>weapon/armor degradation Am I a casual if I hate this concept

>>35894553
You are not alone.

Oregano

If done right it forces the player to use a variety of different weapons and techniques by giving numerous disposable weapons, if done badly it is an artificial means of adding challenge by forcing the player to use inferior equipment.

Guess which one is more common?

I liked it in breath of the wild because it forced me to experiment with all weapon types. if weapons didn't have durability I'd just have used a shortsword the entire game and never discovered the glory of boomerang-tier weapons

It's generally a poor feature I agree, as I feel it breaks immersion and often work unrealistically.

It works alright in Dark Souls, but unless durability is an active participant in the narrative I think it's obstructing and annoying.

>>35894979
That's an interesting perspective. A good point.

File: 1466665101582.jpg (88KB, 750x838px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 750x838px

Depends on the type of game really.

>>35894553
Yeah, it just slows down the game most of the time. The only time I can think of it being appropriate is in the case of stuff like the barrows sets in runescape. They were significantly better than regular items, it was a fair balance to make them cost money to use, and 15 hours was a long enough amount of time that you could do stuff before having to repair.