Weapon Durability: Yay or Nay

  • 189 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
Posted by SolidGame_basic (24258 posts) 2 years, 3 months ago

Poll: Weapon Durability: Yay or Nay (118 votes)

Yay 43%
Nay 57%

Breath of the Wild has made gamers think differently about weapon durability that's for sure. Some like it, others hate it. Up until now, there haven't been a lot of games that have made it a big topic in the gaming world. I think Zelda does it well for the most part. It makes you actually use different weapons, which is great. I do think that the weapons are a bit too weak, but they shouldn't be much more durable than that. Which side you do fall on, SW? Are you for it? Against it? Are there any games that do it better?

Avatar image for Zensword
#51 Edited by Zensword (4509 posts) -

Oh just remember another game I played has weapon durability was FE A. But unlike FC2, it was not annoying.

Avatar image for PurpleMan5000
#53 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (9732 posts) -

I have never played a game with weapon durability that wouldn't have been better without it.

Avatar image for Pedro
#54 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:
@Pedro said:

Durability certainly adds to the game, it adds tedium and routinely breaks the pacing during combat. One can argue that they took the lazy route for balancing the game. Instead of actively spending the time to gate weapon availability in relation to enemies and location they just went for "let make the weapons break".

The crux of your argument is 'I don't like durability, so it is worthless.' When one tries to demonstrate why it is not worthless, they are 'spewing nonsense.' You don't want to have a discussion, you want to, much like so many others on this board, say your piece and be done with it.

How would they have gated weapon in a game where the entire point is for you to be able to go wherever you want, whenever you want, without any restrictions? They chose to make a game with a full open ended nature- they could have gated progression in two ways meaningfully, hard level caps, which they chose not to go with, or durability, which they did. That's all there is to it. You don't like it, which is fine, but please stop pretending your dislike holds even a semblance of assessment of an objective value assessment of the game or its mechanics.

'You are trying to argue that the entire purpose of durability was to prevent gamers from finding the most powerful weapon and using that weapon to dominate. If that's the case then all of the other mechanics with the weapons in the game are garbage because according to you all you need in this game is the most powerful weapon and the game is practically done.'

Generally speaking, this is how games, and especially RPGs, work- if you become too powerful, then the entire game is trivialized, which is why high level loot, high EXP and level gains/etc. are reserved for the end game. I don't see what would be so remarkable or special about Zelda in this case.

Charizard, are your serious? You are trying to argue that without weapons durability a player would not be able to go wherever they want? What does any of that has to to with durability? You seemed to be desperately fishing for a valid point. Weapon gating is already implemented to some degree in the game. Better weapons are found on stronger enemies. Many games have structured their game to create great freedom why gating weapons behind stronger enemies. This is not a new thing. Stop acting like it is or that the idea is unfathomable.

Durability does not gate weapons in this game. What the hell are you talking about? You can cheese kill stronger enemies to get better weapons; that will also break. There are few truly difficult enemies in the game and that is mainly due to the cheesy one hit kills.

Also stop pretending that you cannot weapon farm strong weapons in the game or that the most powerful weapon is applicable in every situation.

The fact that you are trying to avoid, is that durability is not needed a game like this. It is in the game, that is not the debate so don't try to make it the focus of the debate. There is no feature you have listed in which durability is needed. You love the game but please stop pretending your unnatural adoration for the game holds even a semblance of assessment of an objective value assessment of the game or its mechanics.

Avatar image for BassMan
#55 Edited by BassMan (10365 posts) -

The problem with Zelda is not so much the weapon durability, but more so the disposable nature of the weapons. The weapons break so quickly and there is no way to repair or enhance them. You are constantly FORCED to discard them and obtain new weapons at a ridiculous pace. People can try to justify it all they want, but it is shit design. It does not enhance the game in any way and makes it worse. If I want to change my weapon, I will change it. Don't force me to without a good reason (different enemy weaknesses). The argument of treating it like ammunition is bullshit. Weapons are weapons and ammunition is ammunition. I already have to gather various types of arrows. I don't want to keep collecting all these disposable weapons, especially since there are so few slots to carry all the types of weapons that I want. It is tedious and annoying. I want the ability to grow attached to a weapon and customize it if possible as warriors often do. Zelda takes that away from you.

Avatar image for Pedro
#56 Edited by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@metalslimenite said:

You don't like hearing the truth, that your impressions mean nothing to anyone else so you get mad and start throwing out insults and insinuations. You're clearly a very unlikable fellow when others don't share your opinionated criticisms, so I'm not gonna bother interacting with you anymore as it is quite the unpleasant experience, little man.

The irony of your comment is beautifully ironic. :) It happens when you cannot conjure a meaningful argument.

Avatar image for charizard1605
#58 Posted by charizard1605 (82716 posts) -

@Pedro:Except turning that around on me doesn't work. I'm perfectly willing to admit criticisms and valid opposing viewpoints for this game, even people who say they don't like weapon durability and find it tedious, I don't have any issues with that argument (just ask aigis, just one of many). My issue is with your pronouncement that durability in this case adds nothing to this game- bullshit. The game is designed around it. The game is balanced around a progression curve gated by durability.

Your point about 'cheesing and farming can... still be done,' is irrelevant. Any game can be cheesed in spite of gates placed. Super Metroid allows for all manner of sequence breaking- does that suddenly make it a lesser designed game?

Avatar image for Pedro
#59 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:

@Pedro:Except turning that around on me doesn't work. I'm perfectly willing to admit criticisms and valid opposing viewpoints for this game, even people who say they don't like weapon durability and find it tedious, I don't have any issues with that argument (just ask aigis, just one of many). My issue is with your pronouncement that durability in this case adds nothing to this game- bullshit. The game is designed around it. The game is balanced around a progression curve gated by durability.

Your point about 'cheesing and farming can... still be done,' is irrelevant. Any game can be cheesed in spite of gates placed. Super Metroid allows for all manner of sequence breaking- does that suddenly make it a lesser designed game?

You keep saying that it adds to the game but you have yet to explain how it adds to the game. Don't rely on any feature that can exist without durability.

Avatar image for charizard1605
#60 Posted by charizard1605 (82716 posts) -

@Pedro said:
@charizard1605 said:

@Pedro:Except turning that around on me doesn't work. I'm perfectly willing to admit criticisms and valid opposing viewpoints for this game, even people who say they don't like weapon durability and find it tedious, I don't have any issues with that argument (just ask aigis, just one of many). My issue is with your pronouncement that durability in this case adds nothing to this game- bullshit. The game is designed around it. The game is balanced around a progression curve gated by durability.

Your point about 'cheesing and farming can... still be done,' is irrelevant. Any game can be cheesed in spite of gates placed. Super Metroid allows for all manner of sequence breaking- does that suddenly make it a lesser designed game?

You keep saying that it adds to the game but you have yet to explain how it adds to the game. Don't rely on any feature that can exist without durability.

I explained it. You dismissed it as 'don't spew nonsense.' There is no discussion to be had at that point.

Avatar image for xantufrog
#62 Posted by xantufrog (11503 posts) -

It depends entirely on the game and how well it is implemented. That being said, in an RPG setting I am in favor of the added realism - provided it is in fact done in a semi-realistic manner, of course

Avatar image for Pedro
#64 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:
@Pedro said:

You keep saying that it adds to the game but you have yet to explain how it adds to the game. Don't rely on any feature that can exist without durability.

I explained it. You dismissed it as 'don't spew nonsense.' There is no discussion to be had at that point.

Well I have to call it for what it is. Sorry. :(

Avatar image for The_Deepblue
#65 Edited by The_Deepblue (772 posts) -

I don't recall playing any game with weapon durability except for The Legend of Zelda: Breath of Wild, and I like it in that game. Weapon durability makes every combat scenario potentially different. You may go into a battle with a certain weapon, but if it breaks, you will have to change weapons, steal an enemy's weapon, and find another way to defeat the enemies. This element adds to the game's unpredictability.

Additionally, I agree with Charizard's point that the gamer would just locate a superb weapon at whatever stage in the game, rendering most enemy encounters as cupcake battles. Otherwise, either all enemies must power up as the player does (including weapons), or the game must restrict the player from moving into certain locations to obtain beastly weapons until a certain point in the game.

I don't understand the hate against weapon durability in Zelda. Why not enjoy the challenge of it? Why get attached to any particular weapon when the game has a seemingly endless amount of them?

Avatar image for vvulturas
#66 Posted by vvulturas (1249 posts) -

Nay. Absolutely hate it, and believe it messes with the pacing of the videogame.

Avatar image for Pedro
#67 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@The_Deepblue said:

I don't recall playing any game with weapon durability except for The Legend of Zelda: Breath of Wild, and I like it in that game. Weapon durability makes every combat scenario potentially different. You may go into a battle with a certain weapon, but if it breaks, you will have to change weapons, steal an enemy's weapon, and find another way to defeat the enemies. This element adds to the game's unpredictability.

Additionally, I agree with Charizard's point that the gamer would just locate a superb weapon at whatever stage in the game, rendering most enemy encounters as cupcake battles. Otherwise, either all enemies must power up as the player does (including weapons), or the game must restrict the player from moving into certain locations to obtain beastly weapons until a certain point in the game.

I don't understand the hate against weapon durability in Zelda. Why not enjoy the challenge of it? Why get attached to any particular weapon when the game has a seemingly endless amount of them?

There is no challenge. Attack enemy with the strongest weapon and you win. Stock up on the strongest weapons you win. What challenge is there? No one complained that its too challenging but that its annoying,tedious and breaks up the pacing. If weapons are so endless why bother having durability then? Just allow the gamer to hold on to the weapon they acquire.

Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
#68 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (25253 posts) -

I just remembered......

STALKER: Call of Pripyat also has weapon durability.

Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
#69 Edited by jun_aka_pekto (25253 posts) -
@silversix_ said:

The only ones that will say "Yay" are the ones damage controlling the abysmal mechanic from BotW. That's a fact.

C'mon. I don't even have a Nintendo console and I like weapon durability. So far, of my games......

Fallout 3

Fallout New Vegas

Far Cry 2

STALKER: Call of Pripyat

The Witcher 3

all have weapon durability.

Avatar image for silversix_
#70 Edited by silversix_ (26347 posts) -

@jun_aka_pekto said:
@silversix_ said:

The only ones that will say "Yay" are the ones damage controlling the abysmal mechanic from BotW. That's a fact.

C'mon. I don't even have a Nintendo console and I like weapon durability. So far, of my games......

Fallout 3

Fallout New Vegas

Far Cry 2

STALKER: Call of Pripyat

The Witcher 3

all have weapon durability.

But how many of those titles have permanent damage?

Avatar image for jun_aka_pekto
#71 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (25253 posts) -
@silversix_ said:

But how many of those titles have permanent damage?

I recall some weapons in Fallout 3 that I picked up were too far gone and beyond repair.

Avatar image for clefdefa
#72 Posted by Clefdefa (745 posts) -

In Bloodborne it wasn't a problem since the weapons are super durable but in Fallout 3, it was a pain

Avatar image for ConanTheStoner
#73 Edited by ConanTheStoner (17373 posts) -

Depends on the game of course.

Though personally, I've never been a fan. Usually it either comes off as inconsequential or annoying. But I love how it works in BotW and will be sore if they ditch it in the next Zelda game.

It's not just some inventory management deal, it's not some annoyance that weighs on your mind forcing you to backtrack to some smith for a repair. It's not one of the systems you know from other games, and it's really a disservice to shoe horn into the same category.

It's an immediate and engaging mechanic tied directly into the combat system itself. It's one reason among a few others as to why the combat in BotW is a good cut above the previous Zelda entries. It provides a constant shift in variety between various weapon types. It adds a new twist to timing critical hits and stun, be it in melee or projectile form. It adds an extra dynamic to encounters, retrieving and throwing weapons, sometimes the enemies, sometimes your own, sometimes racing an enemy to pick up a certain weapon first, making for unique scenarios you don't see in other melee combat based games. It even adds risk/reward to the dodge flurry mechanic, as you'll output damage much more rapidly, but at the expense of degradation happening exponentially faster.

It's hard wired into the combat system just as it's hard wired into the larger scope of the games progression system. Well designed (you're an idiot Bassman) and well executed.

I don't expect everyone to like it. Obviously that's not how it panned out. And that's all good. But the "hurr durr" all systems are created and implemented equally is just incredibly obtuse, lacking any nuance. Eh, gamers, not surprised. I wouldn't be shocked if a good portion of you believe the act of jumping is the same across all games.

Avatar image for superbuuman
#74 Edited by superbuuman (6400 posts) -

I usually don't mind it is say games like Dark Souls...BUT I dislike the way Nintendo implement it - the durability is too short & no repair option in BotW. :P

Avatar image for waahahah
#75 Posted by waahahah (2461 posts) -

No, Zelda basically copied its weapon system from Dead Rising (the original), and it doesn't make much sense. In DR breaking flimsy merchandise over zombies heads made sense, was overall less intrusive (real time weapon switching). Zelda uses the weapons as resources so it would have been fairly easy to use a different resource in place of dozens of weapons, an upgrade system like the one used for armor.

Avatar image for Pedro
#76 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -
@waahahah said:

No, Zelda basically copied its weapon system from Dead Rising (the original), and it doesn't make much sense. In DR breaking flimsy merchandise over zombies heads made sense, was overall less intrusive (real time weapon switching). Zelda uses the weapons as resources so it would have been fairly easy to use a different resource in place of dozens of weapons, an upgrade system like the one used for armor.

If Zelda does it, not only is it better because it Zelda it is also special. :P

Avatar image for n64dd
#77 Edited by N64DD (11914 posts) -

@Renegade_Fury said:

A big nay on that one. I can tolerate it in games like the Witcher III, but I despise how it's done in Breath of the Wild. One of the reasons why I'm currently enjoying playing Nioh so much is because it doesn't have any of that durability crap.

You're playing Nioh because it's fucking bad ass

Avatar image for jaydan
#78 Edited by jaydan (2301 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:

Breath of the Wild's open endedness is facilitated by the weapon durability. Given the fact that the designers have created the world such that you can go literally anywhere, any time, without the durability mechanic, it would have been all too possible to get an end game weapon near the beginning of the game and then cheese your way through the rest of the game with a broken difficulty and progression curve. Breaking weapons is literally the only way BotW could have existed the way it does, outside of hard level caps, which the game does not have.

You can argue you don't like the mechanic, and that's fine, but to pretend that the mechanic adds nothing to a game that is designed centrally around it betrays ignorance.

I really find it hard to believe this is a concept people can't wrap their minds behind. Having anything but the durability system would have broken the game and then we'd have an entirely different controversy with everyone complaining how easy the game is.

Fine-tuning it is a more justified mention to bring to the table. I've heard a few good ideas, like having a durability gauge, and maybe even items that can sharpen them up again (that is, if you don't break them first. Fix them before they break otherwise perma-loss).

Topic: it depends on the game and how well it is implemented. There's purpose behind the design choice in BotW to keep the game balanced at all times, and it opens up prioritizing different weapons (if you want to hold onto weapons for an extended period you totally can). It is not just any game that can do something like that unless there's reason behind it.

Avatar image for ConanTheStoner
#79 Edited by ConanTheStoner (17373 posts) -
@Pedro said:

If Zelda does it, not only is it better because it Zelda it is also special. :P

I like Demons Souls and Dark Souls more than BotW. I like Bloodborne about the same as BotW. I thought the degradation systems in those games were pointless and at times annoying.

It's not as simple as "hurr durr people just like it because it's Zelda" no matter how hard you try to push that narrative. Fvck man, I've been shitting all over the 3d Zelda games for years haha.

Also, the Dead Rising comparison is superficial at best. Which is weird coming from waahaha, his points are usually pretty solid.

Avatar image for 22Toothpicks
#80 Posted by 22Toothpicks (12546 posts) -

depends on the game, of course. it sounds like it's a nuisannce in botw but in games like nv and STALKER it totally makes sense. for nv in particular it's integral to the experience in hardcore mode. the difficulty is just one big micro-management mode so to not have it would be kinda weird. it also makes sense in the context of the game world where everything is worn down and the only people producing new weapons (the gun runners and caravan company) are using salvaged and rusty ass metal parts to make them anyway.

jamming is a bit to frequent in STALKER but that can be alleviated with mods. playing the game vanilla pretty much stinks anyhow.

Avatar image for Pedro
#81 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@ConanTheStoner said:

I like Demons Souls and Dark Souls more than BotW. I like Bloodborne about the same as BotW. I thought the degradation systems in those games were pointless and at times annoying.

It's not as simple as "hurr durr people just like it because it's Zelda" no matter how hard you try to push that narrative. Fvck man, I've been shitting all over the 3d Zelda games for years haha.

Also, the Dead Rising comparison is superficial at best. Which is weird coming from waahaha, his points are usually pretty solid.

hurr durr people just like it because it's Zelda

Avatar image for jaydan
#82 Edited by jaydan (2301 posts) -

@ConanTheStoner said:
@Pedro said:

If Zelda does it, not only is it better because it Zelda it is also special. :P

I like Demons Souls and Dark Souls more than BotW. I like Bloodborne about the same as BotW. I thought the degradation systems in those games were pointless and at times annoying.

It's not as simple as "hurr durr people just like it because it's Zelda" no matter how hard you try to push that narrative. Fvck man, I've been shitting all over the 3d Zelda games for years haha.

Also, the Dead Rising comparison is superficial at best. Which is weird coming from waahaha, his points are usually pretty solid.

Yeah what gives, just a dumb conspiracy orchestrated by people that don't even play the game and just enjoy pulling their pants down when they see Nintendo actually doing something good.

I don't even like every Zelda game and From Software are my favorite devs.

I'll give @Pedro two cents since he's actually been playing BotW, but don't push buttons by assuming why people love it just because you don't. Maybe some DO love it for nostalgia, and maybe others don't but for other reasons. Same could be said for Halo - maybe people care about those games because of nostalgia, WHO CARES. If you got fair criticisms then don't dismantle yourself with pushing asinine ideals over why you think people love something.

Avatar image for waahahah
#83 Posted by waahahah (2461 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:

I explained it. You dismissed it as 'don't spew nonsense.' There is no discussion to be had at that point.

Your objectively wrong saying the implementation is the only way to meet the design goals. Which is basically what you've been saying in defense, so dismissing it when you try to explain the design goals is reasonable. Fundamentally your reasoning is flawed, it implements a design goal therefore it must be the only way? Or its the perfect system? Your not answering the important aspects. Thats the point of you spewing nonsense. Fundamentally its a resource system. Resource systems can be pretty interchangeable, the weapon breakage is a superficial affect mostly leading to interrupting combat or just a major annoyance.

@ConanTheStoner said:

It's not just some inventory management deal, it's not some annoyance that weighs on your mind forcing you to backtrack to some smith for a repair. It's not one of the systems you know from other games, and it's really a disservice to shoe horn into the same category.

I'd argue its worse because you might end up backtracking to pick up favorite weapons from spawns to "repair" broken weapons. Or so you can continue cheesing lynels with a whirlwind.

@ConanTheStoner said:

It's an immediate and engaging mechanic tied directly into the combat system itself. It's one reason among a few others as to why the combat in BotW is a good cut above the previous Zelda entries. It provides a constant shift in variety between various weapon types. It adds a new twist to timing critical hits and stun, be it in melee or projectile form. It adds an extra dynamic to encounters, retrieving and throwing weapons, sometimes the enemies, sometimes your own, sometimes racing an enemy to pick up a certain weapon first, making for unique scenarios you don't see in other melee combat based games. It even adds risk/reward to the dodge flurry mechanic, as you'll output damage much more rapidly, but at the expense of degradation happening exponentially faster.

Most of this can be done without weapons breaking. And the flurry mechanic doesn't break weapons any faster, it just allows you to get off the hits to kill a mob faster. The degradation is the per hit.

Avatar image for 22Toothpicks
#84 Posted by 22Toothpicks (12546 posts) -

oh yeah, totally forgot about mgs and it's silencer deterioration. it's a good way to prevent people from cheesing the whole game with tranq darts. i mean, yeah, ideally you should be able to handle the missions as you see fit but i take it as the games way of telling to live a little and introduce some variety into your gaming life lol

it also makes for a nice "oh ****!" moment when you aren't paying attention in mgsv and think you're going to covertly headshot a guy only to have this loud ass, base alarming sound come out of your weapon. oops lol

Avatar image for Pedro
#85 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@jaydan said:

Yeah what gives, just a dumb conspiracy orchestrated by people that don't even play the game and just enjoy pulling their pants down when they see Nintendo actually doing something good.

I don't even like every Zelda game and From Software are my favorite devs.

I'll give @Pedro two cents since he's actually been playing BotW, but don't push buttons by assuming why people love it just because you don't. Maybe some DO love it for nostalgia, and maybe others don't but for other reasons. Same could be said for Halo - maybe people care about those games because of nostalgia, WHO CARES. If you got fair criticisms then don't dismantle yourself with pushing asinine arguments over why you think people love something.

I think you should note the :P at the end of my initial comment instead of getting deeply offended. :)

Avatar image for jaydan
#86 Posted by jaydan (2301 posts) -

@Pedro said:
@jaydan said:

Yeah what gives, just a dumb conspiracy orchestrated by people that don't even play the game and just enjoy pulling their pants down when they see Nintendo actually doing something good.

I don't even like every Zelda game and From Software are my favorite devs.

I'll give @Pedro two cents since he's actually been playing BotW, but don't push buttons by assuming why people love it just because you don't. Maybe some DO love it for nostalgia, and maybe others don't but for other reasons. Same could be said for Halo - maybe people care about those games because of nostalgia, WHO CARES. If you got fair criticisms then don't dismantle yourself with pushing asinine arguments over why you think people love something.

I think you should note the :P at the end of my initial comment instead of getting deeply offended. :)

Btw you complain so much about how bad the horse controls are when you can literally put the controller down and it autopilots for you.

Maybe you should spend more time playing the video game.

Avatar image for Pedro
#87 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@jaydan said:
@Pedro said:

I think you should note the :P at the end of my initial comment instead of getting deeply offended. :)

Btw you complain so much about how bad the horse controls are when you can literally put the controller down and it autopilots for you.

Maybe you should spend more time playing the video game.

So, when you realized that I wasn't serious you desperately try to side track from the topic at hand. We are not talking about horse controls in this thread. Besides, your advice to let the game play itself is asinine. There is a reason people play games and it is not to let the game play itself. If you can't handle criticism of the game then you should consider returning to playing the game than be deeply offended by others' view of the game. :)

Avatar image for jaydan
#88 Posted by jaydan (2301 posts) -

@Pedro said:
@jaydan said:
@Pedro said:

I think you should note the :P at the end of my initial comment instead of getting deeply offended. :)

Btw you complain so much about how bad the horse controls are when you can literally put the controller down and it autopilots for you.

Maybe you should spend more time playing the video game.

So, when you realized that I wasn't serious you desperately try to side track from the topic at hand. We are not talking about horse controls in this thread. Besides, your advice to let the game play itself is asinine. There is a reason people play games and it is not to let the game play itself. If you can't handle criticism of the game then you should consider returning to playing the game than be deeply offended by others' view of the game. :)

Lol you must be real offended to assume I'm offended.

Avatar image for 22Toothpicks
#89 Posted by 22Toothpicks (12546 posts) -

i'm rubber, you're glue! and whatever...

Avatar image for Pedro
#90 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@jaydan said:
@Pedro said:

So, when you realized that I wasn't serious you desperately try to side track from the topic at hand. We are not talking about horse controls in this thread. Besides, your advice to let the game play itself is asinine. There is a reason people play games and it is not to let the game play itself. If you can't handle criticism of the game then you should consider returning to playing the game than be deeply offended by others' view of the game. :)

Lol you must be real offended to assume I'm offended.

Using LOL isn't going to hide the fact that you are offended and you specifically choose to address my point over others. REKT.

"I can't let Pedro say bad things about Zelda. I must defend it and bring non thread related things to abate my feelings. "

Avatar image for jaydan
#91 Posted by jaydan (2301 posts) -

@Pedro said:
@jaydan said:
@Pedro said:

So, when you realized that I wasn't serious you desperately try to side track from the topic at hand. We are not talking about horse controls in this thread. Besides, your advice to let the game play itself is asinine. There is a reason people play games and it is not to let the game play itself. If you can't handle criticism of the game then you should consider returning to playing the game than be deeply offended by others' view of the game. :)

Lol you must be real offended to assume I'm offended.

Using LOL isn't going to hide the fact that you are offended and you specifically choose to address my point over others. REKT.

"I can't let Pedro say bad things about Zelda. I must defend it and bring non thread related things to abate my feelings. "

Pedro now putting smileys in his post but now he reverted back to no smileys. UH OH.

Avatar image for trugs26
#92 Posted by trugs26 (7535 posts) -

I usually dislike it, but for some reason, I thought it was appropriate in BotW. It made every battle interesting.

Avatar image for Pedro
#93 Edited by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@jaydan said:

Pedro now putting smileys in his post but now he reverted back to no smileys. UH OH.

I understand that you are mad and its ok. You wasted time commenting on a jest and when called out you were ashamed and offended. Its time to move on and stay on topic. No need to be mad. Until your next thread related comment -->

Avatar image for waahahah
#94 Edited by waahahah (2461 posts) -

@ConanTheStoner said:
@Pedro said:

If Zelda does it, not only is it better because it Zelda it is also special. :P

I like Demons Souls and Dark Souls more than BotW. I like Bloodborne about the same as BotW. I thought the degradation systems in those games were pointless and at times annoying.

It's not as simple as "hurr durr people just like it because it's Zelda" no matter how hard you try to push that narrative. Fvck man, I've been shitting all over the 3d Zelda games for years haha.

Also, the Dead Rising comparison is superficial at best. Which is weird coming from waahaha, his points are usually pretty solid.

Have you played the original dead rising? All the points being made for BoTW apply to DR, you pick up weapons, you use items to get through combat. The difference being your memorization of the mall allows you to plan ahead of time to make sure your getting optimal weapons. Plus the weapons vary greatly changing strategies, and you can throw when they are about to break.. It literally serves the purpose of resources in a survival game, and so you can't just get a chainsaw or sword and win the entire game.

I would argue that the durability system in DR is more integral to the core gameplay, and is still far more forgiving for using your favorite weapons. The game is about time management, so you can never just stock up on weapons you need (at least you couldn't until DR3/4) without having to risk missing an event. The better weapons actually WOULD trivialize the game, because the core game play is cutting paths through zombies.

People saying that zelda without the durability would trivialize because you could get an OP weapon or it its good because it forces variety.. really haven't taken the time to understand why this game is difficult, or why directly forcing someone to do something isn't a good thing.

The game would still be difficult even with a strong weapon, and you'd need variety any way. Until you can upgrade your armor and become nearly invincible to lower level mobs (they have a solution for gating armor)... a strong weapon will only allow you to kill mobs faster. Which isn't a bad thing if you have armor that will trivialize particular mobs because breaking weapons at that point isn't fun at all. The mobs are still incredibly dangerous without upgraded armor and many times abundant. Even if you had a strong weapon your not exactly going to rush in head first. Not to mention weapons have different utility depending on the material or have different benefits sword + parry, spear reach, two hand whirl wind. So there is already motivation for variety and if thats the point of the durability its a unnecessary in that respect. As a resource mechanic it works well, but there are better ways to implement resources that aren't as intrusive or annoying.

Avatar image for jaydan
#95 Posted by jaydan (2301 posts) -

@Pedro said:
@jaydan said:

Pedro now putting smileys in his post but now he reverted back to no smileys. UH OH.

I understand that you are mad and its ok. You wasted time commenting on a jest and when called out you were ashamed and offended. Its time to move on and stay on topic. No need to be mad. Until your next thread related comment -->

You're fake smile trying to be not offended and hoping he doesn't reply back:

Avatar image for ConanTheStoner
#96 Posted by ConanTheStoner (17373 posts) -
@waahahah said:

I'd argue its worse because you might end up backtracking to pick up favorite weapons from spawns to "repair" broken weapons. Or so you can continue cheesing lynels with a whirlwind.

I suppose, though I've never once felt the urge to go somewhere to get a specific weapon. I just roll with what I get because it works and works well.

I don't understand why so many arguments about BotW have to do with "cheesing" the game. It's like ok, so? I have no urge to cheese Lynels.

It'd be like our MGSV discussion earlier regarding its emergence. Great stuff right? Thing is, you can cheese almost every single section of that game. I could fast forward to evening, call in a sandstorm, have Quiet watch my back, flip on my NVGs, and go fulton every single soldier in a large base in under 5 minutes. Could even hold them all up and interrogate to cheese heroism points.

And that's not even the crazy stuff.

Doesn't mean it's something I want to do lol.

@waahahah said:

And the flurry mechanic doesn't break weapons any faster, it just allows you to get off the hits to kill a mob faster. The degradation is the per hit.

Nah, it does. Similar to how using a weapon as a projectile breaks it faster, just not as extreme.

Avatar image for Pedro
#97 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@ConanTheStoner: Have you tested the durability when using flurry?

Avatar image for ConanTheStoner
#98 Edited by ConanTheStoner (17373 posts) -

@Pedro:

Yup. I started to notice it when fighting Lynels and decided to test it with a weaker weapon.

Avatar image for Pedro
#99 Posted by Pedro (34904 posts) -

@ConanTheStoner: So each it counts as a regular degradation hit in flurry?

Something that I was considering as a compromise to the durability system in any game is rewarding the player that is fighting in an efficient manner with lower or no weapon degradation.

Avatar image for waahahah
#100 Posted by waahahah (2461 posts) -

@ConanTheStoner said:
@waahahah said:

I'd argue its worse because you might end up backtracking to pick up favorite weapons from spawns to "repair" broken weapons. Or so you can continue cheesing lynels with a whirlwind.

I suppose, though I've never once felt the urge to go somewhere to get a specific weapon. I just roll with what I get because it works and works well.

I don't understand why so many arguments about BotW have to do with "cheesing" the game. It's like ok, so? I have no urge to cheese Lynels.

It'd be like our MGSV discussion earlier regarding its emergence. Great stuff right? Thing is, you can cheese almost every single section of that game. I could fast forward to evening, call in a sandstorm, have Quiet watch my back, flip on my NVGs, and go fulton every single soldier in a large base in under 5 minutes. Could even hold them all up and interrogate to cheese heroism points.

And that's not even the crazy stuff.

Doesn't mean it's something I want to do lol.

I mean the difference with cheesing a lynel that can one shot you which is why you'd cheese it. You don't want an extended fight with a lynel and the whirlwind kills them quickly. So knowing where to pick up a flaming great sword that you can whirlwind a lynel down in a single spin... is worth picking up, especially if your farming lynels for armor upgrades. Another example is if you want a hammer to smash ore easier, you can't buy one so put a sticker on the map and pick one up every now and then.

MGS5 I'm not even sure how'd you cheese it. You just have a degree of options, either stealthy or blowing everything up. The 'demon' rating and mission ratings when you use things like artillery are affected, same with the chicken hat.

Nah, it does. Similar to how using a weapon as a projectile breaks it faster, just not as extreme.

Its a per strike mechanic unless you throw it. You just get off many more strikes in a shorter time span which is why its perceived to break faster.