• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

345

Member
Oct 30, 2017
7,377
Ya, this is the real reason the intense weapon degradation was an issue. It's not the fact that you go through weapons quickly on its own. I had no issue using "strong" weapons willy nilly, and often did. I rarely ever hoarded strong weapons and only kept the extremely unique ones as back ups.

It's the fact that by making weapons, and by extension most "loot" that you find, fleeting and ephemeral, it guts the desire for exploration. Why explore when you know 90% of the time it will be another temporary weapon that you've likely already seen before and will burn through as quickly as it took to get it. The only thing worthwhile is armor and it is *very* few and far between.

Like my primary example I go to for BotW is the big corrupted dragon on the mountain. It's a long sequence you go through and was neat at the moment but then I got to the end and just got another soul shard and a big flaming sword I've seen and had a half dozen times before. It completely took the wind and momentum out from me and I found myself incredibly jaded and disgruntled by it. What a bummer of a time that was.

this isn't a problem with weapon degradation, it's a problem with BotW not having particularly great loot or rewards. which i do agree with, but didn't really mind because everything else (weapon-degradation combat included) was compelling enough to make exploration its own reward. but that is of course subjective, and yeah it would have been nice to get better stuff from sequences like the dragons.

put it this way, i'd be overjoyed with BOTW2 if they kept degradation but found something more interesting to replace korok seeds.
 

Skulldead

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,450
I disagree with this as an absolute, even if most games with level scaling are bad about level scaling.

Metal Gear Solid 5 is an example of it actually working like it should, because you don't get any weaker/vulnerable from it. You just have to either move on to better equipment or change your strategies. You can also mitigate it by playing more strategically to limit how much the enemies scale to your tactics.

Adaptative difficulty and level scaling are not the same, one is way better then other.
 

Nairume

SaGa Sage
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,930
Adaptative difficulty and level scaling are not the same, one is way better then other.
At the end of the day, they both are functionally making enemies stronger the more the player plays the game, though, yes, they are different in how they are triggered. You could reasonably develop a form of level scaling that functions more similarly to adaptive difficulty, but it would obviously require more consideration than a lot of devs would probably care to put into things.

Even FF8, which is a good example of level scaling being done poorly, has the right *idea* with how it goes about things, but is very poorly executed due to the junctioning system being very sloppily integrated into the overall campaign.
 

TheRulingRing

Banned
Apr 6, 2018
5,713
Fortnite's building system (in BR).

Was supposed to be so you could fortify and then fight from the safety of your cover, but now it basically means camping is useless and has made Fortnite have some of the most complex mobility in any shooter.
 

Acetown

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,297
People who bring up weapon durability in Breath of the Wild are making the assumption that avoiding direct confrontation is not the intended effect.
If there's a problem it's not the durability system the way the game scales as you progress.
Combat works like a dream in the early game when inventory space is minuscule and you're offered little more than sticks and rusty swords to defend yourself. There's just no point in trying to compulsively hoard equipment at this stage, you just gotta grab whatever you can find as you jump into combat, be it a soup ladle. It gives the fights a very dynamic feel, and it works specifically because everything you pick up is so disposable.
But there is a balance that is lost as your inventory grows and the enemies turn into damage sponges. By then combat becomes more of a cost calculation, like "How many royal greatswords am I willing to spend in order to take down this one Silver Bokoblin?" And trying to tackle combat in a creative way by making use of your surroundings, which was a huge part of the early game, basically becomes useless since higher level enemies are more or less impervious to the elements. You can forget about setting them on fire or blowing them up, straight melee combat is the only way.
In a way, the real issue is too much durability, not too little.
 

zMiiChy-

Member
Dec 12, 2017
1,881
You're projecting hugely here. Don't flatter yourself and your niche opinion because there are plenty of people who knew what the mechanic was for, and appreciated what it was doing.
Humor me and tell me what dictates it as 'niche opinion" ?
It is because you said so?

Odds are neither of have quantifiable evidence to determine what the consensus is towards weapon durability in Botw, but there sure is a lot of apparent hate for it on Resetera.

Despite this, I'd say you're the one projecting if you think the view of outrageously brittle weapons not being an engaging mechanic for Botw(Or pretty much any game) is a niche outlook.
You can find complaints about the system pretty much all over the internet.
 
Oct 26, 2017
9,827
Humor me and tell me what dictates it as 'niche opinion" ?
It is because you said so?

Odds are neither of have quantifiable evidence to determine what the consensus is towards weapon durability in Botw, but there sure is a lot of apparent hate for it on Resetera.

Despite this, I'd say you're the one projecting if you think the view of outrageously brittle weapons not being an engaging mechanic for Botw(Or pretty much any game) is a niche outlook.
You can find complaints about the system pretty much all over the internet.
Something that tends to be repeated ad nauseam on Era or even other gaming forums doesn't make it a mainstream opinion, otherwise Bloodborne would be seen as the best game of all time and Fortnite and would be niche at best. Only on gaming forums have I seen anyone have even the slightest issue with it and it all comes down to a hoarding habit built up from playing other games
 

pbayne

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,365
FF8' draw and junction system is just really poorly thought out.

Also any tactics type game that levels characters up by having them perform actions. Good idea in theory but it just leads to a lot of slow play scumming were your healer is healing anyone who even got knicked.
 

Zocano

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,023
Uhh think you've got that backwards, I believe the majority of people who played Breath of the Wild would disagree here, the divine beasts were among the most common complaints from a lot of people (myself included) while the traversal and exploration of the world is amongst the most praised in any open world game. Shrines were indeed a joy, but the more scripted areas outside of shrines were completely unremarkable for a Zelda game

Nah, I said what I said. The base traversal was interesting for all of like ten hours in a gigantic 80 hour game and my only highlights in the rest of that time were the beasts and more complex shrines.
 

MoonlitBow

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,879
It was mentioned several times, but I feel like the majority of FF8's mechanics in general work the opposite of how it was intended.

- Summoning Guardian Forces is supposed to have a drawback where while summoning, they can be damaged and killed, but in practice this never actually happens and you can spam summons with no cost whatsoever. They also have AoE while regular spells do not.

- There's a compatibility mechanic where Guardian Forces are more compatible with certain characters by default and you can gain and lose compatibility depending on what Guardian Forces are equipped, which I guess was supposed to help define character strengths and weaknesses based on what Guardian Forces they were best with? But I don't think it actually had any real effect in practice and I don't think I even knew the mechanic existed until recently.

- Limit Breaks in theory are supposed to be a risk/reward mechanic where if you kept fighting at low health, it would work like Desperation Attacks from FF6, but the game checks if a character can use a limit break when the menu to select their action is brought up, and not when they actually start their turn, so you can just keep switching between characters (even if only one character is able to act) until they are allowed to use the Limit Break so you can just keep using them whenever you want. This also meant that attacking your own characters was a valid strategy.

- Junctioning was supposed to be like armor and weapons on top of the stats you get for leveling, and for the most part it does kind of work like that, but for some reason they implemented enemies leveling up as well and they got very high HP at later levels. Instead of leveling up + Junctioning feeling like a natural progression as it was probably intended to be, it ended up being more of a huge downside especially if you end up locking yourself out of the benefits of leveling with the abilities that gave you better stats on leveling as an alternative to keeping monsters at a low level while wearing "late game equipment" (AKA junctioning high tier magic).
 

VaporSnake

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,603
Nah, I said what I said. The base traversal was interesting for all of like ten hours in a gigantic 80 hour game and my only highlights in the rest of that time were the beasts and more complex shrines.
As said, you are definitely one of very few who thinks of the beasts as 'highlights' and the traversal as the least engaging part of the game despite making it sound like the other way around. Each of the beasts are completed so quickly and effortlessly that I have no idea how you can even have a fond memory of them in a 80+ hour game. Compared to your average dungeon in any other zelda game they were very disappointing, the real meat and joy of the game was the adventure that led to those places, not the destinations themselves. Put the beasts and the more complex shrines together, you get, what? 3 hours of playtime? By your own logic I'd take those 10 hours of interesting and truly unique open world traversal over 3-4 hours of below average zelda dungeons.

The traversal is half of the reason the game is such a breath of fresh air for the franchise, they finally opened it up to the point where after leaving the plateau, no two players experience would ever truly line up, this all of course comes to a halt when you get to the beasts and all the freedom and genius game design becomes pretty generic, complete with reused assets, disappointing samey bosses and brain dead simple puzzles.
 

Keldroc

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,984
User Banned (1 Day): Platform Warring and Trolling; Prior Warning for Trolling
Uhh think you've got that backwards, I believe the majority of people who played Breath of the Wild would disagree here, the divine beasts were among the most common complaints from a lot of people (myself included) while the traversal and exploration of the world is amongst the most praised in any open world game. Shrines were indeed a joy, but the more scripted areas outside of shrines were completely unremarkable for a Zelda game

Hot take: The primary reason the open world is highly praised is because a shocking number of Nintendo fans are extremely ignorant of open world game conventions of the last decade or so. Most of what is praised about BotW's open world design has been done better in other games multiple times. BotW benefits more from hardcore Nintendo fans' general lack of interest in non-Nintendo titles more than almost any other game they've ever made.
 
OP
OP
Kaguya

Kaguya

Member
Jun 19, 2018
6,408
I disagree with this as an absolute, even if most games with level scaling are bad about level scaling.

Metal Gear Solid 5 is an example of it actually working like it should, because you don't get any weaker/vulnerable from it. You just have to either move on to better equipment or change your strategies. You can also mitigate it by playing more strategically to limit how much the enemies scale to your tactics.
I believe you can also just blow their supplies shed in MGSV to revert their upgrades(upgrades are usually better weapons and armors).
 

Toxi

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
17,547
any sort of damage boosting

like the burn damage animation in Mario 64 that allows you to get higher than you should be able to
Super Metroid is a particularly great example because you're literally using the damage boosting to do the opposite of what the damage boost is supposed to do. It knocks you a huge amount backwards (based on your sprite direction), which is supposed to prevent you from just pushing forward using invincibility frames in rooms full of obstacles. So what do players do? Just turn Samus around and hit obstacles with your back so backwards is forwards!
 

Trisc

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,488
In Warframe, Nova has an ability that dramatically slows down the speed of enemies caught in its effective radius, and makes them explode when killed (which often cascades, creating a wave of instant death). By modding Nova for power strength, the slow effect becomes more intense, dramatically slowing down all nearby combatants.

However, if you use mods with negative effects, such as a power strength reduction, enemies suddenly become insanely fast, while still remaining quite explode-y (though less so). This naturally introduced a popular tactic for Defense missions where you'd clear waves simply by having Nova use this ability to bring every enemy to you at once. Because this was so effective, the ability was nerfed to have a slowly increasing radius that gradually procced the speed change on enemies, rather than instantly applying it to all nearby foes.
 

jem

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,757
So it doesnt have anything to do with scale until it does? Okay. And yes, they would perceive that if the speed vs. scale was relative to each other, and theyre not. That's the whole point, you have to be moving faster to cover the same amount of effective distance.



I worded that incorrectly using 'size' instead of 'speed' specifically (even though size does absolutely pertain to perceived speed in relative terms), but my point was moving in relativity demonstrates how perceived speed doesnt change in constants. The whole point of sprinting is to make the game feel quicker but if the map is adjusted to accomodate for it then your speed feels the same in relation to the scale. So the fact that you HAVE to sprint to move as far as you were before literally defeats the whole purpose if you were once moving at just base speed. The maps are literally bigger and your options become limited so the game feels bulkier and more awkward, far from faster.

It doesnt get simpler than that.

Holy shit.


Right, this is my last post on this topic because the lack of reading comprehension here is ridiculous.

I don't disagree with you re: effective speed. I have never disagreed with that point. You cover the same effective distance when sprinting in H5 as you do when running in H3 (at least if you assume Truth and Heretic are the same map).

The point you are completely missing (or intentionally choosing to ignore? I don't know...) Is that effective distance doesn't determine the player's sense of speed.

When sprinting in Halo 5 it takes the same amount of time to cross a larger map (when compared to Halo 3).

Therefore, the player perceives to have travelled across a larger absolute distance (not effective distance) in the same amount of time.

Therefore the player perceives to have travelled at a faster speed.


Effectively that might be the same speed in terms of what fraction of the map you cross - but that's fucking irrelevant to the sense of speed.
 

Wamb0wneD

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
18,735
Not a video game, but an old Magic: The Gathering set had dredge, which was "you can put more cards from the top of the libary to the graveyard to bring a card back", the idea being that you sacrifice cards on the top to get a single card back (which on paper sounds like bad card advantage), but decks were quickly made with things that enjoyed the graveyard, and it turns out that the more cards you needed to put into the graveyard to get a card back was actually better instead of worse.
Life from the Loam is so goood.
Also now that you said its old, I feel old as well. :/
 

VaporSnake

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,603
Hot take: The primary reason the open world is highly praised is because a shocking number of Nintendo fans are extremely ignorant of open world game conventions of the last decade or so. Most of what is praised about BotW's open world design has been done better in other games multiple times. BotW benefits more from hardcore Nintendo fans' general lack of interest in non-Nintendo titles more than almost any other game they've ever made.
Well at least you know it's a preposterous hot take, Breath of the Wild is one of my favorite games of the last decade and I'm no where close to what you would call a nintendo fan, the switch is my first nintendo console since the gamecube. I've also played pretty much every notable open world game released in the last ten years and no, most of what is praised about botw's open world design has not been done better other games. Name one open world game that truly lets you march to the final boss within the opening hour if you really wanted to, additionally being able to do anything and go anywhere in any order that you want without restriction?

Breath of the Wild was praised because it had an approach to open world game design that no one had previously attempted, it's not really up for debate, nothing else gives you the keys to the kingdom in the first hour and pushes you out the front door to carve your own path, the majority of open world games treat you like an overly protective parent would, sheltering you from actual choice and deviation from the curated path they've carefully designed for you, you must do x mission to progress to the next story beat, you must do y to unlock the next area, you need z upgrade to get past this obstacle, etc. Botw trusted the player to do whatever they wanted to do, whenever they wanted to and the only limitation really was your creativity.

I'd also love to hear of another open world game with as many environmental systemic mechanics interacting with one another, another game where fires propagate and spread, effecting both the environment and the enemies within it, even cooking the food that might be in the area. A game where weather itself can be both a nuisance and a weapon, as lightning strikes themselves can be weaponized and used against enemies. Like I understand that breath of the wild isn't for everyone, but to not be cognizant of all the things it's doing that are unique and special is just willfully being ignorant, there's a lot going on under the hood that hasn't really been attempted.
 
Last edited:

Efejota

Member
Mar 13, 2018
3,750
The first thing that comes to mind is the moon ball from gold/silver.
moon-ball.jpg
kurt.png

"This is a situationally useful ball...or it would have been, if another glitch hadn't interfered with its modifiers as well. The Moon Ball is carved from Yellow Apricorns and is intended to make it easier to catch Pokémon who will evolve/have evolved using a Moon Stone, like Clefairy, Clefable, and the Nidoran lines.
It works as intended in the Gen IV remakes, giving trainers a 4x bonus to the catch rate. However, in the original Gen II games, it confers no such benefit. According to the code, it instead gives a 4x bonus to catch Pokémon that evolve using a Burn Heal, none of which currently exist."
 

jem

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,757
Well at least you know it's a preposterous hot take, Breath of the Wild is one of my favorite games of the last decade and I'm no where close to what you would call a nintendo fan, the switch is my first nintendo console since the gamecube. I've also played pretty much every notable open world game released in the last ten years and no, most of what is praised about botw's open world design has not been done better other games. Name one open world game that truly lets you march to the final boss within the opening hour if you really wanted to, additionally being able to do anything and go anywhere in any order that you want without restriction?

Breath of the Wild was praised because it had an approach to open world game design that no one had previously attempted, it's not really up for debate, nothing else gives you the keys to the kingdom in the first hour and pushes you out the front door to carve your own path, the majority of open world games treat you like an overly protective parent would, sheltering you from actual choice and deviation from the curated path they've carefully designed for you, you must do x mission to progress to the next story beat, you must do y to unlock the next area, you need z upgrade to get past this obstacle, etc.

Crackdown 1 in 2007.


Same with Crackdown 3 actually - super underrated game.
 

Glio

Member
Oct 27, 2017
24,516
Spain
Hot take: The primary reason the open world is highly praised is because a shocking number of Nintendo fans are extremely ignorant of open world game conventions of the last decade or so. Most of what is praised about BotW's open world design has been done better in other games multiple times. BotW benefits more from hardcore Nintendo fans' general lack of interest in non-Nintendo titles more than almost any other game they've ever made.
Ah, the Belda argument.
 

bushmonkey

Member
Oct 29, 2017
5,603
Weapon degradation in Breath of the Wild. Encourage me to use more weapons? Nope! I've got an inventory full of good stuff and will run from every mob until I encounter something "worthy" of using these great weapons on.
This is true of most games with limited ammo for the good guns and limited supplies of strong potions in RPGs: you end up never using them, "saving them" for stronger opponents but in the end never making use of them at all.
 
Mar 29, 2018
7,078
From what I remember (it's been a while), you pick a bunch of key action skills (stuff like Two-Handed Weapons, Heavy Armor, Alchemy, Restoration Magic, etc.) and when you level them up enough, you get to properly level up your character. When you level up your character, you get to pick bonus points for your core skills (stuff like Stength, Intelligence, Luck, etc.)

The amount of points you can give your core skills on each level up is proportional to how many levels of associated actions skills you got before the level up. So, if you got a bunch of levels in Swords and Heavy Armor, you could get +5 to Strength instead of +1 or +2. Because of this, the optimal way to play the game is to level up as little as possible and to control when you level up to always get the biggest bonuses that you could. That's why all of your key action skills would be stuff that you could 100% control when you got points in them (like most non-combat magics, speechcraft, enchanting, etc.) and not stuff that you could accidentally level up by just playing the game normally (like skills tied to weapons and armor).

Also, the enemy scaling was ludicrously aggressive and directly tied to your character level, not any other stats. So if you didn't understand the system and leveled up too quickly, not only would you not get many bonus points for your core skills, all of the enemies would rocket up in power and make all the fights incredibly tough.
Hah, I get it. So level up only skills, and loads of them, and never level up your attributes/character, because that makes the game harder and gives you fewer bonuses.

Note I don't like any BSG games really, and it's partly due to this kind of silliness
 

VaporSnake

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,603
Crackdown 1 in 2007.


Same with Crackdown 3 actually - super underrated game.
Played crackdown 1 back in the day but I don't remember being able to just go fight a final boss on the map? You still had to do a few gang boss assassinations beforehand to unlock it didn't you? I don't even remember there being a final big boss actually, I thought it just kinda ended abruptly when you finished the last gang off.

Looking it up, it looks like Crackdown 3's implementation of it was directly inspired by botw according to devs, they even compare the building the boss is located in to Hyrule Castle.
 

KillstealWolf

One Winged Slayer
Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
16,089
This Threads Intended Design: A Place to discuss about mechanics that had the exact opposite results of their intended design.

Actual happenings in the thread: Yet another discussion thread for the vastly overrated Breath of the Wild, of course.

---

Here's an example from hearthstone, The Hunter's Hero Power (Deal 2 damage to the enemy Hero) was designed to make Hunter a control like class that uses their beasts to control the board whilst gradually applying pressure with the hero power to eliminate the opponents remaining health. In reality, it turned Hunter into the Aggro class of choice into the game playing cheap aggressive minions designed to end the game as fast a possible.
 

jem

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,757
Played crackdown 1 back in the day but I don't remember being able to just go fight a final boss on the map? You still had to do a few gang boss assassinations beforehand to unlock it didn't you? I don't even remember there being a final big boss actually, I thought it just kinda ended abruptly when you finished the last gang off.

Looking it up, it looks like Crackdown 3's implementation of it was directly inspired by botw according to devs, they even compare the building the boss is located in to Hyrule Castle.
Pretty sure the game ends when you've killed the 3 main bosses, one for each of the gangs. You can go straight to each one from the start though.
 

ned_ballad

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
48,233
Rochester, New York
The first thing that comes to mind is the moon ball from gold/silver.
moon-ball.jpg
kurt.png

"This is a situationally useful ball...or it would have been, if another glitch hadn't interfered with its modifiers as well. The Moon Ball is carved from Yellow Apricorns and is intended to make it easier to catch Pokémon who will evolve/have evolved using a Moon Stone, like Clefairy, Clefable, and the Nidoran lines.
It works as intended in the Gen IV remakes, giving trainers a 4x bonus to the catch rate. However, in the original Gen II games, it confers no such benefit. According to the code, it instead gives a 4x bonus to catch Pokémon that evolve using a Burn Heal, none of which currently exist."
iirc the love ball also only worked on same gender Pokémon, not opposite as was intended
 

BigHatPaul

Member
May 28, 2019
1,670
Rain had a similar effect.

It was supposed to make me consider alternatives to just climbing up something, but because it wasn't permanent outside of a few set areas, I usally just found myself waiting it out.
Okay, but how about when you had to light up all the lanterns and carry that flame at the beginning of the game and it starts raining. Dude... It happened to me THREE TIMES. That was beyond frustrating. Nothing you can do but wait it out.
 

Prolepro

Ghostwire: BooShock
Banned
Nov 6, 2017
7,310
Holy shit.

Right, this is my last post on this topic because the lack of reading comprehension here is ridiculous.

No shit, Jesus Christ.

I don't disagree with you re: effective speed. I have never disagreed with that point. You cover the same effective distance when sprinting in H5 as you do when running in H3 (at least if you assume Truth and Heretic are the same map).

The point you are completely missing (or intentionally choosing to ignore? I don't know...) Is that effective distance doesn't determine the player's sense of speed.

ONLY IN YOUR LIMITED TERMS OF "MICRO" GAMEPLAY (and even then, again, no) or whatever weird boundaries you defined in the first place when you replied to that original post.

The problem with your argument is that you've limited your definition of gameplay to the macro scale, i.e: the pace of the match, whether or not a player dies in a given encounter etc.
Youre married to the idea of sprint making the game feel faster for the player because your character is literally just sprinting to go max speed. It doesnt. Your sense of the speed in the moment of sprinting doesnt make the game feel faster. Idk how this is some incomprehensible concept for you.

When sprinting in Halo 5 it takes the same amount of time to cross a larger map (when compared to Halo 3).

Therefore, the player perceives to have travelled across a larger absolute distance (not effective distance) in the same amount of time.

Therefore the player perceives to have travelled at a faster speed.

Effectively that might be the same speed in terms of what fraction of the map you cross - but that's fucking irrelevant to the sense of speed.

It's not. It's really not. Unless you have a purposefully limited view.
 
Nov 1, 2017
3,068
Holy shit.


Right, this is my last post on this topic because the lack of reading comprehension here is ridiculous.

I don't disagree with you re: effective speed. I have never disagreed with that point. You cover the same effective distance when sprinting in H5 as you do when running in H3 (at least if you assume Truth and Heretic are the same map).

The point you are completely missing (or intentionally choosing to ignore? I don't know...) Is that effective distance doesn't determine the player's sense of speed.

When sprinting in Halo 5 it takes the same amount of time to cross a larger map (when compared to Halo 3).

Therefore, the player perceives to have travelled across a larger absolute distance (not effective distance) in the same amount of time.

Therefore the player perceives to have travelled at a faster speed.


Effectively that might be the same speed in terms of what fraction of the map you cross - but that's fucking irrelevant to the sense of speed.
No shit, Jesus Christ.



ONLY IN YOUR LIMITED TERMS OF "MICRO" GAMEPLAY (and even then, again, no) or whatever weird boundaries you defined in the first place when you replied to that original post.


Youre married to the idea of sprint making the game feel faster for the player because your character is literally just sprinting to go max speed. It doesnt. Your sense of the speed in the moment of sprinting doesnt make the game feel faster. Idk how this is some incomprehensible concept for you.



It's not. It's really not. Unless you have a purposefully limited view.
Not to add oil to this lovely fire, but there are other issues with the Sprint mechanic neither of you are covering (depending on which Halo we're talking about).

Being unable to fire your gun (+aim-down-sights depending on the game) while sprinting can draw out the individual firefights themselves, as a player can "run away" from a fight. The opposing player then either has to confirm the kill before they escape, chase the player via sprinting (assuming they have the ability, depending on which entry we're talking about), or simply give up and effectively making it a "draw". This in turn drags the match on and slows down the overall pace of the game. Halo's time-to-kill is pretty slow too, not helping the matter.

This isn't exactly the best comparison (as it's a single player game), but it's why the new Doom feels so fast. There's no sprinting, Doomguy is just able to run very fast.

I don't feel like I've made the best arguments here, my mate who's obsessed with Halo series would be able to explain it better. If I recall correctly, he made an incredibly compelling argument and believes the Sprint mechanic (+abilities) almost single-handedly killed the "feel" of Halo.

I'd ask for his input, but alas I have to leave for work. So er, have fun discussing the matter. ^^;

Edit: Wow is this a hotly discussed topic on YouTube. Maybe I shouldn't have said anything...
 

Principate

Member
Oct 31, 2017
11,186
This isn't really a problem and the game can easily be balanced around it. This is how things works in some Souls and a lot other games, if anything, these type of stuff encourage repeated play throughs and make them more fun.
No it's not you have to upgrade weapons in souls games and most of the "absurdly" powerful weapons are gated near the end. The drake sword is simply strong early on but it's not absurdly strong and never breaks any encounter.
 

BigDes

Knows Too Much
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,795
Hah, I get it. So level up only skills, and loads of them, and never level up your attributes/character, because that makes the game harder and gives you fewer bonuses.

Note I don't like any BSG games really, and it's partly due to this kind of silliness
Yes, although really it doesn't matter too much as the buffs you can create through enchanting and alchemy can be so overpowered that it doesnt matter if you level or not.

So yeah the game scales but that 800hp daedra that spawned instead of the 12hp rat still can't hurt you because you have created a fortify armor by 1200000% potion and goes down in one hit because you created a weapon with a 6000% damage multiplier. Also it can't see you because you're permanently invisible thanks to an enchanted ring and if it could it would be your friend because you used a potion that makes everyone like you anyway.

In fact arguably if you go this route it is better to level up as the higher tier enemies drop better mats for alchemy and enchanting.
 
OP
OP
Kaguya

Kaguya

Member
Jun 19, 2018
6,408
No it's not you have to upgrade weapons in souls games and most of the "absurdly" powerful weapons are gated near the end. The drake sword is simply strong early on but it's not absurdly strong and never breaks any encounter.
No a lot of the best weapons are available within the first 20 to 30 minutes in these game, there are even tons of runs revolving around fastest way to getting end game weapon x for those games. Yes, being tied to an upgrade system help with those weapons not completely breaking the game, but it's not like weapons upgrades is foreign concept to Zelda games too.

There are also a lot of other ways to prevent strong weapons obtainable early on from completely breaking the game.
 

Principate

Member
Oct 31, 2017
11,186
No a lot of the best weapons are available within the first 20 to 30 minutes in these game, there are even tons of runs revolving around fastest way to getting end game weapon x for those games. Yes, being tied to an upgrade system help with those weapons not completely breaking the game, but it's not like weapons upgrades is foreign concept to Zelda games too.

There are also a lot of other ways to prevent strong weapons obtainable early on from completely breaking the game.
No they're not unless your talking a speed the vast majority of players don't move at. Tell me exactly what weapons your talking about because with the first 20 minutes the vast majority of players are around undead burg in DS1. Similarly don't remember any such weapons that early on in Dark Souls 2 but best is much more subjective in that game.

It's impossible to get the best weapons in Dark souls games that fast because those weapons at their best are locked behind grinding. Not that you ever need them.
 
Jan 10, 2018
6,927
The Ninja class in the MMO FFXI was supposed to be a damage dealer that tried to avoid the enemies attention but it ended up being a tank class instead due to powerful evasion abilities.
 

Prolepro

Ghostwire: BooShock
Banned
Nov 6, 2017
7,310
Being unable to fire your gun (+aim-down-sights depending on the game) while sprinting can draw out the individual firefights themselves, as a player can "run away" from a fight. The opposing player then either has to confirm the kill before they escape, chase the player via sprinting (assuming they have the ability, depending on which entry we're talking about), or simply give up and effectively making it a "draw". This in turn drags the match on and slows down the overall pace of the game. Halo's time-to-kill is pretty slow too, not helping the matter.
This is what I meant by "limiting your options" by dedicating max mobility to being locked to sprint animation (which was also summarized in the video I initially posted) but yes, youre totally right.
 

jem

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,757
ONLY IN YOUR LIMITED TERMS OF "MICRO" GAMEPLAY
Oh wow. You do understand.


That's the fucking point! That's what I've been saying this entire time. Something you have somehow completely failed to comprehend. Why do you think I brought up the concepts of micro and macro gameplay in the first place?!


The intention of sprint is to make the player feel like they're moving faster. That's the point I've been making this entire time.
 
Oct 26, 2017
9,827
Okay, but how about when you had to light up all the lanterns and carry that flame at the beginning of the game and it starts raining. Dude... It happened to me THREE TIMES. That was beyond frustrating. Nothing you can do but wait it out.
At that point, you're supposed to find shade and make a fire to pass the time if it's really an issue. Folk not knowing that and literally waiting it out is mind boggling to me

This Threads Intended Design: A Place to discuss about mechanics that had the exact opposite results of their intended design.

Actual happenings in the thread: Yet another discussion thread for the vastly overrated Breath of the Wild, of course.
The grudge you folk hold against the game is truly impressive. Never seen it before, honestly
 

s0laster

Banned
Jan 27, 2020
35
The more stuff you buy in dead cells, the more random your run are and therefor the harder your run. So people use custom games with very few stuff unlocked to avoid stupid RNG.

So a mechanic designed to increase diversity of play had the exact opposite effect.
 

crimzonflame

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,754
Warcraft 3 towers. They were intended to be used to defend yourself but instead were used to wall-in your enemy - accidentally creating the Tower Defense genre.

Bonus points for the combo system in Street Fighter and GTA in general. Both were created because the prototypes had bugs.
I was playing tower defense custom games in Brood Wars 2 years before WC3 was released.
 

King Kingo

Banned
Dec 3, 2019
7,656
Attraction Flow in Kingdom Hearts III was activated so often that the appeal of using Disneyland rides as weapons wore off real quick.
 
OP
OP
Kaguya

Kaguya

Member
Jun 19, 2018
6,408
No they're not unless your talking a speed the vast majority of players don't move at. Tell me exactly what weapons your talking about because with the first 20 minutes the vast majority of players are around undead burg in DS1. Similarly don't remember any such weapons that early on in Dark Souls 2 but best is much more subjective in that game.

It's impossible to get the best weapons in Dark souls games that fast because those weapons at their best are locked behind grinding. Not that you ever need them.
Best means best in their class of weapons, so even at end game, it's your best choice if you're playing that weapon class, that or weapons that are stats wise comparable to what you get at end game. We're also talking early in the game on repeated playthroughs, when you already know where they are, "majority of players are around undead burg in DS1" doesn't apply here, you're intentionally going after those weapons and even though they're available to you it doesn't break the game. Just off the top of my head from the ones I remember doing, and I haven't played a DS game since, I think, DS3 launch month:
- Uchigatana in Demon Souls is available right after the first real boss
- Great Scythe in DS1 from fire link shrine, it's one boss away(one of the easiest in the game), this is one of the harder ones mind you since it require a lot of running around while under leveled
- Ricard's Reaper in DS2 available right after one boss, like Uchigatana, no challenges, you can just go and grab it
There also the weapons you get from killing NPCs, while usually not the best in their class, a lot of them are very powerful for early game and available within first encounters. I rarely do this, so about the only one I can remember is Idol's Chime in DS2 from a lady that spawn after killing the first boss.

And them requiring upgrades so they're not game breaking is exactly my argument as to why you can allow players to get end game weapons early on in an open game and still not break the game.
 

Principate

Member
Oct 31, 2017
11,186
Best means best in their class of weapons, so even at end game, it's your best choice if you're playing that weapon class, that or weapons that are stats wise comparable to what you get at end game. We're also talking early in the game on repeated playthroughs, when you already know where they are, "majority of players are around undead burg in DS1" doesn't apply here, you're intentionally going after those weapons and even though they're available to you it doesn't break the game. Just off the top of my head from the ones I remember doing, and I haven't played a DS game since, I think, DS3 launch month:
- Uchigatana in Demon Souls is available right after the first real boss
- Great Scythe in DS1 from fire link shrine, it's one boss away(one of the easiest in the game), this is one of the harder ones mind you since it require a lot of running around while under leveled
- Ricard's Reaper in DS2 available right after one boss, like Uchigatana, no challenges, you can just go and grab it
There also the weapons you get from killing NPCs, while usually not the best in their class, a lot of them are very powerful for early game and available within first encounters. I rarely do this, so about the only one I can remember is Idol's Chime in DS2 from a lady that spawn after killing the first boss.

And them requiring upgrades so they're not game breaking is exactly my argument as to why you can allow players to get end game weapons early on in an open game and still not break the game.
That's a fair run down so I'll agree with that. I wouldn't use the say DS games obtuse grinding as a plus to well anything though. I've never seen someone look at a game and say yes please I want more grinding.
 

Kasey

Member
Nov 1, 2017
10,822
Boise
Played crackdown 1 back in the day but I don't remember being able to just go fight a final boss on the map? You still had to do a few gang boss assassinations beforehand to unlock it didn't you? I don't even remember there being a final big boss actually, I thought it just kinda ended abruptly when you finished the last gang off.

Looking it up, it looks like Crackdown 3's implementation of it was directly inspired by botw according to devs, they even compare the building the boss is located in to Hyrule Castle.
The final boss can be challenged from the start, he's just incredibly hard to reach without upgraded agility and with one bar of shields. And no doubt there was probably some BOTW inspiration in 3, the concept of the final boss waiting for you on top of the city's tallest building is taken directly from CD1.
 

lt519

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,064
The AHs did all those things just fine. The problem was that it did #1 too well, and they didn't properly anticipate how much the game would be affected by such trivially easy trading. It ended up generally being much easier to buy all your gear than to find it (afforded by selling all the gear you find for other classes or that don't fit your build), and playing merchant on the AH was more profitable than actually playing the game. This affected both AHs, not only the real-money one that always catches the blame.

I'm not gonna lie I absolutely loved getting an awesome drop, auctioning it off, and then buying things of my choice for the build I wanted. Diablo 3 is way better right now than it ever was, but trolling the AH for good deals and making gold off of it scratched that weird Drug Wars kinda itch.

It also made our group salty with each other because we weren't sharing non-main gear that dropped so we could sell it haha.

The fact that people made bots that bought/sold gems that people listed under market value, etc on the AH, instead of bots to play the game was kind of funny.

The whole thing was kind of a mess but I secretly loved it.
 
Mar 29, 2018
7,078
Yes, although really it doesn't matter too much as the buffs you can create through enchanting and alchemy can be so overpowered that it doesnt matter if you level or not.

So yeah the game scales but that 800hp daedra that spawned instead of the 12hp rat still can't hurt you because you have created a fortify armor by 1200000% potion and goes down in one hit because you created a weapon with a 6000% damage multiplier. Also it can't see you because you're permanently invisible thanks to an enchanted ring and if it could it would be your friend because you used a potion that makes everyone like you anyway.

In fact arguably if you go this route it is better to level up as the higher tier enemies drop better mats for alchemy and enchanting.
Sounds kinda like Morrowind, but at least Morrowind hid all of that behind actual alchemy and not just needing to game the level scaling system
 

MoonlitBow

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,879
No they're not unless your talking a speed the vast majority of players don't move at. Tell me exactly what weapons your talking about because with the first 20 minutes the vast majority of players are around undead burg in DS1.
Zweihander is the obvious one. It's also possible to get the Gravelord Sword before doing anything else once you leave the Undead Asylum. The Black Knight Halberd is a one time only chance to drop but it is so early in the game that it's possible to farm for it by starting new files.
 

Thorn

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
24,446
Original Idea: Breed pokemon to get baby pokemon like Pichu!

Reality: Dittos become breeding factories where 99% of the offspring are murdered at birth for having "bad" genes.
 

Nauren

Member
Oct 30, 2017
847
Ninja job class being added to FFXI was supposed to be a damage dealer but ended up being a tank job class with shadow clones.