By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - VGC Weapon Durability MEGA Thread

potato_hamster said:
JakDaSnack said:

Idk, I just don't agree with your conclusion.  I'm constantly finding new and better weapons.  And with every obstacle I'm given a dozen or so ways of over coming said obstacle.  I think it has to do with gameplay style.  If you give the player ways to permanently hold on to weapons, then you have to restrict what weapons the user can find early on.  That takes away freedom.  By treating the weapons like ammo, you can reward a players hard earned effort with a powerful weapon that doesn't ultimately break the game.  This gives the player more options early on, and more options is always better than less options imho.

Nonsense. They're not treating weapons like ammo if you can't reload! Besides, all you have to do is implement a way to limit the use of the weapon that isn't permanent and is upgradable over the game. Hundreds of games do this in different ways. This isn't a dichotomy, there are plenty of better solutions that don't restrict play style preference.

Zelda isn't Skyrim though.  In skyrim you can pick whichever style you want because it's an open world rpg.  Zelda might have some rpg elements but at its roots it is an open world action adventure game.  In Zelda they wanted the focus to be on experimentation and exploration.  Upgradable weapons would detract from the core of the game.  Repairable weapons has its own problems, but I think Zelda did it quite nicely by making the repairable weapons special and harder to earn.  



Something...Something...Games...Something

Around the Network

I finally expanded my inventory, 2 more weapon slots. (damn guy left somewhere else after that) That already makes a huge difference, 8 was way too cramped. Weapons still break very fast, yet with more replacements on hand it becomes less of an issue.



It's poor, lazy design like encumbered. These are mechanics put in there supposedly to make the game more complex but are ultimately just tedious things to work around.



Why do red shells have to run out after 3 in Mario Kart?

Lazy game design.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

Weapon durability is dumb as fuck because it's always implemented in lazy ways and the wear speed is usually always constant and far too fast.

E.g. If you're killing slimes none stop a sword should not wear ar all, if you're hitting a stone golem it should wear faster than if you're hitting a fleshy goblin.
But even when they bother to make different targets effect the wear speed, they still make the wear speed too fast for what you're doing. As such it's a dumb mechanic lazily implemented to force you to hunt for weapons and armor and prolong the playtime, I find it similar (but not quite as lame as) forcing the player to backtrack through the same level they just played through to prolong the length of the level/game.



Around the Network
Pyro as Bill said:
Why do red shells have to run out after 3 in Mario Kart?

Lazy game design.

Now give the carts tires that wear out while racing and forces you to stop racing and find new ones.



JakDaSnack said:
potato_hamster said:

Nonsense. They're not treating weapons like ammo if you can't reload! Besides, all you have to do is implement a way to limit the use of the weapon that isn't permanent and is upgradable over the game. Hundreds of games do this in different ways. This isn't a dichotomy, there are plenty of better solutions that don't restrict play style preference.

Zelda isn't Skyrim though.  In skyrim you can pick whichever style you want because it's an open world rpg.  Zelda might have some rpg elements but at its roots it is an open world action adventure game.  In Zelda they wanted the focus to be on experimentation and exploration.  Upgradable weapons would detract from the core of the game.  Repairable weapons has its own problems, but I think Zelda did it quite nicely by making the repairable weapons special and harder to earn.  

Ohh, so because it's an open world action adventure game, the poorly designed weapon degredation feature makes perfect sense! Of course. Care to explain how BotW isn't an open world RPG? It seems to me the core of your argument is that previous games were action adventure, so this one must be too. That's so silly.The only thing it's really missing from a traditional open-world RPG is a skill tree.

I think you misunderstood me when I mentioned the word "upgradable". I mean you could "upgrade" how many hits it takes for the weapon to require repair, you know, the same way you can "upgrade" your stamina and heart containers.  Care to explain why its acceptable to be able to upgrade those two game mechanics, but not be able to upgrade weapons? Besides, doesn't the mere fact that self-repair weapons that are locked behind previously mentioned upgrade do exist in your game fly in the face of tje idea that such an option couldn't work?



archer9234 said:
                                         

1.You design the open world game, to not annoy the user. They needed a stricker breathing room, with their design. They needed to find a proper balance to gating and open world. And letting you do whatever. BOTW failed this, for me. And I'd rather it be done, the past ways of progression, in Zelda. Durability is fine. Weapons shouldn't break, after 30 hits. The base crap weapons should break at 60. And so on. They needed to double the hit numbers, for me to find the durability system acceptable. I'm not having a good experiance, the way it is. I prefer needing the fire tunic to explore the fire temple, over this. It's not the worst Zelda game. But, it's not a potential best ever, anymore.

2.You are missing my point. I rather have the world GATED OFF. Meaning none of the weapons, that are strong are avaible. Over the bad durability system. IE: I want the old way of Zelda games, did things. Because, this way is too annoying. I do not like this mechanic, of the game. That is all. Hell, I'll take the OP weapons amgically vanishing. If you went into weaker territory. It's not about reading the end of the book. I don't want to best gear. I want to be able to use the gear longer. And if that requires the game to be gated off, a little more. I'd want that. Beating Gannon at the start could easily be acomplished, with New Game Plus. For speed runners.

I won't be surpised. When Nintendo remasters BOTW. The first thing they'll do, after fixing the FPS. Is rework the Stamina and Durability systems. Just like how Nintendo will change Fi. If they remaster Skyward Sword. These areas are the most complained about. In their respective games. You can love this system. But, It's not perfect. Just because someone lit the match. Doesn't mean, the fuel wasn't in the room.

I can name a few games that limit. And I have no issue. A big is Resident Evil. I love 0-3. The tank controls and locked off camera angle. Plus, the limited saving system was fine. You had to manage you stuff. In a simliar way to BOTW. I didn't find this annoying. When RE4 came out. I still liked it. I hated that you could save unlimited. But, the core game was there. Than RE5 and 6 happened. BOTW is Zelda's RE4. It's different But, certain elements I hate. I hope the next game merges Zelda 1-TP and BOTW more evenly. And doesn't pull an RE5.

1. They cannot acommodate to every single one out there. There will always be someone who will nitpick or don't like certain features in a game. I and most other people on the other hand don't see this mechanic at an issue at all. If you don't like it, then I can't help you. It is like it is. If they would change it to something different, I will bet my ass that other people will still complain about it.

2. The old Zelda games had 1-2 swords at most and a few games had some upgrades to it. It is still and foremost an adventure game and not a RPG.  But again, what's the point of exploring if most of the strong weapons are hidden behind not accessable parts of the game and appear later at certain locations you already visited before. This would ruin the exploration aspect. Nintendo wanted to get rid of most limitations you had like linearity. Without breaking the game you had to adjust and add certain mechanics to keep the motivation of exploration in the game high. And for me, it did it. The moment I've acquired a really strong weapon I was full of joy, because the journey was a bit more easier from now on, even if it is only temporarily, but this doesn't have to be the case. You can use the stronger weapons for stronger enemies, and attain their weapons as well. If you waste your good weapons on poor enemies, well, then I can't do much about it. It's your choice.

Wright said:
Peh said:

Obviously, no you don't know where the good and best weapon are if you play for the first time. But, that's also not the point. The point is, that you give the players actually not restrictions. So, if a player stumples by accident over a really powerful weapon and he can keep it for the rest of the game, than you created an exploit and all the other weapons loose their purpose and the game also looses parts of its challenge itself. After the tutorial level, you can just go to Hyrule castle and get all the good stuff. It's just lying around or are in treasures. You just have to avoid enemy encounters when doing so. You can see this being done in speedruns.

But there's where the balance thing comes into play: it's the developer's responsability to prevent these exploits. Let's go back to Oblivion. Oblivion puts you no restriction whatsoever. You find a weapon, you can use that weapon. It still cleverly hiddens all the best inventory in several places and quests (outside Oblivion orbs, which they only unlock after a certain point in the main quest), and to actually get "game-breaking" inventory requires knowledge of what you're doing. There's little chance you're going to run into one of these dungeons, and be capable of overcome it to claim the treasure within it. Outside specific story-related places, you can go wherever you want in Oblivion too. So you could aim for these places and try to get the good gear. It's still a monumental task that no player will know about, and by the time you naturally find it you'll have progressed enough to become it an integral part of the experience, not an exploit.

Speedruns are not a good measure of anything, because speedruns are based upon godly optimization and (in the case of any%) massive exploits in favor of breaking the game. Oblivion speedruns for example duplicate one specific item within the first five minutes of the game so they climb the blocked end-game door and open it, thus finishing the game. Can we take that into account when criticizing a game? I doubt saying Oblivion lasts 5 minutes because a speedrun does it is a fair criticism. Speedrunners know the best routes and exploits, but again, a speedrunner (that goes for such level of optimization) is someone who has beaten the game plenty of times and knows all the secrets within it. There's no "lessening the experience" or "accidental exploit" there. It's just a crazy string of optimization over layers of experience. They can't account for any of what this video is saying.

 

Peh said:

The dungeons are all the same level, because all the necessary equipment you need to solve them are there from the tutorial part of the game. I havn't tried it but I guess you can use your bombs to kill nearly every enemy in the game. The better weapons makes the enemies just a bit easier to kill, nothing more. So like mentioned in the video, weapons are just consumable, like ammunition for weapons. There are not a necessity, they just make your journey easier and in order for you not to exploit that, every weapon becomes breakable.

Dungeons being the same level is almost as the same as what he says about Skyrim: the world balances to fit the player skill. In Breath of the Wild, there's that standard skill akin to all dungeons because then there's not some sort of progression the game demands for the player in order to tackle any of them. It's not a bad mechanic, mind you, but this doesn't do anything for the weapon system, at all. Weapons being consumables lose the charm of acquiring weapons; it might not be the point of the game, but it sure can be seen as a complain; and goes against what the dude in the video says about the "charm of finding enemy weapons over and over". Because it's not charm, it's the way the game "forces" you to proceed. Like I said, it's not boring, but not charm either.

Peh said:

But how would you design a game without restricting players in what the can wear or not? You don't have level restriction like Witcher 3 for parts in your game and equipment. Even if the Witcher 3 is an open world game, you still are restricted in what you can do and at what time you can do that. Zelda Botw doesn't have such restriction at all.  You can do whatever you want in the game. And in order to keep a certain balance, certain mechanics have to be made to make it work. If you are allowed to keep the best weapon in the game from the beginning, why go on and explore the game? Being to powerful in the beginning will have no challengers at all and thus the game becomes boring as hell.

I redirect yourself to Oblivion, again. You're never restricted in Oblivion, aside from some progression in the main quest. Let me tell you, there's no way you can become game-breaking powerful in Oblivion either unless you know what you're doing. Which in essence the game can't become boring, because it means you liked it so much you're replaying it and exploiting it in your favor for the thrills of beating it again as far as you can or whatever other reason.

 

Peh said:

I am not saying that every game should absorb this mechanic. It's about what you want to achieve in your game. Diablo is about getting the best gear available and throwing the old ones away. But it also got different difficulty settings to make it challenging. Those doesn't exist in Zelda. And Diablo is also not an open world game without restrictions. It's similar for Oblivion. You have a level system, so better gear is only available with a better level to avoid explotation. But Zelda doesn't have a level system. It never had with the exception of Zelda 2. They just wanted to get rid of the linearity in the game and go back to where it all started with Zelda for the NES.

Oblivion doesn't have level-requirements despite having levels within the game. It's what I'm saying all along: Oblivion is a game that entices looting with some rewarding equipment that doesn't break, but also doesn't impose any limitation on the player to use these (outside specific magic items that worn out and you need Soul Gems to refill them again). Finding them is the challenge, and beating specific quests or dungeons to obtain them isn't an easy task, nor the player knows about it when you start.

 

Peh said:

Zelda is not about finding the best gear, it's about the expierence you have with the game. And with this one, you get all the freedom you want without someone telling you, "Nope. You can't do that unless you are level blablabla". That's why they also give you the possibility to go and beat the game right after the tutorial part.

So does Oblivion, outside the main quest, which also encourages the player to make their own way into several quests, such as when you're tasked to bring a daedric item to a character but it's up to you to find what daedric item in the whole world.

My point with this is not bashing Zelda for what Oblivion or other games have done, mind you. All these games are different in nature, so it's only reasonable that they also play different in praxis, and it's great that Zelda tried to aim for something different. I can't just agree with any of the points made in the video, because there are several examples of games that don't fall on the generalizations the OP makes and manage to be enjoyable throughout; likewise, justifying the weapon-break mechanic by saying that what entices the player to keep through most of the world is finding more weapons that will break so that you'll find more weapons that break is dumb as well; especially when even yourself are pointing out that the game isn't about finding the best gear. Weapon becomes secondary, an expression of the combat system but not an integral part of the world-building or character progression, and thus, weapons get relegated to a second plane. They don't have flavor, they don't have charm. They're nothing but a breakable tool you employ in combat; and nothing about fetching these from fallen enemies become interesting after you've done it the initial 50 times or so. It's like Dead Rising, where you can find plenty of weapons that break after some hits. You never really get attached to any because weapons come and go like the wind.

 

Because you've mentioned Oblivion so often I will tackle this all at once. The issue I have with Oblivion foremost is, that the leveling and difficulty setting in this game is completely broken.

First, you can adjust the difficulty with a slider on your own. Placing it on easy, better weapons loose their purpose because I can one - three hit kill each enemy from the beginning. So, I've found my explotation. There are no better weapons to be found, even in the quests. More and better weapons will be added by the leveling system. How do they accomplish this? By having all the hobos and bandits wear superior armor out of the sudden and this breaks the immersion. All I did was just going on with the quest and slaughtering everyone with a few hits and move on to the point on the map. It became stale really fast. Exploration was only good for finding new quests, but not for equipment, because it just wasn't there. Besides that, Oblivion had also other issues, but that is besides the point.

potato_hamster said:
Peh said:

The video is at least 10 minutes long. You posted 7 minutes after I did my post. So you probably needed 2-3 minutes to post which could make you hit the reply button after 4-5 minutes after me posting the video. And also adding the time of actually finding this post and checking what's new on this site.

So, I conclude that you simply didn't watched the video.

Better game design? The lifted all the restriction to the world so you could actually go anywhere and kill anyone and equip their weapons. A restriction like that would restrict the freedom in this game.

Just watch the video plz. It also addresses your issue.

Well go ahead and pick up the master sword right from the get-go then.

And the next thing you want is that every shrine is already located on your map and points you in that direction.
You know, that for certain equipment in the game you also have to do some work if you want to have that. Because most of the stuff can be found by exploring the game, doesn't mean they will give it for free to you. You also have to pay for armor if you didn't knew.



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3

Great video on the topic here! 



NATO said:
Pyro as Bill said:
Why do red shells have to run out after 3 in Mario Kart?

Lazy game design.

Now give the carts tires that wear out while racing and forces you to stop racing and find new ones.

Well, there are racing games that makes you force to change tires. More realistic racing simulations.

And we choose obviously comparisons that fit our agenda. Red shells or tires. Whatever. Obviously nearly all games have limited resources and unlimited abilities. Some seemingly like that weapons became a limited resource in BotW, others do not. I don't see an overarching 'this is righ and this is wrong'. You just may like it or not. I by the way don't care as I always get weapons, so I'm indifferent towards this mechanic (while I think stamina as a limited resource is great in the game).



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]