For as fun as ESO is, there are some game mechanics that don't enhance playing experience but rather appear to only annoy and inconvenience players. One mechanic, in particular, that doesn't appear to have a justifiable purpose in the game is armor durability and breaking.
I know that realists will say that armor takes damage and should therefore lose durability and eventually break. I hear you, and I would generally agree. However this argument doesn't hold weight in ESO because 1) weapons, especially those of the melee sort, don't lose durability or break (which violates the realistic immersion argument), and 2) armor in ESO deteriorates without even taking damage (see: Nightblades who stealth through quests, untouched, only to see their armor durability drop, or Sorcerers who never see their magical damage shield breached by enemies, yet still receive a penalty to their armor durability). As weapon and armor deterioration is concerned, realism doesn't come into play in this game, which means that it is not reasonable to assume that the goal of armor durability and breaking is for the purpose of realism.
Therefore, to punish players by chipping away at the effectiveness of their earned and crafted armor serves to...what? We've established that it cannot be to provide realism in the game - nor is there reasonable cause to assume that it is meant to keep players' gold counts respectable by forcing them to purchase armor repairs and kits with gold (there are much simpler ways to control in-game money, such as less gold earned by questing or selling items).
So, then why does ESO even have an armor durability and breaking mechanic? If it doesn't serve as a contributor to realism or as a means of controlling gold counts, can it be removed so that players can be less annoyed and inconvenienced?