i'd be fine if it was, and fine if it wasn't. not sure why some people are so against it.

I think we'd have seen it in the combat gameplay if it was included, but I suppose they could be keeping it as a bit of a surprise.

I won't use it if it's there, though. It looks completely ridiculous.

Could be, I just remember seeing the pc pistol whip a raider with a laser pistol, plus one O the mods shown is a bayonet, makes sense for them to add better fps features like that.

That the main issue that melee/ranged both share, IE accuracy, is the same problem. Naming a bunch of crap like reloading which is only present on one, is asinine. It has no bearing on comparison.

Um... Yes it does. Take a look at your post that started all of this.

Can't see why I brought up a bunch of issues that are only present when dual wielding guns and not when dual wielding melee weapons? I'll enhance it for you.

Emphasis mine.

You said they shared all the same issues, but clearly they don't. And I honestly don't see what's asinine about seeing what's different between two things when you compare them. How do you compare things if you refuse to acknowledge differences?

Also, how was I suppose to understand accuracy was the problem from the post I quoted when accuracy was mentioned in your explanation exactly 0 times?

So you are being a pedantic [censored] because?

I'm wasn't trying to be. You said that they shared all the same issues. I challenged that. You then "answered" my challenge with a complete non-sequiter. Confused, I inquired as to why you thought something that literally had no bearing on what I said was an answer, to which you made an illogical argument about how you can't note differences when making comparisons, as well as saying your point was something that you didn't even address in your "answer." So I quoted your OP to show you why I would point out that they didn't share the same issues. And then I, realizing that you've done a fairly poor job with following the through line of this conversation (and I think that is a fair assessment, considering the point of one of your posts [accuracy, according to you] was literally never mentioned in that post), elected to enlarge the font of your initial claim, so as to mitigate any chance of confusion.

I just wanted us to be on the same page, because talking to you throughout this thread has felt like we're not only not on the same page, but like you're randomly picking new pages from totally different books.

It is a game yes, and games are suppose to be fun, some accuracy penalty at the start is fair, but it should be decently manage so that its actually practical to some extent right of the bat, because why have it at all otherwise?

Because that's the point? To suddenly grant the player an obvious bonus with no lasting penalty through an option is stupid, because why would the player go back to a single handgun? The entire point is to have a diverse, varied pathway in handguns: Go Akimbo Gunslinger? You got double the ammo pool, double the DPS, all at the cost of -20-15% Accuracy with a 20% higher recoil. Go "Han Solo"? Your accuracy is unhindered, your recoil is controlled, and you can fire shots down the way without most of them missing. One style is obviously meant for close-up hellfire, the other is a backup medium-long range shooter. One should never overlap the other in roles, To suddenly make dual-wielding have pinpoint accuracy at the get-go destroys the concept of single-handed firearms, and reality wise, it's impossible to get the accuracy you want with dual wielding weapons compared to a well-aimed shot with a single-handed weapon. Hell, I think accuracy should be at -50% until the player works harder at it to get it into a manageable 20-15% penalty.

Side note? Don't insult others, Remmus, he has a point, in what way..does dual wielding melee weapons hit with accuracy? The penalty to dual-wielding melee weapons would actually be the DMG affected, as the human being is no longer wielding the weapon with two hands, thus there's a greater amount of force in the swings.

weird, no one wants to talk about dual wielding unarmed Power Fists ;~; Just one fella did and that was it.

Because it's an RPG not an FPS. I'm totally fine with it being a thing but I think without investment from the player you should be completely rubbish with two weapons.
I think it should also be tied to STR, if you don't have hight STR, you will have crap recoil control and unable to use it.

I did not say no penalty, but the penalty to accuracy should not be so extreme as to basically discourage its use, a decent X% minus on top of the penalties you naturally get from low gun skill should work, that way its not a huge hill you need to climb but just a set accuracy penalty that grows less significant as you buy gun perks, plus naturally dual wielding would come with the default accuracy penalty of not being able to ADS.

On top of that there are other, less intrusive way to balance dual wielding guns, such as you say increase recoil, or reload time.

As for dual wielding fists only, I think its mostly because folks feel dual wielding is a take it or leave it mechanic, either every one handed weapon can be dual wielded or none can.

Actually now that I'm looking back at the Pip-boy, I'm upset at the placement as it is purposely preventing the user to dual-wield power Fists or other unarmed gauntlets. Seriously? Why even have that giant ugly wrist-watch if it actually impedes on safety and survival? Ironic, huh? Maybe the next Pip-boy should be a PDA.

may be not a power fist on the pip boy hand then but a brass knuckle of some kind

That defeats the purpose of dual wielding Power Fists :L The enemy will still obviously hit my exposed left arm and rip it to shreds, whereas if I could, I would dual wield Power Fists which offer considerable defense, and then slam the enemy with both pistons, sending them flying. A Brass knuckle is not going to do that, and honestly, human instinct is going to tell you: Your right arm does more damage, HIT WITH THAT, NOT WITH YOUR LEFT.

Assuming they couldn't miniaturized it more it kinda makes sense to make it wrist strapped honestly, it gives the user both hands free to use tools, its to big to stick in a pocket or similar solution, plus strapped to your arm makes it less likely to be stolen.

You can still have your hands free when operating on anything with a PDA-sized Pipboy, simply place it in your pocket. In fact, judging by what you have to do to operate it, it's actually WORSE than a PDA function, because you need to bend your entire arm to make the pipboy aim towards you, then use your other hand to operate it. A PDA-sized Pipboy? A simple flick of the wrist, you have it, and a quick flex of fingers, and you're on the spot of what you want, whether that be items, armor, or the map. The Pip-boy 2000 I believe was actually pocket sized a 5x3 inches size screen, so no idea why they went with the bigger, heavier object. Stolen? hell, this is the apocalypse, why would someone bother stealing it when they can just shoot you and rob your corpse later?

You mean that pip boy that was in the old games? Nuff said.

So in other words, you can't look at the context and see what attributes they share. And in an attempt to 'clarify' you decided to imply I am both wrong and an idiot. Well done. Truly. Is this your first day on the internet?

This is one of those things that I wouldn't mind being included, simply because I don't have to use it, if I don't like it. But may do, one day. It's always a possibility.

I mean in-game I never used Jet or Psycho, but I don't think they shouldn't be there. However one day I may decide to play as a junkie.

The more options and gameplay elements the better, imo.

What the good doctor said. The only reason (irl) to dual wield is for laying down cover fire at close range in built up areas and not having a second person available to handle your second weapon (which is alway more favorable).

So if the bad guys have duckback-behind-cover animations when they're being actively shot at then I can see this having some tactical value.

-Yeah, that′s right, Doom 3! We′re looking at you!

You know... I'm starting to sense some hostility from you.

For your first point, I'd say it's impossible. I don't see how I'm expected to discern accuracy as the point you're trying to make in a post that says absolutely nothing about accuracy at all. And, given how I said reading your replies was like reading random pages from different books, I think it's pretty apparent that, at least to me, your posts don't seem to have any bearing given the context of the conversation. That's why I referred to them as non-sequiturs. The origins of dual wielding doesn't really serve as an answer to my list of unique problems that appear when dual wielding guns as opposed to dual wielding melee weapons.

And I won't bother implying anything. You said that they shared all the same problems, so you are dead wrong. There are problems unique to dual wielding guns. These problems are not present went dual wielding melee weapons. Since your original argument was that dual wielding melee weapons shared all the problems that dual wielding guns had, you were not correct. You were wrong.

And I'm sorry if you felt like I was insulting you (though I would like to point out that you have insulted me. Repeatedly in fact), but since it seemed as though you and I were having communication issues, I thought it best to leave as little to the imagination as to what my point was as possible. Clearly that didn't work though, as rather than actually acknowledge andslashor argue the point of my original post, you've focused more on name calling. So unless you want to go back to square one and actually deal with the topic at hand, I think I'm done here.

I never use chems either, but I still hoard them on the off chance I suddenly decide to do an impression of a human shaped pharmacy.

nope

Yes IF:

• we get the gun kata (Equilibrium style) - VATS special move?
• we get decreased accuracy
• we get no reload until one hand is free

Otherwise: nope, not needed . Therefore -> optional perk