Poll: Weapon degradation - yes or no?

[UltraXan]

It honestly depends on how it's implemented, but I'm not really adding anything new to the discussion here. When I played Oblivion, I was young then and didn't care for much of a challenge. As a result, I never turned god mode off. Now, I have much higher standards for myself. But the one thing I remember from Oblivion god mode is that items never degraded because of it. I had no idea how the repair system worked, and I frankly didn't care since I felt it would be much too difficult for me to deal with. That was one of the reasons I was glad Skyrim ditched it. Granted, though, it did take something from it. Now that I'm more mature, I understand the value of a good repair system.

One system I feel like mentioning is that of Vindictus. Weapons and armor lose a bit of durability after every instance which is easy enough to repair by going to the forge and paying a modest sum. Naturally, the more advanced gear you have, the more it'll cost to repair it, and some lower level instances don't even damage your equipment at all. But if you don't repair your equipment and you let the durability go down, you actually start to see wear and tear on it. I'm not sure if it becomes less effective or what happens if it reaches zero, but that visual effect is cool.

One more thing about Vindictus is that armor acts differently in instances. If a certain piece of equipment takes too much damage, it'll break and will offer A LOT less protection. But if you have a temporary armor repair kit (you can bring 4 with you into an instance at a time), you can fix the entirety of your armor and it'll be as if nothing happened. Even if you don't fix it during the fight, your armor will automatically be fixed when you get back to town, and it breaking during the fight doesn't impact its overall durability. Sometimes I feel like my armor breaks much too easily, but when I think about it, when you look at some of the bosses and what they hit the player with, I'm surprised they don't just break everything. I'd say it's one of the better repair systems.

 

[GundamSentinel]

Generally, no. In most cases it just comes down to time wasted, a chore, rather than being a valid and fun mechanic. I can imagine some merit in it for games with a survivalist nature, where scavenging is a key part of the game (say, Fallout). Other than that, can't think of any where it would be fun.

 

[AT God]

Weapons shouldn't degrade unless there is a logical way to repair them. I hate games where you cannot repair your weapon and just have to find a new one (STALKER, FAR CRY 2)

 

[somonels]

yes, but then again i tend to be drawn to settings and thenes where it could and should be used. FC3 needed the FC2 variant of decreased reliability based on wear.

 

[Hafnium]

Depends on the game

Fallout 3 and NV do weapon repair very well as it is quite easy to repair things even with low repair skills. Also the fact all you have to do is find another copy of the weapon you wish to repair makes it quite easy to do quick fixes without stopping by a town.

Oblivion did this terribly. You had to level up your repair skill to fix anything and you had to scavenge or buy repair hammers which take up alot of inventory space. Skyrim did a good move removing weapon degration from the game, even if it is a little unrealistic.

Yep! In Oblivion at low levels I often had to bring 10-20 hammers just to make sure my gear wouldn't turn to dust. They were kind of heavy!

 

[munx13]

Yes. I really like how it was done in STALKER games.

 

[Rblade]

no, unless it's part of an overarching survival style. If you absolutly must charge me a "playing the game tax" in ingame currency don't make me every now and then run back to town for it just charge it at the gate. Another way would be to allow you to fix it yourself on location for component price, fine that could even lead to interesting situations like small suvival sections or dungeons where the feature is turned off as part of the challenges.

But as a general gold and time drain "realism" shtick it can go die in a corner.

 

[Mikeyfell]

I'm going to say yes.

Dead Rising and Dark Souls are two of my favorite games ever and they both have weapon degradation
Fallout probably did it the best by making the rarer and better weapons harder to repair
And Minecraft? That's like weapon degradation the game

And when it comes right down to it limited ammo is basically a primitive form of weapon degradation.
Your gun is only good for a certain number of shots then you need to fix it, by reloading...


It's obviously not for all games, but then again it's not in all games so I'm fine with it.

 

[Frankster]

Not a big fan of it overall, usually its just an excuse for you to lose money (especially in mmos!) but in certain games it can add to the challenge or immersion (i didnt mind it in New Vegas for example, as degradation rate was slow enough not to feel like an annoying chore, plus had a mod where my helmet would visually become more damaged, so degradation became a physical factor which was cool)..

 

[Adept Mechanicus]

NO, GOD NO. Possible exceptions in Fallout 3 and New Vegas because there was a repair mechanic, it fit with the post-apocalypse thing, and it gave you something to do with all those extra suits of inferior armor you find lying around. In Fire Emblem or literally any other game that doesn't take place after the destruction of all repair shops and quality manufacturers, it is distracting and unnecessary. Some people say it's to prevent you from just using the three or four most powerful weapons, but that leads to the question of why didn't they just balance the damn weapons properly in the first place.

 

[Seydaman]

If it is done well, if it creates gameplay and not busywork. I think Dark Souls did it well.

 

[babinro]

I've yet to play a game where the weapon degradation system enhanced the game in terms of fun.

I'm not one for zombie survival games and so I could easily be missing out on some of the better implementations.

 

[Tom_green_day]

I think in Fallout 3 and NV it worked well. It kept me scavenging where in other games I'd just ignore the surroundings to shoot stuff.
It also worked really well in Far Cry 2. Instead of just picking up any gun, I was more loyal to the guns I bought, and guns off the floor were used in more desperate situations, making those situations really tense for me. This is something I think Far Cry 3 lacked, it was less tense because you could just unlock any gun by picking it up off a dead guy and using it as though you'd always used it.
In Monster Hunter I won't say it was great because it got really annoying at points, but sharpening a weapon as a Wyvern tried to blow you to hell felt kinda badass if you did it right so I didn't mind it overall.
Overall it's never really annoyed me, it only adds to gameplay in those few games I've played with it.

 

[Glaice]

I hate the weapon and armor degradation mechanic in games, especially when you need the same weapon type or just going to an NPC to fix it.

 

[CyanideSandwich]

I liked the mechanic in Far Cry 2 which degraded your guns the more you used them, causing them to jam, get rusty and generally perform badly. All it took was to get a free replacement from your friendly arms dealer. It also provided incentive to not pick up enemy weapons, as they would almost always be worn down.

 

[Not Lord Atkin]

Well, it's a tool at the game designer's disposal. Can't say I hate it. There are games in which I'd prefer if it didn't exist and there undoubtedly are those where it adds to the gameplay.

So no, no strong feelings about the mechanic outside of context of specific games.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

The major reasoning behind having weapon degradation in a game, outside of trying to make it somehow super realistic, is for a resource sink. By constantly having to sink resources into repairing your gear, it slows down the accumulation of wealth.

 

[Christopher Fisher]

I hate weapon degradation, especially if it's done horribly like Dead Island, where you could barely take out ten zombies before your weapon was useless. There's nothing worse than finding a really badass weapon, only to have it become useless after an hour.

 

[Erttheking]

Depends. It works in games like Fallout and I would've been ok with it in Metero 2033, but in others it just doesn't work.

 

[Pirakahunter788]

Fallout 3 and New Vegas have it fit well into the atmosphere, it's the apocalypse, weapons are difficult to find in decent condition, and need to be repaired in the harsh environments. Weapons and armor don't break very quickly, so unless you're neglecting your stuff, it won't cause problems.

System Shock 2 was alright, because I had plenty of repair tools by the time anything got close to breaking. That's why the Wrench is handy.

Dead Island weapons.. like cardboard and glue. There's virtually no durability, and repairing drains your cash QUICK.

Far Cry 2 did a nice mechanic, and Fallout did it too as well to an extent, your weapons visibly get dirtier, and can even jam in a firefight. Adds tension at some points, frustration at others. Enemy weapons are very damaged, so if you're scavenging, you need to do it often. Not bad, but it could have been tweaked. Had my guns break on me more than once.

Honestly, like a lot have said, if it's implemented well, it can add a decent element of difficulty and resource management, but handled badly, it becomes annoying and worthless. It can help balance the roles of melee and ranged gear, and maybe armor, but that's a concept at best.