/vr/ - Retro Games

>>5307251
I'd never thought about that, in regards to the pick pocketing mechanics, but it's true. Another "incorrect" idea that is spread by the code patch comes from its "Merchant Equipping Fix". It "fixes" how merchants will equip some items they buy from the player.
I can understand how this could annoy a player, but I don't see it as a bug, I always thought it was just a neat feature. These merchants aren't like a modern chain store or something, where clerks have little say in what happens. They own the store, and they live in a dangerous world with monsters and wizards. I think it's sensible that they might use it themselves.

And yet, it's listed under the "Bug Fixes" section of the code patch! As if to say "Nah, this is obviously a bug, obviously the developers did not want this to happen, I can just tell".

Another cause of misinformation is because some people just guess. Someone tries to explain a mechanic, and when they come to some minor circumstance they don't actually understand, they try to use their own logic to "fill in the blanks" and guess at what the game would do, without actually testing the idea, because it's just "obvious".
For example, on UESP's page for the Disintegrate spell effect, it states
>If the armor or weapon is damaged to the point of breaking, it will immediately be unequipped, and the target will automatically equip the next-most-valuable item of that type in their inventory (if they have one).
But as I show in my little webm here, the NPC does not use that logic. After her axe breaks, does she choose to equip the other axe (or the club she has by default)? No sir. I've had the same results with armor breaking.

It's a tiny, minor little detail, so who cares right? But people take UESP as fact. People working on OpenMW use it as a reference at times. Lots of wrong little details can add up. (I guess I should just edit the page instead of whining about it...)