What's better: Improvised environmental weapons, or skipping across a timeline flowchart?

rockpapershotgun.com:

Last time, you decided by 72% against 28% that setting unit waypoints is better than receiving waypoints yourself. Given how loudly people decry receiving waypoints, I'm a little surprised it was that close. And that's how we know we're doing science. This week, I ask you to choose between mastery of place and mastery of time. What's better: improvised environmental weapons, or skipping across a timeline flowchart?

Honestly, what kind of uncool dude actually carries weapons around with them? (The only exception is a switchblade, the one cool weapon.) No, a cool violence-doer is violence incarnate, able to grab random nearby objects and use them to throughly defeat those uncool nerks who've come with their 'guns'. While you're fumbling with your tactikewl holster, you big baby, I'll be clobbering you with a bicycle.

I am clearly thinking most of the allfather, Kazuma Kiryu from the Yakuza games. While he can bring weapons, why would you when he can grab nearby bicycles, bottle crates, traffic cones, barrels, boxes, potplants, stone lanterns, advertising stands, and other environmental objects to smash over some idiot's head. With some moves he'll even seamlessly grab and swing them mid-combo. This fighting style will win the admiration of anyone in need of fathering.

In a far more seamful manner, I did enjoy improvised weapons in 2008's Alone In The Dark (the game with the coolest inventory system). Grab a chair or plank of wood, carefully manoeuvre it into a fire without setting yourself ablaze, then batter monsters with your burning junk.

More recently, I adore how much swashbuckle 'em up En Garde! lets you kick crates and tables at people, throw pots on their head, and all sorts of other foolishness.

In a less formal