Weapon Degradation

[neoblade48]

The Witcher 2 was great without this. It would be nice if weapon degradation could be made optional... either when you start the game or in a menu. For those who have jobs that require a lot of detail... I don't feel like doing WORK in my game. I game to relax. I hated this in Oblivion and was very pleased to see it gone in Skyrim. Games most succeed when designers ask if the realism is going to be damaging to enjoyment. I would have tried Dying Light had it not been for the weapon degradation. I am really looking forward to The Witcher 3.. BUT if they do this... I will not be first in line... and I will not buy it till there is a work around... if at all. I am tired of this over used mechanic. In my opinion your average gamer is as well... and they don't come to forums. When in doubt make it optional.

 

[Xvenger]

so mix feelings and leaning towards the negative side due to past oblvion and fallout experience.

My biggest problem with wep degradation is that if swinging the sword for a few minutes immediately starts to bring down it's effectiveness, then I get annoyed. Imagine having spent quite the time and effort to get this godly kickass sword and then within a few strikes it gets from 100% to 95%. It might not seem much in the grand scale of things but the perfectionist in me will be thinking that I can't do my maximum potential in damage in a fight which dampens the value of the weapon itself.

I think that the best way to solve it is if the damage potential isn't lost until after a certain percentage threshold. Like for example, the weapon will only start to lose effectiveness after it has degraded below 70%

 

[Jamessh1]

Two comments before summed up my feelings pretty well, "meh" and it would be great if it was optional. Nothing upsetting per say but it could be an annoyance...thankful that weapons don't break fully.

 

[neoblade48]

so mix feelings and leaning towards the negative side due to past oblvion and fallout experience.

My biggest problem with wep degradation is that if swinging the sword for a few minutes immediately starts to bring down it's effectiveness, then I get annoyed. Imagine having spent quite the time and effort to get this godly kickass sword and then within a few strikes it gets from 100% to 95%. It might not seem much in the grand scale of things but the perfectionist in me will be thinking that I can't do my maximum potential in damage in a fight which dampens the value of the weapon itself.

I think that the best way to solve it is if the damage potential isn't lost until after a certain percentage threshold. Like for example, the weapon will only start to lose effectiveness after it has degraded below 70%

Oblivion and Fallout allowed repair on the fly... imagine the same game but having to go to a location to repair. Any loss of effectiveness with degradation is going to be timing consuming and demoralizing. I don't want to spend time doing repairs when I could be doing something else...

 

[Kinley]

We've known weapon degradation is in the game for like a year now, so it's not really news. As I said in the interviews thread, we don't know the details of the system, but I personally don't view it as such a big deal.

And I'm all for public polls, but it might be a bit late since the game is so close to release and is feature locked.

 

[OptoNick]

More core RPG elements = more fun
I'm always amazed about complaints on excessive amount of side quests and 'too complex and painful' gameplay elements. That's RPG, not a mindless slasher or shooter, and that's how games of this genre gains depth

 

[prince_of_nothing]

Not sure how I like this. As I've gotten older and accumulated more responsibilities (and children), I find that I don't have much time for games these days, which is why I'm very selective about the games I play as they can be enormous time sinks. And while I appreciate increased realism in games, I don't think adding mechanics such as these are the way to go. It could end up being too much of a hassle for gamers like me, that just want to play..

We'll see how it goes though. I would think that magical blades would be either highly resistant, or even immune to degradation.

 

[Zabanzo]

I find it interesting that lot of you people want to collect herbs for every potion you want to make (no refilling) but cant be bothered to pay a visit to local blacksmith from time to time.

 

[TheMorbidAtheist]

Nay. I remember Fallout 3 and Vegas all too well.

I am pretty sure it takes a long time for swords to degrade. They can get duller, sure, but I doubt they can get totally unusable .

 

[Scryar]

Also also voted for yes. My reason was that it will be a gold sink. I hate it in a rpg (or any other game) when my character has too much money and can buy everything without caring about the costs. Considering Geralt is permanently broke in the books, it would be a huge immersion breaker for me.
I want to be happy about every single crown I earn. I want to feel like a true witcher, who has to do monster hunting jobs to survive. Thats also a reason why I will play the game on the highest difficulty (without permadeath). Because I want to be forced to spent every crown I have on new armor, upgrades, new weapons, enhancements and potions.

 

[prince_of_nothing]

I find it interesting that lot of you people want to collect herbs for every potion you want to make (no refilling) but cant be bothered to pay a visit to local blacksmith from time to time.

Thats kind of a flawed comparison. Alchemy is an extremely important aspect of the Witcher Universe (much like sword fighting), and game mechanics. So implementing more realism in that respect definitely pays off in huge dividends.

But weapon degradation doesn't really do much to impact gameplay, which is probably why it was never featured in previous Witcher games. I haven't played the original game in a long time, but I don't recall it having weapon degradation.

 

[EliHarel]

Thats kind of a flawed comparison. Alchemy is an extremely important aspect of the Witcher Universe (much like sword fighting), and game mechanics. So implementing more realism in that respect definitely pays off in huge dividends.

But weapon degradation doesn't really do much to impact gameplay, which is probably why it was never featured in previous Witcher games. I haven't played the original game in a long time, but I don't recall it having weapon degradation.

Alchemy was barely a factor in the main saga, mentioned rarely here and there. CDPR gave it a consistent importance.

I also disagree that weapon degradation doesn't do much to impact gameplay. Or maybe I just didn't understand that line. I don't see how gathering herbs is a different sort of hassle at its core than repairing weapons, honestly. And saying that this is probably why it was never featured in previous games is an assertion. We have no idea why it was never featured, no more than we know why CDPR decided to do, or not do, many other things.

One place where I can see weapon degradation being affected by the player is using silver swords against armored opponents accidentally. Then again, I think the game automatically unsheathes the appropriate weapon based on who you're facing, no? In that case, letting the silver sword be harmed faster when fighting armored opponents is just a "token" feature, since it'll barely happen. Still a nice touch, I think.

 

[barzozwierz]

Weapon degradation does impact the gameplay, it makes you waste time on chores. I'd rather have more variety in oils/whatever which actually affects Geralt's combat capabilities, than run to blacksmith every once in a while because my sword needs sharpening :3

 

[prince_of_nothing]

Alchemy was barely a factor in the main saga, mentioned rarely here and there. CDPR gave it a consistent importance.

I haven't read the books, but wasn't it alchemy that made Geralt a Witcher to begin with? Trial of the grasses, mutagens and all that jazz..

I also disagree that weapon degradation doesn't do much to impact gameplay. Or maybe I just didn't understand that line. I don't see how gathering herbs is a different sort of hassle at its core than repairing weapons, honestly.

You're right, it isn't any different, at least mechanically speaking. But in terms of significance to the plot and the lore there's a huge difference. Like I said earlier, alchemy constitutes one of the main paths or branches that Geralt can focus in, so it makes sense for it to be as detailed as possible. There will be ingredients that you will only be able to get from certain locations, or from certain monsters.

So it's not only an important game mechanic, but an important plot device as well. When measured against that, repairing weapons seems trivial in comparison.

And saying that this is probably why it was never featured in previous games is an assertion. We have no idea why it was never featured, no more than we know why CDPR decided to do, or not do, many other things.

Well I never said it was a fact, just a probability. Most developers don't mess with weapon degradation period. Return on investment probably isn't high enough to justify the effort.

One place where I can see weapon degradation being affected by the player is using silver swords against armored opponents accidentally. Then again, I think the game automatically unsheathes the appropriate weapon based on who you're facing, no? In that case, letting the silver sword be harmed faster when fighting armored opponents is just a "token" feature, since it'll barely happen. Still a nice touch, I think.

I'm not 100% against weapon degradation, and perhaps CDPR can implement it well enough so that it adds interesting new gameplay and mechanics to the Witcher 3. So I am open minded about it.

I just don't like being bogged down in needless chores..

 

[Sharpy47]

I hate it... I hated such concept in every game that uses it. Completely unecessary and dumb.

 

[Juuuhan]

What I've recently mentioned

In term of weapons getting worn down. Where as this is completely useless feature in for example Skyrim It actually fits quite well in the Witcher universe. Skyrim essentially suffered from an insane loot drop and insane cash drop where you'll never really get poor and durability is just a nuisance, however in Witcher where you play as Geralt (Witcher's are not known to be rich) this mechanic work as an extra "money dump" which will make the player poorer, which both fits the world really well and also deal a bit with the problem the previous 2 games have suffered from. Because the loot isn't as insane either (better weapons are mainly from enchanting weapons by runes and oils rather than finding a sword with +2 more attack) it's also more manageable than Skyrim for example (you won't just throw away weapons willy-nilly).

On the other hand may people dislike durability because it's often been implemented poorly. Percentage based are shit, and so are a durability "meter" because they cause OCD from the player constantly repairing it for every 1%. It should instead be based like a informative de-buff when looking at the weapon (i.e you look at the sword in your inventory and it states, Worn: -1 - 2 less attack). This fixes all OCD scenario where you'll freak out because it lost 1% durability but rather see in an informative way what this effect does (and can when necessary be temporary dealt with, with oils and such if you are in a scenario where you can't repair it). Also it will still show it's base value (buffs/de-buffs will only be noticeable in the combat log) so you know straight away if your otherwise "Sharp" sword is better than the one you now found.

Really if anything the debate should be, do Witcher need a money dump or not (which is mainly yes if previous games are anything to go after) but also then what sort of money dump should they introduce to not make it tedious and/or stupid. Because Witcher's are nomads this is arguable one of the best choices since it will always play a role (early or late game) because you would always want to get the incentive to visit town/villages every now and then.

The issue at hand is, as stated, that they don't make "durability bars" because that invoke OCD where you'll always want to repair your weapon but for example (as stated) this meter is hidden and you'll have different phases (don't need that many to be honest) were your weapon get a de-buff which is shown in the item UI in the inventory.

Tl dr;
1. Weapon degredation work in Witcher 3 game because it serves as a "money dump" and previous games have struggled to stay "true" that Witchers are quite broke.
2. If done without "meters" and percentage and instead are hidden (only shows as informative de-buffs on the weapon) it will prevent OCD where people repair after every 1%.
3. Because Witcher is less of a loot game than for example Skyrim (You enchant yourself + talent points) I foresee this mechanic used rather than just people tossing a weapon whether it get worn down.

 

[randyrhoads]

Not sure. I'm currently playing Fallout 3 and its system is annoying the hell out of me

This is why I'm against it. It doesn't require careful planning but is just a chore that renders you useless if u don't repair your stuff after every fight. It depends on how its implemented ofc but my vote is still No!

 

[wichat]

I like the idea. specialy for the silver sword, the most delicate of the swords.

 

[ploughmore]

i'm fine with this aa long as its not a case of kill a dozen nekkers....swords needs repair...fast travel to the smithy....and repeat
maybe using the wrong sword in battle causes more damage to the sword...........plus if they place a smithy near a main trading place...buy/sell items...walk 20 yards...repair sword......also oils that stops deteriation for a while may be a good idea if your mid battle and the sword is starting to do less damage.

 

[Rudlee]

Depends on at which rate the weapons degrade, and if they degrade differently accordingly to the different things you hit. The most important factor for me would be the way you repair the weapons, and how tedious it would be, if it's not that annoying yay, if it would start getting on my nerves and turned into a chore, nay.