Weapon degradation in games

RandV80

New member
Oct 1, 2009
1,507
0
0
Abomination said:
I like your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Non-enchanted weapon upkeep should probably require you to have some equipment that would be used for it. A whetstone, weapon oil, scabbard and... rag? Every night you'll use a bit of oil so I guess you could run out.

The mechanics surrounding proper weapon degradation requires a total overhaul of most games. It's not just weapons, it's also armour. Dents, rust, leather cracking... I want to see a game that when a poorly equipped enemy hits you in the chest you take ZERO damage, your steel breastplate absorbs the whole thing but the internal durability has taken a small immeasurable decrease to that region of your armour. Maybe your character staggers for a bit, loses some "endurance" but otherwise you're good. It'd open up to all sorts of situations - weapons that flat out penetrate armour, weapons that do a lot of damage to armour or maybe a weapon that does a bit of both.

Balance issues? Make the stuff as expensive as it always was. A full set of plate armour is supposed to cost more than 10 peasants could earn in their lifetime.

I feel games are missing some interesting concepts or considerations when engaging in combat in medieval settings.
I've seen one system like this which I've always liked. While I'm up on all the geek culture I have very little actual experience playing pen & paper RPG's, but the one game I did play with friends a few times way back in the late 90's called Palladium, a medieval fantasy offshoot of another sci-fi/multiverse one called Rifts.

Anyways how they handled it is every set of armour would have it's own durability HP and DC hit rating. So maybe Leather Armour would have something like a DC of 12 and 80 hp and full plate might have 18 dc and 250 hp. The DM roles the D20 for the attacker, you role the D20 to parry. If the attacker beats your D20+parry modifier with a roll that is over the armour DC then your character takes the damage, if it beats you but the roll is under your armour AC then your armour takes the damage.

I later got introduced to proper AD&D through Balder's Gate but I always liked and preferred the way they did things in Palladium. Much more involved than simply compiling everything into a single hit or miss number and it makes a whole lot more sense.
 

Abomination

New member
Dec 17, 2012
2,939
0
0
RandV80 said:
I've seen one system like this which I've always liked. While I'm up on all the geek culture I have very little actual experience playing pen & paper RPG's, but the one game I did play with friends a few times way back in the late 90's called Palladium, a medieval fantasy offshoot of another sci-fi/multiverse one called Rifts.

Anyways how they handled it is every set of armour would have it's own durability HP and DC hit rating. So maybe Leather Armour would have something like a DC of 12 and 80 hp and full plate might have 18 dc and 250 hp. The DM roles the D20 for the attacker, you role the D20 to parry. If the attacker beats your D20+parry modifier with a roll that is over the armour DC then your character takes the damage, if it beats you but the roll is under your armour AC then your armour takes the damage.

I later got introduced to proper AD&D through Balder's Gate but I always liked and preferred the way they did things in Palladium. Much more involved than simply compiling everything into a single hit or miss number and it makes a whole lot more sense.
The problem is that doing it with pen and paper it becomes really damn complex, better to have a video game take care of those calculations for you when you swing your sword at a bugger or a bugger swings one at you.

Hitbox based armour would be awesome.
 

Jacco

New member
May 1, 2011
1,738
0
0
I fucking hate it. I will literally stop playing a game if it is implemented badly. I'm looking at you, Dead Rising you piece of shit.

The only game I've found where it works okay (mostly because it's easy to repair it on the fly) is Last of Us. I wasn't a fan of the one use thing for upgraded melee weapons and knives, but I could tolerate it because you found enough of them to make it relatively easy to repair. And the way the combat was structured was such that you weren't constantly fighitng off hordes of zombies or guys with it. It was purely a "get you out the shit right now" item.

Dead Rising was the opposite. As someone said above, there is no point in getting awesome weapons if you can only use them 10 times. My friend handed me a literal lightsaber in DR2 and I went to town thinking it was immune to degradation since it was a silly over powered weapon. NOPE. The moment it broke and I realized what happened I turned my XBOX off and literally haven't put that disk back in it since.
 

rob_simple

Elite Member
Aug 8, 2010
1,864
0
41
I think it's cool in theory --especially in games like Fallout 3, as you mentioned-- but I've had one too many situations where my rifle breaks at just the exact moment I didn't need it to, to ever think it's a good thing.

It also annoys me when it's just based on percentage of usage, not the situation it's being used in. If my sword degrades with every swing whether I'm slashing through grass or battering it off walls, it feels more like the developers wanted to add it but didn't want the headache of having it make sense.

If it was there as an option that could be toggled I'd be fine with that, but that's an awful lot of extra dev work for a feature that potentially will never be used.

Jacco said:
Dead Rising was the opposite. As someone said above, there is no point in getting awesome weapons if you can only use them 10 times. My friend handed me a literal lightsaber in DR2 and I went to town thinking it was immune to degradation since it was a silly over powered weapon. NOPE. The moment it broke and I realized what happened I turned my XBOX off and literally haven't put that disk back in it since.
You speak the truth, my friend. As if the bosses in Dead Rising weren't enough of a chore, I loved having to make up six of the same super-weapon and then constantly dropping them when I got stun-locked by the boss' over-powered attacks. One of the biggest examples of a great idea horribly implemented I've ever seen in gaming.
 

loc978

New member
Sep 18, 2010
4,900
0
0
I love the idea, but implementation is always spotty at best.

The best implementation I've seen yet was in Fallout 3: Wanderer's Edition. Slowed rates down, made a repair check debuff that only went away in the presence of a workbench (and only affected weapon/armor repairs made in the inventory screen, not any other repair skill checks), implemented weapon cleaning (repair guns with abraxo cleaner, et cetera)...

Now if they'd gone just a little further with that... I understand they couldn't break everything down into weapon components each with their own condition stat and separate carbon buildup stat (for normal guns only, of course) the way I'd like... but they could have at least put a cap on how far a weapon can be repaired with just parts, and a minimum condition for cleaning/maintenance to be effective (maybe put that cutoff in the same place that New Vegas put the stat degradation cutoff... which was also a good idea). I'd also like to have seen them implement the time passage mechanic they added to building things at a workbench to repairs made in the inventory screen.

Maybe one day...

Oh, also... every MMO degradation/repair mechanic I've ever seen has been lazily designed shite.

One really early (and simplistic) example that I thought was done fairly well: Brandish [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandish] (reading someone's post about enchanted weapons never breaking or losing sharpness reminded me of it). So long as you could stomach the perspective. I've only met a few other people who ever played that game, and none but me who beat it. Anyone here?
 

lunavixen

New member
Jan 2, 2012
841
0
0
There are few games which have done weapon degradation well, Dark Cloud is my favourite example of it, it had weapon degradation, but you had ways to repair it in the field and it wasn't expensive to do, weapon degradation speed depended on the enemy you were fighting, your weapons endurance level and whether you had any monster killer things added (different ones for different types).

I think it's wholly dependant on the game and how they implement it in said game
 

Doom972

New member
Dec 25, 2008
2,312
0
0
It depends on the game. For example, In Morrowind and oblivion it was just annoying and immersion breaking (who would go exploring dungeons with 20 hammers?), but in Fallout 3 & NV it made sense to replace parts from other weapons (even though any real soldier would tell you that it's a bad idea) because it fits the idea of making use of what little is left in the destroyed world.
 

KoudelkaMorgan

New member
Jul 31, 2009
1,365
0
0
I hate it. Unless I'm playing a completely realistic simulation or something, where its done based upon actual physics and real weapons etc. then I don't see the point.

Its usually the most unimaginative coin sink that pretty much EVERY mmo relies upon. All it does is actively punish you for playing the game. I'd rather have some other money sink as opposed to make literally every martial interaction with any other lifeform cost you money.

In Fallout, it made a lot of sense, but it penalized you heavily if you wanted an npc to repair something for you and even then it was usually half-assed.

It pretty much meant you either gouged the hell out of repair early and often, or you suffered for it.

I'd rather have rare as hell good weapons, sometimes you find them in completely broken states, but with the right parts you can repair and improve them like the mods in NV. So basically you will be rocking a shovel until you finally get a gun, and then you might get a laser rifle if you are damn lucky, but a WORKING one would be a miracle so you gotta track down the parts. End result you get a one of a kind signature weapon that your pumped up repair/science/energy weapons skill/perks naturally keeps in perfect working order. But that means that if you forego all that in favor of rocking that shovel it must also be unbreakable which kind of stretches the plausibility.

Then you remember its supposed to be fun, and you administer your SHOVEL JUSTICE!

Hardcore mode could work the same as it does now.

In a game like Dead Island or SH:Origins were weapons break constantly, its unpardonable.

Why include an element of "realism" to games that feature the surreal or supernatural? And why implement it so poorly that your only recourse is to do the very UNREALISTIC thing of carrying a dozen axes/TVs/electric hammers on your person at all times?

It was especially abhorrent in Oblivion where at max level against the poorly scaled mobs ALL your light armor would be shattered in like 2 hits from ANYTHING. Heavy at least took a few more hits so you could stop and use your (at that point) UNBREAKABLE repair hammer to instantly repair it to full after every goblin sneeze.

Between that, and the need to stop and squat in the shadows around npcs/jump around like a fool/summon and punch out creatures/swim underwater into a wall for a few hours every so often to not get totally screwed stat-wise its a wonder that I finished that game. Thats not even mentioning the soulcrushing sameness and tedium of closing the Oblivion gates themselves if you are unfortunate enough to activate them.

So yeah...I don't see the point of repairs in a FUN game. In mmos its referred to as the "tank tax" because it unfairly targets the most needed classes in the game typically. When they try to get the group to pitch in for repairs after getting the crap beat out of them for an hour or two its pretty much "lol nope. its your fault for picking a class that takes so many hits idiot."
 

The Harkinator

Did something happen?
Jun 2, 2010
742
0
0
It worked pretty well in Fallout 3 with using same type equipment to repair gear. Worked better in Fallout NV with the Jury Rigging perk as you could now start fixing unique gear yourself.

Was an annoyance in Oblivion, especially with magic weapons. Felt like lugging around lots of repair hammers was a waste of time and thought I was being penalised for using equipment in the game.

Really didn't work in Dead Island where the weapon starts degrading quickly right away, makes getting a decent weapon something you can only enjoy for a few minutes, then you have to go and get it repaired.
 

IronMit

New member
Jul 24, 2012
533
0
0
Odbarc said:
In games like Fallout, it sort of makes sense to have your weapons break or reduce in quality. It made you have to keep your guns in good condition. The game was built around it. But I sort of hated it losing damage by shooting 2~3 times.
Fallout 3 FWE mod struck a better balance;

All Weapons degrade more slowly overall. However you can carry a lot less so it balances out.
Automatics would degrade a bit faster compared to semi-automatics.
You can still use similar weapons to repair those rare weapons
You can use abrox cleaner or make 'repair parts' from 'scrap metal' if your repair skill is high enough and repair weapons with that light weight convenient item. Remember your carry weight is less so it balances out.

It almost got too easy though because some traders have 100 repair skill and weren't tooo expensive.

Also FWE reduces the weapons damage rating being effected by your 'pistol skill' so was more dependent on the condition of the weapon.
 

TheCommanders

ohmygodimonfire
Nov 30, 2011
589
0
0
I absolutely hate it. There are a tiny number of circumstances where it feels appropriate (something with a heavy emphasis on survival, for example), but 99.99% of the time it's just stupid. Often, it makes me not want to use good weapons. I already have a problem in games where I hoard things because I might need them later, and have a really difficult game experience (but usually really easy final boss fight :p ) because of it. Knowing that the equipment might become useless shortly after use only makes this problem worse. Most of the time, weapon/armor degradation isn't even well implemented (not that it would help all that much if it was, but hey), just a sort of stupid check box you need to take care of every . And if all it's doing is being annoying, what's the point?
 

latiasracer

New member
Jul 7, 2011
480
0
0
Personally, i quite like the way Far Cry 2 did it. There was something i just liked about aiming down my sights, lining up a perfect headshot then nothing happening! I also quite liked how the textures changed as the weapon degraded, it was just cool...



The only thing i didn't like about the degradation in FC2 was that if you got the SAW machine gun, with the capacity upgrade you could actually cause the gun to break if you expended the whole mag without pausing.


Unmodded S.T.A.L.K.E.R. SoC was an example of it being poorly implemented, as you had no way to repair your weapon. Whilst this shouldn't be a problem with so many people to shoot, you had the problem of some unique guns (For example, an American battle rifle that used the same ammo as the AKS4u, which was much cheaper to buy) you would be reluctant to use it.
 

K12

New member
Dec 28, 2012
943
0
0
It seems to be generally agreed that Fallout 3 did weapon degradation well and I'm not sure if I completely agree.

Melee weapons worked fine but the degradation of guns will annoying busy work, just requiring you to combine stuff every know and to stop them being total wank to use. I think it would have worked better to simply make bullets much harder to come by.

I think Minecraft and Dead Rising 2 made weapon degradation work well because even if you lose all your stuff you can still get out of most situations with whatever you have to hand, or you can just leg it.

I think the key is to have a game which requires adaptability and intuition rather than preparation and stat building, which just feels like annoying busy work. Try surviving a Deathclaw encounter without preparation. Some of the Prince of Persia games use weapon degradation as well which had the opposite problem of being barely noticeable.

I think treating degradation as an equivalent to "ammo for melee weapons" is the simplest way of thinking about it.
 

Lovely Mixture

New member
Jul 12, 2011
1,474
0
0
I think it's a good feature for RPGs. It adds stress to combat, and is easily countered by thinking strategically.

To me, it makes the weapons and equipment feel more real. It makes me try to take care of my things like I do in the real world.

If it's such a problem for people, just add a repair item so they can fix it on the fly.
 

masticina

New member
Jan 19, 2011
763
0
0
I don't mind it in Fallout. It gives you a reason to gather guns and weapons for repair parts. In short it gives you somethings to do. And repair skill is one of the most important survival skills in Fallout 3/NV due to this.

In Oblivion it goes so slow that at the time you have to repair a weapon you already sold 5x the gold amount of armor and weapons you took from those you killed. And yes you can even repair your own weapons there is a repair skill, the levels up.. very very slowly! So you tend to end up paying anyway for your magical weapons.

I heard that in the past there we're a few games that had silly degradations. Think every 3 enemies your sword would be broken bad. Look I think Oblivions speed on degradation could be faster. I mean it is right now in oblivion nothing more that ever a few big quests you got to the stores and sell all your crap. Then take the weapons to the weaponstore and get them fixed up again. Many times it costs you less then a 300 gold to get all weapons back in perfect order. In short even though it will take a while to buy all houses and upgrade them all in the end you'll get there.

No it is those games that belief that a weapon should only work on 3 enemies.. and that never give you a fully functional sword anyway [all are rusty or almost broken] that seems to attract a dislike.
 

CannibalCorpses

New member
Aug 21, 2011
987
0
0
I consider weapon degredation as more a tool to make the games economy work, rather than a thing for adding anything to the gameplay. Creating a massive and constant drain on resources usually means a game doesn't end up allowing the player to power game from the very start and also means the piss poor games mechanics guys don't have to do their jobs right (which they generally don't anyway.

That said, i don't have any problem with weapon degredation when it's in games but would prefer it to be harsher...your weapon reaches a certain point and then it breaks and becomes unusable. You can be arsed spending 2 hours dungeon crawling to get the 'sword of make-the-game-too-fucking-easy' but can't be arsed spending 10 seconds fixing it? You deserve what you get.
 

Hambers

New member
Jan 25, 2012
26
0
0
Fox12 said:
I loved it in TLoU because it made every encounter tense, and forced mo to think of every fight as a puzzle. "Alright, I can use my machete twice to kill two clickers, but there are still eight runners, and I only have two bullets left..."
The Last of Us is one of the games where weapon degradation add something to the combat and fits with the atmosphere and themes. That said it is frustrating that the machete was only useable for three attacks. Even if it was a one hit kill weapon it was only doing what it was manufactured for, unlike the pipe and 4x2. Bill after all uses a machete to deadly effect and the enemies are pretty proficient with them. Ideally a weapon degradation system should account for the difference between improvised and professionally made weapons. Shivs, pipes and random melee objects should absolutely have a low limit to the stress they can take in combat. More sturdy weapons design for bashing, bludgeoning and bifurcating should last significantly longer.

To balance this in a game like The Last of Us have them be rarer and available only when the odds mount up. Alternatively, give the player this boon in strength when the the enemy are relatively weak and harmless and have the player gleefully slake their blood-lust so you can make them feel like a monster in retrospect.

TL;DR: I'd like to use the machete to carve digital people up then feel bad about it.