@SPavel lol

"This is the legendary weapon the Hero of Past used to win the war - but don't swing it more than 20 times or it'll break forever!"

@trogdor probably misquoting AvE: "You are the softest thing in the machine shop"

lol

@SPavel you can't break legendary weapon :)

if I had the chance to do it sometime, I'd love to take a longsword and split it in half tip to pommel using a garden-variety bandsaw with a good carbide or diamond blade sometime...

@RollingFeles tell that to the Mani Katti

again, the game looks fantastic on almost every other point, but I hope they learn from this that breaking weapons every 20 swings, and not at least giving an option to auto switch them, is a thing to leave out next time

@SPavel I think he means specifically the Master Sword

@Shalvenay I do love Dr. Skookum the Choocher Man

oh good, tiers.

@trogdor I would like if I could screw around with a weapon instead of having to kill the same enemy using it

But there is one tower where a pretty decent sword respawns on every visit so

@Papayaman1000 yeah, again, breaking all the weapons so quickly seems like a bad move, they should last a little longer than it looks like most of them do

@trogdor And then there are the Guardians. Awesome enemies, really, but it's just unfun getting ambushed by five laser-shooting robotic hellspawn while gliding around within ten miles of Hyrule Field.

@Papayaman1000 ...did nobody teach them this little thing called "standard intercept procedures"?!

@Papayaman1000 that does not sound too great XD

@trogdor At least the lasers are easy to dodge in full glide. But on the ground you're royally screwed if you're fighting more than one.

@SPavel I think the tier system was useful and informative back when insights like "variety of options is more predictive of success than damage/round" and "spellcasters are just really way better than non-spellcasters, like by a lot" were novel. But at this point everybody who's still playing 3.5 either already knows those things, or doesn't believe those things and wants to argue about them.

So the tier system is now rarely used for its intended purpose (balance aid for DMs and gaming groups), and almost exclusively used by people who want to get in a fight on a forum.

@Papayaman1000 yeah, I have only seen someone fight one, and it looked difficult but do-able

so five of them chasing you at once when you are just trying to travel sounds like a bad thing to just seemingly randomly happen

@A_S00 Sure, hence my response whenever it's brought up

I don't want to say bad design,.... but maybe bad design?

It always yields a ton of argument with no end in sight

@A_S00 yeah -- people don't seem to grasp that charopt or lack thereof is only a problem in so far as it impacts 1) spotlight control and 2) campaign pacing

@SPavel I endorse this message.

@trogdor Yeah, with loads of health and Stasis+. If you have the right gear then that strategy makes fighting one kind of trivial (Stasis it, then go for the legs. You is win). But it's near impossible to fight more than one, even with the Ancient Bladesaw and the stuff that protects from Guardians.

Unless you have a multi-shot bow and a bunch of rare-ish Ancient Arrows, which two-shot the things.

fighting multiples is too hard even if you have specific gear for it?

that does sound a bit like an issue

They destroy most normal (read: manageable) foes in one blow, with the tradeoff that they don't drop items.

@Shalvenay While I agree that this is a common problem, it's not the one I usually see ruining tier threads. Tier threads in my experience fail due to a combination of "weirdly angry people flipping their shit about whether Spirit Shaman is tier 1 or 3" and "people who like playing monks arguing that the tier system sucks because it told them their favorite class is bad"

@trogdor You probably could do it without too much issue if you were actually good at combat but even that one dual Dark Souls boss is easier (not counting the 30 or so massive health potions Link carries at all times).

because D&D 3.x relies on class balancing for both, which I feel is a failing of the system (and one Wizards partially introduced -- the AD&D/2e philosophy of "not all encounters are meant to be fought" helps keep class balancing separated from campaign pacing IMO)

But hey, even multiple guardians is an easier fight than one top-tier Lionel if you know what you're doing.

@A_S00 yeah -- Monk needs the ToB treatment

I saw a Lionel, they look badass, both aesthetically and in actual combat

Monk got the ToB treatment

They called it Unarmed Swordsage, it was ok

2 out of 5, did not help my Captain America build.

Personally I like the Monk alternate class feature called 'take Tashalatora and then 19 levels of Psychic Warrior"

hahaha

I can see why people would be frustrated with Monk being crappy, because it's quite a flavor-hub

(that said, it is possible for a charopt whiz to make a Monk passable)

@Shalvenay this is a ubiquitous 3.5 problem - shiny traps

Monk isn't flavourful though

It's just "hey what if we can make Asian stereotypes a class, but poorly"?

@SPavel maybe not by default, but people attach a lot of flavor to it

@trogdor Yep. You can take on one weak one without too much in the form of good gear, but the strongest ones will literally make you shatter over ten decent swords before you kill it, discounting bombs, arrows, and lightning strikes.

Nothing about it is compelling at all

I'd love to see a class based on Indian mythology

@A_S00 yeah -- it's one of the great problems of 3.x

They are by far the strongest individual world bosses

But they just free-wheeled it straight to "generic karate dude"

@SPavel This is kind of a problem with the entire D&Dlike genre.

@Papayaman1000 see, this is not cool, if you are breaking about as many or more weapons than you can even carry fighting any one thing, maybe you need to have a talk with the guy who designed em to break that fast

@SPavel I'd rather see classes that aren't nearly as hog-tied to a specific mythology (the way I see Monk is as a generic "unarmed/lightly-armed agility fighter" as that's something that makes sense cross-culturally)

I know you can upgrade inventory in that game, but the number of weapons you can carry from the start looked pitiful to me

@trogdor I guess you could use the bombs (with pathetic amount of damage) or a few Ancient Arrows, but otherwise yeah it's a journey

it seems like the bombs are not designed to be too helpful in combat

But Lionels give loot worthy of the challenge, and drop a pretty wicked weapon themselves (that also breaks in 20 hits or so).

and therefore it seems like a stretch to me to count them

@Shalvenay There's that, but I like "tons and tons of base classes"

@Papayaman1000 that bothers me right there,... XD not that that should be a surprise

@SPavel I find that it gets to the point where there's too much overlap

Because 3.5 was awesome in its disaster

Why yes, I want to do a build that takes no more than 3 levels from 9 different base classes

the more hierarchical structure 5e archetypes impose is much more helpful IMO

@trogdor Nah, they're good for taking out weak 'nuisance' enemies, but the paltry amounts of damage make them practically useless for strong enemies unless you're going straight to fight Calamity Ganon or something

"Helpful" is the opposite of what made 3.5 great

harhar

@Papayaman1000 do they hurt him a lot, or do all your weapons break on him if you go straight to him? XD

@trogdor If you're doing that you're probably using a couple sticks (which break after maybe 3 swings). So they're only helpful there because you have an infinite number (though the cooldown on the basic ones is like 30 seconds)

mk

The upgraded ones reduce that to maybe 3 seconds or so

I take it it might take a while to find the upgraded ones if you don't know where they are

You don't "find" Shiekah Slate abilities like Stasis or Bombs, rather you buy them with Ancient Cores from a little place in the east

well, the upgraded versions at least

how do you get those cores then?

also, finding that place is probably not something you automatically do quickly, I have seen maps of the game, and the zoom in after, and the world is ridiculously big

someone screwing around as much as it looks like you could,... might take a long time to find one little specific place

which is slightly sad considering it seems like at least some of the upgrades seem like things they probably should have just given to you

@trogdor You get one (or the rare larger ones) every time you complete a Shrine, so long as you loot the chest.

just an opinion though

@Papayaman1000 ah

that sounds fair enough, plenty of those Shrines around

There's also the three Dragons. Those were a fun little discovery. That's the best part, how you just find things.

@Papayaman1000 that is a good thing, yeah

just finding stuff is the best actual part of any open world game

some of them don't pull that off well enough to justify making a game in that vein

Three large dragons, flying through the sky and creating updrafts. If you fly too close, you get some elemental pain, but if you shoot them, you get a chunk of that body part. They are creations of (and correspond to) the Golden Goddesses.

@Papayaman1000 neat

And, ooh, the King of the Mountain, a magic spirit horse with better stats than any other horse that appears randomly but disappears after a certain amount of time

And this and that and another thing and

ugh

yep, sounds cool

it's just so good with so much to find

@trogdor such as (besides weapon issues)?

most notably how even the only legendary weapon I have seen breaks in like 10 minutes if you try to start using it

@Papayaman1000 the inventory seems real weak,... and when you start out you have to finish the temples there

@trogdor Well, it breaks a lot faster than that! It takes ten minutes to recharge. [lol]

if they want you to be able to go where you want, don't restrict the player from the start to do a specific thing

@trogdor Yeah, it is. Not made better by the Korok "puzzles" I mentioned earlier

@Papayaman1000 I mean the Gerudo weapon

@trogdor I don't think I've seen it

it's like, a lightning saber they give you when you help them with something

it breaks real fast

despite the fact that the people who revere it had it in their possession,...

But the Korok puzzles are so unfun. It's literally just "oh look an out of place rock" or "some glowy spot" and boom

@trogdor Oh, that. That's actually the rechargeable ability for beating the boss there.

@Papayaman1000 oh, so it can be fixed?

(still like, I saw it get used very little and then promptly conk the hell out,.... not cool in my book)

also the dang stamina

Each of them has one -- The bird makes a huge updraft three times before recharging, the elephant gives you a free fairy that revives you to full with five bonus hearts before recharging, the salamander gives you a shield that absorbs one hit from any angle for free three times before recharging, and the camel gives you that thing.

you start with very little of it, and other than mounts, you need it to move even moderately fast in this huge world map they made

@trogdor Yeah it's kind of "eh" for running, but everything else doesn't blow through it

And it recharges really fast so...

and you have to spend time climbing a whole bunch of towers to fast travel, so for the start of the game at the least, you spend what I think is way too much time just running from place to place

@Papayaman1000 it does, but like, for distance it sucks hard

and distance is what you want sometimes

@trogdor I gotta say, as much as I hate open-world, you seem to have a lot of objections to a game you haven't actually played :P

and again, this is just stuff that would annoy me

The only things you need it for are long climbs and swims (and even then the climbs are easy if you find the glitchy footholds). For distance travel you should be using the sail

@Miniman well I can just tell what would annoy me if I picked a game up myself, and besides which, like, it still looks like a good game :P

it just has issues like any other game, and frankly, I hear a lot of people singing it's praises as flawless

which annoys me XD

And any activated Shrine can also serve as a fast travel point, along with a couple unique locations

@Papayaman1000 fast travel is always good

@trogdor Yeah, that's definitely true. I haven't seen this much hype about a game since No Man's Sky.

Why everyone is showering BotW with praise is because, yeah, some bits are frustrating, but other than Korok puzzles and weapon durability, nothing will ever really grind your gears.

Of course, that was pre-release hype, not post-release.

@Miniman Don't you ever compare these two games.

@Miniman I hate hype, let the dang game speak for itself, and if you like it don't pretend that that means it actually is "perfect" just say it is good, or really good

@Papayaman1000 lol

@Miniman I get that people really like this game, not saying they can't like it

@Papayaman1000 Well, they're both open-world, they both have names longer than 2 words...

also not saying I am not allowed to harp on the flaws I see in it :P XD

@Miniman BoDR. Re-roll your character.

@Papayaman1000 Luckily I can't be killed, only absorbed.

@trogdor Absolutely. I like taking a critical look at things. I mean BotW is great but I don't want it becoming the sacred cow Ocarina is.

@Papayaman1000 sacred cows must die

@Miniman BoDR. Re-roll.

I agree with this

even for some of my favorite games, like BoF3, I can list off the things about them that literally annoy me as someone who likes the game in question

@SPavel Key word, tried. Arguably, failed.

like BoF3 has those particular puzzles that they really didn't need to include/ design in the way they did, but they did it anyway, and every time I do them they are a slog

@trogdor Yeah. I think it's best encapsulated by Egoraptor when he compared Ocarina to Link to the Past: "...What the f███ am I doing with my life? I am harshly criticizing Ocarina of Time on the Internet! I'm gonna get CRUCIFIED!"

@Adeptus Failed by design. PF's whole deal is "we're still printing content for your beloved 3,5"

@trogdor Forgive me but I don't recall what BoF is short for

@Papayaman1000 lol, actually watching his playthrough of Breath of the Wild, and he really loves it, and I can see why, but I can also see him shrugging off things like the weapons breaking when I would be losing my **********

@Papayaman1000 Breath of Fire

@trogdor Ah I thought so

and also like, easily just so easily forgiven XD

@Papayaman1000 I mean, the 2 aren't really comparable. The only similarity between 3D Zelda games and 2D Zelda games is thematic.

(Which is why I still don't think of 3D Zelda games as real Zelda games, but that's not a popular opinion.)

@Miniman about half or so of them are now, I think, even counting the handheld ones I know about

@trogdor It's because, yeah, you see it and think "that would be annoying AF" but really it never actually bothers you outside of 'aww man now I need to find another one' and just go to one of fifty million spawn points.

@SPavel Eh, it's more like "We made a bunch of changes to fix 3.5". Except the changes made things worse.

@Miniman Part of the analysis is comparing how 3D Zelda in general failed

@Papayaman1000 well, I probably wouldn't even be bothered with it if I didn't have to pause the fight and go into my inventory every time it happened, or if they didn't break so dang fast

but they do

@Adeptus "Fixing" 3.5 demands changes to its core essence, which is what 4e did

and I know me, that guy hates that *****,... stuff

@trogdor About a third, but yeah, I see your point.

PF just moved some numbers around and said "look! it's better!"

@Miniman there are a lot of 3D zeldas, is the point XD

I even liked the ones I played

never tried Skyward Sword though, and from what I have heard that is just as well

@Papayaman1000 Hmmm, I'll have to look that up. I would never say 3D Zeldas "failed" - all of the ones I've played have been great games. Just, not Zelda games XD

@trogdor There's also an easy hotswap feature, and some claims of weapon durability are exaggerated (yeah it takes several to fight off the super-ultra-mega-doomguy but a decent sword will last for a good amount of 'splorin especially since combat isn't front-and-center the biggest part), but yeah

@Miniman Aaron's main problem was how they were bad at striking the same combat-exploration balance. Personally, I think BotW was successful in exactly that.

@trogdor "Bomb bowling"

ah, I was away for an hour and chat is still about Zelda

[Aaron rages]

@RollingFeles Christ it has been that long

@trogdor about weapon breaking.

It's annoying at first.

There was some other stuff interspersed, in fairness.

Then it's not. Then annoying thing is a limited weapon stash.

Because there is a LOT of weapons. And they are different.

@RollingFeles And then we get to Korok "puzzles" and how they're so simple and poorly done that they make you rage more than any other mechanic

@SPavel 4e was less "fix" and more "brand new game reusing some of the same names". 5e is closer to a "3e fix" (and I like the look of it, though I haven't had the chance to play it yet)

5e is just 3.5 from levels 1 to 5

@Adeptus I've been getting into 5e myself, and I gotta say it's really good

It didn't fix anything, it just dialed everything down and reduced the bonus stacking that was honestly never much of a real problem to begin with

4e said "hey, let's give everyone access to a broad range of abilities that are not so strong they break the world" which is directly addressing most of 3.5's issues

@SPavel It made things less of a cluttered mess. It simplified it without completely changing it like 4e.

To which people said "ok cool but this is not D&D" and they were kind of right

3.5's problem was never that it was a cluttered mess, the problem was that "+1 to attack rolls" and "turn into literally any monster" were considered the same level of power

@SPavel Yeah, a lot of people would argue that "cluttered mess" was one of 3.5's greatest strengths.

@Papayaman1000 I wanted to try it for the game I recently started running, with a few newbies. I was planning to use the free PDFs to start with (Basic + SRD). But my wife wanted a physical book, and my daughter wanted the one system she has experience with. So I stayed with 3.5

I don't believe that 3.5 needed to be fixed, but that's because I am a terrible person that doesn't want my intimate knowledge of the system thrown to the wolves

So that's what I'm saying - it was 100% a cluttered mess, but the cluttered mess was never the problem

The cluttered mess led to character creation being its very own rewarding game

It's just that your first character creation choice was "do I make a spellcaster, or do I suck and die?"

@SPavel I think 5e is simpler to understand without sacrificing depth. And I ran 3.5e from when it came out and still do.

Once you achieve system mastery, you can optimize the cluttered mess to a desired power level, and have a decent experience. The problem was that until that point, or without a set power level, it was waaaay too easy to make terminally weak or broken characters.

@Papayaman1000 Sure, agreed. But I think it sacrificed the wrong depth.

Consider how much, for example, skills were cut down.

@SPavel Yeah I miss Feats

To the point that any DCs are basically arbitrary

Meanwhile, spells do just as much as they did in 3.5, only with smaller numbers

I do like Concentration

In 4e, there was still a vast array of optimization levels, but it wasn't that easy to make a worthless character.

That was one of the few good ideas

@RollingFeles yeah, I suspect this wouldn't make me happy either

anyway @Miniman I want to reiterate again, I don't think the game is terrible or bad or anything, but I have heard an overwhelming amount of "oh this is like, the perfect Zelda game" and like,... it may be splitting hairs, but the use of the word perfect just sets me off to need to point out exactly why that is untrue

I think BotW is best described as "Skyrim meets Just Cause meets Half Life 2 meets Zelda 1 but only the best parts from the other games and with styrofoam swords"

@trogdor Fair enough!

and I may not have played the game, but having watched a bunch of it, I can still see the flaws

I can also see all the awesome stuff, but I am a little blinded by the fans screaming how great the game is XD

@trogdor Undertale has the same issue. Great game, awful toxic hypetrain fanbase.

and even some reviewers have apparently gotten huge flak for giving the game anything other than a perfect score,.... which is downright ridiculous

@Papayaman1000 fair enough there

I have not personally encountered that, but wtv

@trogdor I am miffed about Jim Sterling getting s███ because he took it below top game ever on Metacritic

@Papayaman1000 yep, he was technically who I meant most when I said that

@Papayaman1000 Wait, what is top game ever on Metacritic?

like, jeez give the guy a break, no game is perfect, freaking relax

@trogdor Yeah...

@Miniman I don't recall

...

of course.

F███ing Ocarina.

loooool

Thanks, Ocarina

Apparently Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 was better

I mean that series was good

but just

no

Wow, there's a lot of stuff in that list that I disagree with.

Like, a lot.

@Miniman I think, honestly, that scoring games in that particular way, unilaterally delcaring certain ones the "best" is just rife with problems

(I mean, Mass Effect 2? Really? I like it a lot, and I've finished it something like 10 times, but one of the best games ever?)

not everyone, obviously, is going to agree with those choices

@Miniman Metacritic has serious issues as a system

@Miniman don't most people like 1 better anyway?

I liked 2 myself, but most people I have talked to said they liked 1 better

Averages weighted on critic popularity between people with drastically different scoring systems

I didn't even play 3, thank goodness

I'm looking at the top 100 and UFO: enemy unknown seems suspiciously absent

I probably would have been majorly disapointed

@trogdor 3 was good but the ending was AAAAAUUUUUGGGHHHHHHH

@trogdor It's really not as bad as the Internet would have you believe.

@Papayaman1000 the ending is my point

Yeah, the ending sucks, but that doesn't make it a bad game.

@Miniman it is bad though, and in the same way, it sounds like, that I was disapointed in 2 over

@trogdor Oh?

2 was good, but it had a nasty habit of trivialisng my choices in 1

which I hated

@trogdor It was bad for the ME franchise to end on that note but it's the only truly awful part

@trogdor Ah, right. Yeah, that's not gonna change.

@Miniman exactly what I thought

again, didn't actually make 2 bad, I still think I actually liked it better than 1 myself, but that part of it disappointed me

I mean, lots of games talk about making your choices matter, but I've never seen one that actually does. And I doubt I ever will, and I'm okay with that.

and 3 having the same issues and a terrible ending,... not what I want to waste my time one I think

@Miniman this is fine too, but if they promised me it, I get to be mad when they don't deliver XD

@trogdor Haha, okay.

XDXD

It's hard to make things matter when it's just a game in the end, especially when all the content is pre-programmed and can be found on youtube a week after the game launches.

anyways its way too late for me to be complaining on the internet so good night

@Erik Well, this is why we have tabletop RPGs, right?

yeah, but maybe now people should learn not to promise a sun moon and star set that others have promised before and found impossible to deliver on?

Yeah. Playing tabletop games makes it even worse because you know what "your choices matter" REALLY feels like :P

I think if you've never tasted that, you might feel that games DO deliver on "your choices matter". We might just be spoiled.

IE, maybe stop promising that all decisions matter in huge project games where it's most likely going to be impossible to deliver on the scale that people feel like you promised

@Erik nah, actually played stuff like Mass Effect before I ever got into tabletop RPGs

Hehe, ok.

I was still disapointed then

Yeah, I'm not a fan of 'diamond shaped' plots.

I was going to say "new to be hobby?" but then I looked it up and Mass Effect is like 10 years old

that being said, I can see your point

@Erik yeah XD

@CTWind Wait, what does that mean?

The plot appears to allow choice and change, but in the end it all converges back to one point, just like it started at.

so it gets wider as it goes along, then returns back to a point towards the end

@CTWind then yeah, I agree with you on that

Yeah. It's sucky, but it's cheap and given how most games run a loss anyway, most companies don't want to have multiple real endings.

It's also why "multiple endings" usually means you make a choice that matters in the last level

if you are going to have the same stuff at the end regardless, if you just don't pretend like that won't be the case,.... I will be less angry

@Erik but like, they could also just not promise it in the first place though

@trogdor Yeah, that's how I feel. I prefer linear plots where the whole thing is polished rather than a shallower set of multiple choices that come back to the same ending.

Yeah, they could do that. That's also a good way to make sure nobody plays your game :)

Completely off-topic: Has anyone here played Recoil?

@Erik well, linear plot-lined games are played though

not every game needs to promise a set of choices that effects the outcome significantly

Haha, yeah of course, but they have some other unique selling points usually.

fair enough XD

I don't think every game promises, just the ones that try to supply it and make it part of the game

@trogdor Yeah. I dare say most JRPGs aren't heavily focused on choice. Most of them are character-focused. The main character you play is who is he is, and does what he'll do.

(Exceptions apply, of course.)

@CTWind yep, good point

Hmmm. So you seem to be saying that having smaller stories along the way with their own variable endings is not good enough, as long as the end is still the same larger story (with multiple endings as well)

@Magician For me, at least, that's true. Because the smaller stories never actually feel like they have a serious impact on the world.

@CTWind ditto

was trying to find a way to say that same thing

True, they usually don't. Or they just add up to a meter of some kind that measures what type of ending you get.

@Magician yeah, it would almost seem less cheap if they stopped even using that meter at least

I dunno about that. The meter puts what you're doing in context. You do a bunch of smaller quests, and as a result life in the kingdom/star system/whatever is better and you get a better ending.

Granted, I say all this knowing how the sausage is made and freely admitting that a free-choice system that would satisfy me is likely financially impractical.

Hm. While on this topic, what do you guys think about games like Dwarf Fortress in terms of "your choice matters"? Those type of games really do give you all the freedom, and your choices really do matter.

Mostly because their entire story is generated through your own activity.

@CTWind Well, yeah. You can't just decide you want an entirely different plot in a plot-heavy game.

and not every one of those smaller stories should need to make some huge impact on the world,..... but some of them are heralded in the game as having monumental impact,..... and then just still have meant next to nothing even in the next game over

it's the disconnect between those two things that adds the extra spice to my rage

(for the record, when movies and books do this, it has a similar effect, who knew right?)

@trogdor Don't you often get essentially cosmetic changes that reflect you've done the thing? E.g. there's now a bustling village where ruins used to stand because you've fixed their problems. I haven't actually played that many CRPGs...

@CTWind my point, again, is maybe they should stop promising that thing that is practically impossible to make,.......

@Magician let me give you an example then

@Erik Those games don't work for me personally because I'm kind of bad at making/enjoying my own stories. There are tons of people who can go "Oh man, [X] happened last night, it was amazing" or follow the thread of a single character/kingdom/etc, but I need some external non-procedurally-generated plot because I'm bad at doing that kind of thing.

@Erik It's different, I think, because you essentially make up your own stories based on the stuff happening in the game. These games have potential story-bits occuring as a result of mechanics, but they're not made with storytelling in mind. Though, again, haven't played them much.

@Magician in Mass Effect 1, you can either get a certain party member killed, or save him, later in 2 you find him as the leader of his people,.... but seeing the difference between him and the other guy if you killed him instead is,...... incredibly disappointing, they don't even lead their race any differently, you basically just get an extra nod from the guy who knows you

Hm. That's really asking for the impossible (for the time being, anyway) then, you want the game to provide all the story, but still be in charge of it.

@trogdor Yeah. I guess I assume that's a person-to-person thing, though, where what little those games do to make you feel like your choices have had an impact is sufficient for some and I just have an unusually high bar; it's just one of those things where I'm not gonna easily put myself in their mindset to 'get' it.

@CTWind I just wish they were actually like,... different people

because from what I saw they essentially are not

@trogdor But... should it be so different it'd be immediately apparent from the initial engagement (even though that's all you get in the game)? Yes, it's just a nod to your previous choice, but I don't really see that as a problem.

except that one knows you personally,... and proceeds after noding to the fact to not care too much anymore

@Papayaman1000 Their purpose is not to be challenging.

@Magician that's fine, you are allowed that

But to be not-so-obvious reward for exploration.

@Erik There is work being done on procedurally-generated storytelling. But yeah, not yet implemented well enough.

I just want to point out, it certainly bothered me

Fair enough

Similar with Telltale games for me.

There are swap-out individual plot points for each of your choices in most of their games, but the ending of episode 5 is usually gonna be pretty significantly similar no matter how many choices you made differently in 1-4.

and a lot of people have mentioned that Mass Effect 3 isn't as bad as the internet says, I can believe that, but from actual details and intimations of why the internet hates it so much, it simply sounds like a waste of my time to play it, so need for me to do that right?

@trogdor "annoying" is wrong word that I used. Actually, it's just a bit of inconvience.

less money spent and less (even possibly mild) disappointment for me

counts as a win in my book

@RollingFeles fair enough

dispensable weapons add dynamics to the fight: change of weapons/styles, taking weapons from enemies mid-fight(that's very fun!)

@trogdor ME3 is great. Endings are waste of such great story. And really, I heard about bad endings befory I reached them and then I finished the game and couldn't believe it.

@RollingFeles but would you disagree that they way they implemented it could use maybe just a little polish next time they implement it? if so wtv, then I am just happy you found it fun XD if not, wtv you still had fun with it and we disagree mildly XDXD

"Guys, ending is logical and nice!" I said to my friends.

And then they revealed what the fuss was about.

But for me ME3 was a great game and my ending was perfectly in line with everything that happened.

@trogdor rough edges needs polishing. I can't see here rough edges.

@RollingFeles fair enough then

let it hereby be known we disagree on that, and that is just fine XD

and I am inclined to give you the bonus points because you played it and I did not XD

seems fair to me

This mechanic may look like annoying. It may be for a first 30-60 minutes. Then: it's a part of the game and it works perfectly well. A lot of weapons and almost all of them have value. Because they're almost never redundant.

@CTWind The changes they made in the redo are barely worth mentioning.

Even simple and less powerful weapons are useful, because you keep mighty swords and axes for a big guys and for small mob you will spend your simple spear and then grab someone's club and finish the job.

And it's fun. It's dynamic. It doesn't stand out as something bad.

I feel the prodecurally-generated story is indeed going to solve the "your choice matters" issue to a large extent

and possibly put a LOT of people out of work, but eh

@trogdor it's ok if you won't like it even after play.

Unless they have something approaching AI, they'll still need writers to put bits into the generator.

Yeah, but a lot less than before

I say that it's not a rough edge in gameplay. But I understand that someone may not like it.

@RollingFeles The criticism I've heard is it breaks up the flow of the game, as you regularly have to pause the combat to select the next weapon from the inventory. And then of course there's the hoarding issue, of never using good weapons because what if you need them for the next, tougher fight?

@RollingFeles I think that is ok too, also,...... it would be certainly too expencive for me to give it a shot till at the very least the system gets cheaper and actually has more games I would even be interested in, at the same time, I think I just get annoyed by some things more than a lot of other people would

That's what I always do with consumables, and in this game all the weapons are consumables.

@Magician I can't say about Wii U version, but for switch "breaking up the flow of the game" is not true. They have hotkey and weapon swap is convinient, fast and in-flow action.

weapon breakage doesn't annoy me by itself, but with other implementations I have seen in the game, and the way they implement weapon breakage specifically in BoTW... I do think I would possibly be more annoyed than some/most would be by that

Hoarding issue may be, but on other hand I rarely feel that loss of this good weapon is such a big deal. You have a lot of good weapons. You have a lot of ways to fight your enemies even with bad weapons. And it's fun.

I keep some weapons on reserve, but generally I use good weapons when I'm in a situation I don't know how to handle yet (outnumbered, tougher monsters) then ween down to the weaker ones once I get used to it. Plus as you advance through the game you get some weapons that refresh/are reacquirable. (Master sword, Zora spear)

@Magician Apropos of nothing, can you punch stuff in BotW?

@Magician these are things I would say I can almost certainly assume would get annoying for me

@trogdor I understand.

Mostly the system also encourages clever combat- there are often environmental hazards you can use as weapons (metal crates for your magnet abilities, opportunities for using your infinite bomb supply, explosive things to set aflame with torches)

@Miniman No idea :). But I'm givent to understand there's plenty of crappy weapons lying around. Sticks and the like.

@Magician Yeah, but, but...what if I need those sticks?

Or ambushes- attacking from stealth is virtually an instant kill, and attacking from above is big AOE damage for the cost of one attack

@Magician I think here hoarding issue is balanced with rewarding the player. Great weapons are not a trash that you find everywhere, but they are not something you will fear to lose.

@Magician yeah, and most enemies, I think, drop a weapon when killed, at least one per group if not more

so it isn't like you can't replace em

if enemies aren't aware of you you can take/destroy/use their weapons before they pick them up from their resting places sometimes, too.

but I think one thing is,... if you have all these good weapons and then kill weak-ish enemies, they replaced your good weapons with bad ones

But before you'll get used to it, yeah, you will hoard best weapons and try to use worst ones, till that mythical "moment".