't care either way, I was just giving my opinion. No need to call me out on it.

Also, I wasn't the only one to voice this opinion. So why you chose to criticize mine is beyond me.

  • 10.07.2009 10:30 AM PDT

http://www.halo-forum.com

Bring it on!!

  • 10.07.2009 10:34 AM PDT

Posted by: DC Dominus
I was just giving my opinion. No need to call me out on it.

Also, I wasn't the only one to voice this opinion. So why you chose to criticize mine is beyond me.

Well it would be a pretty boring forum if all we were allowed to do is post our opinions. Things get much more interesting when we have discussions though, where I share my opinions and show why they may be better or more correct than yours with facts and logic.

I was merely attempting to start a discussion so this thread does not end up like:
User A: I want dual wielding.
User B: I want dual wielding.
User C: I don't want dual wielding.
User D: I want dual wielding.
User F: I don't want dual wielding.

Forgive me if I sounded Harsh / Critical / Sarcastic when I "called you out", its just my writing style.

As for the latter part... if I had to cite everyone's name who shared that opinion before attacking it, it would take me forever to make a post, especially as the thread gets bigger and bigger. I chose you as the champion of said idea. Be proud, for now all the others who also share that same idea will come to defend you if they believe I am wrong.

  • 10.07.2009 10:37 AM PDT