I'm sorry, you just seem to take everything the wrong way, misinterpret and misread everything I say, so I'm done talking to you. We're not getting anywhere- you're set in your ways, you have it in your mind that repairing your weapons is absolutely unreasonable and soul crushing, you refuse to accept that logistics can be abstracted into grander game strategy, and you're generally a surly and condescending individual.


It was never about bragging rights. I don't enjoy the logistical (happy?) management because I can brag and say "look how nice I keep my weapons", it's a personal satisfaction for me. It's not for you or anyone else. The "games should test your patience" is just a stab at the idea that games shouldn't be too easy, they shouldn't hold your hand, there should always be weights to balance, chasms to jump, dragons to slay, and yes, these are all repetitive tasks just like repairs. That's all. YMMV on how much the game should test your patience but all games are an exercise in how long they can hold your attention.

Look buddy, yes, you have a right to point out what you feel is a problem with the game, however you shouldn't insult and talk down to people who DON'T think it's a problem, because you are not superior for disliking the repair feature. No sir. And what's more, looks like that for now the repair feature is here to stay, so don't be upset when no one cares as you continue to protest that it's such a terrible design choice.

I think he's a nice guy

You don't have a dog in the fight old chap, now run along.

Time for my warm milk anyways.....

You're my new favorite person.

Well, if you'd take time and effort into explaining your thoughts and opinions then it'd be less of an issue to misinterpret. But, correct me if I'm wrong, aren't you also the same person who wants us to be forced to use the bathroom every so often in these games? I think I remember reading you finding that idea to be a good one in another thread.
Would you also find the idea that moving in combat across rubble and possibly falling down and breaking your arm to be a fun feature to implement? Or maybe slipping off a ledge and breaking your neck? What about spinal injuries and playing as a quadriplegic? If the PC doesn't have do deal with idiotic circumstances why do the guns?

Now you're equating storyline and in-game encounters to the repair system of this game? The mechanics that actually make or break a game to a bad decision in a game that can easily be overwritten? Now you're just grabbing at straws, man.
Honestly, use the console to max your repair skill and use the console repair command in a playthough. You'll find the game is a hell of a lot more fun when you're not sauaging for parts, or forced to fall back on your close-range weapons in a long distance encounter because you just haven't bothered to go back to the city for a while.
By doing so I was able to explore a hell of a lot of the world before I decided to go back to the city. I got multiple quests done, found some places to explore, and killed the things within them. I spent about a total of 8 hours not bothering with merchants because I was smart with my ammo and kept my weapons maxed.
When my friend had me playing the xbox version it felt more like a tether. "Crap! Can't find another Chinese Assault Rifle, or a combat shotgun! Gotta go to town!"

I'm glad you found a way to play the game in a way you enjoy it more. If that's your gig, then cool, bro. Maybe that's not our gig. There's been quite a procession of people opposing your view, so there must be some degree of concensus from the majority that repair is ok as it is. For them, I get it. Not you. It might help your position to recognize that fact. You don't have to agree with it, but you have to respect other people's likes and dislikes are theirs to decide. Again, I'm glad you found a workaround for you problem. Have you considered just using the geck to change the degradation rates? Or maybe you could make a mod and offer it up to those who feel like you do. Either way, NV looks like it's way too good to spoil your fun over this. I've noticed that all of your posts have been about your feelings on the repair mechanic. Is there anything you do like or arre looking forward to?

No, I was joking. This was before the "use fuchsia to denote facetiousness" policy came into effect. I think I said something to the effect of "it would be good to have you pee your pants in the middle of battle, it could even do some damage to your clothes, due to radioactive pee".

But anyway, I think what I'm seeing is a fundamental difference in how we play the game. I use what I can find. I've never been forced to go back to town because my weapons are too damaged. And falling back on my close range weapons in a long distance encounter is something desirable! Situations like that where the game forces you out of your comfort zone are why I play video games.

I'm an obsessive looter anyway, I make frequent trips to merchants anyway because I like to sell everything that isn't nailed down. Sometimes this means going back and forth between an area while I'm conquering it. Sometimes this means piling up my loot in the area after clearing it out and then coming back to grab and sell the stuff at my leisure.

I also like to decorate my houses with stuff, so I spend a lot of time in towns anyway decorating my places of residence.

What I like most about the repair list feature is that it allows me to consolidate similar loot. If I wipe out a raider camp, instead of being left with more armor and guns than I can carry, I can consolidate them all into a few more valuable pieces that I can sell. I like that.

I never felt tethered to a town. If I've been out in the wasteland so long that my weapons and armor have degraded beyond usefulness, and I've got nothing to fix them with, then in all likelihood I've picked up more weapons and armor that I can use instead of them. And I have absolutely no problem with that.
I do hope at the very leas this discussion is leading you to the conclusion that this is a matter of personal preference, not an objective issue with the game.

Mama Dolce's man. I picked up 18 CAR over there. [censored] was so cash.

Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.



Equivocation is a logical fallacy which relies on invoking multiple definitions of a single word and treating them for purpose of the fallacious argument as synonymous. Gear maintenance and self mutilation are different words. It is not possible to equivocate them and it would behoove you to know what big words mean before you attempt to use them.

It's also less impressive when you just copy mine from a few pages ago.



It's more of a healthy hate for a certain kind of fan: It just gets my blood boiling when kids on internet forums make wildly unrealistic claims about 'realism.' Likewise, people who drop condescending implications that anybody who just finds the feature unnecessary, boring, or poorly implemented cannot possibly have a valid case against it and must actually mean that the game was just too hard for them. No, you are not allowed to feel elitist about simply accomplishing something tedious. Accomplish something actually difficult and maybe we'll talk.

Seriously, though, somewhere toward the end of page 2 we briefly digressed into some halfway civil speculation about how this could have been done differently or better before your camp moved in to start shouting down anybody who questioned the status quo again, so where exactly do you get off imprinting an irrational emotional investment on me?

The "instant gratification" jab just puts a lot of words in my mouth and rings of desperation on your part. I'd rather work toward my goals by making meaningful decisions, not padding gameplay time with backtracking and maintenance.



I'd be very surprised if they did. Game design is just a topic that interests me, and so I felt inclined to express my opinion and banter ideas on how else they could have handled it. To this end I came to an internet discussion forum, which was created for such a purpose.



Calling it now, you'll be back.



I believe the point is and has always been that there should be dragons to slay. Did you, in fact, have anything to add to that? If by 'weights to balance' you are trying to make a case for physics puzzles, I will absolutely concur that they do get repetitive, which is just one of the plethora of reasons that I hold physics puzzles and all who fraternize with them as anathema.

Might I also suggest Desert Bus?

[removed - this isn't the place to talk about killing children]

Please note there is a difference between challenge and difficulty. Something can be difficult without being truly challenging, for example it might be so difficult that you have a very low (random) chance of success, in this case it's not so much a challenge as it is playing it over and over again until your probable success occurs.
Also please note that I said that alone it does not make the game difficult, merely that its inclusion adds to the challenge of resource management and planning for every trip out into the wastes.

Well excuse me, I am aware of the equivocation fallacy, but that's not really where i was going there. Forgive me, I was more criticizing a statement of equivalence, and since "equivolate" isn't really a word, "equivocate" came out. And really, you are in way painting the same black mark on gear maintenance and self-mutilation, which I suppose is a false anology, which seems to be cropping up a lot. As for "copying" I have no idea what you are talking about, and no inclination to dig through your posts to find out.



Hate is never healthy. This was never about elitism on my side. I don't feel real "accomplishment" for mastering video games of any kind- it's just a game. Unless you're winning money in a tournament it means nothing anyway. No, more I feel an "in-game" sense of pride for repairing my guns, as in "I treat you well and you keep me alive". The problem didn't start when "my side" did everything- you started with out and out hostility towards the feature and anyone who enjoys it- and that was the problem. The instant gratification jab wouldn't have been made if your argument didn't come off as "give me guns and let me kill things with them, don't make me worry about their condition because it's BORING.". Again, forgive me if I have misread you here, it's just the feel I got.





No, my point was that slaying dragons is equally repetitive as any action in a game. All actions in a game are repetitive, the trick is to mix them up so that people don't notice they're essentially doing the same thing over and over in different environments. The weights to balance was metaphorical, was more about stats, gear, faction attitudes, etc. Lastly, Physics puzzles aren't my bag, but I don't hate people who like them. To me, hating people for the type of games they enjoy is ridiculous, it's tantamount to calling minecraft players autistic and essentially boils down to "stop liking what I don't like".

Basically, the only reason I responded is because I got a huge vibe of "my way is the best way" from your posts and I wanted to inject a bit of "no, it's not your way is your way and others may disagree".

I will even go so far as to admit you have valid points about realism, but I personally find the current mechanic enjoyable, especially with the addition of repair kits.
If you wanted realism, I would say that weapons should degrade very, very slowly, and suffer extremely minute reductions in damage, so small that they couldn't even be really modeled in the game. After thousands and thousands of rounds though, the barrel should degrade, and accuracy should be reduced. You should also find that weapons that are just laying around are damaged. And you would use parts kits to repair them. Breaking down a like rifle to repair it should leave you with spare parts. Armor should degrade very fast, being ruined after a few hits. You should not be able to repair it.
So basically, realism would have you not wanting to get hit and having to buy new armor whenever you do. Also, all armor on enemies would be ruined.
So instead, we have an abstraction of realism, simulating wear and tear on gear without being overly tedious. Or at least that's the attempt. You find it to be tedious. Fine. That's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. Some people find that inventories themselves are tedious. That's fine too. All I ask is that you respect people who don't find those things tedious, that you don't claim that things must be tedious because you say so.

AGAIN, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH YOU FOR DISLIKING THE REPAIR SYSTEM, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH ME FOR LIKING IT.

I did not really mind making repairs that much once i got used to it.. Though I suppose with enough outcry maybe they could slap that bit into hardcoe as well next time around.. Though to be honest it well made repair skill a bit more useful than it was before though the trap disarming was a fair side effect........ (wonder why there were never any broken terminals you could fix for sone good old boring old prewar letters and notes) ahh well

equate (??kwe?t)

— vb
1. to make or regard as equivalent or similar, esp in order to compare or balance
2. maths to indicate the equality of; form an equation from
3. ( intr ) to be equal; correspond

[C15: from Latin aequāre to make equal ]

e'quatable

— adj

equata'bility

— n

You must have just been playing badly or not exploring and picking up enough other guns or something because I never had a problem keeping my equipment in good repair.... and once they added mothership zeta you got all those alien apoxy things which you could easily keep the most powerful weapons in perfect condition for the rest the of the game by doing mothership zeta right at the beginning of a new game.

Face it.. if you used a real gun and had to shoot 100 rounds into a creature just to kill it.. it'd degrade extremely fast.. The firing pin would break, the gun would jam.. something would just fail. In real life you only need to shoot something once or twice.. guns don't fall apart so fast in the real world because you just don't use them like that.
Fallout isn't supposed to represent the real world in anyway.. It's not like you could run around taking 100 shots from a rifle to bring you down either.. There are plenty of things to complain about if you want realism. Hell I can find plenty of things that I enjoy complaining about just because it's sometimes fun to complain.. But they don't really bother me that much and it doesn't distract me from enjoying the game. .. You can complain all you want but your only basic choices are.... your going to have to like it as it is or get it on the computer and mod it or not buy it..

In the real world, anybody even close to serious uses them like that dozens of times over on training targets. If you genuinely believe just one hundred rounds will snap a firing pin I can only surmise you are not such a person.

Guns like everything else in the world are not all guaranteed to work the same. You can break a pin by dry firing a gun just once or you maybe it'll never break.. There's no way to tell. And yes.. I do believe that if you found some old grubby gun laying around in the wasteland shooting 100 rounds of ammo through it could seriously damage an already damaged gun..

Again.. This isn't supposed to be reality.. it's like arguing that your vorpal blade of stinging and biting could stand up to 1000 orcs. If this game were set in the real world or even based off of our world then you could complain.. but it's a sci-fi fantasy roll playing game. Not real world post apocalyptic simulator.

We are back to the plasma rifle equivocation. Vorpal blades do not exist in reality but if they explain how they function within their own cosmology and behave consistently within their explanation then I can accept them slaying a thousand orcs. Insanely rapid weapon degredation directly contradicts reality by basing itself off of a realistic phenomenon which it then horribly misrepresents. They are completely different breeds of "unrealism" and the one does not justify the other.

And I like your ellipses. Did the rest of your punctuation call in sick?

Yes... this is how I write..
I don't understand your argument though.. Why does anything have to be based on anything. Because one thing functions a certain way doesn't intrinsically mean that another has to function in the same way. It's fantasy.. The game makers can make anything do anything. In a cartoon a character can pull an anvil out of thin air and then find the anvil too heavy and get crushed by it. Your arguing reality v.s. non-reality. If something works for the game and most people enjoy it then why not use it?
Everything can be nit-picked about and taken down. But that just ruins the enjoyment of the game. It's like not liking a horror movie because the bad guy keeps coming back to life.

Before I go into this, I was able to get Baersark to rescind on the puzzle plat formers, somewhat. I reminded him that Portal is an amazing game and absolutely brilliant. And I think we can all agree on that, right?

There's a http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=137402444&blogId=521347594. But hate can be healthy. (If you cannot read that, I can post it with some edits)
Also: all this "hostility" you talk about would be non-existent if you'd just agree that we're right and it is a bad design decision in the game.


Yes, but that's the repetitive stuff that makes the game FUN. That's what gives you a sense of accomplishment. You progress the storyline, find out what is going on and get to blow stuff up.


Neither of us are actually advocating realism in any sense of the word. I don't want my weapons to degrade, or my body armor to fall apart. I refuse to have to deal with mundane tasks that can be reallocated to minions (cooking food for Dogmeat, cleaning my house, washing dishes...ect). I play video games to pass time and ignore reality. If this game was SimGunsmith then sure I'd understand the weapon degrading system. But this ain't SimGunsmith.


Lemme underline just 2 points of your post that stuck out to me. Before you "got used to it" or, "resigned yourself to dealing with it" I guess, it wasn't all that enjoyable? Would you have been happy to just not deal with it at all?

We had this similar argument about the unrealistic weapon degradation system being ok because the game had plasma rifles and those are unrealistic. Your argument is much to the same effect.

What we're arguing is this: Video games are not reality. Never will be and never have been. They're taking a real life mundane logistical problem, making it unrealistically common and forcing us to deal with it over and over again for no real purpose (All thoughts as to why they added it in have been refuted). It'd literally be like if they added in terrain hazards causing you to trip or flesh eating bacteria in water slowly draining your health sometime after the incubation period. These things CAN happen much like weapon damage, IRL. And they realized those would be bad ideas, yet something that kills your gun in much of the same way isn't.

So what is your point? That it is realistic and also that nobody has ever fired a gun at a range? Or that it isn't realistic and I have no place asking it to be?

I haven't even got the energy left to dig up more Orwell. You see what you people are doing to me?

the repair system came out of 2 things. 1 they wanted something to represent guns having been left in the dust for years before picked up. 2 they needed to do it in a way any person can understand, from the gun expert to the guy whos gun knowledge comes from watching action movies and playing other FPS.

It′s the result of streamlined simplicity, you know to make the game fun yet challenging.

Can people stop giving the realism/realistic argument? Its instantly null unless we are talking about a simulator game, which we arnt.

I wouldn't object too deeply to found weapons requiring some skill to restore to working order. I wouldn't even object too much, in principle, to a weapon's quality degrading passively while out in the field to a minimum determined by the weapon's complexity and your own repair skill, and either of those would effectively represent what you're asking it to represent.

I do object to the weapon sustaining severe damage in the middle of a firefight by firing a ridiculously small number of rounds. There are far more realistic and less flat out annoying ways to go about this - and as much as we've gone back and forth about realism, it very much does effect my immersion when something is this unrealistic.