Breath of the Wild I still hate the weapons breaking mechanic

[Hylianhero91]

Saying they break right away is a ridiculous overstatement. The only weapon that does break right away is the tree branch. What you described (deciding on the best weapon for each situation and strategizing) is exactly what you're supposed to do. I know there's no one right way to play the game, and people can play this game however they like, but you're sounding like you don't fully understand how the weapon system works if you don't think it already has the element of strategy you're describing.

The average weapon is spent within a few battles. I would consider that right away seeing as how you constantly run into enemies. Most people I know who have played this game say they either avoid enemies all together or exclusively use bombs on most enemies to save their weapons. That is stupid to me and takes the fun out of the game. I do not want to avoid enemies or kill them with bombs all the time. I want to engage and kill all the enemies I see and I do not want to have my weapons breaking in the process.

I acknowledged that Nintendo was trying to add a strategy and resource conservation element with the breaking weapons. Having said that, I think they could have added those elements in a more interesting way like the ones I described in earlier posts.

Well said @Azure Sage
The issue here is not that the system is bad. The issue here is many people don't like the system and they think it must be bad because they don't like it. That's just not the case. The system is just not everyone's cup of tea. Many will like it, many will not like it. That's totallt ok as not everything exists to please everyone. People need to realise that not liking something is not the same as that thing being fundamentally broken.

In reality the weapon breaking mechanic is a minor part of the game. The weapons breaking or not breaking would not hurt the core experience. The core experience is exploring the digital world here and searching out the korok seeds and shrines. The game is an exploration and collectathon at heart.

I just hope Nintendo don't radically change things up for the bad, in the next Zelda game without thinking seriously about it. The vocal minority should not dictate game design ever. However their concerns are often valid and should be taken into consideration. Could the system be improved? Sure? Is it fundamentally flawed in it's current state? No.

What are you talking about? A big part of Zelda is combat. Combat has been a critical element in Zelda games since the beginning. To say that making all the weapons breakable doesnt impact the core experience is absurd. The series has been just fine without breakable weapons for 30 years. Why is it a good idea now? The vocal minority? H***, this game was made to please casual fans who griped that Zelda was just about a boy in green saving a princess. This game does not feel like a Zelda game to me for so many reasons. I feel like nintendo sold its soul with this game.

 

[the8thark]

Combat has been a critical element in Zelda games since the beginning.

The important word here is "has". This game is different to all of the other Zelda games.

The series has been just fine without breakable weapons for 30 years. Why is it a good idea now?

Fine does not mean great though. Skyward Sword is a good example of this. Sure Skyward Sword is a good game, but it's just a paint by numbers experience. Take the exact same core experience as Ocarina of Time, paint it slightly different colours, give the players slightly different ways to do things and all done.
"Why is it a good idea now?" That's the wrong question to be asking. The better question is "why is this still a thing 25 years later (When SS came out). Why that mechanic lasted so long is anyone's guess. Experimenting with new ideas and featires to innovate and improve an IP is a good thing. Sure it's a risk but if it pays off, it's great. Ocarina of Time was so well liked that it hamstrung Nintendo. Nintendo wanted to keep giving people the same core ecperience the players loved in Ocarina of Time, over and over again, that Nintendo as a whole stopped innovating in the series. Sure you had games like Majora's Mask but the core experience is stillt he same there, it's only expressed in a totally different way. Like Breath of the Wild or hate it, the fact that it is a shift from the same core experience as Ocarina of Time is a good thing. The IP as a whole needs this kind of change from time to time.

This game does not feel like a Zelda game to me for so many reasons.

That's the whole idea. It's meant to feel totally different. This change will not please everyone and it doesn't have to. Zelda 2:AOL is a good parallel here. That was a totally different core gameplay experience than the first Zelda game. AOL is a good game, but it's not what the players wanted. AOL existing taught Nintendo a lot and ALTTP is only what it is today because AOL existed. Just like the future Zelda games will only be as they will be because BotW existed.

Should people voice their opinion if they don't like something in BotW? I say yes they should. They should not just state this though, they should give reasons as to why. Nintendo will pick up on these and design the next game with all this in mind. People should also voice what they do like in BotW and why too. So what the customers think is good and bad with BotW is heard by Nintendo.

Nintendo did not get Ocarina of Time perfect. It has flaws which were dealt with in games made after that. The same will happen with BotW.

 

[Azure Sage]

The average weapon is spent within a few battles. I would consider that right away seeing as how you constantly run into enemies. Most people I know who have played this game say they either avoid enemies all together or exclusively use bombs on most enemies to save their weapons. That is stupid to me and takes the fun out of the game. I do not want to avoid enemies or kill them with bombs all the time. I want to engage and kill all the enemies I see and I do not want to have my weapons breaking in the process.

I acknowledged that Nintendo was trying to add a strategy and resource conservation element with the breaking weapons. Having said that, I think they could have added those elements in a more interesting way like the ones I described in earlier posts.

It comes down to a matter of preference at this point, then. If you prefer to not have to think about how you fight, you're not gonna have fun. If you don't mind strategizing and taking on enemies in ways other than flailing your sword at them every time, you will have fun. Either way, not liking it doesn't automatically make it bad. I'm not crazy about it, but I think it was handled well.

 

[TheRockinStallion]

I've learned to deal but I still think it was unnecessary. Let the player decide which weapon type they are comfortable using. Don't force them to change it up because the weapons are made of unstable material. Way to friggin' go, Nintendo!! You've jost GOT to throw in at least one mechanic to piss players off.

 

[Vanessa28]

I know a lot of people hate the weapon breaking mechanic. I don't really care at all. If you progress through the game you'll pick up better weapons and after a while you just know what enemies are easy to kill and what enemies take some time. And you try to improvise on that knowledge. I always make sure I got some guardian weapons in my inventory. I usually just bomb the crap out of some enemies. That's -at least to me- the fun part of the game. To improvise and to plan your battles ahead. You can always count on enemies crossing your path. So if you don't have that great weapons, try to avoid fighting till you got some better weapons. In general it's just what the player wants. At first I hated the system but after a while I started to like it and now I absolutely don't mind anymore.

 

[Aku]

In past Zelda games, you found fewer weapons but it was rewarding to find them and you got to keep them and use them throughout the rest of the game. In other Zelda games, you have to complete dungeons, minidungeons, or challenging side quests to get new weapons. In BOTW, there are cool weapons everywhere, but they break right away.

In past Zelda games, these weapons were mainly useful within their dungeon, with a limited use outside it. And almost each Zelda game after ALTTP had the same returning weapons over and over and over. The dungeons were largely formulaic, with the same repeating themes and names in almost each and every game. Even though they are few in number and unbreakable, they will eventually become boring as hell if just them are all that one ever sees.

What are you talking about? A big part of Zelda is combat. Combat has been a critical element in Zelda games since the beginning. To say that making all the weapons breakable doesnt impact the core experience is absurd.

Combat is a big part of this game. You can't go 20 yards without running into something that wants to kill you. Even some of the animals will try and kill you, which is a lot more then what previous Zelda games did, and just as important, the enemies start to scale up as you gain more hearts or stamina. Previous Zeldas were so easy I'd have sworn that the devs were thinking that the fanbase was nothing more then a bunch of special-needs children that needed a lot of handholding, because that's how low the combat was sinking. People hated the combat for being too easy, so the weapons breaking was one way to make things a little more difficult.

The series has been just fine without breakable weapons for 30 years. Why is it a good idea now? The vocal minority? H***, this game was made to please casual fans who griped that Zelda was just about a boy in green saving a princess. This game does not feel like a Zelda game to me for so many reasons. I feel like nintendo sold its soul with this game.

Because the series being the same for 30 years is what nearly sank it. How long do you think this series would have gone on if they kept trying to pump out more Ocarina clones, because Ocarina is what some people think Zelda is 'supposed' to be? It was not just casuals that said that this series needed to change, it was the devs saying it too, because they knew they couldn't keep banging that Ocarina nail forever.

And in BOTW, you can wear green and save the Princess. BOTW has the Green Tunic and Hat, you get the Hero of the Wild Tunic after completing all of the shrines, and then returning back to the Forgotten Temple and looking behind the Hylia statue or the Shrine. You are also still rescuing the Princess too, only it's out of Ganon's belly this time rather then out of a crystal or a deep slumber.

Nintedo didn't sell it's soul when it made this game. It went back to it's roots, and remembered what innovation looked like.

 

[the8thark]

Combat is a big part of this game. You can't go 20 yards without running into something that wants to kill you. Even some of the animals will try and kill you, which is a lot more then what previous Zelda games did, and just as important, the enemies start to scale up as you gain more hearts or stamina. Previous Zeldas were so easy I'd have sworn that the devs were thinking that the fanbase was nothing more then a bunch of special-needs children that needed a lot of handholding, because that's how low the combat was sinking. People hated the combat for being too easy, so the weapons breaking was one way to make things a little more difficult.

I agree with you that most Zelda games are not hard. This is not because they are individually easy but because the same skills are used for all Zelda games. Master one and you've mastered them all in a combat sense. Since Nintendo did not want to make Zelda, liek Dark Souls (in design terms, as well as difficulty), Nintendo had two options, make BotW a harder game or change up the game so much that the difficulty of the game does not matter. I am sure we all now kill things in BotW with ease, things that kicked our ass on day 1. But this type of Zelda game it does not matter because combat, though important, is not the core aspect of the game. The combat just makes the time between exploring things and collecting things interesting.

Because the series being the same for 30 years is what nearly sank it.

That's really it. Mixing things up from time to time is actually required or an IP gets stale and boring. Even if the new is not as good as the old, it's appreciated because it's different.

Nintedo didn't sell it's soul when it made this game. It went back to it's roots, and remembered what innovation looked like.

That's true . . . to a point. I'd say Nintendo looked at what the earlier games did well and what moderm games like Skyrim did well.

 

[Aku]

I agree with you that most Zelda games are not hard. This is not because they are individually easy but because the same skills are used for all Zelda games. Master one and you've mastered them all in a combat sense. Since Nintendo did not want to make Zelda, liek Dark Souls (in design terms, as well as difficulty), Nintendo had two options, make BotW a harder game or change up the game so much that the difficulty of the game does not matter. I am sure we all now kill things in BotW with ease, things that kicked our ass on day 1. But this type of Zelda game it does not matter because combat, though important, is not the core aspect of the game. The combat just makes the time between exploring things and collecting things interesting.

Agreed, although earlier games' difficulty and combat need not stop Nintendo from making the next game (or game after that, most likely) Dark Souls level of difficulty. Their main challenge now is to keep things interesting and keep from succumbing to the big temptation to sit back and pull another Ocarina, because that temptation will be very strong especially with a big hit on their hands. Whether or not they ever do a harder DS combat is unknown, but I can see them doing it if there is a possibility that it will change stuff up and be fun.

That's really it. Mixing things up from time to time is actually required or an IP gets stale and boring. Even if the new is not as good as the old, it's appreciated because it's different.

And you see it a lot with older IPs like Batman too, it's one good reason why they lasted so long. I think if Nintendo didn't take the risk they had of departing from the Ocarina formula, Zelda very well could have (in time) slowly become a zombie franchise, where the IP is decaying on it's feet but they keep putting out games anyway to a gradually shrinking fanbase.

That's true . . . to a point. I'd say Nintendo looked at what the earlier games did well and what moderm games like Skyrim did well.

Well what I meant is that Nintendo went back to Zelda's roots of being an open world game, where you didn't know everything and it wasn't handed to you on a platter, the adventure was the one you directed, not someone else. I think it was one of the things that originally drew people to this IP way back before Ocarina, and it seems to be something that Zelda apparently needs to keep if it hopes to survive.

 

[Spirit]

I just went through 1 royal shield, 4 royal swords and 1 royal bow taking down two Lynels.

Good thing i get free amiibo drops every day...

 

[Kylo Ken]

I just went through 1 royal shield, 4 royal swords and 1 royal bow taking down two Lynels.

Good thing i get free amiibo drops every day...

Where those weapons used prior to the lynel battles? Still, shouldn't take 4 Royal Swords unless they were in the red. Here's what I did just now, and they were all used, but not badly damaged.

2 Savage Lynels

Used:
Great Dragonbone Club
Savage Lynel Shield
Savage Lynel Bow
Forest Dwellers Sword

Aquired:
Savage Lynel Sword
Savage Lynel Bow
Savage Lynel Spear
Savage Lynel Bow

That's a pretty good trade

 

[YIGAhim]

I HATED it at first, but, as said, there comes a point where it means nothing. You've got all of dem +55 One handed weapons, and all of that, and those rarely break, and by the time it does, you've found 5 more.

At LEAST they could've made the Master Sword unbreakable...

 

[Azure Sage]

I just went through 1 royal shield, 4 royal swords and 1 royal bow taking down two Lynels.

Good thing i get free amiibo drops every day...

I fought three silver lynels yesterday and barely went through 3 weapons. Plus they got replaced after each fight. I started with a full inventory and ended with just one open slot. Starting and ending with the Master Sword helps you conserve your weapons and so does eating attack meals because it makes them die faster. If you're just fighting them head on without some kind of strategy then of course you're gonna use up more weapons in the end.

 

[the8thark]

Agreed, although earlier games' difficulty and combat need not stop Nintendo from making the next game (or game after that, most likely) Dark Souls level of difficulty. Their main challenge now is to keep things interesting and keep from succumbing to the big temptation to sit back and pull another Ocarina, because that temptation will be very strong especially with a big hit on their hands. Whether or not they ever do a harder DS combat is unknown, but I can see them doing it if there is a possibility that it will change stuff up and be fun.

What you say is true but Dark Souls is a funtamentally core experience than Zelda is. Even if Zelda was hard as, it'd still not be similar to Dark Souls, unless Zelda was changed this way, which I think would be a bad idea.

And you see it a lot with older IPs like Batman too, it's one good reason why they lasted so long. I think if Nintendo didn't take the risk they had of departing from the Ocarina formula, Zelda very well could have (in time) slowly become a zombie franchise, where the IP is decaying on it's feet but they keep putting out games anyway to a gradually shrinking fanbase.

I agree totally

Well what I meant is that Nintendo went back to Zelda's roots of being an open world game, where you didn't know everything and it wasn't handed to you on a platter, the adventure was the one you directed, not someone else. I think it was one of the things that originally drew people to this IP way back before Ocarina, and it seems to be something that Zelda apparently needs to keep if it hopes to survive.

Back in the NEs days the game as a thing was just so different to anything else out there people just gravitated to it. ALTTP fixed a lot of the issues that Zelda 1 had and that is where the series as a whole started to gain a lot of popularity.

 

[JeffJ]

I've got to say that I'm not a fan of the weapon degradation system. However, it's not really a big deal either. I have yet to run out of weapons and usually only have a couple of slots open and for a short period of time so it's no big deal. To preserve my weapons I use bombs to knock down trees and create firewood (and to get the apples on the ground). I also use bombs to mine shiny rocks. In addition to that, if I'm on a hill above an enemy I like to use bombs as a range weapon - rain fire down from above. I have found that the woodcutter's axe and the iron sledgehammer seem to last a long time. I try and keep one on hand (I currently have the sledge hammer) for weaker enemies. Why swing a 25-damage sword at a Keese when a sturdy axe will produce the same results?

 

[Wiggum]

Weapon durability in and of itself is not the issue ... it's the specifics of how the mechanic works in this game that makes it a bit screwy. Here are my basic thoughts about the weapons, durability, fighting, etc...

1. First, it's ridiculous that a bomb can blow up rocks, but only does minor damage to an enemy. I understand it has to be this way because bombs are endless, and if they did major damage to enemies, they would effectively render melee weapons useless for situations such as a skull cave/hut full of enemies where you can throw bombs in there through the eyes and blow them up for damage before confronting them with a melee weapon. That said, it's still ridiculous that the bombs do so little damage to enemies.
2. Having weapons break is not a problem. The problem is they break too easily. The shouldn't last forever, or even a ridiculous amount of time ... but let's just say that if every weapon had about 1.5x the durability it has now, that would make the weapon durability system a LOT better while still forcing you to have to drop damaged weapons at some point to pick up new ones.
3. Because weapons break at some point, it would be nice for the UI to show you how much "health" a weapon has left instead of having it show up "red" when it's at the very end of its durability. I know this game is not a real-life simulator ... but it should have been considered that if it WERE more like real life, you'd have a much better idea of how much life is left in a weapon before you're at the breaking point.

Honestly, my biggest gripe with weapon durability is not about the mechanic itself ... but it's more about the fact that I find myself gaining VERY good weapons, and then being "afraid" to use them so that I don't degrade them. I have fully maxed out all my inventory slots, and have them full of very, very powerful and durable weapons. But ... I find myself constantly using the weapons with the lowest damage ratings in order to preserve the good ones ... and then, after hours and hours and hours of play, I realize I haven't used any of the good ones, and they are doing nothing more than filling up my weapon slots.

I guess what I'm saying is, with this weapon durability mechanic, you either have to embrace the fact that nothing is permanent, use whatever weapon you want, and deal with the fact that you're going to just have whatever you have in the inventory and use it without caring about losing it .... Or, you're going to be constantly apprehensive about using any good weapon because you want to save it for when you really need it ... and perhaps end up pretty much never using the good ones because of that.

Lastly, and bringing this full-circle ... because the weapons break so easily, it does make the combat experience less fun. On silver enemies with thousands of health points to start with, you WILL break a weapon or two, or have to change weapons during the fight to keep them from breaking. To ME, you should be able to into just about ANY battle with MULTIPLE enemies using a fresh weapon, and KNOW it's not going to break during that particular fight. Afterwards, that weapon SHOULD be pretty much spent, and you should be ready to drop it for a new one ... but ONLY after having completed a fun, fully-immersive battle that didn't require you to continually change weapons due to breakage or to keep a weapon from breaking.