79 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Why would you choose anything over Starfang?

That's my favorite example of a bad DLC weapon. I don't mind stuff like this in an item pack, though, where I can just not buy the pack or deauthorize it if it came free.

[KaiserShep]

There are insanely few items like this in most games unless you get into the stupid crafting/enchanting tricks of Skyrim.

Nothing about this removes choice, I used a lot of sub-optimal weapons in ME3 because I preferred the feel of the weapons over their "better" cousins. The problem in DA* is that none of the weapons really really "feel" different - now DA2 had weapons so ugly I could not use them. Why would you choose anything over Starfang? In ME3 I used a Locust over the Hurricane because I wanted accuracy over hitting power. I might pick the M11 despite a crummy ammo capacity because if I get that close to anything it needs to die in one shot. That sort of trade off doesn't exist in DA in any sense that matters and that is why you can get "preferred" weapons. I think there was a hammer vs sword difference but as a player it didn't feel like it mattered. At the end of DAO I can likely tell you the weapons and armor that your party were wearing albeit not the right wearers and users.

 

Guns kind of benefit from being able to have wildly different designs, shooting effects and sounds, so there's a lot more to provide a different feel. It doesn't matter what gun has better stats than the Cerberus Harrier or the Mattock, because they way they look, and "feel" during combat is favorable to me. With swords, daggers and crossbows/arrows, it's all pretty much the same. The only truly different weapon in DA in terms of its feel was Bianca.

 

Personally, I think Asturian's Might is a much better looking sword than Starfang. I usually get it at a higher level so I just sacrifice Starfang's superiority for sake of its looks.

[Gamemako]

1) There are insanely few items like this in most games unless you get into the stupid crafting/enchanting tricks of Skyrim.

2) Nothing about this removes choice

 

3) I used a lot of sub-optimal weapons in ME3 because I preferred the feel of the weapons over their "better" cousins. The problem in DA* is that none of the weapons really really "feel" different - now DA2 had weapons so ugly I could not use them. Why would you choose anything over Starfang?

 

4) In ME3 I used a Locust over the Hurricane because I wanted accuracy over hitting power. I might pick the M11 despite a crummy ammo capacity because if I get that close to anything it needs to die in one shot.

 

5) That sort of trade off doesn't exist in DA in any sense that matters and that is why you can get "preferred" weapons. I think there was a hammer vs sword difference but as a player it didn't feel like it mattered. At the end of DAO I can likely tell you the weapons and armor that your party were wearing albeit not the right wearers and users.

 

1) There are tons of overpowered items and game balance issues in general. Most game designers don't intuitively get everything right the first time. DA:O had Arcane Warrior, which broke the game unless you deliberately used it contrary to what the description suggests. ME3 SP originally struggled with heavy pistols being the end-all-be-all aside from a few overpowered DLC guns.

 

2) First, you say "Well, if it's overpowered, don't use it" and then you say "overpowered items don't remove choice". Which is it?

 

3) Ideally, you should have the option to use whatever type of item suits you. This isn't always totally feasible, but let me give you an example of where a game tries very hard to meet that ideal.The equipment balance in Dark Souls is far from perfect, but I can wear this set, a mix of one mid-game drop and 3 pieces from different classes' starter sets, and still not be totally crippled. Yeah, I could straight up do better than this set, but it's a lot better than most games do. Dark Souls can design around this as a single-player experience based largely on upgrading. You can't really do that without a robust upgrading system, and you often don't really want to as armors are as much a sign of progression as they are a functional or aesthetic piece. In DA, most unique/named items are generally high-tier or top-tier already. This is an attempt to allow players to keep using the cool stuff they find and not be slammed into the steel bookcase of generic heavy armor (something the poorly-conceived scaling of DA2 did to players). This is a tough thing to manage, especially if your opponents scale independent of the equipment you find. DA2 DLC attempts the alternate method of scaling equipment with the player due to how poorly static armor setup turned out.

 

4) ME3 ended up doing that pretty poorly in general. The Hurricane had to miss 4 times more often than the Locust to be worthwhile, and at any range where that could be the case, you should have been using a heavy pistol. Actually, you should have been using a heavy pistol in general due to their obscene combination of low weight, high accuracy, high per-shot damage (relevant to armor), and fire rate (DPS). ME3MP now is vastly better than vanilla ME3 SP was, and it's still not great.

 

5) That's also due in part to DA:O's gear progression. Medium armor was a red-headed stepchild and there were only a few good pieces of light or heavy armors. Kinda beside the point, though.

[HunterX6]

I dont understand how some people love the dark souls games, I decided to play them and beat them and to be honest I wasn't satisfied with it. It felt like a dragon dogma game (which I love) but harder,darker,less beautiful with a less interesting story. It wasnt as good as some people say, also I dont like the combat. I prefer games like the elder scrolls games, fables games and dragon age games (DA on easy) I dont understand whats so good about being hardcore? does it get you in the.. mood? does it feel like some kind of accomplishment? Is it to brag somehow? I say keep powerful weapons in the game but hard to obtain such as in secret quests or hard to find locations,etc.(just like it kind of has been) The hardcore gamers can just play it and beat it in the most difficulty with no weapons (barehands) with no armor or clothing. Then again they might not, not so harcore after all.

[Gamemako]

I dont understand how some people love the dark souls games, I decided to play them and beat them and to be honest I wasn't satisfied with it. It felt like a dragon dogma game (which I love) but harder,darker,less beautiful with a less interesting story. It wasnt as good as some people say, also I dont like the combat. I prefer games like the elder scrolls games, fables games and dragon age games (DA on easy) I dont understand whats so good about being hardcore? does it get you in the.. mood? does it feel like some kind of accomplishment? Is it to brag somehow? I say keep powerful weapons in the game but hard to obtain such as in secret quests or hard to find locations,etc.(just like it kind of has been) The hardcore gamers can just play it and beat it in the most difficulty with no weapons (barehands) with no armor or clothing. Then again they might not, not so harcore after all.

 

Actually, I don't much like Dark Souls combat either, but I rather like Dark Souls as an experience. I guess that game really relies on the attention to detail, and if you're not into that as a gamer, you're just going to completely miss what is great about it. If you just plow through the game, all the story you'll see is "Hi Chosen Undead, go to Lordran! Hi Chosen Undead, go ring two bells! Hi Chosen Undead, go get this random item! Hi Chosen Undead, go collect these 3 items from random inexplicable bosses!"

 

But that's not really the story. You aren't read the story through dialogue; the story is in every object, every opponent design, every item description. You could completely miss the story of Sif, reducing the loyal companion to some random monster wolf. If you aren't looking, you'll never know about the illusion of Gwynevere, or the irony of Solaire's quest. Everywhere you go in the game, you can look over and see where you were. You can stand on top of Sen's Fortress and look back at the Undead Church or up at the walls of Anor Londo. It's a wondrously-realized setting, revealed not through dialogue but through the game world itself. The difficulty in Dark Souls serves a purpose. You are not an invincible hero. You are a doomed player in a doomed world. You're an actor in the play, being pushed to interact with forces for greater than yourself. It's a very different philosophy to the standard power fantasy, I suppose.

[In Exile]

 

But that's not really the story. You aren't read the story through dialogue; the story is in every object, every opponent design, every item description. You could completely miss the story of Sif, reducing the loyal companion to some random monster wolf. If you aren't looking, you'll never know about the illusion of Gwynevere, or the irony of Solaire's quest. Everywhere you go in the game, you can look over and see where you were. You can stand on top of Sen's Fortress and look back at the Undead Church or up at the walls of Anor Londo. It's a wondrously-realized setting, revealed not through dialogue but through the game world itself. The difficulty in Dark Souls serves a purpose. You are not an invincible hero. You are a doomed player in a doomed world. You're an actor in the play, being pushed to interact with forces for greater than yourself. It's a very different philosophy to the standard power fantasy, I suppose.

 

I'd argue that this is more akin to archaeology or lore, and does not amount to an actual story in-game. Otherwise, we'd start to include things like the first blight as part of DA:O's story, because of item descriptions and codex entries. 

 

I do agree that DS is an unbelievably realized world, and that every detail and every aspect of the world is interwoven to create a rich and incredible experience, but that's lore/setting, not story. 

[Omikuji]

I dont understand how some people love the dark souls games, I decided to play them and beat them and to be honest I wasn't satisfied with it. It felt like a dragon dogma game (which I love) but harder,darker,less beautiful with a less interesting story. It wasnt as good as some people say, also I dont like the combat. I prefer games like the elder scrolls games, fables games and dragon age games (DA on easy) I dont understand whats so good about being hardcore? does it get you in the.. mood? does it feel like some kind of accomplishment? Is it to brag somehow? I say keep powerful weapons in the game but hard to obtain such as in secret quests or hard to find locations,etc.(just like it kind of has been) The hardcore gamers can just play it and beat it in the most difficulty with no weapons (barehands) with no armor or clothing. Then again they might not, not so harcore after all.

 

The thing with a Dark Souls game, it's actually not that hard if you play the game smart. The entire game is designed around finding ways around bosses and learning about the monsters to get past them in a number of different ways. It doesn't treat you like a moron. It lets you think, challenges you to figure out different tactics and approaches to the game. The games you point at ones you like are the generally easier RPGs that tell you what's going on and what's in front of you. Dark Souls and Demon Souls are all about finding the story and thinking about it as it's not handed to you outright. Each monster has a story, a past, all tied together in the world they have full of tragic events and they sure as heck aren't going to exposition it at you, not when hints are laced throughout the items and landscapes.

 

It's not about being hardcore, it's about learning. The 'prepare to die' tagline they have is all about learning from your deaths. The fandom tends to be total jerk faces about it though, because really it's not that hardcore of a game. It just has a very steep learning curve that you yourself and the others around you learn and help out each other. It's a surprisingly social game for a single player experience . You just have to be patient and learn, it's a game that anyone who has that can learn to be masters at the game. 

 

It's a different take on the RPG, all based around learning with trial and error. At one point you can indeed know the game so well, you can play it level 1 and with a single weapon, that shows that the game is designed with the idea of letting the player learn and adapt with only their own wit and skill. 

 

Er, right, DA OP weapons. I already said before that OP weapons are a design choice of a game with a level up system and is just the natural progression of that style of game. Nothing wrong with them in my book.

[Sidney]

1) There are tons of overpowered items and game balance issues in general. Most game designers don't intuitively get everything right the first time. DA:O had Arcane Warrior, which broke the game unless you deliberately used it contrary to what the description suggests. ME3 SP originally struggled with heavy pistols being the end-all-be-all aside from a few overpowered DLC guns.
 
2) First, you say "Well, if it's overpowered, don't use it" and then you say "overpowered items don't remove choice". Which is it?
 
3) Ideally, you should have the option to use whatever type of item suits you. This isn't always totally feasible, but let me give you an example of where a game tries very hard to meet that ideal.The equipment balance in Dark Souls is far from perfect, but I can wear this set, a mix of one mid-game drop and 3 pieces from different classes' starter sets, and still not be totally crippled. Yeah, I could straight up do better than this set, but it's a lot better than most games do. Dark Souls can design around this as a single-player experience based largely on upgrading. You can't really do that without a robust upgrading system, and you often don't really want to as armors are as much a sign of progression as they are a functional or aesthetic piece. In DA, most unique/named items are generally high-tier or top-tier already. This is an attempt to allow players to keep using the cool stuff they find and not be slammed into the steel bookcase of generic heavy armor (something the poorly-conceived scaling of DA2 did to players). This is a tough thing to manage, especially if your opponents scale independent of the equipment you find. DA2 DLC attempts the alternate method of scaling equipment with the player due to how poorly static armor setup turned out.
 
4) ME3 ended up doing that pretty poorly in general. The Hurricane had to miss 4 times more often than the Locust to be worthwhile, and at any range where that could be the case, you should have been using a heavy pistol. Actually, you should have been using a heavy pistol in general due to their obscene combination of low weight, high accuracy, high per-shot damage (relevant to armor), and fire rate (DPS). ME3MP now is vastly better than vanilla ME3 SP was, and it's still not great.
 
5) That's also due in part to DA:O's gear progression. Medium armor was a red-headed stepchild and there were only a few good pieces of light or heavy armors. Kinda beside the point, though.

See a lot of this is discussion is the problem. You are a horrible min-maxer. I have really little idea of stats is that x should miss 4 times more than Y to be useful for example.

1. DAO was a joke almost the whole way through - you could auto attack to dea everything but a few bosses. I hated arcane warrior not because it was easy but to me it sucked as a class. Guess I missed the super killer game breakiness of it in the fact that I did like the way it played.

2. Choice is to not use the super powered item. See, there is always a choice. The fact that you don't see a choice says more about you than anyone else. That said, in both DAO and ME3 for example while there might be better equipment I don't think any of that stuff breaks the game or is so outside the realm of reason that it takes away. Usually that sort of stupid requires something like Skyrim where you can drink a potion to improve your black smithing and then cast a spell to enhance your enchanting and then start looping around to craft the Glass Sword of Gamebreaking.

3. You say you want to use what suits you but then go on long rants about things are sub optimal - you don't want to be totally crippled. There is nothing crippling about any weapons or armor set. I finished DAO with terrible low tier weapons and armor on people because I forgot to piddle about with changing out armor several times. It doesn't matter, the minute improvements in each set of armor don't change much of anything.

4. Again we see the problem is that you are actively looking to abuse/maximize game mechanics. Look and read slowly out loud what you write. Seriously miss 4 times at ranges it matters use a heavy pistol...TF? You don't want to "use what suits you" which is functionally what I do because I don't know or care if heavy pistols are "better" in terms of DPS or whatever other goofy measure is used. It is like the folks in Borderlands who gripe about being able to kill a raid boss by hiding under the map. Seriously,you have to grenade jump,follow a specific path and so on to do that. Just...don't....do...it.

This isn't to say be oblivious to the game engine and mechanics. I'm not. I know that I choose the Carnifex over the Paldin because it has more shots and hits for not much less damage. I also like it because it sounds better than any other pistol. The problem is, as you say no game is perfect and if you are trying to exploit the game then you will find ways to exploit it. There hasn't been an RPG I've seen where the forums aren't loaded with people explaining how to do overpowered ridiculous crap I'd never even thought of. Relax, have some fun and stop looking at games like they are an excel spreadsheet and just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to do it.

[HunterX6]

Actually, I don't much like Dark Souls combat either, but I rather like Dark Souls as an experience. I guess that game really relies on the attention to detail, and if you're not into that as a gamer, you're just going to completely miss what is great about it. If you just plow through the game, all the story you'll see is "Hi Chosen Undead, go to Lordran! Hi Chosen Undead, go ring two bells! Hi Chosen Undead, go get this random item! Hi Chosen Undead, go collect these 3 items from random inexplicable bosses!"

 

But that's not really the story. You aren't read the story through dialogue; the story is in every object, every opponent design, every item description. You could completely miss the story of Sif, reducing the loyal companion to some random monster wolf. If you aren't looking, you'll never know about the illusion of Gwynevere, or the irony of Solaire's quest. Everywhere you go in the game, you can look over and see where you were. You can stand on top of Sen's Fortress and look back at the Undead Church or up at the walls of Anor Londo. It's a wondrously-realized setting, revealed not through dialogue but through the game world itself. The difficulty in Dark Souls serves a purpose. You are not an invincible hero. You are a doomed player in a doomed world. You're an actor in the play, being pushed to interact with forces for greater than yourself. It's a very different philosophy to the standard power fantasy, I suppose.

 

 

The thing with a Dark Souls game, it's actually not that hard if you play the game smart. The entire game is designed around finding ways around bosses and learning about the monsters to get past them in a number of different ways. It doesn't treat you like a moron. It lets you think, challenges you to figure out different tactics and approaches to the game. The games you point at ones you like are the generally easier RPGs that tell you what's going on and what's in front of you. Dark Souls and Demon Souls are all about finding the story and thinking about it as it's not handed to you outright. Each monster has a story, a past, all tied together in the world they have full of tragic events and they sure as heck aren't going to exposition it at you, not when hints are laced throughout the items and landscapes.

 

It's not about being hardcore, it's about learning. The 'prepare to die' tagline they have is all about learning from your deaths. The fandom tends to be total jerk faces about it though, because really it's not that hardcore of a game. It just has a very steep learning curve that you yourself and the others around you learn and help out each other. It's a surprisingly social game for a single player experience . You just have to be patient and learn, it's a game that anyone who has that can learn to be masters at the game. 

 

It's a different take on the RPG, all based around learning with trial and error. At one point you can indeed know the game so well, you can play it level 1 and with a single weapon, that shows that the game is designed with the idea of letting the player learn and adapt with only their own wit and skill. 

 

Er, right, DA OP weapons. I already said before that OP weapons are a design choice of a game with a level up system and is just the natural progression of that style of game. Nothing wrong with them in my book.

 

Well that made me understand more about what some people like alot about the dark souls game, so thanks to both of you. I might replay it, maybe I might change my mind about it but I guess I was just expecting different, in my opinion its a good game though just not as good as some people were making it seems.

[Adaar the Unbound]

In DA:I, cant you upgrade your weapons to make them stronger? or if there was a weapon that was stronger than the rest, cant you change the way it looks to fit your satisfaction? I feel like i've heard those things. & if those things (or one of those things) are true, than does it matter anymore?

[AlanC9]

It's not about being hardcore, it's about learning. The 'prepare to die' tagline they have is all about learning from your deaths. The fandom tends to be total jerk faces about it though, because really it's not that hardcore of a game. It just has a very steep learning curve that you yourself and the others around you learn and help out each other. It's a surprisingly social game for a single player experience .
 

Ick. If I wanted a social game, why would I be playing SP?

[Gamemako]

See a lot of this is discussion is the problem. You are a horrible min-maxer.

 

Why, thank you! That was totally a valid argument.

 

1. It's overpowered whether you use it or not. It doesn't go away when you stop looking.

 

2. You just contradicted the premise. If overpowered, then not use. Not a choice, by definition. The entire response is nonsense.

 

3. Giving an opponent a handicap is not the same thing as forfeiting. Trying to complete DA:O on Nightmare (PC) with no armor is crippling, even if it's not impossible.

 

4. Again we see you relying on attacking the person, then setting up another straw man. Neither my play habits nor game exploits are at issue here. The issue is game balance. Pulling the ignorance card does not make it go away. Enough with the ridiculous obfuscation.

 

a. Balanced does not mean the same. Choosing a Harrier over a Locust is not an exploit. The whole "nothing's perfect = has exploits" is a non sequitur.

[Mistress9Nine]

I don't care about the balance aspect of this, as much as the variety aspect. I want to have equally powerful weapons in the same category and not just "THE WEAPON" which everyone will be using by the end of the game. I want to be able to play dressup, or be able to wield an ice axe or lightning hammer on par with the best flaming sword, depending on what would be best suited to my Inquisitor. I want multiple playthroughs with a lot of variety.

 

Shale is a good (if somewhat flawed) example of this. I could make him a nature/fire/ice/lightning/magic golem depending on my mood, with all of the parts available on equal tiers. I call this a flawed example, because of course, some types of damage were prefereable to others because of resistances, but still, I was OK with that.

[Omikuji]

Ick. If I wanted a social game, why would I be playing SP?

It's not the same type of social game you're thinking of I bet. You never have to speak to anyone, you can get people to help you and those who are out to get you. It makes the game organic and have a feeling that has not been given from any other game before. The community can come together and teach each other new things, but it's entirely optional.

 

There are marks on the ground others leave to give hints or attempt to trick you, summoning a player on a hard boss can help lower the stress of some areas that you have issues with, and they will often help with teaching you things you never found before. You can play the game without ever turning on multiplayer, and just run with the ghost npcs in the game. It is not the same as other multiplayers, it's built into the lore and the design of the game and yet you never have to take part.

 

DA Topic erm-

Since I heard the loot drops are going to be RNG, I kinda see the OP weapons being extreamly rare and probably going to have more middle of the road items depending on the RNG. They did announce something like that right? Some new tool in game that names the weapons and has a more variety for the naming of the random items and all the stats?

 

It was in a video, I don't remember if I was just thinking that was the case for the items or not...

[Altima Darkspells]

Why do people complain about overpowered/strong weapons?

Because the games are already incredibly easy.

Games are 'hard' to balance. RPGs even more so, because there's quite a few variables (and heaven forbid players who don't know how to play the game can't get past a certain point by randomly hitting buttons).

So most games rely on scaling difficulty as a crutch, then exacerbate the problem by including super OP weapons. Increases in difficulty usually only make the mobs/critters into damage sponges while doubling damage or some nonsense.

So yeah, lazy difficulty design coupled with crutch weapons and lack of balance.

Personally, I like 'powerful' weapons and armor, as something to work towards, by completing a long, multi-act quest, going out of my way to complete dungeons, etc. I especially like it if those weapons and armor are meant to be used on a bonus dungeon, like Watcher's Keep or on a bonus boss (like a demi-lich). Being able to buy an Infinity+1 sword because you saved the most money by Act 3? Not so much.

[AlanC9]

Being able to buy an Infinity+1 sword because you saved the most money by Act 3? Not so much.

OK. But then what's money for?

[In Exile]

OK. But then what's money for?

 

Potions, apparently, since that's it's only other role. 

[metalfenix]

Having one or two strong/overpowered weapons shouldn't be a bad thing in a personal game. I can see if you were playing a multiplayer online game, but offline one or two weapons or spells being strong should be a problem.

 

Just brace yourself if bioware includes some sort of MP PvP mode, with all the PvP players cries there will be a nerf/boost festival (of weapons/magic/powers) all along.

[AppealToReason]

I don't know man. I remembered this in ME2 when people got the Mattock and GPS and were like "Well there is no point to even playing the game anymore since these weapons are so good".

 

People should going all Nuzlocke - make your own debilitating rules - and just skip using it. If your moral outrage is so high then so should be your self control. Some of us are bad and need that good sword because we are not good. If you think its bogus to use, then don't use it. 

[PsychoBlonde]

Having one or two strong/overpowered weapons shouldn't be a bad thing in a personal game. I can see if you were playing a multiplayer online game, but offline one or two weapons or spells being strong should be a problem.

 

Er, why only weapons?  I want there to be powerful stuff, otherwise why go to the effort of acquiring it?  The loot in DA2 was a snore-fest--I liked the DLC gear just because it meant I really didn't have to mess with the silly stuff any more.  The only thing I cared about was whether it looked halfway decent, the stats were close to meaningless.

 

And I don't like "you must be this high to ride the ride" mechanics viz loot.  If I managed to defeat the effing High Dragon at level six I better not be getting some crappy level six scaled loot that I'll be ditching in 10 minutes for some boots I pulled out of a pile of garbage on the side of the road.  If I want to make a beeline for the best staff in the game so I can demolish everything in my path that's my business.

[In Exile]

And I don't like "you must be this high to ride the ride" mechanics viz loot.  If I managed to defeat the effing High Dragon at level six I better not be getting some crappy level six scaled loot that I'll be ditching in 10 minutes for some boots I pulled out of a pile of garbage on the side of the road.  If I want to make a beeline for the best staff in the game so I can demolish everything in my path that's my business.

That was a general problem with DA:2, when the staff you took from the ancient ruins in the deep roads was inferior to the dirty stick you found in a Dalish wastebin 3 years later. 

[Squeeze the Fish]

I don't necessarily like the overpowered weapons, but I've found they're often the coolest/unique looking. I'm such a simpleton, but it'd be hard for me to put down the shiny for the dull.

[AlanC9]

That was a general problem with DA:2, when the staff you took from the ancient ruins in the deep roads was inferior to the dirty stick you found in a Dalish wastebin 3 years later. 

 

Isn't this a general problem with every game that has a large leveling range and at least some leveled loot? NWN, KotOR, the TES games, ME1, DAO... all had this to one extent or another.

[Gamemako]

People should going all Nuzlocke - make your own debilitating rules - and just skip using it. If your moral outrage is so high then so should be your self control. Some of us are bad and need that good sword because we are not good. If you think its bogus to use, then don't use it. 

 

OK, so I either get a game without Arcane Warrior, or a game that has Arcane Warrior that I don't want to play. Sure, I can "exercise self-control" and throw away the class archetype I use every time it's available, but why the hell should I have to? All so you can what, not have to navigate into the menu to turn down the difficulty setting? You could claim to be looking for what's effective when there isn't any other option to pull you through, but that's never been the case with Dragon Age, where the lowest difficulty setting barely requires interaction to win.

 

Er, why only weapons?  I want there to be powerful stuff, otherwise why go to the effort of acquiring it?  The loot in DA2 was a snore-fest--I liked the DLC gear just because it meant I really didn't have to mess with the silly stuff any more.  The only thing I cared about was whether it looked halfway decent, the stats were close to meaningless.

 

And I don't like "you must be this high to ride the ride" mechanics viz loot.  If I managed to defeat the effing High Dragon at level six I better not be getting some crappy level six scaled loot that I'll be ditching in 10 minutes for some boots I pulled out of a pile of garbage on the side of the road.  If I want to make a beeline for the best staff in the game so I can demolish everything in my path that's my business.

 

You go to the effort of acquiring it so you can meet the challenges ahead. That's the entire point of progression in an RPG. You meet the progression of challenges with your character's increasing strength.

 

A lot of that comes from the decision to use non-upgradeable unique items. There are many advantages of having an upgrade-heavy equipment progression system. The developer is not stuck holding on to all the fun stuff until the end of the game, since early unique drops don't have to be irrelevant at the end. You also don't have to leave game-breaking drops where the player might fall on them and completely trivialize a good chunk of the game (though it's better to be overpowered early than overpowered late). The player also doesn't have to give up the equipment they like for the sake of efficiency (e.g. Ancient Elven Armor).

 

Also, re: demolishing everything in your path, turn down the difficulty setting. If you don't care about gameplay or challenge, the game will let you plow through just fine if you turn the difficulty to zero -- no need to ruin the game for everybody else.

 

I don't necessarily like the overpowered weapons, but I've found they're often the coolest/unique looking. I'm such a simpleton, but it'd be hard for me to put down the shiny for the dull.

 

Which is exactly why they shouldn't be overpowered in the first place.

 

Isn't this a general problem with every game that has a large leveling range and at least some leveled loot? NWN, KotOR, the TES games, ME1, DAO... all had this to one extent or another.

 

ME1 didn't have unique loot at all except the Spectre weapons, which were the best stuff you could get. DA:O generally didn't have that problem because loot tier capped at around the level of most unique loot, though a few items (like the ancient elven armor set) were made irrelevant by the end. TES games recently have been more about the enchantments you can put on random loot rather than the loot itself outclassing the few unique items, though I'll admit I hardly remember the loot at all in Morrowind.

[JCFR]

As long, as there's a party and some tactical influence in combat, i think it's better to exclude overpowerde weapons. Otherwise it ruins the balancing.

 

Even though i wouldn`t mind including them in dark souls (joke).