Poll: Weapon Degradation

[MurderousToaster]

I know that weapon degradation has a mixed opinion.

Some believe it adds an extra layer to gameplay, and some dislike it.
Some just don't mind.

I think it CAN add an extra layer to gameplay if weapons don't degrade quickly. For example, I think FarCry 2 did it right. If you bought a *new* gun from the weapons store, you could use it for a hell of a long time without it exploding or jamming, but if you picked up an enemy weapon, it would already be far down the line towards ending its' projectile-spitting life.

What are your opinions, Escapists?

EDIT: Please give reasons for being for/against.

 

[Manhattan2112]

In Deadrising the weapons degraded, but they made up for it by turning every goddamn thing into a weapon, and placing everything all over the place. The design fit that game because of the out-of-whack inventory system.

I fricking love Deadrising though, so they must have done it right.

It's all got to do with how quickly the weapons degrade and how plentiful the weapons are.

Like in Fallout 3 there is an element of weapon degradation that only works thanks to it being 300 years in the future. -.-
What kind of Ak47 Breaks after a clip of ammo?!

 

[Pigeon_Grenade]

if its Done Right, sometimes they add it to games that Really dont need it

 

[JaymesFogarty]

Weapon degradation is okay if it's sensible. Occasional gun jamming and exploding would be alright, but the gun would have to last long enough for you to gain access to another gun. All in proportion.

 

[orangebandguy]

Far Cry 2 was a shining example of how not to do the degradation system.

5 magazines breaks a gun?

 

[Kuchinawa212]

For a game like fallout, hell yes. It makes you really feel like your using old weapons that are taking a lot of abuse. I don't want pick up a old rifle and it to do perfect damage and dead on shot.

But like in a game like halo, it's just kind of clunky and weird.

 

[FactualSquirrel]

I pretty much can't stand it ever.

It never fits, and I don't want realism, I want fun/an awesome story/amazing gameplay.

I can't have any of those things if every time I try to kill an enemy, my weapon is fucked up.

 

[Daniel Cygnus]

In RPG type games (Fire Emblem, Fallout 3 and Dead Rising did this very well), it's great. It makes you plan out every attack and every move rather than having you run in screaming and murdering.

 

[MurderousToaster]

Far Cry 2 was a shining example of how not to do the degradation system.

5 magazines breaks a gun?

That's only if you pick one up off a dead enemy. If you buy a shining new one, it will take a hell of a lot longer than that. Also, there are guns everywhere.

 

[GundamSentinel]

It's a game, it's not real life. You're supposed to get boring things out when designing a game. I hated Farcry 2 because of the quite absurd weapon degradation (among another dozen reasons). It's also one of the reasons why I always use a bow in Oblivion and why I always feel obliged to upgrade Repair first in Fallout 3. It's just plain annoying. Very annoying.

 

[Drundy]

Depends on the game,in MW2 there would be no point to have weapon degradation but if its an RPG's yes it would make sense.

 

[Xskills]

Maybe. It's never been perfected yet. But different guns have different breaking tendencies. Ak-47's with eastern bloc parts last forever but are only good up to 300m. AR-15's can do 500m but are prone to failures due carbon fowling between the gas tube and bolt carrier. Some guns are good with water, mud and sand and some will just blow up.

 

[funksobeefy]

I think its rude for develpers to put it in. Like "Heres a fun gun! oh! you used it too much I'm gonna have to take it away."

like thanks asshole...

 

[Joe Deadman]

In rpg's like oblivion and fallout 3 its fine but other games just do it terribly like farcry 2. Really I think its an ok mechanic I just really would not want it in every game.

 

[Flames66]

I don't like it. It might be okay if it very rarely happens, and Only at times where it would be epic, rather than Very Annoying.

 

[fix-the-spade]

If weapons can be repaired and degrade at a reasonable rate then it's fine.

It adds an extra layer of involvment to STALKER games buying and trading weapons, as well as gaining an armoury of your own well maintained and reliable gun over the old clunkers at the start. It also added an element of risk to taking enemy guns, especially if you'd used explosives to down them.

Far Cry 2 was almost text book how not to do it. ALL enemy NPC guns magically degraded to crap when you touched them, operating flawlessly for their first owners. It was crap, their should have been a degree of randomness to it instead.

 

[hazabaza1]

Yeah, i'd like to shoot the guy who came up with that idea.

Your gun would melt before you got to him.

OT: I hate it quite honestly. If I'm in the middle of shooting/slashing/bludgeoning an enemy, I don't want my weapon to break, and if it does, why can't I just beat the enemy to death with my broken weapon, rather that throw it away?

Take for example, Oblivion. If I'm using a mace to fight someone, and it breaks somehow, as in the top breaks off, why can't I use the hilt to smack them other the head? It'd be a lot more effective than fists.