What do you think about weapon durability in games?

[Marc]

Do you think weapon durability should be a thing in games?

Some people get annoyed how items and weapons have a specific number of uses before they "break". In those survival games, you can normally find or craft weapons and they break after a certain amount of uses. In games like New Horizons, your tools don't last forever and you must get new ones.

What's your opinion about weapon durability and do you think developers should just stop adding it in?

 

[Gram]

It’s something I had to get used to most notably in Breath of the Wild. I was so used to just slashing away in the previous games. It makes more sense in survival games though. The concept is acceptable as long as there’s an ample supply of materials or other weapons to pick up.

The most recent example of this concept done right is Going Under, which features weapons that degrade quickly, but also includes a ton of other weapons strewn about. So you can even just throw weapons at enemies over and over as a long-range combat strategy, and yet still not worry about running out of weapons.

Degradable tools in Animal Crossing are just annoying. It takes away from the experience that game gives. It’s a survival game mechanic in a title that’s supposed to give you chill island vibes. Not the best utilization of that concept.

 

[Trazzers]

I feel like weapon durability definitely adds more depth and strategy to some games. Fire Emblem and Breath of the Wild are the ones that first come to mind. It makes you more conscientious as to how you manage your weapons'/tools' durability and makes battles feel more "authentic" since you have to prepare your weapons beforehand. As opposed to just running straight into battle and seeing if you are skilled enough or at a high enough level, weapon durability mechanics makes it so that each boss/area/dungeon feels like a new challenge you have to prepare for.

That being said, I think that it doesn't work for Animal Crossing because of the lack of a durability meter. In the games i mentioned, there are ways to know if your weapon or tool is close to breaking. So despite having breaking mechanics, it feels manageable and like you're still in control. It's annoying in Animal Crossing since you'll be in the middle of watering your flower field then randomly have your watering can break.... and even though you "prepare" and bring 2 watering cans for example, there's a chance that either a) You didn't need as many to water all your flowers, so you now have an extra watering can on hand, or b) The 2 cans weren't even enough to begin with!

 

[Deepak]

The breakable tools in animal crossing are definitely annoying. But honestly I don't mind because I can just go buy a new tool in less than 3 minutes. It tends to get annoying when it breaks while i'm in the middle of collecting materials or fishing. I feel that there should be some way to get unbreakable tools. It should be really hard to get but it would be worth it.

Smash bros is introducing steve and his tools break too. I'm interested to see how smash players manage everything from mining to crafting while keeping track of resources and keeping track of weapon durability and at the same time playing smash. I'm sure that weapon durabilty in for steve in smash is gonna be a game-changer. You could be so close to a win, but your weapon breaks, so the opponent combos you and boom. You die.

But it can also be argued that this feature was in the games already. Just not as fleshed out. For example, the axe breaks in past animal crossing games. They just introduced that feature for all tools this game. And for smash bros, some "weapons" disappear too. The best example I can think of is olimar and his pikmin. The pikmin are his main attacks but his pikmin can die, and he has to pluck out more. When you think about it. the feature is really similar to that of steve.

And this also happens in the main game "pikmin". The pikmin can die and you have to manage them carefully. No one realized that it was a weapon durability feature because it was disguised. I think that Nintendo adds this feature to make things seem realistic ? Pikmin are really small and weak creatures. It wouldnt be logical if nothing killed them. And the same thing applies to animal crossing. Weapons break all the time in real life. So this adds some realism to the game.

So in conclusion, I don't mind weapon durabilty but that doesn't mean I don't get annoyed by it at times. I have a feeling that we will be seeing it in more games in the future.

 

[Sunny_Meows]

Do you think weapon durability should be a thing in games?

Some people get annoyed how items and weapons have a specific number of uses before they "break". In those survival games, you can normally find or craft weapons and they break after a certain amount of uses. In games like New Horizons, your tools don't last forever and you must get new ones.

What's your opinion about weapon durability and do you think developers should just stop adding it in?

I think durability should be included for games primarily focused on managing your resources and things (like surviaval games), such as Minecraft and Animal Crossing, as well as in games with an abundance of weapons and strategy, like RPGs and adventure games.

I would most likely not mind durability in most (if not all) games, as it gets you thinking. I would, however, like a nice balance in how common the weapons are, and how long they last. A recent example that comes to mind is Paper Mario: The Origami KIng. I really liked how the most basic boots and hammers don't break, but all of the other weapons can break eventually. What I don't like, however, is how long they last. At the beggining, I thought that the weapons would break very quickly, so I then bought tons of boots, hammers, and fire flowers.

Eventually, I found out that the weapons in this game are so tough, and at the end of my playthrough, I still had 20 or so Fire and Ice Hammers (on a related note, I ended up buying too many Fire Flowers, that I didn't get to use them often in favor of the Shiny Fire Flower). I wished they would break faster so I don't end up with tons of unused stuff you know? Or like, make them more expensive. So for the later half of the game, I didn't really contemplate which weapons to use, as I would just pick the strongest one.

Now contrast this to a game like Minecraft, what I think to be one of the best implementations of durability ever (fite me ). It is a totally different genre than Paper Mario, so uhhhhh. Since Minecraft doesn't have a set ending, it kinda gets a free pass on almost every problem with durability. You can get as many tools as you want, and if you play long enough, they will eventually break. The harder the tools are to get, the longer they will last. If you're like me and want to use the inferior tools to the fullest, I would honestly just use them and use them until they break (or in the wooden tools case, use them as fuel). And then, you're on smooth sailing, only needing to make new tools when you think it's time for your old one, which may take some time if you're looking for strong tools like diamond and netherite.

In conclusion, I don't mind durability as long as there's a nice balance between how long they last, how common they are, and how long the game lasts.

 

[Jisenku]

Durability in games has never been my favorite aspect. FTP games definitely shouldn't have this feature, unless done in a way so that they avoid paywalls. Also, durability shouldn't be a thing for weapons that you can upgrade over and over again, if that was the case, then anything that you do to the weapon would eventually become useless. Durability is really only good in survival games, and horror games to give that extra punch to the gut when playing. As long as it's easy to find items and items cannot be upgraded (unless to a point where they aren't durable anymore/regain durability) then I think it's fine.

 

[Artisan]

The only time I came across this was LoZ: OoT 3D and that was only optional to have for the most part. If it was a puzzle to finish I understand, but attacking just means there better be a invincible weapon or else this game won't be fun. Yeah games are trying to get more complicated and have more creative ways to have fun. I think it's really a setback as to what players should be paying attention to. Health and stats yes. Weapons are a borderline.

 

[Crowing]

It depends on the accessibility of weapons. If it's a game like BotW where I can get weapons left and right from the enemies I defeat, it doesn't matter if my broadsword is almost broken when I can get a new one almost instantly. In games like Fire Emblem, however, I feel micromanagement ruins the flow of the game when you need to take a detour between chapters.

Then there are games like Disgaea which don't have durability, yet such a mechanic would barely alter the game. Weapons are highly accessible in these games. So that's exactly what determines whether or not durability works well, I think.