Jim Sterling (The Jimquisition)

While it's not real time, isn't using Right on the d-pad essentially the same thing?

Why not both?

I feel like they're better off just scrapping durability entirely and thinking of a new way to encourage players to try out different weapons. Maybe making the combat in general more in-depth would be a good place to start because Bot W's (and most Zeldas) combat is rather simplistic. Having weapons with different movesets, strengths and weaknesses with enemies where those aspects really matter would make a huge difference.

A repair system would have defeated the point of including weapon durability in the first place. It's not about encouraging players to try different weapons, it's about reinforcing the concept of impermanence through gameplay.

Presumably the next game will have different themes and therefore won't have need of a weapon durability system.

No, it doesn't. Fallout 3 has weapon durability and yet has the ability to repair your weapons and it's a good game. You're just reinforcing the notion that weapon durability should be a fucking chore that is not fun for any player.

Edited by CybranGeneralSturm on Sep 22nd 2019 at 3:16:11 AM

Yes, separate games with separate themes do have repair systems for their weapon durability, because those are separate games with separate themes.

Breath of the Wild is about impermanence.

Well, that escalated quickly.

Games should be fun. Weapon durability mechanics tend to be unfun.

I don't care if it's thematically important. If it's not fun then what's the point?

And it also doesn't add any challenge, but basically another "meter" to micromanage when it gets too low.

Honestly I wouldn't even mind them too much (Besides causing Too Awesome to Use) if the menus in BOTW werent so bad. It takes forever to do anything. Nothing's convenient or quick.

Also the thematic excuse is weak as hell when they are perfectly fine making several things not degrade. Armor, the tablet, etc...

Nothing lasts forever. Except the stuff that does.

Edited by Ghilz on Sep 22nd 2019 at 6:36:26 AM

Due note that you can NOT buy or sell weapons in the game, all you can do is pick them up and throw them away.

I don't think "fun" (in a conventional sense) should always be a priority in games since that's very limiting, but on the other hand I don't really know if the weapon durability is enough of a boon in that sense that it's worth keeping. In fact I'm not even really sure that it's the reason why the mechanic is in the game. Zelda games are always built with gameplay first and then the story comes around later to provide context, as opposed to the other way around. So I think they just thought it would be a cool idea to experiment with and went with it.

I didn't feel it was much of a positive or negative in either way, so I wouldn't mind them getting rid of it since it was obviously a very divisive mechanic.

There are definitely some flaws with how the durability system was implemented, yes. An ability to buy and sell weapons would have been a good idea, and the game is in dire need of a better inventory management system.

I also like the idea of being able to queue up weapons to instantly replace the one you're holding when it breaks. Would remove a lot of unneeded grief from the execution.

Breath of the Wild's system has problems. But I do appreciate the fact that they committed to the game's central message and made an effort to write it into gameplay. That kind of thematic integration is rare to see in the medium, where games are often content to be like, "FPS violence is bad; here's a twenty-hour kickass shooter game to prove it."

It's a solid effort. It just needed some more work to make it less of a hassle.

And, as noted above, I also wouldn't be against removing it for future games, because I doubt they'll have the exact same message, story, and themes. In fact, I hope they don't, because that would be samey.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 22nd 2019 at 4:44:08 AM

Not sure if that example works since by most accounts the gameplay in Spec Ops isn't very fun.

A more...in-depth combat system would be nice.

If it means the smaller weapons and certain types of swords actually play different, that'd be fantassstique.

Some weapons do handle differently from each other depending on their type.

Those small spiked blades the Yiga clan use control just like regular swords.

But it's Swords, Big Swords(or Hammers), Boomerangs, and Spears. The Wind Cleavers are kind of cool.

A few have special abilities here and there but they clearly attempted to avoid the 'Too Awesome to Use' with making the non elemental weapons not super unique from each other.

You got your Fire swords that can melt ice blocks and heat you up 1 level and stuff like that.

They did later patch in a chance to find the enchanted weapons with Crit-up, Durability up, 5 shot burst and such though.

Add me to the list of people who never had any problems with the weapon durability in Breath of the Wild. Then again, like Tobias mentioned, I was probably playing as the developers intended, so I never felt like I was lacking in weapons.

I don't think anyone claimed you "lacked weapons". So it's not really responding to the criticism. If anything, lacking weapons would make weapon degradation worthwhile, since it'd mean deciding to engage a monster or not is a tactical decision "do I risk my non renewable ressources on this fight or not?"

Since you never lack weapons, it becomes tedium. Another bar to manage. "Welp, did a few fights, time to clean my inventory of weapons who only have a few swings left. Etc..."

Honestly I just let the weapons break or I threw them at an enemy, if they are destroyed in a hit it would always critical hit and knock the enemy back.

Actually stocking up on weapons that are about to break were a valid early game strat to deal with some of the guardians and trials.

I much prefer the way Dark Souls handled it. Most of the time it was a non-issue as Drag said. The few times it is an issue — facing enemies whose gimmick is degrading weapons — it's deliberately meant to add tension. In the first game there's also gear whose special feature is that while they are powerful, they are also non-repairable and far more fragile. Playing with that gear can be an interesting experience. It even makes sense from a story perspective since it's essentially cursed equipment (not to be confused with actual cursed gear).

Edited by M84 on Sep 23rd 2019 at 12:03:00 AM

To free up space?

Besides Boomerangs, thrown weapons are always destroyed in a hit and always a critical.

Edited by randomness4 on Sep 22nd 2019 at 9:35:06 AM

That's exactly what Horizon Zero Dawn did. Tons of weapons in that game, but each one felt unique and useful in different situations.