I find 5 point per STR is way too low. Stats should have more impact, less base and more per point.
The worst problem with BG inventory is that it's fucking nonsensical.I find 5 point per STR is way too low. Stats should have more impact, less base and more per point.
I actually agree with you. Your comment made me remember one observation I made ages ago: with 1 point in Strength, you would have 55lbs of carry weight, which is A LOT for a wimp. Thankfully it is a matter of moving sliders around in Project Nevada, I'll leave it at 20 base and 8lbs per point of Strength, max of 100 like before.
Anyways, after my post I remembered how I DON'T like inventory limits being handled. And that game is Baldur's Gate.
I hate Baldur's Gate inventory. Not because it is limited. I'm oaky with it. I would much rather prefer, however, a space-based system coupled with a carry weight mechanic. But the real issue is that Baldur's Gate works with "loot everything" in mind. Items are very expensive, moreover, selling a sword costs basically nothing, and one would expect a sword to be worth something more than 2 gold pieces, especially since we don't see any lower denomination of coin, whereas in New Vegas, a common gun (at least in my game) costs maybe 200 caps, while the crappier items cost much less.
In other words: in Baldur's Gate you are constantly looting stuff because everything is damn epensive by comparison, and the inventory limit doesn't help at all. Again, this is not a problem with the inventory system itself, but how it becomes an annoyance because of how the loot system works. That's definitely one of the things that makes it difficult for me to enjoy Baldur's Gate (alongside the High Fantasy setting).
While the weight limit works more or less as designed, a single space "slot" can just as well be completely occupied by as little as a tiny ring, gem or a plot-relevant piece of parchment, or as much as a suit of full plate.
It simply makes no fucking sense to the point of being almost painful to wrap your head around.
Having to constantly work around arbitrarily stupid and stupidly arbitrary decision isn't very conductive to getting into game either.
BG2 does. It also has scroll tube and whatever.I was going to point that out, then I remembered the game has the "gem bag" and stuff like that which sort of makes sense when you think about it (it's easier to carry lots of gems when they are in a bag).
Or ditch the concept of abstract inventory in favour of concrete slots and containers, limited by individual volume and jointly contributing to weight.Still, yes, BG's inventory is awful and I'd much rather have a system like Fallout's or TES's. The best system, however, is the one that takes space in mind as well as weight. A gold bar is small in size, but weights a lot. Similarly, a fan may be huge by comparison, but it is also very light (by comparison).
The worst problem with BG inventory is that it's fucking nonsensical.I find 5 point per STR is way too low. Stats should have more impact, less base and more per point.
I actually agree with you. Your comment made me remember one observation I made ages ago: with 1 point in Strength, you would have 55lbs of carry weight, which is A LOT for a wimp. Thankfully it is a matter of moving sliders around in Project Nevada, I'll leave it at 20 base and 8lbs per point of Strength, max of 100 like before.
Anyways, after my post I remembered how I DON'T like inventory limits being handled. And that game is Baldur's Gate.
I hate Baldur's Gate inventory. Not because it is limited. I'm oaky with it. I would much rather prefer, however, a space-based system coupled with a carry weight mechanic. But the real issue is that Baldur's Gate works with "loot everything" in mind. Items are very expensive, moreover, selling a sword costs basically nothing, and one would expect a sword to be worth something more than 2 gold pieces, especially since we don't see any lower denomination of coin, whereas in New Vegas, a common gun (at least in my game) costs maybe 200 caps, while the crappier items cost much less.
In other words: in Baldur's Gate you are constantly looting stuff because everything is damn epensive by comparison, and the inventory limit doesn't help at all. Again, this is not a problem with the inventory system itself, but how it becomes an annoyance because of how the loot system works. That's definitely one of the things that makes it difficult for me to enjoy Baldur's Gate (alongside the High Fantasy setting).
While the weight limit works more or less as designed, a single space "slot" can just as well be completely occupied by as little as a tiny ring, gem or a plot-relevant piece of parchment, or as much as a suit of full plate.
It simply makes no fucking sense to the point of being almost painful to wrap your head around.
Having to constantly work around arbitrarily stupid and stupidly arbitrary decision isn't very conductive to getting into game either.
BG2 does. It also has scroll tube and whatever.
Doesn't change the fact that those only try to solve systemic flaw by exception, anything not specifically covered is still broken, so for example a dagger will take same amount of space as halberd or full plate.
Also doesn't change the fact that BG1 has no such thing.
Or ditch the concept of abstract inventory in favour of concrete slots and containers, limited by individual volume and jointly contributing to weight.
I mean something like this:Or ditch the concept of abstract inventory in favour of concrete slots and containers, limited by individual volume and jointly contributing to weight.
Yes, that's what I suggested at the end.
Imagine a game where character has no inventory of their own, just equip slots, but equipped items can also work as containers, each with their own inventory space OR hotkeyable slots. For example a belt could have a number of small inventory spaces representing pouches as well as quickly accessible weapon slots.
Agreed.Overall, back to OP, I think inventory limitations are awesome when done correctly and when used in the right genre.
I mean something like this:
Imagine a game where character has no inventory of their own, just equip slots, but equipped items can also work as containers, each with their own inventory space OR hotkeyable slots. For example a belt could have a number of small inventory spaces representing pouches as well as quickly accessible weapon slots.
Where there is no notion of abstract inventory space whatsoever - everything is held in some actual place.
UI-wise this should be no problem as the game could simply traverse equipment tree and open up grid window for every item that's a container when opening inventory.
The main difference is that naked character would have no inventory only slots for both hands and worn items.
If a naked character can somehow hold two suits of armour, a halberd, crossbow and a stack of books you're either dealing with a game with an abstract inventory or an implementation of FATAL gone even more wrong than usual.
Yeah, micromanaging a dozen differently sized containers sounds great. The best part would be dumping it all out on to the ground then putting it back together because you found a widget that needs to go in your backpack, and there's not quite enough room, but the things you can afford to discard are in your pockets, so you need to move objects from your belt and backpack to your pockets, pockets to your belt, and then pick up the widget. Then you can bring it back to finish your quest, and be rewarded with a magic sword and do it all over again!I mean something like this:
Imagine a game where character has no inventory of their own, just equip slots, but equipped items can also work as containers, each with their own inventory space OR hotkeyable slots. For example a belt could have a number of small inventory spaces representing pouches as well as quickly accessible weapon slots.
Where there is no notion of abstract inventory space whatsoever - everything is held in some actual place.
UI-wise this should be no problem as the game could simply traverse equipment tree and open up grid window for every item that's a container when opening inventory.
The main difference is that naked character would have no inventory only slots for both hands and worn items.
If a naked character can somehow hold two suits of armour, a halberd, crossbow and a stack of books you're either dealing with a game with an abstract inventory or an implementation of FATAL gone even more wrong than usual.
Oooh, this would be awesome. I originally wanted a New Vegas mod where clothing added carrt weight depending on the type of clothing. So for example, a normal t-shirt would give you nothing, whereas a lab coat with pockets would. I would definitely love something like this.
Yeah, micromanaging a dozen differently sized containers sounds great. The best part would be dumping it all out on to the ground then putting it back together because you found a widget that needs to go in your backpack, and there's not quite enough room, but the things you can afford to discard are in your pockets, so you need to move objects from your belt and backpack to your pockets, pockets to your belt, and then pick up the widget. Then you can bring it back to finish your quest, and be rewarded with a magic sword and do it all over again!
They should simulate the inventories physical properties too, it'd be dumb letting you keep a sword and a blanket in the same bag, it'd obviously get cut up.
Smart sorting is rarely smart. Plus packrat generally has own idea about which goes where.
That's what you THINK. In matter of practices, no games ever has a satisfactory sorting button or auto-sort function worth remembering.
The more it is easy to sort, the boring that inventory become.
Baldur's Gate suffers from the "too much time on the inventory" issue ... The first one is due to the incredibly annoying low value of equipment which forces you to pick up everything you come across instead of only what you could reasonably need.