D4 Item durability

General Discussion
1

I’d love to see some sort of a system implemented in D4 regarding item durability where items would look scruffed, scratched and worn over time as the durability gets lower, with mechanical spice mixed in to make the system more meaningful than just the cosmetics of the item. I think it would really add to the immersion of the game as over time your gear would look battleworn and seasoned, showing the experience of the player character in a way as well.

However I personally think that restoring an item to it’s former, brand new glory from a completely broken state by a simple repair at a blacksmith by paying a bit of gold
would actually break the immersion a bit, but that’s just me. I’d like to see some additional system added to be able to repair an item completely, such as a required blacksmith level, item ‘blueprints’, certain amount of certain crafting materials required, etc. to be able to restore an item.

As an example just paying a blacksmith a bit of gold to repair an item alone would increase the current durability, but reduce the maximum durability ever so slightly after each repair, but to RESTORE an item’s max durability you’d require more than just gold.

It would maybe also be nice to see somewhat of an impact in the performance of an item based on the max durability, such as less armor/block chance on shields if max durability falls a certain amount, less damage on a weapon, less armor on gear etc. But obviously nothing permanent or something materials/gold couldn’t fix.

Also, if there’s to be trading in the game, this would add another layer to that as well - this item is more valuable as it’s ‘brand new’ or ‘unused’.

Thoughts?

4 Likes
2

I think this would add a level of unnecessary complexity to the situation. We don’t need that kind of detail to be honest. There are times when you can overthink something and cause it to be complex to the point where it causes more frustration and annoyance than enjoyment.

Maybe perhaps you could have it be a cosmetic thing. You can choose to have an “undamaged” look, a “slightly used” look, or have a “beat to hell” look cosmetic that can be applied to your gear rather than depend on the durability controlling it. Simplifies it, allows the system to govern the wear separately from the look and you can still have what you want for the most part.

Just a thought.

1 Like
3

Maybe have it the other way round and it doesn’t break but as you use it for a longer time and it obviously shows visually, you actually do more damage, hit faster, move quicker because you get used to your gear and learn to handle it, your armor fits better, you walk in your shoes, etc.
Experience levels for items

2 Likes
4

I agree with the notion that making an aspect of the game frustrating due to the mechanic of it, thus taking enjoyment out of it is to be avoided, however I also think that simplifying a system hurts the longevity of the game especially considering that Blizzard is probably aiming the game to be played for 10+ years.

I think there is be a way to make a durability system on items add depth and thus longevity to the game and making it more immersive, and at the same time not make it frustrating or something to constantly keep an eye on which would in turn make it more of a chore.

How about between each repair at a blacksmith, there would be a LOW chance of reducing the maximum durability of an item rather than automatically reducing it. And by low I mean LOW (like 1-2%) - this way I feel that the need to restore an item’s max durability would only occur quite rarely and not often at all, and at the same time would add depth to the game.

This kind of a system could also play around with ‘crude’, ‘low quality’, ‘damaged’ and ‘cracked’ items.

Oh, and I really like the level of durability cosmetics you suggested, like the ‘beat to hell’ look or ‘undamaged’ etc!

5

No. if an item gets less durability every time you repair it, people just wont bother playing.

6

Ok - would you be happy with the cosmetic side of it though? As the durability goes lower the items appear more worn?

7

no. its too much work for something youd have to zoom in quite far to see, and thus 90% of the people will never see it, or, it will instill the sense of needing to repair it every time it gets scratches or broken or some such. even if it has no actual gameplay effect.

8

So… you pay gold to reiterate the Warrior’s “Item Repair” skill from Diablo 1?

Pass.

I’d be OK with items getting a visual look of abuse. I’d also prefer if items found have a random quality, possibly because whatever you took it from had to be beaten down first.

9

Just confirming if I got this right, would you therefore remove durability altogether from the game? In all existing Diablo games there’s durability and it’s just something you do in between town visits anyway - unless an item is broken or near it, I don’t feel inconvenienced repairing an item.

10

i would remove durability altogether, yeah. it serves no purpose but to be a minor (a very, very, minor) gold sink. honestly, its an annoyance at this point.

2 Likes
11

I agree that durability as it is at the moment, it’s very trivial and if I had a choice between having the existing durability system without any spice added in such as item appearance based on the durability, and removing it altogether, I’d also remove it, but it would be a bit of a shame in my opinion as I believe that there’s potentially a way to improve it to make it meaningful and add depth to the game without making it inconvenient or frustrating. Hence I’d like to see the system improved rather than just removing it altogether.

12

im not sure if you can improve it in a way that isnt annoying, very inconvenient, or just plain awful.

13

I don’t think longevity is going to be a problem overall. I mean, D3 is nearly 10 years old now. D2 and D1 still have activity as well.

Something like this isn’t going to keep interest nearly so much as build variation, skill combinations and development of your character as you progress through the game.

As some others have pointed out, in many ways the whole durability thing is more of a nuisance than anything else. It does nothing to increase desire to play the game, contributes nothing but a small gold sink, and overall is a slow down during game play as you have to stop playing, go repair your gear, then resume playing.

I’m okay with having items like Ethereals (D2) that will break over time for example. As long as that time is long enough to enjoy them properly.

I mean, I don’t go into any version of Diablo and think to myself, “man, I can’t wait till my durability gets so bad I have to repair my items.”

That whole process is honestly just annoying to me. I get it. Realism creates more depth. But under it all, its still a game.

Perhaps during leveling and/or campaign stages you could have gear that needs repair. Once you do something to the gear at a higher level, it could be permanently prevented from ever losing any durability. You could still cosmetic it to look beat up though if you wanted. lol

1 Like
14

Agreed. I never really see the point of item durability whether in D2 or D3 when you can always instant repair them easily in town.

Item durability only matters if the blacksmith NPC that can repair in the game is rare, hard to access or extremely expensive, then I can see people would want to carry multiple gear and weapons to fight due to item durability, which is never an issue in Diablo 2 and Diablo 3. A single town portal solves all durability issues.

15

Honestly, I’d remove durability as well. It really adds nothing but annoyance. It serves no purpose and trying to make it even more complex will just annoy players even more. Using “immersion” as an excuse to add unnecessary and worthless layers of complexity is just bad idea. D4 is going to be an ARPG, not survival game.

16

I’m also in the camp that durability should actually be removed.

Conceptually, at its absolute barest bones, it is nothing more than a “return to town” mechanic, whether it be solely through prolonged combat or an eventual death or more. Secondary to this tends to be an associated cost, which is usually gold, and barring that time in D3 where gold drops were poorly balanced, is typically never an issue to maintain.

In terms of balance, some may view the need for repairs as an anti-zerg mechanism. Personally, if preserving the difficulty of a given encounter is a concern, it needs to be instanced. If party play is involved and revives are an option, you should instead be making the boss(es) grow stronger each time someone dies until resurrections become impossible due to an eventual wipe. At which point the difficulty resets and the encounter must be started over.

I know relative to the trade debate, some people think traded items should lose max durability to prevent a chain trades, but I personally view that as eventually destroying potentially good items and is not a good thing. The same applies to putting some small percentage on repairs doing the same. No one wants to farm an awesome set of gear knowing they actually can’t play in it because after enough time they’ll have to part with it with no guarantee a replacement would be found. “Punishment for the sake of punishment” is how I’d label it, and functionally, the process teachers nothing to the player beyond the usual “don’t die” as if that tends to be a common goal.

Aesthetically, items could have damaged or tarnished variants that could be unlocked through use and applied through whatever cosmetic system. However, you’re unlikely to see giant chunks removed or huge chips because there’s a difference between changing textures and having the polygons beneath to apply them to. Transparency only goes so far, and in some cases, may even demand the creation of additional sub-layers. Grand scheme, you’re basically demanding 2x art development on all applicable items, minimum, when many would argue that manpower could be better spent on making a wider variety of gear.

In the end, I’d personally find more immersion in the ability to completely modify and enhance items we collect along the way, and those needs requiring different things for the player to find. That way, the player can eventually get what they want even if RNG fights them tooth and nail.

17

I like this soooo much, was thinking about it already myself. :grin: Let’s delete durability, and add this.

1 Like
18

Durability is a way to limit the use of very powerful items so that, for example, you can only use X weapon Y times.

Removing this limit results in exploits in other areas.

Or, some other constraint is used instead.

19

It would, if D4 had this kind of mechanics.
As it is now, I just hope they get rid of durability.

20

Agreed. Durability rarely serves as a meaningful game mechanism. Just busywork.
Nor does it work as goldsink, since having items that work is too essential. You cant make the gold cost high enough that people might end up running around with broken gear.

Now, durability, without repair, can work great in some games. Like, I thought it worked brilliantly in Zelda: Breath of the Wild, that you had low durability unrepairable items that made you constantly replace them. But in an A-RPG that kind of gameplay would be bad.

That could be more interesting.
Although, experience for your skills would probably be better, and serve a purpose.