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

Forums - Gaming - VGC Weapon Durability MEGA Thread

archer9234 on 14 March 2017
monocle_layton said:
Why don't they just make it an option to not have weapons break? That would satisfy everyone

That would require all OP weapons to be removed from earilier in the game. And a lot of rework, in areas. They need of had done this, from the design phase. It's the same reason why Capcom doesn't jsut make a RE game that can do the action camera. And tank camera, by just switching. It requires lots of work. Also, the game team. Probably thought it wasn't gonna be hated on. That's how Fi exsists, in SKyward Sword. No one looked and saw how annoying that POS character was. Till people looking at the game, from the outside, played it.



Around the Network
pokoko on 14 March 2017
Pyro as Bill said:
pokoko said:

From my vantage point, it's the other way around.  There are no perfect games.  Every game has something that some people don't like.  With most games, they disagree and it's no big deal.  Everyone accepts that preference is a thing.  However, with Zelda, I can't recall running into a situation where so many people are so angry and eager to prove that other people are wrong for not liking this or that.  It's like they've been personally insulted.

'Weapon durability' hasn't blown up into a big deal because of the people complaining about it, it's blown up because of the people who are upset that other people are complaining about it.  

It's something that some players consider a negative.  Those who insist that Breath of the Wild has to be perfect need to get over it.

Not liking the system is one thing. Calling it lazy and unbalanced is objectively false. It's a backhanded way of saying you know how to make a better BoTW than Nintendo.

That hyperbole isn't needed.  The people who work for Nintendo are human.  They have and will make mistakes.  It's quite fair to point at specific parts of a game and say, "I don't think that was very well done."  You have the right to disagree, obviously, but making an appeal to authority doesn't really work in this situation.



Barozi on 14 March 2017

I think Fallout 3 has by far the best weapon (and armor) durability system.
There are multiple levels of durability and the damage level is adjusted to the durability. Weapons don't start at 100% durability. That makes sense as none of the stuff you find or buy in the Wasteland can be in mint condition. That doesn't mean that they will shatter after a few hits though. By fully repairing a weapon you can therefore increase the damage output over the initial base level, making it more of an upgrade system. So even the shitty weapons at the start of the game can be repaired to get a decent damage output and most overkill weapons you find at the beginning are in such bad condition that they won't show their full potential until you have the right repair skill, thus making it harder to be overpowered at the start.



Platina on 14 March 2017
CGI-Quality said:
Platina said:

Well, one thread was created first and has the most posts due to the most dicussion

If that had remained the only thread, then I would agree with this. But, we've had quite a bit of them. On top of that, this is a good discussion to have, so John is right. Wiping the slate clean was the best course of action.

Yes, I agree.

Just being the devil's advocate in a sense :p



NintenDomination [May 2015 - July 2017]
 

  - Official  VGChartz Tutorial Thread - 

NintenDomination [2015/05/19 - 2017/07/02]
 
          

 

 

Here lies the hidden threads. 

 | |

Nintendo Metascore | Official NintenDomination | VGC Tutorial Thread

| Best and Worst of Miiverse | Manga Discussion Thead |
[3DS] Winter Playtimes [Wii U]

JakDaSnack on 14 March 2017
Areym said:
JakDaSnack said:

There isn't any hand holding in Zelda, you wouldn't know you could do those things unless you experimented.  Also after beating particularly hard groups, it's possible to get a really op weapon early on.  If durability wasn't a thing, that op weapon might make the game too easy.  

I would not considering showing off a mechanic with a small textbox or animated video/image hand holding (assuming not even those things are shown on a new mechanic)

Also, that weapon would not be available so early IF NOT for the weapons being so frail. Otherwise, that would be a god-awful balance issue

 

You might find out you can do things like shield surfing via NPC's or via tips during the load screen.  But for the most part they encourage discovery.  I'm not sure what your point was with the second sentence, but I took it as a great game design.  I'm able to get end game weapons early on if I try out new things, but it doesn't break the game because I can only use it for a few fights.  Later on these weapons are common, but early on it feels like a massive accomplishment.  I love this aspect of Zelda, but I guess that's just a preference.



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

Around the Network
TheLastStarFighter on 14 March 2017
Wright said:
RolStoppable said:

Inventory is limited in BotW. You start out with eight slots for weapons and by the time the average player is going to face Ganon, the inventory is going to have ~15 slots. There is no huge arsenal to build. There is also no real unique weapon, except for the Master Sword (which repairs itself).

What happens in practical terms is that players save strong weapons when they initially find them, but then start using them when they realize that it isn't a rare weapon. Repeat this process a few times and after a good amount of time spent with the game, players begin to realize that all weapons can be replaced, so there's no fear of breaking anything anymore.

You also need to remember that weapon durability in Zelda wasn't a problem until one reviewer out of well over 50 said it is a problem. Since then it has been blown out of proportion because people who wanted to see faults in Zelda finally got something to latch on. They had to endure perfect score after perfect score for ten days, but then finally somebody delivered.

Well, I don't have an issue with it particulary (which is why I put "issue" in my original post), because I do like weapon durability as stated by myself earlier with Dead Rising example. The thing is, you kinda lampshade what I'm saying: weapons lack personality. You come to a point where you don't fear breaking it because there's no attachment to the weapon; the uniqueness is lost. If everything can be replaced, then it also means everything is forgetable, to a degree, outside the first time you find it and keep it for only hard enemies like you said.

This fact doesn't really have to be blown out of proportion or anything, but that's something that comes with the territory with weapon durability of such extent like the one in Breath of the Wild. Going back to Dead Rising, you don't have any attachment to a chair that breaks in ten hits because, well, plenty of other things to grab on the go if it happens. Breath of the Wild just chooses a gameplay system that, while making combat enjoyable, doesn't really emphasize uniqueness of weapons, which at one point doesn't make you thrive to look for them but just wait for them to come for you through enemies.

When you actually play through, weapons do have a fairly unique feel for a while.  When you initially find it, it's usually rare and awesome and you save it for when it's needed.  And that doesn't mean one battle, you can usually use a good weapon for several major battles.  And by then you are probably moving along to the point where a newer, better weapon is coming along.   When you factor in that in between those battles you've probably done a bunch of exploring, found a town, done a shrine trial or two and the pacing is pretty much perfect.  You have your favorite blade, its your baby for a period of time but then its time to move on to something new and special.  So bash it one more time until it explodes over a moblin's head and move on.  It's very well done.



archer9234 on 14 March 2017
JakDaSnack said:
Areym said:

I would not considering showing off a mechanic with a small textbox or animated video/image hand holding (assuming not even those things are shown on a new mechanic)

Also, that weapon would not be available so early IF NOT for the weapons being so frail. Otherwise, that would be a god-awful balance issue

 

You might find out you can do things like shield surfing via NPC's or via tips during the load screen.  But for the most part they encourage discovery.  I'm not sure what your point was with the second sentence, but I took it as a great game design.  I'm able to get end game weapons early on if I try out new things, but it doesn't break the game because I can only use it for a few fights.  Later on these weapons are common, but early on it feels like a massive accomplishment.  I love this aspect of Zelda, but I guess that's just a preference.

Yes. That's the thing. I don't find them balanced, because of that. They break too easily. I don't care about a single weapon I get. I just look at the number. And understand the basic weaknesses. Counter them. Move on. They're disposable items. I don't care about nothing. That's the problem. Makes Link less of a person. More of an managing item box.



Johnw1104 on 14 March 2017
Areym said:
JakDaSnack said:

There isn't any hand holding in Zelda, you wouldn't know you could do those things unless you experimented.  Also after beating particularly hard groups, it's possible to get a really op weapon early on.  If durability wasn't a thing, that op weapon might make the game too easy.  

I would not considering showing off a mechanic with a small textbox or animated video/image hand holding (assuming not even those things are shown on a new mechanic)

Also, that weapon would not be available so early IF NOT for the weapons being so frail. Otherwise, that would be a god-awful balance issue.

Johnw1104 said:

The thing is I'll fully recognize that it's unfair and unreasonable to dismiss the preferences of others, and I do try to remind myself of that constantly. My point, I think, is that this discussion has been blown so far out of proportion as people have fixed on it as the primary criticism of the new Zelda game.

Either way, it's hardly an issue, but the way it's being discussed it's as if it's a game breaking feature.

Also, for the record, I certainly don't think this is a perfect game. Heck, I made a thread about it yesterday lol:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=226761&page=1

That's your opinion and you're still being dismissive despite recognizing how it's unreasonable to do so. I agree that it isn't the make-or-break thing for the game, but it can be a reasonable annoyance. Even Sterling recommended the game, it's not like he dropped it completely or deemed it unplayable. In fact, I have not read a single post where somebody stopped playing the game entirely because of the durability of the weapons.

I'm not dismissing the criticism itself, I'm saying that it in no way deserves the kind of attention it's getting (to the point that a thread to condense all related threads had to be made).

Early on the clear criticism that likewise was probably receiving too much attention (though it also is a valid criticism) were the frame rates, and no one was bothered by the weapon durability enough to make an issue of it. Now, with (primarily) one well known reviewer voicing his disdain for the durability system (despite essentially admiting in the review that he must not have played very far as he couldn't speak to the durability of better late game weapons), suddenly the entire gaming community is discussing it and throwing words around like "lazy" without thinking through the implications of their complaints (that's one thing Sterling was particularly guilty of in his review on multiple occasions, especially in regards to any progression whatsoever and stamina).

I suppose it's to be expected as it's certainly not something that occurs only with games; I think to basketball where LeBron does impossible things night in and night out, and yet for his entire career people have been looking for flaws to label him with. Whenever we come across something that is essentially a masterpiece, it seems to be almost human nature to focus in on any negatives we can find.

I think these pictures can best explain my position on it:

Zelda: BotW and the Durability Issue


How Zelda BotW has been covered over the last couple of days:

Based on the discussions and threads I've been seeing, the above examples don't seem far off ;)



TheLastStarFighter on 14 March 2017

Most of the people bashing the weapon durability haven't actually played the game. Good weapons typically aren't that fragile.



irstupid on 14 March 2017
Johnw1104 said:
Areym said:

Well, rarely do weapons break as frequently as they do in BotW (at least to my knowledge) I'd say its a valid concern for anybody who has played Dark Souls, TW3, etc. Obviously, they each handle it differently but there's an expectations that your weapons will last you a while.
pokoko said:

From my vantage point, it's the other way around.  There are no perfect games.  Every game has something that some people don't like.  With most games, they disagree and it's no big deal.  Everyone accepts that preference is a thing.  However, with Zelda, I can't recall running into a situation where so many people are so angry and eager to prove that other people are wrong for not liking this or that.  It's like they've been personally insulted.

'Weapon durability' hasn't blown up into a big deal because of the people complaining about it, it's blown up because of the people who are upset that other people are complaining about it.  

It's something that some players consider a negative.  Those who insist that Breath of the Wild has to be perfect need to get over it.

The thing is I'll fully recognize that it's unfair and unreasonable to dismiss the preferences of others, and I do try to remind myself of that constantly. My point, I think, is that this discussion has been blown so far out of proportion as people have fixed on it as the primary criticism of the new Zelda game.

I really think it's more impatience than anything, as it ceases to be a problem after only a few hours into the game, and where I'm at I routinely have to leave behind awesome weapons despite a drastically expanded inventory as I always have a full stock of weapons and, as you improve, the gear continues to scale along with you (lately I've been getting ++ items that do absurd damage).

As someone who probably gets more sentimentally attached to in-game items than 99% of people (you should really see my banks from WoW, I still have every set ever, my first epic, my original gear etc lol) I understand that notion of wanting to keep an item. The breaking weapons are one of the driving forces of the game though, keeping you hunting for more gear and such.

To me, there's one improvement that could be made: very rare items that are quite strong but, while still breaking eventually, can be repaired at great expense. A this point we do have reward items that can be replaced, but they're so weak that they're not worth carrying.

Either way, it's hardly an issue, but the way it's being discussed it's as if it's a game breaking feature.

Also, for the record, I certainly don't think this is a perfect game. Heck, I made a thread about it yesterday lol:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=226761&page=1

The unique weapons are not bad. If you notice spears are like 30 at highest damage, and the unique is like 27 or something. The greatsword weapon is like 60 and that fits in line with high end greatswords. And so on. They aren't OP, but they are not underpowered.

Wright said:
RolStoppable said:

Inventory is limited in BotW. You start out with eight slots for weapons and by the time the average player is going to face Ganon, the inventory is going to have ~15 slots. There is no huge arsenal to build. There is also no real unique weapon, except for the Master Sword (which repairs itself).

What happens in practical terms is that players save strong weapons when they initially find them, but then start using them when they realize that it isn't a rare weapon. Repeat this process a few times and after a good amount of time spent with the game, players begin to realize that all weapons can be replaced, so there's no fear of breaking anything anymore.

You also need to remember that weapon durability in Zelda wasn't a problem until one reviewer out of well over 50 said it is a problem. Since then it has been blown out of proportion because people who wanted to see faults in Zelda finally got something to latch on. They had to endure perfect score after perfect score for ten days, but then finally somebody delivered.

Well, I don't have an issue with it particulary (which is why I put "issue" in my original post), because I do like weapon durability as stated by myself earlier with Dead Rising example. The thing is, you kinda lampshade what I'm saying: weapons lack personality. You come to a point where you don't fear breaking it because there's no attachment to the weapon; the uniqueness is lost. If everything can be replaced, then it also means everything is forgetable, to a degree, outside the first time you find it and keep it for only hard enemies like you said.

This fact doesn't really have to be blown out of proportion or anything, but that's something that comes with the territory with weapon durability of such extent like the one in Breath of the Wild. Going back to Dead Rising, you don't have any attachment to a chair that breaks in ten hits because, well, plenty of other things to grab on the go if it happens. Breath of the Wild just chooses a gameplay system that, while making combat enjoyable, doesn't really emphasize uniqueness of weapons, which at one point doesn't make you thrive to look for them but just wait for them to come for you through enemies.

But this is Zelda. There is only one real improtant weapon, and that is the Master Sword.  The very fact that as you said all the other items lose their identity makes the master sword that much more iconic in the game.

You don't want to make a game where the ultimate weapon becomes outshined by others. That always bugged me in RPG's where in the main story you get hinted at about this ultimate weapon, and it is the weapon that is on the coverart, or has huge story significance as the ultimate weapon, ect. Yet you can go to some optional dungeon or boss fight that gives you weapons that dwarf that one. Or do some colloseum fighting and get rewarded with some insane sword. WTF are these people doing with a weapon like that. Always worrying about like MMO problems of endgame or whateve ryou call it brings this about.

This Zelda solves that problem, by not having essentially an endgame. YOu start the game out wiht final quest. Head to Hyrule Castle, beat Ganon. It doesn't tell you to get master sword or anything else.  It's essentially engame the instant you leave the plateau. You can head to the final boss if you want, or start doing optional stuff to beef up, max out, 100% complete, whateve rou want to call it. You know basically the point you reach in a typical RPG where they say "NO turning back point" where you can head to fight final boss and beat game or go off and do all things you missed, side quests, optional bosses/dungeons, ect to power up, level up, explore world, 100%, ect. BotW is just basically in this endgame point the whoel game. And even heading to hyrule castle you can turn back whenever you want. I have a few times now gone and cleared out a few more rooms each time exploring, looting, reading, memories, ect. Not going to go see Ganon yet though.